17 Seconds

so he's replacing him for half the time

Apparently Hendry/Piniella don't share your opinion. To me Dunn was a "backup" in case the Cubs couldn't sign Bradley. i think he was much lower on the list than that... if he was even on the list at all.

The thing is.....Milton Bradley isn't replacing Fukudome int he lineup, he's replacing Edmonds/Johnson in the lineup. we're not talking about guys from last year or last year's production. we're talking about right now and how are team would look going into spring training. edmonds is not part of the picture in 2009 either way. that's in the past. you'tre right though that he's not fully replacing fukudome since he'll still play a lot on center. really he's replacing some sort of fukudome/johnson/gathright/miles/hoffauir combination.

Unless we end up with Peavy, I sure wish the Cubs hadn't traded DeRosa. Seconded. There was no reason to get rid of DeRo unless a Peavy trade was imminent. yea there is. he had to trade peavy to afford bradley. you might not like that, but there was a reason for it. There was no good reason to trade DeRo unless a Peavy trade was extremely likely/imminent. like i said, you ight not agree with the reason, but there was one. it's not like hendry jusat said "i feel like dumping derosa today. im gonna do it". he did it because he had to to get what he wanted.

That's true, but I don't you think can call trading a 34 year .800 OPS 2B/utility player in te last year of his contract "terrible". I lvoe DeRosa and I agree that I don't like the trade if it doesn't lead to Peavy (and I doubt it does), but I wouldn't call it "terrible". We're selling high and getting a few halfway decent pitching prospects. Ultimately, an .800 OPS guy (albeit valuable because of flexibility) should not be the difference in whether or not we win the World Series next year. It's not like we traded a stud hitter with multiple years left on his deal. We dumped a good-but-not-great 34 year old with one year left on his deal.

The DeRo trade is terrible if we don't end up with Peavy. i wouldn't call it terrible. i'd sall the miles contract terrible. the derosa trade is kinda "eh". We were downgrading no matter who we signed once we traded DeRo. If you're not moving him to be able to vastly upgrade elsewhere, then trading him is a terrible decision. Bradley is not a vast upgrade, Peavy is. when healthy, bradley is a vast upgrade to fukudome.

Unless we end up with Peavy, I sure wish the Cubs hadn't traded DeRosa. Seconded. There was no reason to get rid of DeRo unless a Peavy trade was imminent. yea there is. he had to trade peavy to afford bradley. you might not like that, but there was a reason for it.

The DeRo trade is terrible if we don't end up with Peavy. i wouldn't call it terrible. i'd sall the miles contract terrible. the derosa trade is kinda "eh".

my PMs don't work y0

Churchill-

see, this is what i get for commenting on a team i don't follow. my bad. well i'm even worse. i can't believe huet's numbers are better than khabibulin's.

wait, i just looked at the numbers and huet has a 2.30 GAA and a .917 save percentage this season? wtf?

i know from experience with my team, the avs, it is a lot harder to win games 6-5 than it is 3-2. the hawks as improved as they are aren't going anywhere unless you get a (better) [just caught that, mistype, my bad] goalie. or rather the better goalie starts more than the goalie with the monster contract. huh? khabi has been really good this season i think i said as much... well khabi is making more than huet this season. also, khabi has played much more than huet when he's been healthy.

i know from experience with my team, the avs, it is a lot harder to win games 6-5 than it is 3-2. the hawks as improved as they are aren't going anywhere unless you get a regular goalie. or rather the better goalie starts more than the goalie with the monster contract. huh? khabi has been really good this season

show me where i got personal. the only one who got personal was you. also show me how saying howry was the 8th inning guy is an opinion. if you want to talk to me, then don't run away after you've been proved wrong and make excuses as to why you're leaving.... only to come back the next day to take shots at me as for other people being tired of it, whatever. at least i'm not the board joke

they deserve to get booed right now because it looks like they're completely mailing it in. where's the fire?? it's kind of a big game, guys

way to embarrass yourself on national television huet

it's a huge letdown that they're going to lose both games vs detroit. i thought this team was a lot better than that. they should be embarrassed with the effort today. there has been no intensity whatsoever since the first period.

god huet is pathetic. that was flat out embarrassing and we can finally put to rest the thought of winning the division

yes good point. also i don't see how i made anything personal

why are you so hateful all of the time? Were you beaten as a child or are you still being beaten? Why can't we come onto the message board & state our opinions without all of the biting comments all of the time? This is a message board talking about games...not financial planning, teaching or engineering. Is it really worth the anger? I disagree w/ nearly everything that you ever say, but it doesn't make either one of us right. The only thing wrong is when someone makes it personal against the other. At the end of the day, this is no more important than taking out the garbage. To be a message board hero/thread winner is the equivalent of winning a grade school straw pole popularity contest. Umm, stating that Howry was the 8th inning guy last season is not an opinion, it's a lie. And I like how you leave the board when you've been beaten down in baseball arguments because you "have a wife and kids", yet you can come back and respond to me on an unrelated subject. How about leave me alone

You really need to stop constantly complaining abut refs and now other things lol ill put it in green next time for you i was more talking aot the refs. you're cool but you complain about the refs every single game

You really need to stop constantly complaining abut refs and now other things

Because we don't want to waste 2.5M on a backup catcher?

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.