Backtobanks

Lannan for Byrd followed by Barney for Parra. Parra plays CF until Brett is ready and then becomes a solid defensive 4th OF.

I'm glad to see some posters that are having the same concerns that I've been having. Assuming Brett and Rizzo become solid players, we still have a ton of holes to fill for 2013 and beyond. It looks like other teams have realized that extending their own players is preferable to looking at who is available in free agency and/or trades.

We "passed" on both of those players because we have the resources to outbid any other team. Since Theo/Jed didn't think they were worth the extra money, they passed on them. We passed on Pujols and Prince for the same reason - their value wasn't worth they money that it would take to get them.

I love how they brag about cutting the payroll, but then let you know in small print that it doesn't include the $20 million we're paying Zambrano and Wells. The guys who handle the books must work for the government.

I agree with your post. As you stated, it's going to take a lot of crossing our fingers and hoping lots of things go our way. Brett & Rizzo definitely have to live up to expectations or we're really in trouble. It will be interesting to see what happens with Shark in the rotation, but Volstad and Wood seem more like BOR guys. We can all be thankful for being in the NL Central because we might be 5 years away in some of the other divisions.

That's a fairly decent description of the Hendry regime. Those quotes sounds like he's making excuses for the future if things don't go as well as planned. All the more reason he shouldn't have tanked 2012 and probably 2013. If you can't gain as much advantage as you used to, it doesn't bode well for a team that needs to gain 15-20 games to be a serious contender.

I think Theo has a leash that's seems to be way too long for me. I think he could have very easily put a decent team on the field for 2012 while rebuilding. Contention should be the target for 2013 and NL Central winners in 2014. If he doesn't get us to the WS by 2015, then he has been a disappointment to me. He has been brought here to win a World Series and has been given every resource he wanted and complete autonomy by an owner who supports him 100%.

Dont be scared to play with the big boys. The problem with playing with the big boys is that they can concentrate of filling 1-2 holes, while we have a ton of holes to fill.

This is what I have been worried about. All of the top FAs will either be extended before reaching free agency or the big market team that sat out this offseason (Yankees, Red Sox, Dodgers, etc.) will be driving up the price for the players we want.

That's an important point? Do you think people would be predicting mid and low 70's win totals with this rotation if they didn't realize the offense wasn't all that great? The rotation isn't all that it's cracked up to be. Garza would probably be no better than a #2 on a good team while Dempster would probably be a #3 or #4. Maholm is a #5 and Shark & Volsted are unknowns. The depth of the rotation is better than last year, but this is nowhere near a starting rotation for a good team. That being said, it's the most solid part of the 2012 Cubs.

It's the other 42 games that will make the difference between contenders and pretenders.

Just picking a random comment to respond to. As noted, I did say 60 was the low end. But for all this talk about depth, there's also the possibility that (not that I am expecting this, but why I have 60 as the low end) - The lineup ... sucks for much of the year. The youngsters go through ... youngster struggles when they get called up. Soto hits more like he did last year. While I tend to be somewhat optimistic that Ian Stewart can be passable/decent at 3rd (offensively and defensively), it's possible the loop in his swing is something that he can't adjust/fix. It's not hard to imagine LaHair plateauing as a decent bench option. It's also not that hard to imagine DeJesus' struggling (although I think he'll be alright). Our great bench doesn't mean that any of those guys are decent starters. I do tend to think Castro will take a step forward, though. - The bullpen ... sucks for much of the year. Whatever is ailing Marmol this spring isn't resolved. That leaves a pen with very few guys with swing and miss secondary pitches. I mean, it isn't that hard to imagine a crappy bullpen. - The rotation isn't as good as we hoped for (now, I tend to think the rotation will be fairly solid, just speaking on a negative end possibility). Garza regresses a bit (not hard to imagine). Father Time catches up with Dempster (not hard to imagine). Volstad (who I like) and Maholm show more as end of the rotation starters than borderline 3's (also not hard to imagine). Samardzija struggles with his consistency and his slider is never consistently solid enough, and shows more as an end of the rotation arm. Wood struggles if he gets the opportunity (not that hard to imagine coming off his 2011 and his spring), and Wells (who, personally, I think could bounce back to two year's ago form) shows more as an end of the rotation innings eater when called up. I mean, much as I have championed Dempster as a decent 2 still, it's not hard imagine this rotation as a decent 2 (Garza if he regresses) and a bunch of 4's and 5's. I'm not saying any of this will happen, and if you said to me, 60-72 is too wide a range, what's a specific number I'd go for, I'd say 68. But for all the talk about the depth of this squad, it's still more hope that the depth will develop than anything positive that we can feel comfortable about. So ... I really don't think it's that hard to imagine this team bottoming out as a 60 win team. I think they'll be a tad better, but I don't think it's as unrealistic as some are making it out to be. But that's me. Good analysis and one that I agree with. Another important point is that the improvement in the rotation may not translate into more wins because of the offense. Even Garza and Dempster may have trouble getting wins if they face the #1 and #2 pichers on the other staff. Instead of losing 9-4 with our BOR guys, we might lose 4-2. That's an improvement in the rotation, but it's still a loss. As most everyone has posted, the unknowns (Stewart, Lahair, Soto, Dejesus, etc.) are the key.

After looking at this roster and reading the last few pages, I wonder if anyone wants to reassess their prediction as to how many wins this team will have.

I can't believe Wells has much trade value. He's probably much more valuable as rotation depth than trade bait.

Baker????????????????

If SI is right it could be a long summer in Chicago because they have the White Sox losing 95 games.

For all of the Sappelt love, it doesn't look like he's even going to make the opening day roster.

So here's what we have left. The bloded are pretty much locks barring trades. I don't think that anyone expects Concepcion or De La Cruz to make it, and Mateo is likely injured. Sappelt and Castillo will likely end up in AAA to start every day, although I see Sappelts ceiling as a 4th OF, so may as well get him started now uness they're concerned about his clock. Additionally, Caridad, Corpas, Miller, DeWitt, Mather, Amezaga, and Gonzalez have earned consideration off of the minor league invites. All signs point to Mathers Hoffpauir/Fox/Colvin-esque spring training will land him a roster spot. That cuts it down to 5 spots: 1 backup catcher, likely Clevenger, maybe 1 spare bat, and the rest for pitchers. With 5 OFs including Mather, an infielder will likely land the last position spot. Gonzalez has had an impressive spring, but DeWitt is younger. Both of them prety much are what they're going to be. Amezaga has the ability to play SS, which could cause him to beat out both. Personally, I'd prefer that Cardenas get the spot, but what can you do. DeWitt could have a scrap of trade value, as could Baker and Johnson. There's also the option of cutting our losses with Johnson and giving his spot to Campana or Sappelt. As for the pitchers, at least one will be a lefty. There's Miller, Maine, Coleman, and T. Wood. The best choice would be to give the spot to Maine, tell Miller thanks for coming out, have Wood start at AAA and whatever they do with Coleman is fine by me. If they want him to be a long man out of the pen, more power to them. That leaves 1 or 2 more, depending on what they do with Coleman. There is Wells, who I'd like to see shopped. If we could get something close to what we got for Gorz, I'd take it. Lendy Castillo seems to have good stuff but his control seems brutal. I'd say give it to Corpas and see how he looks. So that would make it: 1. SP Garza 2. SP Dempster 3. SP Maholm 4. SP Volstad 5. SP Shark 6. CL Marmol 7. RP K. Wood 8. RP Russell 9. RP Dolis 10. RP Maine 11 & 12. RP Corpas/Castillo/Coleman/Wells 13. 1B LaHair 14. 2B Barney 15. SS Castro 16. 3B Stewart 17. OF Soriano 18. OF Byrd 19. OF DeJesus 20. C Soto 21. OF Mather 22. OF Johnson 23. C Clevenger 24. IF Baker 25 IF DeWitt/Gonzalez/Amezaga So there they are, our 2012 Chicago Cubs. Not exactly awe inspiring, but perhaps not awful. If we could have managed to fix the glaring hole in the heart of the lineup, I'd like our chances. There's more than one glaring hole in the heart of the lineup.

Even in this awful division I doubt we'll be hanging around by the ASB, unless we get really, really lucky with a few guys. We've had this debate before, but I just don't see why a perennial 90-win team and fielding a competitive team this year is an either/or proposition. You can do both. I have no doubt this plan will work, I just don't see how it was the optimal plan. Especially now that the Cards and Reds have taken a couple of pretty big blows. I've agreed with you everytime you've made this point and I agree with you now. I'm disappointed not only that we're blowing off this year, but also giving the other teams time to reload by the time we're ready to compete. Also, we're coming off a winter where the Red Sox and Yankees pretty much stayed out of the free agent market, something that probably won't happen when we need to go after a FA or 2.

They added Volstad, Maholm, and possibly Wood. That could be over half the rotation. There are three big reasons the rotation will be quite a bit better than last year. First is the depth. 49 starts combined last year between pitchers that people knew were not major league caliber starters and proved that last year: Russell, Lopez, Ortiz, Coleman, and Davis. This year, unless you think Samardzija will crash and burn miserably, the number of starts from pitchers like that should be under 10. That's a whole season's worth of starts from one starter plus a little bit. Second is that of the pitchers remaining, based on past history and peripherals Dempster and Wells have more room to go up than down while only Garza has more room to go down than up. Maholm and Volstad don't have huge hurdles to cross to be equal or better than Z and Wells were last year. That leaves Samardzija/Wood to replace all the horrible starters the Cubs threw out last year. Third is the defense. The Cubs made two defensive upgrades (3B and RF) with only one downgrade (1B). They have two upgrades that will likely come up midseason (CF, 1B). Byrd should continue to decline defensively in CF, while Castro will likely improve at SS. Overall, the defense should be better, especially in the second half of the year. That will help the rotation, especially the pitchers without huge strikeout rates. Could the bullpen be bad? Absolutely. It should be better when the starting pitching goes deeper in games which will test the middle relief less, but they also have downside risk especially if Samardzija moves to the rotation. That one is a lot harder to project than the rotation though because of the few innings and the rotating cast that will likely be in the bullpen this year. The big question is whether the pitching improvement is good enough to translate into a better record with a terrible offense. If our offense scores 2-4 runs per game, can the improved BOR guys pitch well enough to win? Obviously, we will feel better for the future if Samardzija, Volstead, and Wood show something, but results (W/L record) might not come around until we get some offensive help.

I'm not "over-the-top negative". I'm just being realistic. I was hoping Theo would field a decent team with a chance to be competitive in 2012 while rebuilding for the future, but he decided to forget 2012 (and maybe 2013) while going for 2014 and beyond. I've accepted this fact and am willing to watch the growing pains of the kids for a year or two instead of throwing out a bunch of "if this happens" and "if that happens" maybe we can "make it interesting" (which is still not contending. Until we really see something on the field, the BOR is better, the defense might be a wash (subtracting Ramirez is a plus but losing Pena is a minus), the bullpen is still an unknown depending on who's out there, and the offense is worse. If that's being "over-the-top negative", then we have a different sense of reality.

It's okay if you want to watch the Cubs play before you come back to reality.

It's good to see all of the optimism, but with all of the issues posted about the other teams in the division, we have more than our share too. Our BOR starters are better, but the question is whether they are good enough to balance out our horrible offense.

Perhaps Theo didn't like the idea of hiring a Cub icon as it might compromise his ability to exert his influence. Perhaps he just felt that Sandberg wasn't very bright, or wasn't great manager material. Perhaps he didn't like other aspects of Sandberg besides his views on fundamentals and bunting- ideas that were strongly criticized by many people here. That's all I meant. What's so hard to understand about that? And maybe Theo didn't want to share the spotlight.

More likely, I think, next year Dempster will be that MOR type guy (if he's back) and we'll be looking for somebody to pair with Garza as a TOR type guy. I'm not a big Maholm fan anyway, and tend to doubt he'll be pitching his best at 32. I agree with you. Maholm is strictly a #5 starter candidate on a good/decent team. With his contract, I expect him to be traded at the deadline if he shows something.