Marquis Not Happy

I wonder if Marquis is going to be part of the possible Brian Roberts deal? I know Tim mentioned months ago that Marquis was a possiblity.

If he doest go to the Os, who are some possible suitors? What will his price be?

Marquis without salary compensation is negative value for any team. Marquis with full salary compensation is just a roadblock for younger starters. Nobody would trade out Marshall for Gallagher based on the inclusion of Marquis.

Way to go LOU! I guess one could interpret some instances last season in which Marquis might have not been in the good graces of Pinella. Well, they've been confirmed! PLEASE get rid of Marquis so my Cardinal friends can stop making fun of the Cubs for signing him! I think LaRussa sent him to the pen for a spell and he pouted then. Marshall, Marquis, Patterson, Cendeno and cash for Roberts!

By doing this in the press, Piniella and Marquis just made Hendry's job alot tougher. He will have to eat 1/2 his salary and get nothing in return. Piniella should have handled this behind closed doors.

If Marquis is traded it will be as a salary dump. He's owed over 16 million for the next two seasons. Sending him to the rebuilding Orioles makes zero sense, unless the Cubs picked up about 12 million of his pay.

this is so so funny. the cubs give marquis a ridiculous contract last year and now they have 16 million owed to him for two years. in a couple years the cubs will have about 5 or 6 bad contracts as well. 3 years and 21 million for a maybe number 5 starter. ha ha. you dug the grave hendry. is there anyone who thought that signing last year was a good idea? i didnt think so. as a cards fan i saw marquis plenty and when i found out he was going to the cubs i was thrilled. no pity for the stupid.

joel: No, I don't think any Cubs fans wanted Marquis...As for pitying the Cubs, don't worry about it, friend. I don't think many Cubs fans are going to be pitying the Redbirds when they're duking it out for last place with Pittsburgh these next couple seasons...

Marquis is gone everytime something happens like this w/ Lou not liking what he's seeing or hearing Hendry trades that person. Like....

Michael Barrett- Fight w/ Zambrano. Not producing well behind the plate or when at the plate. So Hendry sent him to San Diego.

Angel Pagan- Looked at a strike 3 pitch when somebody was at 3B. Lou went off on him and what would you know he's sent back to the Mets.

(soon to be hopefully) Jason Marquis- Said what he said. Lou didn't like it so hopefully he'll be in the deal for Roberts and since he has some trade value maybe we can get somebody w/ Roberts.

Also, pintarhand and A Bravesfan, I know they wouldn't take Marquis over Gallagher thats not what I was saying. I said that Jason Marquis could be in the deal with Roberts as the 4th possibility as the O's are said to want.
Also, Damn Benard Berrian signed with the Vikings

Lou telling them how he thinks. I really like him. He stumbles through sentences in interviews and sounds like he's had a couple, but you got to like him and how he manages. Go Lou!

I'm guessing O's fans are not too excited to hear us Cub fans say we hope Marquis goes in a Roberts trade. I doubt that talk excites anyone in Baltimore. Even though the reality is he is not totally useless...just after June. ;)

I felt Marquis was close to gone last year when Lou was not pleased with Jason. This kind of talk a few days into ST is not good. I think Jason is saying he wants to be here but REALLY telling Jim he has a few weeks to trade him. If that is not what he is REALLY saying, he is just not being smart about it.

signed here for a reason. But I also signed as a starter, and I think that's where I help the team the most.

That's the Funniest joke i have heard in a very long time!

"I wonder if Marquis is going to be part of the possible Brian Roberts deal?"

"Hendry please send Marquis in the O's trade and save Gallagher."

"I said that Jason Marquis could be in the deal with Roberts as the 4th possibility as the O's are said to want."

When you see stuff like this its no wonder darkstar ( and many others for that matter) cant stand the cubs posters on this site. Perhaps if I write it in bold letters people will understand.. MARQUIS ISNT GOING TO THE O's. THE O'S DONT WANT HIM. As a matter of fact no team wants Marquis unless 1) the cubs eat half of his $16+ mil AND 2)settle for very little in return. Marquis is not gonna be easy to get rid of either because 1) he's bad 2) he makes way to much $$$ and 3) every team knows he doesnt have a spot on the cubs, meaning everyone knows the cubs want to dump him. Wheres Aduncaroo ( i.e. one of the only smart cub fans out here) to put his fanbase in check with silliness.

PLEASE tell me Cub fans your just venting and not serious. Marquis is a needed piece to this team at the moment. If it wasn't for Marquis we would have been done, DONE in the first half of last season. It is very easy to dump on someone like everyone is doing. Take last year and the "Dumpster" comments. Common, get real, do you really want to rely on dempster to be a starter? If you do then jeeze, LETS GET READY FOR 101!!!!!!!!

"Plus, never say I'm not a smart Cubs fan cause I know whats going on and been followiing since I was still in the loins of my dad. LOL THTS PRETTY WEIRD"

Thats pretty gross dude. I agree that Cedeno and Gallagher will be going along with 1 to 2 others, but come'on, Marquis is not a throw in. He's too bad and too expensive. A throw in is a Murton/Patterson/Veal/ type, not some goof who makes $16+mil. Im with you, Marquis will be gone but anyone expecting anything in return is mistaken. At this point cub fans should settle for an average prospect.

I smile when I see these grown men making millions to play a kids game cry about starting , playing a certain position , or batting in a certain slot . How many players in any sport cry about this and that and then a few years down the road they can't even get a major league deal . Look at Sosa for example . It was an insult to bat sixth in the Cubs lineup and now he can't even get a major league deal .

Dear Baltimore fans,

Stop making generalizations about all of us Cubs fans.

Love,
All Smart Cubs Fans

XD23: Several realistic and good trade ideas have been posted; perhaps you need to re-assess what Roberts is actually worth.

As for Cedeno, he not only has more upside than the in-house options the O's have, but has also performed better. The fact that the O's are considering Bynum and Hernandez as their starting SS in '08 is laughably pathetic at best.

@CUBBIES2008: Well, at least Briggs re-signed. He got 6 years, $36mil with $12 guaranteed. Not sure what it does with Jamar Williams but maybe he can replace Ayenbadejo on ST and if he can show enough improvement at camp, take over for Hillenheyer.

Simply put...the O's can keep Roberts and finish in 4th or 5th or they can trade him and still finish 4th or 5th so the Cubs really don't need to trade for him. As they are currently 2 or 3 games better than the Brewers trading for him just puts the Cubs 5-6 games up. Trading away Roberts and taking a chance on guys like Cedeno, Patterson, etc and spendning whatever they would've on guys like Lohse the next couple off-seasons on developing minor-leaguers and young foreign players would be a much better investment for the team than holding out for the absolute top quality offer.

Its crap like this that makes me appreciate people like Woody more. Think about it...Woody was gracious in moving from starter to bullpen to nearly retired to back to the bullpen to possible closer. He's just happy to have his arm attached to his body and use it to help this team. In the 10 years he's been with this team, I can't remember hearing or reading anything negative he's said to or about anyone. Marquis' just reinforces what a class act Woody has been.

With that being said, Mark Prior is a prick, too. He owed it to the team that drafted him, supported him, paid him for virtually 0 productivity for the past 2-3 years, and sought out top-flite medical treatment to only see him leave for a 1 year deal in SD.

What is really laughable is that the O's fans think the JH is going to include Ceda in a Robert's deal. The O's can keep Robert's if they don't want Gallagher and Cedeno, and maybe a mid level prospect. No WAY you're getting Ceda,forget about it. The Cubs will be playing in the post season with or without Roberts, and if steroid boy can't take his drugs, he might not be all that good the next 2 years anyway. Enjoy the cellar O's fans!

Darkstar: Roberts is a very good player, but for his career is a .281/.351/.409 hitter. That's good, but hardly irreplacable, especially since DeRosa is a career .271/.341/.408 hitter. Further, Roberts' career line is heavily-skewed by his '05 campaign and his '07 campaign. His increased power numbers in '05, along with his admission to PED usage casts an even bigger doubt as to whether he can slug over .500 again in a season (highly doubtful, IMO). By the by, DeRosa's numbers are trending upwards...

As for being a top defensive player, hardly. He's well above league average, but he's not at the level of an Orlando Hudson. O-Dog is a premiere defensive 2B, not Roberts. Stolen bases are vastly over-rated by many fans, but since you wanted to go that route, a breakdown of his career numbers shows that he's been successful about 80% of the time, which is good. Again, however, that number is heavily-skewed from his '07 performance. Prior to that, his high had been 36 thefts.

The Cubs do not need Roberts--in fact, they don't need to acquire a 2B at all; trading for him becomes worthwhile if/when Lou shifts DeRosa to SS and puts Theriot on the pine, which likely won't happen. Hence, giving up a package of Murton, Gallagher, Cedeno, and Patterson is enough, especially when you take into account Baltimore's need to re-build (and the fact that keeping Roberts really doesn't help them, unless they sense a bigger bounty from another team on the horizon...since 2B tends to be one of the less-difficult holes to fill internally, it's unlikely they'll find a better package any time soon).

To sum up, Roberts is good, but not elite. He plays a position the Cubs have filled already (although again, my interest level increases if acquiring him leads to DeRosa moving to SS), and is a marginal upgrade over the man currently playing that position. Taking it a step further, Roberts' career line is skewed from 2 years, one of which he admittedly used HGH during. Taking those 2 outlying years out of the equation, Roberts' value goes down even further.

Statistics are a really nifty tool. Check 'em out some time.

*applause*

Anyway, they should do the Roberts deal and then package Murton and Marquis and see if anyone bites. I don't even really care if its two B prospects, or even one if they took his full contract. Two if not...

I hate giving up Murt but D-Ro can play left just as well, as can Ward for that matter. With Pie's range, they don't have to do that much.

Oh and look, how cute ~ the Cubs-fans trying to bash me have followed me into into this thread now too… Humm, so I am out of line because the topic here became Roberts and I answered the question. Ok dude, cool deal!

Ryjo,
I am a statistics guy and that’s why I said everything I did. But, DeRosa isnt really trending upward, he more than likely peaked in 2006 (his age 31 season), got a little worse but played at a similar level in 2007 (his age 32 season) and will begin the downward slide most marginal no-speed, slight-power players experience when they are coming out of their peak year range. He is also pretty much a Def liability at almost all of the positions he is able to play, but his ability to play them all is pretty much where his true value lies ~ he is a ideal bench player to have around and little more. To expect DeRosa to get better is going against the normal, to expect Roberts to get better is just common since as he just entered peak years and has been showing the better skills consistently the last three years (2006 he did falter the last month though because the lack of offseason preparation he got because of the 05 injury caught up to him). Also, his HGH use was supposedly a one time event in 2003 and would have no results what so ever on his 2005 numbers, and his power even in 2005 is similar power that he is showing today. Its not like he came out and crushed 40 HR or something, his power has always come more from his huge double and high triple amounts.

dark, you're a little full of yourself. I didn't follow you here. I posted before you.

"Marquis without salary compensation is negative value for any team. Marquis with full salary compensation is just a roadblock for younger starters. Nobody would trade out Marshall for Gallagher based on the inclusion of Marquis."

I think IF Marquis were to be included in the Roberts deal it would only be done IF the Cubs ALSO included an ADDITIONAL prospect OR BETTER prospects.

The O's will not take on salary for the Cubs without being rewarded for it. So I could see the asking for Marquis, Gallagher, Ceda, Cedeno, Veal, and another prospect for Roberts.

I'm not sure the Cubs are really desparate to dump Marquis' salary. Let's not forget that this is all Hendry's fault. He was the only idiot willing to give Marquis such a ridiculous contract offer. If I were Sam Zell I would ask that Hendry take a salary cut for his stupidity!

darkstar: You seem like a very intelligent person; please tell me you don't honestly believe Roberts' story that he only tried HGH one time. That's just silly. If there was enough evidence to prove he used at least twice, he'd amend his story. If there was enough evidence to prove he was using in the off-season of '04 or during the '05 story, he'd also amend his story. The reason he "admitted" to using steroids once in '03 is because that's all the evidence that can be put on him. I believe it "innocent until proven guilty," so I'm not gonna crucify the man, but I surely don't believe his story. As far as Roberts' power, don't quantify "power" in terms of HRs and RBIs. A stats guy would know that slugging percentage is the best way to define power. His slugging % in '05 was .515--very, very, very good for a second baseman. It dropped to .410 in '06, and creeped back up to .432 last season. Both are good, but quite a slip from .515. I think he's a better player than he showed pre-'05, but not capable of duplicating '05's batting line. Maybe he can be closer to his '07 form than his '06 form, but he's likely somewhere between the two at this stage of his career. Like I said, he's very good, but a marginal upgrade over DeRosa.

As for DeRosa, his OPS was slightly higher in '06, but he was also playing half his games in Arlington. He's only 33 years old, so while he's not likely in his prime anymore, he's hardly an old man. He's still a capable player, both offensively and defensively. Rate 2 shows him as a very sound defender at every position he played last year, so I'm not sure where you're getting your information in regards to DeRosa's ability as a fielder.

Again, bottom line is that Roberts' bat is a huge upgrade over Theriot's, but his bat and defense are a very marginal upgrade over Mark DeRosa. If the O's or fans on this board think he's worth Veal/Ceda in addition to Gallagher, Cedeno, and Murton/Colvin, they are seriously over-valuing him.

XD23, that's about as poor a comparison as I've read. D.Lee is a natural athlete who's 6'5". Do you honestly believe his power comes from steroids? His decrease in power numbers comes more from a year recovering from a broken wrist - and at any rate, he's a guy who hits for average, his power is almost accidental - a by-product of his natural size and athleticism. And have you looked at Lee? He has a long, lean athletic build - not the bulky steroids physique. It's very apparent you know very little about the Cubs players, team, and prospects. The Roberts ascent is different. Is it not a little strange that a 5'9" punch and judy hitter suddenly develops popeye form arms and extra base power? Now I like Roberts, but I'm not about to apologize for his steroid use - nor do I believe that he used it once.

There is no question, however, that Roberts is an upgrade to the Cubs at second base and especially at leadoff hitter. He also vastly improves their depth by moving DeRosa to a supersub role.

And I'm curious as to who you think Cleveland will part with to get Roberts.

Ok Ryjo, you want to talk stats and see if we can figure some things out, no problem…

Brian Roberts was having a great season and showing the things we should expect to follow in 2006 and then had his arm nearly ripped off at 1B by Bubba Crosby. Roberts of course had to have surgery, and the 2006 season shows how effected he was. His power was lost nearly completely because he was playing in pain. Do we know this for sure? Yeah, he told us he played in pain all year and his stats show that his power really was completely was lost ~ and I’m not just talking SLG% showing that, I’m talking about the fact that he went from a near automatic 35-40/20/40-45 G/L/F line to 45/20/35. Think of it this way though, start breaking down his 2006 season and see what you really get…

Pre-AS game he had 274 AB and hit .296/.361/.383. OBP is pretty good but not quite as high as it should be ~ but a .383 SLG? And he had that 383 SLG because he had only 1 HR, 2 3B and 17 2B in 315 PA. That’s about ½ a normal season for him so he was on pace for a 34 2B / 4 3B / 2HR season ~ which isnt anywhere near his normal. What happened after the AS break? Well, he tried to compensate for the complete lack of strength he had by attempting to crush the ball. What he ended up doing is dramatically increase his HR rate, at the cost of BA and inturn OBP. Post-AS he had 279 AB, 9 HR, only 1 3B, only 16 2B and a .276/.327/.437 line. Obviously, it was a guy in pain with no power because of it swinging for the fences trying to compensate, and really it was from mid-August till the end of the season that this approach is most visible, which is why we can see a split like this on his 2006 season:
Up to Aug15 ~ .299/.372/.418 with 30 2B, 2 3B and 4 HR in 447 PA
After Aug15 ~ .257/.286/.394 with 4 2B, 1 3B and 6 HR in 183 PA
You can see his HR rate took a dramatic upward turn, but his BA hit the floor because of it. He shouldn’t have even been playing or atleast playing extremely sporadically at that point, but for whatever reason he was…

To assume he took HGH from 2003 to 2005 while managing not to get caught under the testing inplace during the 2005 season, and that is the reason he went from having a higher SLG to watching it drop seems the “Guilty until proven innocent” route and ignores what we know he went through. 2006 doesn’t show signs of a player going from user to non-user, it shows a player trying to deal with the fact that he nearly lost his arm at the end of the prior year. Likewise, 2005 doesn’t show a real different player from 2003/2004, the only thing that really changed was his ability to make solid contact and place the ball ~ you know, the normal stuff that players oftentimes improve on after their first or second fulltime seasons in the majors and when they start to enter their peak years.

As far as the player he was in 2007, well on Sept 1st he was hitting .304/.392/.453 before going only .214/.295/.316 the final month. What do we know about that month? Well, something seemed to have happened as he was a dramatically different player starting about Sept 1st. All of a sudden his FB rate dropped completely and the FB rate crept back up. All of a sudden his BAbip dropped from his normal 300-350 to .253. It looks like he was playing hurt again, it looks like something was probably bothering him ~ don’t know what it was though so I’m just giving the actual stats which show that he might have gotten hit by a pitch or fell funny diving for a ball or whatever sometime late August to cause the change in production. Is also possible that he still just didn’t have the stamina after the injury late 2005, or it could be just plain ol dumb luck since the BAbip dropped ~ what I do know is we don’t know for sure what happened in Sept but the numbers prior to Sept look rather amazing from a 2B.

Say what you want about Roberts, but the stats are extremely logical and point to the guy being pretty much the same player the entire time with a normal development curve and of course some slack for a horrible injury…

Oh, I should have said 2008 would see the Indians play Blake/Peralta/Roberts with AsCab in a utility role with 2009 being when Peralta moves to 3B fulltime, Blake being gone and everything…

Okay cubs fans we the orioles will not take marquis. That's final. Not going to happen. Keep dreaming. Nobody wants him except you guys. You can't move him for anything of value. So just deam with it. We want young players without horible contracts.

What?

You have a list of like 10 guys to choose from, all but 2 of which were top-100 prospects. It also covers every position from SP to any OF spot to 2B to 3B.

“Marte has been given plenty of chances to play and has been traded several times already. Obviously there's something missing when every team that has him ends up getting rid of him”

That’s flat out wrong. He has been traded twice, but has only suited up fro one team. Boston got him with the hope of being able to flip him for Crisp because they knew the Indians were interested. And the Braves traded him because he was blocked by Chipper who had just reupped for like 4 years to play 3B ~ Marte was never going to get a shot there…

Marte able to have a Phillips breakout once given a shot? Hell yeah ~ and I hope he does. Shoot, I wish they would just give him the fulltime 3B job for the Tribe and dump Blake, Andy is a plus fielder with amazing skills at the plate. The team has screwed with him a ton and his results are showing it ~ he is trying to hard, swinging for the fences constantly trying to get someone in the organization to give him some attention just like Phillips was. Give him a chance though and he has a good chance to impress…

But who gives a crap about all the Indians prospects anyway, I don’t fell like going over them one by one because its pointless. Instead I’ll ask ya thins, what are Cedeno, Patterson, Marshall, etc? All guys who once looked like they might be ok players and have since fallen flat on their faces, right? If the O’s want an OF do you really think they would rather have Patterson than Gutierrez, Fancisco, Choo or even Crowe? Why, what exactly has Eric shown again? If the O’s want an infielder do you really think they would be tripping over themselves to get Cedeno instead of Barfield or Marte? Why, do you think they like the lower potential with inability to hit in the majors more than higher potential with similar to better showing in the majors? If they want a SP do you really think they would pass on the higher ceiling guys like Laffey or Sowers to take Marshall who has shown nothing but the ability to pitch for 5 games before imploding? And that’s just scratching the surface of the players the Indians might include ~ its not like those 10 or so aren’t the only ones to choose from. The Cubs don’t exactly have a surplus of guys with talent, and they don’t exactly have many they are willing to discuss moving ~ there are very few teams who couldn’t swoop in and blow their offers out of the water…

“Apart from Lofgren, none of those guys are projected starters in future Cleveland lineups.”

Also blatantly not true. Sowers has already been a starter with the club, and will quite possibly be once again in 2009 when Byrd leaves if he doesn’t beat Laffey and Lee out this preseason. (Lee might also be dealt making it even easier). Laffey and Sowers both in the 09 rotation is easy to foresee though… Gutierrez is the starting RF now, well unless Francisco takes it from him. Marte (unless traded) will be kept on the roster this year and given a shot to take the job fulltime in 2009. Barfield and Cabrera are currently fighting for the 2B job ~ and there is a strong possibility Barfield is the 2009 2B with AsCab at SS and Peralta at 3B. And Crowe is still 1+ years away anyway, that was pretty much always the plan anyway. He will be showing up about the same time Michaels and DavidD are leaving ~ whether he is a starter is as questionable as any other player a ways away still. Really, Choo is probably the only one that isnt a projected starter in one of the many scenarios the team has left open for themselves…

“values their own teams guys higher than outsiders do.”

~ I agree with that, but I’m not putting “value” to guys. Shoot, I never said anything to the extent; I merely pointed out that you were blatantly incorrect saying that none of them were top-100 type guys. But I will say where the bigger selection and higher potential lies ~ that sure isnt in Chicago…

I think marquis think hes not going to make the rotation its barely into spring season.. But i love how lou says idc samne old lou..

Dude, Crunchy ~ I don’t know what your point is but you are stretching all over the place…

Marte is in the exact situation Phillips was ~ a top prospect who is under performing because he is trying too hard to get attention in the minors. Your problem with that being the case, who knows…

Sowers was ranked the #53 prospect in all of baseball going into 2006 (where he lost his prospect status in 2006 because of his ML starts) ~ that means he is projected to be a SP5 at best? Interesting…

“And I'm not saying the O's should trade for Murton or Marshall. Go back through the thread and see if I mentioned it once. Stay on topic, you're throwing stuff at me that I never even mentioned. Do you even read the posts thoroughly? It seems like you're more interested in trying to win a meaningless debate than making an honest reply..”

…that’s all your doing ~ and I don’t even know why; I cant figure out where your point might be and what you are even really trying to talk about... You tried to dismiss the Indians offer because you claimed none of a select few of the guys I had mentioned were top 100 prospects when like 80% of them are/were ~ and almost all of them as recently as 2 years ago while most of them were in the majors since losing their prospect status… Youre, I guess, grasping for straws in an attempt to somehow discredit the Indians possible offers? Who knows, but if that’s what youre doing, you are not doing a very good job of it… Oh, and I never said Murtons name so not sure where you are getting that crap…

If you are seriously saying that a list of 10-15 prospects where more than 50% are said to have top-100 abilities is something you cant find a package out of, but pulling teeth trying to get the Cubs to include a Low-A reliever with control problems is much better way to try to get things done? Whatever dude, please figure out a point then get back to me…

Crunchy, Dark is trying too hard, just like the tribes prospects. Thats why he and his prospects are messing up....ya see? lol

LOL! Good one, INOK.

Dark...you can solve your arguement really quickly.

How many of the prospects you named are CURRENTLY top 100. The word currently means right now.

Believe me, Dark will come on this thread two months from now and try and sneak the last word in...he is really that arrogant and self-righteous. Trust me and crunch on this one...

“Dark...you can solve your arguement really quickly.
How many of the prospects you named are CURRENTLY top 100. The word currently means right now”

As many as the Cubs… Good enough answer?

“Believe me, Dark will come on this thread two months from now and try and sneak the last word in...he is really that arrogant and self-righteous. Trust me and crunch on this one...”

Interesting, would love to see where that is the case… If anything its your name I have seen in threads well after posts have fallen off the main page still going on the same non-existent arguments.

But what do you troll even want? You just trying to bash me again? Its pitiful when a entire group of people can get together, not come up with a single point and still feel like they are superior to a person who is doing nothing more than answering the asnine questions being asked…

I think if the Cubs are truly desperate to get rid of Marquis, especially since Lou has had guys shipped out like this before, they can eat enough of his salary to make Marquis look like a decent two-year investment and grab a useful piece in return; maybe a lefty bullpen arm or a low-level prospect.

When teams are looking at Julian Tavarez and Steve Traschel as their options, Marquis doesn't look that bad.

I do find it funny when fans of a team say "no way, we are not going to take this player, stop suggesting it!" Well, it's going to be amusing when something happens like epicMcFail takes Marquis in the Roberts deal.

Yes Dark, nice how you dodged the question. Of the ones you mentioned, 1 was in the top 100.

Don't be ignorant and dodge questions, answer them. Eat your crow and admit when you used old prospect lists to try and make your proposals better. You were caught, plain and simple.

No, you didn't. The answer is 1, when you were trying to make it like 4 earlier. You were just plain wrong, but your ego wouldn't let you admit that, and still won't. Its pretty sad actually.

Colvin could still be involved for all we know, which would make it two and better than your offer from the Tribe. Veal isn't off limits from what we have heard. But hey, we could go by your thoery and just offer up Angel Guzman with that package and it would be a done deal.

Just some advice, at some point in your life you need to learn when you are wrong, and admit it. Its called eating crow around here. Mature people can do that...you haven't been able yet, but maybe some day.

He means as many as in the proposed Gallagher Cedeno plus mystery player...from what I can tell. The problem is, you still caught him trying to say he had multiple ones in the prospects he mentioned when he tried to back it up by using as far back as 2003 (!) prospect rankings.

So instead of saying, "yes, you are right, there really aren't that many top 100 prospect in what I mentioned, there are only 1."...he said "as many as the Cubs" meaning of the 2 players mentioned in the proposed cubs rumor, it was the same amount. He is just too prideful to say that actual answer, which is 1, because it shows how pathetic his offer is being that he mentioned like 5 guys.

Yes, I guess I kinda answered the wrong question and gave the answer to the implied or atleast much more relevant “how many 2008 top-100 prospects are the Indians offering”. My answer to that is “as many as the Cubs” ~ but even that is rather unknown because we don’t know if the Indians are trying to get Roberts at all and whatever your guys obsession with this topic is, its completely for not. Like I said in the first post were I addressed this whole runaround argument you guys are trying to hold, talking about the Indians prospects is pointless ~ and really on every single level possible. Don’t know if they are interested, don’t know how interested if they are, don’t know how many guys they will give up, don’t know the level of guys they will give up… Its just an ignorant trolling conversation that you are attempting to hold, and its extremely pitiful since you aren’t even giving a real topic or point to begin with…

The fact is that you have mocked the Cubs and their fans for giving quantity trade proposals for like what, 3 or 4 months now? Then you get asked what guys the Indians might offer up and you give us a list of 9 guys, one currently in the top 100, and say some combination of that crap? That is really hypocritical...I mean seriously, you should practice what you preach, and you obviously don't. Just goes to show that your first agenda on here is to bash all that is Cubs...and then you might have some rational conversation on other threads. Just funny how you mock all these proposed Cubs packages and then offer a bunch of crap that no one wants from the Indians. Nice dude.

When you say that former prospects are "top 100" and use 2003 (!!!) as evidence, I'd say thats pathetic, and far from "facts". But seriously, keep believing all you do is objectively tell the truth, and we will keep laughing at you.

And please Adun, enlighten me... Explain which guys I listed that have not ranked as a Top-100 since 2003. Really, let me know how pathetic I am and tell me all the guys above has not ranked in the Top-100 since 2003...

The way I see it, everyone I mentioned ranked in the Top-100 prior to the 05 season at the latest ~ and the guys who haven’t ranked that high since actually lost their prospect status within 1-2 years of 2005 so they weren’t eligible to rank again. (Barfield, Choo and FrankieG are in that boat)

Whatever your point is with that blatantly incorrect, pitiful attempt to try to bash me ~ well, who knows… But its you, its what I expect…

This is what Adun said:

When you say that former prospects are "top 100" and use 2003 (!!!) as evidence, I'd say thats pathetic, and far from "facts".

This is what you posted:

Shin-Soo Choo ~ 2003 #61, 2005 #51 (2006 split between majors, 2007 hurt)

Adun simply said you used prospects back from 2003 to try and prove some point and he's right. You did.

“Adun, you cannot convince Darkstar he has ever been wrong about anything. The day he does, I'll take it as a sign that the apocalypse is near.”

Ok Crunchy, you saying I was wrong and that I provided guys who have not ranked in the Top-100 since 2003? Then I would ask you the same thing I asked Adun, which players are they exactly? Please, someone just answer the damn question since you guys think its somehow a freakin point… Which guys did I list have not ranked in the top-100 since 2003? How hard is that to answer? I think a preschooler could do so ~ cant you two?

“Adun simply said you used prospects back from 2003 to try and prove some point and he's right. You did.”

Ohhh… so you are saying they ranked in 2003 and after… So that’s the big problem with my post? Now I ask, that’s a bad thing? It’s a bad thing if a player ranks multiple times, including as far back as after his first full pro year?

Shoot, I would think prospects ranking 2, 3, 4 or 5 times would be a positive, not a negative. I mean some guy comes out of no where to rank once and he is a guy who came out of no where to rank once ~ his skills might not be too solid though if they developed overnight…

"And I didn't say you were wrong, I said the day you'd admit you're wrong about anything, I'll take it as a sign that the apocaplyse is near"

HAHAHA, the funniest thing I have ever read on here. Lets paraphrase that:

'He isnt wrong about what you are saying, but he will never say he's wrong to what you are saying'

...now that is classic!

huh INOK? You might want to read the thread again, your trolling is missing quite a few posts where that was gone over.

From 7:33...
"Yes, I guess I kinda answered the wrong question and gave the answer to the implied or atleast much more relevant “how many 2008 top-100 prospects are the Indians offering”. My answer to that is “as many as the Cubs”"

So, your problem is? Or do you just not have a point either?