CubinNY

Alomar and Larkin should be the last of the pre-steroid era players to get serious consideration. Alomar is a sure fire HOFer, Larkin is borderline. If they don't let in Big Mac I could see one of those years as not having anyone elected.

How do you get to the conclusion that DeRosa playing multiple positions showed that they weren't comfortable with him at 2nd? DeRosa playing multiple positions was purely a function of how the Cubs built their bench over the last two years. They had 5 bench players. 1) A hitting 1st baseman who is incredibly poor at any other position (Ward/Hoffpauir) 2) A platoon CF that hits left-handers (Pagan/Johnson) 3) A backup SS (Izturis and Cedeno) 4) A backup C (Blanco/Hill/Soto/everyone else in 07) 5) A backup second baseman (Fontenot) As you can see, the Cubs had no options on the bench to legitimately backup either corner OF or 3B. They moved DeRosa to other positions because that got one of their best bench hitters into the lineup and their only other legitimate hitter on the bench couldn't play defense. I also don't see how it cost the Cubs runs. Are you saying that having Cedeno play 3B when Ramirez goes down, Johnson/Pie playing LF or RF last year, and DeRosa playing 2nd would have been better than DeRosa playing those positions and Fontenot playing 2nd? It cost them runs by having him play out of position. DeRosa is not an outfielder. But I really have no idea how Hendry or Lou think. It makes little sense to me to value "versatility" I also don't think that Fontenot is going to hit enough to be an every day player and by June Miles will be starting and they'll be in the market for a 2nd baseman, but that remains to be seen.

Which goes without saying - I would be willing to bet a good sum of money that most people (if given a choice) would prefer DeRosa as their opening 2nd baseman this year over Miles/Fontenot. Of course, that's not really the question - the main question is do you like DeRosa at 2nd, Johnson in CF, Marquis as a 5th starter, and Fukudome in RF a "helluva lot more" than a Miles/Fontenot platoon at 2nd, Fukudome/Johnson platoon in CF, Bradley in RF, 3 decent minor league prospects, Marshall as your 5ths starter, and 2 million (give or take) in extra cash. That question makes Hendry almost appear to know what he is doing, big "no no" around these parts. So yeah, let's all just assume this babble that Hendry decided he wanted Miles, who could hit left handed, over the right hand hitting DeRosa. Yes. Edit: You are providing a false choice, but I still say yes.

I believe Nate Spears is in the Cubs system because they value a guy who went .299/.394/.438/.832 at AA. They even sent Spears to the AFL. His glove is much better than average.

They're looking for another caddie for Fukudome.

I agree with Goony. Hendry does what his manager asks him to do. Lou wants to get younger and more "athletic" and of course more left handed. They never much cared for DeRosa at second or they wouldn't have played him all over the field. Playing him all over the field also probably cost more runs over the long haul. I can't say I was a strong DeRosa fan, but I like him a helluva lot more than the Miles/Fontenot platoon.

Parts of North Dakota are stunningly beautiful.

Gregg will become the invisible man if he doesn't throw more strikes.

[puts on tin-foil hat] The powers that be in MLB and the govt. made sure that Cuban wouldn't own a baseball team.[takes off tin-foil hat] But seriously, the timing of the decision to move forward with his insider trading allegation is really suspicious. I don't think you're in "tin foil hat" territory with that one. That seems to be exactly what happened, and I don't think they would be apologetic about it. And they forced Cuban to write a long blog entry about how he voluntarily pulled out because of credit concerns? I might consider believing it if Cuban hadn't come right out and told us why he is no longer in the bidding, and it had absolutely nothing to do with the Cubs or anybody else forcing him out. Both could be related. An creditor isn't likely to give the benefit of the doubt to a guy who is under investigation for insider trading. But anyway, I don't think that's what's going here.

I gave him a gentleman's C.

It only takes a few to hamstring a roster. He's consistently overpaid (either in years or dollars) for middle relief pitching and redundant backups. If the Cubs are paying a guy 2.5 million when they could be paying him 1 million it's still a poor use of recourses.

[puts on tin-foil hat] The powers that be in MLB and the govt. made sure that Cuban wouldn't own a baseball team.[takes off tin-foil hat] But seriously, the timing of the decision to move forward with his insider trading allegation is really suspicious.

My thoughts as well. which means they have nothing to do with Hendry, thus weakening your original argument Not really. Hendry is the one who built the inefficencies into the roster. He's the one who built a team that needed to overpay Soriano and Marquis just so they could have an outfield with some semblence of production and a rotation that could pitch. Hendry has been given the luxury of much greater resources than most other GMs. It's not like this team is cutting payroll. They are adjusting how much they will raise it. Hendry is hamstrung by his own previous decisions, not ownership. I'm not sure about other GMs but Hendry also seems to give out no-trade clauses pretty liberally. It could be that I don't know how often they are given out by other GMs, but the Samardijza one kills me. It seems to me when he wants a player he gives them an overwhelming offer so as not to get into a bidding war, meaning his MO is to overpay for the things he wants. That's not a good policy unless you're the Yankees or Red Sox.

College football is like dry humping, sure it's fun but in the end all you're left with is a mess and nothing really got accomplished.

Okay, but would you take it if it was guaranteed to you? I think 100 games of his top level performance could be worth it to a team like the Cubs, with a very large payroll and reasonable depth. Earlier this decade, when the offense was Sammy and nobody else, you couldn't afford to have guys this brittle. But with Soriano, Ramirez, Lee and Soto, and potential for solid contributions from a few others, I think you could afford to get just 100 games (and postseason) from a guy like Bradley. The problem is, he might only give you 50-60 games, considering his past and the fact that he's on the wrong side of 30. I highly doubt he'll play much more than 300 in 3 years, so I think I'd lock that in if I could. I'm not sure if I understand the question. Is it, Bradley for 100 games with close to his best career numbers v. Bradley for whatever you could get out of him and whatever he produces? If so, I'll take the former. However, I'd rather not take him at all. I can see this ending real bad for Bradley and the Cubs, but mostly for Bradley when the fans turn on him for being who he is (an injury prone player with severe psychological problems).

You are not factoring in Lou's wishes. I thought Lou was smarter than this. Aside from the quote about getting more athletic, Aurilia is exactly the type of player Lou loves. He can use him all over the infield and he's a vet.

Yankees or Red Sox. They're the only ones who can afford to take the gamble. If he can still pitch, that is.

What's next: An 85 win season and staying competitive within the division. I think the economy and the ownership situation is affecting Hendry's ability to deal. I'm all for selling high on DeRosa, but it seems to me that trading him so they could get Bradley is real, real, bad idea (if that is what really happened).

I would love to keep Hoffpauir too, but there just isn't room on the roster for him. I'm sure they might want Aurilia for more versatility than Hoff. Also, there's the usual reason - He's a veteran. I hear Hendry already, "Rich is a versatile veteran who brings a strong presence to the clubhouse."

except you're missing the most significant factor: milton bradley. he's pretty much a lock to miss significant time. when he goes down, it would have been derosa moving to right and Fontenot getting significant playing time in place of Bradley. now, instead of more at-bats, a bradley injury means more at-bats for much less attractive options Hendy needs Hoff and Pie to produce. Between those two and Fontenot he is counting on his farm system big time to come through. It looks like they've given up on Pie by signing Gathright. Pie's days were numbered when he got on the wrong side of Lou in ST. They'll get pennies on the dollar for him when they trade him. However I will say this, after watching him play several games this year with Iowa he certainly hasn't progressed much with the bat or on the basepaths.

:paladin:

ok i know everyone hates spelling-sticklers but this is just terrible. ceiling: babe ruth bat crossed with ozzie smith's glove floor: the kid on my little league team when i was 10 who got 1 hit the entire year That's going out on a limb. I like the Aramis comparison for how good he could be. Who really cares how bad he could be? Players like Vlad and Aramis who have remarkable plate coverage, power, and contact skills are rare though. I'd rather he develop an eye for pitches to drive. Lot's of MLB players have exceptional vision and superior hand-eye-coordination. If they didn't they would get to where they've gotten.

Mark DeRosa

not in the least. He doesn't suck and he's not a bust, but he's had hard time with the glove and you will all have to excuse me if I can't get excited about performance in short season ball.

I'm not a big fan of trading Vitters for anything short of a perennial allstar. Vitters is probably the most overrated Cub prospect since Bobby Hill. It's comments like these that lead me to believe that the Cubs prospects stand at best half the chance of other team's prospects to succeed. If they don't immediately perform they're "garbage" and people want to chase them away. Nowhere did I say he was garbage. you compared him to bobby hill and bobby hill was garbage No I didn't.