if Castro's gonna have to move to 2B eventually, then anybody else think the cubs should see what Rollins would cost for 3 years? I know he's on the decline, but he still plays pretty good D and can handle the bat better than Barney, Blake, and Baker(the guys he'd basically be replacing...because they'll probably split time at 2B and that's where Castro would go ahead and move...get it?) I think someone's gonna end up getting a pretty decent deal for Rollins and I see know reason it shouldn't be the cubs. He wouldn't be blocking anyone and he'd bring a little swagger along with him.
I also wouldn't mind checking in on Carlos Beltran. Dejesus could move to LF and Soriano could ride the bench or waive his no trade clause. Or, shoot, he could even move to 1B. Surely he can play catch, right? Of course, I'd prefer Fielder, but I doubt that happens. The Boston press says the cubs don't have the funds right now and why wouldn't they know everything about a team in Chicago?
So there ya go...JD's plan---sign Fielder to a 6 year deal and Beltran and Rollins to 3 years. Then trade Soriano for whatever or something. All that stands in the way is money and cooperation from a lot of other people.
Quote from: JD on December 15, 2011, 11:02:56 PM
if Castro's gonna have to move to 2B eventually, then anybody else think the cubs should see what Rollins would cost for 3 years? I know he's on the decline, but he still plays pretty good D and can handle the bat better than Barney, Blake, and Baker(the guys he'd basically be replacing...because they'll probably split time at 2B and that's where Castro would go ahead and move...get it?) I think someone's gonna end up getting a pretty decent deal for Rollins and I see know reason it shouldn't be the cubs. He wouldn't be blocking anyone and he'd bring a little swagger along with him.
I also wouldn't mind checking in on Carlos Beltran. Dejesus could move to LF and Soriano could ride the bench or waive his no trade clause. Or, shoot, he could even move to 1B. Surely he can play catch, right? Of course, I'd prefer Fielder, but I doubt that happens. The Boston press says the cubs don't have the funds right now and why wouldn't they know everything about a team in Chicago?
So there ya go...JD's plan---sign Fielder to a 6 year deal and Beltran and Rollins to 3 years. Then trade Soriano for whatever or something. All that stands in the way is money and cooperation from a lot of other people.
Fair point. I see know reason, either.
why piss away money on Beltran when Brett Jackson's .939 OPS in Iowa (http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=jackso003bre) last year at least earns him a shot?
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2011, 07:38:04 AM
why piss away money on Beltran when Brett Jackson's .939 OPS in Iowa (http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=jackso003bre) last year at least earns him a shot?
Because he struck out enough that there's concern he'll make enough contact to contribute right now. Also, there's no real reason to start his arbitration clock this year.
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2011, 08:33:49 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2011, 07:38:04 AM
why piss away money on Beltran when Brett Jackson's .939 OPS in Iowa (http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=jackso003bre) last year at least earns him a shot?
Because he struck out enough that there's concern he'll make enough contact to contribute right now. Also, there's no real reason to start his arbitration clock this year.
Arbitration worries? Sometimes I think you hate Jerry Reinsdorf because the two of you are so similar.
Quote from: CT III on December 16, 2011, 08:38:34 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2011, 08:33:49 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2011, 07:38:04 AM
why piss away money on Beltran when Brett Jackson's .939 OPS in Iowa (http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=jackso003bre) last year at least earns him a shot?
Because he struck out enough that there's concern he'll make enough contact to contribute right now. Also, there's no real reason to start his arbitration clock this year.
Arbitration worries? Sometimes I think you hate Jerry Reinsdorf because the two of you are so similar.
There goes CT on a tangent about his beloved White Sox again...
tl;dr
Quote from: CT III on December 16, 2011, 08:38:34 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2011, 08:33:49 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2011, 07:38:04 AM
why piss away money on Beltran when Brett Jackson's .939 OPS in Iowa (http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=jackso003bre) last year at least earns him a shot?
Because he struck out enough that there's concern he'll make enough contact to contribute right now. Also, there's no real reason to start his arbitration clock this year.
Arbitration worries? Sometimes I think you hate Jerry Reinsdorf because the two of you are so similar.
Not so much the cost as it means the Cubs would give up a year of team control.
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2011, 08:55:08 AM
Quote from: CT III on December 16, 2011, 08:38:34 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2011, 08:33:49 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2011, 07:38:04 AM
why piss away money on Beltran when Brett Jackson's .939 OPS in Iowa (http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=jackso003bre) last year at least earns him a shot?
Because he struck out enough that there's concern he'll make enough contact to contribute right now. Also, there's no real reason to start his arbitration clock this year.
Arbitration worries? Sometimes I think you hate Jerry Reinsdorf because the two of you are so similar.
Not so much the cost as it means the Cubs would give up a year of team control.
Not if they keep him in Iowa for the start of the season. The arbitration clock and team control are not necessarily related.
Quote from: Canadouche on December 16, 2011, 11:18:40 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2011, 08:55:08 AM
Quote from: CT III on December 16, 2011, 08:38:34 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2011, 08:33:49 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2011, 07:38:04 AM
why piss away money on Beltran when Brett Jackson's .939 OPS in Iowa (http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=jackso003bre) last year at least earns him a shot?
Because he struck out enough that there's concern he'll make enough contact to contribute right now. Also, there's no real reason to start his arbitration clock this year.
Arbitration worries? Sometimes I think you hate Jerry Reinsdorf because the two of you are so similar.
Not so much the cost as it means the Cubs would give up a year of team control.
Not if they keep him in Iowa for the start of the season. The arbitration clock and team control are not necessarily related.
MY HEAD A SPLODE
Quote from: Canadouche on December 16, 2011, 11:18:40 PM
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2011, 08:55:08 AM
Quote from: CT III on December 16, 2011, 08:38:34 AM
Quote from: Eli on December 16, 2011, 08:33:49 AM
Quote from: Fork on December 16, 2011, 07:38:04 AM
why piss away money on Beltran when Brett Jackson's .939 OPS in Iowa (http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=jackso003bre) last year at least earns him a shot?
Because he struck out enough that there's concern he'll make enough contact to contribute right now. Also, there's no real reason to start his arbitration clock this year.
Arbitration worries? Sometimes I think you hate Jerry Reinsdorf because the two of you are so similar.
Not so much the cost as it means the Cubs would give up a year of team control.
Not if they keep him in Iowa for the start of the season. The arbitration clock and team control are not necessarily related.
Right. That's more what I was referring to. Jackson will be up at some point this year, but it makes sense to start him in AAA for a number of reasons.
Re-signing with Philly for four years including a vesting option. Sorry JD.
/thread