adambr2

The record for most errors in a game by an OFer is 5, which has been done numerous times. However, it hasn't happened since 1902. Not sure where to find the modern era figures on it.

Villar and Nieuwenhuis flashing the leather today.

I've been a Villar supporter throughout this thread but I've got to concede he's going too far. I am not going to say never take 3rd with 2 outs, if you catch the other team napping and know you're going to make it, but that's not what's going on here. These seem to be selfish attempts.

I was more okay with it when he was taking 3rd at a 90% clip or so in that situation, but he's getting thrown out too much. I am alright with a guy taking 3rd if the opportunity presents itself, even with 2 out, but if you're going to try, you better be damn sure you're going to make it. Obviously, he's not.

I'm starting to get on board with some of you guys about Villar going after 3rd with 2 outs too much. Knock it off, Jonathan. You've got Lucroy up and you're down 5.

Jeffress, Smith, Thornburg, Torres, and Marinez all have to be considered highly tradeable assets in this market, don't they?

David Stearns needs to leak to the media, 'We feel the Mets asking price on d'Arnaud is just too steep. We offered them their choice of either Kirk Nieuwenhuis or Chris Capuano straight up and they wouldn't budge.'

But you get a guy who, without injury is projected But you can't say 'without injury,' any more than you can say,'without injury and PED concerns, Ryan Braun is worth a top 10 prospect.' The injuries do affect his value.

Good, the more teams involved the better. I don't buy for one second that the Indians aren't interested in Lucroy because of Gomes. It's just a matter of how much they're willing to give up.

Theoretically, if the Braves interest in Lucroy is strong, they could deal Lucroy to the Braves in August if nothing got done by the 1st. Since the Braves have the worst record in the NL, they'd automatically have waiver priority if they put in a claim on Lucroy. Of course, this would limit our return to players not on Atlanta's 40 man, but we'd probably be targeting lower level players like that anyway who are not close to MLB-ready or on the 40 man yet. I find this to be a pretty highly unlikely scenario since the Braves would have most of the leverage, being the only team we could negotiate with, but knowing they'd have to compete with every other team in the offseason might motivate the Braves to make a legitimate offer. Still unlikely, but figured I'd throw it out there.

I've always felt like the definition of quality start was kind of flawed for that reason, but yes it is.

6 IP 3 ER...you're right, for Garza that is a solid night. For most starters that is medicore.

I think Jimmy has at least 3 this year alone. I can think of 2 others. So I'm going to say at least 5 this year.

Nice 2 out rally ! Going to need plenty of run support today.

2-0 in the first. Garza gonna Garza.

Then you're going to have to settle for a back-of-the-rotation starter or average starting position player. The advantage of low-minors players is you get potential superstars. Potential being the key word...Luc is too valuable to throw away on player(s) with POTENTIAL. . That is kind of the point of the rebuild. You're trading away proven commodities for potential superstars. Deadline deals between buyers and sellers are commodity for prospect deals, not commodity for commodity. Rebuilding clubs aren't really in the business of trying to acquire proven commodities and contenders aren't really in the business of trading them. And a few top 51-100 minors players, at any level in the minors, is worth way, way more than a comp pick.

Then you're going to have to settle for a back-of-the-rotation starter or average starting position player. The advantage of low-minors players is you get potential superstars. Right, contending teams are not typically trading AAA stud players who are on the brink of helping them already. They're trading away guys who are years away from helping them to get guys to help them win now. In any event, I don't know why we'd want to target AAA players anyway. There is no window of contention this year, or next year. Probably not even in 2018. We'll take many shots to get the most upside possible. Players who end up being studs in MLB also typically do not take 5+ years to get from A ball to MLB. I would guess it's around 3 on the average.

And if the Cubs lose Chapman, they'll get absolutely nothing. Versus when we gave up a lot for CC Sabathia, at least we knew we had two early comp picks coming if he walked after the season.

Hope they enjoy the World Series batting 2 pitchers #8 and #9 on the road, then. Good luck. And their response would be "Good luck with the comp pick you'll get for Lucroy two years from now. To which I'd say, 'What are you talking about? We already traded him to your competitor who made a better offer.'

Bring your gloves if you're sitting in the outfield bleachers tonight. Bring your helmets if you're sitting in the first 10 rows along 1st base in case Garza has to field a grounder.

Hope they enjoy the World Series batting 2 pitchers #8 and #9 on the road, then. Good luck.

Wishful thinking on your part. What future did they mortgage? Their current SS is 22. They also still have Baez who's 23. McKinney's doesn't project to be a core player if he makes any impact whatsoever at the big league level. Warren's 4-5 starter material that can't crack their present rotation. Crawford's just a warm body. They have plenty of money to fill in any gaps. Continue to mortgage the future. Are you implying trading Vogelbach was mortgaging the future? Rizzo's under control through 2021. Even if they wanted to keep Vogelbach, he will have exhausted all his minor league options long before Rizzo would be gone. I think the Cubs got off light here. The Cubs got off light? In terms of price, the package they gave up is comparable to what we gave up for Sabathia, or at least, what we got for Greinke. The couple of major differences are that they're going to get a lot less innings from Chapman, and if he walks, they get nothing. We got 2 compensation picks when CC walked. Organizational depth is never a bad thing to have, no matter how young your current starters are. It wasn't that many years ago that our best prospects was at first base even though we had Prince Fielder, and it wasn't many years ago that we had Yuni B starting at SS with no SS prospects in the pipeline. I get what the Cubs are doing given how desperate that franchise is for a World Series, although if they were going to jettison their top prospect I think they should have looked further than a 2 month rental of a reliever. But if they win the World Series, all is forgiven. If they don't even get there and Chapman walks, Theo is going to sorely regret it.

It could. Or if he fizzles out like Turnbow or Axford did here, he could be worth nothing. I'd sell any bullpen pieces with the way the market is now. Really, the only ones that aren't going anywhere for sure are Knebel and Barnes, unless part of a throw-in on a blockbuster deal. If you can get a top 100 guy for Jeffress, I'd pull the trigger.

Santana might as well be transferred to the 60 day DL at this point, which would free up a spot on the 40 man.

Last year, Carlos Gomez was traded on July 30th. We traded Zack Greinke on July 27th. Carlos Lee was traded on July 29th. Out of the 4 deadline 'blockbusters' that we've made in the last decade, only CC Sabathia came well before the deadline and that was because we pushed hard to get it done early to get as many starts as possible. The trade deadline is also one day later than normal this year. It's possible that Lucroy doesn't get traded, but the fact that he's still here on July 25th isn't cause for alarm. I still think he'll be wearing another uniform in a week.