rawaction

So in terms of next year's team, we just traded DeRosa and Marquis for Bradley and Miles Yep. That's not good. Peavy pretty much has to happen now to make this offseason a success. Actually we've more or less traded Reed Johnson, Mark DeRosa, and Jason Marquis for Milton Bradley, Mike Fontenot and Sean Marshall. We're better off because of the moves. Personally I would have liked to have gotten different players in the Marquis and DeRosa moves but getting them moved was more important than the guys we got back. Miles though was unnecessary but in a backup role, he can't hurt us too much. I see what you are saying. Yeah, if you put it that way, then the Cubs did get better. Huge upgrade over what they had in RF. Slightly below lateral move at 2B. Slightly above lateral move at SP.

So in terms of next year's team, we just traded DeRosa and Marquis for Bradley and Miles Yep. That's not good. Peavy pretty much has to happen now to make this offseason a success.

It's not an assumption for the future, but a comment on the past. For the Cubs to be as good as they were last year, part of it would include getting similar production out of CF.

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. Yeah, but again, these don't seem like the type of guys that the Padres were looking for. The rumors back then had starters close to the majors going to SD from Philly or Baltimore. None of these guys will start 2009 in the Padres rotation. I don't believe Hendry would trade Derosa just to cut payroll, but I have a hard time believing that SD told Hendry, "if you can get Stevens, Archer and Gaub from the Indians consider Peavy yours."

These don't seem like they type of prospects that SD will jump all over.

Im working under the assumption that DeRosa's gone. If DeRosa's not gone then we have Fontenot and Cedeno. Do we really need a fourth second-sacker that costs 5 mil? Answer: Hell no. If Cedeno and DeRosa are out in trades, then yes we probably would be in the market for another infeilder who can back up in the middle infield. Cintron can play 3B, 2B, and is a natural SS. Mile has played all of like 35 innings over the course of five major league seasons in the outfield. Considering we have Soriano, Fukudome, Johnson, and Bradley who can all play every outfield position plus Hoff in the corners, we don't need any more versatility in the outfield. Any position player who can play SS offers the exact same flexibility that Miles offers. Rivas and Cintron do that. Agreed. Hendry's focus was on replacing Derosa's versatility, no matter how much worse he was at playing those positions.

Yep. Also helps that I am a huge Sizemore fan.

What if we get Peavy for the DeRosa prospects, and no one very valuable to the major league team and go into the season with this roster? OF: Soriano, Johnson, Fukudome, Gathright, Bradley IF: Ramirez, Theriot, Fontenot, Miles, Lee, another bad backup IF C: Soto, Koyie Hill SP: Peavy, Dempster, Zambrano, Lilly, Marshall RP: Gregg, Marmol, Samardzija, Wuertz, Cotts, Guzman, Vizcaino Gone in trades would be: Marquis, Pie, Cedeno, DeRosa, minor leaguers from Cleveland, and a few other lower level guys from Cubs. Harden on the DL already?

Yeah, I hate this philosophy. You know you can get Peavy and Bradley, but wait to get rid of players because you don't want to have that much money tied up in case something doesn't work out. Well, isn't it better to get Peavy and Bradley and worry about a Marquis trade NOT working out than making the trades to get rid of Marquis and Derosa and having the Peavy deal not work out. It's better to be stuck with a super high payroll, but have a good team than it is to be stuck with a lower payroll and a lesser team. Says the guy not writing the checks. I agree with you, but I don't think that's how they think in the front office. But that's the same philosophy that caused the Cubs to settle for Burnitz and Jacque Jones because they were too afraid of being stuck with with the contracts of Sosa, Alou, Alex Gonzalez or whatever and failed to go after Beltran, Vlad, and Tejada. And still if the Braves come in and swoop up Peavy, the Cubs are screwed.

Yeah, I hate this philosophy. You know you can get Peavy and Bradley, but wait to get rid of players because you don't want to have that much money tied up in case something doesn't work out. Well, isn't it better to get Peavy and Bradley and worry about a Marquis trade NOT working out than making the trades to get rid of Marquis and Derosa and having the Peavy deal not work out. It's better to be stuck with a super high payroll, but have a good team than it is to be stuck with a lower payroll and a lesser team.

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. Yeah, I'd imagine Huff as the centerpiece. Then I think you see a guy closer to the majors like maybe Jonathan Meloan.

That would be all kinds of excellent. There is still a need for 1 more IF backup, assuming Cedeno isn't back.

No. I think Fontenot was perfect in the role he was in last year. He got 275 PAs and performed at a high level. I think you can even take that number to 350-400. But if you're talking about 500+ PAs for him, I don't trust him to put up the same numbers. I would have prefered a guy that can be an above average starting 2B if Fontenot busts or gets injured. Barmes, Felipe Lopez, Grudzielanek, maybe even (gulp!) Jerry Hairston Jr.

How many backup middle infielders are good? I don't know what his defense is like, but I'll take a .329 OBP from that spot. Fontenot was a good backup middle IF. And I don't think a .329 OBP is acceptable in any spot. I woulda rather had Grudz come back.

Wow, I was literally just looking at 2B free agents and Miles was the name that set off a lightbulb in my head as I looked for a guy that could possibly play IF and OF as a backup in case of Derosa leaving. Miles can play 2B, SS, and all 3 OF positions. I think this clearly signals the end of the Mark Derosa era (though the Cubs could use Miles as a backup SS even w/ Derosa). This signing fills the need for a backup MIF. The only problem is that Aaron Miles isn't very good.

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.

Why would you srop MB so low vs LHP? He is a switch hitter. I didn't look it up, but I think he is much better vs LHP than RHP anyway. I'm guessing he forgot Bradley switch hits. Because yes, he is an amazing hitter vs. LHPs.

Gathright Theriot Lee Derosa Fontenot Johnson Fukudome K Hill when Soriano and Bradley are on the DL and Ramirez tweaks a knee by not hustling. Seriously, though, I absolutely love Milton Bradley. I've wanted him on the Cubs for about 4 years now. I don't like the prospect of having him without Derosa though. I'd much rather have Derosa and Fontenot at RF/2B than Johnson or Gathright and Fontenot. I worry about Mighty Mike being exposed playing full-time.

Pennington had success with his original team, at least as much as he's had so far this year. True. I guess I was looking more at the latter 3 names when I said that.

It's hard to hit the deep pass with a bum ankle that you can get a full push off of. I'll grant you that it's one of Orton's weaknesses, but if you get some other threats out there, then Hester going deep can open up some other WR's for passes. We knew from the start that Orton wasn't a big yardage, bomb it deep guy. That's why Rex got so many chances. But you can still win with that...fix what's around him first. I think Miami is a good way to see how to "fix" things. Fix the line first, and build from there. Pennington is no great QB...but he's able to get the job done because he has solid parts around him. This is the key for me. It doesn't matter who your QB is or what receivers you bring in until you have a good offensive line. An offense with mediocre skill players can still be effective with a great line. The Bears have shown next to no ability to find and develop those skills players so I'd much rather have the line making those guys look good than spend the time and money on finding those guys and not having the line to have them productive. The Bears went several years ignoring the line. Taking Williams last year was not the final solution. It's a 5 position group with needs for at least 2 guys as insurance ready to step in. What they have is not good enough and it's just going to keep getting worse as Kreutz and Tait age. Definitely. However, I'm starting to think that signing a FA every couple years may be the way to go. If Williams works out and Beekman is good enough, the left side of the line is fine. You can plug in a John Tait like, early 30s lineman on the right side and get some success there. Then you can draft a RG/RT or center in the middle rounds and be fine.

It's hard to hit the deep pass with a bum ankle that you can get a full push off of. I'll grant you that it's one of Orton's weaknesses, but if you get some other threats out there, then Hester going deep can open up some other WR's for passes. We knew from the start that Orton wasn't a big yardage, bomb it deep guy. That's why Rex got so many chances. But you can still win with that...fix what's around him first. I think Miami is a good way to see how to "fix" things. Fix the line first, and build from there. Pennington is no great QB...but he's able to get the job done because he has solid parts around him. The thing w/ Pennington though is that he doesn't make mistakes. You can't have severe limitations in your game AND make poor reads and throws on top of it. I think Orton will get it with experience, though, if allowed. After all, you saw guys like Pennington, Testeverde, Dilfer, and Collins all have success after some pretty crappy early seasons. The question is how long do you wait? None of the above had the success with their original teams.

Sure, everyone will try to lure Schottenheimer, Cowher and Holmgren out of retirement, but I think with the success of guys like Tomlin, Smith, Sparano, and Harbaugh you will see a different approach this offseason. You're going to see some 1st time coaches get a shot, as it has been provent that you don't have to be experienced to have success. Defensive coordinators will get the first shots at jobs, because it is becoming a pretty strong trend that they make the best head coaches. Also will be interesting to see how teams value QBs in the draft. With Ryan and Flacco leading teams to the playoffs, I wonder if QBs will shoot up draft boards and even get handed jobs to start their careers, especially in places like Detroit, SF, KC, and even Seattle.

Frankly, Tommie pisses me the hell off. He takes a lot of plays/games off. I don't know if he's a lazy person overall, but I think he's a lazy football player a lot of the time. He has his moments without a doubt. This is one of those "perception" things, and completely not proveable, and maybe way off base, but that's the impression I'm getting. Last year and this year, he just seems disinterested. Maybe, but I gave him the benefit of the doubt that he was injured. That's part of the problem too, he's always injured. I don't think Tommie is close to the player anymore that makes the defense that much better. I don't think he'll ever be 100% healthy again, but even if he is, he won't be the player that he was. At this point, you hope that if he's not going to be the best DT in football as he was a couple years ago, that he will still be a top 5-10 player at his position.

Goony brought up a good point. The Bears D scheme is reliant on athletes making big plays with their athletic ability. My question is, is it better to change the scheme with a lot of the same players and maximize their strengths? Or should they maximize the athletic ability again and try to get back to what made them so good a few years ago? I still maintain that the Bears need a defensive heavy draft. I don't know if the Bears can become elite in this offseason, but they can get back to being a playoff team that can win a game or two in the NFC. I think if you can draft a DE and FS (who can play significant roles), and get more development out of Roach, Payne, and Harrison, the Bears defense can come close to elite status again. Offensively, the Bears aren't going to be a juggernaut anytime soon, so that's why I feel it's more important to try to get the defense to that level again. On offense, the Bears can go out and get a veteran RT that will be an improvement over Tait. They can get a WR that will be an improvement over Booker and Davis. They can even get a Jeff Garcia at QB to get an improvement at QB. Those players typically aren't there on defense. If you look at the elite defensive teams in the league (TEN, PIT, BAL, etc) all built their defenses through the draft. All built their "good enough" offenses through free agency. I feel these are all good comparisons because they represent the only way the Bears can get back to the elite level. The Bears haven't brought in the level of defensive talent that made them what they are/were. The young guys that have contributed here and there (Roach, Harrison, Anderson, Payne, and Graham) have all been late draft picks. Regardless of what they have left, the Bears built an elite D by drafting guys like Urlacher, Tillman, Vasher, Harris, and Briggs in the top 1/2 of the draft. In order to get back there, that's what they need to do again. Getting a #1 WR won't help if the QB doesn't have time. Getting a stud OL won't help if the QB can't make good throws/reads. Getting a stud QB won't help if he doesn't have anyone to throw to. Besides, the Bears haven't shown they would even know what to do with elite talent at any of those positions. They have shown they know what to do with great defensive talent, though.

They had to replace Corey Patterson's production.