MacPhail: Deal is dead (p. 297), stop posting, go outside

[craig]

One other thought: I may be a bit oversensitive to the necessity of having multiple rotation options. Maybe six is enough? And by May and later somebody else will have emerged as viable?

 

(For context, when Marshall had shoulder problems and couldn't open camp, I sure didn't expect him to be pitching competently in May. And I never dreamed that by September hart would look viable.)

[muntjack]

Juan Cruz is pretty good.

[Guest]

One other thought: I may be a bit oversensitive to the necessity of having multiple rotation options. Maybe six is enough? And by May and later somebody else will have emerged as viable?

 

(For context, when Marshall had shoulder problems and couldn't open camp, I sure didn't expect him to be pitching competently in May. And I never dreamed that by September hart would look viable.)

After the past five years, I think we're all a bit oversensitive to the need for multiple rotation options!

[Guest]

Juan Cruz is pretty good.

I forgot about Juan! He's been up and down, but has definitely had two good years since leaving Chicago. More than I can say for Andy Pratt.

 

He's actually more than half way to qualifying for the HOF ballot, if that means anything. :D

[daske17]

Juan Cruz is pretty good.

I forgot about Juan! He's been up and down, but has definitely had two good years since leaving Chicago. More than I can say for Andy Pratt.

 

He's actually more than half way to qualifying for the HOF ballot, if that means anything. :D

 

And if his birth certificate is ever legitimized, he may be as old as some current HOFers!

[Soul]

Can we stop treating Sean Marshall like Les Walrond. He was an above average starter last year.

 

I view him as well-suited for that #5 start, at least for a couple years. I don't think many teams can be tossing #5 starters who have had some success in the majors around like candy, or they risk the wrath of the baseball gods. Namely -- Dempster sucking bones.

[Backtobanks]

For freak's sake...Roberts is NOT only a marginal upgrade over DeRosa, unless I have a very different definition of marginal than some of you guys. To me, marginal upgrade means he's barely/slightly better.

 

I'll say it again, you can't just assume DeRosa is going to repeat 2007, which was one of the best years of his career, and even if he does, he's barely better than Roberts worst season in recent years. There's a decent possibility that Roberts will outperform DeRo by 3-4 wins next year. That's fairly significant, IMO.

 

Why some people are just assuming DeRosa will be that good again next year is beyond me. I'd like to think he will, but I wouldn't just count on it.

 

People are letting the fact that we have bigger needs to address elsewhere in the lineup cloud their judgment of just how much of an upgrade Roberts is over DeRosa.

 

DeRosa has been very consistent statistically the last two years as a starter which is why many of us think he can repeat his numbers from 2006-2007 ( .295, .374, .438, .802). Of course his numbers fall when you count the years he was a utility IF and not getting regular playing time. Also, I wish all of you posters out there who hint that DeRosa will get significant playing time at SS would realize that the Cubs have no plans for him at SS. They have stated that Theriot is the starter and they're looking for a sub SS who can bat left-handed (Cintron?). As for DeRosa strengthening the bench, we can find a right-handed pinch hitter for a lot less than Marshall, Gallagher, and Cedeno.

[David]

For freak's sake...Roberts is NOT only a marginal upgrade over DeRosa, unless I have a very different definition of marginal than some of you guys. To me, marginal upgrade means he's barely/slightly better.

 

I'll say it again, you can't just assume DeRosa is going to repeat 2007, which was one of the best years of his career, and even if he does, he's barely better than Roberts worst season in recent years. There's a decent possibility that Roberts will outperform DeRo by 3-4 wins next year. That's fairly significant, IMO.

 

Why some people are just assuming DeRosa will be that good again next year is beyond me. I'd like to think he will, but I wouldn't just count on it.

 

People are letting the fact that we have bigger needs to address elsewhere in the lineup cloud their judgment of just how much of an upgrade Roberts is over DeRosa.

 

DeRosa has been very consistent statistically the last two years as a starter which is why many of us think he can repeat his numbers from 2006-2007 ( .295, .374, .438, .802). Of course his numbers fall when you count the years he was a utility IF and not getting regular playing time. Also, I wish all of you posters out there who hint that DeRosa will get significant playing time at SS would realize that the Cubs have no plans for him at SS. They have stated that Theriot is the starter and they're looking for a sub SS who can bat left-handed (Cintron?). As for DeRosa strengthening the bench, we can find a right-handed pinch hitter for a lot less than Marshall, Gallagher, and Cedeno.

 

And there's still a good chance that Roberts will outproduce DeRosa (even at his best) by ~ 3 wins next year. If DeRosa regresses from his career year last year, then it's probably not even close.

 

And if we do keep DeRosa after the Roberts trade, don't be so quick to dismiss the effect he'll have as a backup. It's not just pinch-hitting. There are a ton of backup AB's that he will get over far inferior players. That is definitely significant.

 

Still, I'd rather they flip him to Toronto in a Burnett deal, if that indeed is being discussed. I'm a proponent of cheaper bench players anyway, and I'd love to have AJ here to solidify the rotation.

[erik316wttn]

For freak's sake...Roberts is NOT only a marginal upgrade over DeRosa, unless I have a very different definition of marginal than some of you guys. To me, marginal upgrade means he's barely/slightly better.

 

I'll say it again, you can't just assume DeRosa is going to repeat 2007, which was one of the best years of his career, and even if he does, he's barely better than Roberts worst season in recent years. There's a decent possibility that Roberts will outperform DeRo by 3-4 wins next year. That's fairly significant, IMO.

 

Why some people are just assuming DeRosa will be that good again next year is beyond me. I'd like to think he will, but I wouldn't just count on it.

 

People are letting the fact that we have bigger needs to address elsewhere in the lineup cloud their judgment of just how much of an upgrade Roberts is over DeRosa.

 

DeRosa has been very consistent statistically the last two years as a starter which is why many of us think he can repeat his numbers from 2006-2007 ( .295, .374, .438, .802). Of course his numbers fall when you count the years he was a utility IF and not getting regular playing time. Also, I wish all of you posters out there who hint that DeRosa will get significant playing time at SS would realize that the Cubs have no plans for him at SS. They have stated that Theriot is the starter and they're looking for a sub SS who can bat left-handed (Cintron?). As for DeRosa strengthening the bench, we can find a right-handed pinch hitter for a lot less than Marshall, Gallagher, and Cedeno.

 

And there's still a good chance that Roberts will outproduce DeRosa (even at his best) by ~ 3 wins next year. If DeRosa regresses from his career year last year, then it's probably not even close.

 

And if we do keep DeRosa after the Roberts trade, don't be so quick to dismiss the effect he'll have as a backup. It's not just pinch-hitting. There are a ton of backup AB's that he will get over far inferior players. That is definitely significant.

 

Still, I'd rather they flip him to Toronto in a Burnett deal, if that indeed is being discussed. I'm a proponent of cheaper bench players anyway, and I'd love to have AJ here to solidify the rotation.

 

Unfortunately, Burnett has contracted Mark Prior-itis when it comes to staying healthy.

[David]

Unfortunately, Burnett has contracted Mark Prior-itis when it comes to staying healthy.

 

 

That's quite a bit of an exaggeration.

[jersey cubs fan]

I think it should be pointed out that DeRosa will be playing the next two years at 33 and 34, while Roberts will be 31 and 32. The fact that DeRosa has been consistently productive the last two years getting the first regular playing time of his career, might suggest that his numbers the next two years will be closer to his 2006/2007 numbers, than his career averages. However, it's also quite possible those seasons will wind up being the exceptions to the rule of his career, when all is said and done. He regressed significantly in the 2nd half each season, and still only managed 572 and 574 PA, less than what a starter normally accumulates. Roberts has easily surpassed the 600 PA mark 4 years running without the type of horrible "off-year" that DeRosa had in 2005.

 

While it's possible Roberts may provide nothing more than a minimal upgrade over DeRosa the next two years, I think it's far more likely that he will be significantly better, as DeRosa is likely to decline sooner due to age, and his lesser resume to-date.

[Bruno7481]

What a difference a year makes. Last year when DeRosa was signed the popular sentiment was that he would never repeat his "career year." Now the argument against Roberts is that he's not a significant upgrade over DeRosa.

 

Baseball is a funny game.

[CUBBIEblue16]

What has the cubs one glaring need been forever?

 

Heres the answer..... a prototypical lead-off hitter,

 

No. No it has not been the one glaring need. Leadoff hitter is not a position, it's just a spot in the order that any of the 8 position players can fill. This team's most glaring need for a very long time has been walks, and players who are both willing and capable of taking them. A little more generally, they've lacked OBP. And to the extent that a new hitter can significantly improve the OBP by replacing somebody who is already here, that player would have considerable value to the Cubs.

 

 

You're right, a big need for this ball club is OBP, and you're dead wrong if you think one of the other 8 guys on the team can fill this role. I think you need to take a step back to a few years ago, year 2003..... We took off once we got Kenny Lofton, and all he did for us was get on base, steal bases and play solid defense. I believe Roberts is the same type of player, considering his OBP was .377 last year. He is what will spark this team, it also allows us to move Soriano down, where he needs to be. He is clearly not a leadoff hitter.

 

I know now you're going to come back at me with DeRosa's OBP, which is also very good at .371. I guess, for the less of another argument here, we can say thats even. The one thing, which I dont understand is why everyone is saying stolen bases dont matter. The guy had freaking 50 last year, good lord! We havent had that many stolen bases since Pierre, and he didnt even get on base. Stolen bases are huge, that will lead to more runs, more runners in scoring position. Roberts would be a huge asset to this team. I am also very confident that DeRosa can still play SS, just as good, if not better than Theriot. DeRosa came up as a SS, and he still has a spectacular glove, his range worries me a little, but I believe lots of work in the offseason will make him a solid SS.

 

This trade makes the Cubs an even more potent offensive team. I hate to say this, but ask them White Sox how they won their World Series. They won it with OBP, stolen bases, and timely hitting, and great pitching. Our pitching is strong and will only get stronger, Roberts is a player that will make us stronger offensively. With him, well score more runs, hell score a butt load of runs, and our 3-5 hitters will drive in significantly more runs.

Edited January 7, 2008 by CUBBIEblue16

[SouthSideRyan]

This won't end well.

 

Alright, I'll start things.

 

White Sox were 3rd in the AL in stolen bases in '05. They were also thrown out trying to steal more than anyone.

 

They were 11th in OBP. The White Sox won because of their pitching and defense. Their offense was pathetic. The only part of it that wasn't was their power(4th in HRs)

 

Their pitching was very very good (1st in ERA in a hitter's park)

Edited January 7, 2008 by SouthSideRyan

[CUBBIEblue16]

 

What has the cubs one glaring need been forever?

 

Heres the answer..... a prototypical lead-off hitter...

 

Wonder how much it would cost to get Pierre from LA

 

on>

 

 

He is not a prototypical lead-off hitter. For saying something so dumb and trying to insult me, why don't you show me your baseball smarts and tell me what a prototypical lead-off hitter is. Then compare it to Pierre.

 

Too bad the only positive thing we can say about Pierre is he doesn't strike out. Other than that, he gets caught stealing way to much, and he sure as hell doesn't know how to get on base.

[Sammy Sofa]

This trade makes the Cubs an even more potent offensive team. I hate to say this, but ask them White Sox how they won their World Series. They won it with OBP, stolen bases, and timely hitting, and great pitching.

 

Do all those home runs count for nothing?

 

You could very easily argue they won because they went on a tear that season and hit the hell out of the ball power-wise.

[C.C.]

What has the cubs one glaring need been forever?

 

Heres the answer..... a prototypical lead-off hitter,

 

No. No it has not been the one glaring need. Leadoff hitter is not a position, it's just a spot in the order that any of the 8 position players can fill. This team's most glaring need for a very long time has been walks, and players who are both willing and capable of taking them. A little more generally, they've lacked OBP. And to the extent that a new hitter can significantly improve the OBP by replacing somebody who is already here, that player would have considerable value to the Cubs.

 

 

You're right, a big need for this ball club is OBP, and you're dead wrong if you think one of the other 8 guys on the team can fill this role. I think you need to take a step back to a few years ago, year 2003..... We took off once we got Kenny Lofton, and all he did for us was get on base, steal bases and play solid defense. I believe Roberts is the same type of player, considering his OBP was .377 last year. He is what will spark this team, it also allows us to move Soriano down, where he needs to be. He is clearly not a leadoff hitter.

 

I know now you're going to come back at me with DeRosa's OBP, which is also very good at .371. I guess, for the less of another argument here, we can say thats even. The one thing, which I dont understand why even is saying does not matter is stolen bases. The guy had freaking 50 last year, good lord! We havent had that many stolen bases since Pierre, and he didnt even get on base. Stolen bases are huge, that will lead to more runs, more runners in scoring position. Roberts would be a huge asset to this team. I am also very confident that DeRosa can still play SS, just as good, if not better than Theriot. DeRosa came up as a SS, and he still has a spectacular glove, his range worries me a little, but I believe lots of work in the offseason will make him a solid SS.

 

This trade makes the Cubs an even more potent offensive team. I hate to say this, but ask them White Sox how they won their World Series. They won it with OBP, stolen bases, and timely hitting, and great pitching. Our pitching is strong and will only get stronger, Roberts is a player that will make us stronger offensively. With him, well score more runs, hell score a butt load of runs, and our 3-5 hitters will drive in significantly more runs.

 

They won because of solid pitching and a crap load of home runs. Their team OBP was .322. That's not all that great.

[David]

What has the cubs one glaring need been forever?

 

Heres the answer..... a prototypical lead-off hitter,

 

No. No it has not been the one glaring need. Leadoff hitter is not a position, it's just a spot in the order that any of the 8 position players can fill. This team's most glaring need for a very long time has been walks, and players who are both willing and capable of taking them. A little more generally, they've lacked OBP. And to the extent that a new hitter can significantly improve the OBP by replacing somebody who is already here, that player would have considerable value to the Cubs.

 

 

You're right, a big need for this ball club is OBP, and you're dead wrong if you think one of the other 8 guys on the team can fill this role. I think you need to take a step back to a few years ago, year 2003..... We took off once we got Kenny Lofton, and all he did for us was get on base, steal bases and play solid defense. I believe Roberts is the same type of player, considering his OBP was .377 last year. He is what will spark this team, it also allows us to move Soriano down, where he needs to be. He is clearly not a leadoff hitter.

 

I know now you're going to come back at me with DeRosa's OBP, which is also very good at .371. I guess, for the less of another argument here, we can say thats even. The one thing, which I dont understand is why everyone is saying stolen bases dont matter. The guy had freaking 50 last year, good lord! We havent had that many stolen bases since Pierre, and he didnt even get on base. Stolen bases are huge, that will lead to more runs, more runners in scoring position. Roberts would be a huge asset to this team. I am also very confident that DeRosa can still play SS, just as good, if not better than Theriot. DeRosa came up as a SS, and he still has a spectacular glove, his range worries me a little, but I believe lots of work in the offseason will make him a solid SS.

 

This trade makes the Cubs an even more potent offensive team. I hate to say this, but ask them White Sox how they won their World Series. They won it with OBP, stolen bases, and timely hitting, and great pitching. Our pitching is strong and will only get stronger, Roberts is a player that will make us stronger offensively. With him, well score more runs, hell score a butt load of runs, and our 3-5 hitters will drive in significantly more runs.

 

You might wanna go lookup how many R/G the 2003 team scored both before and after that trade.

[UK1679666180]

That second half pitching in '03 carried that team, specifically getting Prior back also upgrading Ramirez from Bellhorn/Hernandez was more of an impact than Lofton over a productive patterson.

[CUBBIEblue16]

What has the cubs one glaring need been forever?

 

Heres the answer..... a prototypical lead-off hitter,

 

No. No it has not been the one glaring need. Leadoff hitter is not a position, it's just a spot in the order that any of the 8 position players can fill. This team's most glaring need for a very long time has been walks, and players who are both willing and capable of taking them. A little more generally, they've lacked OBP. And to the extent that a new hitter can significantly improve the OBP by replacing somebody who is already here, that player would have considerable value to the Cubs.

 

 

You're right, a big need for this ball club is OBP, and you're dead wrong if you think one of the other 8 guys on the team can fill this role. I think you need to take a step back to a few years ago, year 2003..... We took off once we got Kenny Lofton, and all he did for us was get on base, steal bases and play solid defense. I believe Roberts is the same type of player, considering his OBP was .377 last year. He is what will spark this team, it also allows us to move Soriano down, where he needs to be. He is clearly not a leadoff hitter.

 

I know now you're going to come back at me with DeRosa's OBP, which is also very good at .371. I guess, for the less of another argument here, we can say thats even. The one thing, which I dont understand why even is saying does not matter is stolen bases. The guy had freaking 50 last year, good lord! We havent had that many stolen bases since Pierre, and he didnt even get on base. Stolen bases are huge, that will lead to more runs, more runners in scoring position. Roberts would be a huge asset to this team. I am also very confident that DeRosa can still play SS, just as good, if not better than Theriot. DeRosa came up as a SS, and he still has a spectacular glove, his range worries me a little, but I believe lots of work in the offseason will make him a solid SS.

 

This trade makes the Cubs an even more potent offensive team. I hate to say this, but ask them White Sox how they won their World Series. They won it with OBP, stolen bases, and timely hitting, and great pitching. Our pitching is strong and will only get stronger, Roberts is a player that will make us stronger offensively. With him, well score more runs, hell score a butt load of runs, and our 3-5 hitters will drive in significantly more runs.

 

They won because of solid pitching and a crap load of home runs. Their team OBP was .322. That's not all that great.

 

But, they always had a man in scoring position, meaning they always had someone on base, and then stole a base. The stolen base seems to be forgotten in this sport now. The stolen base is a key category that not every team can posses. This team would be a lot more successful with a player like Roberts getting on base, stealing, and the scoring on a hit.

[inari]

That second half pitching in '03 carried that team, specifically getting Prior back also upgrading Ramirez from Bellhorn/Hernandez was more of an impact than Lofton over a productive patterson.

 

It was Lofton over Tom Goodwin, though.

[SouthSideRyan]

 

What has the cubs one glaring need been forever?

 

Heres the answer..... a prototypical lead-off hitter...

 

Wonder how much it would cost to get Pierre from LA

 

on>

 

 

He is not a prototypical lead-off hitter. For saying something so dumb and trying to insult me, why don't you show me your baseball smarts and tell me what a prototypical lead-off hitter is. Then compare it to Pierre.

 

Too bad the only positive thing we can say about Pierre is he doesn't strike out. Other than that, he gets caught stealing way to much, and he sure as hell doesn't know how to get on base.

 

Rickey Henderson is the prototypical leadoff man, I don't see what he has to do with Brian Roberts.

[Sammy Sofa]

What has the cubs one glaring need been forever?

 

Heres the answer..... a prototypical lead-off hitter,

 

No. No it has not been the one glaring need. Leadoff hitter is not a position, it's just a spot in the order that any of the 8 position players can fill. This team's most glaring need for a very long time has been walks, and players who are both willing and capable of taking them. A little more generally, they've lacked OBP. And to the extent that a new hitter can significantly improve the OBP by replacing somebody who is already here, that player would have considerable value to the Cubs.

 

 

You're right, a big need for this ball club is OBP, and you're dead wrong if you think one of the other 8 guys on the team can fill this role. I think you need to take a step back to a few years ago, year 2003..... We took off once we got Kenny Lofton, and all he did for us was get on base, steal bases and play solid defense. I believe Roberts is the same type of player, considering his OBP was .377 last year. He is what will spark this team, it also allows us to move Soriano down, where he needs to be. He is clearly not a leadoff hitter.

 

I know now you're going to come back at me with DeRosa's OBP, which is also very good at .371. I guess, for the less of another argument here, we can say thats even. The one thing, which I dont understand why even is saying does not matter is stolen bases. The guy had freaking 50 last year, good lord! We havent had that many stolen bases since Pierre, and he didnt even get on base. Stolen bases are huge, that will lead to more runs, more runners in scoring position. Roberts would be a huge asset to this team. I am also very confident that DeRosa can still play SS, just as good, if not better than Theriot. DeRosa came up as a SS, and he still has a spectacular glove, his range worries me a little, but I believe lots of work in the offseason will make him a solid SS.

 

This trade makes the Cubs an even more potent offensive team. I hate to say this, but ask them White Sox how they won their World Series. They won it with OBP, stolen bases, and timely hitting, and great pitching. Our pitching is strong and will only get stronger, Roberts is a player that will make us stronger offensively. With him, well score more runs, hell score a butt load of runs, and our 3-5 hitters will drive in significantly more runs.

 

They won because of solid pitching and a crap load of home runs. Their team OBP was .322. That's not all that great.

 

But, they always had a man in scoring position, meaning they always had someone on base, and then stole a base. The stolen base seems to be forgotten in this sport now. The stolen base is a key category that not every team can posses. This team would be a lot more successful with a player like Roberts getting on base, stealing, and the scoring on a hit.

 

They didn't always have someone on base. See their OBP stat.

 

The stolen base is largely "forgotten" because the game has evolved beyond it in many ways due to how much hitting power has increased. Guys that are fast enough to steal a bunch of bases are almost as likely to score from 1st as 2nd if they're getting on in front of mashers.

 

How is your "steals = more gooder" argument not just a carbon copy of someone's argument for Pierre being on this team?

[SouthSideRyan]

 

But, they always had a man in scoring position, meaning they always had someone on base, and then stole a base. The stolen base seems to be forgotten in this sport now. The stolen base is a key category that not every team can posses. This team would be a lot more successful with a player like Roberts getting on base, stealing, and the scoring on a hit.

 

How can you put down Juan Pierre for getting thrown out trying to steal too often(career rate of 75%) and hold up the White Sox of '05(SB rate of 67%)

[JeffH]

Part of the reason that people remember "the Lofton era" fondly is that he played pretty well in that postseason.

 

Kenny Lofton has always been what the traditionalists would call "a tough out".

 

That's a very desirable quality in the postseason, when you don't see very much poor pitching.

 

One couldn't really use that term to describe Corey Patterson, even when he was going well.