abuck1220

I haven't seen anyone that said that. Not one. the post i quoted pretty much says that.

And our top prospect, starting 2b/depth, and most of our trading chips, seriously just stop. Hey who cares if it weakens our team, and we only win 87 games next year, we have JAKE PEAVY! i can't see how getting jake peavy is going to knock 10 wins off the cubs 2007 total, but my post was in response to this... people seem to be concerned about losing two pitchers (marshall and marquis) and replacing them with one.

And Rich Hill too. They're all wildcards as starters at the ML level though, which is the point. as opposed to jason marquis and sean marshall who are rock solid locks to be healthy, awesome major league pitchers.

oh my heavens, we can't give up our SWING MAN! NOT OUR SWING MAN!

Please tell me that Sean Marshall wasnt one of the main obstacles in this deal? While I can see Hendry not wanting let let DeRosa go, I would give up Marshall for Peavy in a heartbeat. i don't know about that...we would have needed to part ways with marquis and marshall is our swing man since we aren't keeping gaudin around... would else would we use in absence of marshall? JAKE PEAVY.

If Harden's healthy, I'm pretty sure they'll resign him. When he's on point, Harden is one of the best pitchers on the league. He'd be worth the money. one healthy season, and you want to give him 4/$48 or something? i kind of want harden for '09 and that's it. That's not what I said. I said he'd be worth that money IF he'd remain healthy. If they resign Dempster after one good season, why wouldn't they resign Harden? because he's going to command a huge deal if he stays healthy in '09 and he's very likely to miss a bunch of time during the course of this hypothetical new deal.

If Harden's healthy, I'm pretty sure they'll resign him. When he's on point, Harden is one of the best pitchers on the league. He'd be worth the money. one healthy season, and you want to give him 4/$48 or something? i kind of want harden for '09 and that's it.

the cubs will probably be fine w/o peavy in '09, but their '10 rotation could have been tightened up with peavy. if harden is hurt in '09, the cubs likely won't re-sign him/count on him beyond '09. if he's healthy/effective, he may be looking for a big deal which i'm not sure the cubs will want to give him. would have been nice to have z + peavy in your pocket for the next four seasons.

if that's the case, aren't you a little concerned about him sucking ass in every playoff game he's started? all 9 2/3 innings? no.

yeah, i'm not as concerned about going from 97 wins to 103...the cubs probably win the division w/o peavy. i want peavy for games 163 and beyond.

if the difference between marquis and peavy is three wins, then the difference between gaudin and marshall is like .04 wins.

Gee, I wonder why you are picking out the worst guys of the proposed package as your example? Could it be because you have a crap argument? Hart is what our 8th starter? You are absolutely correct, losing him would not hurt this team. However, unfortunately for the validity of your point, and for the Cubs, the Padres are asking for more than just Kevin Hart. Losing DeRosa would be a big blow to the team. He was exceptionally good offensively last year, and very good the two prior years. Additionally, his versatility gives the Cubs a lot of options. We don't need to get a guy who can play 3B, incase ARam goes down. We can sign Bradley and not have to worry about him getting injured because DeRo could replace him. Fontenot had a great year last year, but it was in limited time and when he was put in situations to succeed. I like him, but to think he'd be a lock to approach DeRos #s is foolish. Additionally, moving him from the bench to starting 2b takes away one of your better pinch hitters and your middle infield depth, so you'd have to replace that too. Losing Marshall would be a big blow to the depth of the pitching. He has shown that he can be successful out of the pen or in the rotation. With an injury risk like Harden in the rotation, losing our 6th starter would mean instead of going from a top 5 starter in Harden to an average starter in Marshall, we'd (skipping over Hart and Guzman because they were traded too) have to rely on Gaudin, Shark and God knows who after him. Pie and Cedeno I don't mind losing one bit. I don't think they'll be big contributors to the major league team (even if there are injuries) and have long lost their prospect luster. You can sign a back up SS for a mil or so that can replicate Cedeno's production and we already have Johnson to back up CF. Vitters I also don't mind losing. He obviously has a lot of value and is a great prospect, but his value to the Cubs is really as a trading chip, and thats what he'd be used for here. Not long ago we were talking about this deal without DeRosa and things sounded like they were progressing pretty well, even to the point where the "general framework" of the deal was in place. Frankly, that means to me that its not DeRosa as a player that is the issue, its DeRosa's paycheck that is. In that case, I'd much rather trade Kevin Gregg and retain DeRosa (or go back in time and never have traded for Gregg in the first place). Losing Marshall hurts, but I think its palatable, however losing DeRosa isn't. AND WE WOULD HAVE JAKE PEAVY. you're not going to get jake peavy w/o sacrificing something from your current team. losing derosa would hurt, but, again, WE WOULD HAVE JAKE PEAVY.

well, the rule U draft was yesterday, so today maybe?

Right now the Cubs are a worse pitching team than they were in 2008 and a worse hitting team than they were in 2008. The point remains they must improve just to get back to last year's level. This is correct. But getting Peavy doesn't address the bullpen or the offense. It does make both weaker, with DeRo and Marshall both being involved. Unless everyone plans on all five of Z, Lilly, Peavy, Demp and Harden starting 32 games and pitching into the 7th or 8th every game, and Marmol, Shark and Gaudin being the only relievers used. do you not realize the upgrade of marquis to peavy is worth much more than the downgrade from kevin hart to atkins? yes, the bullpen gets worse if you trade marshall or whatever. but the rotation gets much, much better. and you can't just assume the rotation boost is equal to the bullpen loss because that's insane. And having a crappy bullpen is going to help how? holy [expletive], are you really worried about who the cubs' third righty out of the pen is going to be when we're talking about getting jake peavy? i dunno man, peavy would be great, but i'm a little more worried about who we're gonna call on to get that third out in the 6th inning of a 5-4 game. come on.

Right now the Cubs are a worse pitching team than they were in 2008 and a worse hitting team than they were in 2008. The point remains they must improve just to get back to last year's level. This is correct. But getting Peavy doesn't address the bullpen or the offense. It does make both weaker, with DeRo and Marshall both being involved. Unless everyone plans on all five of Z, Lilly, Peavy, Demp and Harden starting 32 games and pitching into the 7th or 8th every game, and Marmol, Shark and Gaudin being the only relievers used. do you not realize the upgrade of marquis to peavy is worth much more than the downgrade from kevin hart to atkins? yes, the bullpen gets worse if you trade marshall or whatever. but the rotation gets much, much better. and you can't just assume the rotation boost is equal to the bullpen loss because that's insane. And having a crappy bullpen is going to help how? Plus, what about the offense? They've already got at least one hole(with CF maybe 2), this would make two, maybe three. And how healthy is everyone going to stay? And how about any possible deals later in the year. Without Peavy the Cubs are still going to be favorites to win the Central. They can make moves other than this that will help improve upon that more than Peavy. If it was just Cedeno/Hart/Vitters types they are losing, I could easily go for it, but when you start throwing in pretty important pieces like DeRo and Marshall, not so much. Then you have limited resources to get 3-4 other holes filled. I'd be thrilled if the could get Peavy, I'd be more thrilled if they could get a couple of extra hitters to get the offense to where it was last year. and if there was a hitter that filled a hole that was of peavy's quality available in a trade, i would probably prefer to use these resources on that guy. but there's not.

Right now the Cubs are a worse pitching team than they were in 2008 and a worse hitting team than they were in 2008. The point remains they must improve just to get back to last year's level. This is correct. But getting Peavy doesn't address the bullpen or the offense. It does make both weaker, with DeRo and Marshall both being involved. Unless everyone plans on all five of Z, Lilly, Peavy, Demp and Harden starting 32 games and pitching into the 7th or 8th every game, and Marmol, Shark and Gaudin being the only relievers used. do you not realize the upgrade of marquis to peavy is worth much more than the downgrade from kevin hart to atkins? yes, the bullpen gets worse if you trade marshall or whatever. but the rotation gets much, much better. and you can't just assume the rotation boost is equal to the bullpen loss because that's insane.

Who do you replace them with? Hart, Cedeno, Atkins, Guzman, even Pie may not have a ton of value to other teams, but 1) they asked for them for a reason, and 2) the Cubs already weak system has no one to pick up the slack for them in the organization. It's one thing to not care if one of them goes in a deal, it's another to care if they all go, it's how you end up with Les Walrond pitching in meaningful games or Joe Simokaitis getting meaningful at bats. kevin hart and ronny cedeno weren't necessary in meaningful games last year, so i don't think their replacements would be this year. They will when you've traded away Marshall, Marquis, Guzman, Atkins, and DeRosa too, that's the point. well, in theory, replacing marquis with peavy would soften the blow of replacing your second string ss with your third string ss.

jake peavy is in your rotation, so sure one of those three guys can do it. i'm not really concerned about it if my first four are peavy, z, lilly and dempster. probably, yes. so you held on to ronny cedeno. he's not getting you a ramirez-level replacement at 3b anyway, so who cares?

Who do you replace them with? Hart, Cedeno, Atkins, Guzman, even Pie may not have a ton of value to other teams, but 1) they asked for them for a reason, and 2) the Cubs already weak system has no one to pick up the slack for them in the organization. It's one thing to not care if one of them goes in a deal, it's another to care if they all go, it's how you end up with Les Walrond pitching in meaningful games or Joe Simokaitis getting meaningful at bats. kevin hart and ronny cedeno weren't necessary in meaningful games last year, so i don't think their replacements would be this year.

i would not miss any of those players. The point is, why buy at full price when you can pick it up discounted later? This is a poker game, and Hendry is gambling that he can get Peavy cheaper, and imagine he's right. yippy skippy, we'll get to keep kevin hart, a mediocre AAA middle reliever. won't that be great. Or he'll get to keep Marshall and Cedeno. Or DeRosa and Marshall. Or DeRosa and Pie. ok, we'll see if the cubs get peavy w/o trading derosa and pie. they're not trading for livan hernandez, guys. you may have to give up sean marshall, your 25 year old #7 starter, or ronny cedeno, your backup ss, or mark derosa, your 34 year old 2b who is under contract for one more season. come on.

i would not miss any of those players. The point is, why buy at full price when you can pick it up discounted later? This is a poker game, and Hendry is gambling that he can get Peavy cheaper, and imagine he's right. yippy skippy, we'll get to keep kevin hart, a mediocre AAA middle reliever. won't that be great.

i would not miss any of those players. Well, if that's the case, why don't we go ahead and throw in 10 more guys as well and REALLY make sure we get this deal done? Why are you so hung up on quantity? They aren't good players. If you are offering the core, what difference does it make who the 7th and 8th guys are. Because the 7th and 8th guys might be the guys who could acquire someone like Hermida instead of paying big bucks for Bradley, which in turn could allow you to spend those big bucks on someone like Furcal. the 7th and 8th best prospects in the cubs terrible farm system is not going to get hermida. come on. if kevin hart and ronny cedeno are deal breakers, you don't think twice about it. you could replace them both in one second.

i would not miss any of those players. Well, if that's the case, why don't we go ahead and throw in 10 more guys as well and REALLY make sure we get this deal done? fine with me.

Yes thats way too much for one player, even if it's an elite pitcher like Peavy. come on. hart and cedeno are nobodies...they have no value at all. nearly every team has players like that sitting on their AAA roster. marshall is probably above average, derosa's 34, pie doesn't have a job for the next three seasons, guzman is obviously a huge injury risk, vitters is years away and already has health concerns. while big in numbers, that is not an overwhelming amount of talent.

i would not miss any of those players.