dew1679666265

As SSR said, Heilman and Patton don't have roles that would put them in close situations late in the game. I also never said anything about Patton, I like his potential but he's not ML ready yet. As for Gregg, the Marlins wanted rid of him because he was about to make $5+ million and they don't have much of a payroll. It certainly wasn't his 120 or so ERA+s the last couple of years. Gregg can be a solid reliever and that's likely what he'll be this season.

Nobody is complaining about Gooz Alright, Guzman has been pitching well. I just mean that I don't think Marmol should be one of our biggest concerns... he's talented enough that I think he will pull out of it and improve his control. I think our focus should be on figuring out how we can replace Gregg, Heilman, and Patton. I know there is alot of talk about how we need to pick up a bat... but I'd rather pick up a stud reliever or closer. Even if we win the division, there is no way we'll go anywhere in the playoffs with our current bullpen. Talented, veteran hitters will eat them up. Gregg over the last month: 1.64 ERA, 1.000 WHIP, 9:3 K:BB It's only 11 innings, but that's close to half the innings he's pitched this season. I don't understand the rush to get rid of him. Heilman has also pitched well the last two weeks, though granted in just 5 innings of work.

We dont have many of these good prospects you speak of, We have Vitters, and hes pretty much untopuchable. We have Samrdzjia, who has a NTC and whose stock is falling. We have Jackson and Cashner who might generate some interest, but Hendrys generated something out of nothing in the past, and hopefully he can do it again without giving up too much as far as talent, so hopefully we can deal in quantity over quality. Nobody takes quantity over quality. This is one of the many reasons we are in a bad situation. I would think it all depends on who you're trading for. Nobody should be talking about a team's top prospect for someone like Teahen. There's a large gap between the Cubs' best prospect and the players you brought up in the trade proposal. A few mid-range prospects (Castillo, Jackson, etc types maybe) might get the Royals interested. Miles, Cotts, Hart and Patton aren't in that league, though. Teahen isn't a great player, but he has value and he's cheap. That's very important and valuable to a low-budget, slowly building team.

Not true. Rule 5 players can be traded, but then the new team would have the same obligation to keep him on the major league roster all year or offer him back to the original team. I don't think Patton went through waivers when the Cubs traded for him, and Josh Hamilton didn't go through waivers when the Cubs traded him. I thought for sure there was some reason why we couldn't easily just deal Patton. That's a good point on Hamilton that I didn't think of, though.

I'd take Gordon and be ecstatic. What makes you think they'd trade him? A lot of fans around here have already given up on the guy. Listening to sports talk radio they are all pretty down on him and Hochevar, because they aren't Braun and Lincecum, or Longoria and Ryan Zimmerman. Plus Moustakas isn't too far behind. Although I don't think Moore is dumb enough to give up on him yet, I think he knows that Gordon will get more in return than Teahan would. Wells and Blanco for Hochevar and Gordon? :D

A lot of big names, though.

Last year should have been our year too. Their mediocre offense and great pitching played well in the postseason, our very good offense and very good pitching didn't play well in the postseason (in our 97 win season). Williams: .526 winning % in 1,297 games Hendry: .519 winning % in 971 games Each have had a higher payroll than the other for three seasons (Hendry 03-05, Williams 06-08). Hendry has a big advantage this year. However, the Cubs from 03-05 averaged roughly an $85 million payroll. The Sox averaged roughly a $63.6 million payroll. From 06-08, the Cubs averaged roughly a $103 million payroll, while the Sox averaged roughly a $110 million payroll. Hendry has had a payroll advantage overall, I'd say.

Prolly the 1997-to-1998 Marlins. Nope. The 97 Marlins scored 740 runs and the 98 Marlins scored 667. The 97 Marlins, despite all that talent, were a wild card team. Their 92 wins were 10 behind the 101 win Braves. Wow. Just a guess off the top of my head. They won 92 games with only 740 runs scored? Impressive pitching I guess. They allowed 669 runs. There were just 6 other teams with 80+ wins in the NL that year, though. Braves, Mets, Astros, Giants, Dodgers and Rockies.

I'd take Gordon and be ecstatic. What makes you think they'd trade him?

The 2001 Mariners scored 927 runs and the 2002 Ms scored 814. The 2000 Mets scored 802 runs and the 2001 Mets scored 642. The 2001 Indians scored 897 and the 2002 Indians scored 739 runs. Those are some of the biggest dropoffs I've found.

Prolly the 1997-to-1998 Marlins. Nope. The 97 Marlins scored 740 runs and the 98 Marlins scored 667. The 97 Marlins, despite all that talent, were a wild card team. Their 92 wins were 10 behind the 101 win Braves.

According to Cot's, this year is the first year that the Cubs have had a larger payroll than the White Sox since 2005. Cot's has the Cubs at 94M, 99M and 118M from 06-08 and the Sox at 102M, 108M and 121M from 06-08. Over that three year period, Kenny Williams' teams have amassed 251 wins. In the same period, Hendry's teams have amassed 248 wins.

I loved watching the Hulk Hogan/Ultimate Warrior title match.

First problem - Patton cannot be traded without first passing through waivers (I believe) Second - as A-Cal asked, what's the incentive for the Royals? You mentioned they're ready to wave the white flag, but neither Freel nor Guzman are pieces for the future. Both are aged and declining. I love it for the Cubs, though.

.400/.438/.533/.971 in the past week for Milton

Yet its strange that HR numbers went down sharply when they started to test for steroids. Only not. The new policy was handed down in 2005, but the differences in the home run rates pre-2005 and post-2005 are not particularly telling of anything, especially if you think of steroids as having flourished in baseball starting in the mid-90s. To say the numbers have gone down sharply is incorrect. Yeah I couldn't find the stats before I posted that. What has gone down though is the number of HRs the top HR hitters are hitting. Hitting 40 HRs was almost a prerequesite to be called a power hitter a few years back. Now you might win a HR title with 40 HRs. That's happened once(Last year - Cabrera. Meanwhile the HR leaders hit 58 and 54 in '06 while testing was in place.) Last year was the only year that the home run leader didn't have 50+ home runs since 2005. And last year's leader was Ryan Howard at 48. The previous four years (2002-2005) actually had two seasons of league leaders in home runs hit less than 50. ARod and Thome (47) in 03 and Adrian Beltre (48) in 04.

Offer him arbitration at the end of this year though and you will get an extra first round pick at the least. I still wouldn't give up Vitters for him. Some combo of Marshall, Jackson, Fox, maybe Cashner, Colvin, etc. would have to be enough. Otherwise, we're giving up too much since we likely can't re-sign him after the year.

I doubt he'd go after a shortstop. Hendry and Lou both seem to love Theriot and seem to be convinced he's a true SS. I would like to see a shortstop added and Theriot moved to second, but I doubt that's happening. As for Marshall, he's a solid 3-4 starter, not exactly a piece that should be traded for nothing. I'd much prefer Wells to be traded at his value peak than Marshall right now.

How does signing Pedro - without giving up prospects - hurt our future? Marshall is already in the pen and Wells is unlikely to be a mainstay in the rotation anyway. we have no use for pedro right now (i personally think both wells and marshall would be better than pedro), unless we are going to trade marshall or wells for a crap 3rd baseman who will play for a month and then not be heard from again. And i think it is fairly obvious at this point that a marginal upgrade at third for a month will have no impact on whether we make the playoffs or not. How is that mortgaging our future though? If Marshall is traded I can understand, but Wells? The best idea is probably to trade him now while his value is at it's highest. Also, adding a second baseman who can hit better than Fontenot has and, perhaps, who can play some third as well would help us throughout the year and not just for the next month. Plus, Aramis will still need numerous days off most likely, to let his shoulder rest. There will be uses for whoever we might acquire. The question of how effective Pedro might be is legit, however. It's encouraging that his stuff seems to be good, though.

The question is, can you expect a team that is hovering around .500 and is severely underperforming to be whooping and hollering? If the players were cracking jokes with each other and looking generally excited, would that not make the same people question how much they cared? It seems like you'd get the question of, "How can the players be joking around and look so loose when they're batting .250 as a team and hovering around .500?" It's a double edged sword at this point for a struggling team. If they look dejected and depressed, then they're criticized for looking "dead" and Lou "doesn't have any passion." But, if they joke around with each other and are seen laughing and cutting up in the dugout, people will start asking why they don't seem to care and how they can be so aloof when they're struggling. Does being happy, loose and aloof come with winning or does it cause winning? There's no way to know.

How does signing Pedro - without giving up prospects - hurt our future? Marshall is already in the pen and Wells is unlikely to be a mainstay in the rotation anyway.

Signing Pedro has a chance one way or another of strengthening the bullpen. That would help a weakness on the team (though a lessening one). I agree that the pen has been a problem at times, but not the big problem. If were going to get a guy who hasnt played organized ball in about 9 months, why not go after Ray Durham who we could plug in at second, and he can platoon with Font if not send Font to the bench where he belongs when Ramirez gets back, and no more of this Miles/Freel/Blanco/Scales non sense. Why we don't go after Durham, I don't know. But, even though the bullpen isn't the main problem, it still has some holes. Adding Pedro to it - or adding him to the rotation and moving Wells to the pen - likely strengthens it, lessening one weak spot on the team. Signing Pedro also, as has been mentioned, gives us more room to deal one of Wells or Marshall for a bat, thus helping both of our need areas.

I really needed someone to say that. Im lacking in confidence right now. The way I see it is that the Cardinals and Brewers are about as good now as they're going to be (save for any trades they make). The Cubs may not improve, but they have by far the most room to do it.

Here are the current and career OPS' of some of our most important players and their OPS last year. Bradley: .822 career - .718 current - .999 last year Soriano: .842 career - .749 current - .876 last year Lee: .862 career - .804 current - .823 last year That's two players performing well below their career averages and well playing somewhat below his. Is there any certainty that all three of them will match their career numbers? Of course not, but the likelihood is that they'll climb closer to their career numbers as the season progresses. Even taking injuries and age decline into account, Bradley and Soriano aren't likely to end the year 100+ points of OPS below their career averages - especially when they surpassed them last year. As for the others, Soto and Fontenot have both shown better ability previously than they have this year. Soto may not OPS .868 like he did last year and Fontenot may not OPS .909 again, but neither is likely to finish at .650 and .719 respectively, either. Improvement is likely here. Fukudome is a unique case, as he struggled mightily last year. His numbers are better this year - despite his funk - and his peripherals are better this year than last year. His LD% is up four to 22% this year and his K:BB ratio is slightly better than last year. With all of that, plus an expected return of Aramis (though, granted, how much he'll be hampered by injury is unknown), the offense is bound to get better. Considering we're only 4 games back and hovering around .500 with nearly everyone struggling, our chances of taking the lead in the division, reaching the playoffs and being one of 8 teams vying for the World Series are pretty good.

Bradley also OPSd .947 between Oakland and San Diego in 2007 so last year wasn't a complete fluke. The problem with him is injuries.