ShawonOmeter12

This is fun. glad i could entertain you. there is a reason why this board has basically become a little cult of about 15-20 posters, instead of discussions it has turned into a big dick contest between a few people while others just like to rip others opinions. carry on fellas...

sorry grammar police, i was typing while trying to feed my kid. btw thanks for adding anything of substance to this thread. Posts with opinions like "I would rather not have cyborg-werewolf amalgams on my team because I like having prospects that are 2 years away from the bigs," aren't very smart opinions. yes it is so far out there to think that keeping potentially rizzo, baez, teheran, delgado, vizcaino and others could be better then stanton. funny thing is i never said others opinions were wrong just that in my opinion i would rather keep the huge amount of talent it would take to get him. thanks for informing me though that my opinion isnt very smart. maybe we all should just be silent and let only you post since only your opinion has value to a message board.

sorry grammar police, i was typing while trying to feed my kid. btw thanks for adding anything of substance to this thread.

am i the only one who would just prefer to make all the "side moves" that would be nesecary to get stanton and stop there? it will take an unreal haul for him so i would just like to load up and stop there and hope we hit on a few of them. will any of the prospects turn out as good as stanton, no, but if half of them turn into quality major leaguers i think that would help us more then just stanton. i know we are a big market we should be able to buy the rest of the players if we get stanton but i just dont think it is wise to trade what will probably be the mother load of prospects it will take to get him

if im hoyer i call back and tell them 5 for 80, take it now or we are out. puts ball back in our court and its just 1 mil a yr more.

why wouldnt they? if they wer going to for dempster why wouldnt they for maholm if we agreed to pick up his option and pay most of it? maholm for 1.5 yrs is more valuable then dempster for .5 yrs in my opinion

would atl be interested in maholm if we paid rest of salary this yr and all of option next yr? it would be close to same $ as demp for us and for atl it would give them a good sp this yr plus they get him all of next yr for free. to me that would be better for them then dempster. just trying to come up with ways for us to get delgado still!

rotoworld is saying dodgers are looking to deal gould and lee to astros for lowrie, i think i would be fine with giving them dempster and barney for those 2, question is would they do it?

Random thoughts - Wood as a middle-rotation type in 2013? I've started to mildly turn the corner on him ... but I'm just not sure he'll be that good by next year. He's a decent arm to develop at the back end and hope he becomes a mid-rotation arm down the line. What's the quality of the young-ish starter in the majors in this hypothetical Garza deal? Because it's hard for me to imagine getting 2 quality, ready for the big arms in a Garza deal. I'm starting to question if we can land ... the equivalent of what we gave up for Garza (borderline top 50 prospect arm, a 70-100 prospect with a high ceiling, and 2 upper level assets). I think so, and all it takes is one team, but getting 2 quality upper level arms? Seems ... hopeful, and I hope you might be right. I've toyed around with it some. Maybe a Porcello/Turner package from Detroit or Hughes/Banuelos, maybe Delgado/Gilmartin or Eovaldi/Reed. Some other pieces, probably more arms actually. Maybe guys that are controllable pen guys. For me, Atlanta, Dodgers, Tigers, Yanks is how I'd rank those combos, by the way. The guy on PSD with Royals contacts said they're thinking if they're .500 in a couple of weeks, it's likely they'd offer one of Odorizzi/Ventura, one of Montgomery/Dwyer, and possibly Cuthbert, if we'd throw them Barney as well. The royals are a team i would really like to see get involved with garza, their system is pretty deep and they need a TOR sp in a bad way

Castro for Matt Moore. Would you do it? Would Tampa Bay do it?

isnt he still just 25 yrs old? he has put up good Ks in the minors and was a former 1st rd pick, he has to be worth more then shawn camp.

with the news that the red sox released him do you think theo will want to reunite with him? I think it would be a decent buy low type situation to see what he can give us in the pen. He is easily worth the risk over camp in my opinion.

I left out the obvious part that I figured I didn't have to go over it yet again because it's such common sense and it's been covered a zillion times: yes, if we lived in a fantasy world where a team was willing to take Soriano and his paycheck the Cubs should do it...but we live in the real world where any trade for Soriano would involve the Cubs almost certainly paying for at least half of his salary. So you either have Soriano (again, not blocking anyone in the system and not depriving the Cubs of a spot for an impact FA signing) for $18 million or, say, Willingham for all intents and purposes at least for $14 million (and Christ, he's awful this year, and he'd be 33 himself if the Cubs picked him up for next year), because there's almost no way the Cubs are pawning off Soriano without paying something like $9-12 million dollars a year for the rest of his contract. It's just not realistic. With or without Soriano, the Cubs are almost certainly paying WAY too much for their LF production for the next 3 seasons. you think willingham would cost 14 million for next year? by what math. [edit] he's making 6 million this year. he would have to go on quite a tear :roll: his point is you would be paying willingham 5 mil a yr and someone else 9 mil towards soriano's contract making your investment in LF 14 mil.

Just why do you think he is such a solid player for our 25th player? Why is it every released player is sooo much better than what the Cubs have? Oakland certainly isn't that deep to release quality roster prospects. pretty much i dont care who our 25th man is because they dont play that much anyways. my whole point was i think we are stunting cedeno's development by making him ride the pine when he could be playing at iowa.

released by the A's and was solid for a strecth with the dodgers, does he interest anyone? i am not a fan of cedeno starting out in the bigs, i think he would be better served playing everyday in iowa. i think perez could be a solid 25th man for us and allow cedeno to continue to grow in the minors. what do you guys/girls think?

anyone know how these 3 are doing? i know they were preet hyped coming into the league and i was wondering if we could maybe find a decent pitcher out of the bunch. the one that interests me the most is anderson, is he the former tigers closer of the future? thanks for the info in advance.

while not the most ideal situation, what about if we trade jones playing derosa in center and going with patterson/theriot at 2nd? if it came down to it i would rather have one of those 2 in the lineup as oppsed to finley or erstad. thoughts????

i love this pick, high reward, low risk. maybe a change of scenery will help him with his problems as well, very nice move hendry/wilkin.

the only reason i did was that soriano costs only money while manny will cost money and players in a trade.

I think what people are saying is that Matt Murton improved from the first half to the second half. Which means he's making progress and should continue to progress. Since last year was his first full major league season it'll be interesting to see how he fares next year. i am in favor of murton starting for us but if we get lee for example i will not complain, we need impact bats and right now lee is one, 3 years from now he might not be but he is now. i want to win now so i don't really care about the payroll, the cubs can spend with the best of them so we shouldn't have to worry about payroll problems too much in the future.

it is been made very apperant that murton's numbers post break are better than lee's but lees toal numbers dominate murton's. i really could care less about the pre and post break splits, it is a full season and game one is just as important as game 162 so i think overall production is the number to look at. just my opinion though.

Imagine if at the end of the free agent period still sitting out there for the Cubs to grab is Drew. Now imagine if Hendry signs Ted Lilly, or Vicente Padilla to some high dollar contract to go along with Blanco and DeRossa and some other fillers. Drew is looking for 15 mill/year for four years and Hendry has already spent enough that he only has 10 million left. Maybe he didn't overpay for DeRosa or Blanco, but what if signing them costs the Cubs the opportunity to sign Drew. If Hendry covets Drew or Soriano he has to set aside money for them. Niether is likely to be signed right away. I guess it is sort of a catch 22 in some ways. But I'd rather he fills the holes he has first. The Cubs have to get a CF and probably need another run producer to boot. Getting Drew and putting him in CF fills almost holes. I don't like the idea of Sorano playing CF and I don't like the idea of giving him a six or seven year contract. i think it is safe to assume that they will hold enough back to get the guys they want like a drew or soriano. on the flip side what happens if they hold all this money back and dont get a drew or soriano? then you are stuck having to play a theriot(good or bad is in the eye of the beholder) a soto on the bench and so one and so one. look at last year all the eggs in the furcal basket and once he ditched us we had already missed out on a bunch of guys that could help us. i would be really upset if we didnt sign anyone because all we went after was big guys, the middle level solid players are a must too, ask the cardinals how they feel about eckstein for example.

just out of curiosity what do you guys think 4 million buys in the market today? this is in context to derosa, i dont think he will set the world on fire but i think he will prove to be a pretty good player for 4 million. look what jose valentin, helms, and spiezio got, sad to say this is the market so i don't think he over paid for him. what are your thoughts?

how is he preventing him from doing his job? i think you know what i mean but if we have to play these games i will spell it out for you, he is not physically stopping him from doing his job, i am saying to let him complete his body of work before you judge it. for a lame example: a painting looks like a bunch of crap slopped together before it is completed and becomes a master piece. i am in no way calling hendry's work a master piece though just an analogy. I am pretty sure most managers don't agree with that. I certainly don't let my staff "complete their body of work" before I review it. and how are the results of 2005 not hendry's body of work? When you see him following the same pattern that led to disaster, what is wrong with criticizing it? I really don't see your point whatsoever. When Jim makes a bad move, he deserves criticism. do you stand over their shoulder and watch/complain about their every move? that is what you are doing right now with hendry. the funny part is that i really don't like him as a GM either but to me the sum is worth more than the parts is how i like to view/judge things.

i would prefer drew but if he gets soriano you will not here one complaint from me. do you think 6 years and 100 million would get soriano to the midwest?