and this is why we shouldn't have traded jason marquis

[Mephistopheles]

good job jim hendry. you idiot.

[Derwood]

the off season isn't over yet

[Mephistopheles]

we're not going to get anyone better than marquis.

[Peoriaman]

what is why? Did I miss something?

[Derwood]

we're not going to get anyone better than marquis.

 

says you

[Mephistopheles]

what is why? Did I miss something?

 

rich harden has a mark prior gash.

[Butterscup1679666578]

what is why? Did I miss something?

 

rich harden has a mark prior gash.

 

a vagina?

[Outshined_One]

Don't worry, we'll get Jake Peavy.

[Mephistopheles]

that's not going to resolve this issue. we'd likely include marshall in such a deal.

[RedFlash]

But hey, next Saturday, the Cubs ARE going to watching Kris Benson workout. So...we have that...at least.

[BigbadB]

Unless Marquis and DeRosa were necessary to make room for Peavy, I don't like either one of those deals.

 

If we don't get Peavy, this offseason will have been a complete disaster.

[davell]

Sorry, but I'm not getting my panties in a wad about this. Harden is literally playing for his big money contract next year. He's got a lot to lose by not pitching well this year. Prior was always protected by his guaranteed money while he was with us.

[Exile on Waveland]

Unless Marquis and DeRosa were necessary to make room for Peavy, I don't like either one of those deals.

 

If we don't get Peavy, this offseason will have been a complete disaster.

 

I would have to completely agree. Trading Marquis and DeRosa made the team worse, but, if part of a master-plan to land Peavy, likely worth it. I'm still dubious Peavy happens; hope I'm wrong.

[USSoccer]

B3 is right. If we don't land Peavy, our offseason consisted of losing DeRosa, Wood, Marquis, Pie and Edmonds and gaining Gregg, Vizcaino, Miles, Gathright, and Bradley.

 

We're worse off than we were on October 6th or whatever.

[XZero771679666304]

Sorry, but I'm not getting my panties in a wad about this. Harden is literally playing for his big money contract next year. He's got a lot to lose by not pitching well this year. Prior was always protected by his guaranteed money while he was with us.

 

I hate to burst your bubble, but if Harden is hurt he doesn't have much choice in the matter.

[davell]

Sorry, but I'm not getting my panties in a wad about this. Harden is literally playing for his big money contract next year. He's got a lot to lose by not pitching well this year. Prior was always protected by his guaranteed money while he was with us.

 

I hate to burst your bubble, but if Harden is hurt he doesn't have much choice in the matter.

 

Yeah, that's actually my point. He's got plenty of people(not counting the Cubs) looking out for him right now and advising him what is best for his future, since this is his contract year. If surgery was what was best for him, my honest guess is he would have had it. Because other people than the Cubs would have been pushing for it.

[Illini Iceman]

I am not quite sure why we shouldn't have traded Marquis.

 

Peavy or no Peavy I prefer Marshall and Gaudin in the rotation over him. And if it turns out to be Peavy then it is a no brainer.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I am not quite sure why we shouldn't have traded Marquis.

 

Peavy or no Peavy I prefer Marshall and Gaudin in the rotation over him. And if it turns out to be Peavy then it is a no brainer.

 

I don't prefer either off the top of my head..

[imb]

good job jim hendry. you idiot.

 

why dont you write a front page article about it? or hasn't baseball america commented on this yet?

[Little Slide Rooter]

Don't worry, we'll get Jake Peavy.

 

It does seem coincedental that this news comes at the same time that we trade for Olson, who the Padres have had their eye on.

[Magnetic Curses]

but, you hate marquis, meph.

[umpunk]

B3 is right. If we don't land Peavy, our offseason consisted of losing DeRosa, Wood, Marquis, Pie and Edmonds and gaining Gregg, Vizcaino, Miles, Gathright, and Bradley.

 

We're worse off than we were on October 6th or whatever.

If I were to rank those players, I'd put Bradley number 1 (by a fairly wide margin). Plus, I'm not as convinced as the rest of this board that:

 

1 - A Fontenot/Miles platoon is going to be any worse than what DeRosa would give us

2 - That Gathright is horrible and Pie is somehow going to morph into Willie Mays. Both play great defense, and Gathright (shockingly) is the better hitter right now.

3 - Edmonds was going to keep it up this season and Fukudome wouldn't be a better option platooning in center with Johnson.

 

I'm not saying all these things will happen, but I really don't see how we are that much worse off than before.

[17 Seconds]

If I were to rank those players, I'd put Bradley number 1 (by a fairly wide margin).

 

90 games of a guy with an .827 career OPS is better than DeRosa and Wood by a "wide margin"? I don't know aobut that. Even if he OPSs like .900 next year in 90 games I still wouldn't say that.

 

1 - A Fontenot/Miles platoon is going to be any worse than what DeRosa would give us

 

Well I think the best case scenario we can realistically hope for is that they match DeRosa's production, but that's not the only issue. Bradley is a lock to get hurt. With DeRosa, all that would have meant is more Fontenot in the lineup in place of Bradley (with DeRosa going to right). Now since we're using Fontenot, when Bradley goes down it's suddenly more at-bats for much crappier hitters. That's the main loss of trading away DeRosa and that's why I think the combo of trading DeRosa/signing Bradley was pretty dumb.

[Butterscup1679666578]

i didn't know the reasons we shouldn't have traded marquis was a transaction

[umpunk]

If I were to rank those players, I'd put Bradley number 1 (by a fairly wide margin).

 

90 games of a guy with an .827 career OPS is better than DeRosa and Wood by a "wide margin"? I don't know aobut that. Even if he OPSs like .900 next year in 90 games I still wouldn't say that.

 

1 - A Fontenot/Miles platoon is going to be any worse than what DeRosa would give us

 

Well I think the best case scenario we can realistically hope for is that they match DeRosa's production, but that's not the only issue. Bradley is a lock to get hurt. With DeRosa, all that would have meant is more Fontenot in the lineup in place of Bradley (with DeRosa going to right). Now since we're using Fontenot, when Bradley goes down it's suddenly more at-bats for much crappier hitters. That's the main loss of trading away DeRosa and that's why I think the combo of trading DeRosa/signing Bradley was pretty dumb.

 

I guess that's just a matter of how you look at it. I could just as easily argue that Wood doesn't have a great track record either when it comes to injuries or that DeRosa probably isn't going to repeat his numbers from last year or that Fontenot was actually better than DeRosa last season (granted in fewer at bats). I don't want to come off sounding like I blindly support every move, but I'm just failing to see how we are so much worse right now than we would be if we kept Wood, DeRosa, Marquis, and Pie.