Sun: Cubs Offer Ceden, Gallagher, Veal and maybe a 4th player - For Roberts

[Wind Rider]

He threw two good innings but the radar gun had his fastball at 86-88.

The most impressive perfomance was Mrs Sean Marshall, Alexis, in the booth. Apparently she is a TV personality. I'm not impressed by what I saw today. I'd rather keep Roberts and trade for a shortstop, like Wilson.

In your heart you have to know Cindy is right.

[Bloopandablast]

You hang on to him for these reasons:

We have no potential MLB reagular to play 2B if he's traded.

He's still one of the best at what he does and most likely will be in 2009

Of the players mentioned only Gallagher projects to be a long term answer

Giving Jordan 2 top 40 picks in June of 2010 is better than what we'll get in trade.

I am struggling to understand your basis for this comment and I see this type of comment over and over in the board.

Question 1 is what are the odds these guys even get to play any meaningful innings in the bigs?

Question 2 is when do you want to contend again? These two will be anywhere from 18 to 21 years old in 2010.

So if they make it they may be able to help you sometime around 2013-2014.

[clapdiddy]

He threw two good innings but the radar gun had his fastball at 86-88.

The most impressive perfomance was Mrs Sean Marshall, Alexis, in the booth. Apparently she is a TV personality. I'm not impressed by what I saw today. I'd rather keep Roberts and trade for a shortstop, like Wilson.

In your heart you have to know Cindy is right.

I'd try to get Khalil Greene. I don't think SD would give him up, but he'd definitely be a guy I'd go after.

[hoosiers]

Question 2 is when do you want to contend again? These two will be anywhere from 18 to 21 years old in 2010.

So if they make it they may be able to help you sometime around 2013-2014.

What does it matter when these future draft picks become good if they represent more overall talent than what is being received?

[Cubsfan]

Wasn't the early report we rec'd on AM that you would not want to be behind him in a grocery check out; paper, plastic, paper, plastic, paper, plastic. Given his result with dealing Bedard and Miggy you can't argue with his technique. It's yet to be seen if he'll be able to make the snap decisions or orchestrate creative moves when those opportunities come up.

Well, I hope that answers the question as to whether the Cubs or O's were holding up this deal. Now you've heard it from an insider.

[Bloopandablast]

What does it matter when these future draft picks become good if they represent more overall talent than what is being received?

You are correct if is the first question. But when is important if you are trying to get a team to strength to make a run in the division.

If you are content to have a few talented players on each years team, but not compete for the playoffs then when does not matter.....but wasn't that pretty much the point of the Miggy and Bedard deals?

[Bloopandablast]

So, let me see if I understand what you're saying. Your stance is that DeRosa is a good enough player that Patterson doesn't deserve the chance to start at second base and that is why the Cubs are shopping Patterson. Yet the Cubs are shopping Patterson and others for Roberts who will play second. So, DeRosa is good enough to keep Patterson off second, but not good enough to keep Roberts off second. In that scenario, DeRosa moves to utility guy.

If Patterson is even marginal defensively, why wouldn't the Cubs just start Patterson at second, use DeRosa as the utility guy, and keep Gallagher, Veal, and Cedeno? It seems to me that you can't really sell what you're trying to sell from a logical standpoint UNLESS you are admitting that the Cubs are being foolish by not using some version of Patterson at second and DeRosa as a utility guy (who also gets some starts at second).

It is pretty clear that the Cubs don't believe that Patterson, Cedeno, or Murton have much of a future with them. One of them is being blocked by a very marginal player (Theriot). One of them is being blocked by a decent-to-good player who could be moved to a super utility role w/o losing much total production from him. And one of them is so valuable that the Cubs have broken the bank on Soriano and Fukudome the last two years.

Now, I don't really know why the Cubs are playing it this way, but they clearly don't believe these three are starters now or are likely future starters for the current team.

It's really not hard to understand when you are already bringing on 3 young players and want to compete now.

Please don't go to the Theriot Cedeno decision either. We have a hard time explaining it too.

[Bloopandablast]

Yes it is hard to understand. Murton and Cedeno are not raw rookies who haven't had any exposure to the majors. These guys have as many lifetime at bat at the ML level as Nick Markakis. They are as ready as they are ever likely to be. If the Cubs don't believe they can contribute well enough to be part of a play-off team and that clearly seems to be the situation, then it doesn't speak well for them. Either the Cubs aren't valuing them correctly OR they will never be more than marginal ML players. Which side do you fall on? It is basically that simple.

Patterson isn't quite the same situation, but it isn't far off. If you want to utilize DeRosa at multiple positions to spell people, why isn't Patterson the solution for the 3-4 games per week when DeRosa is playing somewhere besides second base.

Play it down all you want, but the Cubs actions re: these three guys are very, very telling about the Cubs valuation of these three guys.

Again, when you go for it you try to limit the number of developing players in your lineup.

Again we do not understand Theriot vs Cedeno.

Again Murton has proven himself as a ML hitter and LF but they saw the opportnuity to make a splash. They tried to move Soriano to CF last year and it did not work. You know all these things already.

[rynomites]

terp...what's your point? Nothing I said violated anything.

[Cubsfan]

So, let me see if I understand what you're saying. Your stance is that DeRosa is a good enough player that Patterson doesn't deserve the chance to start at second base and that is why the Cubs are shopping Patterson. Yet the Cubs are shopping Patterson and others for Roberts who will play second. So, DeRosa is good enough to keep Patterson off second, but not good enough to keep Roberts off second. In that scenario, DeRosa moves to utility guy.

If Patterson is even marginal defensively, why wouldn't the Cubs just start Patterson at second, use DeRosa as the utility guy, and keep Gallagher, Veal, and Cedeno? It seems to me that you can't really sell what you're trying to sell from a logical standpoint UNLESS you are admitting that the Cubs are being foolish by not using some version of Patterson at second and DeRosa as a utility guy (who also gets some starts at second).

It is pretty clear that the Cubs don't believe that Patterson, Cedeno, or Murton have much of a future with them. One of them is being blocked by a very marginal player (Theriot). One of them is being blocked by a decent-to-good player who could be moved to a super utility role w/o losing much total production from him. And one of them is so valuable that the Cubs have broken the bank on Soriano and Fukudome the last two years.

Now, I don't really know why the Cubs are playing it this way, but they clearly don't believe these three are starters now or are likely future starters for the current team.

Let's see if I can answer all of these points that you have made. First, yes DeRosa is good enough to play over Patterson, but not Roberts. DeRosa is outstanding on defense and has proven himself offensively the last two years as a starter. Patterson looks to be a ML hitter, but has proven to be weak defensively. So which player should a contending team start? As for Roberts, he brings speed and the ability to leadoff as advantages over DeRosa. Most other offensive and defensive points are about equal. So Roberts is an upgrade (how much is questionable) over DeRosa. Another advantage for the Cubs is DeRosa then adds depth and strengthens the bench.

Secondly, it is pretty obvious that a team that is contending would play high salaried superstars with long contracts over youngsters. If you look around the league, that is true of all contending teams. The discussion about Theriot and Cedeno has been spelled out. Many Cub fans think Cedeno ought to be starting, but for whatever reason, Piniella likes Theriot and is more comfortable with him at SS.

If the Cubs were rebuilding (or had much lower expectations) for the next year or two, they wouldn't have signed Soriano or Fukudome and Murton would be starting in LF, Cedeno would be given a good chance to win the starting job at SS, and Patterson would have a shot at playing regularly. These opportunities can not be offered by a contending team.

[Ruzious]

Just off the top of my head...

Last year Chase Utley broke his wrist and Pat Gillick picked up Tadahito Iguchi at the deadline to fill in at 2B.

Two years ago after Duaner Sanchez's car accident, Omar Minaya pulled off a fairly big last minute trade sending Xavier Nady to the Pirates for Roberto Hernandez and Oliver Perez. Hernandez didn't quite make up for Sanchez's absence in the bullpen (to put it mildly), but Perez has resurrected his career and become a mainstay of their rotation after being acquired in a panic trade.

Just about every year at least one contender goes through a situation like that.

He could definitely come up with a desperation move like Iguchi. And the Minaya move might have been in the works for a long time. AM's already shown he can wait till the last second to finish something with the Weiters signing.

[owl]

Assuming that Eric Patterson is a plus bat is the first mistake in Dave's theory. Using that as the basis is just foolish. If you look at his minor league numbers, he projects as pretty average with the bat (If that), even for 2B.

Exactly what projection are you using? Just about everything else puts him as a plus 2B bat.

[Mike B]

LOL good Lou impression I really do like it. I would be tempted to throw in Ceda but it would have to be a deal of just Gallagher and Ceda for Roberts then..

Would this be fair to Orioles fans?

Ceda, Galalgher and Patterson for Roberts?

In a word......no!

[HarryReasonable]

I know for a factoid that Lou never said such a thing because he & Dibs were having a brew after going 10 rounds again.

Besides, it's too late to get Pie in a trade. It should have been done last year, then the FO could have announced that they got Cherry Pie for Trachsel.

Cherry Pie was the offer last year, but McPhail said he wanted "more," and Hendry thought he meant "Moore", and the rest is history. At least, that's the way I heard it.

[blueberryale77]

He could definitely come up with a desperation move like Iguchi. And the Minaya move might have been in the works for a long time. AM's already shown he can wait till the last second to finish something with the Weiters signing.

I love how MacPhail gets heaped with credit for signing Weiters when in reality Jim Duquette had laid all the groundwork and MacPhail very nearly screwed it up and lost him when he took over.