TSN's Deveney's Take on Roberts-Cubs

[Sports Guy]

I'm not sure how you can make this statement, considering a package without Pie is very likely going to land Roberts, while there's nothing to suggest that Greene is even available.

Regardless, I've said several times now that if both Roberts and a significant SS upgrade come over, then I don't really give a rip who winds up with Pie.

It's Roberts for Pie *without* an upgrade at SS that I'm opposed to. And the O's don't have a SS upgrade to offer. It's really that simple.

Actually, if Theriot is really that bad defensively and will give you an OPS under 700, Hernandez is probably an upgrade over him.

[Rob H]

Actually, if Theriot is really that bad defensively and will give you an OPS under 700, Hernandez is probably an upgrade over him.

He might be, but so is Ronny Cedeno. The problem is that Lou loves Theriot, so it's going to take a very large upgrade to knock Theriot out of the lineup.

[olehippi]

Funny how we traded all the 2B's we had in the system to the Cubs, and now want/need a 2B back in a trade sending them another 2B. Sounds like some really smart baseball minds at work to me.....

[El Gordo]

He might be, but so is Ronny Cedeno. The problem is that Lou loves Theriot, so it's going to take a very large upgrade to knock Theriot out of the lineup.

They don't call him "Sweet Lou" for nothing. That's why I'm intigued by Cedeno, he could really turn out to be a very solid SS. If he stabilizes his fielding he could be a plus defender with a .750 OPS

[Number5]

Pretty simple.

Greene is probably a five to six win upgrade over Theriot. Roberts is a two or three win upgrade over DeRosa.

If we were going to trade Pie, I'd rather we do it in the trade that helps us most.

So the Orioles should trade Roberts to Pittsburgh for Wilson rather than to Chicago for Pie because Wilson represents a larger upgrade on Hernandez than Pie is to Scott? Come on now, no GM makes trades based so absolutely on positional need. Market value of the players involved is extremely important, and to discount it would be ruinous to any organization.

To say you would trade Pie in a package for Greene, but not for Roberts totally ignores both market value and the chief reason the Cubs are interested in Roberts to begin with - he is one of the top lead-off men in the game. I know that many Cub fans are having a hard time getting on the same page as the Cubs on this, but the bottom line is that the Cubs brain trust sees the need for a change at the top of the order after last year's results. (Especially in the playoffs.) Like it our not, that is the reason the Cubs are trying to get Roberts. It certainly is not because they feel that they absolutely must upgrade at 2B. I've probably seen a hundred posts from Cub fans in various blogs that "lead-off man is not a position." It amazes me that so many Cub fans cannot understand the value of a top lead-off man. Defense is simply not the primary need that the Cubs are trying to address.

[ChaosLex]

If the Cubs trade us Pie, he'd likely be the only Cubs player in the deal.

I'd rather have the package of Gallagher, Veal, Murton and Cedeno.

[Rob H]

So the Orioles should trade Roberts to Pittsburgh for Wilson rather than to Chicago for Pie because Wilson represents a larger upgrade on Hernandez than Pie is to Scott? Come on now, no GM makes trades based so absolutely on positional need. Market value of the players involved is extremely important, and to discount it would be ruinous to any organization.

You're rebuilding. You need prospects, not immediate upgrades.

The Cubs are contending, they need upgrades. Greene is a bigger one than Roberts... a much bigger one.

Oh, and as to the market value argument... try to get the Padres to trade Greene for Roberts straight up. They wouldn't do it.

To say you would trade Pie in a package for Greene, but not for Roberts totally ignores both market value and the chief reason the Cubs are interested in Roberts to begin with - he is one of the top lead-off men in the game. I know that many Cub fans are having a hard time getting on the same page as the Cubs on this, but the bottom line is that the Cubs brain trust sees the need for a change at the top of the order after last year's results. (Especially in the playoffs.) Like it our not, that is the reason the Cubs are trying to get Roberts. It certainly is not because they feel that they absolutely must upgrade at 2B. I've probably seen a hundred posts from Cub fans in various blogs that "lead-off man is not a position." It amazes me that so many Cub fans cannot understand the value of a top lead-off man. Defense is simply not the primary need that the Cubs are trying to address.

The Cubs FO may think Roberts is valuable because he's a "leadoff hitter."

In reality, that's a meaningless designation. The numbers bear this out. It's not a particularly difficult concept if you've ever tried reading any one of the numerous studies.

But let's assume for a moment that you aren't completely wrong. In 2007, the Cubs scored 114 runs in the first inning, the only inning Soriano was guaranteed to lead off. That's a full twenty runs more than in any other inning. If your unsupported theory that being a leadoff hitter actually matters is correct, how on earth could you argue that Soriano is anything less than a stellar one? (The O's scored one more run in the first inning than in their next closest inning)

[PoorMike]

So the Orioles should trade Roberts to Pittsburgh for Wilson rather than to Chicago for Pie because Wilson represents a larger upgrade on Hernandez than Pie is to Scott? Come on now, no GM makes trades based so absolutely on positional need. Market value of the players involved is extremely important, and to discount it would be ruinous to any organization.

To say you would trade Pie in a package for Greene, but not for Roberts totally ignores both market value and the chief reason the Cubs are interested in Roberts to begin with - he is one of the top lead-off men in the game. I know that many Cub fans are having a hard time getting on the same page as the Cubs on this, but the bottom line is that the Cubs brain trust sees the need for a change at the top of the order after last year's results. (Especially in the playoffs.) Like it our not, that is the reason the Cubs are trying to get Roberts. It certainly is not because they feel that they absolutely must upgrade at 2B. I've probably seen a hundred posts from Cub fans in various blogs that "lead-off man is not a position." It amazes me that so many Cub fans cannot understand the value of a top lead-off man. Defense is simply not the primary need that the Cubs are trying to address.

I actually agree with the Cubs posters for the most part. All they are saying is that 2B is not a huge need for them, and they want to trade their best prospect for an area of their biggest need. The cubs obviously want BR for his hitting, defense and OBP/speed. However, they are more than willing to go with the status quo at 2b, so it's not like the O's have a lot of leverage. Plus, trading Pie means they need a CF too. I see the logic.

At the same time, we don't have to trade BR right now either. Cubs fans have also said that maybe the two teams just aren't a good match for a BR deal.

[Frobby]

You're rebuilding. You need prospects, not immediate upgrades.

The Cubs are contending, they need upgrades. Greene is a bigger one than Roberts... a much bigger one.

More to the point, the Padres are contenders themselves, and there would be no reason to trade Greene unless they thought the trade benefitted their team immediately.

[davearm]

So the Orioles should trade Roberts to Pittsburgh for Wilson rather than to Chicago for Pie because Wilson represents a larger upgrade on Hernandez than Pie is to Scott? Come on now, no GM makes trades based so absolutely on positional need. Market value of the players involved is extremely important, and to discount it would be ruinous to any organization.

To say you would trade Pie in a package for Greene, but not for Roberts totally ignores both market value and the chief reason the Cubs are interested in Roberts to begin with - he is one of the top lead-off men in the game. I know that many Cub fans are having a hard time getting on the same page as the Cubs on this, but the bottom line is that the Cubs brain trust sees the need for a change at the top of the order after last year's results. (Especially in the playoffs.) Like it our not, that is the reason the Cubs are trying to get Roberts. It certainly is not because they feel that they absolutely must upgrade at 2B. I've probably seen a hundred posts from Cub fans in various blogs that "lead-off man is not a position." It amazes me that so many Cub fans cannot understand the value of a top lead-off man. Defense is simply not the primary need that the Cubs are trying to address.

I'd love to see the Cubs add Roberts, and stick him in the 2 hole, just to highlight how wrong some folks are with their assumptions and preconceived notions.

[theobird]

You're rebuilding. You need prospects, not immediate upgrades.

The Cubs are contending, they need upgrades. Greene is a bigger one than Roberts... a much bigger one.

Oh, and as to the market value argument... try to get the Padres to trade Greene for Roberts straight up. They wouldn't do it.

The Cubs FO may think Roberts is valuable because he's a "leadoff hitter."

In reality, that's a meaningless designation. The numbers bear this out. It's not a particularly difficult concept if you've ever tried reading any one of the numerous studies.

But let's assume for a moment that you aren't completely wrong. In 2007, the Cubs scored 114 runs in the first inning, the only inning Soriano was guaranteed to lead off. That's a full twenty runs more than in any other inning. If your unsupported theory that being a leadoff hitter actually matters is correct, how on earth could you argue that Soriano is anything less than a stellar one? (The O's scored one more run in the first inning than in their next closest inning)

Rob, I would not be at all pleased with the Orioles trading Roberts straight up for Khalil Greene. No, not at all.

[Rob H]

Rob, I would not be at all pleased with the Orioles trading Roberts straight up for Khalil Greene. No, not at all.

And neither would Padres fans.

Actually, here's a decent example...

Let's pretend the O's are contending with your current roster. Now, you have LH at SS and Roberts and second, with Adam Jones in CF. As an O's fan, would you support trading Adam Jones and others for Chase Utley, relegating Roberts to the bench? Bearing in mind, then your team would have LH at SS and god knows who in CF.

[Number5]

You're rebuilding. You need prospects, not immediate upgrades.

The Cubs are contending, they need upgrades. Greene is a bigger one than Roberts... a much bigger one.

Oh, and as to the market value argument... try to get the Padres to trade Greene for Roberts straight up. They wouldn't do it.

The Cubs FO may think Roberts is valuable because he's a "leadoff hitter."

In reality, that's a meaningless designation. The numbers bear this out. It's not a particularly difficult concept if you've ever tried reading any one of the numerous studies.

But let's assume for a moment that you aren't completely wrong. In 2007, the Cubs scored 114 runs in the first inning, the only inning Soriano was guaranteed to lead off. That's a full twenty runs more than in any other inning. If your unsupported theory that being a leadoff hitter actually matters is correct, how on earth could you argue that Soriano is anything less than a stellar one? (The O's scored one more run in the first inning than in their next closest inning)

I'll go with the Cubs FO and the last 150 years of baseball thinking over your theory, thank you very much. Condescending statements like the bolded one above will certainly not do much to convince me of anything. If you want to think that batting a slugger with a low on-base percentage lead-off in the first inning and after the pitcher the rest of the game rather than a high on-base guy, knock yourself out. To me, doing that reduces Soriano's value to the team and creates a weakness in the lineup, as was very evident in the playoffs last year. I'm just saying that the Cubs FO clearly disagrees with you and frankly, that is what matters.

Further, unlike you, I have no idea what the Padres would or would not do, but it would certainly surprise me in a negative way if the Orioles were to offer Roberts straight up for Greene.

[Number5]

I actually agree with the Cubs posters for the most part. All they are saying is that 2B is not a huge need for them, and they want to trade their best prospect for an area of their biggest need. The cubs obviously want BR for his hitting, defense and OBP/speed. However, they are more than willing to go with the status quo at 2b, so it's not like the O's have a lot of leverage. Plus, trading Pie means they need a CF too. I see the logic.

At the same time, we don't have to trade BR right now either. Cubs fans have also said that maybe the two teams just aren't a good match for a BR deal.

Hey, I'm with you, and have been throughout all of these Roberts threads. I think Cleveland, for one, looks like a much better fit for us than the Cubs if we are going to trade Roberts. I also feel that keeping Roberts for now is a very strong option. Contrary to the assertions of some here, the rumored Cubs offer would remain there at the deadline IMO, since the Cubs are offering nothing that they are relying on, and , in fact, their offer will likely get better if they are in a battle for the division come July. Heck, look what they gave us for Trachsel at the deadline last year.

[yestheydo]

I'll go with the Cubs FO and the last 150 years of baseball thinking over your theory, thank you very much. Condescending statements like the bolded one above will certainly not do much to convince me of anything. If you want to think that batting a slugger with a low on-base percentage lead-off in the first inning and after the pitcher the rest of the game rather than a high on-base guy, knock yourself out. To me, doing that reduces Soriano's value to the team and creates a weakness in the lineup, as was very evident in the playoffs last year. I'm just saying that the Cubs FO clearly disagrees with you and frankly, that is what matters.

Further, unlike you, I have no idea what the Padres would or would not do, but it would certainly surprise me in a negative way if the Orioles were to offer Roberts straight up for Greene.

Sorry to butt in, but as a Cub fan this bolded part made me laugh out loud.