Rosenthal: "Cubs early favorites to land Tejada"

[CubsWin]

Tejada backpedaling:

 

Link

I didn't take this as backpedaling. If you read what he is saying, he is demanding a trade. He is simply clarifying under what conditions he is demanding it.

 

He wants the O's to get pitching and otherwise improve the team or he wants out. Thats still a trade demand. It just means that we will have to wait to see if the O's can acquire some pitching before we can expect any movement of Tejada.

[AlwaysaCub]

Tejada backpedaling:

 

Link

I didn't take this as backpedaling. If you read what he is saying, he is demanding a trade. He is simply clarifying under what conditions he is demanding it.

 

He wants the O's to get pitching and otherwise improve the team or he wants out. Thats still a trade demand. It just means that we will have to wait to see if the O's can acquire some pitching before we can expect any movement of Tejada.

 

The only way, at this point, the Orioles will get pitching is if they sign Kevin Millwood...or trade Tejada.

[stitchface]

please name one cub pitcher who has improved under rothschild's tutelage? please explain why the bullpen is gruesomely mismanaged under Rothschild. He may be the greatest teacher in the world but I don't see any positive results. I continue to see young pitcher after young pitcher make no progress or regress under Rothschild.

You want one? Okay, Carlos Zambrano. Two? Will Ohman. Three? Wuertz? Four? Dempster. Five? Rusch.

 

If you're not seeing any positive results, its either because you are not looking very hard or you don't want to see them because they don't match up with your current opinion of Rothschild.

 

Am I saying he is a great pitching coach? No. I don't know enough to have a truely informed opinion. Am I saying that all of the success that those pitchers have had is due to his teaching? I don't know. All I know is that they weren't that good before. The evidence you asked for is there.

 

None of those pitchers improved under Rothschild. Wuertz was wildly inconsistent. Dempster awful until transitioned to relief and then very lucky. Ohman was about the same as he was in the minors as was Zambrano. Anyway, I have nothing against Rothschild, I just don't see him as much of a positive.

[CubsWin]

please name one cub pitcher who has improved under rothschild's tutelage? please explain why the bullpen is gruesomely mismanaged under Rothschild. He may be the greatest teacher in the world but I don't see any positive results. I continue to see young pitcher after young pitcher make no progress or regress under Rothschild.

You want one? Okay, Carlos Zambrano. Two? Will Ohman. Three? Wuertz? Four? Dempster. Five? Rusch.

 

If you're not seeing any positive results, its either because you are not looking very hard or you don't want to see them because they don't match up with your current opinion of Rothschild.

 

Am I saying he is a great pitching coach? No. I don't know enough to have a truely informed opinion. Am I saying that all of the success that those pitchers have had is due to his teaching? I don't know. All I know is that they weren't that good before. The evidence you asked for is there.

 

None of those pitchers improved under Rothschild. Wuertz was wildly inconsistent. Dempster awful until transitioned to relief and then very lucky. Ohman was about the same as he was in the minors as was Zambrano. Anyway, I have nothing against Rothschild, I just don't see him as much of a positive.

Uh, you can't have it both ways. If you think he is ineffective, you have something against him.

 

Ohman was about the same as he was in the minors? Really? Ohman had one really good season at AA in 2000. At every other level (low and high A combined) in every other year, he has had an ERA over 4.

 

Dempster was lucky? Sorry, but you set the rules of this debate. You asked for one pitcher who had improved under Rothschild. When you get one handed to you, you don't get to claim that he was lucky. Especially if the pitcher performed excellently on a consistent basis over several months like Dempster did.

 

Zambrano hasn't improved since joining the Cubs? He has allowed less hits per inning every year under Rothschild. His ERA went from 3.66 the year before Rothschild to 3.11 and 2.75 in the first two years with him.

 

You may consider Wuertz inconsistent, but that doesn't mean that he isn't improved. What does being consistent have to do with being improved from the year before? You keep coming back with arguments like "he was inconsistent" and I'm going to accuse you of grasping at straws. 4.34 in '04. 3.84 in '05. 30 Ks in 29 IP in '04. 89 Ks in 70 IP in '05. Those are the numbers.

 

And what about Rusch? Perhaps Rothschild's biggest success. I noticed you didn't even respond to his mention.

 

I'd go back and look at the numbers again. They don't support the assertion that Rothschild hasn't helped to improve any of the pitchers under his watch.

[stitchface]

Rusch was good? LOL, you're right Roth is the greatest coach ever. I suggest you look up Dempster's peripherals and tell he got better. Zambrano you could make a case for but I think he would have done the same under any pitching coach. I just don't think Larry is special. That's all I ever said.

[stitchface]

and yes, I can say he's ineffective and not have anything against him. as bruno pointed out, not all pupils listen.

[Jehrico]

Rusch was good? LOL, you're right Roth is the greatest coach ever. I suggest you look up Dempster's peripherals and tell he got better. Zambrano you could make a case for but I think he would have done the same under any pitching coach. I just don't think Larry is special. That's all I ever said.

Rusch has been much better the last two years than he was previously. What was he, like 1-16 before he came to us? You're trying awfully hard to diminish any improvement made by any of our pitchers for the sake of disparaging Rothschild. He may not be perfect, and he may not have the answer for every pitcher out there (but neither did Mazzone), but he's generally considered as one of the better pitching coaches in the game by many people associated with the game. I think you need to be a little more open-minded.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Rusch was good? LOL, you're right Roth is the greatest coach ever. I suggest you look up Dempster's peripherals and tell he got better. Zambrano you could make a case for but I think he would have done the same under any pitching coach. I just don't think Larry is special. That's all I ever said.

Rusch has been much better the last two years than he was previously. What was he, like 1-16 before he came to us? You're trying awfully hard to diminish any improvement made by any of our pitchers for the sake of disparaging Rothschild. He may not be perfect, and he may not have the answer for every pitcher out there (but neither did Mazzone), but he's generally considered as one of the better pitching coaches in the game by many people associated with the game. I think you need to be a little more open-minded.

 

BK did an article a while back showing that most of Rusch's improvement was BABIP related.

[stitchface]

Rusch and Dempster have not improved. Zambrano you could make a case for. Wuertz we'll say the jury is still out. What was the other one he mentioned? I just don't see that Rothschild has done a whole lot with the staff. Truth is, I don't think major league pitching coaches generally do - pitchers should be taught in the minors. I don't really see what being open-minded has to do with it. Seems like ideas of judging pitchers by wins or saves is the close-minded approach to me.