CUBZ99

While I agree with what he's saying, and while I don't believe Levine, I'd believe what Levine had to say every single time over Olney. I don't get what Olney has to do with any of this. Did you not read the whole e-mail? He says it's hard to believe that Levine would have info over "Rosenthal, Olney, Heyman, and the beat guy from each city." While I agree that I don't think Levine has any info here, if Levine came out with a report that no one else had, or Olney came out with a report that no one else had, I'd believe Levine every time over guys like Olney. Just because Levine isn't a "big time" ESPN guy doesn't mean he can't have info. When is the last time that Churchill ever got a scoop over any of the above mentioned? When did He or I ever say he did? He hears thing from a friend (who has been discussed here before) who is really reliable. Now, whether or not the friend is telling him exatly what is really going on is another story, but the definitely he gets stuff from re: The Cubs is definitely above any of those guys. He only gets bits and pieces though. By the way, he told me about a pretty big trade a few hours prior to when it broke anywhere else. Anyways I don't really seeing the point in your post. What are you trying to say? Churchill never claimed to be a reporter and never claimed to break anything. He tells me stuff because I ask. I don't really get your comment. It's like you don't like what he told me, so you're trying to find ways to discredit him when he hasn't really been credited with anything in the first place. Your quoting him like he is an authority. Levine > Chruchill any day of the week. We get it already, you don't believe Levine. Nobody will really know until things settle down, but to quote Chruchill, we might as well quote Banedon.

Would you prefer that I pull a Vance and post in only emoticons for a while? :wink: I'm actually probably going to tone it down a bit. Since the Titans clinched the #1 seed a few weeks ago and the Vols didn't have a bowl game, I've had to expend my energy into Hendry's recent bad moves. Now, though, I'll be able to fret and worry about Saturday's playoff game for the Titans - which will distract me from the Transactions thread for a while. :D Before you go I'm hoping you could clarify how many games you think Bradley will miss. Haven't seen you comment on that much. ;) Nah, I'm going to keep that opinion under wraps for now. :ninja: Just to make this clear....Do you like this trade?

I see why you are having such a tough time grasping this. YOU are the one that's NUTS! It is BOSTON that is desperate, not the Cubs! The Cubs would be dealing from a position of strength, and regardless wouldn't be putting Soto or any regular, other than Soriano, in such a package. Most teams wouldn't be willing to give up such an offensive threat, and that makes a deal for Soriano even more attractive. Remember, I didn't say this was GOING to happen, only that it might. But if the Red Sox were indeed willing to see Beltran as a real offensive threat, how much more valuable would Soriano be to them? Are you Alfonso Soriano's mom or something? No, the old timers on this board know who I am, but for your info, I am someone that reads a lot of "lines", and because of my pedigree in the game, I know what needs to be done, and how to get it done. I am also able to read between those "lines", and keep my ears open. Although my contacts in the game are diminishing due to age and health issues, I still have a few of those, too. I'd love to believe you have a clue what you're talking about. Most people here would love to believe Soriano has positive trade value. But most people here live in reality, where it's clear that Soriano's contract was atrocious even when they thought he could stay healthy and play center field. Now that we know he can't do either of those things, the Cubs are stuck paying a superstar salary to a pretty good but declining player who is already more trouble than he's worth. You're talking two different things: Whether I have "clue" or not, and whether Soriano has any trade value. The answer to the latter is YES, how much will be settled like most barters, by what you get in return, WHEN that bartering is finished, not before! We'll see if Boston can get what they are looking for without coming after Soriano. Is that possible? Sure! Not likely, but sure! To the first, I'll debate any portion of the game you or anyone else would care to debate, but I'd hate to embarrass anyone, that's not my thing...but sometimes I have to come close just to get the attention of some of these dolts! You're really not understanding. If Hendry called Theo Epstein and said "You can have Soriano, all you have to do is take on his entire contract", Epstein would say no. Soriano is not even close to being their type of player, and even if he was, they wouldn't want that awful contract. If Boston was really as desperate as you say they are, they would have caved and given Teixeira that extra 15 million or whatever it was. Now you are sounding as ridiculous as you claim that BroLight sounds. Epstien would gladly take Soriano and his contract if he didn't have to give up anything. Its not like the Red Sox are hurting for money and its not like Soriano hasn't earned his contract to this point.

While I agree with what he's saying, and while I don't believe Levine, I'd believe what Levine had to say every single time over Olney. I don't get what Olney has to do with any of this. Did you not read the whole e-mail? He says it's hard to believe that Levine would have info over "Rosenthal, Olney, Heyman, and the beat guy from each city." While I agree that I don't think Levine has any info here, if Levine came out with a report that no one else had, or Olney came out with a report that no one else had, I'd believe Levine every time over guys like Olney. Just because Levine isn't a "big time" ESPN guy doesn't mean he can't have info. When is the last time that Churchill ever got a scoop over any of the above mentioned?

I wish Prior all the best, but he was the most disappointing Cub in recent memory. I remember last year wanting Hendry to sign him for one more year, for the chance that he would be healthy...... :-)) :-))

If Miles is such a bad defender, why is LaRussa upset at his front office for dropping the ball and letting Miles get away???? I'll take his evaluation of Miles over yours! Even "good people" pout sometimes when they feel unjustly treated, are frustrated or sometimes on a bad day, even when they just don't get their way...kind of like you right now! Holy hell you're making such terrible, awful arguments. I could care less what a manager says about a player. Neifi saved us once, remember? Sam Fuld is untouchable. Etc, etc. I'll forget what I read on Baseball Reference about Aaron Miles being awful at baseball. If Tony LaRussa thinks he's good, that adds an invisible 30 points to your OPS+. And BTW...you still haven't addressed that Milton Bradley will miss time (from both sides of the plate-i will concede that.) and that Soriano has played in 135 and 102 games as a Cub. He'd see time in both spots, and while you may have supreme confidence that Mike Fontenot is an everyday option, I'd rather hedge my bets and keep the versatile guy who, at worst, could make one half of a highly effective 2B platoon. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go grow up and read Baseball for Dummies so that I might understand horrible logic a little bit better. How are his arguments terrible logic? I think it says a lot about a player if his prior manager is upset for not resigning him. Contrary to popular opinion, baseball players aren't robot or stats only. You don't think a player can bring anything to a team other than his statistics? I'm sure that Tony Larussa is a bum and his multiple world series victories to you were only luck, but I would say that he has some perspective on what it take to go all the way. BTW all this Miles bashing is exactly the same thing we heard when DeRosa was signed. Only when DeRo was signed it was for 3/13MM and not 2/5MM.

Maybe they will sign him to a minor league deal, but with Miles on the roster Aurilia doesn't make any sense.

During one of Hendry's most recent interviews he stated Marshall as one of the bullpen arms.

Did you break all your fingers? :-)) All of your posts have been smilies lately.

That would be an excellent trade for the Cubs. Although, I would hate to see Vitters and Castillo go.

It's ok if your bitter. We understand. BTW are you the guy that posts the Youtube? I think you're missing the point. I think not.

It's ok if your bitter. We understand. BTW are you the guy that posts the Youtube?

Dunn, from what I recall hearing, was looking for no more than $3-4 million more than Bradley. That's a definite issue, but instead of signing Aaron Miles for $2.5 million, use that to up the offer to Dunn. It could have been done. And Bradley could be great, but his history shows that it's extremely unlikely that he'll stay healthy. It's nowhere near a safe bet, whereas with Dunn you're pretty much guaranteed 150+ games of similar stats to Bradley. Would Dunn have accepted a 3 year deal? I thought I heard 5 or 6. That is a long time to commit to someone, especially with all of the money the Cubs have on the books in the future.

If Miles could do that consistently, he wouldn't be as much of a problem. But he's failed to do it pretty consistently. He has a .329 career OBP and has been close to .330 all but one year. His splits are also very favorable for a platoon with Fontenot. Vs. LHP his OBP over the last three years jumps to .374. Not a bad option as a PH or to spell other players vs. LHP. Now that I don't disagree with. But there's a word for guys who can play an average but not impressive middle infield and be the right-handed half of a platoon: Fungible. They are a dime a dozen. Unlikely. How many options were out there for the Cubs that put up a .374 OBP vs. LHP over the last three years? Once again, it sounds good when you make fun of Miles, and he is definitely not the type of player that you stake your season on, but he should be a solid platoon partner and he was pretty cheap.

But why did Hendry have to go with an overpaid RF? If he had no other choice and was forced into it, then I could understand. But there were other options. There was Adam Dunn. Still would have necessitated the DeRosa trade, but having as good or better a player in Dunn (compared to Bradley) who can also stay healthy makes that trade look a whole lot better. There was also Jeremy Hermida. Yes, we would have paid a dear price in young talent, but we're trying to win now, we could have kept DeRosa and we'd have a cheap, young budding star in RF instead of a $10 million health risk. If the payroll crunch is that bad and we have to improve in RF (which I think we did) then the cheaper player in terms of money, but more expensive in prospects would seem the most logical choice. There were numerous other options that would not have necessitated forcing a bad deal just to dump DeRosa and Marquis' salaries - and in place add Aaron Miles. Signing Bradley was not the only option and Hendry was not forced into it. If he made up his mind that Bradley was the only player he'd target, then that's not logical and it shows a flaw in him. I was under the impression that Dunn was looking for a bigger deal than Bradley. I didn't realize that Bradley was one of the offensive players in the AL last year. 1st in OBP 1st in OPS 3rd in BA 4th in SLG IF he can stay healthy, there is no question he would be a great addition.

If Miles could do that consistently, he wouldn't be as much of a problem. But he's failed to do it pretty consistently. He has a .329 career OBP and has been close to .330 all but one year. His splits are also very favorable for a platoon with Fontenot. Vs. LHP his OBP over the last three years jumps to .374. Not a bad option as a PH or to spell other players vs. LHP.

How would one rate Bradley's durability? Is he Rondell White-esque?

Alex Cintron had one season of a 112 OPS+ in 448 at bats - better than anything Miles has ever done. Tony Womack had a season of 91 OPS+ in 553 at bats - eight points worse than Miles' career year and better than any other year Miles has ever had. Damian Jackson had a season of 89 OPS+ in 470 at bats - 10 points worse than Miles' career year and better than any other year Miles has ever had. And in Miles' best year (2007) he had just 379 at bats. He's had two seasons over 400 at bats - a 74 OPS+ and a 76 OPS+. He looks very, very similar to those bad, replacement level (or worse) players. Miles is just some scrub. He's exactly the type of player the guys you listed are - scrubs grabbed off the scrap heap. And if the going rate for his type of player is $2.5 mil a year, I'd rather stick with Cedeno. And I don't really like Cedeno. You would rather have career .298 OBP Cedeno over $2.5MM Miles? Why? DeRosa has proven that a decent hitter that can play several positions can be valuable. The simple reason is that you have a good guess on what type of production you are going to get rather than playing roulette with your season. Can you imagine the Cubs having to count on McGehee's .160OBP or Cedeno's .298. For as much bashing as has been going on over Miles, not every middle infielder in baseball can put up a .330 OBP (as pathetic as it sounds). Like Cubsfan26 pointed out, I would take Miles over a slew of other guys the Cubs picked up in the past, including Cedeno. People need to get over the fact that Miles is never going to be a superstar. That is why he isn't getting paid anywhere near superstar money. Next year he will account for what, approximately 1.5% of the teams payroll?

In our system I'd take that bet. I don't see us having a guy who we can call up hit 290 get on base at a 330 rate and have OPS in the 700s while getting 300-400 AB's if he has to down on the farm right now. Yes some some scrub might be able to do that for a week or whatever. I think thats the point though people look at Miles numbers and say well there not that great or average. But people need to factor in the AB's he gets, if the guy is only getting 200 AB's he's probably alot better hitter. Miles would be a bad everyday player, but is a good bench player who can be part of a platoon and start for you at times. I don't see how paying 2.2m for him next year is that much overpaying. Especially when other simliar players just signed simliar contracts. I'm not sure I'd bet on Miles getting on base at a .330 rate with an OPS in the .700s either, considering he's had five chances to cross those thresholds and only done it once. Let's not get carried away. You may not like the Miles acquisition, but the guy did put up a .355 OBP last year, and to claim that any AAA 3B could do that or put up Miles career line of a .328 OBP is beyond defensible. Just for kicks the Cubs AAA 3b last year Casey McGehee put up a .160 OBP in back up duty with the Cubs. Ronny Cedeno comes into 2009 with a career .289 OBP. Its not as easy as you try to make it out to be.

Actually DeRosa's and Miles' careers prior to signing with the Cubs were almost identical. Including the fact, that both had career years prior to signing. Miles career prior to signing at 32 .289/.329/.364 Derosa's career #'s prior to signing .260/.316/.366 at 32 Based on those #'s you would be a fool to assume that Miles would turn out to put up #'s similar to DeRosa's, but I suppose it is possible that Mile's numbers could still improve over his career year, last year. I think the real swap is Fontenot for DeRosa, as the Cubs will be mainly facing RHP. I will be interested to see if Fontenot continues to improve this year. If Fontenot can continue his career .853 OPS vs. RHP. The loss of DeRosa isn't all that bad.

I was all for selling high on DeRosa. I didn't think that would mean trading for marginal relief prospects and signing Aaron Freaking Miles. In all fairness, we don't know how the rest of the offseason is going to shake out. But in general I agree with you, so far it has been very disappointing.

:cry: For good humor, go back and read what this board was saying about DeRosa when he signed his deal. Rotoworld even compared DeRosa to Neifi Perez. :-))

Unless, the Cubs already have the pieces to complete the trade with the Padres and the prospects Hendry got for DeRo were for selected for the purpose of restocking the farm.

I'm sure he has been at some point in his career.

I don't think that word means what you think it means... Some people think these moves are trangressions. As for Peavy, that situation is not directly related to any of these moves. As I blogged, the ownership situation has to sort itself out first. Was DeRosa a cancer in the clubhouse or was there something behind the scenes we are not privy to? It seems pretty odd to move on of your better offensive players for 3 B- or C rated prospects. Nothing like that. DeRosa was great with the media and great with his teammates. The Cubs wanted to get "more left-handed." DeRosa is really the only right-handed hitter they can trade. Lee, Soriano and Ramirez have no-trades, and Hendry has no interest in moving any of the three anyway. So DeRosa was it. If the Cubs sign Bradley, they feel they have a more flexible and left-handed hitting team. We'll see how it shakes out and then see how it works. Thanks for clearing that up. I'm amazed that Hendry couldn't get more for DeRosa than this trade though.