BigbadB

Let's hope Dempster's 2009 looks nothing like Escobar's 2008.

I've got the Chargers winning this game. They are coming off a huge win last week, albeit against a bad Denver team, but if the Charger defense can get some pressure on Manning, the offense will do enough to eek one out. It's been raining all night here in San Diego. I haven't heard a weather report lately, but it sure seems like the rains may continue throughout the day.

Except for the fact that he was well on his way to 100 RBI last year. 75 RBI in 109 games is easily on pace to break 100.

I find it extremely hard to believe that other teams wouldn't offer up more for DeRosa. The rumored packages from Philadelphia sounded pretty good. Maybe they really weren't as good as the rumors, but apparently it was good enough for Towers to sign off on a Peavy trade when coupled with Pie going to Baltimore. What about the Twins? Didn't they lose the Casey Blake sweepstakes? Weren't there other teams looking for infield help? Baltimore even seems like a possibility, though I would understand Hendry's reluctance to deal with them ever again. The return package for DeRosa seems more like a panic deal to me.

For some reason, I seem to recall Andruw signing a 2 year/36m contract last year. How would you like to have that contract coupled with Juan Pierre and Jason Schmidt. Ouch!

It came from the DeRosa savings, and they think he can contribute positively. If they were financially strapped, they had no business offering 10m a year for Bradley. How much savings is there from removing Marquis and DeRosa's contract, only to add Bradley, Miles, Gathright and Vizcaino? The Cubs had players to trade to get a lefty bat. Luke Scott, Hermida, Hawpe, Kubel, etc... And they could have made those trades without having to give up DeRosa. Unfortunately it's become painfully obvious they didn't want a lefty bat. They wanted multiple lefty bats at every position. They are going to struggle all year looking for right handed help. I like Bradley a lot when he is actually playing. I'm utterly shocked, however, that a guy who played a total of 21 games in the outfield last year has gotten a 30m contract to play the outfield. And that the Cubs traded their depth at that position to get him.

It came from the DeRosa savings, and they think he can contribute positively. If they were financially strapped, they had no business offering 10m a year for Bradley. How much savings is there from removing Marquis and DeRosa's contract, only to add Bradley, Miles, Gathright and Vizcaino? The Cubs had players to trade to get a lefty bat. Luke Scott, Hermida, Hawpe, Kubel, etc... And they could have made those trades without having to give up DeRosa.

I generally like the idea of taking the sell high approach in some cases. I don't think DeRosa was one of those cases. Paying 10m a year for the next 3 years for a guy who is just as likely to find himself on the DL than on the field screams for the need for quality depth, which is what DeRosa provides. Bradley had 32 doubles and 22 HR's last year. DeRosa had 30 doubles and 21 HR's last year. Edmonds had 17 doubles and 19 HR's last year. While we can all agree that DeRosa won't have another year like he did last year, although it isn't completely out of the question, Bradley will have quite the challenge to replace the production of DeRosa and Edmonds combined. I certainly have reservations about how well Fontenot can match the production he provided last year. And this doesn't even discuss the loss of depth at SP. If all these deals mean that the Cubs get Bradley and Peavy, then I will be satisfied with the offseason. If all these deals were made just to get an oft injured LH bat into the line up, I'm going to be extremely dissapointed in this offseason. I would have much rather traded for a lesser talented lefty bat, or even given Edmonds or someone of that nature another 1 year deal. It's going to be a long year when Bradley tweaks his knee and Joey Gathright, Aaron Miles, Fukudome and Ryan Theriot are all in the line up together. Why not package Pie and DeRosa for Choo or Hawpe or someone who has shown to be healthy all year long? The reason I'm so down on trading DeRosa at this juncture (unless it is a percursor to getting Peavy) is that he was sure to be a Type A free agent next year, and the Cubs could certainly offer him arby and get draft picks (quite possibly better than what they got from Cleveland) while still having a productive replacement for those days Bradley is hurt.

Probably won't need one. At 10m a year, if he misses anymore time, no one will trade for him.

A reasonable person would think that's where this is leading, but these are the Cubs we're talking about. The rumors from early December had Marquis being shipped out and DeRosa being traded for the necessary pieces to acquire Peavy. This is way too coincidental for it not to be leading up to a Peavy deal. If it doesn't lead to a Peavy deal, Hendry will have performed the ultimate torture technique to Cub fans.

It would be a rather horrific offseason.

The Indians have a pretty good collection of young arms in the low minors. Obviously, Adam Miller won't be coming back in this trade, I don't think. But I think David Huff is the type of guy that San Diego would be enamored with. Huff was just drafted and signed during the '08 June draft, making him ineligible to be part of a package now, I believe. I thought it was 06 I suppose I could be wrong about that. ETA: He was drafted in '06.

The Indians have a pretty good collection of young arms in the low minors. Obviously, Adam Miller won't be coming back in this trade, I don't think. But I think David Huff is the type of guy that San Diego would be enamored with. Huff was just drafted and signed during the '08 June draft, making him ineligible to be part of a package now, I believe.

Guess I can get that jersey with my name on it now. Better hurry. Those are sure to sell like hotcakes.

The amount of money he is getting is what alarms me. I'm fine with him as a back up as a percursor to a Peavy deal. If all of this is not for Peavy, then I'm pissed.

Here we go.........

That's the thing. I only like Bradley as an option if they have someone like DeRosa to fill in WHEN Bradley is hurt. When Bradley is hurt without DeRosa, now you have Gathright playing CF and Johnson/Fukudome playing RF, along with Fontenot playing 2nd everyday. I suppose that would be more tolerable if Jake Peavy was in the rotation every 5th day. Marshall has a lot of value to this team right now as Harden's insurance policy. I'm not sure the Cubs would actually have a viable 6th starter as the roster currently stands if Marshall had to be in the rotation. I can't say that I would rather have Derosa, because Bradley's a better player. But I'd rather keep Derosa if the Cubs get Bradley moreso than if the Cubs were to get a player like Dunn. I think the everyday offense may be upgraded going from Derosa/RF to Bradley/Fontenot, but the dropoff from Bradley to Johnson/Gathright and Fontenot to the new backup 2B (which the Cubs don't have right now) is greatly increased. You quoted the wrong person. I never said I'd rather have DeRosa. I'd rather have Bradley AND DeRosa AND Peavy. But, if we have to lose DeRosa to get Peavy, I can live with it.

That's the thing. I only like Bradley as an option if they have someone like DeRosa to fill in WHEN Bradley is hurt. When Bradley is hurt without DeRosa, now you have Gathright playing CF and Johnson/Fukudome playing RF, along with Fontenot playing 2nd everyday. I suppose that would be more tolerable if Jake Peavy was in the rotation every 5th day. Marshall has a lot of value to this team right now as Harden's insurance policy. I'm not sure the Cubs would actually have a viable 6th starter as the roster currently stands if Marshall had to be in the rotation. Plus if you move Marshall into a bigger role you have to have an insurance policy for him as well. That would leave the Cubs with 2 big risks for injury in the rotation (Harden, Marshall), one moderate risk (Z), and two low risks (Dempster, Lilly). If the Cubs trade Marquis they almost certainly will have to find another starter as that situation is a recipe for disaster. Yep. These deals don't make a lot of sense without something bigger happening. The only other guys I can think of that Hendry has looked at this offseason (beyond Peavy), is Sheets and RJ. Although, I'm not sure whether I'd rather see the Cubs trade DeRosa for the prospects necessary to facilitate a deal for Hermida, and then just sign Sheets. Nah. I'd still rather have Peavy.

There is no market for Soriano. He's been hurt/playing hurt for the past two seasons. His contract doesn't mesh well with the current economic climate.

That's the thing. I only like Bradley as an option if they have someone like DeRosa to fill in WHEN Bradley is hurt. When Bradley is hurt without DeRosa, now you have Gathright playing CF and Johnson/Fukudome playing RF, along with Fontenot playing 2nd everyday. I suppose that would be more tolerable if Jake Peavy was in the rotation every 5th day. Marshall has a lot of value to this team right now as Harden's insurance policy. I'm not sure the Cubs would actually have a viable 6th starter as the roster currently stands if Marshall had to be in the rotation.

There really was no reason to trade Marquis and/or DeRosa unless the Cubs feel like these deals will get the necessary parts to acquire Peavy. Trading Marquis weakens the back end of the rotation, and quite possibly the bullpen as well, since one of the bullpen guys might be needed to fill the rotation spot. Signing Bradley, while losing DeRosa, weakens the depth at 2b and OF, especially if Bradley gets hurt. I just don't see making these trades unless a deal for Peavy is still on the table. I think Hendry walked away originally, because the Padres were making the dealings way too public for Hendry's liking, as well as being too ridiculous on the demands. It's as if Towers was dictating/directing the entire deal. Towers still needs to deal Peavy. His job may be on the line if he doesn't. With limited places to trade him to, Hendry might still be able to swing a deal if he: a) frees up the rotation spot by trading Marquis b) gets the necessary trade chips by trading DeRosa c) frees up enough money between Marquis and DeRosa to afford Peavy. All indications early on were that the Cubs had money to spend to upgrade RF, if they did nothing else. Use that money for Bradley and then trade Marquis and DeRosa for the necessary money to afford Peavy.

I never thought it was completely dead. But, I also fully expected to see many more teams trying to get in on the action.

Soriano was on pace to drive in more than 100 RBI in 2008 (75 RBI in 109 games). That's great production for a top of the order hitter. Not all of Soriano's hits are HR's. He's typically right around 40 doubles a year also, which allows the other guys to drive him in. Derrek Lee had too many GIDP's, but that's because Theriot is too one dimensional. Theriot would be the ideal #8 hitter in the Cubs line up. He can draw the walk or stroke a base hit, steal 2nd or get to second on the sacrifice by the pitcher and be in scoring position for Soriano. I think Soriano's stolen base rate would actually improve from that lower spot in the order. Soriano was also on pace to score 100 runs, something he's done several times in his career. Keeping him healthy is what the Cubs need from Soriano more than anything. A switch to another spot in the order isn't necessary at all.

Sure would have been nice to have Clady drop two more places in the draft last year. That's the guy this team needed.

I wanted to touch on the Bears takeaway discussion a few pages back. I'm sort of under the impression that the Bears are constantly in the top percent of teams in takeaways because the offense sucks. When the offense is only on the field for 3 plays at a time, that puts the defense on the field much more than they should be. When your defense is on the field as much as the Bears defense is, isn't it somewhat of a given that the defense will eventually get more opportunities for takeaways than other teams? Where did the Bears fall in actual interceptions? Where do the Bears fall on takeaways if you exclude special teams?