vance_the_cubs_fan

I'd like to see the Cubs sign Giles and if Castillo could be had in a trade, we would have a very good team.

Considering your love for Pierre, why not the same feeling toward Crawford?

1. Fredi Gonzalez 2. Davey Johnson 3. Larry Dierker 4. Ned Yost (I may even move Yost up a slot or two, but I'm not sure if he could get away from Milawukee)

The Braves also take BPA and actually prefer taking high schoolers and have been extremely sucessful in doing so. They key is to have the right people in player development. When working on limited revenue, it might be somewhat beneficial to target college players because they are closer to the majors, teams with more financial resources would do best to take the best available player.

My team didn't fare well (or maybe too well)- Base Cloggers- 412 points or #1005

Girardi might have been nice, but he still would have been no higher than fourth or fifth on my list. So far, my top three are still available should the Cubs can Baker.

Actually I think that's the Player of the Year award. The MVP should go to the best player that propelled their team to the playoffs imo. That said, I'm taking nothing away from Lee. He should get the POY. The give it to Jones. He's no where near the player as Lee and Pujols, but the Braves didn't have Chris Carpenter to shut down the opposition every fifth day along with a very healthy rotation. I still don't see this as a team award. It's an individual accomplishment, and Lee did more than any other player to help his team win. Just because his team mates couldn't make up the gap between their talents and the other teams they were chasing does NOTHING to dimish the value Lee brought to the team.

There's not much value in finishing 4th. That's not a biased opinion. It's what most of America believes, and probably what the majority of sports writers will determine. Maybe the majority of people are wrong, and you're right. It's not out of the question. "Value" is ambiguous, though. It's not necessarily black & white. And I'm not sure that Pujols had better teammates around him (other than the pitching). He spent much of the season with people like So Taguchi and Yadier Molina hitting behind him. I'm sure he would have preferred the protection of Aramis Ramirez, and might have benefitted from it. So your saying sum of all Cardinals - Pujols < sum of all Cubs - Lee, and that Pujols alone is accountable for the difference in wins between the Cubs and Cardinals ?!?!? Unless you can say that, then team wins mean nothing in the discussion of MVP. The fact that you have a pitcher in Cy Young race indicates that Pujols had more help than Lee in accumulating team wins. The worth of the supporting cast does not nothing to increase or decrease the value of an individual performance. We're not giving out the MVT (Most Valueable Team) it's the MVP, because it focuses on the worth of the individual performance.

So basing post season awards on Win Shares, we have: NL MVP- Albert Pujols NL Cy Young- Roger Clemens AL MVP- Alex Rodriguez AL Cy Young- Mark Buherle or Santana (I'm not sure if one tenth of a win share is that significant and that's the difference between the two) I'm not saying that it should be based strictly on Win Shares, but that's a pretty solid list, isn't it? Obviously, I'd love for Carpenter to win the Cy Young, but I'm pretty disappointed in how he was used down the stretch, and how poorly he finished. I'd trade the Cy Young for a dominant post-season performance from him in a heartbeat. I don't think it should be based on Win Shares either, and countered with it to say that if you look simply at Pujols WS to give him the lead over Lee (difference of 1 WS or roughly 1/3 of a win), you should do the same in the CY Race where Clemens lead in pitching win shares over Carpenter is greater than Pujols's over Lee in overall win shares. I think win shares are a very encompassing stat, but when they are as close as they are in the case of Pujols and Lee, I look at other stats as well. Lee leads in RC and RC/G. I'm still going with Lee on this one. Both are deserving, but the stats seem to indicate Lee was the more (if slightly) productive and therefore valuable player. I'm not going to make the Cy Young argument. Like I said, Carpenter crawled to the finish line. So if you're trying to bait me on that, it ain't gonna happen. :wink: Win Shares don't tell everything, but they're a pretty solid measure. The fact that Pujols had slightly more Win Shares, and led his team to the best record in baseball, while the Cubs didn't finish .500.......... that's a pretty strong case for Pujols. A strong case can be made, and has been made, for Lee, also............ which I could live with. I'm honestly pretty worried about Andruw Jones winning it, though. That would be a shame. Slightly more...why not say how slight? It was one or 1/3 of a win. To me that doesn't make too strong of a case. I wasn't trying to bait you on Cy Young, just seeing if you were consistent in your application of the data. If 1/3 of a win is enough to give Pujols the MVP when other metrics (RC RC/G point to Lee) shouldn't 3 WS or a full win be enough to swing your Cy Young vote to Clemens? Just trying to chip through the bias to see how you apply the data objectively.

Not surprising, but Giles was also fourth in the leage in runs created. I agree. If we add Giles, I think we almost could live with Cedeno at SS, Walker a 2b, a Lofton/Hairston platoon in CF, Murton in LF and still have a very productive offense. I just wish Hendry would got off the fixation for Furcal that I'm afraid he's on and focus on the best available FA. Giles + Lee + Ramirez = Lot o' runs.

Vance, I had read some place that their owner was planning on increasing payroll if they made the post-season. Since they did, I assume he will. By how much, I have no idea. I do think the Astros will be in on the Giles and Furcal sweepstakes. Cardinals will definitely be in on Giles. By the way, Oswalt is under contract for $11M in 2006. He will still be final year arbitration eligible for the 2007 season. I have Pettite: 17.5 Bagwell: 17 Oswalt: 11 Berkman: 14 Lidge 2.5 (estimate) Ensberg 2.5 (estimate) Biggio: 4 That's 68.5 million for seven players. If Clemens returns you can add another 15 plus to that. That would 83 million for 8 players. Their payroll was at 85-88 million this year. I just don't see how the Astros complete a roster under 100 million if they pursue Furcal (8 million ?) or Giles (11-12 million ?) unless they plan on letting Ensberg walk.

So basing post season awards on Win Shares, we have: NL MVP- Albert Pujols NL Cy Young- Roger Clemens AL MVP- Alex Rodriguez AL Cy Young- Mark Buherle or Santana (I'm not sure if one tenth of a win share is that significant and that's the difference between the two) I'm not saying that it should be based strictly on Win Shares, but that's a pretty solid list, isn't it? Obviously, I'd love for Carpenter to win the Cy Young, but I'm pretty disappointed in how he was used down the stretch, and how poorly he finished. I'd trade the Cy Young for a dominant post-season performance from him in a heartbeat. I don't think it should be based on Win Shares either, and countered with it to say that if you look simply at Pujols WS to give him the lead over Lee (difference of 1 WS or roughly 1/3 of a win), you should do the same in the CY Race where Clemens lead in pitching win shares over Carpenter is greater than Pujols's over Lee in overall win shares. I think win shares are a very encompassing stat, but when they are as close as they are in the case of Pujols and Lee, I look at other stats as well. Lee leads in RC and RC/G. I'm still going with Lee on this one. Both are deserving, but the stats seem to indicate Lee was the more (if slightly) productive and therefore valuable player.

Then they are screwed. They have no choice. They must improve the OF. I don't buy that. Have something like Lee, Kent, Furcal and Ramirez in the infield and Murton, Lofton and say Jacque Jones in the outfield, and the offense looks alright. Pitching is what usually wins titles anyways. You don't buy it. Alright, I'll give you the one exception. If next year's infield is Aramis (and he doesn't get injured), ARod, MGiles, Lee (and he doesn't regress, and they get serious pitching upgrades, then maybe they'll contend without improvement in the OF. I think people forget, this was a sub .500 team. They were not in contention the last 2 months of the season. They stunk. And the OF was pitiful. Unless they seriously upgrade the OF, they will have to have enormous upgrades elsewhere to even think about contending. And no, Furcal and Kent don't even come close to getting that done. Kent? Are you serious? Mr. Defense and speed first wants Jeff Kent at 2B? I'm going to have to side with goony here. This team isn't a quick fix or a minor tinkering away. It needs a massive overhaul. We can't just do a wink and a nod at the outfield and hope it fixes itself with weak additions like Jaque Jones or Preston Wilson. We either need to add one major impact bat or two very good ones. Giles is good enough to make a major difference, even if the infield remains the same as last season and you force another year out of Patterson/Hairston. Giles + someone else (Furcal, Wilkerson, etc) greatly improves the team. But, just replacing Nomar with Furcal and signing a bunch of mediocre talent to fill out the outfield will leave us dissapointed again in 2006.

Not surprising, but Giles was also fourth in the leage in runs created.

I'm beginning to think that that is what is going to happen too. Damon will go to the Yankees or Angels. Beltran will become Boston's CF. Cliff Floyd coming here. So Hoops, 3 minutes after you said we'd be going for a RF or CF, you say Cliff Floyd is coming here? :scratch: Actually my source thinks we're going after a RF AND CF. As for Floyd, I think if Hendry brings him here, it will be to play RF. Is your source of the mind-set that Furcal is the primary target, Hoops? And does your source think we have any chance for Giles? My 2 key sources would love Giles and Giles in Cub uniforms. Wouldn't we all? As for Marcus, there have been grumblings that he does not get along with Braves management, which has fueled the trade rumours, especially because he's 2nd time arbitration eligible and stands to get a raise from $2.3M to possibly $5.5M. Furcal is an obvious target for the Cubs, Mariners, Astros, Mets and Blue Jays because he plays SS and can lead-off, which are 2 key holes this off-season for many teams. Is he the primary target? I don't know. I will say I like the idea of acquiring Castillo, Giles, and/or Lugo before signing Furcal to a 4 year/$32M type deal. Hoops, Do you really think the Astros will raise payroll enough to pursue Furcal? By my rough estimates, I already have their payroll at 70+ million considering arbitration eligibles Ensberg, Oswalt, and Lidge.

So basing post season awards on Win Shares, we have: NL MVP- Albert Pujols NL Cy Young- Roger Clemens AL MVP- Alex Rodriguez AL Cy Young- Mark Buherle or Santana (I'm not sure if one tenth of a win share is that significant and that's the difference between the two)

Why not use 1987 as one? I think part of the problem is the voters have had no consistiency in this discussion.

I'm beginning to think that that is what is going to happen too. Damon will go to the Yankees or Angels. Beltran will become Boston's CF. Cliff Floyd coming here. So Hoops, 3 minutes after you said we'd be going for a RF or CF, you say Cliff Floyd is coming here? :scratch: Actually my source thinks we're going after a RF AND CF. As for Floyd, I think if Hendry brings him here, it will be to play RF. Is your source of the mind-set that Furcal is the primary target, Hoops? And does your source think we have any chance for Giles?

I'm also in agreement with UK. Where analogies about "price" fail is that those things can only assign economic value. there is more to value than economic principles. K-town, for example your analogy about the price of gas or snow shoes to a child in Alaska ignores the "cost" of moving commodities, etc. The "value" of those items doesn't necessarily change, there's just ineffieciencies in supply and demand based on locale. Also, there are things that have value, but not "economic" value. How valuable is my daughter? How valuable is knowledge or happiness or health? I know I made the mistake of doing it as well, but trying to use economic or any other analogy for value places us on slippery slope of not adjusting to other factors which are not congruent to the discussion. I think the fairest and simples way to assign value is to look at the best individual performance and assign value to that. Now if you want to debate the value of stats such as BA, HR, OBP, SLG, etc and how each should be weighted in determining the best player, that would be a discussion germaine to the topic. Observing the performance of a player's team mates to me should not be.

Yes, the Braves are in quite a pickle, thats why they couldnt do anything in the market last year to solve their barren OF...worked out for them though :D Heres their big salaries for 2006 Chipper: 17M +1.2M signing bonus w/ 2M of that deferred Andruw: 13M + .5M signing bonus Hampton: 13.5M Smoltz: 8M + 2M signing bonus Hudson: 6M + 2.5M signing bonus So with bonuses its more like 62M! They'd be idiots to try to keep furcal and trade giles, especially with betemit ready. And thats not an org filled with idiots. And it's because of those finances that I wouldn't be surprised if they entertained the idea of trading A. Jones. I'm sure that they'll publicly deny it, but production for dollar wise, they'd be smart to hang on to Giles and trade Andruw. His value is very, very high right now as well.

That's the point, if you start playing the "if" game, then everything changes. Who knows how well Lee would have hit in the Cards' lineup, or how well Pujols would have hit in the Cubs' lineup. In general, I agree with you, UK. But when the numbers are relatively close, then I think you have to lean to the player who led his team to the playoffs, and the best record in baseball. There IS value in that. It's not Lee's fault, but maybe someday the roles will be reversed, and Lee will benefit from playing for a winning team. "Value" isn't simply "value". It's not cut & dry. A gallon of ice cream doesn't hold much value to an Eskimo, but a kid might spend a month's worth of allowance for it. A pair of snow boots is worth more to an Eskimo than they are to a kid in southern California. Why does a gallon of gas cost $2.50 in Missouri, but $3.10 in Chicago? It's the exact same gas. Shouldn't the value be exactly the same? The context of everything DOES change it's value. That's not a new concept. A great baseball player isn't as valuable to a non-contender as it is to a team trying to position themselves for the playoffs. Did Pujols do that or what is it the combined efforts of him as well as Carpenter, Mulder, and company? If you give Pujols the MVP since his efforts were so valuable, shouldn't that mean Clemens should get the Cy Young because he obviously did more to get his team to the post season than Carp? Carp had an "MVP" to help him, who did Clemens have? When you say that Pujols had more value because he "led" his team, then you must in some form assume that the accomplishments of his team mates would be diminished without him. Or should the award be given to the best player on the best team?

I'm beginning to think that that is what is going to happen too. Damon will go to the Yankees or Angels. Beltran will become Boston's CF. Cliff Floyd coming here. So you're ok with a Murton, Wilkerson and Floyd OF? That would be an improvement over what we had this year. Murton > Hollandsworth/Lawton/Dubois/Hairston Wilkerson > Patterson/Hairston/Macias Floyd > Burnitz Would it be enough? That would depend on how well our infield produces.

Does anyone know if the family section will be rebuilt or is it gone for good?

He's got some tough decisions to make: (1) Should he or should he not trade Alfonso Soriano and/or Kevin Mench for starting pitching? (2) Can he get Boras to agree to an extension for Teixeira to cover his arbitration years at a price the Rangers can afford, or is it better to go with one-year deals until free agency? (3) Should they move Michael Young to 2B? There's probably several more. Hoops An addedum to #2 is if they can't get an extension for Tex, should they try to trade him while his value is so high? Good point. And if they decide to trade Tex and he can still play LF, I'd hope the Cubs would be all over that!

I read the Miami papers this morning, and many down there believe he'll end up being the Marlins next manager. Hoops This would make sense. I guess that Freddi Gonzalez doesn't get an opportunity this season. That's good that he could still be around when we bid adieu to Baker after 2006.