vance_the_cubs_fan

David Newhan. In six seasons, he has a career line of 256/315/386. His best season was 311/361/453 at age 30 in 2004. He followed that in 2005 by hitting 202/279/312. He's a blah player that should be playing AAA somewhere.

Suppan has been more consistent than Lilly, but I'm not sure he's been any better. He definitely has been healthier. With Lilly in the AL, ERA+ is likely the best metric for comparison. Suppan's last three ERA+: 104, 114, 110. Lilly's last three ERA+: 109, 80, 120. Lilly has a higher ceiling, Suppan is more durable. It's a wash as to which one will be better. You're right that it's not really fair to compare Sheets injury to Prior's history. On the other hand, if taking injuries into account, Zambrano easily gets the nod over Sheets. So, Zambrano > Sheets. Suppan and Lilly are a wash. The rest of the Brewers rotation of Vargas, Capuano and Bush could be better than the Cubs rotation of Hill, Marquis, and Prior. On the other hand, if Prior returns to his 2005 form, then the Cubs easily take the edge. In 2005, Prior posted an ERA+ of 116 over 166 IP. In Capuano's best ceiling he only posted an ERA+ of 112. The question then becomes is 2006 indicative of Capuano's performance or a spike season for him. Considering Prior doesn't even need to return to his peak season of 2003 to beat Capuano's peak season. Cap's ERA+ for the past four seasons: 112, 106, 83, 101. Prior's ERA+ the past four seasons: 64, 116, 113, 175. What that shows me is that Capuano is a pitcher who is likely to perform 5-15% above league average. Prior, if healthy, can be expected to perform 16 or more above average. Now the question for Prior isn't ability, it's health. It's a big concern, for certain. But to say Capuano is better than any non-Zambrano pitcher is being dishonest. It's just not true. Now on to Bush and Hill. Bush posted an ERA+ of 102 over 200+ IP last season. Hill posted a 111 ERA+ in 99 IP. Bush has a longer track record for certain as he posted that over a full season, while Hill pitched only 100 major league innings in the majors. Given Hill's minor league success, it's not a stretch, however, to believe he can keep it up. Both pitchers look to be pretty good, but I'd actually give the nod to Rich Hill. Marquis is likely to outperform Vargas as well. While Marquis had an atrocious ERA+ of 73 last season, his full three year line of ERA+ is 73, 103, 113. Given that, I'd expect Marquis to be anywhere from 10% above average to 20% below average. On the other hand, Vargas has been below average in each of his last three seasons. His best ERA+ was 99. Even assuming he might have some improvement left in his game, it's a stretch to think he'll be anywhere above 1-2% above average. He also has a floor about as low as Marquis. When looking at the two staffs, it's really hard to guess which one will be better. If both get best case scenarios, the Cubs are likely better because Prior is just that good if completely healthy. The Brewers have fewer question marks, but if Sheets goes down again, they have less to cover the loss.

I really don't think an extension will be needed to get Andruw to waive his no-trade clause; Boras will want to shop him on the open market next season. What will be asked for is concessions. Boras may ask that Andruw be given a 2-5 million bonus to waive his no-trade which would bring his salary into the 18 million range for next season. Boras could ask that Andruw receive perks like the ones Soriano received such as his own suite on the road, the team pays to fly his family to Chicago for a certain number of times, a certain amount of tickets, etc.

I don't know who will be the better staff between the Brewers and Cubs. What I do know is ranking the Brewers with Sheets and then not given the Cubs credit for Prior isn't really intellectually honest. Sheets pitched 106 innings last year. Prior pitched 43. In 2005, Sheets pitched 156; Prior pitched 166. Zambrano gets the edge over Sheets simply because he's shown he's healthy and can handle a 200 IP load. Sheets hasn't done that in two years. By negating Prior and Hill in your comparisons, Ender, you make the Brewers look better. A few adjustments, I could make... A healthy Prior = healthy Sheets. (We can debate which one is more likely, but this is probably true.) Zambrano > Capuano Hill = Bush (Assuming the second half Hill is for real.) Lilly > Suppan Vargas = Marquis Now we can argue over the liklihood of the scenarios needed to flip the rotations like I have, but it's all plausible. Sheets pitching 200 innings is just as likely as Prior pitching 185 innings. Zambrano's durability gives him the edge over Ben. Hill is definitely a wild card for the Cubs and Prior there are questions of health and performance, but his ceiling is higher than any pitcher on either staff.

It appears Israel is creating its own baseball league and even hopes to be an entrant in the next WBC. Link.

According to the Star-Ledger, a deal sending the Unit to Arizona could be close. Link.

Link.

I find this view rather short sighted.

I feel sorry for those who will be judged for their unbelief.

Adam Eaton got 3/24. If Prior were a FA, some team would offer him that.

Unless I'm getting a player that I believe immediately helps the major league team, I wouldn't trade Prior. Prior still has huge upside. If he comes back to his 2002-early 2005 form, the Cubs could have a phenomenal pitching rotation with Zambrano, Prior and Hill at the top with Lilly and Marquis or a young pitcher at the bottom. While no one is counting on Prior to be that type of pitcher, he's still incredibly young and isn't a drain on the payroll. I would package Prior for an impact bat at SS (Tejada or M. Young) or at CF (A. Jones), but I likely wouldn't give him away for a prospect unless it was a prospect that I envisioned winning a job and producing in 2007. Those prospects are few and far between. So, I'm likely over-valuing Prior. But since he isn't being counted on, he's of more value to hold onto than to trade for another question mark.

Somehow I think it would take much more than that to get Tejeda.

Ugh, I couldn't stay out of this thread. Brock shouldn't be in the HOF therefore he shouldn't be a baseline for HOF OFers going forward. But the fact is, he is in the HOF. We can't remove those already enshrined, so the fact they are is relevant. Dawson if enshrined would not lower the caliber of player in the HOF. No, Dawson doesn't merit mention with the best or even an average HOF. But he is of the level of the lowest group of HOF player, as his comparison to Brock. Dawson likely was better offensively and defensively than Brock. If Brock is a HOFer (and he is), Dawson should be as well. If we can't compare him to current HOF, then compare him to players of his generation. Dawson surely makes the Hall on that standard. Maz is in. Therefore, Izzy should go. Maz: .260 .299 .367 Izzy: .259 .295 .336 Oh wait. Damn. Izzy can't quite slug at a hall of fame level! But Izzy isn't among the best players or SS of his generation is he? No, he's not. Dawson was among the best players of his generation and his numbers are equivalent with other HOFers.

Ugh, I couldn't stay out of this thread. Brock shouldn't be in the HOF therefore he shouldn't be a baseline for HOF OFers going forward. But the fact is, he is in the HOF. We can't remove those already enshrined, so the fact they are is relevant. Dawson if enshrined would not lower the caliber of player in the HOF. No, Dawson doesn't merit mention with the best or even an average HOF. But he is of the level of the lowest group of HOF player, as his comparison to Brock. Dawson likely was better offensively and defensively than Brock. If Brock is a HOFer (and he is), Dawson should be as well. If we can't compare him to current HOF, then compare him to players of his generation. Dawson surely makes the Hall on that standard.

But I don't think Romo makes it if there's a clear viable alternative. As silly as Romo looks in there, there wasn't an obvious other choice. If Grossman had made it, or if Vick had made it, there would be the same arguments that they didn't deserve it. With the Coach of the Year, I just don't see how Payton gets overlooked. I agree with Banedon here. Romo didn't really belong in the Pro-Bowl. On the other hand, in the NFC he was just as good a choice as the others. Vick and Grossman had their flaws as well. Had they made it, there would be detractors saying they didn't deserve it. The arguments would be different, but there would have been arguments nonetheless. I don't see how Payton isn't Coach of the Year. I don't think most people who actually watch the games will choose anyone else.

Dawson has a case for election, but it isn't a strong case. He's not one of the guys that when looked at, immediately deserves enshrinement. But, Dawson also would not lower the level of players in the Hall if he were admitted. Dawson was an eight time all-star. Not only did Dawson win an MVP, but he finished second twice, and in the top ten in voting one other time. He was in the top ten in SLG% eight times. He was among the top ten in total bases ten times. He ranks 24th on the career list of total bases. His 438 HR ranks him 35th on the all-time list and his 1591 RBI ranks him 29th on the all-time list. He's 22nd all-time on extra-base hits. I'll admit he's not an easy candidate to admit into the Hall. There are others like Albert Belle that may be better that will never get a sniff. Dawson doesn't rank as well when measured with the saber stats, and that I'll easily confess. Were Kirby Puckett and Dave Winfield really that much better players than Dawson? As I pointed out earlier, if there's a place in the HOF for Lou Brock, surely there should be one for Dawson.

My own feeling is that this becomes an option worth possibly exploring if the Cubs bomb in the first half of 2007. That is to say, all the things that can go wrong do (Lee can't recover, Soriano reverts back to 2004-2005, same with DeRosa, Marquis and/or Lilly bomb, etc.). If the Cubs are toiling in the cellar again, you start exploring a trade of Zambrano (among others) to "re-load" on prospects, IMO. He's going to be owed a truck-load of money and it might not be in the best interest of the Cubs to pay it to him if they have no hope of contending with their current roster. Get what you can out of him and re-group. If the Cubs are tanking the first half, Zambrano could be the player that helps the Cubs unload Marquis and Derosa's contracts.

My guess is Dawson will eventually make it as a veterans committee choice. He'd be a lock under the old system. What makes me wonder so far is the fact that the current set-up of the VC hasn't voted anyone in. Dawson seems to have a lot of support among players who played with him and against him. He also has the demeanor that is respected by the old-timers. While he'll have to wait a long time, I have a feeling that since he was pre-steroid era, a model citizen and teammate, and regarded as a feared hitter of his day, that Dawson will be enshrined one day.

Dawson has a case, albeit a weak one. If he were inducted, he'd be below average by HOF standards, but I don't think his case should be dismissed out right. He did play outstanding defense until his knees gave out and put up these numbers as a CF early in his career. His list of comparables: 1. Billy Williams (892) * 2. Tony Perez (886) * 3. Dave Parker (865) 4. Al Kaline (859) * 5. Harold Baines (851) 6. Dwight Evans (834) 7. Ernie Banks (829) * 8. Dave Winfield (827) * 9. Vada Pinson (810) 10. Fred McGriff (797) Of the ten, five are HOFers. He is most comparable to Billy Williams, who is another HOF corner OF. Brock was mentioned earlier in this thread, so how about a comparison of Brock and Dawson. Career OPS+ Dawson: 119 Brock: 109 Career HR Dawson: 438 Brock: 149 Career BA Dawson: 279 Brock: 293 Career Runs Scored Dawson:1373 Brock: 1610 Career RBI Dawson:1591 Brock: 900 The only reason Brock is in and Dawson is out is that Brock stole 938 bases to Dawson's 314. Dawson was a better player than Brock.

Is anyone impressed that Ronny has improved his IsoD? I think its lost among the dismal numbers he's put up. I am happy to see that Angel is pitching well.

Marmol isn't looking too good.

no, I was just trying to be a martyr. this is a 92 win team. 100+ if they get a couple breaks. I hope what you believe is true, but I don't see a 92 win team unless the Prior of 2003-2004 shows up. If that happens, maybe. But right now, I think the Cubs are an 84-88 win team. We might contend in a weak division, but I don't see 90+ wins from this team. It might happen if Rich Hill continues to pitch like he did in the second half and Prior returns healthy and effictive. If that's the case, this team could be very good. But those are huge "ifs" and even with those, we have to hope that Marquis is effective or if not, the Cubs are willing to cut bait and eat a lot of money while someone takes his place. I would love to see 100 wins from a Cubs team, I just don't think the current 2007 version can produce that.

Payton's done a great job, but if the Titans make the playoffs Fisher's got to win. The Titans have some of the least talent overall of anybody and Fisher (with some luck of course) would have turned them into a playoff team. If the Titans don't make the playoffs, then Payton probably should win it. I disagree. Before the season, no one thought the Saints had any talent either. Even at 3-0, people were doubting the Saints. While Fisher has done a nice job bringing a mid-season resugence to the Titans, Payton started his outstanding job in training camp and has his team which had a worse 2005 record than the Titans not only in the playoffs, but has secured them a first round bye. Payton has been the coach of the year, and it's not even close.

I think the Cubs are giving up too many future arms and the Braves aren't getting enough to help them right now. Also, would Tampa want Laroche? How about: Cubs get A Jones. Tampa gets Davies, Saltamalaccia, and Prior. Braves get Baldelli, E. Patterson, and Ohman. They were only giving up 4 of their top 10 prospects, and best 2 arms! I was thinking something with Prior, but was thinking he would have to go to the Braves. You're right. In looking at my proposal again, the Braves aren't getting enough in return for Jones, Davies, and Salty. The Cubs would likely need to toss some more to the Braves or else Prior goes to the Braves and another prospect, maybe Marshall or Guzman moves to the Rays.

I think the Cubs are giving up too many future arms and the Braves aren't getting enough to help them right now. Also, would Tampa want Laroche? How about: Cubs get A Jones. Tampa gets Davies, Saltamalaccia, and Prior. Braves get Baldelli, E. Patterson, and Ohman.