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

BigbadB · January 7, 2008

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.

You seem pretty convinced that DeRosa has a very strong likelihood of regressing in 2008, yet you ignore the fact Brian Roberts has the same likelihood of regressing in 2008.

Brian Roberts OPS+ by year the last 4 years:

2004- 90

2005- 139

2006- 96

2007- 112

DeRosa's OPS+ the last three years:

2005- 97

2006- 108

2007- 102

Looks to me like Roberts likes to have an average year followed by a good year followed by an average year followed by a good year. Uh oh. Guess what kind of year Roberts is on pace to have in 2008?

Marginal upgrade is the correct term.

inari · January 7, 2008

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.

No, their .322 OBP means they rarely had someone on base.

UK1679666180 · January 7, 2008

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.

That was two weeks between Patterson's injury and Lofton arriving on the Cubs. Patterson in the 1st half of the year was just as good as Lofton in the second half, you can't say that about Ramirez and Bellhorn/Hernandez/etc.

CUBBIEblue16 · January 7, 2008

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?

Speed kills, and it also bothers opposing pitchers, and could cause them to make mistakes. I don't understand how anyone can justify that Roberts is not a good leadoff hitter and wont help this team. The fact that anyone says this is just insane.

KingCubsFan · January 7, 2008

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.

The White Sox won with career-year pitching from most of their starters and HOMERUNS. Don't let irrational Sox fans trick you into thinking their offense consisted mostly of stealing bases and bunting. The only team that had a larger percentage of their runs scored come from homeruns that year was the Cubs. And as someone else pointed out, their OBP sucked, which is why they had the most solo homers in the game (although the Cubs might have beat them there too)

Edited January 7, 2008 by KingCubsFan

fromthestretch · January 7, 2008

Speed kills, and it also bothers opposing pitchers, and could cause them to make mistakes.

Not as much as you would think.

I don't understand how anyone can justify that Roberts is not a good leadoff hitter and wont help this team. The fact that anyone says this is just insane.

Who said Roberts isn't a good leadoff hitter?

VVMattVV · January 7, 2008

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?

Speed kills, and it also bothers opposing pitchers, and could cause them to make mistakes. I don't understand how anyone can justify that Roberts is not a good leadoff hitter and wont help this team. The fact that anyone says this is just insane.

You probably don't understand it because no one has said that.

XZero771679666304 · January 7, 2008

Speed kills, and it also bothers opposing pitchers, and could cause them to make mistakes. I don't understand how anyone can justify that Roberts is not a good leadoff hitter and wont help this team. The fact that anyone says this is just insane.

I think the insinuation is that OBP is the key. The stolen bases are kind of superfluous. Roberts would indeed be a good leadoff hitter, but not because of his speed.

UK1679666180 · January 7, 2008

Speed is a valuable asset to have, just at what cost?

I think putting Roberts at leadoff and Soriano where he belongs in the middle is an upgrade offensively.

The likely increase in OBP of Roberts over Derosa is more valuable than the speed advantage, although if the Cubs had another higher OBP guy at the top, Derosa's ability to hit in the middle of the order would outweigh that speed advantage.

It is pretty telling as to how close the abilities of Derosa and Roberts truly are when roster composition plays a larger factor into why Roberts should start rather than their abilities.

Edited January 7, 2008 by UK

BigbadB · January 7, 2008

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.

Roberts as a lead off hitter in 2007: .288 .376 .424, 710 plate appearances, 101 runs scored

Soriano as a lead off hitter in 2007: .308 .345 .579, 577 plate appearances, 92 runs scored.

CLEARLY not a lead off hitter? I beg to differ. If Soriano had 710 plate appearances last year, he would have scored more runs than Roberts scored last year by quite a bit. And isn't that really what you want your lead off hitter to do?

Even if the Cubs get Roberts, I have no issues with Pineilla batting Soriano and Roberts 1/2 in the order. And if the Cubs could get some better bats hitting 7th and 8th in the order, I think Soriano challenges the 100 RBI mark in 2008.

XZero771679666304 · January 7, 2008

The White Sox won with career-year pitching from most of their starters and HOMERUNS. Don't let irrational Sox fans trick you into thinking their offense consisted mostly of stealing bases and bunting. The only team that had a larger percentage of their runs scored come from homeruns that year was the Cubs. And as someone else pointed out, their OBP sucked, which is why they had the most solo homers in the game (although the Cubs might have beat them there too)

Yeah, the notion that the Sox won 2005 due to "smallball" is not only a myth, but almost the polar opposite of what actually was the case.

XZero771679666304 · January 7, 2008

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.

Roberts as a lead off hitter in 2007: .288 .376 .424, 710 plate appearances, 101 runs scored

Soriano as a lead off hitter in 2007: .308 .345 .579, 577 plate appearances, 92 runs scored.

CLEARLY not a lead off hitter? I beg to differ. If Soriano had 710 plate appearances last year, he would have scored more runs than Roberts scored last year by quite a bit. And isn't that really what you want your lead off hitter to do?

Even if the Cubs get Roberts, I have no issues with Pineilla batting Soriano and Roberts 1/2 in the order. And if the Cubs could get some better bats hitting 7th and 8th in the order, I think Soriano challenges the 100 RBI mark in 2008.

To be fair, Soriano had much better hitters following him than Roberts did.

rawaction · January 7, 2008

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.

Roberts as a lead off hitter in 2007: .288 .376 .424, 710 plate appearances, 101 runs scored

Soriano as a lead off hitter in 2007: .308 .345 .579, 577 plate appearances, 92 runs scored.

CLEARLY not a lead off hitter? I beg to differ. If Soriano had 710 plate appearances last year, he would have scored more runs than Roberts scored last year by quite a bit. And isn't that really what you want your lead off hitter to do?

Even if the Cubs get Roberts, I have no issues with Pineilla batting Soriano and Roberts 1/2 in the order. And if the Cubs could get some better bats hitting 7th and 8th in the order, I think Soriano challenges the 100 RBI mark in 2008.

Agreed. I would go Soriano-Roberts, with the current roster. Mainly because Theriot is the obvious replacement in the 2-hole.

SouthSideRyan · January 7, 2008

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?

Speed kills, and it also bothers opposing pitchers, and could cause them to make mistakes. I don't understand how anyone can justify that Roberts is not a good leadoff hitter and wont help this team. The fact that anyone says this is just insane.

What has the cubs one glaring need been forever?

The answer is good players.

Nobody's denying that Roberts is a good player, or that he would help his team. People are pretty annoyed at giving up (what might be) a lot for a player that they don't think is a lot better than the current option. I personally think Roberts would be a decent upgrade when figuring in the AL to NL move, but he should be far from our top priority. We have a black hole of suck occupying SS right now, and we're trying to dump our one chance at the position not being the suck. Our 4 and 5 spots in the rotation are iffy at best, and we're trying to dump our 2 best chances at bringing some goodness and stability to the 4 and 5 spots.

I don't understand how you can just throw out anecdotal evidence and expect everyone to swallow it down like a spoonful of sugar.

Edited January 7, 2008 by SouthSideRyan

David · January 7, 2008

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.

You seem pretty convinced that DeRosa has a very strong likelihood of regressing in 2008, yet you ignore the fact Brian Roberts has the same likelihood of regressing in 2008.

Brian Roberts OPS+ by year the last 4 years:

2004- 90
2005- 139
2006- 96
2007- 112

DeRosa's OPS+ the last three years:

2005- 97
2006- 108
2007- 102

Looks to me like Roberts likes to have an average year followed by a good year followed by an average year followed by a good year. Uh oh. Guess what kind of year Roberts is on pace to have in 2008?

Marginal upgrade is the correct term.

Look at their WARPs. Look at their ages.

As far as the "pace" comment, are you trying to imply that he's on some sort of one year on, one year off trend? I don't really buy into that stuff.

Edited January 8, 2008 by David

BigbadB · January 7, 2008

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.

Roberts as a lead off hitter in 2007: .288 .376 .424, 710 plate appearances, 101 runs scored

Soriano as a lead off hitter in 2007: .308 .345 .579, 577 plate appearances, 92 runs scored.

CLEARLY not a lead off hitter? I beg to differ. If Soriano had 710 plate appearances last year, he would have scored more runs than Roberts scored last year by quite a bit. And isn't that really what you want your lead off hitter to do?

Even if the Cubs get Roberts, I have no issues with Pineilla batting Soriano and Roberts 1/2 in the order. And if the Cubs could get some better bats hitting 7th and 8th in the order, I think Soriano challenges the 100 RBI mark in 2008.

To be fair, Soriano had much better hitters following him than Roberts did.

To be fair, Soriano drove himself in (HR) quite a few more times than Roberts did.

We can go back and forth on this, but if Soriano can put up a .345 OBP or better, I have no issues with him leading off. And as Raw pointed out in his recent response, if the alternative to hit 2nd behind Roberts is Theriot, I'll take Soriano/Roberts 1/2 all day long.

David · January 7, 2008

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.

Roberts as a lead off hitter in 2007: .288 .376 .424, 710 plate appearances, 101 runs scored

Soriano as a lead off hitter in 2007: .308 .345 .579, 577 plate appearances, 92 runs scored.

CLEARLY not a lead off hitter? I beg to differ. If Soriano had 710 plate appearances last year, he would have scored more runs than Roberts scored last year by quite a bit. And isn't that really what you want your lead off hitter to do?

Even if the Cubs get Roberts, I have no issues with Pineilla batting Soriano and Roberts 1/2 in the order. And if the Cubs could get some better bats hitting 7th and 8th in the order, I think Soriano challenges the 100 RBI mark in 2008.

To be fair, Soriano had much better hitters following him than Roberts did.

To be fair, Soriano drove himself in (HR) quite a few more times than Roberts did.

We can go back and forth on this, but if Soriano can put up a .345 OBP or better, I have no issues with him leading off. And as Raw pointed out in his recent response, if the alternative to hit 2nd behind Roberts is Theriot, I'll take Soriano/Roberts 1/2 all day long.

I'm pretty sure he has only done that once in his whole career, and a big reason for it was that he was intentionally walked eleventy billion times.

January 7, 2008

What has the cubs one glaring need been forever?

Better management?

A quality shortstop?

Improved bathrooms?

inari · January 7, 2008

Why not a Roberts-Fukudome 1-2 punch? Or if DeRosa can play short competently, a Roberts-DeRosa one?

David · January 7, 2008

What has the cubs one glaring need been forever?
Better management?

A quality shortstop?

Improved bathrooms?

All of the above.

BigbadB · January 7, 2008

Look at their WARPs. Look at their ages.

I don't have to look at their WARP's or their ages. You can't justify that one guy is likely to regress and say they other won't. You just can't do it.

It's a marginal upgrade no matter how you slice it. There is POTENTIAL for it to be a significant upgrade if Roberts were to repeat his career year 4 years ago, but I don't think we should assume that anymore than we should assume Mark DeRosa will all of a sudden forget everything he accomplished in the last 2 years.

XZero771679666304 · January 7, 2008

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.

Roberts as a lead off hitter in 2007: .288 .376 .424, 710 plate appearances, 101 runs scored

Soriano as a lead off hitter in 2007: .308 .345 .579, 577 plate appearances, 92 runs scored.

CLEARLY not a lead off hitter? I beg to differ. If Soriano had 710 plate appearances last year, he would have scored more runs than Roberts scored last year by quite a bit. And isn't that really what you want your lead off hitter to do?

Even if the Cubs get Roberts, I have no issues with Pineilla batting Soriano and Roberts 1/2 in the order. And if the Cubs could get some better bats hitting 7th and 8th in the order, I think Soriano challenges the 100 RBI mark in 2008.

To be fair, Soriano had much better hitters following him than Roberts did.

To be fair, Soriano drove himself in (HR) quite a few more times than Roberts did.

We can go back and forth on this, but if Soriano can put up a .345 OBP or better, I have no issues with him leading off. And as Raw pointed out in his recent response, if the alternative to hit 2nd behind Roberts is Theriot, I'll take Soriano/Roberts 1/2 all day long.

But is Soriano going to put up a .345 OBP? Probably not. And would all those homers be more beneficial to the team lower in the order? Almost certainly.

I think even putting Soriano in the 2 hole behind Roberts would be at least a marginal improvement.

UK1679666180 · January 7, 2008

Why not a Roberts-Fukudome 1-2 punch? Or if DeRosa can play short competently, a Roberts-DeRosa one?

I would do Roberts/Fukudome.

While I want Derosa to get a shot at SS, I would put the odds of him being able to stay there defensively at minimal at best.

David · January 7, 2008

Look at their WARPs. Look at their ages.

I don't have to look at their WARP's or their ages. You can't justify that one guy is likely to regress and say they other won't. You just can't do it.

It's a marginal upgrade no matter how you slice it. There is POTENTIAL for it to be a significant upgrade if Roberts were to repeat his career year 4 years ago, but I don't think we should assume that anymore than we should assume Mark DeRosa will all of a sudden forget everything he accomplished in the last 2 years.

Roberts was barely half a win worse than DeRosa's 2007 in his down year.

In other words, if Roberts has a down year, you basically have DeRosa at near his best. If Roberts has an up year, he's significantly better than DeRosa at his best, and miles better than a regressing DeRosa.

On top of all that, DeRosa's age makes it more likely that he will regress than Roberts.

Edited January 7, 2008 by David

cbbryan · January 7, 2008

Look at their WARPs. Look at their ages.

I don't have to look at their WARP's or their ages. You can't justify that one guy is likely to regress and say they other won't. You just can't do it.

It's a marginal upgrade no matter how you slice it. There is POTENTIAL for it to be a significant upgrade if Roberts were to repeat his career year 4 years ago, but I don't think we should assume that anymore than we should assume Mark DeRosa will all of a sudden forget everything he accomplished in the last 2 years.

I would agree with this as well. You can skew the numbers all you want, but in the end there's really not much difference between the two if they both have "average" years for themselves. They're very comparable players.

While Roberts gives you more speed. DeRo gives you alot more versatility. I really wish DeRo could play SS everyday......

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

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blogs