The Other 15

Easy on the $8/1 year thing folks. Apparently there was no one year $8 mil offer, just the Sox calling to see what his asking price was. Since the conversation stalled at that point, my guess is that it was for more than one year @ $8mil.

What's worse is that it appears no one really discovered the extent of the damage to his shoulder for quite some time. Had it been found and repaired sooner, he might be healthy now. Then again, shoulder injuries can be difficult to come back from, so who knows. I strongly suspect whatever persistent shoulder damage Prior suffered was a result of the repetitive stress of pitching, not from the Giles collision. Then every pitcher with 300 ip (or so) should be injured too, right? What kind of junk logic is that? Not every body is equally susceptible to repetitive stress injuries. Or any type of injury. Some wind up like Clemens, and some like Prior. And some might say that pitchers that suffer trauma from a collision are susceptible to injuries. Especially since injuries immediately follow said trauma. Just a wild guess, but better than random.

What's worse is that it appears no one really discovered the extent of the damage to his shoulder for quite some time. Had it been found and repaired sooner, he might be healthy now. Then again, shoulder injuries can be difficult to come back from, so who knows. I strongly suspect whatever persistent shoulder damage Prior suffered was a result of the repetitive stress of pitching, not from the Giles collision. Then every pitcher with 300 ip (or so) should be injured too, right?

Pie - imo - they waited until he was too far up the ladder to try and shorten his swing. Cory - ditto, with the added complication of being rushed Choi - could have been great, but never really recovered from his hand/wrist injury Hill - hurt his back and was never the same Prior - hard to say he didn't reach his potential. Just a damn shame that he got abused like that in his first full season Montanez - didn't have the talent to start with; bad scouting job here Cedeno - I'm not sure that this isn't what his talent level really is; needs a full-time job in mlb to find out Prior - hard to say he didn't reach his potential. Just a damn shame that he got abused like that in his first full season It'd be more accurate to say it's too bad Prior was so good in his first full season. If he wasn't so good, he night have been slowed down but teams dont' shelf their top pitchers during a pennant race due to age. He's not the first ever "abused" pitcher. Just recently Lincecum put up as many innings as Prior for a dead last team in the NL. It's too bad Prior injured his shoulder in the Giles collision because that likely began the end of a certain stellar career.

Yeah, I'm going to say they have a few of other things to worry about even if Pujols puts up another monster season. They benefited as much (or more) than anyone from breakout seasons last year. Until proven otherwise, I doubt that Ludwick is MVP good like he performed last year. Am I to understand they they wouldn't need another great season from Schumacker, Ankiel or Molina? I doubt Lohse finishes another season as sub 4 era. Losing Wainwright was a big hit to them last year, and it would be again. Of course, losing Pujols would be a sure end, but there was more to their success last year than just another monster season from Pooie.

C'mon Miguel. You're kidding yourself here. First of all, we'd be worse if we didn't make a single move, if only for the fact that we will be expected regress in quite a few areas next season. We weren't a 97 win team heading into the offseason and we certainly aren't one heading out of the offseason. Let's look branch by branch. 1.) Kevin Gregg to Kerry Wood This is a pretty poor downgrade. We go from one of the top ten relievers in the game, who's a good health guy at this point (shove it naysayers you're wrong) and go from a guy, who if we stretched it, would barely qualify among that top fifty relievers in the game. You could make a case for him being outside the top 100 if you wanted to. In the greater scheme of things, it probably costs a few runs in high leverage situations, thanks to Gregg being in the game in the seventh and eighth with a tough jam instead of Carlos Marmol. 2.) DeRosa and Edmonds to Miles and Bradley Well if you throw defense out the window, I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that we're any better. Mark DeRosa was very very very very very productive last season and Aaron Miles is Neifi Perez without the defense. Sure Bradley's better than Edmonds, except for the fact that Bradley's probably going to get hurt and Edmonds (and the Cubs CFers in general) produced top five centerfield numbers for the Cubs last season. We got a TON of production out of center field last year. The way I see it, Fukudome goes to center, and we still get Fukudome. So we're replacing our CF production with Milton Bradley, and giving Bradley just 500 PAs instead of 650 is a wash. Signing Bradley only let's us keep the offensive production we got in center last year - not improve on it. Our overall team defense might improve in the outfield, as Edmonds was a tree in center, but so is Bradley. I am really seeing these moves as lateral at best and more expensive. I think any improvement we're going to get is going to be from resurgent Derrek Lee and Kosuke Fukudome campaigns, as both players (especially KF) played well below their potential in 2008. 3.) Marquis to Heilman There's no improvement here. We're the same. Marquis and Heilman are interchangeable and this is another lateral move, albeit a cheaper-ish one cash wise. Heilman may end up with a slightly better RA, but the difference is made up in Marquis' elite SP bat, similar to Fat Z. 4.) Harden It's Harden, not Hardin. He's already hurt, to expect more than we got last year is foolish. 5.) Gaudin blows. Shark is good unless he remembers that he doesn't get whiffs. Guzman's an unknown at this point. I do think there's a chance he's the number five by May in the current setup. 1.) Kevin Gregg to Kerry Wood This is a pretty poor downgrade. We go from one of the top ten relievers in the game, who's a good health guy at this point (shove it naysayers you're wrong) Hmmm, something tells me the month-long sabbatical Wood took last year was closer to resting shoulder tendinitis than healing a blister. Don't get me wrong, if that's what Wood has to do each year, I'd still be in favor of him, but that's hardly a good health guy. You also mention the natural regression that will occur from 2008 but you cite the 2008 numbers when countering the 2009 additions. Seems contradicting. Wood was decent last year...good god stop overrating like we gave up Dennis Eckersley at his prime. He was not that good last year and it's not going to hurt us that much I think you got me confused with someone else. I'm of the opinion that the difference between Gregg and Wood is minor at best. They go about different ways of getting nearly the same results.

Omar Minaya is Latin for outbidding himself.

Mets sign Perez to 3 year deal at $12 mil each according to espn.com. We'll learn more about Sheets's status after this signing.

We already did that by depending on a injury prone pitchers like rich harden, Carlos Zambrano and Ted Lilly and trading for Kevin Gregg and Aaron Heilman. Meanwhile the Cards traded for the greatest SS ever. You don't know how close to true you are. Things could go very bad very quickly for the Cubs Harden pulls a Prior Z is a shell of himself after all the Dusty innings pile up Dempster becomes Dempster Lilly stays the same Kevin Gregg couldn't throw strikes last year and Lou hates relief pitchers who cannot throw strikes Marmol had a terrible winter in the Caribbean If Bradley goes down Fukudome moves back to RF and we have The Car Hopper and Facial Hair manning CF It's a worst case but it's not that far outside of the realm of possiblility Fair enough. Now use that worst case scenario reasoning and use the Cardinals as an example. I was also wondering what would be worst case about Lilly staying the same?

The bolded I don't recall being prevalent views on the board. They were the opinions of some, but I saw them far less often than the opposing viewpoints. And what about those of us who disagreed with most of that? We can't complain when we see things we don't like? We're supposed to just not have an opinion on things? People can complain if they like and other people can refute those complaints. I've defended Hendry for most of his entire tenure and still think he's a pretty decent GM, but I don't like the moves he's made this offseason. I hope he proves me wrong, but until that happens, I'm not going to sit back and have no opinion on things. Some people choose to use their opinions as statement of facts and use it as an argument ignoring that those opinions are often wrong as people have tried to point out.

C'mon Miguel. You're kidding yourself here. First of all, we'd be worse if we didn't make a single move, if only for the fact that we will be expected regress in quite a few areas next season. We weren't a 97 win team heading into the offseason and we certainly aren't one heading out of the offseason. Let's look branch by branch. 1.) Kevin Gregg to Kerry Wood This is a pretty poor downgrade. We go from one of the top ten relievers in the game, who's a good health guy at this point (shove it naysayers you're wrong) and go from a guy, who if we stretched it, would barely qualify among that top fifty relievers in the game. You could make a case for him being outside the top 100 if you wanted to. In the greater scheme of things, it probably costs a few runs in high leverage situations, thanks to Gregg being in the game in the seventh and eighth with a tough jam instead of Carlos Marmol. 2.) DeRosa and Edmonds to Miles and Bradley Well if you throw defense out the window, I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that we're any better. Mark DeRosa was very very very very very productive last season and Aaron Miles is Neifi Perez without the defense. Sure Bradley's better than Edmonds, except for the fact that Bradley's probably going to get hurt and Edmonds (and the Cubs CFers in general) produced top five centerfield numbers for the Cubs last season. We got a TON of production out of center field last year. The way I see it, Fukudome goes to center, and we still get Fukudome. So we're replacing our CF production with Milton Bradley, and giving Bradley just 500 PAs instead of 650 is a wash. Signing Bradley only let's us keep the offensive production we got in center last year - not improve on it. Our overall team defense might improve in the outfield, as Edmonds was a tree in center, but so is Bradley. I am really seeing these moves as lateral at best and more expensive. I think any improvement we're going to get is going to be from resurgent Derrek Lee and Kosuke Fukudome campaigns, as both players (especially KF) played well below their potential in 2008. 3.) Marquis to Heilman There's no improvement here. We're the same. Marquis and Heilman are interchangeable and this is another lateral move, albeit a cheaper-ish one cash wise. Heilman may end up with a slightly better RA, but the difference is made up in Marquis' elite SP bat, similar to Fat Z. 4.) Harden It's Harden, not Hardin. He's already hurt, to expect more than we got last year is foolish. 5.) Gaudin blows. Shark is good unless he remembers that he doesn't get whiffs. Guzman's an unknown at this point. I do think there's a chance he's the number five by May in the current setup. 1.) Kevin Gregg to Kerry Wood This is a pretty poor downgrade. We go from one of the top ten relievers in the game, who's a good health guy at this point (shove it naysayers you're wrong) Hmmm, something tells me the month-long sabbatical Wood took last year was closer to resting shoulder tendinitis than healing a blister. Don't get me wrong, if that's what Wood has to do each year, I'd still be in favor of him, but that's hardly a good health guy. You also mention the natural regression that will occur from 2008 but you cite the 2008 numbers when countering the 2009 additions. Seems contradicting.

Nothing is written in stone, but it seems to me it's fairly obvious they've down graded from what they had to what they have. With bullpen performances, things are not what they seem. I still don't think the bullpen is that drastically different. Time will tell and I'll be sure to revisit this by June.

With Wuertz gone, there's room for guzman now. Assuming Heilman is the 5th starter, the bullpen could be: Marshall, Cotts, Gaudin, Vizcaino, Guzman, Gregg, Marmol Man, that looks like a pretty shaky bullpen. It looks very similar to last years. Last year had the benefit of keeping Marmol as an anytime guy. Going in Howry and Eyre were a bit more dependable than guys like Vizaino and Cotts. And Wuertz is better than a couple of those guys as well. They've lost Wood and Wuertz and added Vizcaino and Gregg. I say that's a downgrade. Plus, last year's bullpen got the surprise addition of Samardzija, which they are very much unlikely to get this year. We saw how "Going in Howry and Eyre were a bit more dependable than guys like Vizaino and Cotts" worked out. We still don't know that Marmol wont be the anytime guy, Gregg is not very different than Wood as closer (Where is it written that Wood has no chance to put up worse numbers and Gregg has no chance to put up better ones?) and Samarzija is still there to be used if the need arises like last year. We can talk about possible downgrades all we like, but all things being equal (they never are, but still,...) the bullpen is very similar to last seasons.

With Wuertz gone, there's room for guzman now. Assuming Heilman is the 5th starter, the bullpen could be: Marshall, Cotts, Gaudin, Vizcaino, Guzman, Gregg, Marmol Man, that looks like a pretty shaky bullpen. It looks very similar to last years.

This is, in general, the sentiment by everyone here about nearly every move. Fukudome was last season universally loved move. Oops. Who was it that said moves need time to be judged? Nope. I didn't love Fukudome and I wasn't alone. Why do you post here because you seem to hate everything about NSBB? Almost every post of yours is some gross judgment of the entire board. NSBB is full of different opinions on every topic, all you have to do is read a little. Bako is a crap sandwich but the Cubs aren't overpaying for him and backup catchers seem to be hard to find. I could use better words than everyone or always, but I choose to post replies to those equally annoying posts by people that do nothing but bitch - about everything - all the time - constantly - incessantly ... (damn, my use of words needs help). If that's their right, and I think it is, then I should be afforded the opportunity to respond. If what I post doesn't apply to you, then a simple reply explaining your opposition to Fukudome, without lecturing me on the differences of opinions on a message board, would suffice.

This is, in general, the sentiment by everyone here about nearly every move. Fukudome was last season universally loved move. Oops. Who was it that said moves need time to be judged? Soriano is still considered a bad contract. DeRosa and Lilly were terrible contracts as well. When they became excellent contracts, people just shut up about them. Even began new crying campaigns when DeRo was traded - for nothing. But if Stevens turns into a reliable reliever and Fontenot (another win in Hendrys trade resume) matches DeRo who regresses to career means, everyone will just go mute on that trade instead of admitting that they jumped the gun with their criticism. The only bad trade I can recall at this time is the Pierre deal. But I'm forgetting that Jose Ceda will be a great reliever in this league. BA did have him ranked as the 5th best prospect in the Cubs system so it must be a bad trade, or was it his great k ratio in half a season in AA? No wait, he's 22 years old. Anyways, it was a terrible trade because Hendry made it. From those big moves to small ones like Ardsma for Cotts, Hendry can't seem to get anything right with message board experts even though he's won the vast majority of his trades. The only thing that keeps getting in the way is winning division titles three of 6 years as GM. Which still gets no acknowledgment whatsoever from his constant critics. That was a very long route to saying have patience. Reactionary opinions have a bad history of being right with Hendrys decisions

How is pointing out that the Cubs got worse at a position overreacting? And as goony pointed out, the difference between 83 and 62 in OPS+ is fairly significant. On top of that, Blanco is better defensively. Sorry, I don't agree. hank had a OPS+ of 6 in 2007? Is that indicative of his skill? His career OPS+ is .....drumroll please...63. Hank had a good 120 AB's last year. There's no need to label him a offensive threat. Give him an additional 200 AB's like Bako had and you'll see that precious, all so important on this site, OPS+ fall. His last four seasons (OPS+) 2005: 71 2006: 81 2007: 6 2008: 83 As has been pointed out, his 2007 was due in large part to a major injury. Is he guaranteed to put up an OPS+ over 80 this season? Of course not. But it wouldn't be a stretch to expect something in the mid-70s. And you can cut the condescending crap. No one is labeling him an offensive threat. Although, compared to Bako, he is. Your point about an additional 200 at-bats is moot, as well. No one would have expected him to get that many at-bats unless Soto got hurt. Even then, Blanco would still provide good defense if he's not hitting. Dude, relax, it's a conversation about Bako vs Blanco for christssakes. We're not talking about some important cogs to this team. Both are crap offensive players no matter what their meager OPS+ numbers are . It wasn't meant to be condescending pointing that out. It's much ado about nothing. Like another poster pointed out, what significant difference do you really expect out of Blanco over Bako in 150 AB's? You're making this sound way too critical. If Soto has to miss any significant time, they would be in just as much trouble with Blanco. Whatever, chief. I'm not the one claiming that everyone here is overreacting. I'm not the one that claims this board in general has "man-love" for certain players. Again, I never said Blanco was some sort of All-Star. I simply said he's better than Bako, both offensively and defensively. If Soto has to miss significant time, they would be in trouble, regardless of who the back up is. What people are saying here is that it is a downgrade from Blanco to Bako. That's all. Regardless of their role on the team, a downgrade is a downgrade. When you've downgraded in more than one area, people tend to take notice. Lighten up, Francis. No! I had no idea that I was the first to use the word overreacting. How crude of me! There should be no tolerance for that kind of implication. Then I compound it with man-love? My deepest, sincerest apologies. How crude. However, as Francis, I feel offended that someone arguing that Blanco is better as if that's supposed to mean something over 150 AB's. Now that's offensive Chief.

How is pointing out that the Cubs got worse at a position overreacting? And as goony pointed out, the difference between 83 and 62 in OPS+ is fairly significant. On top of that, Blanco is better defensively. Sorry, I don't agree. hank had a OPS+ of 6 in 2007? Is that indicative of his skill? His career OPS+ is .....drumroll please...63. Hank had a good 120 AB's last year. There's no need to label him a offensive threat. Give him an additional 200 AB's like Bako had and you'll see that precious, all so important on this site, OPS+ fall. His last four seasons (OPS+) 2005: 71 2006: 81 2007: 6 2008: 83 As has been pointed out, his 2007 was due in large part to a major injury. Is he guaranteed to put up an OPS+ over 80 this season? Of course not. But it wouldn't be a stretch to expect something in the mid-70s. And you can cut the condescending crap. No one is labeling him an offensive threat. Although, compared to Bako, he is. Your point about an additional 200 at-bats is moot, as well. No one would have expected him to get that many at-bats unless Soto got hurt. Even then, Blanco would still provide good defense if he's not hitting. Dude, relax, it's a conversation about Bako vs Blanco for christssakes. We're not talking about some important cogs to this team. Both are crap offensive players no matter what their meager OPS+ numbers are . It wasn't meant to be condescending pointing that out. It's much ado about nothing. Like another poster pointed out, what significant difference do you really expect out of Blanco over Bako in 150 AB's? You're making this sound way too critical. If Soto has to miss any significant time, they would be in just as much trouble with Blanco.

How is pointing out that the Cubs got worse at a position overreacting? And as goony pointed out, the difference between 83 and 62 in OPS+ is fairly significant. On top of that, Blanco is better defensively. Sorry, I don't agree. hank had a OPS+ of 6 in 2007? Is that indicative of his skill? His career OPS+ is .....drumroll please...63. Hank had a good 120 AB's last year. There's no need to label him a offensive threat. Give him an additional 200 AB's like Bako had and you'll see that precious, all so important on this site, OPS+ fall.

The Cubs told Blanco to follow Kerry Wood out of town back in October. Given the choice, I'd imagine Blanco would prefer to stay on the team he's been on for 4 years, the team he happens to be comfortable with, and the team that actually has a chance to go to the playoffs vs. going to the worst team in baseball where he could get an extra 200 ABs. Jim Hendry(as usual) misread the FA market and didn't think he could get Blanco as cheaply as he came. Or, and this is completely out of LF, Hendry being familiar with Blanco, just didn't want him back. This is rather entertaining that whipping boys (because of their contracts over the last couple of years) are finally being respected on here.

Come on, are we really comparing 83 OPS+ to 62 as a positive? Blanco signed to get playing time. Good for you Hank, knock yourself out. With that done, the Cubs went with another light hitting defensive minded catcher. But let's not let that stand in the way of overreacting to everything this off season.

There's not too many people on that list that are surprising to see there. Manny wants $25/3 years. Paging Colletti or Sabean. Good luck to whomever signs him for below what he thinks he deserves. His last days in Boston will be remembered as the hustle days compared to the effort he will put out. (Personally, I'm still as stunned as DeRosa was to see Manny hustling on Kemps first inning double in game 3.) Dunn is a one dimensional player that despite the man love this message board has for him, in the real world of baseball, you just don't pay top dollar for. He's in the Ibanez, Bradley income bracket, he just doesn't know it yet. Sheets and Crede are coming off of serious injuries as far as big money investment is concerned. Crede has the balls to ask for $5mil to be the starting point in his talks? Joe, two words, back surgery! Sheets wants multiple years guaranteed? Ben, you tore a muscle in your pitching arm in August. Abreau just now figured out that the market for him will be less than what he made last year? What world are these guys living in? Pedro is coming off of possibly the worst value contract this side of Schmidt and Pavano. He should thank God Minaya has a powerful position in this industry. Perez is still holding out hope of a huge deal? Once again, he should thank his parents for being Latin bacuse Uncle Omar will be there in the end. Cabrera is a tool getting goofier as he ages. Looper, Izzy, Pudge, Glavine? I'm stunned that there is no market for them. Griff should have begged the Rays to sign him, but he looks like he's lost his interest. He sleepwalked through a pennant race last year. Andrew will be the highest paid ST invitee in history. Nice to have the Dodgers paying you $22 mil. Why Varitek is haggling with the Red Sox at htis stage of his career is baffling. Does he really believe someone will pay him more or treat him better? I guess Wolf (a decent back end of rotation depth for contender that isn't asking for the world) and Hudson (a decent 2b in a year with no 2B's available, and a good guy to boot) are the only surprises that they are not signed at this stage.

This "should have traded them when their value was high" sentiment is silly. When was Hills value the highest? Start of last year when they needed all the pitching they could get. Why should they have traded him then? When you're a team in need of pitching, you should trade your good young cheap pitcher? Brilliant. How many guys lose it as fast as Hill has? Its' unfortunate, because nobody ever saw this coming, but is not a sure sign to trade away all future prospects when their value is highest. That's just silly. Back to Hill. I feel terrible for him because anybody that has ever pitched at any level understands how frustrating this is to him. It's not for a lack of effort, for some reason, inexplicably, you just lose all confidence. Without options and without Hill showing the slightest glimmer of hope in AFL or Winter ball, there was no reason to believe that anything would have changed during ST when other pitchers need the time to get ready. There is no blame here, just an end.

Fukudome is still in the lineup (against RHP, so for the majority of the games) so Bradley isn't replacing him. He's basically replacing Edmonds. Fontenot is replacing DeRosa. I'll play nice but, as usual, you're fixated on semantics. It really doesn't matter who replaced who where, it's about the overall effect on the offense. If you believe that Bradley is better than 2008 DeRosa and that Fontenot can is better than 2008 Fuku, you have to say they got better. CF platoon notwithstanding. Obviously health will be a much bigger issue than CF production. Why does it matter if Fontenot is better than Fukudome? That implies Fukudome has been replaced, when he hasn't. Nobody is replacing Fukudome. He's still in the lineup. Edmonds is the one who is being taken out of the lineup. It's to determine what kind of upgrade or downgrade we'll see though since Edmonds didn't play a full season. Plus we got a .900+ OPS from Fontenot in a good chunk of at-bats and that doesn't seem likely to be duplicated. Why does it matter if Fontenot is better than Fukudome? Becasue he will (or at least appears set to) take the AB's that Fuku loses this year. How? Fukudome is slated to be the every day CF against RHP, meaning he'll be getting close to the amount of at-bats he got last season. He's still playing. He's not being replaced by anybody. Not to mention Fontenot still got 243 at-bats last season. If Fukudome plays against every RHP, how many AB's does he figure to get next season? Like 400, at least?? He had 501 last season, meaning he's only losing about 100 at-bats, or less, while Fontenot only gains like 150-200 Really, Bradley is replacing Edmonds (except he'll be playing every day...when healthy) and Fontenot is replacing DeRosa. Fukudome is not being replaced in the lineup, he's just switching positions. Jeebus. Could you please stop with the semantics? It doesn't matter who is replacing who where, just that the production will be coming from different places than last year form a couple of guys. Bradly can counter DeRos 500 AB's. Fontenots possible 450 to 500 AB's will counter Fukudomes 2008 500 AB's. And the Fuku/johnson platoon will be compared to the Johnson/Edmonds platoon. You're too focused on who is replacing who that you're ignoring the point - weather this years lineup will be worse than last years.

Fukudome is still in the lineup (against RHP, so for the majority of the games) so Bradley isn't replacing him. He's basically replacing Edmonds. Fontenot is replacing DeRosa. I'll play nice but, as usual, you're fixated on semantics. It really doesn't matter who replaced who where, it's about the overall effect on the offense. If you believe that Bradley is better than 2008 DeRosa and that Fontenot can is better than 2008 Fuku, you have to say they got better. CF platoon notwithstanding. Obviously health will be a much bigger issue than CF production. Why does it matter if Fontenot is better than Fukudome? That implies Fukudome has been replaced, when he hasn't. Nobody is replacing Fukudome. He's still in the lineup. Edmonds is the one who is being taken out of the lineup. It's to determine what kind of upgrade or downgrade we'll see though since Edmonds didn't play a full season. Plus we got a .900+ OPS from Fontenot in a good chunk of at-bats and that doesn't seem likely to be duplicated. Why does it matter if Fontenot is better than Fukudome? Becasue he will (or at least appears set to) take the AB's that Fuku loses this year. Fine, Font may not repeat last years 900+ OPS, but DeRosas 850 was not set in stone either. Overall, production wise (if healthy), this lineup can be better than last years. It certainly is way too soon to declare it worse.