XZero771679666304

I guess my view on the trade is that having Stewart and Baker at 3B isn't going to be any worse than the Baker/DeWitt platoon we were likely looking at before the trade. And there is at least the possibility he hits for some power. And the guys we gave up? A mediocre IF and what is basically Ian Stewart without the walks at a position we don't need filled. If there were a bunch of alternatives out there, I'd take a dimmer view of this, but there really aren't. It's not sexy at all, but it's a worthwhile risk to take for low cost. If it doesn't work out, we move on without much lost.

He didn't hurt his wrist until August and hasn't played in the big leagues since. The injury doesn't explain why he sucked so hard last year at the big league level. Legitimate question: did he hurt his wrist in August, or is that just when it landed him on DL?

They're not going after Fielder. Berkman will be the 1B.

ARAM was still available and a full 4 WAR better than Stewart for probably a $10-11MM difference. Is Stewart worth negative WAR or something, because ARam hasn't been worth 4 WAR since 2008...and in 2 of the last 3 years he has barely been over 1 WAR (yes, he was hurt for part of it). He's also 34 next year, so this trend isn't likely to reverse (and if it does, not for long), although he did have a significant uptick in 2011. Yes, he was. Yes who was what? He had a negative WAR in 48 games last year, so he's a negative WAR player.

That probably doesn't apply to lefties who have gone 56 consecutive games without hitting a home run. Yes, because Stewart clearly has no power. Well, the wrist injury...he might just suck now. Or at least for a while. He very well might. But generally speaking a lack of power is not one of the valid criticisms you can make of him.

That probably doesn't apply to lefties who have gone 56 consecutive games without hitting a home run. Yes, because Stewart clearly has no power.

ARAM was still available and a full 4 WAR better than Stewart for probably a $10-11MM difference. Let's not forget the team picked up it's part of ARam's option. Bringing him back wasn't the issue, it's that Ramirez wanted more years than was prudent to give.

That's funny, I can't believe there's a significant portion of this board who are glad our starting 3b for 2012 is coming off a sub-replacement season and we are hoping he bounces back to maybe average. WHATEVER YOU SAY I WILL REPHRASE IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION! BOOM! ROASTED! Truly, his is a scathing wit.

That's funny, I can't believe there's a significant portion of this board who are glad our starting 3b for 2012 is coming off a sub-replacement season and we are hoping he bounces back to maybe average. The .780-ish OPS' he posted in 2009 and 2010 aren't sexy, but they're not bad. This isn't an inspiring move, but it's nowhere near worthy of the kind of assault you're waging on it. Would a .240/.330/.450 type season with improved defense for 2MM be that offensive to you? If he flames out, the team is out 2MM. You'd rather have given Aramis a 3-4 year deal?

Yes. We had this discussion during the Kemp/Braun MVP debate. A narrow split doesn't absolve a player of playing in a friendly home environment. So then the knocks of being helped by a home park or not "taking advantage" of it become two angles that can be used to support whichever side of an argument you choose to take? How convenient.

So he's done a bad job of taking advantage of his home park. Point for him? Really?

His numbers took a dip this year to be sure and that's reason for concern, but I've not seen a steady decline. TT (I believe) pointed out earlier in the offseason that after a rough first couple of weeks to the season, Pujols was back to his old self in 2011. His numbers have dropped from his 2008 peak, but if you'll notice his LD% held steady from 2010 to 2011 and yet his BABIP dropped 20 points. Given the numbers TT posted and the drop in BABIP, I don't think it's all that out of line to think he could sit right around his 2010 numbers for the next 4-5 years and then drop off. A 2-3 WAR player in at most 5 years is falling off a cliff, though, and I don't think he'll do that. I'm thinking he'll be a 3-5 WAR player around that time. He's been in consistent decline for 4 years. Last year was a tad anomalous, but there's a clear year to year trend downward in OPS, OPS+ wOBA, WAR and a few others. His o-swing is also clearly trending in the wrong direction. Everything looks like decline compared to two of his two best seasons, even the 4 years prior to 2008. His O-Swing hasn't really moved relative to the league average. True, but it seems like a 10/250 contract is rewarding him for his best years, not paying for the production you're likely to get from here on out. The downward trend is clearly there, regardless of the apex it's moving away from. Would I pay him 25MM per over the next five years? Without a doubt. But the second half would just be folly. Would you give him 10/250 right now?

His numbers took a dip this year to be sure and that's reason for concern, but I've not seen a steady decline. TT (I believe) pointed out earlier in the offseason that after a rough first couple of weeks to the season, Pujols was back to his old self in 2011. His numbers have dropped from his 2008 peak, but if you'll notice his LD% held steady from 2010 to 2011 and yet his BABIP dropped 20 points. Given the numbers TT posted and the drop in BABIP, I don't think it's all that out of line to think he could sit right around his 2010 numbers for the next 4-5 years and then drop off. A 2-3 WAR player in at most 5 years is falling off a cliff, though, and I don't think he'll do that. I'm thinking he'll be a 3-5 WAR player around that time. He's been in consistent decline for 4 years. Last year was a tad anomalous, but there's a clear year to year trend downward in OPS, OPS+ wOBA, WAR and a few others. His o-swing is also clearly trending in the wrong direction.

And plays sub-average defense. Based on what exactly?

There's about a .030 lean towards home in OPS over his career. Pretty neutral, especially for Rox players. Good to know. How have park factors compared between Wrigley and Coors over the last 5-10 years? Wrigley varies quite a bit, but Coors is consistently top 3 in offense.

There's about a .030 lean towards home in OPS over his career. Pretty neutral, especially for Rox players.

We had no shortage of MI - we just gave three of them away and got a lottery ticket in return. I'm not against this trade, but I don't feel like it was a particularly good move either. Probably my biggest disappointment is that it almost certainly takes us out of the running for Headley, which is fine if the Pads were asking the moon but disappointing if he could have been had for a reasonable price. I've been consistent in my disbelief that Headley would be offered by the Pads for a reasonable return. It just never made sense to me. Yeah, he's one of the few decent offensive players the Pads have, relatively cheap and under team control for the next few years. If we were going to get him, it was going to cost us. I thought if Theo/Jed could use Marmol as the centerpiece they could get away with giving up lesser prospects, but that ship sailed with the Street trade. Giving up top prospects for a guy who may or may not be an .800 OPS guy at 3B wouldn't jive with the business plan.

It was the mix of him likely being fantastically productive (even if he simply repeated his 5-6 WAR performance of last year) for at least the front half of his contract plus our complete and utter dearth of major league talent at first (save for Vogelbach) that made me willing to commit that much to Pujols. I don't think it's safe to assume a normal aging curve for one of the greatest players ever and with our payroll and desperate need at first, it was a good gamble to take. His numbers indicate he's already in decline. He's not HOF Pujols anymore. He'll rebound a bit next year, but imo he'll be a 2-3 WAR player at most five years from now.

If DJ can play second in the majors, we'll miss him. We have no shortage of MI, and D.J. was nothing special. We won't miss him.

I'm also annoyed to find out that we're taking a $5 million hit to Pena. But yes, I have a big dislike for the little overpays. It adds up. Overpaying for guys like Grabow et al, yes. Getting worked up over 2MM for Ian Stewart is a tad irrational.

I did. I'd have been fine with the Cubs matching, or even slightly exceeding, that offer. I'm having a hard time figuring out how people can feel this way. It's way too much money a few too many years. I really think people were just enamored with the idea of nabbing a once in a generation player from our rival more than making a prudent long term move. Five or six years from now we'll be thanking god we didn't go there.

Not acquire Ian Stewart. What is wrong with this deal? Neither of the pieces we gave up will be missed, and we got the two most talented players. 2MM is not worth hand wringing over.

Nobody is freaking out. Well, maybe jersey, but he always does. I'm a little annoyed and a little concerned, but that's a long long way from freaking out. Otherwise known as being impatient. It's too early for even that. If we're still here a month from now, I'll be on board.

People are just succumbing to need to see the team do something big because other teams are doing something big. Nevermind that it's only been a couple of teams or that the moves they've made have been largely stupid. Or that it's pretty early. I expect that from some people, but it's spreading.

Christ, you'd think it was February the way people are freaking out right now.