vance_the_cubs_fan

Did you mean "acquiring a starter" or just what should we "require" this starter to do? I find the complete disregard for intelligent speech in a post which calls others [expletive], very ironic. No offense. Especially when you can't spell [expletive].

This post is so full of fallacies, its comical. There is absolutely no evidence Rogers is on steroids. I'd still take Willis over him, but there's no reason to bring that up. Dontrelle's career ERA+ is 120. He's 24. Kazmir's career ERA+ is also 120 and he's 2 years younger than Dontrelle. Kazmir improved from 2005-2006, while Dontrelle showed a decline. Kazmir looks to be the better pitcher. Zach Duke's career ERA+ is 119. Not much worse than Dontrelle. He's also a year younger. Duke did show a decline in 2006, so it's debateable as to who is better. He at least could be argued to be in the same class. Gorzelanny posted a 119 ERA+ last season. It was only 11 starts, so he has a little bit more to prove. Dontrelle is a good pitcher, but not elite. He could become that, but many believe with his delivery, he is a greater risk to decline than improve. He's charismatic and a name. He likely would not be worth the players it would take to acquire him.

Both are free agents following this season. I think it's a pretty safe bet to say Wells, as a 28 y/o CF, has a better chance to stay highly productive, longer, than the 29 y/o C who has a long list of injuries and plays a position where guys break down quickly. Ack, that's the second time I've messed that up too. Barrett hasn't been catching that long, and hasn't been hurt in 3 years. I think his positional value and the fact he'll be (much) cheaper to retain than Wells wins out over being further into his prime. There's also the thing that making that trade makes it harder to improve the offense since finding a new catcher that can hit is much more difficult than upgrading CF. Furthermore, I think Barrett likes it here and I wouldn't be surprised to see him give the Cubs a "hometown" discount.

No. Molina isn't the offensive player Barrett is and while once top defensively, he's slipping. Trading Barrett for Wells doesn't improve the offense at all. Barrett is as productive a hitter as Wells is. Furthermore, it would be easier to add a productive CF bat than it would be to add a productive bat at C. No to trading Barrett for Wells.

Holy smokes!! I actually agree with you on this. Im sure Toronto is going to ask for Hill, Pie, and Guzman for Wells. In other words, Toronto is going to ask for alot in return for Vernon. That might be where they'd start, but even they would have to know they wouldn't get our best young pitcher and our top position prospect for a 1 year rental. I'll bet you could talk them down to Marshall, Guzman, Izturis and Harvey. But wouldn't the Blue Jays want someone who they feel is going to be a superstar player in return? Not to say Pie is going to be that guy, but they would probably want him if they're going to trade Vernon. But is Wells a superstar player? And he'd be a rental. That's the problem with paying a premium price for Wells. Two key issues. He may not bring premium production and you may only have him for a year.

USSoccer, It's obvious that you and I see this situation the same. Toronto doesn't have to move him and they aren't a team that is dumping contracts. They also aren't in rebuilding mode. That indicates to me that they want a player or players that will contribute at the major league level. While I'm not opposed to moving Murton or Hill or Pie (and I'm more inclined to move one Pie than the former two), I want it to be in the right deal. While Vernon Wells has age on his side, he's not signed beyond this year. Unless you sign him to an extension, he'll walk. Then you've paid a heavy price for a player that gives you only one year. I may be willing to do that for an impact player that would get the Cubs to the postseason. Is Wells that player? His 2006 OPS+ was 126. That is good for CF. His 2003 was 131. That would be great as well. However, his 2004 OPS+ = 103 and his 2005 was 104. That's pedestrian. While still above average, it's not worth paying top talent to acquire when that player is not signed beyond next season. Take Andruw Jones in comparison. Jones 2006 OPS+ was 129. In 2005, it was 133, in 2004 it was 113. Jones has consistently been more productive than Wells. Jones was 29 last season, Wells was 27. The age difference isn't significant. Whatever package the Cubs offer for Wells, they should offer to Atlanta for Jones instead. Spend the talent to win. I'm ok with that. I just want to make sure we're actually acquiring elite talent while paying an elite price. I'm not sure that would be the case with Wells.

My position on Wells revolves around what it would cost to get him. If they ask for someone like Izturis and a minor leaguer, sure. If they want Rich Hill or Matt Murton, no. I would consider a Pie for Wells deal, but I don't really like it. Not unless we negotiate that extension. Trading Pie for a rental doesn't make much sense. If I'm trading Pie for a rental, I'd rather aim for Andruw Jones. Jones production is better than Wells and he's not much older. So, it's really hard for me to know how I feel here until I'm more certain what the player cost will be. My guess is Tornto is going to want a very good player in return. I'm thinking they will ask for a package that revolves around Hill or Murton and under those circumstances, I'd have to pass.

Good point. Moving Jones to CF and upgrading in RF would be better than acquiring Wells.

And this would also mean the Giants aren't likely to pursue Bonds. Let the Giants have Burrell, and lets sign the cheaper Bonds! :D

Wilkerson is an intriguing option. I was a big proponent of his and really thought he would tear it up in Texas. That didn't happen. He still will take a walk and get on base at a much higher clip than his average. If he hits 260 or higher, he'll likely post a 350 or higher OBP. The problem last year was he could barely keep his BA over 200, so he barely cleared a 300 OBP. His power has also declined, and that surprised me. AFIA is a good park for left-handed hitters to hit for power, but I guess when one bats only 220, it's hard to generate much power at all. Wilkerson is also 29 now. He's no-longer pre-prime. He's a huge risk. If he could return to his 2004 levels he'd be pretty good. If the Cubs got him for a mid-level prospect, maybe....but he'd have to be able to still handle CF and I'm more skeptical of a comeback than I was at this point last season. Whether it's injuries or some other factor, Wilkerson is not as young as he once was and he never really showed anything at all in 2006.

My biggest gripe was giving him the opt out and a no-trade clause. That cost the Cubs some leverage. If he didn't have the no-trade clause, Hendry likely could have forced them to the table in July with the threat that he would be traded if an agreement wasn't completed. That would have prevented this chance of him leaving without the Cubs receiving anything for him.

fixed :lmao:

This one is almost worse than a Joe Morgan chat. Can you tell this is advertising schill. Of course, this is my favorite. What Ozzie really wanted to say, "Hell nah! I'm the Wizard of Oz. You ever seen that little man do a back flip? "

Uh oh!

I think I'm going to place a bet tonight that Texas gets him.

According to rotowire, several teams have decided to back out of the bidding. Those teams include the Angels, Orioles, and Giants.

For the gamblers, you can go to http://www.sportsbook.com and bet on which team will land Matsuzaka.

How can the Angels re-sign Thomas? They never had him. Do you mean the A's? Or do you mean that the Angels will sign Bonds if they can't sign Thomas? Not trying to be a smart ass, just tryin to clear it up. im sorry, i was listening while taking a shower and posted while still dripping...rushed through it not being too careful...should read A's not Angels Beane recognizes the value of a 400 OBP.

Link. Let the Joe Randa for HOF debate begin...:lol:

3 million + incentives!?!? I'd be all over that deal to bring Bonds to the Cubs!

From the latest ESPN insider, Bonds' agent is discussing other teams' interest in the slugger. I'm going to change the title of the thread to reflect a slight change in what's happening.

if they would want him, it wouldn't be a bad idea as long as the cubs are confident that howry can close. I'm pretty confident that Wuertz can close.

As mentioned in another thread, Baker is among the candidates for the Padres job. Link.

How about we give them Dempster for Figgins? Now that might be a deal I could get behind.

I guess the question would be what qualified for a genuine interest in signing him. Would offering Matsuzuka a 6/30 deal qualify as genuine? I don't know and I don't know if the commisioner would agree or not. Definitely, Daisuke has no room to complain about a 6/30 deal. That wouldn't be a bad deal for a team. Submit a 50 million posting fee and then offer Daisuke 6/30. At worst, you have him for a cost of 80 million which is like 13 million a season. That's cheaper than offering a 30 million posting fee and then paying him 10 million a season. He may turn it down, but then he's kept from signing elsewhere. The only damage may be that he won't negotiate with that team when he returns as a FA next season. Could the O's do a sign and trade? I'm sure it's possible. But I wonder if MLB would approve of a team sending enough cash in the deal to cover the posting fee.