Why trade Roberts?

[Mackus]

Frankly, if the downside of holding on to BRob for a better offer is two high draft picks and two years of quality production from BRob, I've no problem whatsoever to the calculated risk AM is taking waiting for a better deal.

The downside is just the two high draft picks. The "two years of quality production" are just as valuable to us as "two years of Luis Hernandez". If we can extend him and he plays on a contender, then that would have value, but I think the odds of him extending are about the same as the odds of Luis Hernandez being our All-Star rep.

I'd much rather have Sean Gallagher than 2 comp picks during the 2010 draft.

[davearm]

This is the post that is 100% right.

Some might view the risk that AM is taking is that over the next two years, he might fail to find a deal that represents better talent that the Cubs offer. What about the possibility that AM feels he is just not getting appropriate value for BRob - regardless of whether the deal may or may not be topped in the future by another team -and just flat out does not want to do the deal at this time.

Frankly, if the downside of holding on to BRob for a better offer is two high draft picks and two years of quality production from BRob, I've no problem whatsoever to the calculated risk AM is taking waiting for a better deal.

Folks are quick to assume that's the downside.

In actuality, the downside is just average production, and zero draft picks.

And before you brush off the notion, realize that all the various excuses notwithstanding, average production is just what Roberts generated in '03 '04 and '06.

[RShack]

The downside is just the two high draft picks. The "two years of quality production" are just as valuable to us as "two years of Luis Hernandez".

That's not true, unless you want to completely ignore the quality of baseball for 2 years, and decide that it only matters if-and-when there are post-season possibilities. I guess people watch baseball for different reasons, which is fine, and you can ignore the quality of Oriole baseball for two years if you want to. But it's just flat-out wrong to assume that everybody doesn't care about baseball unless it has post-season implications. If BRob stays, I will get great personal enjoyment from watching him play baseball, and that's true regardless of what the buy-and-sell implications are. Saying that has no value is just wrong. The quality of Oriole baseball between now and 2011 (or whenever) might have no value for you, but you're not everybody. Lots of people do care about it. According to the logic you're using, they should've traded Cal right after his 2nd MVP year when his value was highest and the team was going nowhere for 5 years.

[davearm]

I'm not quick to jump into these back and forths, but I have to disagree here.

Soriano as a lead-off man is a huge mistake. He's got too much power and only a mediocre obp (.337 last season) to be an effective lead-off man. You have to play to his strengths, and he is not suited for lead-off. Yes, he's fast. Yes, he's got a pretty solid average. But that's about it. Now imagine if Roberts were in front of him. The boost to the team would be enormous. Teams with great lead-off men practically build around them: Phillies, Seattle, Mets. The Cubs aren't going to be able to put a legitimate run at the title without using their players properly.

Looking at the 2007 numbers show the Cubs with the 4th best ERA (4.04) but 18th in run production (752). Roberts could be the boost they need. Look at Seattle, by no means a team full of power hitters. They had less doubles, less triples, only 2 more home runs (153 vs. 151) but they were 12th with run production at (794). How much of that do you think was because of Ichiro's presence? I bet quite a bit. He gets on base, steals or gets moved over and someone hits some dinker and gets him in.

The Cubs may think the price for Roberts is steep (and they're right) but at the same time, if they aren't willing to take the plunge and make some risks, they're not going to get the title. Isn't that what this year is supposed to be about?

More eloquent than me:

http://blog.stats.com/2008/03/no_cubs_trade_for_2b_roberts_h.html

Study Soriano's career OPS splits by position in the batting order, and see if you still feel making him the lead-off man is a huge mistake.

It just so happens that hitting the guy first *is* playing to his strengths.

[cindyluvsbrady]

There is 0 reason to trade Brian Roberts...EVER!

The ? has been answered;)

[Sports Guy]

This is the post that is 100% right.

Some might view the risk that AM is taking is that over the next two years, he might fail to find a deal that represents better talent that the Cubs offer. What about the possibility that AM feels he is just not getting appropriate value for BRob - regardless of whether the deal may or may not be topped in the future by another team -and just flat out does not want to do the deal at this time.

Frankly, if the downside of holding on to BRob for a better offer is two high draft picks and two years of quality production from BRob, I've no problem whatsoever to the calculated risk AM is taking waiting for a better deal.

There is no guarantee of the draft picks and even if we get them, there is no guarantee that Joe Jordan will be making those picks.

Why is it everything that is downside is best case scenario?

[Mackus]

There is 0 reason to trade Brian Roberts...EVER!

The ? has been answered;)

Question Cindy, if trading Roberts guaranteed we'd win the World Series in 2009, would you make the move?

[RShack]

Question Cindy, if trading Roberts guaranteed we'd win the World Series in 2009, would you make the move?

Question Mackus, if it's guaranteed that we don't win the WS until 2012 or 2013, and we do it then with him or without him, would you make the move?

[square634]

Question Mackus, if it's guaranteed that we don't win the WS until 2012 or 2013, and we do it then with him or without him, would you make the move?

Both your and Mackus's questions are equally silly. And I'm not sure if this is a rhetorical question. And I'm not Mackus.

But other than all that...

I'd say, if the final results in 2012/2013 would be the same either way, I'd rather trade Roberts now because it would save salary down the line.

[Sports Guy]

Both your and Mackus's questions are equally silly. And I'm not sure if this is a rhetorical question. And I'm not Mackus.

But other than all that...

I'd say, if the final results in 2012/2013 would be the same either way, I'd rather trade Roberts now because it would save salary down the line.

Actually, Mackus's question has merit in regards to Cindy...I believe what he is really asking is this....

What is more important...Winning or keeping your favorite player?

[square634]

Actually, Mackus's question has merit in regards to Cindy...I believe what he is really asking is this....

What is more important...Winning or keeping your favorite player?

I agree that the question you asked is legitimate, but hypothetical questions, especially outlandish ones or those that require a lot of assumptions, aren't very useful.

[Mackus]

Actually, Mackus's question has merit in regards to Cindy...I believe what he is really asking is this....

What is more important...Winning or keeping your favorite player?

Well, I'm not gonna lie, it is a leading question, and completely and utterly hypothetical to the point of absurdity.

They way you worded it is a bit fairer, but again not completely, because her obvious answer will be she'd like to see both.

[Scrat1]

Study Soriano's career OPS splits by position in the batting order, and see if you still feel making him the lead-off man is a huge mistake.

It just so happens that hitting the guy first *is* playing to his strengths.

I don't buy that. True, the numbers show he does better at lead-off. But that's also because he's played by far the most games there and it's inevitable when you move guys around it is going to affect their game a little bit. If he had over 800 at bats batting 2nd I bet the numbers would be comparable. For evidence of that fact look at how much closer the numbers are at 3rd and 5th to his lead-off numbers than at the other batting spots. There isn't any significant reason to think his numbers would be less at the number 2 spot if they kept him there all season.

The fact is Soriano is a power hitter with a mediocre obp. It makes a lot more sense to have someone in front of him with a good obp so he can use his power hitting to score runs, something the Cubs need desperately.

Even if his numbers would be slightly better as a lead-off man, which is something I'm highly skeptical of, the team as a whole would score a good deal more runs if they had a lead-off man with a higher obp.

[hoosiers]

And before you brush off the notion, realize that all the various excuses notwithstanding, average production is just what Roberts generated in '03 '04 and '06.

And if you want to bring up average production from BRob, then don't trade for him.

[RShack]

Both your and Mackus's questions are equally silly.

Thank you.