Cleveland Indians & MLB

by **peeker643** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:36 pm

Bottom line is they're better today than they were yesterday. Over the last three years DeRosa received regular ABs and put up above average numbers. The position issue will shake itself out. Either DeRosa or Honny have to switch positions and they have the time to let that sort itself out.

The power increase on the surface has little to do with Wrigley and may be explained by that 3rd year of regular ABs and a natural development, albeit at 32 or 33 years old. By all accounts the guy the guy keeps himself in shape and is a solid teammate too. Don't discount that given that Wood just signed here and may have had some input.

by **skatingtripods** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:37 pm

MFRONE wrote:
AGoodPerson wrote:Why are they saying in the news report he's going to play 3b?? Who said that?

It's probably just speculation because the Tribe don't have a 3B right now and the media doesn't realize that JP has been playing 3rd in winter ball.

Castrovince's blog says: "Though the 33-year-old DeRosa played primarily at second base for the Cubs, the Indians will probably move him to third to avoid disrupting their infield. The Tribe had considered moving shortstop Jhonny Peralta to third and second baseman Asdrubal Cabrera to short."

by **danwismar** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:39 pm

You have to wonder if the "probable" move to 3B is AC's speculation, or if he got it from a club source. I thought the whole idea was to "disrupt" our infield, by changing shortstops etc. Shapiro has said repeatedly he is looking for a second baseman...then he goes out and gets a second baseman. Granted, we have holes at both positions, but DeRosa is a plus bat at second...not so much at third.

It stands to reason of course, that he'll have some starts at both positions. Either way, I love this deal.

by **Chris** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:43 pm

Peeker643 wrote:Bottom line is they're better today than they were yesterday. Over the last three years DeRosa received regular ABs and put up above average numbers. The position issue will shake itself out. Either DeRosa or Honny have to switch positions and they have the time to let that sort itself out.

The power increase on the surface has little to do with Wrigley and may be explained by that 3rd year of regular ABs and a natural development, albeit at 32 or 33 years old. By all accounts the guy the guy keeps himself in shape and is a solid teammate too. Don't discount that given that Wood just signed here and may have had some input.

Yeah, think of it this way: replace Marte's Black Hole of Non-Offensiveness with DeRosa's numbers and we're improved, at least a little. :cheers:

by **consigliere** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:43 pm

Just posted a full article on the front page with detailed scouting reports of all three players we gave up. THis was actually a good trade as it lets me sort of promote what people will be seeing in my rankings/prospect book this year!

by **Stu** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:44 pm

petes999 wrote:Now, we need a starting pitcher with out excess of ready ML OFs and ready relievers gone. Leaves us with basically Hodges and lefty starters for our major pieces for a trade (and Shoppach).

We add 2 relievers, lose 1, and our excess of ready relievers is now gone?

by **Pufferbelly** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:46 pm

So the best part about this offseason is that its been done well without giving up Shoppach. Now, if hes not going to be playing alot I think we should trade him. But will they? It just seems that if there was a great deal of interest in him he would have been traded already because we would have been presented with a trade that would have been beneficial to our offseason needs. But who knows, maybe somthing will spring out of nowhere and we will get a young MOR starter.

By the way, how much do you all think it will take to get Garland?

by **TitoFrancona** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:47 pm

jameseboy wrote:There are a couple of reasons I much prefer him as second.

First is defense. Cabrera is supposed to be an outstanding shortstop Peralta is average. At some point Peralta is going to third I just prefer sooner than later.

Second DeRosa's hitting is outstanding for a second baseman but only average for a third baseman. Traditionally third base is a hitters position second is more of a defensive position. When your looking at who is available for what those are what you generally find in those positions. Its why Marte is at 3rd and Barfield at 2nd even if they have not worked out so far.

I am not so sure about DeRosa batting second. I have not seen him play but I do see he has very few stolen bases. I think his 6 last year is his high. His power numbers make are pretty high for a contact guy who moves runners etc. Maybe someone with more knowledge can tell a bit more about that.

In most situations, I would agree with you. However, what you seem to be saying is that DeRosa being in the lineup as a 3rd baseman somehow makes the lineup worse than if he were playing 2nd? How is that possible, when it will be the same lineup whether he plays 2nd or 3rd? If he plays 2nd, Cabrera moves to short and Peralta to 3rd, if he plays 3rd, Peralta and Cabrera stay put. But regardless of where they play, they're all in the same lineup batting in the same slots.

You have to put that logic away since this is only a 1-year deal. DeRosa won't be our 2nd or 3rd baseman in 2010. That's pretty much a given. That being said, of course I'm hoping he plays 2nd. But that doesn't detract from this being a good deal for the Tribe.

by **ArtGold** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:48 pm

I think they will leave him at 2nd base, and move ACab to shortstop.

Regarding the deal, look at it this way, we finally have closure on Brandon Phillips.

After all Phillips was traded for Stevens, who was just dealt for DeRosa. So basically, you have Phillips dealt for a replacement grinder to be named (much, much) later.

Regarding Phillips and DeRosa, I thought the Bill James projections for next year are kind of interesting:

Phillips - .263 BA, 39 BBs, 21 HRs

DeRosa - .273 BA, 63 BBs, 17 HRs

by **carnegie44115** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:53 pm

Pufferbelly wrote:
By the way, how much do you all think it will take to get Garland?

I would say with the down economy and Derek Lowe being offered a 3yr/36 M contract, Garland is going to be looking for a one or two year deal at best, I say $8 M, especially with him coming off a not so great year.

by **TitoFrancona** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:07 pm

carnegie44115 wrote:
Pufferbelly wrote:
By the way, how much do you all think it will take to get Garland?

I would say with the down economy and Derek Lowe being offered a 3yr/36 M contract, Garland is going to be looking for a one or two year deal at best, I say $8 M, especially with him coming off a not so great year.

Why would Garland who is 29 years old an has never thrown less than 192 innings in a season since his rookie season, get only a 1-year deal. I'm thinking he gets at minimum 3-year 25 million dollar deal. And I think even with today's market that's being conservative.

by **carnegie44115** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:17 pm

TitoFrancona wrote:
carnegie44115 wrote:
Pufferbelly wrote:
By the way, how much do you all think it will take to get Garland?

I would say with the down economy and Derek Lowe being offered a 3yr/36 M contract, Garland is going to be looking for a one or two year deal at best, I say $8 M, especially with him coming off a not so great year.

Why would Garland who is 29 years old an has never thrown less than 192 innings in a season since his rookie season, get only a 1-year deal. I'm thinking he gets at minimum 3-year 25 million dollar deal. And I think even with today's market that's being conservative.

But my idea for a one year deal, is to get the most for one year than with hopefully a better economy and a good year next year he could land that big 4 year, 60 M deal.

by **TitoFrancona** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:21 pm

That is a possibility, but a big gamble for a pitcher. If he signs a 1-year deal, I'm betting it will be for more than 10 million. I would think his agent would tell a team that if they're willing to sign a 1-year deal, the team has to be willing to make it worth his while.

But really, I don't expect Garland to take the risk. I think he goes for the security of a multi-year deal pretty much as other players are doing.

by **martyinnewyork** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:22 pm

Love this pick-up, despite losing Stevens. Archer and Gaub are far enough away that they may never contribute. We have arms left for the pen. And we won't have to spend the next 3 months praying that Marte and Barfield don't get regular AB's. Don't care where DeRosa plays, he's versatile enough that we know 2B, SS and 3B are all safely out of reach for Andy and Barf... so now we can trade those two for a FOR starter (ok, I'm getting carried away).

Plus we still have Huff, DeLaCruz, etc.

by **statmasta** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:28 pm

I love this trade. Absolutely love it.

Archer and Gaub probably won't reach the majors, so to me it's pretty much Jeff Stevens for DeRosa. So we again traded from a position of strength with giving up all that much.

I'll miss Jeff Stevens, but we have other reliever prospects. I was very relieved when I saw the only player of significance we traded was Stevens. I was scared Shoppach would be involved. The only thing that concerns me is DeRosa is 34 years old and just came off a career year. No way he puts up 21 HRs and 87 RBIs again. But that's alright, he's still lightyears ahead of Andy Marte.

by **Rocky55** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:33 pm

I think that most people assume DeRosa will play 2B because it works better defensively. As someone mentioned, where he plays on defense doesn't affect the offense at all.

DeRosa is a decent 2B, plus he's okay at 3B, but if he's the 3B and Jhonny's the SS the defense on that side is close to sucky as far as range anyway. Putting Droobs between them helps them both.

by **AGoodPerson** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:36 pm

Career-wise, DeRosa....

as a 2B... 935AB .303/.376/.464
as a 3B... 645AB .259/.325/.391

by **Indians88** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:46 pm

This guy is essentially Casey Blake but with slightly less power and is a slightly better contact hitter who strikes out less.

Sounds good to me. But hey, what do I know, I liked Blake.

by **TitoFrancona** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:48 pm

statmasta wrote:I love this trade. Absolutely love it.

Archer and Gaub probably won't reach the majors, so to me it's pretty much Jeff Stevens for DeRosa. So we again traded from a position of strength with giving up all that much.

I'll miss Jeff Stevens, but we have other reliever prospects. I was very relieved when I saw the only player of significance we traded was Stevens. I was scared Shoppach would be involved. The only thing that concerns me is DeRosa is 34 years old and just came off a career year. No way he puts up 21 HRs and 87 RBIs again. But that's alright, he's still lightyears ahead of Andy Marte.

I like the trade to but I think you're underestimating Gaub and Archer's chances. I think they have a very good chance to be decent ML pitchers in a few seasons. But have very live fastballs and secondary pitches. They are both strikeout pitchers with Gaub striking out 100 batters in only 68 innings.

And how can you miss Stevens when he's never been in an Indians uniform?

by **TitoFrancona** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:50 pm

Indians88 wrote:This guy is essentially Casey Blake but with slightly less power and is a slightly better contact hitter who strikes out less.

Sounds good to me. But hey, what do I know, I liked Blake.

Except he's a few years younger and only comes with a 1-year 5.5 million dollar deal. Which is a much more palatable than having Casey on a 3-year 18 million dollar deal.

by **Commodore Perry** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:52 pm

Derosa is very much like Blake. But from what I gather from Cubs fans, he is a great CLUTCH hitter.

Cubs fans are not happy with this deal. They love Derosa, and figure this must be part of some coming big move. They don't understand why the cubs would trade a fan favorite who is a versitle infielder with some pop for a bunch of prospect relievers.

The more I read about this trade, the more i LOVE it.

by **statmasta** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:03 pm

TitoFrancona wrote:
statmasta wrote:I love this trade. Absolutely love it.

Archer and Gaub probably won't reach the majors, so to me it's pretty much Jeff Stevens for DeRosa. So we again traded from a position of strength with giving up all that much.

I'll miss Jeff Stevens, but we have other reliever prospects. I was very relieved when I saw the only player of significance we traded was Stevens. I was scared Shoppach would be involved. The only thing that concerns me is DeRosa is 34 years old and just came off a career year. No way he puts up 21 HRs and 87 RBIs again. But that's alright, he's still lightyears ahead of Andy Marte.

I like the trade to but I think you're underestimating Gaub and Archer's chances. I think they have a very good chance to be decent ML pitchers in a few seasons. But have very live fastballs and secondary pitches. They are both strikeout pitchers with Gaub striking out 100 batters in only 68 innings.

And how can you miss Stevens when he's never been in an Indians uniform?

I'll miss him because I've been looking forward to seeing him in an Indians uniform for a while.

by **WiscTribeFan** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:07 pm

Commodore Perry wrote:Derosa is very much like Blake. But from what I gather from Cubs fans, he is a great CLUTCH hitter.

Cubs fans are not happy with this deal. They love Derosa, and figure this must be part of some coming big move. They don't understand why the cubs would trade a fan favorite who is a versitle infielder with some pop for a bunch of prospect relievers.

The more I read about this trade, the more i LOVE it.

They are clearing salary and picking up trading pieces for Jake Peavy. It wouldn't shock me if SD had a hand in choosing who the Cubs got in this deal. My bet, all are part of a package to SD. Stevens will be without question.

Having been a Cubs fan through marriage since '98, I can say that DeRosa is the type of veteran player this team will love. This is a solid deal, even if Stevens turns out to be an above average reliever/closer. It also wouldn't shock me to see the team try to extend him at some point before the season starts.

by **TitoFrancona** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:08 pm

Fair enough. I personally think that Meloan might end up being the better of the 2 and I think Sipp is the guy that made Stevens expendable.

by **daddywags** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:08 pm

I honestly thought Stevens had a chance to help us as early as 2009, although he wouldn't have made the club out of ST. I can't get excited about trading three parts of our minor league pitching excess for a 34 year old second baseman not named Robbie Alomar. Put me down as: :thumbdown:

by **statmasta** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:15 pm

daddywags wrote:I honestly thought Stevens had a chance to help us as early as 2009, although he wouldn't have made the club out of ST. I can't get excited about trading three parts of our minor league pitching excess for a 34 year old second baseman not named Robbie Alomar. Put me down as:

but can you get excited about a guy who hit .285/.376/.481 replacing Andy Marte?

Because I can.

by **TitoFrancona** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:16 pm

daddywags wrote:I honestly thought Stevens had a chance to help us as early as 2009, although he wouldn't have made the club out of ST. I can't get excited about trading three parts of our minor league pitching excess for a 34 year old second baseman not named Robbie Alomar. Put me down as:

Stevens will be a ML reliever this season, but he'll be a middle reliever. Right now we have Meloan, Sipp and Miller all of whom appear to be ready to step in. Archer and Gaub are a minimum of 3 years away and project as relievers.

How in the world can you not identify 2b/3b as a serious need for this team? Unless you have decided that this team will not and should not attempt to compete this season, I can't even begin to see how you can say this was a bad deal?

The fact that this is a 1-year deal makes it even more appealing. It shouldn't affect Shapiro's efforts to get the SP we need. I see no downside to this trade.

by **WiscTribeFan** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:24 pm

daddywags wrote:I honestly thought Stevens had a chance to help us as early as 2009, although he wouldn't have made the club out of ST. I can't get excited about trading three parts of our minor league pitching excess for a 34 year old second baseman not named Robbie Alomar. Put me down as:

A 34 year old Alomar kinda sucked. Why would you have wanted him?

We traded a solid major league ready reliever for a huge hole in our infield. This is a solid deal no matter how much you pine for Robbie.

by **PPark** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:47 pm

They've acquired a solid bat in DeRosa though I like him better playing second rather than third.
It appears both clubs got what they wanted.

by **daddywags** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:54 pm

TitoFrancona wrote:
daddywags wrote:I honestly thought Stevens had a chance to help us as early as 2009, although he wouldn't have made the club out of ST. I can't get excited about trading three parts of our minor league pitching excess for a 34 year old second baseman not named Robbie Alomar. Put me down as:

Stevens will be a ML reliever this season, but he'll be a middle reliever. Right now we have Meloan, Sipp and Miller all of whom appear to be ready to step in. Archer and Gaub are a minimum of 3 years away and project as relievers.

How in the world can you not identify 2b/3b as a serious need for this team? Unless you have decided that this team will not and should not attempt to compete this season, I can't even begin to see how you can say this was a bad deal?
The fact that this is a 1-year deal makes it even more appealing. It shouldn't affect Shapiro's efforts to get the SP we need. I see no downside to this trade.

If you think DeRosa makes the difference between being able to compete or not being able to compete in 2009, then I can see why you'd like the deal. If that's the way it turns out, I'm okay with it. I don't think we were that desperate for an infielder. Even so, we gave up three power arms, including one everyone seems to think is ready to help in middle relief this season, for a one year rental at 2B or 3B. Just not my idea of a good trade. YMM(actually, does)V.

by **MadThinker88** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:08 pm

WOW.

Unplug for a day to actually work and you miss a ton.
I'll need some time to absorb all this before going :thumb up:

or

I will say this though: At least Shapiro is trying......

by **Chiefroy** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:10 pm

I think this is a fantastic pickup. Hell, I would've been happy with Fontenot.

DeRosa vs lefties last year: .310 .398 .497 .895

LEADOFF vs lefties, move Grady down.

I LOVE this deal.

by **TitoFrancona** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:14 pm

daddywags wrote: If you think DeRosa makes the difference between being able to compete or not being able to compete in 2009, then I can see why you'd like the deal. If that's the way it turns out, I'm okay with it. I don't think we were that desperate for an infielder. Even so, we gave up three power arms, including one everyone seems to think is ready to help in middle relief this season, for a one year rental at 2B or 3B. Just not my idea of a good trade. YMM(actually, does)V.

Again, I have to disagree with you. Having either Marte or Barfield in the starting lineup everyday could very well be a disaster. The Indians have effectively filled 2 needs in one shot. Number 1 need of course is a 2b/3bman, and number 2 is a legitimate #2 hitter - who preferably bats RH.

And in the Indians situation, a 1-year deal was perfect. It allows them to give both Valbuena and Hodges another season of 3A ball. Something I think both players need. Stevens had little chance of making the team out of ST. Archer and Gaub are again - 3 years or so away from being ML ready.

Does DeRosa push them over the edge? No of course not. But he gets them closer to it.

Also, if DeRosa has a decent year, as someone else pointed out, he'll probably be a class A free agent, meaning 2 picks. Even if he's a B type they get 1 pick. And imo, the Indians most definitely will offer arbitration because the chances are - he will be looking for a 2-year deal and even if he decides to accept it, at the very worst, they have an expensive UIF'er who should be very easy to trade.

by **drewd** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:17 pm

Thats a nice line up we got now! But don't fall in love with DeRose, he's only a one year guy. It will give Valbuena some good time at AAA before next year!

CF Sizemore
SS Cabrera
RF Choo
3B Jhonny
1B Victor
2B DeRosa
DH Hafner
C Kelly
LF Francisco

by **chitowntribephan** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:19 pm

Most trades can't be judged for at least a year and usually more but this certainly has the makings of a solid deal for the Tribe and most likely a footnote deal for the Cubs. However, this trade is about 2009 for both teams.

Getting rid of DeRosa combined with trading Marquis while adding Miles, Vizcaino, Bradley, Stevens and minor leaguers reduces payroll (for now), perhaps gives the Cubs ammo to get Peavy and improves their overall team for this year. They probably wouldn't have resigned DeRosa after this season anyway and will now have Bradley for RF. May not have significant droppoff (other than power) from DeRosa to Miles/Fontenot.

For the Tribe, this gives them the #2 hitter they needed behind Sizemore, gives them position flexibility (as DeRosa could even be the 5th OFer, essentially 'replacing' Gutierrez in that role) and gives them flexibility after this season to let him go or resign him as a super-utility player to replace Carroll. If Marte finds his way (and he's not lost when he's optioned out), perhaps he fits back in for next season at 3B. If Hodges steps up his defense, perhaps he's then an option at 3B next year too. Plus you have Barfield, Valbuena and even Josh Rodriguez sitting down in AAA as options at 2B. Most importantly, I think they are absolutely right to keep Peralta and Cabrera right where they are at SS and 2B for this season. Once Peralta goes to 3B he ain't going back and there's no reason to reduce your options after this season.

By the way, Gaub was very old for his level despite his awesome stats. He'll be 24 a month into the season without having pitched at all in A+ or above. Archer is a project who odds are won't ever have a ML career. We've had a lot of Archers in the system over the last 20 years who've never become anything.

Now I'd love to see them make a play for Sheets but that most likely won't happen. I'd be satisfied with Garland for a two year deal at $6 or $7 mil per but that is doubtful. Frankly, I believe Shapiro's fallback will be signing Paul Byrd for a year and frankly, I wouldn't be too upset with that as the topper to the offseason. Then they keep Shoppach as a mid-season trading chip and acquire another SP if necessary come June or July.

by **drewd** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:23 pm

chitowntribephan wrote:Most trades can't be judged for at least a year and usually more but this certainly has the makings of a solid deal for the Tribe and most likely a footnote deal for the Cubs. However, this trade is about 2009 for both teams.

Getting rid of DeRosa combined with trading Marquis while adding Miles, Vizcaino, Bradley, Stevens and minor leaguers reduces payroll (for now), perhaps gives the Cubs ammo to get Peavy and improves their overall team for this year. They probably wouldn't have resigned DeRosa after this season anyway and will now have Bradley for RF. May not have significant droppoff (other than power) from DeRosa to Miles/Fontenot.

For the Tribe, this gives them the #2 hitter they needed behind Sizemore, gives them position flexibility (as DeRosa could even be the 5th OFer, essentially 'replacing' Gutierrez in that role) and gives them flexibility after this season to let him go or resign him as a super-utility player to replace Carroll. If Marte finds his way (and he's not lost when he's optioned out), perhaps he fits back in for next season at 3B. If Hodges steps up his defense, perhaps he's then an option at 3B next year too. Plus you have Barfield, Valbuena and even Josh Rodriguez sitting down in AAA as options at 2B. Most importantly, I think they are absolutely right to keep Peralta and Cabrera right where they are at SS and 2B for this season. Once Peralta goes to 3B he ain't going back and there's no reason to reduce your options after this season.

By the way, Gaub was very old for his level despite his awesome stats. He'll be 24 a month into the season without having pitched at all in A+ or above. Archer is a project who odds are won't ever have a ML career. We've had a lot of Archers in the system over the last 20 years who've never become anything.

Now I'd love to see them make a play for Sheets but that most likely won't happen. I'd be satisfied with Garland for a two year deal at $6 or $7 mil per but that is doubtful. Frankly, I believe Shapiro's fallback will be signing Paul Byrd for a year and frankly, I wouldn't be too upset with that as the topper to the offseason. Then they keep Shoppach as a mid-season trading chip and acquire another SP if necessary come June or July.

he's not a # 2 hitter, you need speed in the top of the order! Sizmore, Cabrera, and Choo is my 1,2,3 then have Francisco at number 9 to rap-around the order...

CF Sizemore
SS Cabrera
RF Choo
3B Jhonny
1B Victor
2B DeRosa
DH Hafner
C Kelly
LF Francisco

by **carnegie44115** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:26 pm

drewd wrote:
chitowntribephan wrote:Most trades can't be judged for at least a year and usually more but this certainly has the makings of a solid deal for the Tribe and most likely a footnote deal for the Cubs. However, this trade is about 2009 for both teams.

Getting rid of DeRosa combined with trading Marquis while adding Miles, Vizcaino, Bradley, Stevens and minor leaguers reduces payroll (for now), perhaps gives the Cubs ammo to get Peavy and improves their overall team for this year. They probably wouldn't have resigned DeRosa after this season anyway and will now have Bradley for RF. May not have significant droppoff (other than power) from DeRosa to Miles/Fontenot.

For the Tribe, this gives them the #2 hitter they needed behind Sizemore, gives them position flexibility (as DeRosa could even be the 5th OFer, essentially 'replacing' Gutierrez in that role) and gives them flexibility after this season to let him go or resign him as a super-utility player to replace Carroll. If Marte finds his way (and he's not lost when he's optioned out), perhaps he fits back in for next season at 3B. If Hodges steps up his defense, perhaps he's then an option at 3B next year too. Plus you have Barfield, Valbuena and even Josh Rodriguez sitting down in AAA as options at 2B. Most importantly, I think they are absolutely right to keep Peralta and Cabrera right where they are at SS and 2B for this season. Once Peralta goes to 3B he ain't going back and there's no reason to reduce your options after this season.

By the way, Gaub was very old for his level despite his awesome stats. He'll be 24 a month into the season without having pitched at all in A+ or above. Archer is a project who odds are won't ever have a ML career. We've had a lot of Archers in the system over the last 20 years who've never become anything.

Now I'd love to see them make a play for Sheets but that most likely won't happen. I'd be satisfied with Garland for a two year deal at $6 or $7 mil per but that is doubtful. Frankly, I believe Shapiro's fallback will be signing Paul Byrd for a year and frankly, I wouldn't be too upset with that as the topper to the offseason. Then they keep Shoppach as a mid-season trading chip and acquire another SP if necessary come June or July.

he's not a # 2 hitter, you need speed in the top of the order! Sizmore, Cabrera, and Choo is my 1,2,3 then have Francisco at number 9 to rap-around the order...

Actually the speed might be nice, but having OBP machines at the top is best for your #3,4, and 5 hitters to knock them in, if you have guys hitting 2B and HR behind your 1 and 2 guys, why do you need speed or at least really good speed? Also DeRosa did score over 100 runs last year.

by **Mcreek** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:54 pm

you have Barfield, Valbuena and even Josh Rodriguez sitting down in AAA as options at 2B. Most importantly, I think they are absolutely right to keep Peralta and Cabrera right where they are at SS and 2B for this season. Once Peralta goes to 3B he ain't going back and there's no reason to reduce your options after this season.

Valbuena is being groomed as the secondbaseman for 2010. So why wait until 2010 to move Peralta to thirdbase? That makes no sense. Does Jhonny need another year of winter ball playing 3rdbase?

by **TitoFrancona** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:00 pm

carnegie44115 wrote: Actually the speed might be nice, but having OBP machines at the top is best for your #3,4, and 5 hitters to knock them in, if you have guys hitting 2B and HR behind your 1 and 2 guys, why do you need speed or at least really good speed? Also DeRosa did score over 100 runs last year.

I agree completely. Speed is not the number 1 priority for a #2 hitter. Hell, it's not even a #1 priority for the #1 hitter. It's nice to have but definitely not necessary. #1 priority is OBP. #2 is bat control and for the Tribe #3 is that he bats RH. DeRosa will fill the #2 hole very nicely.

by **Chiefroy** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:06 pm

If we want to move Grady down in the batting order, what better chance do we have than now? This guy gets on base.

by **noles1** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:07 pm

GO away to New Orleans for New Years and miss all the festivities.

Love the deal from the Tribe's end. DeRosa is the type that fits in well. Hopefully he's at 2nd and I think we are shored up considerably.

Add one last chip with a FOR starter and we are on our way towards rebounding from last year's disaster.

by **TCBinaflash** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:15 pm

TitoFrancona wrote:
carnegie44115 wrote: Actually the speed might be nice, but having OBP machines at the top is best for your #3,4, and 5 hitters to knock them in, if you have guys hitting 2B and HR behind your 1 and 2 guys, why do you need speed or at least really good speed? Also DeRosa did score over 100 runs last year.

I agree completely. Speed is not the number 1 priority for a #2 hitter. Hell, it's not even a #1 priority for the #1 hitter. It's nice to have but definitely not necessary. #1 priority is OBP. #2 is bat control and for the Tribe #3 is that he bats RH. DeRosa will fill the #2 hole very nicely.

Yep, he hits for average with a solid obp, not an atrocious so ratio and we could use an experienced bat that moves the runners over in key situations as well.

I'm ok with the move. But like a lot of other posters I think De Rosa is a more ideal fit at 2nd if we even have confidence in Jhonny at 3rd com ST.

by **statmasta** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:18 pm

drewd wrote:he's not a # 2 hitter, you need speed in the top of the order! Sizmore, Cabrera, and Choo is my 1,2,3 then have Francisco at number 9 to rap-around the order...

CF Sizemore
SS Cabrera
RF Choo
3B Jhonny
1B Victor
2B DeRosa
DH Hafner
C Kelly
LF Francisco

Asdrubal isn't fast at all.

by **Prosecutor** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:43 pm

Looks like we might not get that starting pitcher. From MLB.com:

"With the Wood and DeRosa contracts eating up a sizable chunk of the '09 payroll, Shapiro will have to get creative if he's going to fill the Indians' other glaring need in the starting rotation.

"The lion's share of our resources have been committed," Shapiro said. "If we do anything else, it's going to require a creative contract or some sense of subtraction [of payroll] before addition." "

DeRosa looks like a one-year rental while we see what Hodges and Valbuena do at Columbus. If either of them has a break out season he can step into the lineup in 2010 while DeRosa and his $5 million salary move on. If neither proves to be major-league ready, we could make a play for keeping DeRosa beyond this year.

As for what position he'll play this year, that will be very interesting. Wedge has stated that Peralta needs to move to 3rd at some point and he's playing 3rd in winter ball. We just went out and got a proven major league second baseman. It sure looks like one plus one equals two here, so I don't understand the talk about DeRosa playing 3rd, especially since his fielding percentage is better at 2nd.

by **IronMike** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:45 pm

Great addition. DeRosa is a gamer and pure baseball player. He can hit second, does the little things that win games, will be a team leader and can drive in runs and hit for power. He's not quite Brian Roberts but close enough.

Stevens will help the Cubs, as stated we have Miller, Sipp and Meloan ready to make the next step to the Tribe's bullpen.

Shapiro and Antonetti did well making this trade.

DeRosa played 95 games at 2B for the Cubs last year and only 22 at 3B, the rest of the time in the OF. Second base is where he should play but we still have that same old stubborn Wedge.

This organization can't seem to get the infield right, especially when it involves Peralta. With Valbuena on the horizon it is best to make the move of Peralta to 3B sooner than later. IF he can play third base. He doesn't exactly have a rocket up his rear-end as an infielder. Coupled with the fact he is slow a foot, a slow thinker and has slow reactions. Will give him credit for cutting down on his K's the second half of last season which enabled him to be more productive at the plate.

Website · by **Jennifer** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:46 pm

DeRosa was meant to be a placeholder at third base until one of the prospects are ready. If you move Peralta to third this year what are you going to do next year move him back to short? My guess is that if Valbuena, or even Barfield, establish this year the ability to play second that in 2010 Cabrera will be moved to short Hodges or Mills start at third and Peralta may move to first especially depending on how Garko does this year, whether a decision is made to move Martinez fulltime to first and whether it is decided that Mills is better suited for first. Under these very scenarios Peralta becomes trade bait. Peralta has two years left after 2009, 2010 and a club option for 2011 at a very reasonable salary.

Also bear in mind it is defense up the middle that is important. Short is the glamour defense position in the infield and while Cabreara might be an excellent shortstop someday is is no slouch at second -- another up the middle position.

And also don't forget that the trade frees up a spot on the 25 man roster because Marte is as good as gone before the start of the season.

Tony -- this trade must be a little bittersweet for you. The Tribe has upgraded its infield but you have lost your "favorite player."

by **chitowntribephan** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:56 pm

Mcreek wrote:Valbuena is being groomed as the secondbaseman for 2010. So why wait until 2010 to move Peralta to thirdbase? That makes no sense. Does Jhonny need another year of winter ball playing 3rdbase?

What if Valbuena has a lousy 2009 and isn't ready for '10 and Hodges steps up and is ready to take over 3b next season? Now you have two 3b, a light hitting but solid SS in Cabrera and nobody for 2b.

Or what if Peralta sucks at 3b and it affects his hitting this season? No, the safer move is keeping Peralta right where he is b/c you know what you have. His power at SS makes up for getting only 12-15 HRs from your third baseman.

Let the season play out while taking advantage of the flexibility that DeRosa and Cabrera have and phase in Peralta. Let him play third 10 or 20 times this year against a tough LHP, put Cabrera at SS, Carroll at 2B and DeRosa, Francisco and Sizemore in the OF. Sprinkle in Shoppach at C, Garko at 1b, Martinez at DH, give Hafner the night off and you've got a pretty powerful RH hitting team. Then you get a regular season look at Peralta so you know what you have going into the offseason. Spring training '09 won't give them enough info to make an accurate judgment and you can't trust what you hear out of the Dominican Winter League.

As for DeRosa as a #2 hitter, I much more prefer a solid, high-average and intelligent hitter at that spot than I care about speed. No need to run much with a healthy Martinez and Hafner coming up afterwards anyway.

by **noles1** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:56 pm

Prosecutor wrote:Looks like we might not get that starting pitcher. From MLB.com:

"With the Wood and DeRosa contracts eating up a sizable chunk of the '09 payroll, Shapiro will have to get creative if he's going to fill the Indians' other glaring need in the starting rotation.

"The lion's share of our resources have been committed," Shapiro said. "If we do anything else, it's going to require a creative contract or some sense of subtraction [of payroll] before addition." "

DeRosa looks like a one-year rental while we see what Hodges and Valbuena do at Columbus. If either of them has a break out season he can step into the lineup in 2010 while DeRosa and his $5 million salary move on. If neither proves to be major-league ready, we could make a play for keeping DeRosa beyond this year.

As for what position he'll play this year, that will be very interesting. Wedge has stated that Peralta needs to move to 3rd at some point and he's playing 3rd in winter ball. We just went out and got a proven major league second baseman. It sure looks like one plus one equals two here, so I don't understand the talk about DeRosa playing 3rd, especially since his fielding percentage is better at 2nd.

This is just depressing to hear...

You know, I saw an article a couple of days an article on Mark Mulder and him throwing here at the end of the month. If he throws well and knowing how hot we were on him when he signed with STL, I could see us as a possible destination on an incentive-laden short-term deal...

Not ideal but I wonder if that isn't what Marky is thinking...

by **TitoFrancona** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:11 pm

Jennifer wrote:DeRosa was meant to be a placeholder at third base until one of the prospects are ready. If you move Peralta to third this year what are you going to do next year move him back to short? My guess is that if Valbuena, or even Barfield, establish this year the ability to play second that in 2010 Cabrera will be moved to short Hodges or Mills start at third and Peralta may move to first especially depending on how Garko does this year, whether a decision is made to move Martinez fulltime to first and whether it is decided that Mills is better suited for first. Under these very scenarios Peralta becomes trade bait. Peralta has two years left after 2009, 2010 and a club option for 2011 at a very reasonable salary.

Also bear in mind it is defense up the middle that is important. Short is the glamour defense position in the infield and while Cabreara might be an excellent shortstop someday is is no slouch at second -- another up the middle position.

And also don't forget that the trade frees up a spot on the 25 man roster because Marte is as good as gone before the start of the season.

Tony -- this trade must be a little bittersweet for you. The Tribe has upgraded its infield but you have lost your "favorite player."

Well first of all there are so many different scenarios that it's almost impossible to choose 1 or 2 as what can happen this year.

But I think one thing is pretty evident, there is going to be some kind of trade before the season opens and in my opinion, it's going to be a significant trade. Yeah, Marte is probably gone. Hopefully Barfield isn't far behind. But even with Stevens gone we have more relievers than can be put on the 25 man roster and if Miller and Meloan impress enough, I could see Betancourt and/or Kobyashi moved.

Also, the addition of DeRosa gives Wedge a lot of flexibility (the same as he had with Blake) in making his lineups and making moves during the game. Him and Carroll can play virtually any position other than C/P. Cabrera can play 2nd or short. Peralta can play short or 3rd. Victor can catch or play 1st.

by **Prosecutor** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:21 pm

TitoFrancona wrote:Also, the addition of DeRosa gives Wedge a lot of flexibility (the same as he had with Blake) in making his lineups and making moves during the game. Him and Carroll can play virtually any position other than C/P. Cabrera can play 2nd or short. Peralta can play short or 3rd. Victor can catch or play 1st.

Yeah, there is a ridiculous amount of flexibility here. We might see 135 different starting lineups again this year.

One good thing; if anybody gets off to a horrible start like Cabrera and Garko and Dellucci and Michaels and Hafner did last year, Wedge has a lot of options. If Francisco stumbles out of the gate he can put DeRosa in left and use Carroll at 2nd or 3rd. If Cabrera is in a slump he can use DeRosa and Carroll at 2nd and 3rd, or vice versa. If Garko isn't hitting he can put Victor at first and have Shop catch.

And as chitown pointed out, he can essentially replace Hafner and Choo with Shoppach and Carroll against a tough left-hander and put eight right-handed bats plus Grady in the lineup without screwing up the defense.

So far we've added Wood, DeRosa, and the reliever from the Mets in exchange for Gutierrez and prospects. Not bad at all. And Shapiro still has Shoppach and a surplus of young left-handed starters if he wants to make a play for a starter. It sounds like he's out of money, though.

Cleveland Indians & MLB

Who is online

Who is online