jersey cubs fan

#-o lol so basically it's like... if two of our 3 best starters suck and/or get hurt, our rotation is questionable. cool.. Except one is a lock to get hurt and the other is a very good bet to take a significant step backward.

I would love to trade Derosa this year to get younger. He's a 34 year old coming off a career year and while the manager is willing to play him everywhere, he's not particularly good at any of his positions (the Macias effect). Plus, he's about the most replacable starter on the team.

It wasn't 7 for 1, but regardless, giving up quantity doesn't really matter to me. I don't know a single one of those players. Anybody who wants quantity from the Cubs system can go right ahead and take it.

If those two things happen (with Marshall sliding in for Harden for over 1/2 the season and Dempster pitching just as an average starter) the rotation would still be well above average. Well above is a pretty vague statement. My guess is the lineup takes a step back, and if the rotation does to this team could easily miss the playoffs. I'm not sold on anything about this team yet. The only thing they've done so far is take a step back.

It doesn't really matter what Bradley is asking for, it's what he can get offered that matters. 4/40 would be absurd.

Except it became pretty clear that they matched up perfectly fine for what SD wanted.

What are your thoughts on Jason Kendall destroying his bone stepping on first?

Not sure if it's been mentioned but Bears are 3 point favorites. Also, while it may be dry tomorrow night, that's been a crappy field recently and didn't it rain/snow/sleet for a couple days already?

I'll add a Saints fans stamp of approval onto this post. Saints are pretty much fried toast in games in those elements. Only consolation is that Reggie looks to be back from the DL playing very well and Pierre Thomas has never played as good as he has recently. Bears win. The Saints are going to stomp the Bears. Cold weather, unless accompanied by snow or rain, doesn't mean a thing. It is much harder to run a vertical passing game in the cold. Need to wear gloves or lose feeling in your hands, the football is hard, tougher to stay loose for the receivers. Not saying it is impossible, just that it would be crazy to think the Saints wouldn't much rather be playing in their dome than outdoors in Chicago. Fine but its irrational to think that the Bears passing defensive ranking jumps 20 spots if the temp at game time is 20 degrees or cooler. No more irrational than dismissing the Saints being 1-5 on the road. The outdoor cold night clearly plays in the Bears advantage in a game againt the dome-homed Saints. Yes, actually, its much more irrational. The Saints 6 road games were played against teams not named the Chicago Bears, who now currently have the 28th ranked passing defense. The cold might be an advantage, but not like the advantage of having the number one ranked passing offense versus the 28th ranked passing defense. Well they did lose to the 23rd and 27th rated pass defense on the road this season...(Atlanta and Denver) And Minnesota at hime (20). Pretending the only thing that matters is the Saints are good through the air and the Bears are bad defending it doesn't make much sense.

I'll add a Saints fans stamp of approval onto this post. Saints are pretty much fried toast in games in those elements. Only consolation is that Reggie looks to be back from the DL playing very well and Pierre Thomas has never played as good as he has recently. Bears win. The Saints are going to stomp the Bears. Cold weather, unless accompanied by snow or rain, doesn't mean a thing. It is much harder to run a vertical passing game in the cold. Need to wear gloves or lose feeling in your hands, the football is hard, tougher to stay loose for the receivers. Not saying it is impossible, just that it would be crazy to think the Saints wouldn't much rather be playing in their dome than outdoors in Chicago. Fine but its irrational to think that the Bears passing defensive ranking jumps 20 spots if the temp at game time is 20 degrees or cooler. No more irrational than dismissing the Saints being 1-5 on the road. The outdoor cold night clearly plays in the Bears advantage in a game againt the dome-homed Saints.

I don't know. With the economy the way it is, the trend is for top of the line performers getting their money, while the second tier people take the hit. The fact that CC got what he got while Rodriguez settled for what he got makes me think GMs are reprioritizing. The demand for aces hasn't taken a hit. But the demand for others? Clearly it's not high enough to have set off bidding wars yet, which is fairly late in the game for movement to just be starting. Bradley fits the Cubs needs, but how many other teams can afford to spend millions on a guy they know won't play a full season? NY is paying CC because they expect 35 starts and 250 innings (plus nobody else even put their pole in the water there). But I don't see teams going gaga over a guy when they are hoping for 100 starts if things work out. Anyway, I don't think the money being paid/offered to CC and other #1 starter types is really all that indicative of where the market lies for the rest of the crowd.

How could people not be willing to trade Marmol for Peavy straight up? I wouldn't trade Ramirez because he's the Cubs best hitter and probably irreplacable for several years. Wouldn't trade Soto either. I'd deal Zambrano because I think Peavy is better than him and we're talking similar dollar figures coming and going.

I think there's a hell of a lot more people who are indifferent than you think. Personally, I think the HOF arguments are stupid and pointless. I couldn't care less about it and I don't really care if Santo gets in or not. I'm sure his constant campaigning for the call works against him with the voters. I don't care about individual awards or recognition. I care about how well the Cubs do. I don't know a single friend who puts an ounce of thought into things like MVP, All Star and HOF voting. The only time I discuss it is when I'm bored and on this site, but I usually try and avoid those threads.

What free agent offers to take a 1-year deal? Hendry pushed Wood out the door. He didn't want him on a 1-year deal. And he shouldn't have. If this was a player with the same history and his name wasn't Kerry Wood people wouldn't want him even on a 1 year 10 million deal. Better off giving Wuertz, Shark, Guzman, etc a chance to fill the role at lower cost. Look at Boston - management there doesn't get hung up on the emotional issues of letting a long time player go if it doesn't make sense in the overall team financial picture. IMO that is how to build long term success, not by re-signing veterans at high cost because they happen to be fan favorites. Wood's negative history is that he can't stay healthy as a starting pitcher. He'd have troubles in the 4th and 5th innings of games. He was perfectly fine as a reliever and an excellent performer. And now he's being replaced with a lesser guy who is probably going to make $6+ million.

If that's what it takes to insert Marquis in a trade for someone instead of Marshall, it's a sacrifice I'm gladly willing to make. I'd much rather indirectly pay Marshall 4 million than Marquis 9 million. fair point, though i'm dubious that one year of marquis at $5-6M has much value to anybody. Truffle, your two posts in this quote seem contradictory to me. You'd rather keep him than pay him to play elsewhere because he's got some value but you don't think he's got much value to anybody at $5-6m.

Not sure how you can come to that conclusion.

What free agent offers to take a 1-year deal? Hendry pushed Wood out the door. He didn't want him on a 1-year deal.

The idea is to not get swept in the postseason. The more good talent you add, the more likely it is to win - though that's certainly not the only factor. I'm mostly tongue-in-cheek on the "too much" thing, but the odds of any individual player being the difference in a five-game playoff series is almost nil. You're a big fan of regressions. How do we even know the Cubs will get into the playoffs without Peavy and Bradley? DeRosa should regress, Soto could regress, Theriot could regress, Ramirez should have an age related regression, Lee etc. The pen is already worse than last years shaky one, Dempster and Harden you said yourself should regress. Never take making the playoffs for granted. I agree who would have thought that the 2004 Cubs would have missed the playoffs? Plus nobody can predict a players health, or what type of fluke injuries could happen. You just have to put the best team possible on the field, especially if you wanna win now. You can't think about 2-3 years down the line, because you never know what will happen. The way I look at it, there's a very good chance Peavy could be a huge bargin in 2011 at 16m, same with Bradley at 8m. I think we gotta keep in mind that the Cubs would be trading one top prospect, who might or might not be a good major leaguer. Were not emptying the farm, were trading one top prospect(who would be 3rd-5th best prospect in most farm systems), and spare parts for one of the best young pitchers in baseball about to enter his prime. You absolutely can, and should, think about 2-3 years down the line. But that should not prevent the Cubs from committing financially to guys like this.

I doubt it, as Baseball Prospectus has plenty of traffic regardless. He's just not very good at reporting rumors. How could he report it differently? Responsibly... as in not posting the idiotic musings of a front office type from another organization with no real information. We're talking about baseball rumors, not something important. If the guy says he's heard crazy rumors that Zambrano might be traded he's not exactly leaking national security information.

I think it's a good deal only in the sense that they got him for what many probably believe was much cheaper than everyone thought he'd go for. But I don't care if you combined K-Rod, Trevor Hoffman, and Mariano Rivera into one uber closer... I still wouldn't pay him more than $10 mil a year That's actually quite ridiculous. I'm not a fan of "closers", but incredibly good relief pitchers are easily worth that type of money. Rivera alone is worthy of being paid more than $10m a year.

If there's one thing Lou has done here, it's play the guys who deserve it. Who has rotted in his "doghouse" that absolutely should have been on the field? Scott Eyre and Mike Wuertz. Although, in general, I agree with your sentiment that he plays the guys who deserve it.

He turns 35 this year and is mediocre, no thanks.

This sentence confuses me.

http://blogs.dailyherald.com/node/1044 Bruce throws Bradley's name back out there as a possibility.

Do me a favor and look up Jeter's numbers and compare them to any other SS in the HOF. Based on stats alone Bill James has his chances of getting in the HOF at greater than 100% (as only James can). Jeter is a first ballot HOFer. Mattingly is borderline but defiantly should get consideration. He's the Mark Grace of the 1980s. In an odd twist, writers who vote in a lot of Yankees and Reds, and discount many other who didn't win rings, will have to take into consideration his lack of championships. He's got to be the best Yankee to never win one. But he's not HOF material. He had a relatively short peak and wasn't anything special during that time.