Cubs sign DeRosa to 3 year deal

by kylejo on Nov 14, 2006 3:06 PM CST Comment 173 comments

Don't know what position he will play but good job Hendry, valuable player here. BlueMike, the Hendry-o-meter has reached 1. Here's the link: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2661869

Three years for 13 million, not too bad, I mean we are paying Ryan Dempster even more. Annnnnnd dont trade Felix Pie...im just trying to get the character limit up.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

0 recs | Comment 173 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

never mind on the position thing

the article says he will be the second baseman most likely...I would have been fine with Theriot at second but this is a good move.

by kylejo on Nov 14, 2006 3:03 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Adios Ronny Cedeno?

DeRosa is a 2nd baseman normally although he can play many positions. Guess that means that Ronny isn't in the plans for '07. This is a really nice pick-up. DeRoda is a very good player and he isn't that expensive. Let the new Cubs begin!

"If you can accept losing, you can't win." - Vince Lombardi

by bergs55 on Nov 14, 2006 3:06 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Hmm...

Okay.

4.3MM per. I'd rather him be used as a superutility, but perhaps that is what Theriot will be.

Anyone savvy on his defense at 2B?

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 3:06 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

defense looks pretty good

one error in 26 games at second, none in seven games at short, one in 64 games in the outfield....at third base though is not as good, 3 errors in 40 games. Overall it seems good...i wonder what his range is though because he isnt a basestealer.

by kylejo on Nov 14, 2006 3:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

So very excited over here in Wheaton

guys......DeRosa is exactly whom the CUBS should have targeted.....I thought that Hendry would miss out and have to settle for Kennedy.....thank GOD I was wrong!!!!!!

STEVE STONE!

by TheBeerBaron on Nov 14, 2006 3:15 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

i don't like it

Other than 2006, the rest of his career is quite Ramon Martinez-like. Last year was really his only good year that was even close to a full season (136 games), at age 31. He'd be an ok utility player, I guess, but the money he's getting suggests he'll be a starter at 2nd.

I'd rather save that money, put it towards Soriano, and have Theriot play 2nd with Cedeno as a fallback.

by MikeJ on Nov 14, 2006 3:15 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I agree

He'll be 32 years old, I believe, and his numbers are medicore until 2006.

"Life is a temporary victory over the causes which induce death." -- Sylvester Graham

by ExNorthsider on Nov 14, 2006 3:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

if we are

paying for career years, i'd rather pay durham for his.

the best way this could work out is if he played second base against right handers, and right field against lefties.

DEJESUS!!!

by tomas21 on Nov 14, 2006 3:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Save the money for someone more exciting. Give Theriot a chance to start. Looks like the Cubs are doing what they always do - throwing big bucks at older players who are mediocre to begin with and telling good young players in their own organization to get lost.

by danimal15 on Nov 14, 2006 4:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You nailed it MikeJ

Plus the latest "strong" offensive numbers were in hitter friendly Texas. 3 year deal much too much for (as you said) a Ramon Martinez type player.

The Wisconsin Badgers. The best 1 loss team in the country.

by wicubfan on Nov 14, 2006 4:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Starting 2B?

Is he a better hitter than Theriot? Seriously, look at Theriot's numbers...

Did you know that Theriot had the best OBP and OPS on the team last year?

I would much rather use DeRosa as a supersub if Theriot plays like he did last year.

by ontheuptick on Nov 14, 2006 3:16 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Theriot's numbers are small sample size...

...and not anywhere near is minor league totals.

I like Theriot, and I think he'll make the team as a sub and backup. And perhaps he does outplay DeRosa in ST or during the first part of the season and DeRosa simply becomes Jones's platoon partner.

Though for 4.3MM per I have a hard time seeing that happen.

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 3:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Did you know that

The Riot only has 147 MLB at bats? Yes, I love The Riot.....and his .395 OBP....but I like The Riot more as a Ryan Freel type....if Izturis could be phased out and have DeRosa and The Riot up the middle.....then have at it!

DeROSA!

by TheBeerBaron on Nov 14, 2006 3:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Theriot

looking at his major league numbers is very misleading because of the limited AB's.

look at his minor league numbers for a better story

he had a .755 OPS in AA in 2005

and a .745 OPS in AAA in 2006

he's a fine utility player

DeRosa has increased his OPS each of the last 3 seasons

while his 2006 was probably an anomaly, he's fine for the money we're paying him. 4.3 million is only 1.8 more than what we were paying Neifi last year

this is fine as a move

Soriano is not out of the picture, we're supposedly looking at him as a CF

by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 14, 2006 3:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Guys, Don't look at Theriot's minor league numbers

and I'll tell you why. Theriot himself said that his hitting took a dramatic turn for the positive after he decided to quit switch hitting (which he had done most all of his time in the minors) and concentrate on hitting righthanded. That's the main reason why he experienced so much success last year.

I realize 150 AB's isn't a ton, but it's a decent sample size.

by ontheuptick on Nov 14, 2006 4:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The best way to look at DeRosa it seems is...

...welcome back Mark Grudzielanek.

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 3:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

and what was wrong with Grudz

Should have kept him instead of walker
Congrates on his first Gold Glove this year
Don't know if DeRosa is better than Thierot
but let em fight is out for a starting job

I love the ballpark. I love the city. I love the fans. Aside from how we've played this year, there's nothing not to like about Chicago." Greg Maddux 7/29/06

by jessica on Nov 14, 2006 3:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I didn't say it was bad necessarily...

...just that his career splits seem to indicate he is this kind of player.

I liked Grudz.

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 3:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Big difference

DeRosa is a lot easier to spell than Grudzielanek.

When trouble arises there is always one individual who perceives a solution and is willing to take command. Very often, that individual is crazy. - Dave Barry

by Jesse Guam on Nov 14, 2006 3:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

but

does he keep the Southport bars in business?

SINATRO!!!! Its music to my ears.

by flyball on Nov 14, 2006 3:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Allow me to qualify that...

...as if we're lucky he'll be Mark Grudzielanek.

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 3:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Numbers are similar to Grudzielanek...

...which isn't bad at all. This is an upgrade to Cedeno to say the least. TheRiot is still a little green but I wouldn't be surprised if he's used as trade bait...still, for 4 million, why not?

"If you can accept losing, you can't win." - Vince Lombardi

by bergs55 on Nov 14, 2006 3:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Or Mickey Morandini

Chicks dig the long ball

by Will23 on Nov 14, 2006 3:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Grudz and Morandini

didn't cost over $4 mln a year (though Jeff Blauser was just as bad as DeRosa and cost similar). I guess that's what you pay these days for a guy who has one successful major league season.

by danimal15 on Nov 14, 2006 4:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I like

the signing as a "super-sub" like Chone Figgins or Ryan Freel.

I suppose he's a better option at second base than throwing a ton of money at Ray Durham or Adam Kennedy. The good news is that if Theriot emerges and can play second, DeRosa is flexible enough to move to another position.

Hopefully, Piniella will be smart enough to use him properly. I wouldn't like this signing if Dusty were still in charge.

by Josh77 on Nov 14, 2006 3:19 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

RE:

Hopefully, Piniella will be smart enough to use him properly.

I am confident that he will.....sure, DeRosa is coming off of a career year....his first with more than 118 games played (136).....but he looked sharp all season....do you think it's a fluke? Or do you think that hitting along side Young the past two seasons helped?

DeROSA!

by TheBeerBaron on Nov 14, 2006 3:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

In the end............

..........this is like last year's signing of Neif! except it's involving more years at a higher salary.

They're less than two years apart in age and their career stats are far from distinguished. Yes, Perez is deficient in BA/OBP, but peel back DeRosa's 2006 "monster" season and the overall differences start to get fuzzy.

Not sure why Hendry did this. Too much for too long and for a guy too weak to command such terms.

by tville on Nov 14, 2006 10:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

last time i checked

neifi couldnt take a walk to save his life, while derosa put up an obp about .360

by kylejo on Nov 14, 2006 11:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

As mentioned in my post...........

.......Neif! has a poor OBP. In fact, his career OBP is 33 points less than DeRosa's.

And, as mentioned, factor out 2006 (career best OPB for DeRosa; career worst for Perez) and this gap dwindles to less than 25 points. Still significant, I suppose, but we're not talking about Hall of Fame numbers in either case.

The reality is neither of these guys are great offensive players, but now the Cubs are paying a hell of a lot more for a longer span of time for essentially the same results.

by tville on Nov 15, 2006 12:04 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Interesting

when DeRosa's name came up in a Trib article a few weeks ago, it was ridiculed, BCBers were called lemmings and attacked for believing that this signing was in the works.

Somebody should keep track of these things.

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 3:19 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

This would be

a good wa to keep JJ away from left handed pitching

by Laven on Nov 14, 2006 3:19 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Yep,

I think Hendry is going to save the FA money for pitching.

"Chicago baseball fans, who are composites of scar tissue and mortifying memories..." - George F. Will

by eswan9 on Nov 14, 2006 3:20 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

2B?

Put him at SS. He hits better than Izturis, right.

Play him at RF when a lefty is pitching.

Lets not waste him at 2B when we have 3 others that can play there.

by cubfaninSTL on Nov 14, 2006 3:21 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Not too bad?

What? This is such a horrible deal it actually made me laugh. This isn't even horrible. It's just plain dumb. No other general manager in the history of baseball would have considered signing this guy to the contract Hendry just did. It's quite laughable when you think about it. 3 years and $13 million for a guy who has a .742 OPS over the last 3 seasons to go along with a .331 OBP, which unsurprisingly, are nearly identical to his career numbers.

Wow. If this weren't so funny, I'd be upset.

by Maddog on Nov 14, 2006 3:25 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

LMAO!!!!!!

It is Jones contract all over again......

No More Negativity! I am reborn!!!!!!

by timeforachange on Nov 14, 2006 3:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Hahaha..oh wait...

For all the spewing, hissing, and growling over the Jones signing, the season that Jackie Jones was well worth the money we spent.

4-4.5 mil isn't awful.. I was hoping for more in the 3-3.5 neighborhood but getting a super sub cost the Cubs an extra mil a year.

by cubsfan2883 on Nov 14, 2006 3:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Trends...

Jones was trending downwards...and still is in all likelihood. For the record, I didn't much mind the signing of Jones. It wasn't as bad as some made it sound and he carried his own weight in 2006, but I do also recognize that he's not likely to repeat the 2006 season he had.

Any contract in this range isn't crippling to a team, but the combination of contracts like this is. For DeRosa and Jones combined, the Cubs could get a legitimate player if you add a couple more million.

by Maddog on Nov 14, 2006 3:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes

I agree (although perhaps with less venom). Also note that DeRosa batted .200 in his final 100 at-bats last year with just 1 HR. Utility players shouldn't cost $13MM/3yr.

"Life is a temporary victory over the causes which induce death." -- Sylvester Graham

by ExNorthsider on Nov 14, 2006 3:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Depends on how the rest of the market...

...shakes out, imo.

I do disagree that no other GM was going to give DeRosa 3 years. There has been plenty of speculation that he would get just that.

However, I am not exactly enthralled with this deal, DeRosa, at best, becomes the return of Mark Grudzielanek.

And 3 years is way too many.

Would Theriot have been so much worse?

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 3:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Grudzielanek

Grudzielanek drove in over 60 ones exactly once in his career and it certainly wasn't when he was 31 like DeRosa's 74 last year. Perhaps it's just that he's blossoming at an older age like say....Gary Matthews Jr.?

Eighty-five percent of the f*ckin' world is working. The other fifteen percent come out here. -- Lee Constantine Elia, 1983.

by krummy12 on Nov 14, 2006 3:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Why is this so bad?

Couldn't his breakout season last year be a good sign of things to come? Give him a chance.....first full season....

DeROSA!

by TheBeerBaron on Nov 14, 2006 3:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

the guy is 32 years old

and has had several years to prove he is just an average player

"Its not like we need 10-12 players to contend"

by ksucubbie on Nov 14, 2006 3:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Give him a chance?

That is a lot of money to "give a guy a chance."

Sure...I love to give players the benefit of the doubt. But spending that kind of money for a minimal upgrade over someone like Theriot seems pretty foolish to me...

by big_lowitzki on Nov 14, 2006 3:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Last year was his first season in which

he was given a full chance to showcase what he could do. He was great offensively last season and was MORE than versatile defensively.

DeROSA!

by TheBeerBaron on Nov 14, 2006 3:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I like DeRosa...

as a bench guy for one year 2.5MM.

3 years 4.3MM per and I get a little twitchy.

Here's hoping last year becomes the norm for him.

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 3:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

that simply not true

derosa had over 1000AB before last year to show what he is and you are smart enough to understand that one career year does not equal 13 million dollars

"Its not like we need 10-12 players to contend"

by ksucubbie on Nov 14, 2006 3:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Wow....ok...unwarrented personal

attacks are really mature!

I was big on DeRosa all season. Aside from his strikeouts, he showed great promise in a near-full time role. I truly believe that hitting with Michael Young and Teixeira for 2 years really helped his hitting approach. How else do you explain the career year?

Oh, but signing Gary Matthews Jr. to play CF again at about $8M/YR is ok though huh?

DeROSA!

by TheBeerBaron on Nov 14, 2006 3:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Despite whatever feelings abound for one...

Mark DeRosa right now, I must say, I do like your signature.

Well done.

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 3:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Doubtful.

Signing Sarge, Jr. to that contract is even worse than this contract. Both players will go back to the world of suck next year and the Cubs will probably be left footing the bill for 3 or 4 years of them sucking on the Cubs.

by Maddog on Nov 14, 2006 3:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

no no no

i wasnt attacking you im saying i know your smart enough to pick apart a career year outlier from someones real talent--

"Its not like we need 10-12 players to contend"

by ksucubbie on Nov 14, 2006 3:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Be accurate

DeRosa never was a starter until 2004 when he was benched one month into the season after a poor start.

2006 was the first year in his career he was penciled in to the line-up each day and every day and the first time he played a full season as a starter.

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 3:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Shouldn't that tell you something?

That no other manager or general manager felt it necessary until 2006 to make him a starter?

That tells me something without even looking at the stats.

by Maddog on Nov 14, 2006 3:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

If the Cubs spend 120-130 Mil

In the grand scheme of things what is 4-5 mil. I meant we spent more on Mike Remlinger (5.3 mil his lat year in Chicago) this signing isn't great but if DeRosa is able to replicate his 2006 he'll be fine.

by cubsfan2883 on Nov 14, 2006 3:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

But...

that's an almost certainty to not happen. He had a career year last year. Career years are not replicated. They come and go. He'll return to the .260/.325/.435 hitter he was before the career year. And if $4 million keeps us from going after a guy like Schmidt or Soriano or Zito...it's a tremendous amount of money. A guy who could put up the lines that DeRosa will over the next 3 years are easily available on the waiver wire and in each team's farm system for next to no cost.

by Maddog on Nov 14, 2006 3:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

While I agree

that he may regress towards his mean I don't think see him regressing to it.

I see him as a .270/.335 hitter with 10-15 HR's and 50-60 RBI's.

Is this worth 4 mil... No.. But is it an awful contract worth so much spit and hissing.. No.

The length again bothers me. Why we just hand 3 year contracts out like candy but refuse to go past 5 years with anyone seems short-sighted.

by cubsfan2883 on Nov 14, 2006 4:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well

you have to factor circumstances in there. The Braves had Chipper Jones to plug in at 3B. If you routinely benched players after one month when they get off to a slow start, you would bench D-Lee and Ramirez every year.

Obviously DeRosa is not the force offensively that those guys are, but the fact is, last year was the first year DeRosa got more than 309 ABs and he put up the numbers he did. You can rationalize all day long that he isn't this or that, but the numbers do not lie, and it is not over 134 ABs like Ryan Theriot.

If the Cubs had made a move like this last year to protect Ronny Cedeno, we wouldn't have had to look at his name in the line-up all year when he clearly was struggling.

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 4:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I was going to make the same argument...

but then I realized I was advocating platooning him.

So my argument was:

His averages are skewed because most of his career he was part-time.
Last year he was given somewhat full-time opportunities.
He performed well.

Therefore, he is a player who plays better playing nearly every day.

He has great stats against left-handed pitching.
Jacque Jones has above average stats against righties.

Therefore, he would be a perfect platoon.

But that means he wouldn't be full-time and we should expect him back at his 300 AB numbers.
It didn't logically make sense.

Thus, anyone who advocates him as anything other than a full-time starter really shouldn't also argue that we can expect him to have his 2006 numbers repeated.

But that's all my opinion, I could be wrong.

"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." -- Albert Einstein

by tyger1147 on Nov 14, 2006 4:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Then look at him as insurance

I think Jessica has it right. Let Theroit and DeRoda duke it out in ST. Best man wins. If it is Theroit and then he struggles as pitchers adjust, then you aren't stuck with no Plan B as with Cedeno.

It isn't so much DeRosa getting 300 ABs that is the problem, it's HOW he gets 300 ABs. If he starts the season on the bench, and then becomes the starter in June, I think you can expect him to perform somewhere close to what he did in 2006 (adjusting for park/league differences).

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 4:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think that all contracts are going to be

inflated. What MLB did by flaunting their influx of cash (or, rather, what the media did to MLB) is tell all the players' agents to add 30% to their asking prices.

"My uncle says you've got a screw loose." -- "Your uncle molests collies."

by jcub on Nov 14, 2006 4:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Great?

By no means was DeRosa great last year offensively. Decent, maybe even good? Yes, but not great.

by big_lowitzki on Nov 14, 2006 3:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Expectations

Sometimes when I read stuff like this, I wonder what the expectation is.

DeRosa had the 5th highest OPS of all the second baseman in MLB last year. Who was better? Utley, Druham, Cano, Uggla (barely).

The only one of those guys who is remotely available is Durham, who besides being a HUGE negative defensively, will surely command a lot more $$ than DeRosa (likely DOUBLE).

How can you not like this signing?

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 3:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Jazzman56 and TheBeerBaron....

in agreement?

What is the temperature in hell today? ;)

DeROSA!

by TheBeerBaron on Nov 14, 2006 4:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

great point

the negativity on this blog is absolutely mind blowing. No one can just say, hey, not a bad move, great obp last year, great ops for a second baseman, solid defense and under 5 a year for a short contract. Plus the ability to play almost every position? This is not going to put us over the top but geeze, i think it adds solid depth to our team and at least we wont have ray durham when he's forty.

by kylejo on Nov 14, 2006 4:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Except...

He wasn't a 2b. Less than 1/5 of his at-bats came at second.

I don't hate the guy, it just seems like a lot of money for a guy who just had a career year that was decent, but not great.

And I am not convinced that this is much of an upgrade over Theriot.

by big_lowitzki on Nov 14, 2006 4:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

hm...

..looking at his career marks he really hasn't played that many games at 2B.

Until I hear Hendry or Piniella say definitively that he's the starting 2B I'm going to assume he will be utilized much as he was elsewheres, that being, as a supersub who will garner about 350 PAs between platooning with Jones and filling in around the diamond.

I just can't buy yet that the Cubs have slated him to be their starting 2B until someone other than the AP says "expected".

I want to hear it from Hendry. Once I do, then I'll rip my hair out. 4.3MM over 3 yrs is exorbitant and ridiculous for supersub, but that can't be changed now, the only hope now is that DeRosa will be used properly.

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 4:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I thought

that in making the announcement the Cubs said they were acquiring DeRosa for 2B. All I am saying is that if the need is there for 2B, before you conclude that DeRosa is a bad signing, you have to evaluate what other options are available.

My comment wasn't about negativity, per se (although there is plenty of that) it is about reality checks. If you identify 2B as a need, who can you get that would be significantly better than DeRosa? Utley, Cano, Uggla, etc are NOT available. Durham? No. Then, who?

It's easy to criticize and complain, but I would be more impressed if and when somebody proposes a logical and superior alternative. I'd like to have Joe Morgan in his prime...but that ain't happening, either.

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 4:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'll agree..

He may be the tallest midget in the room..:)

The Wisconsin Badgers. The best 1 loss team in the country.

by wicubfan on Nov 14, 2006 5:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Alternatives are everywhere!!!!

DeRosa is a decent back-up. He had a career year in a great hitters park. I don't mind the $$ so much except that it probably means he'll be starting at 2nd base no matter how he does. I'd say the chances of Theriot and Derosa having similar stats is very high. I'd rather pay Theriot his minimum salary and use the few extra million to toss at a difference maker. If the Cubs fail to sign Lee or Soriano because of a few million, Derosa becomes a terrible signing. Year after year the Cubs overpay for mediocrity. If you're going to overpay at least do it for a star with a proven track record. I hope DeRosa somehow magically improved at age 32, but my head tells me, he'll hit .260 with little impact on the team.

by Rotodaddy on Nov 14, 2006 7:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

OK

Name some alternatives.

As pointed out elsewhere, DeRosa's numbers on the road were virtually identical to those at home, so you can forget the hitter's ballpark argument.

Theroit has a total of 30 some ballgames under his belt. You prepared to have another Cedeno type disaster on your hands in 2007? Obviously Hendry isn't.

Finally DeRosa's contract will have no impact on whether the Cubs do or do not get Soriano (or Leem who they aren't getting in any event).

by jazzman56 on Nov 16, 2006 1:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd rather have...

DeRosa than Durham. Durham makes more errors than I care to remember, and his offense isn't that much better than DeRosa's to make him a better choice.

by Macy on Nov 15, 2006 1:06 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Beerbaron...

...I obviously will root for DeRosa. In fact, let me be the first to say, GO DEROSA.

However, my expectations aren't very high for him.

Perhaps I'll be pleasantly surprised. But Hendry better have a lot more bullets in that gun of his and bigger targets than Mark DeRosa.

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 3:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I can understand that...

but I believe that his first full season is a good sign of what to expect....especially since he won't have to hit against the Oakland Athletics and Anaheim Angels anymore.

Ask yourself this......aren't you glad that TheBeerBaron was wrong about Adam Kennedy? I think that's what Hendry would traditionally have gone for....this is a step above that....

DeROSA!

by TheBeerBaron on Nov 14, 2006 3:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I suppose...

...but it's the same difference of choosing Dumb over Dumber.

We'll see. If DeRosa is utilized properly he could be a useful player. But even with being useful, he wasn't worth Jacque Jones money and commitment.

Did I just say Jacque Jones money?

ugh...

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 3:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It's not.

Career years happen all the time...they're called career years for a reason. This is a career .270 hitter whose obp is .331 in his career. It's possible I'm wrong here, but the overwhelming majority of the evidence we have says I'm not. This deal cannot be justified.

by Maddog on Nov 14, 2006 3:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Unlikely.

by Maddog on Nov 14, 2006 3:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think this deal...

...has the fingerprints of Sweet Lou all over it.

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 3:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree.

I don't doubt that Lou wanted DeRosa, but not at this price. This has Hendry's fingerprints on it in my opinion. So much so that it could have been, and probably was by some, predicted. DeRosa is not, under any circumstances, a guy that you make your first acquisition. He's someone you get to fill out the roster with. You cannot build around a replacement level player and that's what DeRosa is. This is Neifi, Rusch, and Dempster all over. Many blamed those deals on Baker. They clearly were architected by the genius general manager we have right now. If this deal wasn't so laughable, it would be frustrating and even angering, but I really can't stop laughing it's such a ridiculously awful deal.

by Maddog on Nov 14, 2006 3:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Give him a chance

What is this little league?

by ccd on Nov 14, 2006 6:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well the infield is set

Now on to the outfield where I think there's a queston as to who will be starting at all 3 positions.

by NO100 on Nov 14, 2006 3:27 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

yeah

i cant say im too impressed-- we just signed a guy who cant hit but plays good defense (Neifi) to a 3 year deal paying him 4 mill that we could have saved by using theroit

man this is a stinker of a deal

"Its not like we need 10-12 players to contend"

by ksucubbie on Nov 14, 2006 3:27 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

hey its a hell of a lot better

than signing ray durham for 10 mil a year, i like this, he can play short if izturis gets hurt and now theres no room for ronny.

by kylejo on Nov 14, 2006 3:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't have a problem...

with this signing, and even at this price, if the intent is to make him first man off the bench. As a starting second baseman though, I just don't get it. There are established glove men with better numbers out there. If he is a starter, this is destined to be a bust signing.

by Damen Jackson on Nov 14, 2006 3:39 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

for that money

I'd rather have Craig Wilson, a guy who can play RF/LF, power guy with lots of doubles. jesus.

by cashcowsquirtingsourmilk on Nov 14, 2006 3:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah...

Again, it's just a utilization issue for me. So I've got no beef until the lineup is officially announced for 2007. I'm a little surprised to see so many people hung up on the money. This is very consistent with the anticipated market in general, and what DeRosa was expected to sign for in particular.

by Damen Jackson on Nov 14, 2006 3:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

FWIW

DeRosa had more doubles last year than Craig Wilson has ever had in a single season in his career.

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 4:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

good!

thank you. I didn't know about the doubles

by cashcowsquirtingsourmilk on Nov 14, 2006 4:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

don't laugh but...

I picked this guy up as a free agent on my fantasy baseball team & for about a month or so he was a MONSTER!!!

hopefully this year was a sign of things to come but it's his ability to play ANYWHERE that makes me feel good about this signing!

in 2007 we're goin' to heaven!!!

by ryno4ever on Nov 14, 2006 3:41 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Seems like a RF platoon to me

DeRosa
AB---R---H---2B---3B---HR---RBI--BB---HBP--SO--SB--CS--AVG--OBP--SLG--OPS
vs. Left 146 20 50 15 0 7 27 13 0 27 3 1 .342 .394 .589 .983

Jones
AB---R----H---2B---3B---HR---RBI--BB---HBP--SO--SB--CS--AVG--OBP--SLG--OPS
vs. Right 396 54 120 24 1 21 59 33 2 83 8 1 .303 .358 .528 .886

Expensive, yes... but good, too. (notice I didn't say great).

But if they don't use him to platoon, which may be likely... well, then, whatever.

"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." -- Albert Einstein

by tyger1147 on Nov 14, 2006 3:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Wikipedia

is already updated.

by NO100 on Nov 14, 2006 3:53 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

He better not bat 2nd

I'm not at all a fan of this signing. DeRosa just happened to have a career year at a hitters park. Think it's more than coincidence.

I wouldn't be against him as a sub and at a price of about 2million a year, but as a starter and 4.3, I'm unimpressed.

Lou better put him as a 7 or 8 hitter and not even think about the 2 slot.

by Scott on Nov 14, 2006 3:55 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

for the record...

...he hit just as well, if not better, on the road then he did at home.

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 3:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

you're right

It was 2005 when he was absolutely putrid away from home.

Still not a fan of this signing.

by Scott on Nov 14, 2006 4:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not really..

His home away splits are nearly identical..
Home- 254 AB's .299/.358/.441
away - 266 .293/.355/.470

This means he showed more power on the road than at home. If you're going to complain, complain about the size of the contract or contract length..

Otherwise it really isn't a Glendon Ruschish signing.

by cubsfan2883 on Nov 14, 2006 4:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well.

A lot of commentary here, I've been away from the computer for a while, so this is my first chance to chime in.

Though the wire service story says he'll start at 2B, I wouldn't assume that. He's never been a regular starter anywhere -- even last year, when he played more or less full-time. I'd love to see him as a "super-sub".

The money isn't ridiculous. Three years is a bit much, though. This seems to be Hendry's MO -- give extra years to people he wants.

I'll reserve judgment on this one until I see who else is signed/acquired.

by Al on Nov 14, 2006 3:55 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I agree on the position...

I don't think they'll just give him the 2B position. Lou doesn't seem as attached to guys like Dusty was (for example, Dusty consistently claiming that Jones was an "every day" player and not platooning him). Lou will do what's right.

If he is used as the starting RF EVERY TIME we face a lefty, this will be a very good signing, mark it down.

Anything to get Jock out of the lineup against lefties. Also, notice DeRosa had a near .400 obp last year against lefties. Hopefully, Lou will be smart enough to have Theriot at 2B and DeRosa at RF when we face a lefty.

by ontheuptick on Nov 14, 2006 4:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Thats what I was thinking Al

I'll reserve some judgement until I see the final product. He would make a good utility guy, but I don't know about being the starter at 2nd. Sounds like some trades could be brewing since the Cubs have like 37 players at 2nd... Oh wait, no more walker or Neifi!

by LT on Nov 14, 2006 4:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

In any case...

... this probably means the end of Ronny Cedeno on the major league roster. For that alone, it's an improvement.

by Al on Nov 14, 2006 4:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Good .. Ronny needs more development

That's all I'm gonna say about it. The Experiment is over. It didn't work.

Well, Next Year is here .. and Jack's century's gotta end some time .. GO CUBBIES!

by cubnational on Nov 14, 2006 4:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I guess we'll see

but $4+M a year is a lot for a bench player. I think he's being signed as the everyday 2B.

by NO100 on Nov 14, 2006 4:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It really isn't...

It's been discussed in many circles, here and elsewhere, but I have to say it again. The market is going to be obscene this year!!!! Middleof the rotation pitchers seeing 10 million plus. Aging outfielders at 10 million. Middle relievers seeing 6-8. Jose Valentin's deal was 4 million, plus significant incentives. This is not going to be even close to the shocker deal of the season.

by Damen Jackson on Nov 14, 2006 4:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The Valentin deal

was for one year only. Furthermore, didn't he got almost all the starts down the stretch at 2B for the Mets? While he wasn't a full fledged starter, he was more than a bench player and I know the Mets considered him integral in having the season they did.

by NO100 on Nov 14, 2006 4:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think..

the length of the deal was more an issue of age. My point is that they happily paid 5-7 million for a player that may very well be a non-starter in 2007. It's just that kind of market.

by Damen Jackson on Nov 14, 2006 4:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, I see your point

I can't say I disagree with you. It very well may play out that way. I'm just not convinced at this point.

Outrageous money is outrageous money and I do believe there will at least be some fiscal responsibility. Maybe I'm just not open to it yet, but I still think that $4+M is buying the Cubs a starting player.

But I'm not really arguing with you. The handwriting on the wall right now is pointing in your direction.

by NO100 on Nov 14, 2006 4:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Me neither..

I'll buy the first round at the Cubbie Bear if he ends up the starter. We can cry in our beers together.

by Damen Jackson on Nov 14, 2006 5:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

BTW

I assume y'all know this, but DeRosa started more games in RF than he did any other position for the Rangers last year (59).

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 4:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

ARam

If nothing else, this signing means that the next time ARam tweaks his hammy, the Cubs won't have to run Ronnie Cedeno out there. I see this as being a bench strengthening move as much as it is a lineup move. $4m seems like a lot less when you remember who they were putting at 3rd last season when Aram was hurt.

Like Al says, it keeps Cedeno, who adds absolutely nothing of value, off the roster. Will DeRosa repeat his '06 numbers? Probably not. But he's apparently well-versed in moving over runners, baserunning, working counts, etc., and now the Cubs have a manager who appreciates that.

by Seamer on Nov 15, 2006 12:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

further

it was pointed out at 1060 that we have given up the 3rd pick in the 2nd round for this guy

"Its not like we need 10-12 players to contend"

by ksucubbie on Nov 14, 2006 4:13 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Now THAT...

... is not good.

by Al on Nov 14, 2006 4:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

are we absolutely certain of that?

If so, then egads, this just got worse.

Anyone else confirm this from a reputable source?

This part of the issue always seems hazy to a lot of people.

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 4:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

he is a type B FA and this year you still lose draft picks for those-- our 1 pick is proteced but we lose a very high pick for a "super sub"

"Its not like we need 10-12 players to contend"

by ksucubbie on Nov 14, 2006 4:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Elias Sports Rankings

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2006-10-31-elias-rankings.htm#nl

by cubsfan2883 on Nov 14, 2006 4:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

texas gets a sandwich pick, we dont lose anything

While the classification modifications won't take place until next year, the compensation for each group changes immediately. Type A free agents will yield the signing team's first-round pick (provided it's not in the upper half of the first round) and a supplemental first-rounder, the same as before. But Type B compensation goes from the signing team's first-round pick (with the same upper-first-round protection) to a supplemental first-round choice, and Type C goes from a supplemental second-rounder to nothing. Teams still have to offer their free agents arbitration in order to receive compensation.

by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 14, 2006 5:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

mmm...sandwich pick...

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 5:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes and No

If we sign someone else who is a Type A free agent, we would have lost that pick anyway. We can't lose it twice. I'd expect the Cubs to sign at least one player higher ranked than DeRosa.

I don't particularly like this acquisition, but the draft pick isn't a big concern to me.

The call of the Cub fan, c. 1893: "one long, ravaged, derisive yell...a cyclonic whoop!"

by zambranofan on Nov 14, 2006 4:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

good point...

...since we stood to lose the pick anyway...but even still...

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 4:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

NOT ACCURATE

the new CBA goes into effect THIS SEASON for draft compensation

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/askba/262766.html

by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 14, 2006 5:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I have to agree with the Beer Baron

I like this signing for a couple reasons. First, the guy played on winning teams with the Braves and even though he wasn't a full-time starter, I tend to like guys who have played on successful teams (such as the Braves in the early 00's). Not saying he will be the savior, but there is something to be said for players who have been in winning environments.

Second, it was his first season with over 300 at-bats. Contrary to people who compare him to Neifi, Perez had six full seasons as a starter with 500+ at-bats before the Cubs signed him and you knew what he brought to the table. I'm encouraged by DeRosa's numbers (even though they were in a hitters park), plus he was sitting behind guys like Giles, Furcal, Jones (Chipper and Andrew) when he was in Atlanta.

We should probably recognize the signing for what it is: a safety net in case the Cubs can't net a big-time outfielder. I like the Chone Figgins comparison (because of the number of positions he can play, not for his speed).

by gentbaseball12 on Nov 14, 2006 4:15 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Bench Players

It has been noted that Piniella wants a player who can step in in case there are injuries. Good job Hendry! Izturis is injury prone. it also has been mentioned that Cedeno, Murton, Jones are possible trade chips.

by fuzzycubfan on Nov 14, 2006 4:22 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I'd guess that Theriot and some of the other

young guys will be going in a deal for a pitcher.

As far as the money goes, I think the early signings will be cheap when the off season is done. I think the money is going to be obscene this off season.

by cubswin on Nov 14, 2006 4:24 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

What?!?!?!

THREE years? It's Jones all over again.

Uhhhhhhhhhh. . . . .

HENDRY!

by cubbiejulie on Nov 14, 2006 4:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Yes. The Cubs Official Typist

lost her left pinky finger in a tragic toy train accident. Since she can't reach the 1 on the keyboard, she always types a 3 into the years blank on the Cubs players' contracts.

Unfortunate, really.

"My uncle says you've got a screw loose." -- "Your uncle molests collies."

by jcub on Nov 15, 2006 1:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

First DeRosa...

Next DeSosa!

"If you can accept losing, you can't win." - Vince Lombardi

by bergs55 on Nov 14, 2006 4:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Nice.

Post of the Day!

by NO100 on Nov 14, 2006 4:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Lipstick on a pig

The best case scenario:

DeRosa shifts between second and right, so essentially Theriot platoons with Jones.

If DeRosa isn't productive, you bring up Eric Patterson mid-season and Mark goes back to the bench.

The call of the Cub fan, c. 1893: "one long, ravaged, derisive yell...a cyclonic whoop!"

by zambranofan on Nov 14, 2006 4:34 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Eric Patterson

AFL update: .358/.425/.495 12 out of 14 SBs

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 4:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

This is a good point...

Patterson could be ready for the majors sooner rather than later, making this signing fairly unnecessary. Still, having DeRosa and Theriot as your backup infielders wouldn't be a bad thing, except you're paying DeRosa a starter's salary.

by mportsch on Nov 14, 2006 4:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Although I forgot to mention,

I've read lately at the Cub Reporter that Patterson's defense has regressed at 2B - here's a link. Arizona Phil believes Patterson will need to move to the outfield, possibly CF. Of course, the presence of Felix Pie might make that unlikely. Something to keep in mind when discussing Patterson.
Also, BP had this mention of Patterson yesterday:

After leading the Midwest League in batting last year, Patterson's Double-A showing was a significant dropoff to .263/.330/.438, but a late-season surge at Triple-A brought some of the buzz back. That buzz is only growing in Arizona, as Patterson has smacked 12 hits in his last six games to raise his AFL average to .358 to go with 25 runs scored in 24 games, thanks in part to a .425 on-base percentage and a league-leading 12 stolen bases. Scouts have been impressed with Patterson's speed, approach, and gap power, leaving many to wonder if he's got a shot at the big league second base job in early 2007, if not Opening Day.

So, it sounds like Patterson's offense is really progressing, while his defense is regressing. Hopefully he can work out the defensive issues and remain at 2B, rendering DeRosa to a utility role by 2008.

by mportsch on Nov 14, 2006 4:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes

I read this and did some checking on my own. Patterson has made 6 errors, but hasn't made one since the first part of the season. Most of his errors were throwing errors.

If the errors were due to his having an inadequate arm, then it would be a problem moving him to the outfield.

More likely his arm is fine and it is mechanical, which can be corrected. So far, he has played every game at 2B. Since the AFL is a perfect opportunity to try players at different positions (Scott Moore, for example, has played 3B, 1B and the outfield), I would conclude that, at least for now, the Cubs project Patterson as a 2B.

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 5:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

if eric's ready

at any point then awesome, he would beat theriot and derosa out and wed have good utility depth on the bench and if patterson IS starting at second, then he's getting the league minimum so the money this signing wouldnt really matter even if you just have derosa as a super sub

by kylejo on Nov 14, 2006 5:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Patterson's not ready

check his AA stats last year, he hit like .270

also, the AFL hitting stats are REALLY overrated

the pitchers in the AFL are usually guys that didnt get enough innings because of injuries or lower level guys, while the hitters are AA and AAA prospects often

hitting dominates that league

by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 14, 2006 5:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

true

because didnt the beloved ronald cedeno hit about .385 there last year? im not saying he's ready, just responding to speculation, but his triple a numbers were encouraging. Its a good situation either way, if and when he is ready then a guy like derosa would just fill another role

by kylejo on Nov 14, 2006 5:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Ronny Cedeno

hit .200 in the AFL in 2004. He hit .380 something in winter ball last year. Which one is the better predictor?

Sucess in the AFL is the best indicator we have of future success in the majors.

It is better than big numbers at AAA, it is better than success in Winter Ball in South America and better than stardom in Japan. You can look it up.

The 2006 All-Star Game in Pittsburgh featured 25 AFL alums, including first-time All-Stars David Wright, Chase Utley and Ryan Howard.

The rosters of the two teams in the World Series last year contained 24 AFL alums (out of 50 players).

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 5:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think Hendry is overpaying...

but DeRosa should be a positive contributor to the club with his flexibility. BP has his career defensive Rate2 for each position as follows:

Pos Rate2
2B 106
3B 90
SS 113
RF 106

So, he's been above-average defensively at 2B, SS, and RF, and can play 3B in a pinch. Unfortunately, he hasn't played much SS in recent years, so I'd take his numbers there with a grain of salt.
Offensively, he has a career .250 EqA, and is coming off a career year in which he posted a .265 EqA at age 31. I expect he'll put up an EqA somewhere between .250 and .260 each year of the deal while playing primarily 2B and RF (as Jacque's platoon partner). This isn't great, but isn't bad either. I probably would have tried Theriot at 2B and spent the $4M elsewhere, but having DeRosa aboard is a safer option as long as his salary doesn't prevent other moves. Hopefully this move will appear minor when Hendry's offseason is complete.

by mportsch on Nov 14, 2006 4:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Buster Olney

There is a good story about DeRosa on Buster Olney's blog from 11/9. I think it requires a subscription but here is an excerpt:
===============
"He's made himself into a very capable offensive and versatile player," says a veteran scout. "He can be a Chone Figgins-Tony Phillips type of guy. He's the total package -- probably a shade above an average defensive third baseman, an adequate second [baseman], an average outfielder, and he kills left-handed pitchers. He's a very intelligent kid, a leader in the clubhouse.

"His versatility is well-suited for a championship contender."
==================

by amisaid1 on Nov 14, 2006 4:52 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Kid?

Buster Olney calls 31-year-olds 'kids'?

by mportsch on Nov 14, 2006 5:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh, veteran scout, not Olney.

by mportsch on Nov 14, 2006 5:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

What are the chances that the veteran scout

quoted in the article is Gary Hughes?

by mportsch on Nov 14, 2006 5:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It's a relativist statement

I call ML baseball players kids even though they are approx the same age or older than I. It's their relative age/exp not so much their age persay.

by cubsfan2883 on Nov 14, 2006 5:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Three things

I think it will officially come out of Jim Hendry's and/or Lou Piniella's mouth that Mark DeRosa was signed to be the EVERYDAY Cub 2nd baseman. He hasn't been signed to be the super utility guy he was in Texas in 06. Maybe he plays a game or two at several positions, but 90% of his at bats will come at 2nd base. At least that's what I think Hendry/Piniella will say.
The Cub organization doesn't seem too high on Eric Patterson. Surely, they must have their reasons.
Ryan Theriot hasn't been screwed out of anything. Why? Because he was never handed anything in the first place, other than probably an invite to spring training to compete for a roster spot.

Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I READ YOUR BOOK !!!

by BlueMike on Nov 14, 2006 5:14 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Phil Rogers Confirms

Per article posted several moments ago on chicagosports.com, Mark DeRosa is QUOTED as saying one reason he signed with the Cubs is to be the everyday 2nd baseman.

DeRosa isn't going to be super-utility anything. Get this into your heads folks.

Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I READ YOUR BOOK !!!

by BlueMike on Nov 14, 2006 5:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

okey dokey then...

...another thing to keep in mind.

Everyone is adamant about JJ being platooned next year, but it's possible Jones isn't even a Cub uni next year.

Right now though. We seriously need some more left-handed sticks.

PINIELLA!

by theprognosticator on Nov 14, 2006 5:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Here is the link

to the article Mike is talking about. Phil Rogers is the one who says DeRosa will be playing 2nd base. DeRosa himself says he wants the chance to play second.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-061114cubsderosa,1,2290617.story?coll=chi-spor tstop-hed

Please, please, please keep Orange guy!!!!!!

by sue369 on Nov 14, 2006 6:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Question

"The Cub organization doesn't seem too high on Eric Patterson. Surely, they must have their reasons."

Why do you say that? Other than the obvious fact that Patterson is 22 and likely a year or two away?

Why would they use up one of their 7 slots in the AFL for Patterson, if they don't consider him of their top prospects? Pie isn't in Arizona...

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 5:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Arizona Fall League argument?

No. Sorry, but the guys the Cubs planted down there aren't spectacular or "high-ceiling" guys, to include Jake Fox. Don't attack me regarding Patterson. But the writing is clearly on the wall.

Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I READ YOUR BOOK !!!

by BlueMike on Nov 14, 2006 5:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

How is

asking a follow-up question to your post attacking you? Sheesh.

I can list several indicators, yes, including the fact that he in playing in the AFL, that Patterson is considered by the Cubs to be one of their top prospects.

All I did was to ask you for some support for your statmement that the Cubs do not think highly of him. And you whiffed.

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 5:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Eric Patterson

Might be a "top prospect" within the Cub system, but that isn't saying very much. Look, the Cubs didn't dole out $13 million to Mark DeRosa to serve as everyday 2nd baseman because they are bullish on the future of Eric Patterson. Patterson is a guy who played in Double A ball last season, so in theory his major league timetable is soon if he indeed is any good. Which I have my suspicions the Cub organization doesnt' believe he is.

Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I READ YOUR BOOK !!!

by BlueMike on Nov 14, 2006 5:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I understand

that you don't think much of Patterson as a prospect. But, you said the Cubs don't think much of him and so far the only (extremely weak) support you have offered is that they just signed Mark DeRosa.

2nd Question: If the Cubs don't consider Patterson a top prospect, why was he voted organization's 2005 Minor League Player of the Year? Do you really think they have given up on him based on his .738 OPS at West Tennessee last year?

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 5:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not to be a smart ass.....

but is Patterson winning the award due to his outstanding skill level or an indictment on the Cubs farm system?

No More Negativity! I am reborn!!!!!!

by timeforachange on Nov 14, 2006 6:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

A liitle

of both, I think.

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 6:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, I think Theriot...

will be the utility guy and DeRosa start. Unless the Cubs, i.e., Pinella does not want Theriot in that role. If they do use him as utility he should play alot because Itzuris sucks at the plate and could be an injury risk and DeRosa looks like a one year wonder at the plate. If DeRosa sucks at the plate in 2007, it SHOULD mean some ABs for Theriot.

Realistically Theriot may be nothing more than a utility guy, but that's a very good and important gig. However, I don't understand the amount and years handed to DeRosa. Maybe Hendry was scared that DeRosa was ready to bolt back to Texas for LESS money like Aramis and so he pre-empted that move? Another great job, Jim! If DeRosa is indeed another utility player, then you didn't need to spend that to add him and you may have had a guy on your roster already for even less money. Hendry just can't help but mess up these kind of deals.

by DudeVf1 on Nov 14, 2006 8:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Thierot SHOULD not be trade bait

How much you gonna get for a guy with very limited
numbers ? Is he going to be someone that clinches a
deal for Westbrook, Wells etc. NO ! We need him. Got to
keep some cheap versatile guys around
Tragically for me Murton probably IS worth a lot relatively in
trade but I would surely try to keep him unless offered a lot

I love the ballpark. I love the city. I love the fans. Aside from how we've played this year, there's nothing not to like about Chicago." Greg Maddux 7/29/06

by jessica on Nov 14, 2006 5:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

The odds of Theriot

working for the Geek Squad at Best Buy alongside some of the members of this board in two years is a lot greater of him carving out a major league role. Please, this is Chadd Meyers redo. Get over yourselves on Ryan Friggin I Caught Lightning in a Bottle But Ain't Very Good Theriot.

Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I READ YOUR BOOK !!!

by BlueMike on Nov 14, 2006 5:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Did you

channel Sylvia Browne to get that information?

Please, please, please keep Orange guy!!!!!!

by sue369 on Nov 14, 2006 5:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

as soon as you

get over that clown Izturis.

TRAMMELL!

by Faith plus 1 on Nov 14, 2006 11:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Grudz..

He cost the Royals one million bucks last year as a free agent after posting with our dear redbirds a .294 Avg to go with 8 HRs and 59 RBIs... Got em the same number plus a little Gold glove... One Million Bucks<4.3 Millions.

NUFF F####NG SAID, god, and I who was euphoric after that Aram deal..gfsdjfcghknfgiwjnhdfkjxemriguwo45t0245692-9586

please for the love of God do not even think of pulling a sarge junior on us...we beg of you hendry...we beg

by Chitown Mojo on Nov 14, 2006 6:02 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Post of the day

Now that was funny. Laugh out loud funny.

Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I READ YOUR BOOK !!!

by BlueMike on Nov 14, 2006 6:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You very well know...

That it's not as funny as it sounds.

by Chitown Mojo on Nov 14, 2006 6:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

But I do have to admit, I get a mild sick delight in seeing Cub fans go into vapor lock over things like Jacque Jones, Mark DeRosa, Neifi Perez, Donuts Rusch signings.

I've been a diehard for 30 years. I can't cry anymore. I have to laugh for pure sanity sake. This organization is so unbelievably, massively screwed up that it's the only route to go.

Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I READ YOUR BOOK !!!

by BlueMike on Nov 14, 2006 6:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Seriously Mike

Who would you target for the 2007 roster? We all know how bad the Cubs were in 2006. When you throw out names, I can't always tell if you are mocking the organization (as in, "this is the type of player they ALWAYS get") or if you are actually making a suggestion.

If you were GM, what would you do?

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 6:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

What would I do?

Admit defeat. Tear this thing down to bare metal. Rebuild. Starting with player scouting and development. Nobody would be an untouchable.

Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I READ YOUR BOOK !!!

by BlueMike on Nov 14, 2006 6:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

OK

And I presume that means you would be okay with 90 + loss seasons in 2007-08 (if not 100+ losses).

by jazzman56 on Nov 14, 2006 7:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The ends

then justify the means.

What Mike doesn't realize is there isn't enough time for Hendry to be doing these things, he's dug his own grave, I doubt seriously he'll be resigned for 2007, therefore, any rebuilding would go into the hands of a new GM which really wouldn't be fair to that GM.

TRAMMELL!

by Faith plus 1 on Nov 14, 2006 11:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

36 year old Grudz's

2006 salary was four million dollars. I don't know where you got the one mil number.

by Matt Allison on Nov 15, 2006 8:04 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh...

and Freel costs the reds less than half a mill..So long Theriot, here's hoping you don't rot in the minors

by Chitown Mojo on Nov 14, 2006 6:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I'd also like to add that...

My love for the Cubs is unconditionnal, I'll die a cubs fan...but c'mon, I think with all the undeserved suffering we've endure we're now all martyrs, saints even. Reward us now. It's time.

by Chitown Mojo on Nov 14, 2006 6:09 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

the market context makes this deal absurd...

There are way too many second basemen on the market this season to justify this deal. DeRosa is a good player, but nowhere near $4 million in a regular offseason. In an offseason where Ray Durham, Todd Walker, Adam Kennedy, Mark Loretta, Akinori Iwamura, Julio Lugo, and Marcus Giles are/were all available, on the heels of a deal that netted the Indians Josh Barfield for a few prospects, and coming on after a year when Walker and Loretta were traded for peanuts... This is a vastly overpriced contract.

I give Hendry credit for the Ramirez contract - given the lack of 3rd basemen on the market he was signed below free market value. However, all the savings were just wasted on a guy whose best use is the short side of a platoon.

I'd be OK if we gave him a long-term deal that didn't overpay per season, or if we overpaid for a 1-year deal. However, we somehow gave him more years than we should have AND gave up more per year than was warrented.

The Cubs better shine 'fore twenty-oh-nine!

by shawndgoldman on Nov 14, 2006 7:43 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Apparently Derosa did not want to leave

any money out there to return to Texas, lol...Just think if Aramis had reacted as rationally as DeRosa, we'd have lost Aramis and over paid for a guy who I am not even sure should be classified as a starter?

by DudeVf1 on Nov 14, 2006 8:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

How?

We supposedly saved 20-30 Million on Aramis and just spent 13 on DeRosa

by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 15, 2006 8:29 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

easy...

Look at things on an annual basis, not on the total contract size.

Per year, the Cubs saved about $3-4 million on Ramirez. Since DeRosa isn't likely to significantly outperform a replacement-level player, we're about to waste about $4 million per season on him. The savings on Ramirez's deal are easily cancelled out by the DeRosa signing. We should be using young guys that make league-minimum to do what DeRosa and Blacno are going to do for the Cubs. The total spent on those two alone will be $6.5 million per season. That $6.5 million will make a BIG BIG difference in who else the Cubs can pursue.

The Cubs better shine 'fore twenty-oh-nine!

by shawndgoldman on Nov 15, 2006 12:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

yes

second base should be the cheapest position on the diamond to fill, unless you are getting someone like soriano or durham who can be expected to post numbers well over the norm for the position.

derosa is not that guy. in a career year, he was right in the middle of the pack compared to other second basemen. his babip was WAY over his career norms and the AL average, which means we can reasonably expect an significant regression in performance. babip is batting average of balls in play. it is a better indicator for pitchers, but even for hitters if the number is well off career norms, you can sort of say the player got lucky and a lot of his hits just happened to find holes.

So Hendry both overpaid for the position, and overpaid for the production he'll likely get. AND he already has no plans to use Derosa in the most valuable way-- in right field against left-handers. In doing so he wiped out any "savings" he got by signing Ramirez under market value (and i use quotes around savings, because he only had to resign him close to market this year because of combined incompetence 2 years ago and at the deadline).

Derosa might have a decent year, but that won't change the fact that this was a terribly signing in the vein of Rusch and Perez. Put it this way, wouldn't everyone rather have a 13 mil starter like zito or schmidt and a league average second baseman over a 8 or 9 mil starter like lily and derosa?

One of Hendry's biggest faults (and he has many) as a GM is paying a premium price for roles players who give you replacement level production. One has to only look at the league's two worst teams, the cubs and royals, to see how terribly that philosophy works.

DEJESUS!!!

by tomas21 on Nov 15, 2006 9:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I know nothing about this guy.

Looking at his stats, boy, we are paying for one year of performance at age 31 in a hitter's park? This is what it looks like to me. At least the Cubs went for someone perceived to have offensive skills. I hope that he can make it happen again in 2007, but I wouldn't call the guy a lock to keep a starting position for an entire season, as he seems to have done that just once in his career. At least Theriot should get opportunity to play.

by DudeVf1 on Nov 14, 2006 8:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Another case

of Hendry targeting a mid-level player and completely overpaying him, along with too long of a contract.

by Peoria Matt on Nov 14, 2006 9:02 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Solid Move

This is a solid move. Yes, the contract is a bit too much and too long, I won't argue that. However, I believe that this will be looked at later as a KEY signing. This guy is coming off a career year. Why do we assume that it was a fluke? It's tough to put up great numbers with limited playing time. He plays several positions, and does so quite well. He can play RF in place of Jones against tough lefties. Ramirez is not going to play 162 games.

He gives us depth and options. Good move.

by nevadadave on Nov 15, 2006 8:20 AM CST reply actions 0 recs