Nothing in this approach is "extremely flawed logic". I could accept Meph's -Bradley replaces Edmonds and leave Fukudome alone- comment because CF/RF will likely be overlapping all year, but I disagree with your points in total. First, the off-season isn't over. Not all roles have been resolved. I currently don't see who will fill the 7th inning with-a-lead role (Marmol 2008) or the floating loogy/6th starter (Marshall 2008) for 2009. And there is nothing wrong with that. I don't acknowledge a lack of depth because there is no need to yet. The roster isn't complete. If spring training rolls around and we're having this same discussion, then there is a problem. Second, role does matter. Otherwise you could say Bradley replaces Wood, or some other random observation. Wood was the closer. Therefore if you're going to analyze a replacement for Wood, then I believe you have to start with the incumbent, Marmol. Gregg might be "in the mix" for closer in spring training because Lou loves competition for spots, but at this point in the off-season, Gregg looks like the 8th inning set-up man (Howry 2008) and Marmol the favorite for closer. 2008 7-8-9: Marmol, Howry, Wood 2009 7-8-9: ?, Gregg, Marmol Spring training likely shakes out that 7th inning guy. If I was forced to fill-in a name, I would say Samardzija has the inside track on the 7th inning. Another way to approach it would be look at the unit as a whole. Meaning, evaluate the Marmol-Howry-Wood unit against the Samardzija-Gregg-Marmol unit regardless of which guy slots into which role. I hesitate to look at this way because we don't know if Samardzija is the guy in that mix. But if he is, I'd call it a slight downgrade, only because the unit is less proven and doesn't have the track record of consistency. Third, DeRosa's value as a plug-and-play anywhere player can't be replaced by anyone on the current roster. There is no point trying to account for Bradley's replacement in RF with a 2B because you assume he will get hurt for extended time. That isn't how a 2B is typically used. If you want a depth chart replacement for Bradley, then it would likely be Pie, which is a notable downgrade. But back-up plans and depth for injuries, while part of the discussion, isn't the purpose of starter level or 1st choice role analysis. DeRosa was primarily a 2B. And if everyone is presumed healthy, he would get 80% of his ABs at 2B if still with the club. When defining his replacement, you look at 2B. How was it not flawed logic? You had Marmol replacing Wood but Gregg replacing Howry instead of Marmol? Who replaces Marmol? Gregg is replacing Wood, or if you want to get into semantics, he's facing Marmol. Either way, he's not replacing Howry. Also, as others mentioned, Fukudome is still in the lineup against rigties, so Bradley is essentially replacing Edmonds. Also it's not fair that you just say Marshall replaces Marquis but then fail to mention that Marshall's old role will not be replaced., or that Fontenot can't replace DeRosa since he can't play right when Bradley gets hurt. Your whole thing was just very flawed and simplistic and left out of a ton of things. I alreayd explained all this (and so did everyone else), I guess you just didn't read it. I don't understand why you keep saying this. Did you not follow the Cubs last year, or are you just lying and hoping we don't notice? Marmol was the 8th inning guy last season.