Rogers: Cubs, Red Sox showing most interest in Drew

[CubsWin]

And yes, if Barrett goes down in a pennant race, having Blanco fill his shoes over a rookie may well save the Cubs playoff hopes.

 

I call BS.

 

Blanco is a .657 career OPSer. He's not a high standard to live up to.

And when evaluating a back-up catcher, OPS is the most important stat how? If that is what you are using to judge what Blanco brings to the table then you are missing the big picture.

 

I guarantee you the loss of offense from barrett to blanco would cost the cubs far more than the loss of defense from blanco to soto - if there was one.

I agree. But that wasn't my point.

 

My point is Soto might be close to what Blanco is, he might not. Why take the chance if you can financially afford not to?

[Guest]

because blanco is no good! either way you have to go find someone better. soto would provide little to the team as well as blanco does!

[CubsWin]

I said he's no better. and we're talking about the backup freaking catcher here. if Barrett goes down in a pennant race, blanco ain't gonna save the cubs.

So a good bench isn't important? Besides a super-sub, the back-up catcher will start more games than any other bench player without injury coming into to play.

 

And yes, if Barrett goes down in a pennant race, having Blanco fill his shoes over a rookie may well save the Cubs playoff hopes.

 

there is nothing super about blanco.

What? To what are you responding?

 

you said blanco is a super-sub - he isn't. he's below league average.

No I didn't. Read it again.

 

so why do you want a bad player like blanco filling that role then?

Because his defensive abilities, ability to throw out the would be base-stealer and game calling abilities are above average if not elite among back-ups. In other words, he's not a bad player. Of course, if all you look at is OPS, then, yes, he sucks.

[Guest]

I said he's no better. and we're talking about the backup freaking catcher here. if Barrett goes down in a pennant race, blanco ain't gonna save the cubs.

So a good bench isn't important? Besides a super-sub, the back-up catcher will start more games than any other bench player without injury coming into to play.

 

And yes, if Barrett goes down in a pennant race, having Blanco fill his shoes over a rookie may well save the Cubs playoff hopes.

 

there is nothing super about blanco.

What? To what are you responding?

 

you said blanco is a super-sub - he isn't. he's below league average.

No I didn't. Read it again.

 

so why do you want a bad player like blanco filling that role then?

Because his defensive abilities, ability to throw out the would be base-stealer and game calling abilities are above average if not elite among back-ups. In other words, he's not a bad player. Of course, if all you look at is OPS, then, yes, he sucks.

 

those abilities won't be enough with this cubs team though - unless the offense gets much much better. and the difference between henry and soto defensively is miniscule.

[CubsWin]

I think its best to let the Blanco sidebar go so this Drew thread can get back on track. If you want to continue this discussion, PM me.

[Guest]

I think its best to let the Blanco sidebar go so this Drew thread can get back on track. If you want to continue this discussion, PM me.

 

NEVER! Blanco's defense would save what 2 runs in 2 two months tops? I think that's generous. so, maybe one win? that's very generous.

 

Getting Drew would be good.

[CubsWin]

I think its best to let the Blanco sidebar go so this Drew thread can get back on track. If you want to continue this discussion, PM me.

 

NEVER! Blanco's defense would save what 2 runs in 2 two months tops? I think that's generous. so, maybe one win? that's very generous.

 

Getting Drew would be good.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

And, yes, getting Drew would be good.

[baseball7897]

And yes, if Barrett goes down in a pennant race, having Blanco fill his shoes over a rookie may well save the Cubs playoff hopes.

 

I call BS.

 

Blanco is a .657 career OPSer. He's not a high standard to live up to.

 

What are your thoughts on Blanco? All you use is stats to judge a player. In this case, Blanco is a tremendous back up catcher. And as a back up catcher your role is not to be a great hitter, its to be one hell of a defensive player.

[sethuel1]

And yes, if Barrett goes down in a pennant race, having Blanco fill his shoes over a rookie may well save the Cubs playoff hopes.

 

I call BS.

 

Blanco is a .657 career OPSer. He's not a high standard to live up to.

 

What are your thoughts on Blanco? All you use is stats to judge a player. In this case, Blanco is a tremendous back up catcher. And as a back up catcher your role is not to be a great hitter, its to be one hell of a defensive player.

 

aw christ.

 

time to go to bed.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

And yes, if Barrett goes down in a pennant race, having Blanco fill his shoes over a rookie may well save the Cubs playoff hopes.

 

I call BS.

 

Blanco is a .657 career OPSer. He's not a high standard to live up to.

 

What are your thoughts on Blanco? All you use is stats to judge a player. In this case, Blanco is a tremendous back up catcher. And as a back up catcher your role is not to be a great hitter, its to be one hell of a defensive player.

 

My last post on the topic since it's late:

 

Blanco is a good defender, he's terrible at the plate. Soto is a good defender too, he has the chance to not be terrible at the plate. There is not much of a difference, if any, between the two defensively. All the talk about Blanco's "handling" of the staff and game-calling is not much different than the sportswriting babble about clutch. They take the unquantifiable or not easily quantified and subjectively praise and criticize who they want. Of course, Soto has gotten this same praise, and the only thing keeping him from having this rep is the fact that he's not been in the big leagues for beat writers to heap cliches upon. Soto has a good approach at the plate, he takes walks and doesn't hit for power. Blanco will probably outslug him, but at a possibly large difference in OBP. Referring to Blanco as some sort of sure thing offensively while Soto is a mystery is misguided. Sure, Soto may be pretty bad, but interestingly enough, Blanco is so bad with the bat he doesn't set much of a bar to reach. And there's also the thing about Soto being younger, cheaper, under our control for longer, and a much better gamble for the duration of the contract we gave to Blanco.

[Rob]

2. DeRosa is a much better bet to be good then Theriot.

 

uhhhh...no.

 

Why?

 

Outside of his anomoly of a season last year in a hitters paradise, DeRosa was never really good.

 

I know it was a small sample size, but Theriot was pretty damn good last year when he got a chance. Theriot also showed a great approach at the plate from what I saw, so I don't see him entering a Cedeno-like slump.

 

Fact is that if Theriot was really all that good of a player, would Jim have felt the need to get DeRosa? Probably not. Theriot isn't likely to hit 100+ points above his average minor league slugging again.

 

DeRosa has been pretty good since changing his swing , has done it for a full season, and can play pretty much anywere on the field. He does more for the team then Theriot. Theriot will still get his chances anyway, unless he is horrible in the spring.

 

That's like saying the Phillies wouldn't have grabbed Jim Thome cause they didn't think Ryan Howard would end up being a stud. By all accounts, they knew he would be... they just thought Thome was a decent signing for that time.

 

Only difference is, Thome was worth risking the money on.

[JeffH]

Blanco is a good defender, he's terrible at the plate. Soto is a good defender too, he has the chance to not be terrible at the plate.

 

Soto has the chance to not be terrible at the plate in the same way that I have a chance to win the lottery or sleep with Bridget Fonda.

 

Theoretically possible, but very, very, very, very unlikely.

 

That said, the Blanco contract is ridiculous.

[CubColtPacer]

Well, this is complete conjecture, so take it for what its worth, but because we don't know what Hendry's spending limits are, the following might be true:

 

Hendry wanted to give the Cubs the best chance at winning this season. He didn't feel comfortable relying on unproven entities like Theriot and Cedeno to man 2B, so he decided to "upgrade" to a veteran bat. He could see the writing on the wall when he spoke to the agents for Durham and heard that he was expecting 2/16 or 1/10. He knew that he likely couldn't afford to sign Durham and sign the hitters he wants and the pitchers he needs, so he proactively jumped at the chance to sign DeRosa at 3/14, thus making it possible to upgrade or solidfy 2B and still afford Soriano or Drew and the starting pitchers.

 

Again, who knows if that is anywhere close to what actually happened, but it shows hypothetically why waiting to fill other needs (and yes, unless you wanted to count on Theriot or Cedeno, 2B was a need) would have cost the Cubs in the end.

 

Those that say signing back-up catchers, marginally upgrading 2B and re-signing possible hole-fillers for the pitching staff before signing the big name FA only serves to hinder the big FA signing have a very valid point, but its still completely hypothetical and they need to keep in mind that the Cubs finished with the worst record in the NL last year. The big name FAs are well aware of how well the Cubs did last season and will be looking at how the Cubs are improving themselves by filling out the roster with solid, unspectacular yet still needed and more reliable pieces.

 

Hypotheticals can be successfully created from both points of view.

 

I think your guess at Hendry's thinking is probably accurate, but still doesnt excuse the fact that Loretta, Belliard, Kennedy, Aurilia, and Giles (through trade) are probably all better alternatives to DeRosa and will most likely get similar salaries, especially considering the fact that there are not 5 other teams in need of second basemen. Not to mention that all of the options I listed (except Belliard) are better options at the top of the order, which supposedly is such a concern of Hendry's. The only thing that DeRosa has over those players is outfield experience and my opinion on that is whoopdeefreakindoo.

 

I don't necessarily know why all those players are better alternatives to DeRosa unless you think that his hitting style means absolutely nothing to his success. I submit that it does mean something, but that he had a career year to go on top of that. Even if he splits the difference between his previous numbers and last year, he still will have a better season then Loretta has in each of his last 2 years. He will beat Giles's last year numbers, and he will be better then either of Kennedy's last two years. He would beat Belliard's year last year-the only one who he wouldn't beat the numbers of last year would be Aurilia.

 

Add to that DeRosa'a versatility allowing for some creative bench options (for example, DeRosa playing third on Ramirez's days off allowing Theriot to play second instead of having to go out and get a bench player specifically to backup third), and it would seem to suggest that DeRosa could be and probably is more valuable then about all of those players. He doesn't have to perform up to what he did last year to justify the contract-all he has to do is put up between a 730-760 OPS, and he'll be an average second baseman (yes, their average is that low-for example, 4 of the 5 guys you mentioned had below a .730 OPS last year) making about average salary with the added versatility. Any more than that is simply a bonus that will make him worth more than his contract.

[BigbadB]

What does DeRosa fix?

 

The whole point isn't that DeRosa is a steal at 4M or not. That obviously is yet to be determined. The point is taht DeRosa is a nice to have, not a fix for this team. This team has no NEED for a possible upgrade at 2b. With 2b being the only position that supply far outweighs demand, if Jim is looking to upgrade, why not wait until a few of them have signed and in the mean time use that money on players that will actually fix the team. If at the end of the day you have 4 more M, then spend it on one of the many similar second basemen on the market, if you don't have the money, that means you likely landed a big time player (or more than one) and can afford to risk handing 2b over to Theriot.

 

And just like last year, these little signings add up. At this early stage we could have kept Soto as the backup catcher and Theroit as starting 2b and had nearly enough money to sign a second tier starting pitcher.

 

My lengthy post was not about DeRosa. It was about making the team better. It's debatable whether DeRosa will be better than Theriot. But, DeRosa at least has a large enough sample size to argue in his favor.

 

DeRosa is most definitely better than either Izturis or Cedeno. I'm not so sure Hendry or Piniella value Theriot higher than either of those two, so is it an upgrade to have DeRosa at 2nd over Cedeno? ABSOLUTELY.

 

DeRosa can play multiple positions. As a platoon with Jones in RF, he can be very valuable. As a 4th outfielder, he is valuable. As a back up for Ramirez or Lee, he's a whole heck of a lot more valuable than John Mabry.

 

As a 2b, I'll agree with you that he isn't someone to get overly excited about. If it was going to cost much more for a better upgrade at 2b and Soriano and Drew or Soriano and Manny is no longer doable, who is upset now?

 

The Cubs have made it clear that they still want 2 BIG bats and two arms.

 

DeRosa isn't standing in the way. If EPatt shows he belongs in the big leagues anytime within the next 3 years, DeRosa isn't standing in the way. If Drew and Soriano ended up wearing a Cub uniform in 2007, DeRosa at 2nd is not going to hurt much.

 

I fell into the Cedeno trap last year. I felt he could handle a starting job. I'm not so willing to play that game again without significant upgrades elsewhere. Theriot isn't Cedeno. But, he is still somewhat of an unknown. I can understand Hendry's hesitancy to do this also. His last offseason earned him a last place finish.

 

My post wasn't about DeRosa. It was about getting better across the board. DeRosa is a better bench option already than any player that was a bench player last year. Maybe that won't be his true role, but I'm going to give Hendry the benefit of the doubt for the time being.

 

If DeRosa ends up being our most significant addition, I'll be right there with you with the torches.

[TheDude]

So, any news about Drew?

[Derwood]

Cubs sign Drew vs. Red Sox sign Drew, trade Manny to Cubs

 

Discuss

[VanceJergins]

Cubs sign Drew vs. Red Sox sign Drew, trade Manny to Cubs

 

Discuss

 

If Manny took the place of Jones in RF, I'd rather have Manny. But it it meant getting rid of Murton, I'd rather sign Drew.

[USSoccer]

Cubs sign Drew vs. Red Sox sign Drew, trade Manny to Cubs

 

Discuss

 

Cubs sign Drew.

 

Drew means Murton still plays LF at a low cost. Drew means we can save the players we would trade for Manny and use them to deal for a player like Westbrook. I like Manny a ton, but I think Drew would be the better option for a team that still needs a lot of improvement in several areas.

[CubColtPacer]

BTW-I was looking around for some news on Drew that may have gone unreported, and I ended up looking at some Dodgers and Red Sox fan forums. Apparently, we are the only teams fans who actually want Drew. Dodgers fans are ecstatic that he opted out of that "crazy" contract as they called it, and many thought that there is no way he would get more on the market with his skills (which is crazy-I know). When the Red Sox offered him 4/44, the Red Sox fans went crazy-they wanted nothing to do with him, and couldn't believe that the team had offered him that kind of deal. Maybe we should show this all to Drew-he is very concerned about these types of things, and maybe we can show him we're the only ones who really want him and so he should come here. :D

[waffle]

gimme manny.

[UMFan83]

I just want him for his OBP...I think it would take a lot of burden off of the rest of our lineup to have one stable OBP guy in there. His above average power is a bonus.

[RynoRules]

I just want him for his OBP...I think it would take a lot of burden off of the rest of our lineup to have one stable OBP guy in there. His above average power is a bonus.

 

Manny gives you that too, plus he has a career OPS of over 1.1. I really don't get why anyone would want Drew over Manny, but that's just me.

[VanceJergins]

I just want him for his OBP...I think it would take a lot of burden off of the rest of our lineup to have one stable OBP guy in there. His above average power is a bonus.

 

Manny gives you that too, plus he has a career OPS of over 1.1. I really don't get why anyone would want Drew over Manny, but that's just me.

 

I think its the prospects we'd have to give up for Manny. Plus the thinking that he'd take Murton's spot instead of Jones'.

[goonys evil twin]

I just want him for his OBP...I think it would take a lot of burden off of the rest of our lineup to have one stable OBP guy in there. His above average power is a bonus.

 

Manny gives you that too, plus he has a career OPS of over 1.1. I really don't get why anyone would want Drew over Manny, but that's just me.

 

I think its the prospects we'd have to give up for Manny. Plus the thinking that he'd take Murton's spot instead of Jones'.

 

I'd be more than happy seeing Murton move to a 4th OF role if Manny took his spot.

[JWCUB]

I just want him for his OBP...I think it would take a lot of burden off of the rest of our lineup to have one stable OBP guy in there. His above average power is a bonus.

 

Manny gives you that too, plus he has a career OPS of over 1.1. I really don't get why anyone would want Drew over Manny, but that's just me.

 

Count me in for Manny. It appears this year, unlike years past, that Manny could be had. It would be up to Manny do to his NTC. However, if the Sox sign Drew, it would make a Manny trade more realistic.