Transmogrified Tiger

You're gonna need to elaborate, because there's still no connection between the two.

What a guy hitting .292 with 28 HR and 82 RBI with a OBP .352 isn't good enough? Huh? Carlos Lee is 96th of qualified players in OBP. He's not a bad player, but on a team that's going to need an OBP stud to overcome low OBP guys in Izturis, Jones, and possibly Cedeno, it's not enough. Gee, Hee Flop Choi is an OBP stud, he just can't hit too well. See, this is called trolling. No, just stating a well known fact. Also a well known fact: the United States was originally a colony of England. It's irrelevant to the topic at hand and posted just to get a rise out of someone or start an argument. That's trolling defined. But whatever, if it makes you feel better to use strawmen like this instead of debating the topic at hand, go ahead.

What a guy hitting .292 with 28 HR and 82 RBI with a OBP .352 isn't good enough? Huh? Carlos Lee is 96th of qualified players in OBP. He's not a bad player, but on a team that's going to need an OBP stud to overcome low OBP guys in Izturis, Jones, and possibly Cedeno, it's not enough. Gee, Hee Flop Choi is an OBP stud, he just can't hit too well. See, this is called trolling.

Cut for Cap Space takes Laveranues Coles, WR, NYJ

According to The Fielding Bible, Byrnes is above average in LF. PMR agrees with that as well.

What a guy hitting .292 with 28 HR and 82 RBI with a OBP .352 isn't good enough? Huh? Carlos Lee is 96th of qualified players in OBP. He's not a bad player, but on a team that's going to need an OBP stud to overcome low OBP guys in Izturis, Jones, and possibly Cedeno, it's not enough.

I don't see much point in bringing Choi back. His only defensive value is at 1B, and he's not going to guarantee enough production on the bench to be a hired gun or professional hitter or whatever you want to call it.

Loretta too.

How soon til Marshall is ready to pitch? I bet Mateo is here for less than a week, and probably won't pitch. That's not necessarily bad.

Remlinger had a shoulder injury when he signed with the Cubs. Hawkins pitched in a dome stadium. Much different pitching in doors than it is out doors. Stadium only affects half your games, and Hawkins was great for the Cubs in '04. Remlinger was pretty good in '03 as well. Again, relievers vary wildly in performance, giving middle relievers 3 years is not a smart idea, especially when coupled with high dollars.

I think it should be in the NSBB Guidelines that every post that honestly uses the phrase "Quite Frankly" should be followed with a post saying only "QUITE FRANKLY, THESE CHEESE DOODLES ARE DELICIOUS".

The problem with the relievers contracts was and always has been the length. Relievers are too variable to commit to for 3 years, and when you commit high dollars to them it's even worse. Apparently we didn't learn from the Remlinger and Hawkins deals.

Slow down, that never happened. I took full responsibility for the Maddux for LaRoche thing because I was openly pining for him and never posted any rumors, sources, or whatever that said the Cubs were talking about Maddux for LaRoche. I wanted that trade to happen, despite the incredibly low probability that it would, due to the rumors that Ramirez would opt out and that the Cubs were reportedly looking to trade him. I never reported it like it was a fact. Anyone who construed it to be me actually reporting that as a credible rumor is a nitwit. Ignorant statement. I never accused you of anything. Its when some random person post a rumor/ trade they would like to happen, people jump all over it, and begin to think it is possible. Then they get mad, because they think they could of got a highly regarded prospect or two in return for Maddux. Jim Hendry himself said he could've gotten 2 high level prospects for Maddux, but couldn't pass on Izturis. I don't know what else could qualify as conclusive proof.

I'm going to preface this by saying that I like the Cubs. I want them to do well, and I'm looking for ways that things might turn out well for them. I'm not too excited about the Izturis trade, but I want it to work out okay. So, in a search for rationalization of this move, I noticed a coincidence. Many people were not happy the last time the Cubs acquired a 26 year old player who had a near .290 career OBP in roughly 2000 major league at bats. That 26 year old didn't have a great minor league career to go off of, and like this situation he was taking the place of the incumbent who was serviceable but not earth shattering. If you haven't figured it out by now, I'm comparing him to Michael Barrett. There are some differences between the two, Barrett having the better career major and minor league numbers, and Izturis being quite a bit younger when traveling through those levels. Barrett was a man caught between C and 3B, Izturis is a fine defender at SS. Now, and I want this to be inescapably clear, I don't think it's very likely Izturis has a breakout of Barrett's proportions. What I am saying is that players have the best years of their careers during their prime, which Izturis is going to be entering. Like Barrett, Izturis was highly regarded at one point, he wouldn't be exceeding his potential if he were an okay offensive SS. Izturis in previous seasons has been very unlucky with batted balls, hitting a lot of line drives and possessing good speed yet having a very low BABIP, especially for his LD%. What I'm getting at is that maybe Izturis won't be the nightmare we are seeing at this moment. Don't confuse this for excusing Hendry though. This trade is horrible on a number of fronts. It shows a staggering lack of identification of the team's needs, lack of value placed in certain qualities and overvalue of others, and a mismanagement of the contracts involved. However, just because he made a terrible deal doesn't mean he can't get lucky, or correctly identify Izturis as better than the sum of his career to date.

It depends on a couple of things, though. If you could pick either player in retrospect, then for certain you'd take the .300/.350 guy over the .280/.350 guy; especially since the .300/.350 guy is much more likely to have a higher SLG than the .280/.350 guy. However, if you look a bit deeper into the numbers, there is something to be said for plate discipline and the ability to repeat numbers. While some guys have a bit easier time repeating batting average than others, the numbers tend to fluctuate year in, year out. However, IsoD and plate discipline are much easier to repeat and erode much less with time. In other words, the .280/.350 guy is much more likely to be more valuable and productive in the future than the .300/.350 guy. The .280/.350 guy is much more likely to have a clue at the plate than the .300/.350 guy. Is there a study that back this up? A hit is worth more than a walk. But the walk is more repeatable/predictive than the hit. In a vacuum .300/.350 is more valuable than .280/.350, but because of defenses and luck(i.e. BABIP), the .280/.350 is more likely to continue to put up a .350 OBP(or just the better OBP of the two players) than the .300/.350. If you're just taking that in isolation though, wouldn't the hitter with .300/.350 be just as likely to hit .320/.370 as .280/.330? I agree that the hitter who is the .280/350 guy is more likely to put up a .350 OBP, but I think that the higher average guy has just as much chance of having a higher average the next season as having a lower one. The likeliness of a player getting a certain AVG then delves into batted ball types, defense, and luck. Needless to say, there's more room for luck to be on your side when you're hitting .280 than when you're hitting .300. Simply put, you're a better bet for a higher OBP if you have the better IsoD, because it's much more predictive than AVG.

It depends on a couple of things, though. If you could pick either player in retrospect, then for certain you'd take the .300/.350 guy over the .280/.350 guy; especially since the .300/.350 guy is much more likely to have a higher SLG than the .280/.350 guy. However, if you look a bit deeper into the numbers, there is something to be said for plate discipline and the ability to repeat numbers. While some guys have a bit easier time repeating batting average than others, the numbers tend to fluctuate year in, year out. However, IsoD and plate discipline are much easier to repeat and erode much less with time. In other words, the .280/.350 guy is much more likely to be more valuable and productive in the future than the .300/.350 guy. The .280/.350 guy is much more likely to have a clue at the plate than the .300/.350 guy. Is there a study that back this up? A hit is worth more than a walk. But the walk is more repeatable/predictive than the hit. In a vacuum .300/.350 is more valuable than .280/.350, but because of defenses and luck(i.e. BABIP), the .280/.350 is more likely to continue to put up a .350 OBP(or just the better OBP of the two players) than the .300/.350.

That's weird, I just saw the CSN report where Mitch Whatshisname talked to Cedeno and said that Cedeno said he had never played second before. Could be semantics between game situation and "working out" though.

The answer is yes. Major League teams value 26 year old shortstops who have won 2 gold gloves, had 193 hits in a season and an All-Star appearance. At $4.5M there are multiple teams who would have picked him up. I call shenanigans.

I'm not watching, but probably. Hendry has the coherence and fluidity in speech of a speak-and-spell.

kill me

The Perez deal make sense if he's actually lost a lot of velocity like some reports have said. The Wilson deal is just dumb, and the Kip Wells deal is meh.

Silver lining part deux: 2004 was the year he actually had a BABIP in line with his LD%, he should've repeated his '04 numbers in '05 with the batted balls he had. Now for the bad news. His LD% is way down this year, so much that his production is in line with his BABIP. Plus he's had 2500 Major League PA's, so it's probable that he's a guy who will consistently be below his expected BABIP despite having the tools not to do so. You know, like Neifi.

Feeble silver lining: Izturis is less worthless in Day games(.719 OPS) than Night games(.600)

Conflicting opinions here, I see. I think this is a good one from the Pirates perspective. For what ever reason, they soured on Wilson. That they got a started for a guy they didn't want is doesn't suck. At worst, they Chacon for someone they didn't want anymore. Draft pick > Chacon

Yep. I might've held out for the draft pick, but it's not a big difference.