mookie

Hold on cowboy. I didn't know all of the teams in the central were so bad. So, both the Reds and the Cardinals are going to barely eclipse the .500 barrier? Do explain.

Hmmm, on an offensive level, Jemile Weeks beats Barney, but that is the only advantage on their roster I am seeing at the moment.

Actually, and I may very well be in the minority, but I think they'll end up better than last year. Granted, I don't think they're a .500 team, but I do see improvement happening. I could see 74-75 wins. I see 76-77 as a baseline projection. But with a few games of luck and a few games of breakout performances? I don't see why 81-81 is unattainable. I agree, .500 is well within reach. That's why they play the games.

I didn't know copy and paste had an objective maturity level evaluation.

We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both. We are doing both.

Shocker! Cubs actually offered money! Can the choir of "we want our toys" folks calm down now?

Michael Choice is the one we should target, but that won't happen.

SSR wants to sign everyone.

Well, glad this is over. On to Soler!

Yesterday. Oh boy. I can't help but get all worked up seeing Soler mentioned with Heyward and Starling. Baseball is about to start, and I am a bit jacked with enthusiasm.

This is why he is ours. This is why Theo and Jed are all over this kid. This is exactly what we need in our system right now. All he costs is money, and we have the ability to blow down the doors before the new rules take effect. Soler is a Cub. I am actually remarkably comfortable calling it now with 100% certainty. Get mad all you want at me typing that, whatever. Get ready for the excitement ya'll. Jorge Soler is a Chicago Cub!

Delightful.

This off season has been a big bowl of juicy cherries. Add to that one of Soler/Cespesdes, and I believe a new bowl is on its way to my table.

They're going to show him the center field home run celebration diorama, aren't they. With Zambrano riding one of the Marlins.

The Marlins keep losing! I am noticing a trend here people.

Rinse. Repeat. We need some [expletive] baseball STAT!

I guess I didn't flesh out my thoughts completely. I do agree that Vitters is too high. He just isn't a too high guy that is going to make me flip out or anything.

Vitters is a big bag of awful. No sweat off my sack.

60-72. These guys are scrubtastic. I am excited, but it isn't an excitement for winning.

As much as I am just craving new talent on the Cubs, let the Marlins blow the doors off this kid. They are going to go balls out for the contract. The only way I see the Cubs winning this thing is if there is some personal preference in play. I don't know their payroll situation, but they lost arbitration with Anibal. Maybe that couple million will be a difference maker? That is about as much optimism as I can muster at the moment.

He is gonna sign sometime between Friday and Monday.

Beautiful! You nailed it Rob. Mike Leake is a glanced over gem of a pitcher. Late round value all over the place.

Man, what a huge drop by Welker.

No, the risk is that he returns to pre-2011 ability levels and we waste an opportunity to sell high. If we're selling high, then trade him. However, if we're not getting the offers Theo and co want (which we clearly aren't or he'd have already been traded) then I question whether we're actually selling high. That was my whole point - if we're simply getting what he's worth, then keep him. But if somebody is willing to overvalue him because of the big 2011 season, then you trade him. If all we're getting offered is Turner, one of Crosby or Smyly, and maybe a couple lottery tickets, then I question whether we're selling high because that's not too much different than Lee/Archer/etc in terms of value - thus it isn't selling high. I don't want to trade Garza simply to trade him, I want to trade him because we're getting incredible value. If the reported offers are accurate, then we're not being offered enough for me to consider it selling high and I'm perfectly comfortable keeping him as a result. But that package is already better than what we gave up.

I want an impact talent that is close to the major leagues as a starting point for Garza, and one to two other pieces that are of some value. If we get Turner, Smyly, and an upside guy in A ball from Detroit, I don't think there's anyone who will be upset. The point being made is that there are other avenues to capitalize on Garza's value too. Because if we can't get strong value in exchange for him, we should be using those avenues instead. Right, but all signs point to a trade. We could get a pick for him or hope for a 4/52 deal. I get that everyone wants value for Garza. Where I am confused is why there is this perception that we won't get strong value.