LOL! Cubs prospects.

''I like the idea of two lefties in the rotation because our bullpen is [mostly] right-handed,'' Piniella said. ''We've got one lefty out there right now in Neal Cotts, and he's doing a real nice job. But that's it. All of a sudden, you put a couple of lefties in your rotation, and it plays into the strength of your right-handed bullpen.''

The first semi-intelligent justification I've ever seen for actually preferring to have a lefthander in the starting rotation. Mind you, it's only semi-intelligent, but it's a start.

Agreed, LSR. Gallagher is a better pitcher than Marshall, plain and simple. Neither one seem great out of the pen. I do have an almost irrational hatred of Marshall, so I want to be clear my bias is showing.

I'd like to think that adding another SP would replace Marquis in the rotation and not Gallagher/Marshall.

Has the team given up on Rich Hill entirely then?

I don't think they've given up on him, just that they're not counting on him while he works through his issues in the minors.

Probably in the same position the Brewers are in with Gallardo: if he gives you anything this year, great, but don't plan on it.

Pops:

For this year at least. He has completely lost any control of the strike zone.

Hendry isn't going to risk a pennant on trying to help a guy find strike one.

A few years ago I did a quick and dirty study of NL teams' OPS splits vs RHPs and LHPs. The absolutely non surprising results indicated that most NL teams hit better against LHPs than RHPs. I say non surprising because as a rule the majority of PAs go to RHBs who as we all know tend to do better against LHPs than RHPs. So - all things equal - why would I prefer to add a LHP to the rotation?

Conventional wisdom always refers to the advantage of "mixing up your starters" so that the opponent sees something different each day. But that's just plain ridiculous. Unless each of your RHPs has basically the same pitches thrown at the same angles and the same velocities you're showing something different every day anyway. Plus, you're only play 3-4 games in a row against the same team - they might not even see your LHP. Plus if you've got LHPs coming out of the pen, you'll be "mixing it up" anyway. Conventional wisdom is stupid.

Piniella's reasoning is semi intelligent given that he doesn't have LHPs in the pen he might as well leverage his RHP relievers by starting a LHP. But in the final analysis, the only strategy that really makes sense is to start your best pitcher, regardless of "handedness".

And while we're on the subject: I'll be overjoyed (and totally amazed) if Marquis has an ERA below 5.00 for the second half. I'd love it if they could include him in a deadline deal while he still has some value.

I don't think they've given up on him, just that they're not counting on him while he works through his issues in the minors.

Well, I don't see how the Cubs could make a Rich Harden deal happen while holding on to such an interesting piece as Rich Hill - who won't help the team win in 2008.

I don't follow, Pops. Why can't they try dealing for Harden completely irregardless of Hill? Or are you suggesting they try building the trade around Hill? It's going to take a lot more, Hill has almost zero value in his current state. The Cubs would be best served holding on to him, IMO.

Vitters, Pie, and Hill? Way off?

That seems like a lot.

The only way the Cubs could make up a package for Harden would be to start with Vitters, right? Unless the A's scouts love Pie, he's not enough for the centerpiece to the trade, struggling in AAA as a 23-year-old. What non-Pie piece would you package with Vitters to make the deal?

I don't get it. What's in it for the A's? Felix freaking Pie? Harden is making $3.8M and the club has a $7M option on Harden for next year, reasonable money. They're in contention and Harden is pitching well. I know he's a health risk, but ... Doesn't this have a whiff of white flag about it?

Hey, the sun's rising in the east, and Beano's still a troll. Having done him the wholly undeserved favor of acknowledging his existence, we can now go about the business of ignoring him for the rest of the thread.

There's no point in trading Hill now; his value's as low as it's going to be. Giving up Vitters for Harden would be risky, but suppose I'd consider it. Ramirez should have several good years left. That said, given the asking price, I'd just as soon pick up Burnett for peanuts and see what he does. Harden's the better pitcher, but also the worse health risk, and he'll cost a ot more.

Trading for Randy Wolf would be pointless, however much he might "command Hendry's respect." He's got a lousy health history, and he's got a 4.59 ERA pitching in Petco. I'd rather keep running Marshall out there.

I guess that idea really isn't that much, Danny. I've said it elsewhere, but I'm not opposed to trading any of the Cubs prospects. I like that the Brewers are going all out, and I want the Cubs to do the same. I don't think any of their young players are can't miss, and I have no problem overpaying for a legit stud. I guess I question Harden, if only because of his health past and I still have lingering doubts about the Cubs training staff (especially when it comes to pitchers).

Pie is in a really tough spot, and I wonder the best way to evaulate his numbers. He was great in AAA last year and probably thought he had a job in the bigs this season. None of us think he got a fair shot to keep the CF job. I wonder how much of his struggles are simply mental, and how fixable that is, and what, if anything that tells us about him as a player. If the Cubs do end up trading either Hill or Pie, they're doing so with both at their lowest value. The Cubs do that quite often.

Trading for Randy Wolf would be pointless, however much he might "command Hendry's respect." He's got a lousy health history, and he's got a 4.59 ERA pitching in Petco. I'd rather keep running Marshall out there.

CONCUR. And I don't want Paul Byrd either.

And yes, Moses, I prefer Gallagher to Marshall too. I think Gallagher's gonna be really good, actually, but I also think Marshall's a perfectly acceptable #5 starter. (Not that keeping him in the rotation at Gallagher's expense makes a lot of sense to me, as long as their continuing to waste time with Jason Marquis is a given.)

CONCUR. And I don't want Paul Byrd either.

Right. If the Cubs want 4th/5th starter-quality pitchers, well--they've already got enough of those to fill a rotation and then some. Their aim should be to get someone (Harden and Burnett fill the bill) who might actually IMPROVE the rotation from now through September, and make the team more formidable in a short series. Byrd, Wolf, etc. don't accomplish the former. As to the latter, either of those guys would be lucky to even make the postseason roster.

Between Hill, Marshall, and Gallagher, the Cubs have cobbled together a nice back end of the rotation spot. 18 starts, ERA+ ~ 104

Sure, he's acceptable as a #5 on an average team. The Cubs just happen to have 5 better options than him (at least, and maybe soon enough they'll have another one too), and that's why I don't want to see him start anymore. I thought Gallagher's gutsy outing against the Sox would have bought him more than 1 more start.

Between Hill, Marshall, and Gallagher, the Cubs have cobbled together a nice back end of the rotation spot. 18 starts, ERA+ ~ 104

Considering that Hill was probably their 2nd best starter coming into the season, it's disappointing to see his name there.

Dempster is a Canadian Vampire, as I've proposed before. Rich Hill was merely one of his victims.

I was thinking the same thing (about Hill). However, I think Hill et al and Dempster have probably combined to give pretty much what we could have hoped for, just not the way we expected.

Rich Harden + Larry Rothschild = ?!?!?!?

Unless Rothschild is some 21st century medical pioneer on the side, I don't think that matters. When Harden's healthy, he's great; that's never the issue with him.

It was noted in the game story yesterday (by Geren) that Harden's velocity is somewhat down the last two starts, but that could just be an ordinary dead-arm period.

What would it mean to the Cubs to have 2 Canadians in their rotation?

Is there any worse match for Harden than the Cubs?

With their history, the team needs freakishly healthy workhorse types.

Sabathia would have been a better fit, but it was pretty obvious the Cubs don't have the swag the Brewers do.

Marshall has shown enough flashes of brilliance that I believe Moses is far off in his dismissal of him. I agree that Gallagher is the better prospect, but, handedness issues aside, at this point don't see a strong argument that Gallagher is the better option right now in the rotation.

I'm also not enthusiastic about trading for Harden, assuming it will definitely cost something like Vitters and Gallagher plus. I don't like the idea of hitching my wagon to that unreliable horse, and while I've long been trumpeting the TINSTAACPP (There Is No Such Thing As A Cubs Position Prospect) adage, I'm hopeful that with recent changes the outlook will be different, and Vitters is someone I'd like to see make his way through.

I feel okay about the Cubs making it through this year with the pitching talent on the roster, and while it would be great to see it bolstered, I don't like the idea of digging too deep.

Vitters, Pie, and Hill? Way off?

That was my exact thought. High risk, high reward there. Beane though, I would expect would want Ceda in any deal. Cubs are going to be under a lot of pressure to deal now.

And I thought this would be an article about the Cubs hoping to get Rich Hill back soon

Pie's value has fallen through the floor with him not blowing the doors off in Iowa. .246 with nothing to go with it. OBP under .300.

Is he hurt?

Fine, he can have Ceda, I want him traded this year, cause I don't think he'll ever have more value.

Regarding Rich Hill, he FINALLY had a good sign yesterday in Mesa throwing 4 innings, striking out 6, walking 1.

Is [Pie] hurt?

Nah, he's just a nutcase

Nah, he's just a nutcase

Evidence, please.

What would it mean to the Cubs to have 2 Canadians in their rotation?

That between them they'd pitch as many innings as Fergie Jenkins?

I don't get it. What's in it for the A's? Felix freaking Pie? Harden is making $3.8M and the club has a $7M option on Harden for next year, reasonable money. They're in contention and Harden is pitching well. I know he's a health risk, but ... Doesn't this have a whiff of white flag about it?

As an A's fan, it's very tempting to look at the raw stats and run differential of the A's and Angels and want to ride Harden and Duchscherer and a resurgent Frank Thomas to an AL West title. But they're six games back, their offense is in shambles, and it makes sense to cash out on Harden and/or Duke while they're still healthy if the right offers are there.

The A's also have a frustrated Chad Gaudin in the bullpen, so the dropoff from trading Harden wouldn't be as large as it would be for some teams.

How is Vitters' defense at 3B, and Pie in CF?

Rich Hill is a year and a half older than Rich Harden. I don't think Beane is dumb enough to bite on Pie (hehe) either. Considering it cost the White Sox their only 2 good prospects plus Ryan Sweeney to get Swisher, it's going to take Vitters (who is nowhere near the prospect level of Gio Gonzalez from the Swisher deal) and plenty more to land Harden. The A's don't mess around.

Well, if anyone would have personal experience on coping with mental instabilities it's levski........

Pie's a superb centerfielder. Don't know much about Vitters' D, but projecting a 19-year-old 3B's defense to the major league level's a fool's errand.

Vitters (who is nowhere near the prospect level of Gio Gonzalez from the Swisher deal)

Oh?

The A's don't mess around.

One of these years Beane's going to make a bad trade and Hendry's going to make a good one. Might as well be this one.

Hendry's made a number of good trades (Murton/Nomar, Lofton/Ramirez, anything at all for LaTroy Hawkins, etc.). He's not an elite GM, but he's got his strengths, and in-season trading has been one of them.

Rich Hill is a year and a half older than Rich Harden. I don't think Beane is dumb enough to bite on Pie (hehe) either. Considering it cost the White Sox their only 2 good prospects plus Ryan Sweeney to get Swisher, it's going thttp://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/newsstand/discussion/chicago_sun_times_cubs_hope_to_get_rich/o take Vitters (who is nowhere near the prospect level of Gio Gonzalez from the Swisher deal) and plenty more to land Harden. The A's don't mess around.

Swisher was also signed for 5 more years at a reasonable rate, and he doesn't have injury problems.

Vitters (who is nowhere near the prospect level of Gio Gonzalez from the Swisher deal)

Oh?

BA rated Gio as the 26th best prospect this year, while Vitters was at 43. BP had Gio 56th and Vitters 46th.

Vitters had some injury issues this year (tendinitis in his hand?), so that may have knocked him back a bit.

I'd say a somewhat comparable recent traded player to Harden would be Bedard--less injury history, but also not as good when healthy.

34: you want the truth? you can't handle the truth.

Well, if anyone would have personal experience on coping with mental instabilities it's levski.

Yes, I've had to put up with feeble-minded comments like yours for a long time

And obviously I wasn't referring to Pie's mind, but to his nuts. Anyhow, nevermind, back to your grand show of demonstrating your indubitable superiority over all things human and animal...

Is he hurt?

According to Rotoworld, he did a stint on the DL with a sprained thumb. I thought I also remembered reading shortly after he was demoted that they sent him down specifically to re-work his swing, which supposedly was leading to some of his early struggles in Iowa while he was adjusting.

34: you want the truth? you can't handle the truth.

"Nutcase." Heh.

your indubitable superiority over all things human and animal

See, now that leaves you out of the mix since vegetables weren't included..................

P.S. This is intended as good-natured fun. If you are legitimately taking offense then I will desist. Though I would find that odd since you regularly send barbs hither and yon. But so be it.

And obviously I wasn't referring to Pie's mind, but to his nuts.

Well, it was obvious once you posted the link. Clever, but easily misunderstandable.

Harveys, I never take offense to anything here. All's good. Hope you feel the same way

Hendry's made a number of good trades (Murton/Nomar, Lofton/Ramirez, anything at all for LaTroy Hawkins, etc.). He's not an elite GM, but he's got his strengths, and in-season trading has been one of them.

Spot on.

Hendry's strength is making midseason deals... The only blemish was really last year's inexplicable pickup of Trax last year. Whatever other weaknesses he has - getting help in July, with surprisingly little heading out of town in return, has been a forte.

Pie's OPS at Iowa this year:

May .557
June .766
July .861

And, of course, his OPS at Iowa last year: .973

He'll be fine if he's just left damn well enough alone, which is what the Cubs should have done from Day 1. The guy's defense is so good that's he's a championship-caliber player if he can maintain a .750 OPS, which is below his MLEs and what nearly every reasonable projection system has for him long-term.

I'm almost certainly in the minority here, but it's not obvious to me that trading Pie for Harden straight up would be a win for the Cubs. That is, while it clearly would improve the Cubs this year (and maybe that's what we should be playing for), someone's got to man CF next year, and I'm pretty sure Edmonds' expiration date is earlier than that.

To preempt accusations of me being a Cubs' prospect fanboy generally, I'd be happy to trade anyone else on the farm -- including Vitters, Ceda, Ascanio, even Hill -- for Harden.

The guy's defense is so good that's he's a championship-caliber player if he can maintain a .750 OPS, which is below his MLEs and what nearly every reasonable projection system has for him long-term.

I wish I were as confident about that. There aren't a lot of data in support of the jaw-dropping defensive numbers he's put up. I agree with the general principle, but he looks to me a lot like Corey Patterson at this point. Strong defense/mediocre offense CFers tend to be undervalued, and there were times when Corey Patterson was a very valuable player, but mostly not so much.

I am far more optimistic about the prospects for a player with Pie's weaknesses in this organization than before, but it's hard to turn an organization around on a dime. Cubs players with Pie's weaknesses tend to get worse, not better.

One of these years Beane's going to make a bad trade and Hendry's going to make a good one. Might as well be this one.

Sadly, Tim Hudson waves hello.


I would be happy with a package of Vitters, Pie, and something or other. I don't know the Cubs system that well, so I don't know if that's asking a whole lot or not. But given that we have gobs of pitching prospects in our system and very little in the way of hitting, I would not mind trading Rich Harden's next injury for a few upside bats. Especially one like Vitters, who was a high pick, and is a third baseman. There's just nothing at third base in our system.

The dropoff from Harden to Gaudin isn't so huge that we can't continue to keep up the appearance of contending (especially if someone like Murton somehow became involved. "Look! We picked up a bat!"), but the writings on the wall after the last two series. The Angels have been lucky, but, true talent wise, they're still better than us, especially with our offense in the pits and a six game deficit staring us in the face. That we were able to last this long with legitimate hopes of contention was a nice surprise for A's fans, but there's no point getting attached to it.

One of these years Beane's going to make a bad trade

It's amazing how Sandy Alderson's McGwire deal never gets brought up (Beane was in the room for that right?). Horrible. I can't give Beane blame if he didn't pull that trigger, but he was there. Still, Beane is excellent. Kind of like how Mo Rivera blew game 7 in the World Series and nobody feels that diminishes his HOF chances in the least (it shouldn't). Beane is right there too.

I'm more sanguine about the A's chances than jonathan appears to be, but I'd still trade Harden for two guys with the upside of Vitters and Pie. If Hill's included all the better. I'd trade Duchscherer and Street too if multiple good prospects were offered. Crosby should be available for a lot less than that.

What market inefficiencies is Beane keyed in on this year? It was OBP, then defense, now what? That might be a clue to whether the Cubs have the goods or not.

What market inefficiencies is Beane keyed in on this year?

If it's redheads, the Cubs may have something to offer.

I'd say a somewhat comparable recent traded player to Harden would be Bedard--less injury history, but also not as good when healthy.

Harden has been dominant over a longer period of time, but at his peak Bedard has been every bit as good as Harden.

He had a 20 start stretch last year from mid-May up until he was injured where he had a 2.18 ERA and a 172/37 K/BB ratio in 136 IP.