davearm2

By my numbers, right now the Cubs are probably a true 88 or so win team. The Cubs probability of getting in the post season with 88 wins is probably 50%, maybe a little higher given the sad state of our division. If the Greene was just a slight upgrade (say 3 wins) over Theriot those 3 wins, probably increase the chances of us getting into the playoffs by 30-40%. The playoff revenue generated by the higher probability is likely to offset the 6 million extra spent....not to mention the 30-40% higher chance of getting into the playoffs...and possibly DOUBLING or TRIPLING our chances of getting a world series win. All for a six million. Three wins isn't a slight upgrade. That's a large upgrade. In fact the probability of it is probably pretty small, and there's a higher probability that Greene is either no improvement or worse than Theriot (as he was in 08 by a large margin).

The fact that your opinion on Greene hasn't been revised at all in light of what he did in 2008 (especially on the road, where he was supposed to be so amazing) is very telling. And what it tells us is, the person who earlier said it's pointless to debate anything with you is exactly right.

A big part of Scott's value would be in his low cost. Conceivably for the price of two or three years of Ibanez or Abreu, the Cubs could have two or three years of both Scott and Wood. (Not that Hendry would necessarily use the money saved in RF on Wood, but it'd be one of several options.)

I think most objective observers would say that's a reasonable discussion to have. Marshall is a decent backend starter but great in a swing role. Scott is a decent corner OF but great in a platoon role. Pie and Olson are also sort of pitcher/hitter mirror images inasmuch as both had good minor league numbers (Olson moreso) and were highly rated prospects (Pie moreso), but have stunk in the bigleagues so far (about equally). And Cedeno is a starting SS only in the most dismal circumstances. He's become Omar Infante, throw-in grade.

430 foot flyballs tend to fly out of just about every ballpark.

Who will the Giants be trading Howry to for that to happen? Back to the Cubs, obviously.

he spent the first 3 years in the minors switch-hitting. his OPS the next 3 years: 707, 756, 746 Thanks Bob, I knew someone would know the details. So using just 2004 forward, I've got: MiLB: .294/.366/.372/.738 in 1058 ABs MLB: .290/.362/.369/.732 in 1264 ABs Those seem like pretty stable numbers to me. Looks like '08 was a shade high (.746 OPS, +14 points), but '07 was quite a bit low (.672 OPS, -60 points).

I don't think Theriot is as bad as some people make him out to be. However, I'm not willing to bet that he can reproduce what he did last year either. I expect him to regress towards the norm. He may not, who knows. Either way, his value is as high as it's going to ever be and he's replacable. We either need to sell high on a trade with him this offseason, or just accept he's going to be our starting SS for the next 5 years. What norm, though? Going back to AA in '05, Theriot's posted pretty consistent .300 AVG, low-SLG, OBP-heavy .750ish OPS's, and that's exactly what the Cubs got from him in '08. Seems to me that, if anything, he regressed to the norm in '08, and '07 was uncharacteristically bad. Of course perhaps the better explanation is that Theriot simply hasn't been in the bigleagues long enough to establish a norm in the first place. At any rate, I surely wouldn't be so quick to assume that '07 is it, and that some sort of deline from '08 levels is inevitable. Theriot's career minor league line is .271/.355/.692. Guys normally don't put up better lines in the majors than minors, especially guys who spend 6 years in the minors. I think the norm should be expected to be closer to his career minor league line than what he did last year. He turns 29 this month, and is now a marginally passable SS. So, he's got maybe a couple of seasons left to where he can passably play SS. If he can't play SS everyday, he loses a ton of value. Back to the norm argument, some guys like Theriot leave everyone waiting for years for them to trip up but they continue exceeding expectations. Good organizations realize these guys are the exceptions and not the rules, and don't sit on them. More often than not, selling high on guys who fit Theriot's profile ends up being the right answer. Theriot spent the early portion of his minor league career as a switch hitter. His numbers picked up when he dropped hitting lefthanded. I'm sure someone here can shed more light on this and maybe speak to the timing of when the change was made, but suffice it to say that looking at his career minor league line is going to be misleading. I'd put more weight on the last few years when we know for sure he was only batting righthanded. All the weight, actually.

I don't think Theriot is as bad as some people make him out to be. However, I'm not willing to bet that he can reproduce what he did last year either. I expect him to regress towards the norm. He may not, who knows. Either way, his value is as high as it's going to ever be and he's replacable. We either need to sell high on a trade with him this offseason, or just accept he's going to be our starting SS for the next 5 years. What norm, though? Going back to AA in '05, Theriot's posted pretty consistent .300 AVG, low-SLG, OBP-heavy .750ish OPS's, and that's exactly what the Cubs got from him in '08. Seems to me that, if anything, he regressed to the norm in '08, and '07 was uncharacteristically bad. Of course perhaps the better explanation is that Theriot simply hasn't been in the bigleagues long enough to establish a norm in the first place. At any rate, I surely wouldn't be so quick to assume that '07 is it, and that some sort of deline from '08 levels is inevitable.

Oh for pete's sake... I strongly doubt that Hendry has ended talks with the Padres for Jake Peavy. At least not before the Winter Meetings. Or, perhaps Hendry has ended talks with the Padres because they've got the parameters of a deal in place, and there's nothing to talk about until Hendry can get his ducks in a row, as outlined above.

I don't dislike MacPhail at all, but you must admit that his slow moving pace and his overvaluing his players can be really annoying. I think he might be the wrong man for the job to rebuild the O's if you are an impatient O's fan. He might get it done, but it won't be done quickly. MacPhail does appear to be quite slow moving when making a trade, but I don't know if all the blame should be directed at him for this Peavy fiasco. 1) Cubs ownership is in flux 2) Cubs budget is currently higher than it should be for a team that is looking to add players 3) More than 1 team is needed to finish the deal 4) Other players appear to need to be traded in order for this particular trade to work for the Cubs 5) The market has been moving slowly for everyone due to the economy 6) Towers is getting raped on this Peavy deal no matter what. I can understand their slow response. 7) SP is honestly not the Cubs biggest need at this point, which requires Hendry to be working on more than just Peavy. 8) There are other teams Hendry can look to to get the package of players the Padres need. 9) Hendry might actually be required to actually move some payroll before a deal for Peavy goes down so as not to be stuck with a higher payroll than is allowed. 10) I'm sure there are plenty more, but I'm still on my first cup of java this am. MacPhail's name only really came up toward the tail end of last week. Towers is the one that has been the slow mover at this point, even though he was pretty clear in the early going that he wanted to get something done as soon as possible so that he could focus on the rest of the team's needs. I can't blame Towers for still being where he is at. He's partially to blame for giving Peavy no trade rights, but at the same time, Moores is the one who is forcing Peavy to be moved. I want this to be over as much as the next guy, but this is a very complicated situation. Even though Towers is forced to trade Peavy, and the Cubs appear to be the only real suitor, Hendry is still not the type of GM that will kick Towers in the nads with his current predicament. Hendry will see to it that Towers gets fair value for Peavy. In the big picture, that would probably be wise anyway. I would think a strong working relationship with small market teams who can't keep their high priced talent would be quite valuable in future dealings. Two things are holding up this deal, IMO. One, the Cubs need to clear salary. This means finding a taker for Marquis, or perhaps even Derrek Lee. Marquis is the clear preference of course for several reasons, not the least of which is that his rotation slot would be taken by Peavy. Point 5) above is why this task is proving difficult to accomplish. Two, the Cubs need to find a way to source another young ML-ready pitcher from a third team to put in their package to SD. Pie for Olson could satisfy this one, but who knows what kinds of wrenches MacPhail might throw into the works here. I remain convinced that Hendry will eventually be able to clear both of these hurdles, and once he does Peavy will be a Cub.

Oh for pete's sake... I strongly doubt that Hendry has ended talks with the Padres for Jake Peavy.

And the Cubs are by far in the best position financially and should therefore contend every year and win big quite often. I don't disagree with the notion that the Cubs ought to contend every year. I would point out, though, that you'd need only one hand (with fingers to spare) to count the teams that actually do contend every year. Boston and NYY. Anaheim, lately. That's pretty much it, now that teams like STL and ATL have faded. (Meanwhile the Cubs have been contenders in 4 of the last 6 years themselves.) So maybe building a well-oiled, perennial contending machine isn't quite as easy as it sounds. And maybe the Cubs aren't too far from the discussion to begin with.

Personally, I don't put all that much stock into a GM's post season record. It's the GM's job to put a team on the field that can consistently get to the postseason. Obviously, the stronger the team the better. It's the players and managers who then need to continue to play in the playoffs the way they played all season. I agree 100% with everything you just wrote. In fact the other day I made the point that for all intents and purposes, a GM's roster-building efforts end 2 to 3 months before the World Series rolls around. It's not unlike how a "winning pitcher" often leaves the game 3 or 4 innings before the game's actually over. Rightly or wrongly, though, Epstein's reputation has benefitted greatly from the fact that the Sox broke their "curse" under his direction, and so IMO it'd be interesting to consider what his legacy would be if the Sox hadn't won in '04, and hadn't begged him to come back after he up and quit after '05.

IDK about that. I think you will see teams value their prospects little bit more due to the financial struggles of the economy. Which means, unless MacPhail lowers his demands on his players, teams are not going to be bullied into giving up young, CHEAP prospects for expensive veterans. For the time being Bavasi deal will be the excpetion, not the rule. I don't see teams giving in like Bavasi. :confused: What the Padres want from the O's is a young, cheap player (Olson), not an expensive veteran. In fact Peavy himself is the only expensive veteran in play here. Seems as though MacPhail is doing just what you predict: not being bullied into giving up a young cheap guy easily.

I also wonder how Epstein would be viewed if the Yanks had finished off the sweep in the '04 ALCS. At one point Epstein quit his GM job before agreeing to return a short while later (Wikipedia says: Epstein resigned in October 2005, but was rehired as GM and Executive Vice President on January 24, 2006.). Perhaps the Sox brass isn't quite so inclined to convince him to return if '04 didn't play out the way it did. If things go down that way, he's just another whiz kid that couldn't do any better than the old-school guys he succeeded. Maybe '07 happens without him, and maybe it doesn't. Curious to think about, at any rate.

I think if the Cubs had just taken Samardzija in the first, and Colvin in the 5th, the world would be a much happier place.

I agree with all of this, except for maybe the part about Towers trying to leverage Hendry with ATL. If he was doing that, then he'd be pretty dumb to come out and say that he doesn't expect Peavy to go there because of the Braves' policy against issuing NTCs. My take is that Towers and Hendry have the framework for a 4- or 5-for-1 deal in place. It's on Hendry now to a) clear some salary, most likely by trading Marquis, and b) come up with a pitcher from a third team, possibly Olson from BAL. IMO once Hendry gets over those two hurdles, this thing will be a go.

List for me the overpaid junk that's currently under contract with the Cubs, preventing the retention of Kerry Wood. I'll get you started: Jason Marquis. Most indications are that Hendry's trying to wiggle out of that one as we speak. Who else you got? You don't think the 40 million designated to Fukudome, Marquis and Soriano is a deterrent? The phrase you used was "overpaying for other junk". Soriano has been at or near the top of the Cubs' OPS list both years. That's not anywhere close to "junk". Fukudome had a disappointing second half with the bat, but "junk" is way too harsh. Marquis is the only one I see that can remotely qualify, and even then, a starter that gives you 180+ IP and league-average production is not "junk". (Yes I know Marquis fell short of 180 IP, but only because Lou chose to skip him several times.) So "junk" doesn't apply well to any of these guys. Are they "overpaid"? Relative to what you'd like their production to be, sure. Relative to the FA market? Not at all. Each guy got pretty much exactly what his skillset is valued at.

List for me the overpaid junk that's currently under contract with the Cubs, preventing the retention of Kerry Wood. I'll get you started: Jason Marquis. Most indications are that Hendry's trying to wiggle out of that one as we speak. Who else you got?

People say that because it's true. Folks are quick to point out (and rightly so) that it's silly to judge a starting pitcher based on wins and losses, because lots of other things are at work, and besides, the SP is usually long gone by the time the game actually ends. Well guess what. For all intents and purposes, a GM's job constructing the current year's roster ends long about August 31 with the trade deadline. (And arguably the July 31 non-waiver deadline is the more appropriate finish line.) 8/31 is a full 2 months before ol Bud hands over the trophy to the WS winner. Everything that happens in that intervening 2 months is out of the GM's hands.

I'm confused as to why you think Gregg needs to be used as a closer to maintain Type A status.

yep, it is concerning I'm way more concerned about the declining peripherals and injury potential than I am about the possibility of a playoff collapse.

This all works if you ignore the two draft picks on the table, and the cost we are paying for Gregg (and that he probably wouldn't have gotten $10 million in arbitration). I'm not ignoring the picks. I simply realize that the upside of the picks is overshadowed by the downside of leaving other more pressing needs unaddressed because you had no money left after Wood accepted arb. There are quite a few ways to go in the unlikely event Wood accepts arbitration. And as I just pointed out above, Hendry's trying his darndest to go all of those ways already. Then how did he get himself into such a bad situation? Tapped out before the offseason even started? It seems unlikely, but if it's true, then it's even more damning, because I don't recall a sudden payroll decrease or anything like that. A bad situation was 2006, when the Cubs won, what was it, 66 games? What Hendry has done since, is spend the money necessary to turn 66 wins into 97: re-up Zambrano, Ramirez and Dempster. Add Soriano, Harden, DeRo, Lilly, Fukudome, etc. All of those extra wins cost money. So let's not get too carried away with the damning because all of a sudden the Cubs can't afford to add even more impact players (Peavy, Abreu, etc) *and* overpay for a fan favorite on top of it.

This all works if you ignore the two draft picks on the table, and the cost we are paying for Gregg (and that he probably wouldn't have gotten $10 million in arbitration). I'm not ignoring the picks. I simply realize that the upside of the picks is overshadowed by the downside of leaving other more pressing needs unaddressed because you had no money left after Wood accepted arb. There are quite a few ways to go in the unlikely event Wood accepts arbitration. And as I just pointed out above, Hendry's trying his darndest to go all of those ways already.