Tony Clark says he is willing to waive his no-trade clause..

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Wuertz is a little above average. A little. Until he can figure out how to get people out consistently, it makes no difference how many people swing and miss. He's already 27 and can't stick around for a full season. He really doesn't have a whole lot of time until his skills start declining and batters make more contact. Then what?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I think many on this board over-value Wuertz.

 

His ability to miss bats is not irrelevant. I don't have those links handy, but TT or BK might.

 

Are you just referencing K's or BB's as well? Because the walks are very much a concern.

 

Sorry I don't have the link, but he's not just talking about K's. In the said link, it showed Wuertz was one of the best pitchers in all of baseball(like top 5 of ALL pitchers) in getting batters to swing and miss, whether that was strike 1, 2, or 3.

[nilodnayr]

I think many on this board over-value Wuertz.

 

His ability to miss bats is not irrelevant. I don't have those links handy, but TT or BK might.

 

Are you just referencing K's or BB's as well? Because the walks are very much a concern.

 

As his his inconsistency. If I though trading Wuertz would contribute at all to the Cubs keeping their heads above water until Lee returns, I wouldn't hesitate for a second.

 

Wasn't most of this due to overuse?

[XZero771679666304]

I think many on this board over-value Wuertz.

 

His ability to miss bats is not irrelevant. I don't have those links handy, but TT or BK might.

 

Are you just referencing K's or BB's as well? Because the walks are very much a concern.

 

As his his inconsistency. If I though trading Wuertz would contribute at all to the Cubs keeping their heads above water until Lee returns, I wouldn't hesitate for a second.

 

Wasn't most of this due to overuse?

 

Micheal hasn't thrown a lot of innings. It may be because his stamina just isn't what it should be. Plus both in 2004 and 2005, he had his really bad stretches in the beginning or middle of the season, and his good stretches in the second half.

 

Looking at his game logs from 2004/2005, there seems to be no pattern to his poor outings. Some came after an outing the previous day, but just as many of his worst ones came early in the season after 1-3 days of rest. It sure doesn't look like overuse is an issue.

[SouthSideRyan]

Wuertz is not a particularly young guy, he's 27 this year. He was converted from a starter just recently, but I don't see anything in his admittedly small sample to show me he's much better than average. He's walked nearly 5 guys per 9 innings in the majors, and a guy who gets in trouble with walks is really the last thing I want in our present pen. In the current pen, he seems to fit in nowhere better than a long man. By next year you're looking at a 28 year old who still fits in no better than a middle reliever with lots of prospects hanging around who would be great to break in as middle relievers in the pen. There are 2 righties ahead of him on the depth chart for the next 3 years, and righties everyhwere in the system this year, and over the next 2 that could replace him with little drop off. He defines spare part to me.

[snoodmonger]

I'm inclined to agree w/ Southside on Wuertz. Good stuff, too inconsistent, and generally overvalued here. If you can help the team, you deal him.

[XZero771679666304]

Wuertz is not a particularly young guy, he's 27 this year. He was converted from a starter just recently, but I don't see anything in his admittedly small sample to show me he's much better than average. He's walked nearly 5 guys per 9 innings in the majors, and a guy who gets in trouble with walks is really the last thing I want in our present pen. In the current pen, he seems to fit in nowhere better than a long man. By next year you're looking at a 28 year old who still fits in no better than a middle reliever with lots of prospects hanging around who would be great to break in as middle relievers in the pen. There are 2 righties ahead of him on the depth chart for the next 3 years, and righties everyhwere in the system this year, and over the next 2 that could replace him with little drop off. He defines spare part to me.

 

For the record, I totally agree with you here.

[KatJ]

...if the trade makes sense for the D-backs.

 

He is definitely a nice, cheap, right-handed option to fill in for Lee.

 

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/diamondbacks/articles/0427dbacknb0427.html

 

Well, the Cubs are in AZ next week - if Jim got the deal done by then, it would make transportation easier. :-)

[Balsa]

I saw give them the Aardvark. I don't think anyone would miss him.

[XZero771679666304]

I saw give them the Aardvark. I don't think anyone would miss him.

 

I'd rather give them Wuertz than Aardsma. I think David has a chance to be pretty good. I'm not convinced Wuertz will be any better than what we have seen from him already.

[Diffusion]

http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2006/03/pitchers_pitch_1.php

[RynoRules]

I'm inclined to agree w/ Southside on Wuertz. Good stuff, too inconsistent, and generally overvalued here. If you can help the team, you deal him.

 

We keep looking to JH to rip people off with every trade he makes. You have to give up something of value to get something of value back in a negotiation. If Wuertz is what he appears to be - a guy who will have a 7 or 8 year career as middle innings man - then I don't have a problem trading him straight up for Clark.

 

We need help now. Our team OBP is putrid. Clark can help. He had a .366 OBP last year, and was over .350 several times before that. If you give him the ABs, it looks like he will produce. If all we need to do is give up Wuertz or his ilk, lets do it.

[srbin84]

I have always been one of the biggest Wuertz fans since he came up, but if we could get Clark for him for this and next year at the cheap price he is signed for, we would be crazy not to do it. I would be surprised if Arizona didn't try to squeeze a prospect out of us as well.

[SouthSideRyan]

I should note that I think Clark is goign to cost more than Wuertz. He's dirt cheap and had a GREAT year last year.

[Magnetic Curses]

lee and clark look identical.

 

and btw- i hate worst, he's terribly overrated.

[Quakers]

I should note that I think Clark is goign to cost more than Wuertz. He's dirt cheap and had a GREAT year last year.

 

Is it possible that Clark would want to renegotiate his contract in return for waiving his No Trade clause. It is my understanding that he signed for so little so that he could stay in Arizona.

[Rob]

We need help now. Our team OBP is putrid. Clark can help. He had a .366 OBP last year, and was over .350 several times before that. If you give him the ABs, it looks like he will produce. If all we need to do is give up Wuertz or his ilk, lets do it.

 

Tony Clark's OBP:

 

2001 - .374

2002 - .265

2003 -.300

2004 -.297

2005 - .366

 

He's hardly a sure thing to bring our OBP up. Last year was his only adequate year OBP-wise since he hit 30 back in '02.

Edited April 28, 2006 by Rob

[YearofDaCubs]

I just think we should stick with Walker right now. He defense hasn't been that bad and with Hairston playing 2B and the lack of options out there we might just have to bite the bullet and stay put.

[NorthsideAvenger]

If we get Tony Clark, maybe Lee and Clark can challenge Deng and Noce to a 2 on 2 basketball game. :wink:

[RynoRules]

RynoRules[/b]"]

We need help now. Our team OBP is putrid. Clark can help. He had a .366 OBP last year, and was over .350 several times before that. If you give him the ABs, it looks like he will produce. If all we need to do is give up Wuertz or his ilk, lets do it.

 

Tony Clark's OBP:

 

2001 - .374

2002 - .265

2003 -.300

2004 -.297

2005 - .366

 

He's hardly a sure thing to bring our OBP up. Last year was his only adequate year OBP-wise since he hit 30 back in '02.

 

Fixed misquote.

 

Those years, IMO, were abberations based on sporadic use. In his prime he put up .360-70 OBPs, and did again last year. There's no reason a first basemam with a good eye can't do it again in his mid to late 30s.

 

In any case, it allows Walker to slide back to 2B and keeps Neifi and Hairston out of the evreyday lineup. This is a good thing.

 

And let me repeat that he is cheap, apparently wants out of AZ, and it ain't gonna take Rich Hill to get him (or at least it shouldn't).

[goonys evil twin]

There's no reason a first basemam with a good eye can't do it again in his mid to late 30s.

 

 

There's no reason he can't, but there's quite a possibility he won't.

[Rob]

Those years, IMO, were abberations based on sporadic use. In his prime he put up .360-70 OBPs, and did again last year. There's no reason a first basemam with a good eye can't do it again in his mid to late 30s.

 

In any case, it allows Walker to slide back to 2B and keeps Neifi and Hairston out of the evreyday lineup. This is a good thing.

 

And let me repeat that he is cheap, apparently wants out of AZ, and it ain't gonna take Rich Hill to get him (or at least it shouldn't).

 

I'm not so sure you can say it was abberations based on sporadic use. I'd say he was getting sporadic use because he wasn't performing well, not the other way around.

 

Yeah, I know he's a streaky hitter, but we really can't afford to pick him up and pray for a hot streak. When he's cold, he makes Neifi look like Barry Bonds...

[RynoRules]

There's no reason a first basemam with a good eye can't do it again in his mid to late 30s.

 

 

There's no reason he can't, but there's quite a possibility he won't.

 

Is this the "refute the argument by stating the opposite" approach? If not, please support your argument with something other than a naked conclusion.

[treebird]

There's no reason a first basemam with a good eye can't do it again in his mid to late 30s.

 

 

There's no reason he can't, but there's quite a possibility he won't.

 

Is this the "refute the argument by stating the opposite" approach? If not, please support your argument with something other than a naked conclusion.

 

i think the argument that an old first baseman who had a crazy good season preceded by two terrible ones probably wont do it again stands pretty well on it's own.

[Danny82]

Funny how some of the same logic isn't afforded to Pierre after having a bad year last year when he had two very good years the years before.