Magnetic Curses

i thought it was pretty great. right on..

he's not exactly out of his prime, either. come on, he'll be just 32 at the start of the season. that's pretty prime in my book.

nice deal for the rangers. I think it's the opposite. You can argue that Young is better than Eaton(as well as a year younger), and Sledge+Gonzalez is worth well more than Otsuka and a prospect. Towers fleeced them here. i'm not really impressed with either sledge or gonzalez. i don't know a lot about young but eaton's a good pitcher.

You have no idea what Hendry will or won't do, unless you have some personal relationship with Jim that I'm unaware of? Dealing Pie in a package for a player like Abreu should be a no-brainer. I know I'm going to get killed for this, but so be it. Why are we anxious to trade a 20 year old centerfielder who scouts well and put up a .903 OPS in Double-A at age 20 for a 32 year old rightfielder who couldn't get his OPS over .900 last season playing in one of the best offensive parks in the National League, posted a .787 OPS after the All-Star break, and is due $30 million over the next two seasons? And not only him, but other valuable players, too? Goodness gracious. I'll bite. Because the .787 is likely an aberration stemming partly because of an off-field incident, and because there is a massive, massive, massive difference in plate discipline between the two. massive is not the right word. there is a difference in discipline the size of the grand canyon between the two. and one is a freaking proven commodity while the other hasn't played in the majors yet.

The Astros might also be willing to part with Lidge in a deal for Abreu which trumps anything we'd be willing to offer. i don't think the astros would give up lidge. Well, that's yet to be seen but there have been reports that he's being shopped and his name has definitely been mentioned in trade rumors. Even the Chronicle says teams have been inquiring about his status. If he was untouchable McClain would have put an end to the rumblings like Hendry did for the Prior and Zambrano rumors. i just doubt that philly would ask for lidge in return, as they don't really need to swap their best position player for a closer. if philly is smart, they ask for oswalt. The report I read out of Houston last month or earlier this month stated that Houston would shop Lidge for the right deal because they are confident that Wheeler can close. My guess is that they wouldn't part with Oswalt considering the loss of Clemens. The seem to be eager to deal Backe however (probably because they feel Astasio is ready). so it's houston that has mentioned lidge? makes a lot of sense. i don't know why philly would want lidge.

btw- this team needs abreu a heck of a lot more than it needs tejada. so, if he's waiting on tejada and ignoring the venezulan god of walks, he shouldn't be running a baseball team.

well, he's waiting himself right out of a job then.

WHAT?!? Williams is at least as valuable as Lidge? Please, let's hear this argument... Williams(or other SP) is going to pitch 3 times as many innings as Lidge will in a given season. Therefore, even though his performance isn't as dominant as Lidge's, he's worth more to the team because the quantity outweighs the marginal difference in quality. I undertsand your point but I think, if given the opportunity, the Phillies would like to replace Wagner before acquiring a middle of the rotation guy. Closers are much harder to acquire. i just don't know why they'd want to go and acquire another bullpen arm in exchange for their best player when what they need is a starter. there, i said it again. is anyone listening to me?

Lidge did get knocked around a bit in the postseason last year. Houston might get rid of him if they are afraid of the Mitch Williams disease. Houston's offense was atrocious. It should be better with a full season of Berkman. They have to rely on their offense more now that Clemens is gone. 600 AB's of Abreu is more valuable for Houston than 70 IP of a great closer for Houston. Philly needs Billy Wagner's replacement too. they have a decent bullpen and added tom gordon. they need starting pitching.

The Astros might also be willing to part with Lidge in a deal for Abreu which trumps anything we'd be willing to offer. i don't think the astros would give up lidge. Well, that's yet to be seen but there have been reports that he's being shopped and his name has definitely been mentioned in trade rumors. Even the Chronicle says teams have been inquiring about his status. If he was untouchable McClain would have put an end to the rumblings like Hendry did for the Prior and Zambrano rumors. i just doubt that philly would ask for lidge in return, as they don't really need to swap their best position player for a closer. if philly is smart, they ask for oswalt.

WHAT?!? Williams is at least as valuable as Lidge? Please, let's hear this argument... Williams(or other SP) is going to pitch 3 times as many innings as Lidge will in a given season. Therefore, even though his performance isn't as dominant as Lidge's, he's worth more to the team because the quantity outweighs the marginal difference in quality. probably only twice as many, but your point is well taken. williams is a quality starter.

Good call, Mon. Arguably one of the ten best players in baseball is available, plays a position where we have a gaping hole and could be had for a few relievers and a starter. Hendry should be fired soon after. What can the Cubs offer that tops any Houston deal involving Lidge? Be realistic please. 1. money 2. money 3. money while the cubs might not be able or willing to offer someone with lidge's talents, they could assume the entirety of his contract and then some. something that houston CANNOT do.

The Astros might also be willing to part with Lidge in a deal for Abreu which trumps anything we'd be willing to offer. i don't think the astros would give up lidge.

nice deal for the rangers.

if the astros acquire abreu for a combo of wheeler, qualls, and backe, hendry is a bigger idiot than i ever gave him credit for. does he not understand that he could not only blow any deal houston could make away, but he could also assume all of abreu's contract, plus the remaining portion of thome's contract which the phillies owe? if the astros get abreu, i won't watch the cubs until hendry is fired.

Even his best year was below average for a corner outfielder. If it was 1 year and we had Tejada at SS or Abreu in the other corner, I'd be fine with Jones for that 1 year. Though, I'd definitely prefer Murton over Jones. he hasn't ever been a good player. the only thing that would save him is if he hit .300 with last year's IsoD.

Without a doubt. Considering his recent health, I wouldn't be surprised to see him take a 2 year extension and run. Could be a wise business decision. Washington is a team without an owner and as such is in no position to be offering contract extensions like this. This "deal" is not in the realm of possibility. Is there any chance Kerry will get dealt to another team this offseason? do you really honestly care if there's any return on him or are you just so eager to get rid of him that you'd take a much lesser player, a player likely to get no important innings, pay all of wood's salary just to be rid of him? i honestly don't understand the hate for wood at all. If he's dealt, they better get a good return. Would be nice to have more money freed up tho. fair enough.

I agree, but I don't think anyone is advocating the Cubs become a small ball team. you are right about the recipe for success, but a team that can scratch out a run here and there will win alot of tough games over teams that cannot. that being said, all is lost in terms of the advantage of playing small ball as our manager wouldn't have the slightest idea when it is a good time to play small ball and when it is a good time to wait for the three run dinger. i'm saying small ball is ineffective. and probably only useful over the course of a small sample size, like in the playoffs, when gambles either pay off big or lose big. playing it over the course of a 162-game season only hurts a good team. a team is more successful if their hitters are allowed to behave normally in a RISP situation. you will never see Jim Edmonds, Albert Pujols, or Scott Rolen EVER intentionally try to hit a ball the other way unless that's where the ball is pitched....ever.never ever. all I'm saying is that a team that can selectively play small ball will have an advantage over a team that can't. if Roy Oswalt is on and hasn't given up a flyball all game, with Lidge looming, small ball can mean the difference in having a chance and having no chance. but I would never condone trying to scratch in a run before the sixth or seventh in that situation, and I would never ask my power hitters to bunt. the bolded part is not true whatsoever. maybe with Edmonds and Rolen, but I have seen Pujols inside out a pitch to get a runner home many many times. all it takes in one mistake to a hitter that can punish them. and i've never seen pujols intentionally hit a ball more softly than he absolutely could. and why would he be inside outing a pitch to get a runner home? generally players try to inside out pitches to move runners over, and i've never seen pujols do that. but what you just said makes no sense.

what about mind games by steve goldman? i'm thinking of checking it out.

Without a doubt. Considering his recent health, I wouldn't be surprised to see him take a 2 year extension and run. Could be a wise business decision. Washington is a team without an owner and as such is in no position to be offering contract extensions like this. This "deal" is not in the realm of possibility. Is there any chance Kerry will get dealt to another team this offseason? do you really honestly care if there's any return on him or are you just so eager to get rid of him that you'd take a much lesser player, a player likely to get no important innings, pay all of wood's salary just to be rid of him? i honestly don't understand the hate for wood at all.

I agree, but I don't think anyone is advocating the Cubs become a small ball team. you are right about the recipe for success, but a team that can scratch out a run here and there will win alot of tough games over teams that cannot. that being said, all is lost in terms of the advantage of playing small ball as our manager wouldn't have the slightest idea when it is a good time to play small ball and when it is a good time to wait for the three run dinger. i'm saying small ball is ineffective. and probably only useful over the course of a small sample size, like in the playoffs, when gambles either pay off big or lose big. playing it over the course of a 162-game season only hurts a good team. a team is more successful if their hitters are allowed to behave normally in a RISP situation. you will never see Jim Edmonds, Albert Pujols, or Scott Rolen EVER intentionally try to hit a ball the other way unless that's where the ball is pitched....ever.never ever.

OBP isn't just extremely important. it's the most important stat in the game. there is no stat that is more directly related to the scoring of runs than the one that reflects the failure to make an out. a team gets 27 outs in a game-giving them away is like moving your back pieces in a game of checkers.

this is voodoo baseball, here. the facts simply do not support your reasoning so you start making stuff up. there's no way that you can know either way by watching a team during 162 games. like i've said before, the difference between a .275 hitter and a .300 hitter is a 1 hit every 2 weeks. there is no possible way that you can tell the difference without cold hard statistics. baseball is an invisible game of numbers. i find it fascinating, many others do not. the cardinals won because their pitching was great and their OBP was very good. the cubs were terrible because their pitching was average and their OBP was absolutely terrible. a few runs here or there over the course of a season mean little. furthermore, if you play too much small ball, you are rarely in one-run situations anyway, so what's the point? teams that get on base and have solid pitching win baseball games. teams that routinely waste outs and takes unnecessary gambles on the basepaths generally lose. and again, history...and stats bear this out. the problem with this idealogy is that it tries to attach a transcendental quality to a game of statistics. and baseball is, more than any other sport that's ever existed, a game of statistics. playing small ball may win a few games per year, i'll give you that. but it will LOSE you just as many games per year, erasing any supposed advantage it gives. playing consistent baseball over the course of a year, trusting in good players to hit, get on base, and create runs by their talent alone is the best recipe for success. bad ballclubs may have to take a ton of gambles, but good ballclubs don't. good ballclubs don't give outs away or do things that erase their advanatge as a team.

STL and the Cubs were very close in sacrifice hits and sacrifice flies last year, in the middle of the NL pack. Sacrifices, and the little things, are not why STL had success. The big things are. The Cards ranked 3rd in OBP, and 3rd in runs scored. There's your correlation for offensive success. And they pitched extremely well. There's your overall success. Washington, San Francisco, Florida, Pittsburgh, and San Diego were among the most sacrificial teams in the league last year. Those little things are things that weaker offensive teams do, and they don't correlate to success. total sacrifices: chicago- 106 st louis- 112 walks: chicago- 419 (dead last) st louis- 534 but i'm sure that there was some special kind of magic in st louis sacrifices that gave them the out back or something. i'll say it again, wasting an out is stupid if it's not the pitcher making it.

it also takes several runs away per year. paying lip service to the times it is effective while ignoring how many times it's ineffective is short-sighted. yes, i can. the cardinals have success because they have 3 great hitters and an overachieving staff. what, by talking to a fan? i talk to cubs fans all of the time, and many of them actually think that neifi is an effective player! i doubt cardinal fans can offer much more insight into their team. they'd probably say something like: "the cards do better because of clubhouse chemistry" or some other bs baseball mythology. i'll repay your sentiment and tell you that your views are full of conventional mythology that amounts to a pile of crap itself.