New Article: Don't Panic

[srbin84]

second: prior was really bad the last 4 months of last year.

 

He was 6-4 with a 3.89 ERA post all star break last year. How in the world is that "really bad"? He was coming off a broken freaking elbow, and came back as good as any reasonable person could expect.

 

That's not really bad. It's about No.3/4 starter quality. He's probably just frustrated that in addition to that, Prior had a 4.02 ERA the year before. That's cause for concern for a guy who was once one of the better pitchers in the league.

 

Number of NL starters with an ERA below 3.89 last year: 24

 

That must be quite the pitching staff for it to be 3/4 starter quality.

 

Any contending team who has a No.2 starter with an ERA around 4 has problems.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

second: prior was really bad the last 4 months of last year.

 

He was 6-4 with a 3.89 ERA post all star break last year. How in the world is that "really bad"? He was coming off a broken freaking elbow, and came back as good as any reasonable person could expect.

 

That's not really bad. It's about No.3/4 starter quality. He's probably just frustrated that in addition to that, Prior had a 4.02 ERA the year before. That's cause for concern for a guy who was once one of the better pitchers in the league.

 

Number of NL starters with an ERA below 3.89 last year: 24

 

That must be quite the pitching staff for it to be 3/4 starter quality.

 

Any contending team who has a No.2 starter with an ERA around 4 has problems.

 

First of all, using ERA as a black and white determinant is pretty crazy. FWIW, Prior's ERA all of last year was 3.67

 

Secondly, there are 16 teams in the NL, and Prior's marks(no pun intended) put him 19th ERA. He was 14th in WHIP, 12th in K/BB, 1st(by quite a bit) in K/9, 11th in Quality Start %, 5th in BAA, 9th in OBP against, and 12th in OPS against. If anything, he was a borderline number 1 starter last year.

Edited April 21, 2006 by Transmogrified Tiger

[rawaction]

a couple things

one: pitching dominates early. hitting comes on as the weather heast up and pitchers start wearing down. our pitching has been evry good for the most part...BUT when hitting takes off will it be good enough to continue to hold down hitters? and will we have enough hitting when the hitters take over?questionable

second: prior was really bad the last 4 months of last year. his pitch counts were up(way up) he gave up bomb after bomb. there is absolutely no way to know if he will be that pitcher(who supposedly was healthy) or the old prior. there is a good chance he will never be the stud he was in 2003.

 

three: without rehashing this again, i certainly hope we all know better than to base our hopes on wood doing anything!

 

bottom line is the stros went last year. can not take it away from them.

everyone except pittsburgh,tampa and kc could go this year. so yes this team could go. they need a whole lot of things to break their way but it could happen. not very likely but it could happen.

 

The Cubs gave up 34 runs in 4 of the 5 games vs. the Reds. They won't play an offense as good for the next 4 weeks. I don't know that you will see a big difference in the Cubs pitching, especially considering you'll have Marshall getting more experience, Williams getting more comfortable, and Wood and Prior coming back to take some of those innings.

[srbin84]

second: prior was really bad the last 4 months of last year.

 

He was 6-4 with a 3.89 ERA post all star break last year. How in the world is that "really bad"? He was coming off a broken freaking elbow, and came back as good as any reasonable person could expect.

 

That's not really bad. It's about No.3/4 starter quality. He's probably just frustrated that in addition to that, Prior had a 4.02 ERA the year before. That's cause for concern for a guy who was once one of the better pitchers in the league.

 

Number of NL starters with an ERA below 3.89 last year: 24

 

That must be quite the pitching staff for it to be 3/4 starter quality.

 

Any contending team who has a No.2 starter with an ERA around 4 has problems.

 

First of all, using ERA as a black and white determinant is pretty crazy. FWIW, Prior's ERA all of last year was 3.67

 

Secondly, there are 16 teams in the NL, and Prior's marks(no pun intended) put him 19th ERA. He was 14th in WHIP, 12th in K/BB, 1st(by quite a bit) in K/9, 11th in Quality Start %, 5th in BAA, 9th in OBP against, and 12th in OPS against. If anything, he was a borderline number 1 starter last year.

 

We're talking about the last two years. His combined numbers been far from Ace quality.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

We're talking about the last two years. His combined numbers been far from Ace quality.

 

I'm pretty sure you're the only one talking about the last two years, from the looks of the quotes.

 

I don't have the time to calculate his two year totals, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it's not worse than 32 other starters in the NL, which would make the 3/4 starter at least minimally true.

[Soul]

 

If all the Cubs players repeat what they did last year in 06 vs. Astros in 05.

 

CF- Tavarez (.666 OPS) vs. Pierre (.688 OPS, career .729)

SS- Everett (.654 OPS) vs. Cedeno (1st year, but fair to say he should surpass that)

2B- Biggio (.793 OPS) vs. Walker (.829)

C- Ausmus (.682 OPS) vs. Barrett (.824)

LF- including 46 games by Berkman out there (.698 OPS) vs. Murton (1st full year, but again, should easily surpass)

 

 

Houston's starters had a 3.46 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, and 6.81 K/9, thanks to a very weak 4-5. Zambrano has been better than that for the last few years. Prior has better career numbers than that. Wood is likely to be at least within striking distance of that. Maddux still should be just behind Wood. Jerome Williams just behind that.

 

And as good as the Houston bullpen was in 05 (3.63 ERA, 8.39 K/9, 1.25 WHIP), the guys that the Cubs currently have in the pen (minus Aardsma, and using career averages for Williamson) combined to put up a 2.57 ERA, 8.38 K/9, and a 1.14 WHIP. That's enough to allow for lesser years and a mediocre 6th reliever (Aardsma, Wuertz, Novoa) and still be better than Houston.

 

Wood & Prior aren't playing in '06. Nobody knows when they'll be back, and frankly nobody knows if they will be of any use this year when they DO get back. You can't just throw whoever you want into the mix just to bolster your argument when they aren't even on the active roster. The '06 team is without Wood & Prior until proven otherwise.

 

Secondly, you can't use career averages whenever you want when talking about specific seasons. Nor can you just disregard marginal players like Aardsma because it sends your argument down the drain.

 

As for Lidge/Dempster: I'm not going to knock Dempster, because I love the guy and think he's done a fine job. Lidge is the far more feared pitcher though.

 

In your player-by-player analysis, it's highly suspect to say Cedeno is going to surpass anything. He's basically a rook. Doing great now, and I hope it continues. But any assumptions about him are premature.

 

Saying Murton is better than Berkman is just plain laughable. You know better than that.

[rawaction]

Wood & Prior aren't playing in '06. Nobody knows when they'll be back, and frankly nobody knows if they will be of any use this year when they DO get back. You can't just throw whoever you want into the mix just to bolster your argument when they aren't even on the active roster. The '06 team is without Wood & Prior until proven otherwise.

 

Secondly, you can't use career averages whenever you want when talking about specific seasons. Nor can you just disregard marginal players like Aardsma because it sends your argument down the drain.

 

As for Lidge/Dempster: I'm not going to knock Dempster, because I love the guy and think he's done a fine job. Lidge is the far more feared pitcher though.

 

In your player-by-player analysis, it's highly suspect to say Cedeno is going to surpass anything. He's basically a rook. Doing great now, and I hope it continues. But any assumptions about him are premature.

 

Saying Murton is better than Berkman is just plain laughable. You know better than that.

 

Seriously, are you just saying stuff to disagree now?

 

1. I never remotely said Murton was anywhere near the player that Berkman is.

 

2. How is it premature to say that Cedeno (who's hit well over .300 in his 150 career ABs so far) won't outproduce the worst SS in the NL?

 

3. Are you honestly arguing my STATS that Dempster was the better closer than Lidge last year with your PERCEPTION of fear?

 

4. When did I use career averages? I mentioned them with Pierre, but still showed with a down year he was better than Tavarez....which was the point. I did for Williamson because it's clear as day that he won't pitch like he did last year coming off of surgery. His career numbers are actually much higher because of the times he's pitched when needing or coming back from surgery. His healthy years have all been remarkably better than the numbers I used.

 

5. When did I disregard Aardsma? I explicitly said the Cubs top 5 in the pen are good enough to still be better than the Astros 05 pen even when you factor in Aardsma, Wuertz, and Novoa.

 

6. Maybe you haven't heard, but since Wood and Prior went down there have been at least hints and at most target dates for when both would be coming back. I don't know how I'm throwing "whoever I want in the mix". That doesn't even make sense.

[Mizzou]

I'm sure this has been brought up, seeing as how this thread is at 6 pages now, but... there's no way that Lee's injury will only cost us 1-2 wins. That's just silly.

[rawaction]

I'm sure this has been brought up, seeing as how this thread is at 6 pages now, but... there's no way that Lee's injury will only cost us 1-2 wins. That's just silly.

 

And I still don't understand how statistical proof is silly. BK showed that Lee as great as he was last year was only 65 runs better than the average hitter. That's less than 1/2 a run per game the Cubs lose.

[Mizzou]

I'm sure this has been brought up, seeing as how this thread is at 6 pages now, but... there's no way that Lee's injury will only cost us 1-2 wins. That's just silly.

 

And I still don't understand how statistical proof is silly. BK showed that Lee as great as he was last year was only 65 runs better than the average hitter. That's less than 1/2 a run per game the Cubs lose.

 

I'm sorry, you can show me all the numbers you want to, but I'll never believe that losing a player of his caliber for 2 months is only going to cost us 2 games. I respect you and BK's opinions, but that's just absurd in my eyes.

[srbin84]

Why not just start Mabry all year and use Lee's money for something else then? We'd win like 3-5 games less, right?

[badger1679666666]

second: prior was really bad the last 4 months of last year.

 

He was 6-4 with a 3.89 ERA post all star break last year. How in the world is that "really bad"? He was coming off a broken freaking elbow, and came back as good as any reasonable person could expect.

 

That's not really bad. It's about No.3/4 starter quality. He's probably just frustrated that in addition to that, Prior had a 4.02 ERA the year before. That's cause for concern for a guy who was once one of the better pitchers in the league.

 

Number of NL starters with an ERA below 3.89 last year: 24

 

That must be quite the pitching staff for it to be 3/4 starter quality.

 

Any contending team who has a No.2 starter with an ERA around 4 has problems.

 

First of all, using ERA as a black and white determinant is pretty crazy. FWIW, Prior's ERA all of last year was 3.67

 

Secondly, there are 16 teams in the NL, and Prior's marks(no pun intended) put him 19th ERA. He was 14th in WHIP, 12th in K/BB, 1st(by quite a bit) in K/9, 11th in Quality Start %, 5th in BAA, 9th in OBP against, and 12th in OPS against. If anything, he was a borderline number 1 starter last year.

 

We're talking about the last two years. His combined numbers been far from Ace quality.

 

It seems from your posts that you really don't want Prior here anymore and I really can't understand that sentiment.

 

in 2003 he was amazingly good #1 starter numbers

in 2004 he was shaky due to injury #3 starter numbers when pitching

in 2005 he was downright cruising till he took a ball off the elbow and still ended up with #1 starter numbers

 

He's only 25 I believe. TT proved his numbers last year - he started nibbling too much but other than that he had #1 starter numbers.

 

Why do you want to get rid of him so badly when he's so young and could be one of the best if not THE best pitchers for years to come?

[srbin84]

second: prior was really bad the last 4 months of last year.

 

He was 6-4 with a 3.89 ERA post all star break last year. How in the world is that "really bad"? He was coming off a broken freaking elbow, and came back as good as any reasonable person could expect.

 

That's not really bad. It's about No.3/4 starter quality. He's probably just frustrated that in addition to that, Prior had a 4.02 ERA the year before. That's cause for concern for a guy who was once one of the better pitchers in the league.

 

Number of NL starters with an ERA below 3.89 last year: 24

 

That must be quite the pitching staff for it to be 3/4 starter quality.

 

Any contending team who has a No.2 starter with an ERA around 4 has problems.

 

First of all, using ERA as a black and white determinant is pretty crazy. FWIW, Prior's ERA all of last year was 3.67

 

Secondly, there are 16 teams in the NL, and Prior's marks(no pun intended) put him 19th ERA. He was 14th in WHIP, 12th in K/BB, 1st(by quite a bit) in K/9, 11th in Quality Start %, 5th in BAA, 9th in OBP against, and 12th in OPS against. If anything, he was a borderline number 1 starter last year.

 

We're talking about the last two years. His combined numbers been far from Ace quality.

 

It seems from your posts that you really don't want Prior here anymore and I really can't understand that sentiment.

 

in 2003 he was amazingly good #1 starter numbers

in 2004 he was shaky due to injury #3 starter numbers when pitching

in 2005 he was downright cruising till he took a ball off the elbow and still ended up with #1 starter numbers

 

He's only 25 I believe. TT proved his numbers last year - he started nibbling too much but other than that he had #1 starter numbers.

 

Why do you want to get rid of him so badly when he's so young and could be one of the best if not THE best pitchers for years to come?

 

I love Prior, but with all of his injuries, I am worried this is gonna keep happening every year. I know a couple were freak, but still. I also don't understand why he has pitched so far below the 2003 season the last 2 years. I am concerned he is a falling asset, and I don't want the Cubs to end up with nothing to show for what was once the most valuable asset in baseball on the pitching side.

[A New Era]

People seem to be missing the point which for once Rosenthal manages to make in his latest article. The cubs were short a bat anyway. To win the division we needed another bat in between or behind Aram and D-Lee. Now we have lost D-lee we are 2 huge bats short. IMO no amount of pitching can make up for this.

 

Yes. The point is, we weren't good enough to win even with Lee. Now we are a bad ballclub.

 

Looks like it will be Mabry/Walker/Restovich @ 1B, in whatever combo Dusty likes. Wow.

 

Don't panic? My goodness. I was panicking before Spring Training began, and with good reason----we lost all our pitchers before we even started preparing for the season! Panic doesn't describe the appropriate response to Lee's injury. More like resignment to fate.

 

We weren't good enough to win even WITH Lee? Man oh man the negativity on this board sometimes. Last time I checked we had a 9-5 record with Lee and above the Cardinals. We were winning series and on a good pace to seriously contend. Now without Lee, everyone else needs to step it up. And I think they will.

 

Seriously, why not just give up this year. Aren't we suffering enough after the loss of Lee? To have to come to this board to such negativity. :shock:

[BigbadB]

So why did we just pay Lee $65M? :lol:

 

I only read the first 2 posts in this thread, but that was my thinking exactly after reading the first one. If Lee is only good for a couple of extra wins per year, maybe we should have given Neifi, Mabry and Hairston that 65m.

 

Joking of course. And Lee isn't missing a whole year anyway.

[RegulusBlue]

Excellent read, and very well based in reality and stats.

 

I spent much of last night pontificating to my friends about the Cubs still-alive playoff hopes, but mine was just about heart, drive, and passion, mostly of Matt Murton, the leader of our people in dark and troubled times.

[badger1679666666]

second: prior was really bad the last 4 months of last year.

 

He was 6-4 with a 3.89 ERA post all star break last year. How in the world is that "really bad"? He was coming off a broken freaking elbow, and came back as good as any reasonable person could expect.

 

That's not really bad. It's about No.3/4 starter quality. He's probably just frustrated that in addition to that, Prior had a 4.02 ERA the year before. That's cause for concern for a guy who was once one of the better pitchers in the league.

 

Number of NL starters with an ERA below 3.89 last year: 24

 

That must be quite the pitching staff for it to be 3/4 starter quality.

 

Any contending team who has a No.2 starter with an ERA around 4 has problems.

 

First of all, using ERA as a black and white determinant is pretty crazy. FWIW, Prior's ERA all of last year was 3.67

 

Secondly, there are 16 teams in the NL, and Prior's marks(no pun intended) put him 19th ERA. He was 14th in WHIP, 12th in K/BB, 1st(by quite a bit) in K/9, 11th in Quality Start %, 5th in BAA, 9th in OBP against, and 12th in OPS against. If anything, he was a borderline number 1 starter last year.

 

We're talking about the last two years. His combined numbers been far from Ace quality.

 

It seems from your posts that you really don't want Prior here anymore and I really can't understand that sentiment.

 

in 2003 he was amazingly good #1 starter numbers

in 2004 he was shaky due to injury #3 starter numbers when pitching

in 2005 he was downright cruising till he took a ball off the elbow and still ended up with #1 starter numbers

 

He's only 25 I believe. TT proved his numbers last year - he started nibbling too much but other than that he had #1 starter numbers.

 

Why do you want to get rid of him so badly when he's so young and could be one of the best if not THE best pitchers for years to come?

 

I love Prior, but with all of his injuries, I am worried this is gonna keep happening every year. I know a couple were freak, but still. I also don't understand why he has pitched so far below the 2003 season the last 2 years. I am concerned he is a falling asset, and I don't want the Cubs to end up with nothing to show for what was once the most valuable asset in baseball on the pitching side.

 

Thanks for the honest response. I guess I understand the concern, but I just can't see someone flopping whose already shown tremendous stuff. I think he just needs to develop a greater pain threshold.

 

Pitch through pain, not through injury is what I was always told.

[BigbadB]

Nice sig. I am very impressed with Murton's veteran qualities.

[Coach C]

Not sure if this been posted, but here's this, just for cautionary measures.

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v39/SwedeCarlson/Cubs/panic_button.jpg

[soccer10k]

6. Maybe you haven't heard, but since Wood and Prior went down there have been at least hints and at most target dates for when both would be coming back. I don't know how I'm throwing "whoever I want in the mix". That doesn't even make sense.

 

I would say that we don't know if Prior and Wood are going to be back at full strength. During Spring Training, the initial reports said nothing was wrong with Prior, then he would only miss a few days, then he would miss a couple starts, then he's out til the middle of May. Frankly I don't know what to think of our pitchers and when they are actually going to return. I wouldn't be surprised at all to have Wood come back only to go back on the DL within a month. To rely on him is one of the worst things you can do. Prior is another thing. As somebody else pointed out, Prior has had some freak injuries. But hints and target dates aren't sure things.

[soccer10k]

People seem to be missing the point which for once Rosenthal manages to make in his latest article. The cubs were short a bat anyway. To win the division we needed another bat in between or behind Aram and D-Lee. Now we have lost D-lee we are 2 huge bats short. IMO no amount of pitching can make up for this.

 

Yes. The point is, we weren't good enough to win even with Lee. Now we are a bad ballclub.

 

Looks like it will be Mabry/Walker/Restovich @ 1B, in whatever combo Dusty likes. Wow.

 

Don't panic? My goodness. I was panicking before Spring Training began, and with good reason----we lost all our pitchers before we even started preparing for the season! Panic doesn't describe the appropriate response to Lee's injury. More like resignment to fate.

 

We weren't good enough to win even WITH Lee? Man oh man the negativity on this board sometimes. Last time I checked we had a 9-5 record with Lee and above the Cardinals. We were winning series and on a good pace to seriously contend. Now without Lee, everyone else needs to step it up. And I think they will.

 

Seriously, why not just give up this year. Aren't we suffering enough after the loss of Lee? To have to come to this board to such negativity. :shock:

 

We were a game or two up on the Astros in 2004 with a week to play and blew that without suffering any injuries. Why should we be positive when our MVP candidate is going to miss 2 months? I'm not throwing in the towel, but to have World Series aspirations is ludicris.

[A New Era]

People seem to be missing the point which for once Rosenthal manages to make in his latest article. The cubs were short a bat anyway. To win the division we needed another bat in between or behind Aram and D-Lee. Now we have lost D-lee we are 2 huge bats short. IMO no amount of pitching can make up for this.

 

Yes. The point is, we weren't good enough to win even with Lee. Now we are a bad ballclub.

 

Looks like it will be Mabry/Walker/Restovich @ 1B, in whatever combo Dusty likes. Wow.

 

Don't panic? My goodness. I was panicking before Spring Training began, and with good reason----we lost all our pitchers before we even started preparing for the season! Panic doesn't describe the appropriate response to Lee's injury. More like resignment to fate.

 

We weren't good enough to win even WITH Lee? Man oh man the negativity on this board sometimes. Last time I checked we had a 9-5 record with Lee and above the Cardinals. We were winning series and on a good pace to seriously contend. Now without Lee, everyone else needs to step it up. And I think they will.

 

Seriously, why not just give up this year. Aren't we suffering enough after the loss of Lee? To have to come to this board to such negativity. :shock:

 

We were a game or two up on the Astros in 2004 with a week to play and blew that without suffering any injuries. Why should we be positive when our MVP candidate is going to miss 2 months? I'm not throwing in the towel, but to have World Series aspirations is ludicris.

 

Then I'll go ahead and have world series aspirations and you can keep comparing us to past teams. We are NOT, the 2004 Cubs. Can't see that, then you're blind.

[goonys evil twin]

Then I'll go ahead and have world series aspirations and you can keep comparing us to past teams. We are NOT, the 2004 Cubs. Can't see that, then you're blind.

 

No, they aren't the 2004 Cubs. But they are very similar. Week offense, with no patience, relying on pitching to carry them through.

[XZero771679666304]

Then I'll go ahead and have world series aspirations and you can keep comparing us to past teams. We are NOT, the 2004 Cubs. Can't see that, then you're blind.

 

No, they aren't the 2004 Cubs. But they are very similar. Week offense, with no patience, relying on pitching to carry them through.

 

True, but on paper that offense looked devastating. Walker, Sosa, Alou, Ramirez, Lee, Patterson (before he fell of the earth)....

 

But that's why they play the games.

[A New Era]

Then I'll go ahead and have world series aspirations and you can keep comparing us to past teams. We are NOT, the 2004 Cubs. Can't see that, then you're blind.

 

No, they aren't the 2004 Cubs. But they are very similar. Week offense, with no patience, relying on pitching to carry them through.

 

True, but on paper that offense looked devastating. Walker, Sosa, Alou, Ramirez, Lee, Patterson (before he fell of the earth)....

 

But that's why they play the games.

 

That's true. That's why they play, so let these team play!! I wouldn't agree this team has no patience, this team has WAY more patience at the plate than 2004 Cubs.