dew1679666265

Dunn doubled and was just driven in. 4-1 StL now with the Nationals still batting.

Hendry rarely overpays in deadline deals. I agree. Between Hendrys 3 big trades in recent years, Aramis, Nomar, and harden, the only player whose done anything at the big league level has been Brendan Harris, whose essentially Ryan Theriot. We'll see where Gallagher and Donaldsons careers go. If we can get a solid loogy for spare parts, then go for it, but please dont give up prospects that we can use for something bigger and better in the off season. If one of these teams want something like Kevin Hart, Sam Fuld, or even Aaron Miles, they can have them, but I dont see that happening. That was, of course, a year where we weren't winning, but still...so it was less about overpaying than underselling. I never said Hendry didn't make bad trades from time to time - just that he rarely gives away too much in prospect value for mediocre veterans. The Pierre trade is probably the most he's overpaid. I don't think the Walker trade was bad in and of itself, though.

Hendry rarely overpays in deadline deals.

No problem. I can see where you could get the idea I was in favor of it, though. I'd love to have Martinez, but I don't think he'd fit anywhere.

Yeah, let's trade Vitters so we can have a catcher for 3 weeks. We might not have to give Vitters, but we may have to give Soto + good prospects for him. Only? I would definitely not make that trade I didn't say only. I wasn't advocating it.

Veteran-ness? Gaub is the only young player he mentioned. Ryan and Fossum are veterans. Lefties are hitting Beimel this year at a .228/.286/.421/.707 clip. He also has a 13:4 K:BB ratio. Lefties are hitting Grabow at .250/.333/.271/.604 this year. Ryan could be an option but they want him to pitch in the minors some and see if he has anything left, Fossum isn't very likely to do as well as Grabow and Beimel and Gaub is still working on getting his control improved. I wouldn't give much for either Beimel or Grabow, but both are decent bets to be better this year than the other three options.

I don't think so. I just forgot about him when I made that list off the top of my head. Flaherty is already splitting time with Junior Lake at Peoria. His move to full time second base really is coming soon (it's probably just a matter of when he starts playing at the same level as Hak-Ju Lee or Starlin Castro). Junior Lake is a better SS prospect in the organization (despite the errors and high strikeout rate). Thanks.

Not happening. He can't throw a baseball from 3rd to first. I'm not sure how they think he's going to play the OF with his shoulder as bad as it still is. Also, as somebody else said, Dero is going to be playing 3rd every day. Thanks, I didn't realize that. If he can't throw from third then he likely can't throw from the outfield either, as you said. So in that case, I don't think you can count him as outfield depth - leaving DeRosa as the third baseman and Schumaker as the second baseman.

Yeah, let's trade Vitters so we can have a catcher for 3 weeks. We might not have to give Vitters, but we may have to give Soto + good prospects for him.

Reid Brignac! Works for me! I don't guess the Indians would be open to parting with Asdrubal Cabrera?

The good news is, Balester is a top 100 ranked prospect and this year is the #3 ranked prospect in the Nationals' system. He's at least a prospect with a lot of talent. And what about that whole never having faced a pitcher therefore, can't touch him thing? Or, does that only happen against the Cubs. Let's hope the Cardinals act like the Cubs today then.

How is that the first in a series of moves except by a loose definition considering all trades a series of trades? How does swapping out Duncan for Lugo open up anything, unless they trade Brendan Ryan and Bo Hart for Halladay? They are looking at Dunn and Holliday, who are both outfielders, and just traded Duncan, who was an outfielder. Seems pretty simple to me. Ankiel, Ludwick, Schumaker, Rasmus, DeRo, and Stavinoha can all play the OF. Add in the Glaus experiment when/if he returns. Couldn't they have traded Duncan because they had a massive logjam in the OF and need a SS? Schumaker and DeRo are primarily 2nd basemen and they'd likely prefer Glaus at third if possible. That leaves Ankiel, Ludwick, Rasmus and Stavinoah as the primary OFs. Acquiring Dunn/Holliday and dealing Duncan leaves them with 5 OFs after the trades are made.

Who would we get?

I was a big fan of the trade at the time. I lived in Nashville around the time that Aramis was playing there and watched him a number of times. I knew the talent was there, it was just a matter of him producing. And he definitely has. It wasn't a wildly popular deal among everyone, though. Well it wasn't wildly popular because everyone wanted Lowell. Were there really a lot of people that preferred Bobby Hill + trash (+Lenny Harris/Jose Hernandez everyday at 3B and Goodwin in CF) vs. Ramirez and Lofton? Most of the complaints I remember were that Hill and Bruback were too valuable to trade for a guy with poor major league numbers (Aramis) and an aging center fielder (Lofton). Lowell played a part in it, I recall, but most of it was a feeling that we were hurting our farm system for a marginal improvement that season. Bruback had been putting up some pretty decent numbers in AA and AAA the past couple years as well. For Pittsburgh that year, Lofton only had a .770 OPS with a .333 OBP. However, he followed that up with an .850 OPS in Chicago with a .381 OBP and .471 SLG.

The good news is, Balester is a top 100 ranked prospect and this year is the #3 ranked prospect in the Nationals' system. He's at least a prospect with a lot of talent.

I was a big fan of the trade at the time. I lived in Nashville around the time that Aramis was playing there and watched him a number of times. I knew the talent was there, it was just a matter of him producing. And he definitely has. It wasn't a wildly popular deal among everyone, though.

Your latter point may stand, but the reason the other team traded for a player isn't necessarily just hype from the original team. Maybe Florida and Pittsburgh genuinely saw what the Cubs scouts saw in Choi and Hill and felt they could produce at a high level. Just because a player doesn't pan out doesn't mean he was all hype - the talent could be there. Choi did perform at a high level for the Marlins. I'd love to know exactly what happened to his bat. Was it a matter of adjusting, or were there injuries involved? I know Tracy [expletive] with him in LA, but it doesn't explain his power just disappearing by '06. Yeah, he had one good season for Florida at age 25 - .270/.388/.495/.883 - but then didn't really produce after that. I was always a big Choi fan, but I have no idea what happened.

Man, didn't realize he was traded while still in low A. I thought he had made AA by then. He was a top 50 ranked prospect in 2003, though.

We also had, at the time, Mark Prior, Carlos Zambrano, Juan Cruz, Angel Guzman, Dontrelle Willis, Ricky Nolasco, Todd Wellemeyer and Brendan Harris who were helping those high rankings as well - and all of these guys have had some type of major league success.

Your latter point may stand, but the reason the other team traded for a player isn't necessarily just hype from the original team. Maybe Florida and Pittsburgh genuinely saw what the Cubs scouts saw in Choi and Hill and felt they could produce at a high level. Just because a player doesn't pan out doesn't mean he was all hype - the talent could be there.

I'm not saying good Soriano absolutely should hit leadoff. I don't think he should drop below the top three to four hitters, though. In the Cubs' situation, Lee and Aramis were already entrenched in the 3-4 spots, leaving the top 1-2 spots for Soriano. I was fine with him hitting in either of those spots. As for Pujols, I wouldn't necessarily move him there from the #3 spot in the order, but I wouldn't find it outlandish to lead him off. Skip Shumaker played 110 games in the leadoff spot and had 536 PAs. Pujols played 143 games in the 3rd spot and had 636 PAs. Pujols had 100 more PAs in 30 more games. Had Schumaker played as many games as Pujols at the average number of PAs he was getting per game, Schumaker would have had 50 more PAs than Pujols. Not a huge difference, but imagine Pujols getting 50 more PAs a season. Moving Soriano from 1st in the lineup to 5th last year would have decreased his PAs by nearly 100. That's significant. I guess the weight of that argument would depend a little bit on on who got those 100 at bats instead. If they got on base a better clip than Soriano I wouldn't have too much of an issue - factor in more people on base when Soriano did come to bat and its pretty easy to rationalize a net gain. I wouldn't bat him second, and with Lee and Ramirez on the the team (and producing) I couldn't justify him hitting third or fourth - I could see an argument where you would move Lee to 2nd - in which case I would bat him 4th - ultimately I would disagree with the move of Lee but I understand the reasoning. FWIW I would find it outlandish to bat Pujols leadoff I agree that it depends on who's taking the extra ABs. If there is a player who will be more productive who you want in that slot, I have no problem with moving down Soriano. But, putting a guy there who might not be that good but is a traditional leadoff hitter isn't the best choice and in that scenario, Soriano should remain where he is. In the Cubs case the last couple years, there hasn't been a player who really needed to get those extra ABs so I've been fine with a highly productive Soriano batting first. Also consider that good Soriano is a good bet to hit 40+ doubles a year. He doesn't just hit homers, he also hits for extra bases. So, numerous times a year he makes up for his lack of great OBP by getting to second base with one swing of the bat. There's no need for taking a chance on a stolen base or giving up an out to move a more traditional leadoff man over from first. Soriano will generally be in scoring position much easier than a leadoff hitter with virtually no power but a good OBP - and that's important. And on that Pujols comment, if the choice is between 1st in the order and 3rd, I'll tend to lean toward third because the difference in at bats isn't that significant. However, in the Cubs lineup, if you drop Soriano from the top spot in the order, he moves down to fifth or sixth and loses 100+ PAs over the course of a season. I'd much rather bat Pujols 1st than 5th or 6th.

Next year's money isn't guaranteed unless he hits 635 PAs this year - he hasn't come close to that once in his career. 2010 is a club option. Sanchez made the All-Star team this year, so his option vests at 600 PA's. He's currently on pace for more than 660. Ah, forgot he made the All-Star team. That definitely makes the option more likely to be guaranteed.

Astros win!!! Cubs are 1 game out of first place!!!!

The catcher we almost claimed off waivers when Geo got hurt.

Thaaaaaaat'll end well. You're right, it did end well. :D Pujols grounds out to second. Pujols made an out? Unpossible. I guess it does happen . . . from time to time.