Cubs Still Discussing Roberts

Tim,
What is the latest you have heard on Eric Patterson? Are they definely moving him to the outfield? His PECOTA projection is similar to Robert's http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/story/2008/1/10/1108/94872 - though I know his defense is sub par.

Would it be impossible for Roberts to make a switch to centerfield ? Biggio made the move to the outfield though his defense was average .I just don't care for the idea of making Derosa take a back seat just to get a lead off hitter in the lineup . Curious how Roberts would do if he made a switch to short ?

Roberts is not a SS. He is not a CF. I love it when orgs try to switch players' positions like it was wearing a new cap. To do so I think basically would affect his bat from all of the reps he'd be taking in his new position all season long at the expense of his BP ABs. It makes sense sometimes but in Roberts case, he has an arguably GG-type of glove at 2B. Why make his glove and bat worse in the near-term so you could switch him to a new position?

To me , I wouldn't even bother with Roberts anymore unless it was a Beddard / Roberts deal and I'm not sure the cubs have enough and whether it would be worth giving the orioles the moon for them .

Hey, I read at the Baltimore sun's website that the Orioles need to decide on a closer, shortstop,an everyday center fielder and a veteran starting pitcher. Now most people out there want Roberts and it is a little greedy but we have what they need. We have three closers in our back pocket (although I don't want to get rid of Marmol), we have a decent young shortstop (Cedeno) that is available, we have many young outfielders, and although not necessarily veteran we have more starting pitchers than any team needs. I know its great to have pitching and young talent but we are playing for this year not next. I don't want them to get rid of a lot of young talent but you get talent in return. I know Hendry's job isn't as easy as we think but it seems that the pieces are all there. I guess we have to sit back and wait.

The fact those guys are cheaper plays into their value too. I think those guys would be more expensive in prospects than you might think, at least enuff to test your willingness if you want those guys at all at thei price. I'm sure the Cubs have plenty to get a decent guy, maybe one with some decent upside. But, I think the whole reason these Roberts/Figgins talks are even on is because the Cubs need a bonafide leadoff hitter, not a "decent" guy. Being cheap with prospects is not the way to win ballgames. It's very possible no matter how good the prospects we are all talking about that only 1 actually turns into a ML player. There will be plenty of prospects and players who will step into play between now and several years from now. Many of them might be true stars. Many of them might not even be in the bigs or prospect charts just yet. So being cheap on holding onto possible future 5 starters or a 4th OF might look silly in 3 years from now. I am not saying that as a dis to Pie, Gallagher, or Marshall at all. I'm just saying that if Prior's value can sink the way it did the last 4 years then anyone's can. At that time, Derek Lee and Aramis weren't even in the picture at all, much less centerpieces of the offense.

The excitement has faded with this rumor. Not the interest, just the excitement.

Personally, I would have rather seen a trade for a quality starter or upgrade at short.

No problem. Thanks for saying "Thanks". ;)

I would so much rather give up on Roberts and focus on trying to get Khalil Greene from the Padres.

I'm afraid that the precious Zips projector is of little use to us. Projections fail to account for the randomness we see in every day life. What are the odds of Brian Roberts slipping in the shower and pulling a glute? What are the odds of Sean Gallagher being assaulted by an angry ex-girlfriend? Are these odds possible to compute? No. Is there an attempt made to take them into account? No.

I see Zips like I see stock market analysts. Maybe you lemmings that think "I sound unintelligent" know nothing of the market and such randomness, but being a financial speculator teaches one that "expert" projections in the face of unpredictability are unreliable at best.

Sorry for the tangent, projections tend to rile me up. Cheers.

"Lofton for the 03 Cubs (who would have made the playoffs in 04 had they frickin signed Lofton!"

dan-

Sorry to bring up the past. Loften and Sosa did not get along...at all. Sosa was still 'the man' so Loften was a FA.

-studio

I had no idea that was the case. Still, too bad. I think Lofton over Patterson would have made that final collapse moot.

Sorry, RbCubs, but the Os wouldn't trade just Bedard for that return, much less throw in Roberts and Gibbons. I think the Os would take the earlier suggestion of Colvin, Gallagher, Veal, and Cedeno for Roberts in a heartbeat, but I don't see the Cubs giving up all 4 in the deal. Take Veal out, and it seems like a deal that might work for both sides.

If we can only get the Bears to throw in Devin Hester to the Roberts trade...

"Lofton for the 03 Cubs (who would have made the playoffs in 04 had they frickin signed Lofton!)"

Yeah, that was the problem. Had nothing to do with the fact that our bullpen completely sucked.

"The problem is that the Cubs need a lead-off hitter. We'll see what happens between Soriano/Pie/Theriot in spring training."

If you are wondering between those three, Soriano will lead off.

Yes, studio is right. The ONLY other option is roberts. Pie has absolutely no business hitting higher than 7th or 8th. None

I don't think the cubs can get to the series with the rotation as it stands. They should try and get Bedard if they can. I don't think there farm system is that good, but if the mets are not willing to give up Marinez, and the mariners are not willing to part with Jones or morrow, then I think the cubs 2nd tier prospects could possibly get a conversation started.

Keith law says it best:

Keith Law: (1:07 PM ET ) The Cubs don't have the young players needed to acquire Santana or, for that matter, Bedard.

Kevin (Manassas): You would not take Pie, Veal, Cedeno, Patterson, Colvin, and Gallagher or some combination close to that for Bedard?

Keith Law: (1:16 PM ET ) That's a pile of stuff - quantity, but not quality. And while I like Pie's tools, his value is slightly diminished because 1) his MLB performance in '07 wasn't great and 2) the Cubs have made it seem like they don't like him. Gallagher's a 4th starter type. Colvin, Cedeno, and Patterson are bench guys. Adding more names isn't the key - the key is replacing three extra guys in that offer with one impact guy. The Cubs can't do that right now.

Alright, can't let it go anymore -if I see another lineup projecting Lieber in the 5 spot I am going to cough up my intestines. Why, oh why, is everyone so quick to dismiss Marquis in favor of Liebs? Hmm, I think I smell a goat on the fire, or is that the scapegoating?

Reality Dawns

Marquis was 12-9 with a 4.57 ERA in 191 innings.

-In 06', despite losing 16 and compiling a elevation curdling 6.02 ERA, the guy pulled out 14 games in 194 innings.

Lieber, whom everyone is cheering like Christ on parade in Peoria, has been hurtling down the slippery slope for o'er the past two years!

-In '06 the man compiled a 9-11 record and a 4.93 ERA in 168 innings.

-In 07 he absolutely blew a heel, puking a 4.73 ERA with a 3-7 record.

Now, call me an ardent antisentamentalist, but this to me seems a quantum leap of profound magnitude to expect a 38 year old noodle to go out and pitch past June, let alone nab you the 12 W's/191 innings that Marquis did one year ago. And I am no Marquis fan, but this science here just don't make any sense.

Marshall, Marquis, Dempster, Gallagher, Guzman, Ron Santo, slot in a flipping Kangaroo as long as has some life left in his arm. I say Kangaroo before Lieb, but after Kangaroo Marquis just makes way more sense.

One thing to remember about Marquis, is he was left in games to just eat innings and save the pen. His ERA could have been lower if not for this. So you can't strictly judge him by that Stat.

He is an adaquate #5. I would actually prefer him to Lieber. This isnt the 2001 Lieber.

The way I have it, marquis would be the 4 and lieber the 5. If we got bedard, marquis is the 5, especially for the first half, where his numbers are hisorically good. U don't sit a guy making 8 mil a year for the next 2 years...

The way I have it, marquis would be the 4 and lieber the 5. If we got bedard, marquis is the 5, especially for the first half, where his numbers are hisorically good. U don't sit a guy making 8 mil a year for the next 2 years...

Do not forget that the white sox are really, really bad. Please

If we traded places with the cubs, and the cubs were in the AL central, you guys would be looking alot worse than we do this season. Atleast we have a world series and are not trying to buy one, like you guys are!

OH and I live in wrigleyville, on the non gay side, and I have many friends that are cubs fans and we make fun of each other all the time. I am just stating my opinion, and I am not trying to bash the cubs. But you want to bash my sox so bring it on.......

Do u know that your payroll was higher than ous was last year? Seriously, buy one? That's just ignorant of reality, especially considering the sox paid 108 million to barely finish better than dead last.

Are payroll was high by resigning are own players. The Tigers,Angels,Red Sox, and of course the yankees all have higher payrolls than us this year. The cubs have the highest payroll in the NL. Odviously they have an advantage over the rest of the NL. I hope some day they put in a salary cap, so then the cubs would never win a world series. They have tried everything, and now they are just going to keep adding payroll until they win one. I would do the same thing if I hadn't one in 100 years, but it is the only way they can ever win one.

Lets trade for Greene I think his a beter option.

Ted Lilly is #3 starter and nothing more. You NL'ers make it so obvious that you have no idea how good Bedard pitched last year. The Orioles had a horrible offense and an unreliable bullpen that frequently blew games especially while under Perlozzo. Bedard at one point had seven or eight no decisions in a row where the offense scored no runs for him or the bullpen blew his lead. He rattled off like 7 straight wins at one point shortly after that and if he had a good offense and bullpen behind him, Bedard has at least 18 wins and probably 20 before the season was even over with. He led the AL in strikeouts until his oblique injury on top of all that. I had the pleasure of seeing him pitch every game and it's annoying to see him so undervalued. Bedard? A #3 pitcher behind Ted fkin Lilly? Give me a break, that's ridiculous. Bedard is better than even Zambrano.

Another thing you forget is that Bedard dominated this way in the AL East which is easily the toughest division in baseball to pitch in. The NL is weak and even Joe Torre was amazed at how he would shut down the Yankees lineup every single time they saw him. Torre himself said at one point that he was the second coming of Sandy Koufax. It's too bad the Dodgers don't want to give anything up to get him. If Bedard goes to the NL, the only thing preventing him from being a shoe-in for the Cy Young is Jake Peavy. If Bedard can dominate in the AL East, you can't be serious when you imply that he wouldn't be better than fkin Ted Lilly in the NL. Ridiculous.

Sosa was brought to the league by the Texas Rangers. They traded him to the White Sox who trade him to the Cubs.

Sosa made his major league debut on June 16, 1989 with the Texas Rangers, and he hit first career home run off of Roger Clemens. Later in the season, the Rangers traded Sammy to the Chicago White Sox. He played two full seasons for the White Sox and was traded, along with pitcher Ken Patterson, to the Chicago Cubs for outfielder George Bell before the 1992 season.

I am also making this post because I realize what a hard thing it can be to take a look at a player from another league. All you have to go by is stats right now. I think of it like this. I know for a fact Zambrano is a great pitcher. I don't really much care what his stats are. I don't need numbers to tell me how he dominates hitters, how feeble batswings are vs. him, and how great his stuff is. The stats will more or less be there and at the end of the season. In the end, numbers are just a tool to see what I already know. For those of you who have not seen Bedard pitch because he's in the AL, he's a great pitcher who has pitched his whole career for shaky defenses, losing teams that give up in August, and anemic run support. Such things suppress a pitchers' numbers in innumerable ways and keeps him a pretty big secret.

He is a great pitcher. There's a reason why there's all this talk about him right now. I understand that you might want to hash out the finer points of the stats (whcih is valid), but he is a very good pitcher who is not just slightly better than Hill or Lilly. He could swap places with Zambrano without missing a beat.

Its not goign to happen without Hill, and I think that is a waste. Yes he is a better pitcher than Hill, but the point would be to upgrade the rotation. Giving up Hill, would still mean our 4&5 are weak. Z, Bedard, Lilly, Hill is the end goal and that just isn't gonna happen.

I say if the Cubs are persuing both Bedard and Roberts then let them. We need help at pitching and we need a better SS. I must've said this a million times by now but Theriot is not a starter. I like Hill though if we can get a deal for both roberts and Bedard without Hill we could pull off a steal but I doubt that would happen.

If you can't get Bedard without giving up Hill, look elsewhere. The improvement from Hill to Bedard is probably a few games, but the improvement from Lieber or Marquis to Blanton would be twice as good. Even if you have to get a guy thats not as good as Bedard (which is almost everyone), but keep Hill, the price would be cheaper to get him, it would be cheaper to keep him, and the rotation would probably be better for it, 1-5.

Aduncaroo, who would you rather have as your top three in a playoff series? Z, Bedard and Lilly or Z, Lilly and Hill?

It would obviously take some prospects to get a Blanton\Snell type as well, but not what it would take to get Bedard...

I think Hill will outperform Lilly next year as well.

Yeah, I knew I'd get kickback on Blanton, but remember, I was just using him as an example. What about an Ian Snell? Thats a little tougher because of being in the same division, but you get my point. It just depends on whats out there, and only the GMs know that. I respect your point though, because I don't want to watch that movie either. I just want to worry about getting there first...and I think with the offense and defense already improved, you don't have to tweak the pitching staff much. I believe Z and Hill will improve, LIlly will fall back a bit, and Marquis will be about the same. If you put someone else as the 2, and they are a legit 2, I think they do very well in the playoffs. The playoffs are kind of a crapshoot though, there is no guarentee that the best team wins.

Bedard is filthy, he's got legit #1 stuff. There is no doubt that if the Cubs had him they would have a great one-two punch with Zambrano and Bedard with Lilly making a very solid #3. I think you give up Hill if that's what it takes to get him. The only question you have with Bedard isn't the stuff, but is he the kind of horse you can ride down the stretch? Strikeouts are nice but I'd like to see Bedard get more hitters out with the first or second pitch so he can last longer into the game -- and longer into the season. With all due respect, I don't think Blanton gives you what Bedard gives you -- a guy that can flat out shut down a team. If you've got a 1-2-3 of Zambrano, Bedard, Lilly then the 4,5 guys don't have to do too much. Just eat some innings and save the bullpen, then get ready to pitch long relief in the playoffs. My only question again is - will Bedard be able to handle that burden? If he can, the Cubs would be a beast in the NL and a worthy opponent of any team in the AL.

Wouldn't bash you on that one uww1, and if we could keep Hill that would put pretty sweet. But if the O's are limiting themselves to an age group then I think they'd be making a mistake in regard to Hill. He's an east coast guy who didn't pitch year round. He's got a lot of miles left on that arm and he has a lot of room for growth. He's a bit of a late bloomer because he didn't get the innings and development the California/Texas/Florida kids get. The age for Hill is deceptive in my opinion. He's a young 27/28 in terms of his arm and potential for improvement. Lefties in general seem to develop later. If the O's are dismissing Hill because of his age, then I'm sure the Cubs would be estatic to keep him -- and so would I. I'd be happy to sub Donnie Veal as a sub 24 guy with #2 starter potential. But if I'm the O's, I'd take Hill.

I don't know really. The one problem on the Cubs side of that deal is that it includes 4 of the 5 guys who can play CF for the Cubs (Pie, Colvin, Patterson, and Cedeno -- and assuming the Cubs don't want to move Fukudome). That leaves you with Sam Fuld. You'd have to sign Lofton for a year but you'd be stuck without a legit CF for the forseeable future. I think you take either Pie or Colvin out and substitute a young player of equal or greater value -- maybe Vitters as a player to be named later, maybe Samardjza. Without Hill, it's tough to put something together. A lot O's fans would say if you don't include Hill then you'd have to include Marmol. Something most Cub fans would be pretty uncomfortable with.

Vitters could be traded as a player to be named later, the O's would just have to wait until he's eligible to be traded. As for Coles and Meyers, they are fringe prospects. In my opinion those deals were more about unloading Jones and Pagan then they were about the players they got back. Some of it was Jones salary, some of it was Pagan's inability to stay healthy -- and both players had frequent lapses of concentration. The same goes for Ohman. Ascanio has the best ability of the bunch, but he's a throw in at best. He has a great arm but not much else right now. He's also on the small side and his durability is always going to be questioned. My gut feeling on this is the Cubs wind up with Roberts only - and probably for something like Gallagher, Colvin and Cedeno.

I don't see the Cubs giving up two pitchers for Roberts alone. I also believe MacPail when he says he wants to trade Bedard and Roberts in seperate deals. I would guess the O's send Roberts to the Cubs (I prefer other needs) and Bedard to the M's. The Mets end up with Santana.

I think epicMcPhail might be waiting for the Santana derby to clear out so he can get the losers to toss in for Bedard.

That could backfire, though, if the Twins keep waffling and get less than they originally planned.

Bedard isn't as good, but he doesn't demand a multi-year extension either.