Marshall as #4 starter?

[CUBZ99]

Why do you think they are so enamored with [expletive] then? he's just as much of a fatty a Williams was lat year.

 

Who?

 

[expletive] = Rusch.

 

The Cubs love Rusch, they've always loved Rusch. They've kept him in the rotation when he didn't deserve it. They feel they took a gamble on him and he paid off, so they owe him the benefit of the doubt. Williams hasn't done anything for them yet, so they don't care about dissing him. Plus, Glendon is a "proven veteran" while Williams is still a kid, and this team certainly puts more emphasis than is necessary on tenure.

 

They put Williams in the minors and made it clear they wanted him to lose weight. They never did anything like that with Rusch, which tells me they are comfortable with Rusch's self motivation, and feel the need to use the hammer more with Jerome.

 

I agree that Rusch may not be the best available person to pitch in the rotation this year, but Rusch has been above average as a 5th starter when compared to the #4's and #5's in the NL Central. I think we tend to exaggerate how bad he is. Sure a 4.5 ERA and 1.50 WHIP is not good, but as I pointed out in a previous post, compared with his peers in the division he actually outperforms a majority of them. So the fact that the Cubs see him as a viable #4 or #5 guy is realistic.

[ltb]

LaMar is so ridiculous in his trade demands I'm surprised Hendry even considered dealing with TB.

 

I thought LeMar was fired after the 2005 season?

 

He was, but his replacement (Hunsicker I think?) hasn't been much of a step up.

 

how can you even evaluate him yet? he hasn't been in the position for more than a few months. saying something as drastic as that is a little premature, don't you think?

[Outshined_One]

how can you even evaluate him yet? he hasn't been in the position for more than a few months. saying something as drastic as that is a little premature, don't you think?

 

Considering his reported demands for Lugo and Huff (which weren't much different from LaMar's), I really don't think it was premature.

[ltb]

how can you even evaluate him yet? he hasn't been in the position for more than a few months. saying something as drastic as that is a little premature, don't you think?

 

Considering his reported demands for Lugo and Huff (which weren't much different from LaMar's), I really don't think it was premature.

 

what were his demands for lugo, then?

 

don't even try saying andy marte, either.

[goonys evil twin]

Come on gooney , i think Mt Ruschmore has thrown decently as a cub starter. Im not putting him in the hall but he is a southpaw who has been overall fairly productive as a cub starter. I think williams fairly , has to prove he will go get it in terms of consistancy and motivation. Thats what hurt him in SF. Coach L. Its time to stop the obligitory Cubs love Vets hate youth crud. Pagan, Marshall , Theriot, Murton , Cedeno, I dont care who is on the bump as long as they keep us in the game.

 

Come on goony? Come on what?

 

If you want to say Rusch pitched well as a starter for the Cubs, then you have to say Williams pitched better. His brief career has also been much better than Rusch.

[CubDad4Ever]

Based on a smaller sample size. Which comes to be important when evaluating whether Williams is going to going to regress or not. I just dont buy the cubs give the vet the nod every time. Coach L

[sethuel1]

Based on a smaller sample size. Which comes to be important when evaluating whether Williams is going to going to regress or not. I just dont buy the cubs give the vet the nod every time. Coach L

 

Wait, you're saying that his career is a smaller sample size?

 

Of course it is, he's younger.

[CubDad4Ever]

No my friend. , im talking about his time with the cubs. Coach L

[goonys evil twin]

Based on a smaller sample size. Which comes to be important when evaluating whether Williams is going to going to regress or not. I just dont buy the cubs give the vet the nod every time. Coach L

 

What small sample size? The career comparison is quite valid. Jerome threw over 100 innings last year for the Cubs, Rusch just had a couple more as a starter. Rusch has proven over a longer period that he's not good. Williams has shown over a smaller period, but a substantial one nonetheless, that he's better, and could keep improving.

[TheDude]

Does it seem odd to anyone else that the Cubs are actually starting to make some decent moves? In the past it seemed like they were less willing to take a chance on a young player or give a spot to a more deserving player.

 

This year, Marshal and Hill both have a shot to win a job, Pagan probably made the team, Murton and Cedeno are starting and Theriot actually has a small chance to break camp.

I think Hendry and Baker know their job is on the line.

 

That doesn't really follow. Contract year is a factor, but I don't think quite in the way you implied. If you're feeling the heat and perceive your job is on the line, odds are you put your faith in something more proven (or perceived as more proven) than take an even bigger risk on multiple unknown qualities.

 

What is more likely, IMO, is that the relationship between GM and manager has evolved, and the GM's desire to see more youth (combined with the youth in question demonstrating talent at the right time) has had an impact on the manager.

 

I've always seen Hendry as a GM wanting to infuse youth with a veteran core. I've always seen Dusty as a manager less willing to gamble on that youth. Hendry wanted Choi, Patterson, Dubois to have an impact on this team in previous years, as an example, and we know how Dusty responded.

 

Perhaps Dusty simply recognizes the cards he has been dealt for 2006 and is playing along this time around.

[ltb]

how can you even evaluate him yet? he hasn't been in the position for more than a few months. saying something as drastic as that is a little premature, don't you think?

 

Considering his reported demands for Lugo and Huff (which weren't much different from LaMar's), I really don't think it was premature.

 

The Tampa Tribune reports that the Devil Rays may try to trade for Aaron Heilman, likely offering the Mets Julio Lugo in return.

 

Source: http://www.sptimes.com/2006/03/30/Rays/Maddon_won_t_fret_ove.shtml

 

Still think that claim wasn't premature?

[cubfan]

how can you even evaluate him yet? he hasn't been in the position for more than a few months. saying something as drastic as that is a little premature, don't you think?

 

Considering his reported demands for Lugo and Huff (which weren't much different from LaMar's), I really don't think it was premature.

 

The Tampa Tribune reports that the Devil Rays may try to trade for Aaron Heilman, likely offering the Mets Julio Lugo in return.

 

Source: http://www.sptimes.com/2006/03/30/Rays/Maddon_won_t_fret_ove.shtml

 

Still think that claim wasn't premature?

 

I read the link and all it said about Lugo and Heilman was

 

They could also get quickly involved in a bigger deal with the Mets if they were to consider trading Aaron Heilman, who is unhappy about being bumped to the bullpen. The Mets have had interest in Julio Lugo and still have a need for an established second baseman.

 

Not saying that it will not happen, I just think that if that was Rotoworlds only source they are reading a little to much into the statement. It just mentions that the 2 players could be involved in a trade but I saw nothing suggesting that it would have to be straight up. As far as we know, the Rays might was a few prospecs from the Mets as well.

[mg420]

i guess its all but official that marshall is the #4:

 

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=260&p=2&c=514978&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fcubs.scout.com%2f2%2f514978.html

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

i guess its all but official that marshall is the #4:

 

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=260&p=2&c=514978&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fcubs.scout.com%2f2%2f514978.html

 

Can anyone with a subscription state exactly what he said that caused the headline. Not that I doubt it, but this was the same site that had us undeniably acquiring Furcal and trading for Soriano. There's a credibility issue with the site, needless to say.

[Burtonbell]

Well, heres rotowire's take. It comes from the Sun times apparently...

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=rotowire-eanarshalleatsuterom&prov=rotowire&type=lgns

 

 

 

RotoWire.com Staff - RotoWire.com

Thursday, March 30, 2006

Update: Marshall seems to be on course to start April 8 at Wrigley Field against St. Louis, the Chicago Sun-Times reports.

 

Recommendation: It's not official yet, but for now it looks as though Marshall beat out Jerome Williams for the No. 4 starter job.

[Burtonbell]

It looks like rotowires stuff came from this article that was printed yesterday.

 

http://www.suntimes.com/output/cubs/cst-spt-cub29.html

 

Nothing official yet...

[CUBZ99]

i guess its all but official that marshall is the #4:

 

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=260&p=2&c=514978&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fcubs.scout.com%2f2%2f514978.html

 

Can anyone with a subscription state exactly what he said that caused the headline. Not that I doubt it, but this was the same site that had us undeniably acquiring Furcal and trading for Soriano. There's a credibility issue with the site, needless to say.

 

Headline says that Sean Marshall himself said that he was told he was the 4th starter. :shock:

[badgercub]

from everything in the papers today, it sounded like they were going to wait and see how Williams' start went today.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

i guess its all but official that marshall is the #4:

 

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=260&p=2&c=514978&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fcubs.scout.com%2f2%2f514978.html

 

Can anyone with a subscription state exactly what he said that caused the headline. Not that I doubt it, but this was the same site that had us undeniably acquiring Furcal and trading for Soriano. There's a credibility issue with the site, needless to say.

 

Headline says that Sean Marshall himself said that he was told he was the 4th starter. :shock:

 

Yeah...that's why I'm curious to what exactly Marshall said. This could be a case of a faulty inference to create a shocking headline.

 

There was a headline in the Dallas papers "Clemens to Be with Rangers for Opening Day". Everyone who intially saw the headline was lie "WTF...the Rangers signed Clemens!" But the article was misleading in that it was about Clemens accepting Hicks invitation to be a part of the festivities celebrating the Texas Longhorns national championship team. I'm not saying that's what happened here, but I'd like some of the facts to go with the headline.

 

Has that site not been known for faulty infor before (Furcal, Pudge), I might be willing to pony up for some of their articles.

[Blueheart05]

i guess its all but official that marshall is the #4:

 

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=260&p=2&c=514978&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fcubs.scout.com%2f2%2f514978.html

 

That site has no credibiility with me. I doubt Marshall told Scout.com before any major news outlet. I'll wait to read it for free and not for a $80 subscription fee.

[Mizzou]

So if Marshall is the #4 starter, will he start next Saturday's game against the Cards? Are the Cubs still planning on using Rusch on Wednesday and Maddux on Friday?

[Blueheart05]

So if Marshall is the #4 starter, will he start next Saturday's game against the Cards? Are the Cubs still planning on using Rusch on Wednesday and Maddux on Friday?

 

Z, Rusch, Maddux, Marshall/Williams is the order (not sure which days that corresponds to)

[Jon]

Sullivan included Williams as a bullpen pitcher in one of his latest articles. Not that it necessarily means much, but everything points to Marshall getting that 4th spot.

 

The rotation should go like this:

 

@ CIN

Zambrano

Rusch

 

vs. STL

Maddux

Marshall

Zambrano

 

vs. CIN

Rusch

Maddux

Marshall

 

@ PIT

Zambrano

Guzman/Hill

Rusch

 

@ LAD

Maddux

Marshall

Zambrano

[CubinNY]

Sullivan included Williams as a bullpen pitcher in one of his latest articles. Not that it necessarily means much, but everything points to Marshall getting that 4th spot.

 

The rotation should go like this:

 

@ CIN

Zambrano

Rusch

 

vs. STL

Maddux

Marshall

Zambrano

 

vs. CIN

Rusch

Maddux

Marshall

 

@ PIT

Zambrano

Guzman/Hill

Rusch

 

@ LAD

Maddux

Marshall

Zambrano

 

If the Cubs manage to go 7-7 during that stretch I will be ecstatic. My worry is that the clock has struck 12 for Glendon "[expletive]" Rusch.

[Fro]

http://cubs.scout.com/2/514978.html

 

Marshall named the #4 starter.