ESPN: Cedeno & Olson Traded for Heilman (P. 4)

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Goodbye Rnny Ceen, hello yet another RH pitcher. I really wish we had another LH arm in the pen. Correct me if I'm wrong, but as it stands right now (with Marshall in the rotation) the only LH pitcher in the pen is Cotts, and who knows what we will get from him.

 

Edit: I'm not upset about the trade, we improved our team. Just pointing out our lack of LH pitching in the pen.

 

Cotts, Pignatiello, Olson, plus Campusano, Stanton, Bill White, Jason Waddell, and Matt Smith from the NRI pile. Given that several of our RH relievers do just fine against lefties(Marmol, Gregg, to a lesser extent Wuertz), I don't think it's a huge problem.

[sneakypower]

Gaudin is more than adequate as a fill-in starter.

 

if we can get Heilman for unwanted junk, why did we give up Ceda for the right to pay a likely inferior pitcher 2.5 times the salary?

[cubbinalltheway]

is any other team overhauling their roster more than the Cubs this offseason?

 

I don't think anyone is even close to the Cubs in offseason moves. Something still needs to happen with Rich Hill and they still need a back up infielder, even if a Peavy deal doesn't happen.

miles is the backup infielder.

 

pretty ironic that the team that won the most games in the league last year is making the most changes.

[abuck1220]

olson and cedeno for heilman. barf.

[17 Seconds]

WTF. ESPN.com is saying it's for Cedeno and Olson

 

The Chicago Cubs have acquired pitcher Aaron Heilman from the Seattle Mariners for infielder Ronny Cedeno and pitcher Garrett Olson, a baseball source told ESPN.com.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3866647

 

That better not be true

[Little Slide Rooter]

The Chicago Cubs have acquired pitcher Aaron Heilman from the Seattle Mariners for infielder Ronny Cedeno and pitcher Garrett Olson, a baseball source told ESPN.com.

 

So in the end we get Aaron Heilman for Pie and Cedeno.

 

R.I.P. Jake Peavy to the Cubs.

[Outshined_One]

WTF. ESPN.com is saying it's for Cedeno and Olson

 

The Chicago Cubs have acquired pitcher Aaron Heilman from the Seattle Mariners for infielder Ronny Cedeno and pitcher Garrett Olson, a baseball source told ESPN.com.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3866647

 

That better not be true

 

What the hell?

[CUBZ99]

olson and cedeno for heilman. barf.

 

? where did you get olson? That would be a horrendous trade.

[17 Seconds]

Sounds like BS. It has to be. Hendry isn't THAT bad

[cubbinalltheway]

whoooooa, what?? no way this can be true.

[sneakypower]

oh god, i take what i said back now.

[17 Seconds]

If this is true then this is seriously a nightmarish offseason

[nolanwood]

But we're talking about depth that is actually good, not depth with crappy players. If Zambrano gets hurt during a period where Harden is also out,how are we looking? Not only is our rotation a mess, but the bullpen is weakened significantly because you're taking guys from that to replace (or attempt to replace) the injured starters.

 

I'd say right with Heilman we'd have pretty decent depth but not "plenty"

 

How do the Cardinals look without Carp and Wainwright? How about the Mets without Santana and Maine?

 

The difference is that Zambrano and Harden getting hurt is much more likely than most teams 1/2 starters. Did Santana have shoulder problems last year? Is Maine a lock to miss significant time? And the Cards were without Carp all last year and they still won 86 games.

 

True. Also, name either of those teams that has a calibre #3 and #4 as Dempster and Lilly?

 

Depends on what Dempster we're talking about and which Dempster we're going to get in 2009

 

THis isn't the point though. I never said we didn't have depth. I was saying we didn't have "plenty of depth" or whatever was said

 

Name me a team whose rotation would be better in that situation than if it were to happen to the Cubs.

 

I really don't understand what you're trying to get at. I could just as easily ask "name teams whose top 2 starters are as big of an injury risk as Zambrano and Harden". It's irrelevant

 

My point was that we don't "certainly have plenty of depth". You never do, especially when your top 2 starters are injury risks.

 

How is it irrelevant, when it is the basis for your complaint:

 

But we're talking about depth that is actually good, not depth with crappy players. If Zambrano gets hurt during a period where Harden is also out,how are we looking? Not only is our rotation a mess, but the bullpen is weakened significantly because you're taking guys from that to replace (or attempt to replace) the injured starters.

[17 Seconds]

But we're talking about depth that is actually good, not depth with crappy players. If Zambrano gets hurt during a period where Harden is also out,how are we looking? Not only is our rotation a mess, but the bullpen is weakened significantly because you're taking guys from that to replace (or attempt to replace) the injured starters.

 

I'd say right with Heilman we'd have pretty decent depth but not "plenty"

 

How do the Cardinals look without Carp and Wainwright? How about the Mets without Santana and Maine?

 

The difference is that Zambrano and Harden getting hurt is much more likely than most teams 1/2 starters. Did Santana have shoulder problems last year? Is Maine a lock to miss significant time? And the Cards were without Carp all last year and they still won 86 games.

 

True. Also, name either of those teams that has a calibre #3 and #4 as Dempster and Lilly?

 

Depends on what Dempster we're talking about and which Dempster we're going to get in 2009

 

THis isn't the point though. I never said we didn't have depth. I was saying we didn't have "plenty of depth" or whatever was said

 

Name me a team whose rotation would be better in that situation than if it were to happen to the Cubs.

 

I really don't understand what you're trying to get at. I could just as easily ask "name teams whose top 2 starters are as big of an injury risk as Zambrano and Harden". It's irrelevant

 

My point was that we don't "certainly have plenty of depth". You never do, especially when your top 2 starters are injury risks.

 

How is it irrelevant, when it is the basis for your complaint:

 

But we're talking about depth that is actually good, not depth with crappy players. If Zambrano gets hurt during a period where Harden is also out,how are we looking? Not only is our rotation a mess, but the bullpen is weakened significantly because you're taking guys from that to replace (or attempt to replace) the injured starters.

 

It's irrelevant that you keep trying to compare it to other team's situations, when I can't think of a contender whose top 2 starers are that much of a risk

[nolanwood]

If we gave up Olson and Cedeno for Heilman, Hendry has officially lost his marbles.

[Outshined_One]

This trade seriously has me confused.

[UMFan83]

I was actually about to post that you shouldn't assume the pitcher in the deal isn't just a throw in. And Olsen was one of the names I was thinking.

 

Hilarious (and sad) that I was right

[BigbadB]

I thought the trade said Cedeno and an MILB pitcher. Olson has been with Baltimore the last two seasons, even if his ML stats suggest MILB.

[Sever82]

Wow, that is a horrible trade, I'm sorry but i've defended Hendry this offseason but he has really pulled some BS trades. I mean Ceda and now Olson? Give me a break.

[nolanwood]

But we're talking about depth that is actually good, not depth with crappy players. If Zambrano gets hurt during a period where Harden is also out,how are we looking? Not only is our rotation a mess, but the bullpen is weakened significantly because you're taking guys from that to replace (or attempt to replace) the injured starters.

 

I'd say right with Heilman we'd have pretty decent depth but not "plenty"

 

How do the Cardinals look without Carp and Wainwright? How about the Mets without Santana and Maine?

 

The difference is that Zambrano and Harden getting hurt is much more likely than most teams 1/2 starters. Did Santana have shoulder problems last year? Is Maine a lock to miss significant time? And the Cards were without Carp all last year and they still won 86 games.

 

True. Also, name either of those teams that has a calibre #3 and #4 as Dempster and Lilly?

 

Depends on what Dempster we're talking about and which Dempster we're going to get in 2009

 

THis isn't the point though. I never said we didn't have depth. I was saying we didn't have "plenty of depth" or whatever was said

 

Name me a team whose rotation would be better in that situation than if it were to happen to the Cubs.

 

I really don't understand what you're trying to get at. I could just as easily ask "name teams whose top 2 starters are as big of an injury risk as Zambrano and Harden". It's irrelevant

 

My point was that we don't "certainly have plenty of depth". You never do, especially when your top 2 starters are injury risks.

 

How is it irrelevant, when it is the basis for your complaint:

 

But we're talking about depth that is actually good, not depth with crappy players. If Zambrano gets hurt during a period where Harden is also out,how are we looking? Not only is our rotation a mess, but the bullpen is weakened significantly because you're taking guys from that to replace (or attempt to replace) the injured starters.

 

It's irrelevant that you keep trying to compare it to other team's situations, when I can't think of a contender whose top 2 starers are that much of a risk

 

And I can't think of one who'd have the capabilities of sliding in as good of a substitute in their place.

[UMFan83]

Felix Pie and Ronny Cedeno for Aaron Heilman and that other dude in the Pie trade.

 

Sounds about right ha

[CubColtPacer]

Olson wouldn't seem to go with the previous reports. Usually a guy would get his name in print immediately with that much service time and not be still declared as a "minor league pitcher". It's possible (from earlier in the offseason Hendry didn't sound particularly high on Olson) but it would be certainly be not standard reporting for it to be him.

[BigbadB]

is any other team overhauling their roster more than the Cubs this offseason?

 

I don't think anyone is even close to the Cubs in offseason moves. Something still needs to happen with Rich Hill and they still need a back up infielder, even if a Peavy deal doesn't happen.

miles is the backup infielder.

 

pretty ironic that the team that won the most games in the league last year is making the most changes.

 

Lou will not begin the season with just one infield back up.

[CUBZ99]

Any chance that the Padres wanted Heilman over Olson? If so, this trade is forgivable.

[17 Seconds]

But we're talking about depth that is actually good, not depth with crappy players. If Zambrano gets hurt during a period where Harden is also out,how are we looking? Not only is our rotation a mess, but the bullpen is weakened significantly because you're taking guys from that to replace (or attempt to replace) the injured starters.

 

I'd say right with Heilman we'd have pretty decent depth but not "plenty"

 

How do the Cardinals look without Carp and Wainwright? How about the Mets without Santana and Maine?

 

The difference is that Zambrano and Harden getting hurt is much more likely than most teams 1/2 starters. Did Santana have shoulder problems last year? Is Maine a lock to miss significant time? And the Cards were without Carp all last year and they still won 86 games.

 

True. Also, name either of those teams that has a calibre #3 and #4 as Dempster and Lilly?

 

Depends on what Dempster we're talking about and which Dempster we're going to get in 2009

 

THis isn't the point though. I never said we didn't have depth. I was saying we didn't have "plenty of depth" or whatever was said

 

Name me a team whose rotation would be better in that situation than if it were to happen to the Cubs.

 

I really don't understand what you're trying to get at. I could just as easily ask "name teams whose top 2 starters are as big of an injury risk as Zambrano and Harden". It's irrelevant

 

My point was that we don't "certainly have plenty of depth". You never do, especially when your top 2 starters are injury risks.

 

How is it irrelevant, when it is the basis for your complaint:

 

But we're talking about depth that is actually good, not depth with crappy players. If Zambrano gets hurt during a period where Harden is also out,how are we looking? Not only is our rotation a mess, but the bullpen is weakened significantly because you're taking guys from that to replace (or attempt to replace) the injured starters.

 

It's irrelevant that you keep trying to compare it to other team's situations, when I can't think of a contender whose top 2 starers are that much of a risk

 

And I can't think of one who'd have the capabilities of sliding in as good of a substitute in their place.

 

You mean to replace the injury-risk-filled 1/2 starters of a contender that doesn't exist?