davearm2

Is that even possible? Of course it is. The Yankees singlehandedly made three teams (LAA, MIL, and TOR) significantly worse. If you've got a handful of teams buying, and the rest either selling or struggling to tread water, then the net losers are going to outnumber the net winners. Now having said that, let's see where guys like Dunn and Manny and Abreu etc. wind up before we pass out final grades.

What he said. If this was as much of a no brainer as it seems like, than Sheets would be signed by now. Not necessarily. Sheets could be waiting until teams get a little more desperate. Unfortunately for Sheets, the sort of desperation teams are feeling right about now is the kind that leads them to spend less money, not more.

What he said. If this was as much of a no brainer as it seems like, than Sheets would be signed by now. Yeah, if Lowe is getting nearly $50 mil. There is no reason Sheets shouldn't at least have an offer of 2@24 or 3@36. Garland, Wolf, Looper are all getting more interest than Sheets right now and Sheets left nut can pitch better than any of those guys. Make that $60 mil.

One aspect of this I find interesting is that back in November and December, we were hearing noise that 3 or perhaps even 4 teams would have to be involved for this deal to happen. Well that number has actually grown to five, considering the Rox, Indians and Orioles have already contributed. Conceivably, Seattle could become a 6th, if there's anything to the Heilman rumors.

Not that I put a lot of stock in your theory here, but nevertheless it seems to me that putting the screws to the new boss wouldn't be the best way to make a positive first impression.

Point of reference here. 98: Cubs clinched by winning a 1-game playoff 03: Cubs clinched on the last weekend of the year 04: Cubs eliminated on the last weekend of the year 07: Cubs clinched on the last weekend of the year I truly hope the Cubs' braintrust is not making playing time decisions on the presumption that the team will coast into the postseason, and therefore has the luxury of pissing away games while underproducing young players "get a full chance to succeed". Your 20/20 hindsight notwithstanding, they'd be utter fools to assume they've got a comfortable margin for error to work with.

Hendry doesn't get it. The problem wasn't Marquis, it was Marquis contract. He was a very good 4th or 5th starter but he was payed like #1 or #2. Sabathia 7 years, 161 million Burnett 5 years, 82.5 million Lowe 4 years, 60 million Dempster 4 years, 52 million Moyer 2 years, 13 million Silva 4 years, 48 million Eaton 3 years, 24.5 million Hernandez (Orlando) 2 years, 12 million Igawa 5 years, 46 million (including posting fee) Lilly 4 years, 40 million Marquis 3 years, 21 million Matsuzaka 6 years, 103 million (including posting fee) Meche 5 years, 55 million Mulder 2 years, 13 million Mussina 2 years, 23 million Padilla 3 years, 33.75 million Schmidt 3 years, 47.5 million Suppan 4 years, 42 million Williams (Woody) 2 years 12 million Zito 7 years, 126 million There is every multi-year starting pitching deal given in the past 3 years. Every player who was considered a possible #1 or #2 at the time he was signed (Sabathia, Burnett, Matzuzaka, Schmidt, Zito, and possibly Lilly) got a contract that was much different from the one of Marquis. Just think about that. The best comparable contracts to the ones of Marquis on the market today? Jamie Moyer, Adam Eaton, Mark Mulder, and Woody Williams. Is Marquis worse than that group? Absolutely not. Does spending money on average starting pitchers not make sense instead of dipping into the minor leagues? That argument has some merit as starting pitching gets a premium on the free agent market and the money might be able to be better spent in other areas. But as far as value on the market, Marquis was not overpaid. In fact, of the 20 contracts listed above, the one for Marquis will probably be ranked 6th or 7th when all is said and done for effectiveness. Great post, and that just tells me once again that Cubs fans just complain to complain. Sometimes fans just need sit back and see how some of these moves work out. Instead of calling Hendry names, and saying how much he sucks at his job and other crap. I'm all for people giving their opinions, but I think sometimes fans overreact a bit, and don't realize their opinions are wrong an awful lot. Hendry has made alot of moves over the last few seasons that many fans were wrong about, who says they won't be again next year. Looks to me like the fans of a lot of teams must be equally as convinced that their GM is an absolute maroon as so many Cub fans are. Heck Hendry said it himself a few years ago that nobody wants to be in the position of needing to find pitching on the FA market. But take a look at the cast of misfits that the Cubs trotted out in 2006 for 6 starts here and 10 starts there, and suddenly the urgency of the situation hits like a January blast of wind off of the lake.

I'm pretty sure that is Gathright. Who's the guy in the background there, with the stubble and glasses? Hoffpauir? Gregg? That was the only guy I couldn't ID.

Marquis Grissom redux

The point remains that your insistence that Miles replaces DeRosa is a gross oversimplification that badly mischaracterizes the situation. Miles will assume something like 1/3 of the 500 or so ABs that DeRosa leaves behind. The other 2/3rds will be absorbed by Fontenot and various OFs. I think you realize this but for whatever reason have become so entrenched in your position that you're refusing to acknowledge the fundamental truth here. Fontenot and others are what made DeRosa expendable, not Aaron freaking Miles.

Really? Those groups look about equally blah to me. Nobody's seriously going to miss having bats like Blanco Cedeno and Pie available off the bench, right? The collective defensive value of those two groups seems roughly equal to me too. Miles to Cedeno is a mild downgrade. The rest is a wash. you can call them a wash, but the new bench is older and more expensive than last year's, and isn't better. More expensive? Not by much, if at all. Blanco would be the highest paid of all those names. Older? Who cares. Only Miles is committed for more than this year.

Sounds awfully hazardous.

Ok, I'll bite. You? No, I said the primary reason for dealing DeRosa was to get more lefthanded. The only way they've done that so far is by adding Miles. Miles was acquired because he could switch hit and is "versatile". So if the Cubs had traded DeRosa but hadn't added Miles, then they wouldn't be more lefthanded? You're not that dumb. Of course they would, by committing more ABs to Fontenot. So I conclude you're simply being stubborn and unreasonable.

You'd prefer Cedeno to Aurilia for the same $$$? That's really the choice here. Not me. Cedeno stinks. Time to pull the plug. Aurilia stinks, is old, and can't play defense. As a hitter, Cedeno stinks a whole lot more. I know which guy I'd rather send up to pinch hit or to spot-start for Ramirez here and there. That's the role we're discussing here.

You'd prefer Cedeno to Aurilia for the same $$$? That's really the choice here. Not me. Cedeno stinks. Time to pull the plug.

Really? Those groups look about equally blah to me. Nobody's seriously going to miss having bats like Blanco Cedeno and Pie available off the bench, right? The collective defensive value of those two groups seems roughly equal to me too. Miles to Cedeno is a mild downgrade. The rest is a wash.

So it's come to this. Players that have signed longterm extensions for megabucks are demanding trades before year one of said extension.

Embezzles? You mean extorts?

I think this really comes down to Peavy. The Padres dangled him and I think he officially wants out. Peavy's contract extension was based on the Padres staying competitive. I wouldn't be surprised if Peavy forces the trade to the Cubs. I've held firm all offseason that this deal will happen. I'm also expecting it to happen sooner now than later. Both teams still have work to do if Peavy isn't going anywhere, and less and less players will be available to either team the longer this deal takes. How would he do that? By taking his gripes to the front office. He can express his disappointment with the organization for having a fire sale when his contract extension was based on the team staying competitive. Peavy acted in good faith to the organization and they crapped all over him. Granted, he can't actually force a trade. But, I would imagine the proper thing to do when you have burned that bridge is to trade the player. Kinda hard for Peavy to take a "you owe it to me to trade me" stance when he's got a NTC that he's using to tie the Padres' hands. I'm sure if Peavy was willing to waive the NTC then Towers would be more than happy to accomodate him.

Lee would have helped them a lot more. When your pitching staff puts up ERAs of 2.20, 2.63, and 3.00 in three postseason series, my pregnant wife would be a good fit in left field. Apparently she's found something fun to do while you're online with us. ;)

That and the fact that Hendry has shown no willingness to even ask Lee to waive his NTC, much less entertain offers. So any talk of moving Lee is pretty much moot. There were reports earlier this offseason that Lee had been asked to waive his NTC and he declined.

I've been big on Sheets for a while now. Kind of a poor-man's Peavy (due mainly to the injury history; healthy they're very comparable), plus you get to keep all the players you would've sent to SD, and his contract wouldn't be any bigger than what Peavy's got left.

The key is 6th inning which means that they see him as the garbage time reliever. Nah. The 5 guys in the bullpen that aren't the closer and the primary setup guy all have a roughly equal chance of being called on first when the starter needs to come out. At that point it mostly depends on matchups and who's been used recently. Seems to me that if a guy was brought into the 6th inning of a 7-6 game, when everyone in the 'pen is rested and available, then that'd be a pretty good indication the manager's comfortable with the guy.

I think you're exactly right that the biggest factor in the DeRosa decision was the RH thing. If the objective is to get more LH bats into this Cub lineup, the opportunities are few. Soriano, Lee, Ramirez, and Soto aren't going anywhere. That leaves Theriot and DeRosa as the only candidates to be replaced. Hendry had a natural LH replacement for DeRosa already in hand. Couple that with the age and salary considerations, and it's obvious he had to be the one to go. If it comes to pass that the Cubs still have a big chunk of cash left for another starter, then it'll become even more clear that money wasn't the main thing that drove DeRosa out of town.

So if "people get hurt by twisting (their) legs up all the time," then what the heck is the problem here? That proves what happened to Bradley could've happened to any athlete: fragile, normal, durable, or Ripkenesque.