A few points:
- I believe Threiot doesn't always lead off because he can bat other places in the lineup (like 2nd) where he is very valuable and that allows flexibility. He has an OBP of .361 in the leadoff spot in the past 3 years (2007-2009) while Bourn is at .327 (ESPN has the split stats). Houston has no other options at leadoff.
- While it is true that RBIs are not the main job of a leadoff hitter, the fact remains that RBI situations still happen and should not be totally discounted. RBIs are still runs produced. Theriot is batting .409 with runners in scoring position this year while Bourn is batting .217. Maybe Theriot should bat 4th or 5th.
I said that Theriot was comparable to Bourn over the past 2 years. I don't think that is a huge stretch. If Bourn is so good offensively and defensively (gold glove last 2 years, excellent range factor, leads league this year in CF assists) why would Houston trade him?
Good, relevant points.
First, the fact that Theriot is probably the Cub layer best suited to bat second should be considered in light of the two considerations: first, he is not a superior #2 hitter, isn't going to be compared to models like Sizemore or Polanco--is not a great bunter, doesn't excel at advancing runners by such as hitting to RF behind them, etc; moreover, the acquisition of Bourne would not only allow putting Theriot as the #2 hitter (and with Bourn's ability to get himself in scoring position, Theriot would have less occasion to bunt, less need to hit to right to advance him--it would maximize Theriot's offensive contributions) and it would enable the Cubs to drop Castro down in the lineup (as a VERY young rookie, with so little high minors play, he would benefit from not having to master the nuances of hitting second in the order).
Second, it is misleading to make two or three season comparisons, use stats like a three-year mean OBP. Bourn struggled his first year as a MLB regular in Houston; then emerged as an outstanding player last season.
But, again, clearly the most critical measure of a leadoff man is to get into scoring position. Bourn does that better than any leadoff man. And scoring runs is the most critical need the Cubs have to fill.
Third, your doubts about the willingness of Houston to trade Bourn undoubtedly are well-founded. Equally, IF they make him available the price will be high, by virtue of the extent to which the demand for a top-flight leadoff may exceeds the supply.
Still, there are some reasons, some evidence, some likely developments that may make it possible to obtain Bourn. First, while the Astros struggle every bit as much as the Cubs to score runs, their situation is far more dire because the Cubs have pitching; the Astros don't. Bleaker factor, unlike the Cubs who have pitching talent in AAA, the Astros have no one beyond Bud Norris anywhere close to MLB-ready (and Norris is struggling in the Astro rotation--ERA of about seven runs a game). Their top pitching prospects are very good supposedly--especially 19 year old Jordan Lyles in Double A. But that is a measure of their problem, as the other top pitching prospects are two other 19 year old kids in low A ball. All of them two or more years away from providing the pitching help so very needed now.
Next, it is going to get worse as Houston yields to Roy Oswalt's demand to be traded to a contender. Another hole in a SP rotation already lacking. Which is the basis of my guess that GM Ed Wade (who has long lusted for Zambrano) would deal for Z, who is young enough and on a contract that would set him up as a top of the rotation tandem with Wandy Rodriquez for the next three, four years.
When Wade deals Oswalt, he will look for young pitching help, but also he will be looking to add speed to the lineup. And that, ironically, would make it feasible to send Bourn to the Cubs in a deal that along with Zambrano also includes a young pitcher ready to start in Houston--BUT ALSO, key to the deal, last year's #1 draft pick of the Cubs, U of California CF Brett Jackson.
The logic of this scenario is that Jackson is seven years away from free agency, while Bourn is less than three years until he is going to get a big contract (which the Cubs will be in position to afford by then); and Wade gets rid of Oswalt's contract, has the Cubs picking up a big share of Z's, and with these moves and other trades of vets for kids reduces the Astro payroll--an imperative demand of his owner, and necessary for Wade to keep his precarious hold on his job.
Final point: the one other valuable chip that Wade has is that catchers are always in demand, and the Astros have no less than two of the hottest, most highly regarded, near-MLB ready catching prospects (Koby Clemons, Jason Castro) in all of baseball. They are alternating catching and DH in Triple A, giving first-rate performances behind the plate and hitting solidly. Houston undoubtedly will make Clemons (Roger's kid) their catcher next year, batting 5th or 6th in the lineup (he already has 10 2B, 10 HR), but Castro will be playing somewhere in the majors next year, and Wade will get young infield and/or pitching for him.
Probably fantasizing on my part, but IMO there is no single move that would help the Cubs more than getting the huge positive impact to the offense that Bourn would bring while resolving the Zambrano problems.
