DeRosa was a good signing, plain and simple. He wasn't on my radar in the offseason, but when you think about his ability to play many positions and tie that in with how limited the Cubs have been in overall depth, DeRosa was a good pick up. I will hold out that I didn't feel like the Cubs would or should go into the season with DeRosa set as an everyday player. That offsets the value of the signing, IMO. Derrek missing several months last year had Mabry and Walker playing 1b. Aramis being injured had next to no one available to fill the hole. There was no outfield depth until they got Nevin, and the season was pretty much done already at that point. Looking back at previous years, you had a good bench guy starting in LF (Hollandsworth) and no one decent as a back up. The last time the Cubs had any decent depth was in 2003. What DeRosa provides is quality bench depth, yet the Cubs didn't really sign him to be bench depth, and I think that's where the deal looks bad. I would have been much happier with Durham or Giles AND DeRosa. Of course, that's ignoring the fact something drastic needed to happen at SS as well. Overall, I gave Hendry an (A) for his offseason moves. I felt he did enough to go out and win the division in the NL Central. If this team played in the AL East, the team he assembled wouldn't be good enough. I wanted Lugo, Schmidt and Drew. I admit it. I also wanted Lofton as bench help, although Lofton wasn't interested in being a bench guy. It's the kids who are making the difference, however. Guys who were not expected to step up have done just that.