DeRosa Traded to Indians

[DaveB]

<!--quoteo(post=8389:date=Jan 2 2009, 04:07 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 2 2009, 04:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=8385:date=Jan 2 2009, 03:57 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jan 2 2009, 03:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=8382:date=Jan 2 2009, 03:47 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 2 2009, 03:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=8380:date=Jan 2 2009, 03:43 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jan 2 2009, 03:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=8376:date=Jan 2 2009, 03:39 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 2 2009, 03:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=8372:date=Jan 2 2009, 03:37 PM:name=Mikey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mikey @ Jan 2 2009, 03:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Do you think that Derosa would resign with the Cubs for 2010?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I wouldn't want him back for 2010 -- not for the money he will likely get. But he was making $5.5M this year -- an absolute bargain for DeRosa. There was no reason to trade him unless we got something of value in return. And it appears that we didn't.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So swapping DeRosa for prospects in order to sign Miles and Bradley isn't a good move?

Cubs lose:

DeRosa


Cubs add:

Miles
Bradley
3 prospects

I don't see how that's not a upgrade for both the MLB team and the minor league system.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Are you talking about next year? Because DeRosa isn't making a whole lot more money than Miles this season. DeRosa is making about half of what Marquis is making. And those 3 prospects appear to be next to worthless.

I don't see the connection between the DeRosa trade and a potential Bradley signing.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Weren't you just the one that made a post about how money is tight and every penny counts? Assuming that is the case, is it not possible that the $3M saved from trading DeRosa and signing Miles will enable the Cubs to get Bradley? Of course DeRosa and Bradley is better than Miles and DeRosa, but I don't think that was an option.

Also, in the DeRosa trade, we got a 5th rounder from 2 years ago, the closer for Team USA, and another pitching prospect. I don't think it's as weak as a haul as you're trying to make it out to be.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's impossible to know for sure, since we haven't seen what our final budget will be, but if it's true that we couldn't afford DeRosa and Bradley but we could afford Miles and Bradley, then it isn't that bad, I guess. But I would guess that we could've found a way to squeeze in the extra 3 million -- especially when you consider how much better DeRosa is than Miles.

Take out the Bradley deal for a second...The closer for team USA, a 5th rounder and another guy? For a player who is making $5.5M and had the 3rd highest OBP for 2nd basemen in baseball -- and can play nearly anywhere on the field? Hendry didn't get equal value in return for DeRosa.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I agree with Butcher. If you look at this deal for what it is (not taking into consideration a possible Peavy trade), it was not a good trade. We got no where near the equal value in return for DeRo.

You can argue how it turns out to be a good deal if we get a Jake Peavy or other high-calibur player down the road, but I just can't see how anybody can argue that this is a good deal because we got a "could-be" bullpen pitcher and some Crudinal to replace DeRo.

I see people looking at similarities in statistics between Miles and DeRo when we signed him. But look beyond the stats.

Will Miles provide the same clubhouse leadership that DeRo did?
Will Miles be the charismatic fan favorite that DeRo was?

Nope.