Cubs Close to Acquiring Aaron Heilman

[rok]

<!--quoteo(post=14215:date=Jan 28 2009, 11:52 AM:name=ColoradoCub)-->QUOTE (ColoradoCub @ Jan 28 2009, 11:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14214:date=Jan 28 2009, 10:52 AM:name=Sandberg)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Sandberg @ Jan 28 2009, 10:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Queue the KB rant.

And I can't say I'll disagree with him<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Seriously, this is mind boggling
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Um, wow. Ok, I guess I'm back to mildly disliking Hendry. WTF is he doing?

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=14282:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:23 PM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Jan 28 2009, 01:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14276:date=Jan 28 2009, 02:11 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 28 2009, 02:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->If Peavy (or some other impact player doesn't come our way), then it's the DeRosa deal that is really puzzling. With Bradley looking like our only "big" acquisition this offseason now, it would've been really nice to have DeRosa on board to take his spot in RF for the 50-75 games he misses.

I'll wait until the offseason is over to make a final judgment, but right now it looks like Hendry is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The 2009 Cubs are a sinking ship?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe I overshot it a bit with the Titanic reference. But I do think, for all of these moves, we've either taken a step backwards or stayed stationary. A lot of time and energy has been spent on doing what seems like very little.

[veryzer]

<!--quoteo(post=14285:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:37 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 28 2009, 01:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14282:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:23 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Jan 28 2009, 01:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14276:date=Jan 28 2009, 02:11 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 28 2009, 02:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->If Peavy (or some other impact player doesn't come our way), then it's the DeRosa deal that is really puzzling. With Bradley looking like our only "big" acquisition this offseason now, it would've been really nice to have DeRosa on board to take his spot in RF for the 50-75 games he misses.

I'll wait until the offseason is over to make a final judgment, but right now it looks like Hendry is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The 2009 Cubs are a sinking ship?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe I overshot it a bit with the Titanic reference. But I do think, for all of these moves, we've either taken a step backwards or stayed stationary. A lot of time and energy has been spent on doing what seems like very little.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

with all due respect, i disagree. we lost derosa, but fontenot/miles will fill his spot well. we lost wood, but gregg will take his spot. we lost pie and cedeno and they sucked anyway. bradley is an upgrade and i think heilman is too. where did we take a step back?

plus, we aren't done yet.

[kbwsb]

Does anyone know why Heilman went from being a darn good pitcher to a complete wash-out last year? Was he hurt? Does he have shoulder problems?
The only obvious indicator seems to be that he doubled his walks last year (Lou will love that).

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=14286:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:40 PM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Jan 28 2009, 01:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14285:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:37 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 28 2009, 01:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14282:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:23 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Jan 28 2009, 01:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14276:date=Jan 28 2009, 02:11 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 28 2009, 02:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->If Peavy (or some other impact player doesn't come our way), then it's the DeRosa deal that is really puzzling. With Bradley looking like our only "big" acquisition this offseason now, it would've been really nice to have DeRosa on board to take his spot in RF for the 50-75 games he misses.

I'll wait until the offseason is over to make a final judgment, but right now it looks like Hendry is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The 2009 Cubs are a sinking ship?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe I overshot it a bit with the Titanic reference. But I do think, for all of these moves, we've either taken a step backwards or stayed stationary. A lot of time and energy has been spent on doing what seems like very little.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

with all due respect, i disagree. we lost derosa, but fontenot/miles will fill his spot well. we lost wood, but gregg will take his spot. we lost pie and cedeno and they sucked anyway. bradley is an upgrade and i think heilman is too. where did we take a step back?

plus, we aren't done yet.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I really hated the DeRosa deal. I think we're going to miss him a lot more than you do. He was one of our best players last season and I don't see a Miles/Fontenot platoon filling his spot all that well. And Bradley is a better hitter than Fuk, but we'll be lucky to get 100 games out of him. Heilman? I hope he pitches like he did in 2007 and not 2008. Because Marquis had a better 2008 than him. Honestly, it looks to me like Hendry is just running in place.

[ruby23]

<!--quoteo(post=14268:date=Jan 28 2009, 12:54 PM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Jan 28 2009, 12:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->i think a lot of you overvalue pie and cedeno. it's entirely possible that what we got fro them is all we were ever gonna get. there was no place on this team for either of them. so we get heilman, who before last year, was a solid middle reliever for 3 years. i don't think we're all that much worse than last year. maybe we're better.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't think we're better or worse, but I do think we've made a whole bunch of moves for no reason.

Also, there's no way that I believe that all of these moves were made with the intention of getting Peavy, it's too many moving parts. I just don't realistically see Hendry (or anyone) sitting down and thinking "Hey, I need to trade these 6 or 7 guys and replace them with these 6 or 7 guys in order to get Jake Peavy on my roster." That's just not what's happening here.

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=14289:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:43 PM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jan 28 2009, 01:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14268:date=Jan 28 2009, 12:54 PM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jan 28 2009, 12:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->i think a lot of you overvalue pie and cedeno. it's entirely possible that what we got fro them is all we were ever gonna get. there was no place on this team for either of them. so we get heilman, who before last year, was a solid middle reliever for 3 years. i don't think we're all that much worse than last year. maybe we're better.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't think we're better or worse, but I do think we've made a whole bunch of moves for no reason.

Also, there's no way that I believe that all of these moves were made with the intention of getting Peavy, it's too many moving parts. I just don't realistically see Hendry (or anyone) sitting down and thinking "Hey, I need to trade these 6 or 7 guys and replace them with these 6 or 7 guys in order to get Jake Peavy on my roster." That's just not what's happening here.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I actually agree with ruby on this one.

[HTC]

Miles blog on the trade.

[kbwsb]

<!--quoteo(post=14286:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:40 PM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Jan 28 2009, 01:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14285:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:37 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 28 2009, 01:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14282:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:23 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Jan 28 2009, 01:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14276:date=Jan 28 2009, 02:11 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 28 2009, 02:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->If Peavy (or some other impact player doesn't come our way), then it's the DeRosa deal that is really puzzling. With Bradley looking like our only "big" acquisition this offseason now, it would've been really nice to have DeRosa on board to take his spot in RF for the 50-75 games he misses.
I'll wait until the offseason is over to make a final judgment, but right now it looks like Hendry is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The 2009 Cubs are a sinking ship?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe I overshot it a bit with the Titanic reference. But I do think, for all of these moves, we've either taken a step backwards or stayed stationary. A lot of time and energy has been spent on doing what seems like very little.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
with all due respect, i disagree. we lost derosa, but fontenot/miles will fill his spot well. we lost wood, but gregg will take his spot. we lost pie and cedeno and they sucked anyway. bradley is an upgrade and i think heilman is too. where did we take a step back?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, with all due respect:
DeRosa > Miles = Downgrade
Wood > Gregg = Downgrade
Marquis > Heilman = Downgrade

Jim threw some cash to get a FA (a nice move, and if Bradley plays more than 100 games, I'll be a happy fan).

But otherwise, it's tough to say things are rosy.

[savant]

<!--quoteo(post=14275:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:10 PM:name=Clapp)-->QUOTE (Clapp @ Jan 28 2009, 01:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14271:date=Jan 28 2009, 12:03 PM:name=savant)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (savant @ Jan 28 2009, 12:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I agree with Tom on this one. Cedeno and Pie were out of options, and had very little chance of contributing anything to this team. I also find it hard to believe that Olsen (and his career era of almost 7), is the deciding factor in the Peavy acquisition. Hendry had no interest in Olsen, I never saw where anyone involved with the Cubs had the normal fluff quotes about him. From the Padres perspective why on earth would they show any interest in Olsen with Marshall here?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's not the Cedeno/Pie stuff that makes me mad, I'd much rather have Heilman than them. It's trading Marquis and DeRosa to also help set up all these moves that bothers me. Contracts aside, I don't know that I'd rather have Heilman than Marquis. I thought Heilman also had thrown more innings than he has. I just checked out his stats and see his high in a season is 108, and he hasn't started since 2005. So scratch my he'll be the #5 crap. I have no clue whatsoever what's going on anymore. Fuck me.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I know I am in the minority on this, but I like this team as it stands much more than last years team. If you look at the payroll as it currently stands there was no way to make the changes Lou wanted without moving Marquis(also don't forget the marquis Lou blowup last spring training) and his salary. Fontenot has hit everywhere he has been including with the Cubs in a part time role it was time for him to get more ab's, so DeRosa had to go. Also with DeRosa having his career year with one year left on his contract what do you do with him at the end of the season? Offer arbitration and hope to get a prospect further away than Stevens or Archer. Sign him to a multi-year contract at age 35.

I am not a huge fan of what has happened with the bullpen. I am a fan first, and Woody was my favorite player on the team. But again Hendry was able to get similar production at a savings of $6 million a year with a better track record of health. Vizcaino does nothing for me, and the the lefthanders without Marshall in the pen are frightening to say the least.

With the rotation I find it hard to believe that a combination of Gaudin, Marshall, Shark, Guzman, Heilman, or pick a random minor leaguer won't be able to give us results similar to Marquis. The rest of the rotation is fine.

With Soriano, Fukudome, and Bradley our outfield is going to be just as productive offensively as it was last year, and better defensively. I would still like to see someone added on the cheap that could provide some production in the corners, but at the end of the day i guess that will be Gathwright with Fukudome sliding over.

I know on message boards handedness has become fodder for Cubs stupidity, but it is probably the single post predictive stat out there. We had the platoon advantage in less than 50% of our AB's last year, as this team is currently constructed we should be much closer to 60% this year. This team is going to score a ton of runs in the regular season, just get to the postseason with with Bradley and Harden healthy and there is a great chance of this team doing great things.

[Ace]

<!--quoteo(post=14292:date=Jan 28 2009, 02:49 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Jan 28 2009, 02:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14286:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:40 PM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jan 28 2009, 01:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14285:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:37 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 28 2009, 01:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14282:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:23 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Jan 28 2009, 01:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14276:date=Jan 28 2009, 02:11 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 28 2009, 02:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->If Peavy (or some other impact player doesn't come our way), then it's the DeRosa deal that is really puzzling. With Bradley looking like our only "big" acquisition this offseason now, it would've been really nice to have DeRosa on board to take his spot in RF for the 50-75 games he misses.
I'll wait until the offseason is over to make a final judgment, but right now it looks like Hendry is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The 2009 Cubs are a sinking ship?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe I overshot it a bit with the Titanic reference. But I do think, for all of these moves, we've either taken a step backwards or stayed stationary. A lot of time and energy has been spent on doing what seems like very little.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
with all due respect, i disagree. we lost derosa, but fontenot/miles will fill his spot well. we lost wood, but gregg will take his spot. we lost pie and cedeno and they sucked anyway. bradley is an upgrade and i think heilman is too. where did we take a step back?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, with all due respect:
DeRosa > Miles = Downgrade
Wood > Gregg = Downgrade
Marquis > Heilman = Downgrade

Jim threw some cash to get a FA (a nice move, and if Bradley plays more than 100 games, I'll be a happy fan).

But otherwise, it's tough to say things are rosy.

<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Dude.

DeRosa at 34 = Miles/Fontenot (except they're cheaper)

Wood = Gregg in production (and considering health)

Marquis < Heilman - and Heilman costs about $7 mill less.

(and that's playing in your world where those are the only moves)

[Clapp]

<!--quoteo(post=14287:date=Jan 28 2009, 12:40 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Jan 28 2009, 12:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Does anyone know why Heilman went from being a darn good pitcher to a complete wash-out last year? Was he hurt? Does he have shoulder problems?
The only obvious indicator seems to be that he doubled his walks last year (Lou will love that).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He was walking the world and looked like he lost some confidence. I watched one game and he just looked like a mess out there. This guy was a very, very solid pitcher before last year with one of the best sinkers in the game. If he gets his control back and head on straight, we'll love him. Whether or not that will happen is anybody's guess though.

[Fella]

<!--quoteo(post=14289:date=Jan 28 2009, 12:43 PM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jan 28 2009, 12:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14268:date=Jan 28 2009, 12:54 PM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jan 28 2009, 12:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->i think a lot of you overvalue pie and cedeno. it's entirely possible that what we got fro them is all we were ever gonna get. there was no place on this team for either of them. so we get heilman, who before last year, was a solid middle reliever for 3 years. i don't think we're all that much worse than last year. maybe we're better.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't think we're better or worse, but I do think we've made a whole bunch of moves for no reason.

Also, there's no way that I believe that all of these moves were made with the intention of getting Peavy, it's too many moving parts. I just don't realistically see Hendry (or anyone) sitting down and thinking "Hey, I need to trade these 6 or 7 guys and replace them with these 6 or 7 guys in order to get Jake Peavy on my roster." That's just not what's happening here.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yep I agree, we have made a whole lot of moves but I don't think we are any better or worse overall.

[ruby23]

<!--quoteo(post=14292:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:49 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Jan 28 2009, 01:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14286:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:40 PM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jan 28 2009, 01:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14285:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:37 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 28 2009, 01:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14282:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:23 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Jan 28 2009, 01:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14276:date=Jan 28 2009, 02:11 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 28 2009, 02:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->If Peavy (or some other impact player doesn't come our way), then it's the DeRosa deal that is really puzzling. With Bradley looking like our only "big" acquisition this offseason now, it would've been really nice to have DeRosa on board to take his spot in RF for the 50-75 games he misses.
I'll wait until the offseason is over to make a final judgment, but right now it looks like Hendry is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The 2009 Cubs are a sinking ship?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe I overshot it a bit with the Titanic reference. But I do think, for all of these moves, we've either taken a step backwards or stayed stationary. A lot of time and energy has been spent on doing what seems like very little.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
with all due respect, i disagree. we lost derosa, but fontenot/miles will fill his spot well. we lost wood, but gregg will take his spot. we lost pie and cedeno and they sucked anyway. bradley is an upgrade and i think heilman is too. where did we take a step back?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, with all due respect:
DeRosa > Miles = Downgrade
Wood > Gregg = Downgrade
Marquis > Heilman = Downgrade

Jim threw some cash to get a FA (a nice move, and if Bradley plays more than 100 games, I'll be a happy fan).

But otherwise, it's tough to say things are rosy.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, it's pretty much a wash, we might be even slightly better. A bunch of moves have been made for no good reason and new faces are gonna be around, but we're not worse than last year, that's a fantasy.

[kbwsb]

<!--quoteo(post=14294:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:51 PM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Jan 28 2009, 01:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14292:date=Jan 28 2009, 02:49 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Jan 28 2009, 02:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14286:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:40 PM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jan 28 2009, 01:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14285:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:37 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 28 2009, 01:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14282:date=Jan 28 2009, 01:23 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Jan 28 2009, 01:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14276:date=Jan 28 2009, 02:11 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 28 2009, 02:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->If Peavy (or some other impact player doesn't come our way), then it's the DeRosa deal that is really puzzling. With Bradley looking like our only "big" acquisition this offseason now, it would've been really nice to have DeRosa on board to take his spot in RF for the 50-75 games he misses.
I'll wait until the offseason is over to make a final judgment, but right now it looks like Hendry is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The 2009 Cubs are a sinking ship?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe I overshot it a bit with the Titanic reference. But I do think, for all of these moves, we've either taken a step backwards or stayed stationary. A lot of time and energy has been spent on doing what seems like very little.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
with all due respect, i disagree. we lost derosa, but fontenot/miles will fill his spot well. we lost wood, but gregg will take his spot. we lost pie and cedeno and they sucked anyway. bradley is an upgrade and i think heilman is too. where did we take a step back?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, with all due respect:
DeRosa > Miles = Downgrade
Wood > Gregg = Downgrade
Marquis > Heilman = Downgrade

Jim threw some cash to get a FA (a nice move, and if Bradley plays more than 100 games, I'll be a happy fan).

But otherwise, it's tough to say things are rosy.

<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Dude.

DeRosa at 34 = Miles/Fontenot (except they're cheaper)

Wood = Gregg in production (and considering health)

Marquis < Heilman - and Heilman costs about $7 mill less.

(and that's playing in your world where those are the only moves)
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh, I didn't include the Gathright and Vizcaino "moves." Sorry, how bereft of me.
-Gregg = Wood? Uh-huh.
-Heilman better than Marquis? Uh...what "world" are <i>you</i> playing in? One where a guy who pitches 100 fewer innings and gives up a run more <i>per</i> inning is more valuable?
-We already had Font. Thus, DeRosa <b>WAY</b> over Miles.

But thanks for playing. Here's you door prize.