I just don’t buy this argument for inaction because “it won’t be that much of an improvement” arguement, which seems to stem from the belief that changing one player in the lineup won’t improve the lineup. Who said that we are trying to improve the other players in the lineup? I want to replace the poor hitting player(s) with better hitting players. I can understand if you want to argue that there are thresholds (or in this case winshares or another similar stat) where marginal improvements aren’t going to improve a team enough to actually improve the expected win-loss record, but are hitters have been so poor that any player of substance that Shapiro would bring in would provide marked improvement in performance.

I also don’t think anyone is arguing that we should enter into a “losing” trade where we give up more than we receive. I think the advantage of working a deal well before the trade deadline is that you have less leverage against you. Our production out of the corner outfield spots and corner infield spots has been far below league avg. This is simply not acceptable for a contending team. Everyone says sit and wait for the offense to adjust, well what do you think our pitching is going to do? just as our offense regresses to improved numbers our pitching is likely to regress negatively (you think C.Lee is going to post an ERA below 1.00 all season?).

Not that we’re going to get a haul for him in return, just that he may be expendable at some point this season (for good reasons) and almost any return is a good return.

Is $7 million a lot of money by today’s standards? Last year he pitched 190 innings and walked less than 30 guys with an ERA+ of exactly 100. $7 million didn’t seem like a horrible option to pick up for me.

Eric Gagne is making $10 million this year.

At least for me, it hinges on their planned use for Atom. If he’s going to be bullpen help (if anything) at the major league level, then Byrd is unlikely to go anywhere. But if Miller is seen as a starting arm and Westbrook returns with no apparent lingering affects, then they’re 8-deep in the rotation, Miller being at the backend of any combination. If GMs call with interest in any of the bottom 4 of those 8, then I think Shapiro’s listening.

Chuck,

Care to wager, starting today, which Tribe starter has the lowest ERA on the team? I’ll take CC.

I wouldn’t mind having Atkins for this year and the next couple. His has two more years of arbitration, so he won’t be cheap, and he’ll be 29 and 30 for those years. But Laffey? That’s too expensive.

But the Rox have Ian Stewart ready to roll, so it’s an interesting situation. And Baker might be available on the cheap.

The big bonus with Garrett Atkins is that we’d have a couple years of spelling mistakes and corrections to look forward to.

rather.

Agreed. The problem is that Abreu would not make as much of an impact as C.C.

Remember, I said they would have to take on Hafner’s bloated contract too. We have the luxury of plugging Laffey into the rotation. Removal of Hafner’s contract from the budget represents a long term value to the org as a substitute for being handed young talent.

We’ve got six, no seven major league starters. We’re doing it now with CC-lyte. We get Westbrook back and one of our starters has gotta go – either to Buffalo or trade bait. I say trade CC, keep Lee, Carmona, Westbrook, Byrd and Laffey. I’ll go to war with those five and ship CC for a bat.