Sun: Cubs Offer Ceden, Gallagher, Veal and maybe a 4th player - For Roberts

[ChaosLex]

Would you do Pie for Roberts straight up.I think it would be tempting for AM.What a young outfield that would be for you guys.

Honestly, I probably would.

Hope I don't get neg-repped for that.

Edit: I'd prefer if it were Pie and Cedeno though.

[davearm]

Is there a reason you have never acknowledged the much larger likelihood that DeRosa declines??

Those numbers don't take into account speed and defense either.

BRob is 2-4 wins better than DeRosa....That is just the way it is(or at least likely to be)..Put BRob in the worse league and division and sit him 10-15 games and he may be much better than that.

The Cubs are, without question, a better team with BRob than without and you guys need to actually win at some point.

As much as you pump and overhype your system, you should be fine trading a few guys out of it for the sake of actually winning.

There isn't a "much larger" likelihood of DeRosa declining. Both players are at similar risk for that.

And there is some decline built into those EqA projections -- DeRosa was at .280 and .276 the last two years, or someplace between his 75th and 60th percentile projection for 2008.

Baserunning (speed) is indeed incorporated... you know this (or so I thought).

Defense is a wash; both guys are league averageish. Excluding it is irrelevant as it wouldn't change anything anyway.

[ChaosLex]

We'd have 2 OF spots (LF and CF) and 3 guys. While both Jones and Pie are highly regarded, and Scott looks good when you look closely, it's not like any of them are sure things. So, you've got 2 jobs and 3 guys. You give the talent to DT and tell him to sort it out. DT has DH issues to deal with too. If we had all 3 of those guys, then all 3 would get tons of time playing the OF. The result would be a talent competition and finding out exactly who's who. It would not be about making trades to move any of these guys, especially not for this year. Neither would it be DT assigning sure-thing roles on Day 1 to each guy. He's have all this talent, and he'd use this season to sort it out.

I think it would an absolutely great thing to do. It would let AM cross OF off of his To Do List, which is a whole lot to accomplish in 1 off-season, given where he started from. That, plus the other guys he got, that's getting a whole lot done in just 1 winter.

Agreed. Also, it would free up Reimold for a trade. A package of Reimold and Olson/Liz/Penn would be a very attactive package, IMO. I don't know if it'd be enough to get a SS like Andrus, Wood, etc., but it'd definitely be worth looking into.

[hatepaste]

Honestly, I probably would.

Hope I don't get neg-repped for that.

Edit: I'd prefer if it were Pie and Cedeno though.

I think if Pie is included, the O's would still want Gallagher, IMO.

Let's just hope we're sitting around in 2 weeks talking about how much we ripped the Cubs off.

[Sports Guy]

There isn't a "much larger" likelihood of DeRosa declining. Both players are at similar risk for that.

BS! DeRosa is like 3-4 years older and he is getting to the age where he could see a sharp drop.

He has only been a full time player twice, the last 2 years. In both years, he has seen a drop in his OPS between the 2 halves(as BRob has)...Difference between him and BRob is the age and the idea that DeRosa isn't used to being an everyday player.

The risk is much larger with DeRosa....Any reasonable person would agree with this.

And there is some decline built into those EqA projections -- DeRosa was at .280 and .276 the last two years, or someplace between his 75th and 60th percentile projection for 2008.

Why don't you use the comparable percentages??

Baserunning (speed) is indeed incorporated... you know this (or so I thought).

I didn't realize speed was incorporated into EQA to be honest.

Defense is a wash; both guys are league averageish. Excluding it is irrelevant as it wouldn't change anything anyway.

Ok...I figured this was the case to be honest...Wasn't sure about DeRosa though.

[Sports Guy]

PECOTA EqA projections:

Melvin Mora 90th = .296; Aramis Ramirez 60th .298

Melvin Mora 75th = .278; Aramis Ramirez 25th .278

Melvin Mora 60th = .266; Aramis Ramirez 10th .261

Interesting that there was no comment given on this....You can always twist a stat to serve your purpose i guess.

Again, end of the day, the Cubs are unquestionably a better team with BRob than without. The NL isn't as good as the AL but it is still extremely competitive and the difference of 2-5 games could mean winning the world series or not making the playoffs at all.

[Cubsfan]

Sorry, but I thought my "If" was enough of a qualifier, as well as calling the deal an "unlikely-to-happen scenario." I do not actually believe the Cubs will in fact trade Pie. My suggestion was only playing off the previous posts that Pie might be included in the deal if the Cubs could get Crisp from Boston. IF Pie was included, would flipping Murton for Scott make the deal more palatable for the Cubs?

Although I think Murton is a better hitter (although Scott has more power), the Cubs may think that Scott's LH bat and power fits better into the Cubs outfield than Murton's RH bat. Didn't Hendry once say that Murton's only problem was that he wasn't a left-handed hitter?

That was before Fukudome. The Cubs want a RH OF that can play all 3 positions (especially CF). You're right about the Cubs trading Pie, it ain't gonna happen. The Cubs are looking at Crisp (and others) to be a 4th OF and as insurance if Pie proves a flop, but Pie is going to be the starter and will be given a long look.

[McNulty]

Joe Sheehan of BP just had this to say in his chat:

Steve (PA): Joe, do the Cubs really have a trade package worthy of Brian Roberts without including Pie? The Gallagher/Cedeno/et al package being thrown around seems weak for a top-5 2B with two years under contract remaining.

Joe Sheehan: I saw a comparison somewhere--or maybe we were talking about it at a Feed--that Mark DeRosa and Brian Roberts had similar stats last year. DeRosa had the higher OBP, Roberts was better overall, but the gap wasn't huge.

Roberts is the better player, to be sure, and getting him would align the Cubs' talent better. However, I'm not convinced that Roberts + Fuld are better than Pie + DeRosa. And I say that as someone not at all sold on Pie.

If I'm the Orioles, there's no way I deal Roberts for a package where Gallagher is the best player.

[Cubsfan]

Interesting that there was no comment given on this....You can always twist a stat to serve your purpose i guess.

Again, end of the day, the Cubs are unquestionably a better team with BRob than without. The NL isn't as good as the AL but it is still extremely competitive and the difference of 2-5 games could mean winning the world series or not making the playoffs at all.

I would be ready to make these 4 for 1 proposed deals if only the 2-5 game upgrade could be in the postseason. I (and most "experts") think the Cubs can get to the playoffs. Winning the playoffs and World Series is another question.

[olehippi]

Joe Sheehan of BP just had this to say in his chat:

Steve (PA): Joe, do the Cubs really have a trade package worthy of Brian Roberts without including Pie? The Gallagher/Cedeno/et al package being thrown around seems weak for a top-5 2B with two years under contract remaining.

Joe Sheehan: I saw a comparison somewhere--or maybe we were talking about it at a Feed--that Mark DeRosa and Brian Roberts had similar stats last year. DeRosa had the higher OBP, Roberts was better overall, but the gap wasn't huge.

Roberts is the better player, to be sure, and getting him would align the Cubs' talent better. However, I'm not convinced that Roberts + Fuld are better than Pie + DeRosa. And I say that as someone not at all sold on Pie.

If I'm the Orioles, there's no way I deal Roberts for a package where Gallagher is the best player.

I think it's becoming more and more obvious that MacPhail also agrees with that last sentence.

[davearm]

BS! DeRosa is like 3-4 years older and he is getting to the age where he could see a sharp drop.

He has only been a full time player twice, the last 2 years. In both years, he has seen a drop in his OPS between the 2 halves(as BRob has)...Difference between him and BRob is the age and the idea that DeRosa isn't used to being an everyday player.

The risk is much larger with DeRosa....Any reasonable person would agree with this.

Why don't you use the comparable percentages??

I didn't realize speed was incorporated into EQA to be honest.

Ok...I figured this was the case to be honest...Wasn't sure about DeRosa though.

What "comparable percentages" are you referring to?

What I illustrated is that PECOTA has already factored in some deline into their forecast for DeRosa. What he did, EqA-wise, the last two years is now his 60th-75th percentile projection in 2008. Same deal with Roberts -- his .300 EqA from 2007 is a shade above his 60th percentile projection for 2008.

A 33 YO does not face a "much larger" risk of age-related decline as compared to a 30 YO. Not under any reasonable definition of "much larger" anyway. Going from 32 to 33 isn't a whole lot different than going from 29 to 30.

[Sports Guy]

What "comparable percentages" are you referring to?

What I illustrated is that PECOTA has already factored in some deline into their forecast for DeRosa. What he did, EqA-wise, the last two years is now his 60th-75th percentile projection in 2008. Same deal with Roberts -- his .300 EqA from 2007 is a shade above his 60th percentile projection for 2008.

A 33 YO does not face a "much larger" risk of age-related decline as compared to a 30 YO. Not under any reasonable definition of "much larger" anyway. Going from 32 to 33 isn't a whole lot different than going from 29 to 30.

Show Roberts 90% to DeRosa's 90% and so on......

And I disagree with the last statement....33 is certainly a bigger risk. Denying that is humorous at best(although par for the course).

[WebLink21]

If I'm the Orioles, there's no way I deal Roberts for a package where Gallagher is the best player.

Oh no! Joe Sheehan is going to get ripped and neg feedback for that comment!

[davearm]

Show Roberts 90% to DeRosa's 90% and so on......

And I disagree with the last statement....33 is certainly a bigger risk. Denying that is humorous at best(although par for the course).

What would be the point of that?

Nobody's debating that at any given point on the curve, Roberts is better than DeRosa.

The issue I'm illustrating is where the equilibrium points lie -- if Roberts produces a little below his forecast, where does DeRosa have to be relative to his forecast to match him? What if Roberts is a little above, or well below, etc.

And WRT the age thing, PECOTA has DeRosa's collapse rate at 33%, and Roberts' at 20%. That surely doesn't meet my definition of a much larger risk.

[Sports Guy]

What would be the point of that?

Nobody's debating that at any given point on the curve, Roberts is better than DeRosa.

The issue I'm illustrating is where the equilibrium points lie.

And WRT the age thing, PECOTA has DeRosa's collapse rate at 33%, and Roberts' at 20%. That surely doesn't meet my definition of a much larger risk.

DeRosa could easily fall to a 750ish OPS guy this year....BRob should still be around 800ish. I don't expect any decline in BRob yet...I would be surprised to not see some decline in DeRosa.

And what would the point be? How about comparing apples to apples?

I get your point when you say in some scenarios...Well great..In some scenarios, Mora is better than ARam...Would you like to have that discussion too?

Again, it goes back to one simple thing...The Cubs are, without question, a better team with BRob than they are with DeRosa. That can not be denied.