Derosa to Indians for Jeff Stevens, Chris Archer, John Gaub

[CubColtPacer]

I'm confused here. If you needed to lose the payroll to get Bradley, how was this a bad deal?

 

You're losing DeRosa and getting Bradley. You don't seriously overvalue DeRosa that much, do you you?

 

Entertaining the thought that a full season of DeRosa is more valuable than a half season (of less) of Bradley means we're overvaluing him?

So everyone is basing it off of injury risk? I understand that you have to be concerned, especially with his history, but come on, Bradley is a hell of a player when healthy. Quit being typical glass half empty Cubs fans.

 

Now we are only assuming a half season OR LESS from Bradley? That seems a bit pessimistic. I have also seen people saying that we will be lucky if we get as many innings out of Harden in '08 as we did in '09. Worst case scenarios are pretty popular around here these days.

 

Bradley has played 100+ games in the field exactly once in his entire career. I would say expecting him to only play 70-80 is being rather pessimistic, but it's hard to argue that he's going to suddenly be able to be out in the field for more than 100 games this year either. There's a lot of history that suggests he's not going to be able to.

[dew1679666265]

Clearly, Hendry had to shave payroll in order to get Bradley. Miles gives us 2+ million PLUS another year. We were going to lose DeRosa after this year or probably pay him even more. It also got us more left handed and probably better defense.

 

Money does matter. The Trib is bankrupt.

 

Then don't get Bradley. If you have to downgrade in one spot to moderately upgrade in another, it's not worth it.

 

Pursue a Hermida or Scott or Sammy Sosa, but don't trade a valuable chip in order to moderately upgrade.

 

Obviously he likes Fontenot and feels better trading DeRosa and taking a chance on Fontenot being able to make the leap from backup to starter than he feels about the chances of Fukudome or Hoff being able to put up respectable numbers in RF.

 

I hope this all leads to Peavy, but even if it really is just a money thing I agree with the move. I would rather have Fontenot / Bradley / Fukudome at 2B/RF/CF than the alternative of DeRosa / Fukudome / Pie. It is just a bit of a shock to the system if that is the way it turns out because the Cubs have not done anything other than add payroll for the last couple years so a move like the DeRosa trade primarily to dump salary takes some getting used to.

 

That's not the choice the Cubs would have likely gone with. The two options would have either been:

 

Fontenot at 2nd, DeRosa at RF, Fukudome in CF

or

Fontenot at 2nd, Bradley+Johnson in RF (Johnson for the 40-80 games that Bradley doesn't play, Fukudome in CF

 

Would you rather have DeRosa for 140 games in RF and Marquis in the 5th spot or Bradley for 100, Vizcaino in the bullpen, and 3 decent pitching prospects? Personally I think the Cubs are better off with the former. If the Cubs get another upgrade other than Bradley it makes more sense. But is Bradley really a more valuable RF than DeRosa this year?

 

Plus if you kept DeRosa you could have kept an extra OF bat for the bench that could hit instead of having to pay Miles to be a backup IF (because DeRosa would essentially be your 2nd backup IF even while starting in the OF).

 

So with DeRosa you have about the same offense over the course of the year, a better starting rotation, a better bench, and possibly a better bullpen (because it could be argued that Vizcaino hurts the pen more than helps it). Trading him should only have been done to get talent that could be used to upgrade somewhere else. Removing DeRosa's salary isn't much of a help because DeRosa was being underpaid so much.

 

This whole time I was hoping you'd disagree with me. Now I feel worse. :-))

[Illini Iceman]

Clearly, Hendry had to shave payroll in order to get Bradley. Miles gives us 2+ million PLUS another year. We were going to lose DeRosa after this year or probably pay him even more. It also got us more left handed and probably better defense.

 

Money does matter. The Trib is bankrupt.

 

Then don't get Bradley. If you have to downgrade in one spot to moderately upgrade in another, it's not worth it.

 

Pursue a Hermida or Scott or Sammy Sosa, but don't trade a valuable chip in order to moderately upgrade.

 

Obviously he likes Fontenot and feels better trading DeRosa and taking a chance on Fontenot being able to make the leap from backup to starter than he feels about the chances of Fukudome or Hoff being able to put up respectable numbers in RF.

 

I hope this all leads to Peavy, but even if it really is just a money thing I agree with the move. I would rather have Fontenot / Bradley / Fukudome at 2B/RF/CF than the alternative of DeRosa / Fukudome / Pie. It is just a bit of a shock to the system if that is the way it turns out because the Cubs have not done anything other than add payroll for the last couple years so a move like the DeRosa trade primarily to dump salary takes some getting used to.

 

That's not the choice the Cubs would have likely gone with. The two options would have either been:

 

Fontenot at 2nd, DeRosa at RF, Fukudome in CF

or

Fontenot at 2nd, Bradley+Johnson in RF (Johnson for the 40-80 games that Bradley doesn't play, Fukudome in CF

 

Would you rather have DeRosa for 140 games in RF and Marquis in the 5th spot or Bradley for 100, Vizcaino in the bullpen, and 3 decent pitching prospects? Personally I think the Cubs are better off with the former. If the Cubs get another upgrade other than Bradley it makes more sense. But is Bradley really a more valuable RF than DeRosa this year?

 

Plus if you kept DeRosa you could have kept an extra OF bat for the bench that could hit instead of having to pay Miles to be a backup IF (because DeRosa would essentially be your 2nd backup IF even while starting in the OF).

 

So with DeRosa you have about the same offense over the course of the year, a better starting rotation, a better bench, and possibly a better bullpen (because it could be argued that Vizcaino hurts the pen more than helps it). Trading him should only have been done to get talent that could be used to upgrade somewhere else. Removing DeRosa's salary isn't much of a help because DeRosa was being underpaid so much.

 

Cmon now, we are now counting the loss of Marquis from the rotation as a downgrade? And we are assuming DeRosa repeats his '08 career year but Bradley will be hurt for a significant portion? It is just as easy to say Marquis would wind up in long relief and DeRosa would wind up regressing and hurt overall RF production.

[dew1679666265]

I'm confused here. If you needed to lose the payroll to get Bradley, how was this a bad deal?

 

You're losing DeRosa and getting Bradley. You don't seriously overvalue DeRosa that much, do you you?

 

Entertaining the thought that a full season of DeRosa is more valuable than a half season (of less) of Bradley means we're overvaluing him?

So everyone is basing it off of injury risk? I understand that you have to be concerned, especially with his history, but come on, Bradley is a hell of a player when healthy. Quit being typical glass half empty Cubs fans.

 

Now we are only assuming a half season OR LESS from Bradley? That seems a bit pessimistic. I have also seen people saying that we will be lucky if we get as many innings out of Harden in '08 as we did in '09. Worst case scenarios are pretty popular around here these days.

 

Bradley has played 100+ games in the field exactly once in his entire career. I would say expecting him to only play 70-80 is being rather pessimistic, but it's hard to argue that he's going to suddenly be able to be out in the field for more than 100 games this year either. There's a lot of history that suggests he's not going to be able to.

 

I'm thinking half the season is about the lowest he'll go. I'm worried that 100 is on the very high end, however.

 

85-90 is what I'm expecting.

 

EDIT: I was thinking in too many round numbers. Changed 80 games in the expectation to 85.

Edited January 1, 2009 by dew

[dew1679666265]

Clearly, Hendry had to shave payroll in order to get Bradley. Miles gives us 2+ million PLUS another year. We were going to lose DeRosa after this year or probably pay him even more. It also got us more left handed and probably better defense.

 

Money does matter. The Trib is bankrupt.

 

Then don't get Bradley. If you have to downgrade in one spot to moderately upgrade in another, it's not worth it.

 

Pursue a Hermida or Scott or Sammy Sosa, but don't trade a valuable chip in order to moderately upgrade.

 

Obviously he likes Fontenot and feels better trading DeRosa and taking a chance on Fontenot being able to make the leap from backup to starter than he feels about the chances of Fukudome or Hoff being able to put up respectable numbers in RF.

 

I hope this all leads to Peavy, but even if it really is just a money thing I agree with the move. I would rather have Fontenot / Bradley / Fukudome at 2B/RF/CF than the alternative of DeRosa / Fukudome / Pie. It is just a bit of a shock to the system if that is the way it turns out because the Cubs have not done anything other than add payroll for the last couple years so a move like the DeRosa trade primarily to dump salary takes some getting used to.

 

That's not the choice the Cubs would have likely gone with. The two options would have either been:

 

Fontenot at 2nd, DeRosa at RF, Fukudome in CF

or

Fontenot at 2nd, Bradley+Johnson in RF (Johnson for the 40-80 games that Bradley doesn't play, Fukudome in CF

 

Would you rather have DeRosa for 140 games in RF and Marquis in the 5th spot or Bradley for 100, Vizcaino in the bullpen, and 3 decent pitching prospects? Personally I think the Cubs are better off with the former. If the Cubs get another upgrade other than Bradley it makes more sense. But is Bradley really a more valuable RF than DeRosa this year?

 

Plus if you kept DeRosa you could have kept an extra OF bat for the bench that could hit instead of having to pay Miles to be a backup IF (because DeRosa would essentially be your 2nd backup IF even while starting in the OF).

 

So with DeRosa you have about the same offense over the course of the year, a better starting rotation, a better bench, and possibly a better bullpen (because it could be argued that Vizcaino hurts the pen more than helps it). Trading him should only have been done to get talent that could be used to upgrade somewhere else. Removing DeRosa's salary isn't much of a help because DeRosa was being underpaid so much.

 

Cmon now, we are now counting the loss of Marquis from the rotation as a downgrade? And we are assuming DeRosa repeats his '08 career year but Bradley will be hurt for a significant portion? It is just as easy to say Marquis would wind up in long relief and DeRosa would wind up regressing and hurt overall RF production.

 

Marquis was decent last year and with his loss and no other additions we have very little depth to absorb a Harden injury.

 

And I think DeRosa will be somewhere between his 08 and 07 numbers.

[rawaction]

I'm confused here. If you needed to lose the payroll to get Bradley, how was this a bad deal?

 

You're losing DeRosa and getting Bradley. You don't seriously overvalue DeRosa that much, do you you?

 

It's an upgrade, but if we're that cash strapped is it worth it? If we're now going to be playing a whole lot of Aaron Miles, Micah Hoffpauir and Joey Gathright have we really improved that much?

 

Bradley's injured far too often for this to be a big improvement.

 

Yeah, if the option was Bradley or Peavy, go with Peavy. Peavy is a bigger upgrade over what the Cubs put out at SP than Bradley is over Derosa (this is under the assumption that Derosa was the RF with the Cubs teams as it was yesterday w/ Fontenot at 2B).

 

And as was mentioned, the Cubs have some cheap options that are likely to have the chance to be productive in RF. Not many cheap options available that can give you Peavy production.

[Illini Iceman]

Clearly, Hendry had to shave payroll in order to get Bradley. Miles gives us 2+ million PLUS another year. We were going to lose DeRosa after this year or probably pay him even more. It also got us more left handed and probably better defense.

 

Money does matter. The Trib is bankrupt.

 

Then don't get Bradley. If you have to downgrade in one spot to moderately upgrade in another, it's not worth it.

 

Pursue a Hermida or Scott or Sammy Sosa, but don't trade a valuable chip in order to moderately upgrade.

 

Obviously he likes Fontenot and feels better trading DeRosa and taking a chance on Fontenot being able to make the leap from backup to starter than he feels about the chances of Fukudome or Hoff being able to put up respectable numbers in RF.

 

I hope this all leads to Peavy, but even if it really is just a money thing I agree with the move. I would rather have Fontenot / Bradley / Fukudome at 2B/RF/CF than the alternative of DeRosa / Fukudome / Pie. It is just a bit of a shock to the system if that is the way it turns out because the Cubs have not done anything other than add payroll for the last couple years so a move like the DeRosa trade primarily to dump salary takes some getting used to.

 

That's not the choice the Cubs would have likely gone with. The two options would have either been:

 

Fontenot at 2nd, DeRosa at RF, Fukudome in CF

or

Fontenot at 2nd, Bradley+Johnson in RF (Johnson for the 40-80 games that Bradley doesn't play, Fukudome in CF

 

Would you rather have DeRosa for 140 games in RF and Marquis in the 5th spot or Bradley for 100, Vizcaino in the bullpen, and 3 decent pitching prospects? Personally I think the Cubs are better off with the former. If the Cubs get another upgrade other than Bradley it makes more sense. But is Bradley really a more valuable RF than DeRosa this year?

 

Plus if you kept DeRosa you could have kept an extra OF bat for the bench that could hit instead of having to pay Miles to be a backup IF (because DeRosa would essentially be your 2nd backup IF even while starting in the OF).

 

So with DeRosa you have about the same offense over the course of the year, a better starting rotation, a better bench, and possibly a better bullpen (because it could be argued that Vizcaino hurts the pen more than helps it). Trading him should only have been done to get talent that could be used to upgrade somewhere else. Removing DeRosa's salary isn't much of a help because DeRosa was being underpaid so much.

 

Cmon now, we are now counting the loss of Marquis from the rotation as a downgrade? And we are assuming DeRosa repeats his '08 career year but Bradley will be hurt for a significant portion? It is just as easy to say Marquis would wind up in long relief and DeRosa would wind up regressing and hurt overall RF production.

 

Marquis was decent last year and with his loss and no other additions we have very little depth to absorb a Harden injury.

 

And I think DeRosa will be somewhere between his 08 and 07 numbers.

 

Gaudin, Shark, Marshall, Hart, Atkins - how much depth do you want. I would think at least one of those guys can match Marquis' production.

 

And I "think" that Bradley will be able to play 120 games with Hoff filling in against RH pitching and holding his own as that part of the platoon. Assuming the worst does not make it the most likely outcome.

[dew1679666265]

I'm confused here. If you needed to lose the payroll to get Bradley, how was this a bad deal?

 

You're losing DeRosa and getting Bradley. You don't seriously overvalue DeRosa that much, do you you?

 

It's an upgrade, but if we're that cash strapped is it worth it? If we're now going to be playing a whole lot of Aaron Miles, Micah Hoffpauir and Joey Gathright have we really improved that much?

 

Bradley's injured far too often for this to be a big improvement.

 

Yeah, if the option was Bradley or Peavy, go with Peavy. Peavy is a bigger upgrade over what the Cubs put out at SP than Bradley is over Derosa (this is under the assumption that Derosa was the RF with the Cubs teams as it was yesterday w/ Fontenot at 2B).

 

Agreed.

[dew1679666265]

Gaudin, Shark, Marshall, Hart, Atkins - how much depth do you want. I would think at least one of those guys can match Marquis' production.

 

Ok sorry, good depth. Gaudin and Shark will be pretty good depth maybe, but with Marquis gone Marshall will be the 5th starter. Hart and Atkins are mediocre at very best.

 

And it's not Marquis' production - Marshall can do that as the fifth starter. It's producing well in place of Harden when he's hurt. I don't have much faith in in anybody outside of, maybe, Gaudin and Shark. And they're a little iffy.

 

And I "think" that Bradley will be able to play 120 games with Hoff filling in against RH pitching and holding his own as that part of the platoon. Assuming the worst does not make it the most likely outcome.

 

120 games would be more than he's played in any season but two. One of those he played the vast majority of his games at DH.

 

And if that's the absolute best we can hope for, I'm worried.

[CubColtPacer]

Clearly, Hendry had to shave payroll in order to get Bradley. Miles gives us 2+ million PLUS another year. We were going to lose DeRosa after this year or probably pay him even more. It also got us more left handed and probably better defense.

 

Money does matter. The Trib is bankrupt.

 

Then don't get Bradley. If you have to downgrade in one spot to moderately upgrade in another, it's not worth it.

 

Pursue a Hermida or Scott or Sammy Sosa, but don't trade a valuable chip in order to moderately upgrade.

 

Obviously he likes Fontenot and feels better trading DeRosa and taking a chance on Fontenot being able to make the leap from backup to starter than he feels about the chances of Fukudome or Hoff being able to put up respectable numbers in RF.

 

I hope this all leads to Peavy, but even if it really is just a money thing I agree with the move. I would rather have Fontenot / Bradley / Fukudome at 2B/RF/CF than the alternative of DeRosa / Fukudome / Pie. It is just a bit of a shock to the system if that is the way it turns out because the Cubs have not done anything other than add payroll for the last couple years so a move like the DeRosa trade primarily to dump salary takes some getting used to.

 

That's not the choice the Cubs would have likely gone with. The two options would have either been:

 

Fontenot at 2nd, DeRosa at RF, Fukudome in CF

or

Fontenot at 2nd, Bradley+Johnson in RF (Johnson for the 40-80 games that Bradley doesn't play, Fukudome in CF

 

Would you rather have DeRosa for 140 games in RF and Marquis in the 5th spot or Bradley for 100, Vizcaino in the bullpen, and 3 decent pitching prospects? Personally I think the Cubs are better off with the former. If the Cubs get another upgrade other than Bradley it makes more sense. But is Bradley really a more valuable RF than DeRosa this year?

 

Plus if you kept DeRosa you could have kept an extra OF bat for the bench that could hit instead of having to pay Miles to be a backup IF (because DeRosa would essentially be your 2nd backup IF even while starting in the OF).

 

So with DeRosa you have about the same offense over the course of the year, a better starting rotation, a better bench, and possibly a better bullpen (because it could be argued that Vizcaino hurts the pen more than helps it). Trading him should only have been done to get talent that could be used to upgrade somewhere else. Removing DeRosa's salary isn't much of a help because DeRosa was being underpaid so much.

 

Cmon now, we are now counting the loss of Marquis from the rotation as a downgrade? And we are assuming DeRosa repeats his '08 career year but Bradley will be hurt for a significant portion? It is just as easy to say Marquis would wind up in long relief and DeRosa would wind up regressing and hurt overall RF production.

 

I'm actually not assuming that DeRosa repeats his 08. I'm looking at around an .800 OPS next year for him (or somewhere between his 06 and 07).

 

Yes, the loss of Marquis would hurt the rotation. 180-200 innings of mediocre pitching becomes more valuable the more injury prone the rest of your starting rotation is. If Marquis is gone, that means Marshall is starting. It is unlikely that Marshall throws over 150 innings between his injury history, a tendency to have a dead arm, and the fact that he's never done it before, not even in the minor leagues. Harden could throw anywhere between 50-160 innings (I see anything over 160 as unlikely as the Cubs are going to back up him at times, skip a couple starts, take him out early etc. to protect his arm). Those innings would go to Marshall but now have to go to somebody else. Then of course you have Z who has a decent shot of missing 2-3 starts over the season. So that's somewhere between 90-260 innings that you have to make up.

 

The Cubs have options for starters behind Marshall, but the further you go the more you're both hurting the bullpen by taking them out of there, and also you have an increasing possibility they'll blow up and be absolutely terrible out of the rotation. It's just not as simple as comparing Marquis and Marshall. Marquis leaving pushes everybody a slot up and makes the rotation more injury prone while removing pitching depth from the system at the same time. That's a bad combination, and the depth would very likely not be sufficient.

[17 Seconds]

So everyone is basing it off of injury risk? I understand that you have to be concerned, especially with his history, but come on, Bradley is a hell of a player when healthy. Quit being typical glass half empty Cubs fans.

 

Now we are only assuming a half season OR LESS from Bradley? That seems a bit pessimistic. I have also seen people saying that we will be lucky if we get as many innings out of Harden in '08 as we did in '09. Worst case scenarios are pretty popular around here these days.

 

Bradleys games by year

 

42

77

98

101

141

75

96

61

126 (DH)

 

Obviously some of those early years are skewed because I don't know when he was given a full time job, but you get the point. 2 of the last 3 seasons he's played the field, he's played less than half the year. I'm not being pessimistic, I'm being realistic. I never said he WOULD play less than half the season, I said it's possible.

 

I'd expect about 80-90 games out of him

[Monco]

Clearly, Hendry had to shave payroll in order to get Bradley. Miles gives us 2+ million PLUS another year. We were going to lose DeRosa after this year or probably pay him even more. It also got us more left handed and probably better defense.

 

Money does matter. The Trib is bankrupt.

 

Then don't get Bradley. If you have to downgrade in one spot to moderately upgrade in another, it's not worth it.

 

Pursue a Hermida or Scott or Sammy Sosa, but don't trade a valuable chip in order to moderately upgrade.

 

Obviously he likes Fontenot and feels better trading DeRosa and taking a chance on Fontenot being able to make the leap from backup to starter than he feels about the chances of Fukudome or Hoff being able to put up respectable numbers in RF.

 

I hope this all leads to Peavy, but even if it really is just a money thing I agree with the move. I would rather have Fontenot / Bradley / Fukudome at 2B/RF/CF than the alternative of DeRosa / Fukudome / Pie. It is just a bit of a shock to the system if that is the way it turns out because the Cubs have not done anything other than add payroll for the last couple years so a move like the DeRosa trade primarily to dump salary takes some getting used to.

 

That's not the choice the Cubs would have likely gone with. The two options would have either been:

 

Fontenot at 2nd, DeRosa at RF, Fukudome in CF

or

Fontenot at 2nd, Bradley+Johnson in RF (Johnson for the 40-80 games that Bradley doesn't play, Fukudome in CF

 

Would you rather have DeRosa for 140 games in RF and Marquis in the 5th spot or Bradley for 100, Vizcaino in the bullpen, and 3 decent pitching prospects? Personally I think the Cubs are better off with the former. If the Cubs get another upgrade other than Bradley it makes more sense. But is Bradley really a more valuable RF than DeRosa this year?

 

Plus if you kept DeRosa you could have kept an extra OF bat for the bench that could hit instead of having to pay Miles to be a backup IF (because DeRosa would essentially be your 2nd backup IF even while starting in the OF).

 

So with DeRosa you have about the same offense over the course of the year, a better starting rotation, a better bench, and possibly a better bullpen (because it could be argued that Vizcaino hurts the pen more than helps it). Trading him should only have been done to get talent that could be used to upgrade somewhere else. Removing DeRosa's salary isn't much of a help because DeRosa was being underpaid so much.

 

Cmon now, we are now counting the loss of Marquis from the rotation as a downgrade? And we are assuming DeRosa repeats his '08 career year but Bradley will be hurt for a significant portion? It is just as easy to say Marquis would wind up in long relief and DeRosa would wind up regressing and hurt overall RF production.

 

I'm actually not assuming that DeRosa repeats his 08. I'm looking at around an .800 OPS next year for him (or somewhere between his 06 and 07).

 

Yes, the loss of Marquis would hurt the rotation. 180-200 innings of mediocre pitching becomes more valuable the more injury prone the rest of your starting rotation is. If Marquis is gone, that means Marshall is starting. It is unlikely that Marshall throws over 150 innings between his injury history, a tendency to have a dead arm, and the fact that he's never done it before, not even in the minor leagues. Harden could throw anywhere between 50-160 innings (I see anything over 160 as unlikely as the Cubs are going to back up him at times, skip a couple starts, take him out early etc. to protect his arm). Those innings would go to Marshall but now have to go to somebody else. Then of course you have Z who has a decent shot of missing 2-3 starts over the season. So that's somewhere between 90-260 innings that you have to make up.

 

The Cubs have options for starters behind Marshall, but the further you go the more you're both hurting the bullpen by taking them out of there, and also you have an increasing possibility they'll blow up and be absolutely terrible out of the rotation. It's just not as simple as comparing Marquis and Marshall. Marquis leaving pushes everybody a slot up and makes the rotation more injury prone while removing pitching depth from the system at the same time. That's a bad combination, and the depth would very likely not be sufficient.

 

Marquis was there every 5th and was one of the best number fives around. Remember 2003 with Shawn Estes? Did the 2006 Cubs had pitching depth?

 

Angel Guzman

Rich Hill

Greg Maddux

Carlos Marmol

Sean Marshall

Juan Mateo

Wade Miller

Ryan O'Malley

Mark Prior

Glendon Rusch

Jae Kuk Ryu

Les Walrond

Jerome Williams

Kerry Wood

Carlos Zambrano

[Derwood]

DeRosa is yet another victim of the "Hendry's publicly stated offseason need of the year" nonsense. A lefty power bat would be nice, but not at the expense of downgrading elsewhere.

[dew1679666265]

DeRosa is yet another victim of the "Hendry's publicly stated offseason need of the year" nonsense. A lefty power bat would be nice, but not at the expense of downgrading elsewhere.

 

I don't have a problem with targeting a left handed bat. That's perfectly fine.

 

The problem is when you make yourself worse in order to do that. In this case, unless we get Peavy, Hendry made the team worse.

[Illini Iceman]

DeRosa is yet another victim of the "Hendry's publicly stated offseason need of the year" nonsense. A lefty power bat would be nice, but not at the expense of downgrading elsewhere.

 

Hendy probably feels Fontenot can take the next step and put up production similar to what he would get from DeRosa this year, so he doesn't see it as a significant downgrade.

 

I guess the only way we are going to resolve all this difference of opinion is for Hendry to go out and get Peavy, so he may as well just get it done.

[dew1679666265]

DeRosa is yet another victim of the "Hendry's publicly stated offseason need of the year" nonsense. A lefty power bat would be nice, but not at the expense of downgrading elsewhere.

 

Hendy probably feels Fontenot can take the next step and put up production similar to what he would get from DeRosa this year, so he doesn't see it as a significant downgrade.

 

He better be right then, because if he's wrong we're a worse team.

 

I guess the only way we are going to resolve all this difference of opinion is for Hendry to go out and get Peavy, so he may as well just get it done.

 

We can agree on this one. :D

[cubsfan26]

He better be right then, because if he's wrong we're a worse team.

 

I recall some people saying that about Theriot a year ago, and they didn't believe he could improve and Hendry did. Lets not forget the team that starts the season on opening day isn't the final team. I recall a year ago some people being concerned about Pie in CF Theirot at SS, and if Soto would be as good. Many were concerned about potentially having 3 easy outs in the line-up. Well Theriot/Soto were better then anyone expected, and after Pie struggled, they picked up Edmonds to replace him and it ended up being a great move. If Fontenot does struggle, or Fukudome still isn't hitting or something else happens. We can always find replacements for players at those postions in trades, minors or off waivers, just like we did a year ago. At some point you gotta go with your young players, especially when their hitting at the big league level.

Edited January 2, 2009 by cubsfan26

[dew1679666265]

He better be right then, because if he's wrong we're a worse team.

 

I recall some people saying that about Theriot a year ago, and they didn't believe he could improve and Hendry did. Lets not forget the team that starts the season on opening day isn't the final team. I recall a year ago some people being concerned about Pie in CF Theirot at SS, and if Soto would be as good. Many were concerned about potentially having 3 easy outs in the line-up. Well Theriot/Soto were better then anyone expected, and after Pie struggled, they picked up Edmonds to replace him and it ended up being a great move. If Fontenot does struggle, or Fukudome still isn't hitting or something else happens. We can always find replacements for players at those postions in trades, minors or off waivers, just like we did a year ago. At some point you gotta go with your young players, especially when their hitting at the big league level.

 

But you shouldn't go with younger players just for the crap of it, which is what Hendry did.

 

There was not a need to trade Mark DeRosa. Trading him raises significant questions, which is not what a GM or manager should want. If Peavy is brought in, that's a clear improvement. Otherwise, all Hendry did was raise questions that didn't need to be raised.

[17 Seconds]

He better be right then, because if he's wrong we're a worse team.

 

I recall some people saying that about Theriot a year ago, and they didn't believe he could improve and Hendry did. Lets not forget the team that starts the season on opening day isn't the final team. I recall a year ago some people being concerned about Pie in CF Theirot at SS, and if Soto would be as good. Many were concerned about potentially having 3 easy outs in the line-up. Well Theriot/Soto were better then anyone expected, and after Pie struggled, they picked up Edmonds to replace him and it ended up being a great move. If Fontenot does struggle, or Fukudome still isn't hitting or something else happens. We can always find replacements for players at those postions in trades, minors or off waivers, just like we did a year ago. At some point you gotta go with your young players, especially when their hitting at the big league level.

 

Just because we lucked out last year with many guys performing way above what was expected doesn't mean we can count on that happening again this season. Edmonds was lightning in a bottle. It's not that easy to just pick up guys like that on the wire

[cubsfan26]

But you shouldn't go with younger players just for the crap of it, which is what Hendry did.

 

There was not a need to trade Mark DeRosa. Trading him raises significant questions, which is not what a GM or manager should want.

 

Why do you think he's doing it for the heck of it? How do you know he doesn't think Fontenot is ready to play at least against RH pitching? It's not like what he's done in the minors and off the bench the last two years doesn't show that. Hendry probably wanted to start Fontenot at 2b, and decided he would rather have Bradley over DeRosa. Stuff like this only raises questions with the fans, but plenty of times last season the fans questioned him and he was right. Probably the only time they didn't was when they signed Fukudome, and as of right now thats really is only major mistake. His job is to make the team better, he believes Fontenot/Miles can do what DeRosa was gonna do and Bradley will give them a quality bat in RF.

 

If Peavy is brought in, that's a clear improvement. Otherwise, all Hendry did was raise questions that didn't need to be raised.

 

I will agree with you that right now this team isn't better then the one that finshed the season. But I think their only a little worse, and still a 90 plus win team. Of course getting Peavy, Sheets or Lowe would put them past last year IMO. I still think were not done, and once we get a little payroll boost from the new owner we will add another pitcher.

[cubsclapp]

Clearly, Hendry had to shave payroll in order to get Bradley. Miles gives us 2+ million PLUS another year. We were going to lose DeRosa after this year or probably pay him even more. It also got us more left handed and probably better defense.

 

Money does matter. The Trib is bankrupt.

 

Then don't get Bradley. If you have to downgrade in one spot to moderately upgrade in another, it's not worth it.

 

Pursue a Hermida or Scott or Sammy Sosa, but don't trade a valuable chip in order to moderately upgrade.

 

Obviously he likes Fontenot and feels better trading DeRosa and taking a chance on Fontenot being able to make the leap from backup to starter than he feels about the chances of Fukudome or Hoff being able to put up respectable numbers in RF.

 

I hope this all leads to Peavy, but even if it really is just a money thing I agree with the move. I would rather have Fontenot / Bradley / Fukudome at 2B/RF/CF than the alternative of DeRosa / Fukudome / Pie. It is just a bit of a shock to the system if that is the way it turns out because the Cubs have not done anything other than add payroll for the last couple years so a move like the DeRosa trade primarily to dump salary takes some getting used to.

 

That's not the choice the Cubs would have likely gone with. The two options would have either been:

 

Fontenot at 2nd, DeRosa at RF, Fukudome in CF

or

Fontenot at 2nd, Bradley+Johnson in RF (Johnson for the 40-80 games that Bradley doesn't play, Fukudome in CF

 

Would you rather have DeRosa for 140 games in RF and Marquis in the 5th spot or Bradley for 100, Vizcaino in the bullpen, and 3 decent pitching prospects? Personally I think the Cubs are better off with the former. If the Cubs get another upgrade other than Bradley it makes more sense. But is Bradley really a more valuable RF than DeRosa this year?

 

Plus if you kept DeRosa you could have kept an extra OF bat for the bench that could hit instead of having to pay Miles to be a backup IF (because DeRosa would essentially be your 2nd backup IF even while starting in the OF).

 

So with DeRosa you have about the same offense over the course of the year, a better starting rotation, a better bench, and possibly a better bullpen (because it could be argued that Vizcaino hurts the pen more than helps it). Trading him should only have been done to get talent that could be used to upgrade somewhere else. Removing DeRosa's salary isn't much of a help because DeRosa was being underpaid so much.

 

Cmon now, we are now counting the loss of Marquis from the rotation as a downgrade? And we are assuming DeRosa repeats his '08 career year but Bradley will be hurt for a significant portion? It is just as easy to say Marquis would wind up in long relief and DeRosa would wind up regressing and hurt overall RF production.

 

I'm actually not assuming that DeRosa repeats his 08. I'm looking at around an .800 OPS next year for him (or somewhere between his 06 and 07).

 

Yes, the loss of Marquis would hurt the rotation. 180-200 innings of mediocre pitching becomes more valuable the more injury prone the rest of your starting rotation is. If Marquis is gone, that means Marshall is starting. It is unlikely that Marshall throws over 150 innings between his injury history, a tendency to have a dead arm, and the fact that he's never done it before, not even in the minor leagues. Harden could throw anywhere between 50-160 innings (I see anything over 160 as unlikely as the Cubs are going to back up him at times, skip a couple starts, take him out early etc. to protect his arm). Those innings would go to Marshall but now have to go to somebody else. Then of course you have Z who has a decent shot of missing 2-3 starts over the season. So that's somewhere between 90-260 innings that you have to make up.

 

The Cubs have options for starters behind Marshall, but the further you go the more you're both hurting the bullpen by taking them out of there, and also you have an increasing possibility they'll blow up and be absolutely terrible out of the rotation. It's just not as simple as comparing Marquis and Marshall. Marquis leaving pushes everybody a slot up and makes the rotation more injury prone while removing pitching depth from the system at the same time. That's a bad combination, and the depth would very likely not be sufficient.

Bingo! Marquis' value to our team as it's currently constructed is so much higher than some people realize. We need 6 starting pitchers with Harden in the rotation, and as you said about Marshall, he's never thrown 150 innings at any level and he's not going to all of a sudden do that now. This would absolutely kill the bullpen.

 

As for Harden, yeah, no way he throws 160 innings. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they just put him on the shelf until July, I'm serious. Our only concern should be getting him to October at 100%, and he certainly wasn't near that this past October.

 

Great post.

[17 Seconds]

Clearly, Hendry had to shave payroll in order to get Bradley. Miles gives us 2+ million PLUS another year. We were going to lose DeRosa after this year or probably pay him even more. It also got us more left handed and probably better defense.

 

Money does matter. The Trib is bankrupt.

 

Then don't get Bradley. If you have to downgrade in one spot to moderately upgrade in another, it's not worth it.

 

Pursue a Hermida or Scott or Sammy Sosa, but don't trade a valuable chip in order to moderately upgrade.

 

Obviously he likes Fontenot and feels better trading DeRosa and taking a chance on Fontenot being able to make the leap from backup to starter than he feels about the chances of Fukudome or Hoff being able to put up respectable numbers in RF.

 

I hope this all leads to Peavy, but even if it really is just a money thing I agree with the move. I would rather have Fontenot / Bradley / Fukudome at 2B/RF/CF than the alternative of DeRosa / Fukudome / Pie. It is just a bit of a shock to the system if that is the way it turns out because the Cubs have not done anything other than add payroll for the last couple years so a move like the DeRosa trade primarily to dump salary takes some getting used to.

 

That's not the choice the Cubs would have likely gone with. The two options would have either been:

 

Fontenot at 2nd, DeRosa at RF, Fukudome in CF

or

Fontenot at 2nd, Bradley+Johnson in RF (Johnson for the 40-80 games that Bradley doesn't play, Fukudome in CF

 

Would you rather have DeRosa for 140 games in RF and Marquis in the 5th spot or Bradley for 100, Vizcaino in the bullpen, and 3 decent pitching prospects? Personally I think the Cubs are better off with the former. If the Cubs get another upgrade other than Bradley it makes more sense. But is Bradley really a more valuable RF than DeRosa this year?

 

Plus if you kept DeRosa you could have kept an extra OF bat for the bench that could hit instead of having to pay Miles to be a backup IF (because DeRosa would essentially be your 2nd backup IF even while starting in the OF).

 

So with DeRosa you have about the same offense over the course of the year, a better starting rotation, a better bench, and possibly a better bullpen (because it could be argued that Vizcaino hurts the pen more than helps it). Trading him should only have been done to get talent that could be used to upgrade somewhere else. Removing DeRosa's salary isn't much of a help because DeRosa was being underpaid so much.

 

Cmon now, we are now counting the loss of Marquis from the rotation as a downgrade? And we are assuming DeRosa repeats his '08 career year but Bradley will be hurt for a significant portion? It is just as easy to say Marquis would wind up in long relief and DeRosa would wind up regressing and hurt overall RF production.

 

I'm actually not assuming that DeRosa repeats his 08. I'm looking at around an .800 OPS next year for him (or somewhere between his 06 and 07).

 

Yes, the loss of Marquis would hurt the rotation. 180-200 innings of mediocre pitching becomes more valuable the more injury prone the rest of your starting rotation is. If Marquis is gone, that means Marshall is starting. It is unlikely that Marshall throws over 150 innings between his injury history, a tendency to have a dead arm, and the fact that he's never done it before, not even in the minor leagues. Harden could throw anywhere between 50-160 innings (I see anything over 160 as unlikely as the Cubs are going to back up him at times, skip a couple starts, take him out early etc. to protect his arm). Those innings would go to Marshall but now have to go to somebody else. Then of course you have Z who has a decent shot of missing 2-3 starts over the season. So that's somewhere between 90-260 innings that you have to make up.

 

The Cubs have options for starters behind Marshall, but the further you go the more you're both hurting the bullpen by taking them out of there, and also you have an increasing possibility they'll blow up and be absolutely terrible out of the rotation. It's just not as simple as comparing Marquis and Marshall. Marquis leaving pushes everybody a slot up and makes the rotation more injury prone while removing pitching depth from the system at the same time. That's a bad combination, and the depth would very likely not be sufficient.

Bingo! Marquis' value to our team as it's currently constructed is so much higher than some people realize. We need 6 starting pitchers with Harden in the rotation, and as you said about Marshall, he's never thrown 150 innings at any level and he's not going to all of a sudden do that now. This would absolutely kill the bullpen.

 

As for Harden, yeah, no way he throws 160 innings. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they just put him on the shelf until July, I'm serious. Our only concern should be getting him to October at 100%, and he certainly wasn't near that this past October.

 

Great post.

 

The main reason Marshall's never pitched 150 innings is because he's never been asked to. I've seen no evidence that leads me to believe he's not capable of throwing that many innings. I don't understand where the "Marshall can't pitch a full season" stuff comes from.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

The main reason Marshall's never pitched 150 innings is because he's never been asked to. I've seen no evidence that leads me to believe he's not capable of throwing that many innings. I don't understand where the "Marshall can't pitch a full season" stuff comes from.

 

Marshall had injury issues almost every season of his minor league career, 16 starts and 94 IP was his high despite being exclusively a starter.

[17 Seconds]

The main reason Marshall's never pitched 150 innings is because he's never been asked to. I've seen no evidence that leads me to believe he's not capable of throwing that many innings. I don't understand where the "Marshall can't pitch a full season" stuff comes from.

 

Marshall had injury issues almost every season of his minor league career, 16 starts and 94 IP was his high despite being exclusively a starter.

 

That doesn't mean he can't pitch 150 innings

[Transmogrified Tiger]

The main reason Marshall's never pitched 150 innings is because he's never been asked to. I've seen no evidence that leads me to believe he's not capable of throwing that many innings. I don't understand where the "Marshall can't pitch a full season" stuff comes from.

 

Marshall had injury issues almost every season of his minor league career, 16 starts and 94 IP was his high despite being exclusively a starter.

 

That doesn't mean he can't pitch 150 innings

 

It doesn't mean he can't, but the fact that his career high is 147 (2006), that he's eclipsed 100 IP twice, and he's coming off a year where he threw less than 100 casts some doubt on how likely he is to reach it without problems with injuries and/or ineffectiveness.