The 2010 Cubs Free Agent and Roster Moves Thread: SAVEENG OUR KUBBEEZ!!11

[Quality Start Machine]

Inevitable.

According to FOXSports.com, the Cubs are stepping up their pursuit of free agent outfielder Marlon Byrd.

The Cubs will have to look at alternatives now that they lost out on Mike Cameron, who agreed to terms with Boston this week. Byrd, 32, batted .283/.329/.479 with 20 homers, 89 RBI and 43 doubles in '09. If he signs with Chicago, he'll be reunited with his former hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo. It's believed that Cubs will need to shed some payroll -- most likely through a Milton Bradley trade -- before any additional spending takes place.

I'm no statfaggatron, but those are better than Cameron's numbers.  And Byrd's younger.  Is there a faggy stat that confirms me wanting the Cubs to sign Cameron over Byrd?

Let's just keep Milt. Come on, make it so.

Let's get Morgan Morgan.

[Weebs]

Inevitable.

According to FOXSports.com, the Cubs are stepping up their pursuit of free agent outfielder Marlon Byrd.

The Cubs will have to look at alternatives now that they lost out on Mike Cameron, who agreed to terms with Boston this week. Byrd, 32, batted .283/.329/.479 with 20 homers, 89 RBI and 43 doubles in '09. If he signs with Chicago, he'll be reunited with his former hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo. It's believed that Cubs will need to shed some payroll -- most likely through a Milton Bradley trade -- before any additional spending takes place.

I'm no statfaggatron, but those are better than Cameron's numbers.  And Byrd's younger.  Is there a faggy stat that confirms me wanting the Cubs to sign Cameron over Byrd?

For one, Byrd played half his games in Arlington.  He's not a bad defender, but Cameron is much better.  And Cameron has been amazingly consistent throughout most of his career, whereas Byrd wasn't very good at all before going to Texas.  If the Cubs don't overpay for him, I'm fine with the signing.  But they probably will, so fuck it, keep Milton.

[Slaky]

Inevitable.

According to FOXSports.com, the Cubs are stepping up their pursuit of free agent outfielder Marlon Byrd.

The Cubs will have to look at alternatives now that they lost out on Mike Cameron, who agreed to terms with Boston this week. Byrd, 32, batted .283/.329/.479 with 20 homers, 89 RBI and 43 doubles in '09. If he signs with Chicago, he'll be reunited with his former hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo. It's believed that Cubs will need to shed some payroll -- most likely through a Milton Bradley trade -- before any additional spending takes place.

I'm no statfaggatron, but those are better than Cameron's numbers.  And Byrd's younger.  Is there a faggy stat that confirms me wanting the Cubs to sign Cameron over Byrd?

For one, Byrd played half his games in Arlington.  He's not a bad defender, but Cameron is much better.  And Cameron has been amazingly consistent throughout most of his career, whereas Byrd wasn't very good at all before going to Texas.  If the Cubs don't overpay for him, I'm fine with the signing.  But they probably will, so fuck it, keep Milton.

Byrd hit 14 homers in Arlington last year and 6 on the road. His road OPS+ was still over 100 but it was about 20 points higher at home. He definitely had a career year and his combined OPS+ for the season was 106. That doesn't amaze me. He did have a .380 OBA in 2008 but had 200 less at bats than in 2009.

Look, this team is going to be average no matter how the fatso in charge moves things around. Let's just keep Milton so there's a reason to watch. Also because he's better than all these retarded options I keep hearing about.

[Powdered Toast Man]

Inevitable.

According to FOXSports.com, the Cubs are stepping up their pursuit of free agent outfielder Marlon Byrd.

The Cubs will have to look at alternatives now that they lost out on Mike Cameron, who agreed to terms with Boston this week. Byrd, 32, batted .283/.329/.479 with 20 homers, 89 RBI and 43 doubles in '09. If he signs with Chicago, he'll be reunited with his former hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo. It's believed that Cubs will need to shed some payroll -- most likely through a Milton Bradley trade -- before any additional spending takes place.

I'm no statfaggatron, but those are better than Cameron's numbers.  And Byrd's younger.  Is there a faggy stat that confirms me wanting the Cubs to sign Cameron over Byrd?

For one, Byrd played half his games in Arlington.  He's not a bad defender, but Cameron is much better.  And Cameron has been amazingly consistent throughout most of his career, whereas Byrd wasn't very good at all before going to Texas.  If the Cubs don't overpay for him, I'm fine with the signing.  But they probably will, so fuck it, keep Milton.

Byrd hit 14 homers in Arlington last year and 6 on the road. His road OPS+ was still over 100 but it was about 20 points higher at home. He definitely had a career year and his combined OPS+ for the season was 106. That doesn't amaze me. He did have a .380 OBA in 2008 but had 200 less at bats than in 2009.

Look, this team is going to be average no matter how the fatso in charge moves things around. Let's just keep Milton so there's a reason to watch. Also because he's better than all these retarded options I keep hearing about.

Okay, THIS.  But, how does Wrigley compare to Arlington in the "hitter's ballpark" category?

[Eli]

I'm no statfaggatron, but those are better than Cameron's numbers.  And Byrd's younger.  Is there a faggy stat that confirms me wanting the Cubs to sign Cameron over Byrd?

Defense.

[Slaky]

Inevitable.

According to FOXSports.com, the Cubs are stepping up their pursuit of free agent outfielder Marlon Byrd.

The Cubs will have to look at alternatives now that they lost out on Mike Cameron, who agreed to terms with Boston this week. Byrd, 32, batted .283/.329/.479 with 20 homers, 89 RBI and 43 doubles in '09. If he signs with Chicago, he'll be reunited with his former hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo. It's believed that Cubs will need to shed some payroll -- most likely through a Milton Bradley trade -- before any additional spending takes place.

I'm no statfaggatron, but those are better than Cameron's numbers.  And Byrd's younger.  Is there a faggy stat that confirms me wanting the Cubs to sign Cameron over Byrd?

For one, Byrd played half his games in Arlington.  He's not a bad defender, but Cameron is much better.  And Cameron has been amazingly consistent throughout most of his career, whereas Byrd wasn't very good at all before going to Texas.  If the Cubs don't overpay for him, I'm fine with the signing.  But they probably will, so fuck it, keep Milton.

Byrd hit 14 homers in Arlington last year and 6 on the road. His road OPS+ was still over 100 but it was about 20 points higher at home. He definitely had a career year and his combined OPS+ for the season was 106. That doesn't amaze me. He did have a .380 OBA in 2008 but had 200 less at bats than in 2009.

Look, this team is going to be average no matter how the fatso in charge moves things around. Let's just keep Milton so there's a reason to watch. Also because he's better than all these retarded options I keep hearing about.

Okay, THIS.  But, how does Wrigley compare to Arlington in the "hitter's ballpark" category?

I don't know - this isn't my area. I'm in over my head. Keep Milton.

[Yeti]

Inevitable.

According to FOXSports.com, the Cubs are stepping up their pursuit of free agent outfielder Marlon Byrd.

The Cubs will have to look at alternatives now that they lost out on Mike Cameron, who agreed to terms with Boston this week. Byrd, 32, batted .283/.329/.479 with 20 homers, 89 RBI and 43 doubles in '09. If he signs with Chicago, he'll be reunited with his former hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo. It's believed that Cubs will need to shed some payroll -- most likely through a Milton Bradley trade -- before any additional spending takes place.

I'm no statfaggatron, but those are better than Cameron's numbers.  And Byrd's younger.  Is there a faggy stat that confirms me wanting the Cubs to sign Cameron over Byrd?

For one, Byrd played half his games in Arlington.  He's not a bad defender, but Cameron is much better.  And Cameron has been amazingly consistent throughout most of his career, whereas Byrd wasn't very good at all before going to Texas.  If the Cubs don't overpay for him, I'm fine with the signing.  But they probably will, so fuck it, keep Milton.

Byrd hit 14 homers in Arlington last year and 6 on the road. His road OPS+ was still over 100 but it was about 20 points higher at home. He definitely had a career year and his combined OPS+ for the season was 106. That doesn't amaze me. He did have a .380 OBA in 2008 but had 200 less at bats than in 2009.

Look, this team is going to be average no matter how the fatso in charge moves things around. Let's just keep Milton so there's a reason to watch. Also because he's better than all these retarded options I keep hearing about.

Okay, THIS.  But, how does Wrigley compare to Arlington in the "hitter's ballpark" category?

When it comes to park factor, Wrigley's a bit more of a "hitter's park" than Arlington..

RV made the point that it doesn't account for quality of pitching.. However, the Rangers are around 15-20th in the league in pitching.. That would skew their park factor up.. The Cubs pitching is top 5-10. That would skew their park factor downward..

On the flipside of that, the Rangers' semi-poor pitching could have been because their park is a hitter's park in general. I know I'm basically arguing my own point, but they are a couple decent points that I don't fully have the answer to.

I have yet to find (or look) for something that fully incorporates an adequate balance between the two

[Powdered Toast Man]

Inevitable.

According to FOXSports.com, the Cubs are stepping up their pursuit of free agent outfielder Marlon Byrd.

The Cubs will have to look at alternatives now that they lost out on Mike Cameron, who agreed to terms with Boston this week. Byrd, 32, batted .283/.329/.479 with 20 homers, 89 RBI and 43 doubles in '09. If he signs with Chicago, he'll be reunited with his former hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo. It's believed that Cubs will need to shed some payroll -- most likely through a Milton Bradley trade -- before any additional spending takes place.

I'm no statfaggatron, but those are better than Cameron's numbers.  And Byrd's younger.  Is there a faggy stat that confirms me wanting the Cubs to sign Cameron over Byrd?

For one, Byrd played half his games in Arlington.  He's not a bad defender, but Cameron is much better.  And Cameron has been amazingly consistent throughout most of his career, whereas Byrd wasn't very good at all before going to Texas.  If the Cubs don't overpay for him, I'm fine with the signing.  But they probably will, so fuck it, keep Milton.

Byrd hit 14 homers in Arlington last year and 6 on the road. His road OPS+ was still over 100 but it was about 20 points higher at home. He definitely had a career year and his combined OPS+ for the season was 106. That doesn't amaze me. He did have a .380 OBA in 2008 but had 200 less at bats than in 2009.

Look, this team is going to be average no matter how the fatso in charge moves things around. Let's just keep Milton so there's a reason to watch. Also because he's better than all these retarded options I keep hearing about.

Okay, THIS.  But, how does Wrigley compare to Arlington in the "hitter's ballpark" category?

When it comes to park factor, Wrigley's a bit more of a "hitter's park" than Arlington..

RV made the point that it doesn't account for quality of pitching.. However, the Rangers are around 15-20th in the league in pitching.. That would skew their park factor up.. The Cubs pitching is top 5-10. That would skew their park factor downward..

On the flipside of that, the Rangers' semi-poor pitching could have been because their park is a hitter's park in general. I know I'm basically arguing my own point, but they are a couple decent points that I don't fully have the answer to.

I have yet to find (or look) for something that fully incorporates an adequate balance between the two

This is all very confusing.  Keep Milton.

[Slaky]

Inevitable.

According to FOXSports.com, the Cubs are stepping up their pursuit of free agent outfielder Marlon Byrd.

The Cubs will have to look at alternatives now that they lost out on Mike Cameron, who agreed to terms with Boston this week. Byrd, 32, batted .283/.329/.479 with 20 homers, 89 RBI and 43 doubles in '09. If he signs with Chicago, he'll be reunited with his former hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo. It's believed that Cubs will need to shed some payroll -- most likely through a Milton Bradley trade -- before any additional spending takes place.

I'm no statfaggatron, but those are better than Cameron's numbers.  And Byrd's younger.  Is there a faggy stat that confirms me wanting the Cubs to sign Cameron over Byrd?

For one, Byrd played half his games in Arlington.  He's not a bad defender, but Cameron is much better.  And Cameron has been amazingly consistent throughout most of his career, whereas Byrd wasn't very good at all before going to Texas.  If the Cubs don't overpay for him, I'm fine with the signing.  But they probably will, so fuck it, keep Milton.

Byrd hit 14 homers in Arlington last year and 6 on the road. His road OPS+ was still over 100 but it was about 20 points higher at home. He definitely had a career year and his combined OPS+ for the season was 106. That doesn't amaze me. He did have a .380 OBA in 2008 but had 200 less at bats than in 2009.

Look, this team is going to be average no matter how the fatso in charge moves things around. Let's just keep Milton so there's a reason to watch. Also because he's better than all these retarded options I keep hearing about.

Okay, THIS.  But, how does Wrigley compare to Arlington in the "hitter's ballpark" category?

When it comes to park factor, Wrigley's a bit more of a "hitter's park" than Arlington..

RV made the point that it doesn't account for quality of pitching.. However, the Rangers are around 15-20th in the league in pitching.. That would skew their park factor up.. The Cubs pitching is top 5-10. That would skew their park factor downward..

On the flipside of that, the Rangers' semi-poor pitching could have been because their park is a hitter's park in general. I know I'm basically arguing my own point, but they are a couple decent points that I don't fully have the answer to.

I have yet to find (or look) for something that fully incorporates an adequate balance between the two

This is all very confusing.  Keep Milton.

It's just so much easier to do nothing than something.

[Powdered Toast Man]

Inevitable.

According to FOXSports.com, the Cubs are stepping up their pursuit of free agent outfielder Marlon Byrd.

The Cubs will have to look at alternatives now that they lost out on Mike Cameron, who agreed to terms with Boston this week. Byrd, 32, batted .283/.329/.479 with 20 homers, 89 RBI and 43 doubles in '09. If he signs with Chicago, he'll be reunited with his former hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo. It's believed that Cubs will need to shed some payroll -- most likely through a Milton Bradley trade -- before any additional spending takes place.

I'm no statfaggatron, but those are better than Cameron's numbers.  And Byrd's younger.  Is there a faggy stat that confirms me wanting the Cubs to sign Cameron over Byrd?

For one, Byrd played half his games in Arlington.  He's not a bad defender, but Cameron is much better.  And Cameron has been amazingly consistent throughout most of his career, whereas Byrd wasn't very good at all before going to Texas.  If the Cubs don't overpay for him, I'm fine with the signing.  But they probably will, so fuck it, keep Milton.

Byrd hit 14 homers in Arlington last year and 6 on the road. His road OPS+ was still over 100 but it was about 20 points higher at home. He definitely had a career year and his combined OPS+ for the season was 106. That doesn't amaze me. He did have a .380 OBA in 2008 but had 200 less at bats than in 2009.

Look, this team is going to be average no matter how the fatso in charge moves things around. Let's just keep Milton so there's a reason to watch. Also because he's better than all these retarded options I keep hearing about.

Okay, THIS.  But, how does Wrigley compare to Arlington in the "hitter's ballpark" category?

When it comes to park factor, Wrigley's a bit more of a "hitter's park" than Arlington..

RV made the point that it doesn't account for quality of pitching.. However, the Rangers are around 15-20th in the league in pitching.. That would skew their park factor up.. The Cubs pitching is top 5-10. That would skew their park factor downward..

On the flipside of that, the Rangers' semi-poor pitching could have been because their park is a hitter's park in general. I know I'm basically arguing my own point, but they are a couple decent points that I don't fully have the answer to.

I have yet to find (or look) for something that fully incorporates an adequate balance between the two

This is all very confusing.  Keep Milton.

It's just so much easier to do nothing than something.

That's what Jim's doing.  I actually thought that Cameron would be locked up.  I guess it shows how good of a player he is if he gets two years from Boston.

[Armchair_QB]

Inevitable.

According to FOXSports.com, the Cubs are stepping up their pursuit of free agent outfielder Marlon Byrd.

The Cubs will have to look at alternatives now that they lost out on Mike Cameron, who agreed to terms with Boston this week. Byrd, 32, batted .283/.329/.479 with 20 homers, 89 RBI and 43 doubles in '09. If he signs with Chicago, he'll be reunited with his former hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo. It's believed that Cubs will need to shed some payroll -- most likely through a Milton Bradley trade -- before any additional spending takes place.

I'm no statfaggatron, but those are better than Cameron's numbers.  And Byrd's younger.  Is there a faggy stat that confirms me wanting the Cubs to sign Cameron over Byrd?

For one, Byrd played half his games in Arlington.  He's not a bad defender, but Cameron is much better.  And Cameron has been amazingly consistent throughout most of his career, whereas Byrd wasn't very good at all before going to Texas.  If the Cubs don't overpay for him, I'm fine with the signing.  But they probably will, so fuck it, keep Milton.

Byrd hit 14 homers in Arlington last year and 6 on the road. His road OPS+ was still over 100 but it was about 20 points higher at home. He definitely had a career year and his combined OPS+ for the season was 106. That doesn't amaze me. He did have a .380 OBA in 2008 but had 200 less at bats than in 2009.

Look, this team is going to be average no matter how the fatso in charge moves things around. Let's just keep Milton so there's a reason to watch. Also because he's better than all these retarded options I keep hearing about.

Okay, THIS.  But, how does Wrigley compare to Arlington in the "hitter's ballpark" category?

When it comes to park factor, Wrigley's a bit more of a "hitter's park" than Arlington..

RV made the point that it doesn't account for quality of pitching.. However, the Rangers are around 15-20th in the league in pitching.. That would skew their park factor up.. The Cubs pitching is top 5-10. That would skew their park factor downward..

On the flipside of that, the Rangers' semi-poor pitching could have been because their park is a hitter's park in general. I know I'm basically arguing my own point, but they are a couple decent points that I don't fully have the answer to.

I have yet to find (or look) for something that fully incorporates an adequate balance between the two

This is all very confusing.  Keep Milton.

Maybe this will simplify it.

Gary Matthews Jr. sucked in Chicago.

Gary Matthews Jr. didn't suck in Arlington.

Of course I'm not sure he was doing roids when he was in Chicago so that might skew things a little.

[Kermit, B.]

Cameron at 2 years for $15.5M was a very, very good deal for Boston, which is exactly why Jim Hendry wasn't in on it.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Maybe this will simplify it.

Gary Matthews Jr. sucked in Chicago.

Gary Matthews Jr. didn't suck in Arlington.

Of course I'm not sure he was doing roids when he was in Chicago so that might skew things a little.

That applies to a lot of guys.  Like Mark DeRosa.

[PenFoe]

Maybe this will simplify it.

Gary Matthews Jr. sucked in Chicago.

Gary Matthews Jr. didn't suck in Arlington.

Of course I'm not sure he was doing roids when he was in Chicago so that might skew things a little.

That applies to a lot of guys.  Like Mark DeRosa.

Except the part about where he sucked in Chicago.

So really none of it applies to DeRosa.

[Slaky]

Maybe this will simplify it.

Gary Matthews Jr. sucked in Chicago.

Gary Matthews Jr. didn't suck in Arlington.

Of course I'm not sure he was doing roids when he was in Chicago so that might skew things a little.

That applies to a lot of guys.  Like Mark DeRosa.

Except the part about where he sucked in Chicago.

So really none of it applies to DeRosa.

Maybe he means DeRosa was on roids in Chicago. Otherwise it's another baffling UpChuck.