17 Seconds

Umm. All of 'em. Okay, so name a contender whose numbers 2 and 3 starters are as likely to get hurt and regress as Harden and Dempster Haha. Yeah, right. I'll get right on that. Any player can get hurt or regress. Uhh yeah, but what players are as likely as Harden and Dempster? It's not jyst a chance, it's a good chance. So you say "all of em" when I ask what teams are that suspect, and then why I ask to give an example you sau "haha, yeah right" Well played. I already gave examples. I said ALL OF THEM. That's not an example, that's a blanket statement because you have no answer. Name one contender who has a number 2 that is as likely to get hurt as Harden and a number 3 who is as likely to add a run and a half onto his ERA as Dempster. Just one Someone already did up above. The World Series winner. And they named a few more as well. I'm done here. I have work to do, and as much as you would like to give me some sort of homework assignment, I'm going to go do my own work. I've never been a big Hendry fan, but I am not complaining about this particular decision to back off on an 8 for 1 deal for Peavy. That's just silly. Not only that, Peavy is no lock to be be the stud in the NL Central that he was in the NL West. Doesn't mean I wouldn't love to have him. Just not for the entire farm. The phillies are an awful example, and I already explained why. I never said question marks, I said injury and regression. The phillies aren't counting on Brett Myers to be Rich Harden, and they aren't counting on Joe Blanton to be like 2008 Dempster. They know what those guys are, and they're built around that. We're built around Harden being healthy and Dempster being good. Why are you so hung up on injury and regression? It completely misses the point. Lilly and Marshall/Marquis/whatever is comparable to Myers and Blanton. So the Phils need your worst case just to get to even with the Cubs. Meanwhile, since I'm sure this is where you're headed next, the Cubs outscored the Phils last year, and are having to replace Edmonds while the Phils have to replace Burrell and 2 months of Utley. Advantage Cubs. Here's why it is relevant. The Cubs were what, like 7 wins better than the Phillies last season? We should be trying to widen that gap, not close it. We got lucky last year with a lot of things. I think the offense is likely to lose more than just the Edmonds production. I think we're going to lose some production from DeRosa, Theriot, and Fontenot. Also, the Phillies bullpen is looking a lot better than our as wll. The point is that you build a team based on what you have. When what you have has the potential to fall apart, it can screw a lot of things up. The Phillies showedlast year they could succeed with that mediocre rotation. That doesn't automatically mean we will too. I thought your point was to prove that no contenders have a rotation whose second and third starters are as big of a question mark as the Cubs' allegedly are. My point was to show that no contenders have a rotation whose second and third starters are as likely to not meet expectations (Harden staying healhy, Dempster being good) as the Cubs' are.

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. But getting Peavy doesn't address the bullpen Yes it does. You don't see a correlation between starters and the bullpen? So maybe it helps the bulpen in one out of 5 games

Interesting quote from Hendry that pretty much sums up what I'm saying. Keep in mind I am not saying we should overpay for Peavy if it would have taken the package that Rob speculated. Which is what UI have been saying. We're counting on Harden and Dempster to be 2008 versions of themselves. The Phillies aren't counting on Maine and Pelfrey to be mid-high 2's ERA pitchers.

Derosa is a nice player but he's not nearly good enough to hold up a trade for far better player. He's replacable, and just because you don't care about his age doesn't mean that it's not an issue. No, that production is not replaceable at 2B. Now if you tell me you are working on a Furcal deal after DeRo gets moved for Peavy, then we'll talk. But let's not make it seem that DeRo is some scrub player that can be easily replaced by a Fontenot or old ass veteran. Yeah, DeRosa really showed up in the playoffs when he fumbled an easy DP in Game 2 (opening the floodgates) and then went 0-4 in Game 3. Furthermore, why does DeRosa seem to skate by with mistakes while someone like Soriano never does? I can remember a few times during the season he made dumb defensive or baserunning plays, and nothing was mentioned. Because it was an aberration for DeRosa and not a once a week occurrence like it seems to be for Soriano. And it's not like he didn't get a few hits in the post season. Was it disappointing? Yeah, but they were physical mistakes and not mental errors like other players make. And as others have mentioned, he's making $4 million, not $14 million. Actualkly DeRos'a numbers in the last 2 postseasons are quite good.

Umm. All of 'em. Okay, so name a contender whose numbers 2 and 3 starters are as likely to get hurt and regress as Harden and Dempster Haha. Yeah, right. I'll get right on that. Any player can get hurt or regress. Uhh yeah, but what players are as likely as Harden and Dempster? It's not jyst a chance, it's a good chance. So you say "all of em" when I ask what teams are that suspect, and then why I ask to give an example you sau "haha, yeah right" Well played. I already gave examples. I said ALL OF THEM. That's not an example, that's a blanket statement because you have no answer. Name one contender who has a number 2 that is as likely to get hurt as Harden and a number 3 who is as likely to add a run and a half onto his ERA as Dempster. Just one Someone already did up above. The World Series winner. And they named a few more as well. I'm done here. I have work to do, and as much as you would like to give me some sort of homework assignment, I'm going to go do my own work. I've never been a big Hendry fan, but I am not complaining about this particular decision to back off on an 8 for 1 deal for Peavy. That's just silly. Not only that, Peavy is no lock to be be the stud in the NL Central that he was in the NL West. Doesn't mean I wouldn't love to have him. Just not for the entire farm. The phillies are an awful example, and I already explained why. I never said question marks, I said injury and regression. The phillies aren't counting on Brett Myers to be Rich Harden, and they aren't counting on Joe Blanton to be like 2008 Dempster. They know what those guys are, and they're built around that. We're built around Harden being healthy and Dempster being good. Why are you so hung up on injury and regression? It completely misses the point. Lilly and Marshall/Marquis/whatever is comparable to Myers and Blanton. So the Phils need your worst case just to get to even with the Cubs. Meanwhile, since I'm sure this is where you're headed next, the Cubs outscored the Phils last year, and are having to replace Edmonds while the Phils have to replace Burrell and 2 months of Utley. Advantage Cubs. Here's why it is relevant. The Cubs were what, like 7 wins better than the Phillies last season? We should be trying to widen that gap, not close it. We got lucky last year with a lot of things. I think the offense is likely to lose more than just the Edmonds production. I think we're going to lose some production from DeRosa, Theriot, and Fontenot. Also, the Phillies bullpen is looking a lot better than our as wll. The point is that you build a team based on what you have. When what you have has the potential to fall apart, it can screw a lot of things up. The Phillies showedlast year they could succeed with that mediocre rotation. That doesn't automatically mean we will too.

Umm. All of 'em. Certainly most, anyway. All of the NL Central for sure. Brett Myers as a #2 is surely a questionmark. As are John Maine and Javier Vazquez. Is Kershaw the Dodgers #2 now behind Billingsley, with Lowe and Penny gone? Huge upside but definitely a questionmark. I'm not talking about question marks, I'm talking about injury and regression. With those teams you're pretty know what you're getting and aren't really counting on those guys to be great. We're counting on that from Harden and Dempster. The bottom line is that if Harden and Dempster get injured and suck, the rotation is not good. That is relevant because there is a pretty good chance both of those things happen. If Harden and Dempster get injured and suck, then Lilly and Marquis/Marshall/Johnson move up the ladder and instead of being a vastly better rotation, it's a similar rotation. I really don't think you've had a look at what some of these teams have going on right now. There are still FAs yet to sign, but it's not pretty a lot of places. Just to give an example, the Mets now show Santana, Maine, Pelfrey, Niese, Knight. Ugh. The Cubs could lose two guys and still beat that 2-5. Yes but the Mets will likely have a better offense and bullpen. Plus the Mets aren't that great. We're trying to be better than everybody else, not comparable. You asked for an example and now that you have one (of many available, mind you), you want to try and redirect the conversation from rotations to offense and bullpen? That's really weak man. The point remains, on paper the Cubs still have a better rotation than anyone else in the NL, and injury and/or regression would merely bring them back to the pack. So if "comparable" only comes in your worst-case scenario, I'll happily live with that. I've already explained to you that I find that example weak, and I already explained it. You just are choosing not to listen. I didn't say "find a team who has question marks as big as Harden and Dempster". I asked who is as likely to get hurt or regress....not suck. The mets aren't expecting John maine to be Rich Harden, and they're not expecting Mike Pelfrey to be 2008 Dempster. Do you not get that? Actually... Well played. That was just a poor choice of words, but in the context that I had already established, you know what I meant

Umm. All of 'em. Certainly most, anyway. All of the NL Central for sure. Brett Myers as a #2 is surely a questionmark. As are John Maine and Javier Vazquez. Is Kershaw the Dodgers #2 now behind Billingsley, with Lowe and Penny gone? Huge upside but definitely a questionmark. I'm not talking about question marks, I'm talking about injury and regression. With those teams you're pretty know what you're getting and aren't really counting on those guys to be great. We're counting on that from Harden and Dempster. The bottom line is that if Harden and Dempster get injured and suck, the rotation is not good. That is relevant because there is a pretty good chance both of those things happen. If Harden and Dempster get injured and suck, then Lilly and Marquis/Marshall/Johnson move up the ladder and instead of being a vastly better rotation, it's a similar rotation. I really don't think you've had a look at what some of these teams have going on right now. There are still FAs yet to sign, but it's not pretty a lot of places. Just to give an example, the Mets now show Santana, Maine, Pelfrey, Niese, Knight. Ugh. The Cubs could lose two guys and still beat that 2-5. Yes but the Mets will likely have a better offense and bullpen. Plus the Mets aren't that great. We're trying to be better than everybody else, not comparable. You asked for an example and now that you have one (of many available, mind you), you want to try and redirect the conversation from rotations to offense and bullpen? That's really weak man. The point remains, on paper the Cubs still have a better rotation than anyone else in the NL, and injury and/or regression would merely bring them back to the pack. So if "comparable" only comes in your worst-case scenario, I'll happily live with that. I've already explained to you that I find that example weak, and I already explained it. You just are choosing not to listen. I didn't say "find a team who has question marks as big as Harden and Dempster". I asked who is as likely to get hurt or regress....not suck. The mets aren't expecting John maine to be Rich Harden, and they're not expecting Mike Pelfrey to be 2008 Dempster. Do you not get that? It is fine to expect maine and Pelfrey to perofmr like they did last season. I don't think it's fine to expect Harden to make as many starts as he did last season and to expect Dempster to pitch like he did last season.

Umm. All of 'em. Okay, so name a contender whose numbers 2 and 3 starters are as likely to get hurt and regress as Harden and Dempster Haha. Yeah, right. I'll get right on that. Any player can get hurt or regress. Uhh yeah, but what players are as likely as Harden and Dempster? It's not jyst a chance, it's a good chance. So you say "all of em" when I ask what teams are that suspect, and then why I ask to give an example you sau "haha, yeah right" Well played. I already gave examples. I said ALL OF THEM. That's not an example, that's a blanket statement because you have no answer. Name one contender who has a number 2 that is as likely to get hurt as Harden and a number 3 who is as likely to add a run and a half onto his ERA as Dempster. Just one Someone already did up above. The World Series winner. And they named a few more as well. I'm done here. I have work to do, and as much as you would like to give me some sort of homework assignment, I'm going to go do my own work. I've never been a big Hendry fan, but I am not complaining about this particular decision to back off on an 8 for 1 deal for Peavy. That's just silly. Not only that, Peavy is no lock to be be the stud in the NL Central that he was in the NL West. Doesn't mean I wouldn't love to have him. Just not for the entire farm. The phillies are an awful example, and I already explained why. I never said question marks, I said injury and regression. The phillies aren't counting on Brett Myers to be Rich Harden, and they aren't counting on Joe Blanton to be like 2008 Dempster. They know what those guys are, and they're built around that. We're built around Harden being healthy and Dempster being good.

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? The bottom line is that giving up DeRosa, Marshall, Vitters, Pie, Cedeno, Hart and Guzman for Peavy owuld be foolish, especially when Towers has no leverage. That is bastly overpaying, even Axelrod acknowledges that.

Are you kidding me? Nope. Not at all. Marshall and Pie would be a nice package for Hermida. Maybe even Marshall and Vitters. Maybe it's not enough. If so, look elsewhere. I'm just baffled that anyone would think you just keep throwing more and more names at someone in hopes that it will be enough when it is obviously clear that the other team has zero leverage. Wait, so Marshall and Pie would have been the 7th and 8th best players? Okay.

Umm. All of 'em. Certainly most, anyway. All of the NL Central for sure. Brett Myers as a #2 is surely a questionmark. As are John Maine and Javier Vazquez. Is Kershaw the Dodgers #2 now behind Billingsley, with Lowe and Penny gone? Huge upside but definitely a questionmark. I'm not talking about question marks, I'm talking about injury and regression. With those teams you're pretty know what you're getting and aren't really counting on those guys to be great. We're counting on that from Harden and Dempster. The bottom line is that if Harden and Dempster get injured and suck, the rotation is not good. That is relevant because there is a pretty good chance both of those things happen. If Harden and Dempster get injured and suck, then Lilly and Marquis/Marshall/Johnson move up the ladder and instead of being a vastly better rotation, it's a similar rotation. I really don't think you've had a look at what some of these teams have going on right now. There are still FAs yet to sign, but it's not pretty a lot of places. Just to give an example, the Mets now show Santana, Maine, Pelfrey, Niese, Knight. Ugh. The Cubs could lose two guys and still beat that 2-5. Yes but the Mets will likely have a better offense and bullpen. Plus the Mets aren't that great. We're trying to be better than everybody else, not comparable.

Umm. All of 'em. Okay, so name a contender whose numbers 2 and 3 starters are as likely to get hurt and regress as Harden and Dempster Haha. Yeah, right. I'll get right on that. Any player can get hurt or regress. Uhh yeah, but what players are as likely as Harden and Dempster? It's not jyst a chance, it's a good chance. So you say "all of em" when I ask what teams are that suspect, and then why I ask to give an example you sau "haha, yeah right" Well played. I already gave examples. I said ALL OF THEM. That's not an example, that's a blanket statement because you have no answer. Name one contender who has a number 2 that is as likely to get hurt as Harden and a number 3 who is as likely to add a run and a half onto his ERA as Dempster. Just one

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. Marshall is extremely valuable when Rich Harden is in your rotation. Without Marshall who iflls in for him when he misses half the season? Samardzija? Guadin? Guzman? DeRosa is also more valuable than you're making him out to be. He's not just a 2B, he can play everywhere. That would be especially valuable if we sign Bradley. Would you seriously trade DeRosa, Marshall, Vitters, Pie, Cedeno, Hart and Guzman for Peavy? That is a bad trade, any way you slice it. Plus, what happens if you need upgrades at the deadline? What happens if the bullpen sucks, or Ramirez goes down for the season? What do you have to trade? Absolutely nothing.

Umm. All of 'em. Okay, so name a contender whose numbers 2 and 3 starters are as likely to get hurt and regress as Harden and Dempster Haha. Yeah, right. I'll get right on that. Any player can get hurt or regress. Uhh yeah, but what players are as likely as Harden and Dempster? It's not jyst a chance, it's a good chance. So you say "all of em" when I ask what teams are that suspect, and then why I ask to give an example you sau "haha, yeah right" Well played.

Umm. All of 'em. Certainly most, anyway. All of the NL Central for sure. Brett Myers as a #2 is surely a questionmark. As are John Maine and Javier Vazquez. Is Kershaw the Dodgers #2 now behind Billingsley, with Lowe and Penny gone? Huge upside but definitely a questionmark. I'm not talking about question marks, I'm talking about injury and regression. With those teams you're pretty know what you're getting and aren't really counting on those guys to be great. We're counting on that from Harden and Dempster. The bottom line is that if Harden and Dempster get injured and suck, the rotation is not good. That is relevant because there is a pretty good chance both of those things happen.

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.

Umm. All of 'em. Didn't the Phillies just win a World Series with that rotation? Yup. I rest my case. So because the Phillies won the World Series with a mediocre rotation, it would be okay for the Cubs rotation to be mediocre. Awesome.

Umm. All of 'em. Okay, so name a contender whose numbers 2 and 3 starters are as likely to get hurt and regress as Harden and Dempster

Because quantity matters? You can't just go throwing away every player you don't like. They still have value

Even his bat is mediocre

Not really. What contenders have a rotation whose second and third starters are that big of question marks? Harden isn't just a question mark, he's pretty much a lock to miss significant time. Dempster could very easily be a mid 4's ERA guy next season and it wouldn't (or shouldn't) really shock anyone. Well nobody really "knows" anything, but Zambrano's number has been getting worse each year, not better. Also I'd say Lilly has pretty much maxed out his talent.

I have my doubts that any improvement in RF will offset what will surely be a significant decrease in CF. Not to mention that DeRosa and Theriot will each probably take a step back

#-o lol so basically it's like... if two of our 3 best starters suck and/or get hurt, our rotation is questionable. cool.. You're acting like those 2 guys are extremely likely to stay healthy and perform like they did last year What are the chances of Harden missing significant time? What are the chance of Dempster pitching like he has his entire career? Yeah, it's not at all unlikely. It's not like I'm saying "What if Brandon Webb gets hurt and Dan Haren starts sucking?". No. Don't even try to deny that Harden and Dempster are huge question marks, and we're relying on both of them to be healthy and good.

#-o Instead of using a smiley how about you tell me how that's wrong

If those two things happen (with Marshall sliding in for Harden for over 1/2 the season and Dempster pitching just as an average starter) the rotation would still be well above average. Well above is a pretty vague statement. My guess is the lineup takes a step back, and if the rotation does to this team could easily miss the playoffs. I'm not sold on anything about this team yet. The only thing they've done so far is take a step back. The bullpen looks pretty questionable as well