Sign Zito

[Caryatid]

I can't believe after Wood and Prior, people are still fawning for the injury risk. Zito NEVER misses a start and would surely benefit from a move to the NL. Let's say Schmidt only misses 5 starts a year. You still have to see Rusch or Hill go 0-5 10+ ERA, so no, I don't want anybody who is at any kind of added injury risk.

 

Schmidt's missed like 5 starts in 5 years.

 

Zito missed like 1 start in 5 years

 

Zito has made, on average, 6 more starts per year than has Schmidt.

 

Schmidt: 28.8 Starts/Season (01-05)

Zito: 35 Starts/Season (01-05)

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT: added numbers for verification purposes

Edited June 22, 2006 by Caryatid

[baseball7897]

Not to mention Zito pitched over 200 innings in every single year he has pitched except for his rookie year in 2000

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Not to mention Zito pitched over 200 innings in every single year he has pitched except for his rookie year in 2000

 

and yet people say Schmidt has been overworked....

[soccer10k]

Not to mention Zito pitched over 200 innings in every single year he has pitched except for his rookie year in 2000

 

and yet people say Schmidt has been overworked....

 

Schmidt is a power pitcher though. He most likely puts more strain on his arm. You don't see Greg Maddux with any arm issues for a reason.

[baseball7897]

Its harder to find a Ace lefty than it is a Ace righty. If you have a chance to sign Zito you do it.

[Caryatid]

Just for the record, you could add both Zito and Schmidt for $12 million per each and only add a million to the total payroll (accounting for the loss of Wood's 13 and Maddux's 9).

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Its harder to find a Ace lefty than it is a Ace righty. If you have a chance to sign Zito you do it.

 

It's also harder to find pitchers who are as good as Schmidt. He's better than Zito. Zito makes a bunch of starts, that's great. It still doesn't mean that he's immune to injury. Schmidt has had very little in the way of injury problems. Yes, he's been ridden hard, but considering how long he's been worked in this fashion, it's not illogical to think he can handle it. Schmidt will likely have less of a market than Zito, is a better pitcher, and isn't a significant injury risk. Zito is a big name pitcher based on what he did before the Cubs even hired Baker. He's been good but not great since, and he won't be worth the contract he signs.

[srbin84]

I can't believe after Wood and Prior, people are still fawning for the injury risk. Zito NEVER misses a start and would surely benefit from a move to the NL. Let's say Schmidt only misses 5 starts a year. You still have to see Rusch or Hill go 0-5 10+ ERA, so no, I don't want anybody who is at any kind of added injury risk.

 

Schmidt's missed like 5 starts in 5 years.

 

Sorry, but Zito averages around 5 more starts than Schmidt.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I can't believe after Wood and Prior, people are still fawning for the injury risk. Zito NEVER misses a start and would surely benefit from a move to the NL. Let's say Schmidt only misses 5 starts a year. You still have to see Rusch or Hill go 0-5 10+ ERA, so no, I don't want anybody who is at any kind of added injury risk.

 

Schmidt's missed like 5 starts in 5 years.

 

Sorry, but Zito averages around 5 more starts than Schmidt.

 

I was obviously exaggerating(hence the use of "like" and the fact that I spelled out Schmidt's starts the previous post), but there's still nothing showing that Schmidt is an injury risk.

[srbin84]

I can't believe after Wood and Prior, people are still fawning for the injury risk. Zito NEVER misses a start and would surely benefit from a move to the NL. Let's say Schmidt only misses 5 starts a year. You still have to see Rusch or Hill go 0-5 10+ ERA, so no, I don't want anybody who is at any kind of added injury risk.

 

Schmidt's missed like 5 starts in 5 years.

 

Sorry, but Zito averages around 5 more starts than Schmidt.

 

I was obviously exaggerating(hence the use of "like" and the fact that I spelled out Schmidt's starts the previous post), but there's still nothing showing that Schmidt is an injury risk.

 

He's been among the leaders in pitcher abuse almost every season and he's getting old.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I can't believe after Wood and Prior, people are still fawning for the injury risk. Zito NEVER misses a start and would surely benefit from a move to the NL. Let's say Schmidt only misses 5 starts a year. You still have to see Rusch or Hill go 0-5 10+ ERA, so no, I don't want anybody who is at any kind of added injury risk.

 

Schmidt's missed like 5 starts in 5 years.

 

Sorry, but Zito averages around 5 more starts than Schmidt.

 

I was obviously exaggerating(hence the use of "like" and the fact that I spelled out Schmidt's starts the previous post), but there's still nothing showing that Schmidt is an injury risk.

 

He's been among the leaders in pitcher abuse almost every season and he's getting old.

 

Aren't you the same person that said Livan wasn't injury prone even though he's been overworked, yet Schmidt will be even though he hasn't been hurt either?

[soccer10k]

Its harder to find a Ace lefty than it is a Ace righty. If you have a chance to sign Zito you do it.

 

It's also harder to find pitchers who are as good as Schmidt. He's better than Zito. Zito makes a bunch of starts, that's great. It still doesn't mean that he's immune to injury. Schmidt has had very little in the way of injury problems. Yes, he's been ridden hard, but considering how long he's been worked in this fashion, it's not illogical to think he can handle it. Schmidt will likely have less of a market than Zito, is a better pitcher, and isn't a significant injury risk. Zito is a big name pitcher based on what he did before the Cubs even hired Baker. He's been good but not great since, and he won't be worth the contract he signs.

 

As I asked before, how is Schmidt a better pitcher? You have stated this a couple times and haven't backed it up yet.

[srbin84]

I can't believe after Wood and Prior, people are still fawning for the injury risk. Zito NEVER misses a start and would surely benefit from a move to the NL. Let's say Schmidt only misses 5 starts a year. You still have to see Rusch or Hill go 0-5 10+ ERA, so no, I don't want anybody who is at any kind of added injury risk.

 

Schmidt's missed like 5 starts in 5 years.

 

Sorry, but Zito averages around 5 more starts than Schmidt.

 

I was obviously exaggerating(hence the use of "like" and the fact that I spelled out Schmidt's starts the previous post), but there's still nothing showing that Schmidt is an injury risk.

 

He's been among the leaders in pitcher abuse almost every season and he's getting old.

 

Aren't you the same person that said Livan wasn't injury prone even though he's been overworked, yet Schmidt will be even though he hasn't been hurt either?

 

Schmidt is older, has been injured even though not often and relies on velocity. If Schmidt loses something on his fastball halfway through the contract, he could far worse. Zito relies on the curveball and has a rubber arm.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Its harder to find a Ace lefty than it is a Ace righty. If you have a chance to sign Zito you do it.

 

It's also harder to find pitchers who are as good as Schmidt. He's better than Zito. Zito makes a bunch of starts, that's great. It still doesn't mean that he's immune to injury. Schmidt has had very little in the way of injury problems. Yes, he's been ridden hard, but considering how long he's been worked in this fashion, it's not illogical to think he can handle it. Schmidt will likely have less of a market than Zito, is a better pitcher, and isn't a significant injury risk. Zito is a big name pitcher based on what he did before the Cubs even hired Baker. He's been good but not great since, and he won't be worth the contract he signs.

 

As I asked before, how is Schmidt a better pitcher? You have stated this a couple times and haven't backed it up yet.

 

Last three seasons ERA.

 

Schmidt

2005: 4.40

2004: 3.20

2003: 2.34

 

Zito

2005: 3.86

2004: 4.48

2003: 3.30

 

Schmidt's numbers look better.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I can't believe after Wood and Prior, people are still fawning for the injury risk. Zito NEVER misses a start and would surely benefit from a move to the NL. Let's say Schmidt only misses 5 starts a year. You still have to see Rusch or Hill go 0-5 10+ ERA, so no, I don't want anybody who is at any kind of added injury risk.

 

Schmidt's missed like 5 starts in 5 years.

 

Sorry, but Zito averages around 5 more starts than Schmidt.

 

I was obviously exaggerating(hence the use of "like" and the fact that I spelled out Schmidt's starts the previous post), but there's still nothing showing that Schmidt is an injury risk.

 

He's been among the leaders in pitcher abuse almost every season and he's getting old.

 

Aren't you the same person that said Livan wasn't injury prone even though he's been overworked, yet Schmidt will be even though he hasn't been hurt either?

 

Schmidt is older, has been injured even though not often and relies on velocity. If Schmidt loses something on his fastball halfway through the contract, he could far worse. Zito relies on the curveball and has a rubber arm.

 

So, when Schmidt was Zito's age, how many injuries had he suffered? Was he injury prone then? The fact is we don't know that Zito has a rubber arm. He could still get hurt in year two of a five year deal just as likely that Schmidt would get hurt in year two of a three year deal.

 

Schmidt is the better pitcher. For a little less money and years, I'll take him every time.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

This season:

 

Schmidt- 2.84 ERA, 1.09 WHIP.

Zito- 3.36 ERA, 1.27 WHIP.

 

Schmidt > Zito

[soccer10k]

Its harder to find a Ace lefty than it is a Ace righty. If you have a chance to sign Zito you do it.

 

It's also harder to find pitchers who are as good as Schmidt. He's better than Zito. Zito makes a bunch of starts, that's great. It still doesn't mean that he's immune to injury. Schmidt has had very little in the way of injury problems. Yes, he's been ridden hard, but considering how long he's been worked in this fashion, it's not illogical to think he can handle it. Schmidt will likely have less of a market than Zito, is a better pitcher, and isn't a significant injury risk. Zito is a big name pitcher based on what he did before the Cubs even hired Baker. He's been good but not great since, and he won't be worth the contract he signs.

 

As I asked before, how is Schmidt a better pitcher? You have stated this a couple times and haven't backed it up yet.

 

Last three seasons ERA.

 

Schmidt

2005: 4.40

2004: 3.20

2003: 2.34

 

Zito

2005: 3.86

2004: 4.48

2003: 3.30

 

Schmidt's numbers look better.

 

Schmidt's ERA has also been consistently rising. I know his ERA this year is 2.84 and Zito's is 3.36 but who's more likely to get tired as the season progresses and watch his ERA grow? Most likely Schmidt. And, as I said before, don't forget about the Zito being in the AL and Schmidt in the NL.

 

ERA+ the last 3 years (03, 04, 05)

Schmidt: 183, 139, 94

Zito: 129, 105, 116

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Its harder to find a Ace lefty than it is a Ace righty. If you have a chance to sign Zito you do it.

 

It's also harder to find pitchers who are as good as Schmidt. He's better than Zito. Zito makes a bunch of starts, that's great. It still doesn't mean that he's immune to injury. Schmidt has had very little in the way of injury problems. Yes, he's been ridden hard, but considering how long he's been worked in this fashion, it's not illogical to think he can handle it. Schmidt will likely have less of a market than Zito, is a better pitcher, and isn't a significant injury risk. Zito is a big name pitcher based on what he did before the Cubs even hired Baker. He's been good but not great since, and he won't be worth the contract he signs.

 

As I asked before, how is Schmidt a better pitcher? You have stated this a couple times and haven't backed it up yet.

 

Last three seasons ERA.

 

Schmidt

2005: 4.40

2004: 3.20

2003: 2.34

 

Zito

2005: 3.86

2004: 4.48

2003: 3.30

 

Schmidt's numbers look better.

 

Schmidt's ERA has also been consistently rising. I know his ERA this year is 2.84 and Zito's is 3.36 but who's more likely to get tired as the season progresses and watch his ERA grow? Most likely Schmidt. And, as I said before, don't forget about the Zito being in the AL and Schmidt in the NL.

 

ERA+ the last 3 years (03, 04, 05)

Schmidt: 183, 139, 94

Zito: 129, 105, 116

 

Why is Schmidt more likely to tire? It seems you're projecting there based on your own feelings with little facts.

 

And looking at ERA+ for the last season, I notice this.

 

Zito has been above average those seasons, but not necessarily an ace. Schmidt has been better in 2 of the three seasons, and his best blows away Zito. Also, Schmidt's weakest season, while his most recent, was the one he struggled with health issues. Now healthy, his numbers look more in line with his best season...

 

Schmidt has been the better pitcher. Schmidt has been the pitcher that is more likely to dominate a game. For less money and fewer years, Schmidt is still the better choice.

[soccer10k]

 

So, when Schmidt was Zito's age, how many injuries had he suffered? Was he injury prone then? The fact is we don't know that Zito has a rubber arm. He could still get hurt in year two of a five year deal just as likely that Schmidt would get hurt in year two of a three year deal.

 

Schmidt is the better pitcher. For a little less money and years, I'll take him every time.

 

At age 27 in 2000 Schmidt only made 11 starts and had 63.3 IP and at age 28 in 2001 he made 25 starts and had 150.3 IP. Zito at age 27 in 2005 made 35 starts and had 228.3 IP and is 28 right now but has made 16 starts this year and has 104.3 IP.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

 

So, when Schmidt was Zito's age, how many injuries had he suffered? Was he injury prone then? The fact is we don't know that Zito has a rubber arm. He could still get hurt in year two of a five year deal just as likely that Schmidt would get hurt in year two of a three year deal.

 

Schmidt is the better pitcher. For a little less money and years, I'll take him every time.

 

At age 27 in 2000 Schmidt only made 11 starts and had 63.3 IP and at age 28 in 2001 he made 25 starts and had 150.3 IP. Zito at age 27 in 2005 made 35 starts and had 228.3 IP and is 28 right now but has made 16 starts this year and has 104.3 IP.

 

The fact that Zito was better at a younger age says nothing to how good they are now. Recent history indicates that Zito is a good pitcher, Schmidt is a staff ace.

[soccer10k]

Its harder to find a Ace lefty than it is a Ace righty. If you have a chance to sign Zito you do it.

 

It's also harder to find pitchers who are as good as Schmidt. He's better than Zito. Zito makes a bunch of starts, that's great. It still doesn't mean that he's immune to injury. Schmidt has had very little in the way of injury problems. Yes, he's been ridden hard, but considering how long he's been worked in this fashion, it's not illogical to think he can handle it. Schmidt will likely have less of a market than Zito, is a better pitcher, and isn't a significant injury risk. Zito is a big name pitcher based on what he did before the Cubs even hired Baker. He's been good but not great since, and he won't be worth the contract he signs.

 

As I asked before, how is Schmidt a better pitcher? You have stated this a couple times and haven't backed it up yet.

 

Last three seasons ERA.

 

Schmidt

2005: 4.40

2004: 3.20

2003: 2.34

 

Zito

2005: 3.86

2004: 4.48

2003: 3.30

 

Schmidt's numbers look better.

 

Schmidt's ERA has also been consistently rising. I know his ERA this year is 2.84 and Zito's is 3.36 but who's more likely to get tired as the season progresses and watch his ERA grow? Most likely Schmidt. And, as I said before, don't forget about the Zito being in the AL and Schmidt in the NL.

 

ERA+ the last 3 years (03, 04, 05)

Schmidt: 183, 139, 94

Zito: 129, 105, 116

 

Why is Schmidt more likely to tire? It seems you're projecting there based on your own feelings with little facts.

 

And looking at ERA+ for the last season, I notice this.

 

Zito has been above average those seasons, but not necessarily an ace. Schmidt has been better in 2 of the three seasons, and his best blows away Zito. Also, Schmidt's weakest season, while his most recent, was the one he struggled with health issues. Now healthy, his numbers look more in line with his best season...

 

Schmidt has been the better pitcher. Schmidt has been the pitcher that is more likely to dominate a game. For less money and fewer years, Schmidt is still the better choice.

 

As I've stated before, Schmidt is older and a power pitcher. Who is more likely to tire, a guy that throws in the mid to upper 90's on his fastball - and throws a ton of fastballs - or a guy that rarely hits 90? Factor in that the older pitcher also throws harder and you have a guy that is more likely to tire. Also notice that I didn't say he would tire, just that he was more likely too.

[soccer10k]

 

So, when Schmidt was Zito's age, how many injuries had he suffered? Was he injury prone then? The fact is we don't know that Zito has a rubber arm. He could still get hurt in year two of a five year deal just as likely that Schmidt would get hurt in year two of a three year deal.

 

Schmidt is the better pitcher. For a little less money and years, I'll take him every time.

 

At age 27 in 2000 Schmidt only made 11 starts and had 63.3 IP and at age 28 in 2001 he made 25 starts and had 150.3 IP. Zito at age 27 in 2005 made 35 starts and had 228.3 IP and is 28 right now but has made 16 starts this year and has 104.3 IP.

 

The fact that Zito was better at a younger age says nothing to how good they are now. Recent history indicates that Zito is a good pitcher, Schmidt is a staff ace.

 

You asked me about injuries. I showed you that Schmidt made 36 starts combined in 2 years at ages 27 at 28 which is Zito's age last year and this year. Zito, on the other hand, made 35 starts one year alone and is on his way to that again. Not only that, Zito has shown the ability to make 35 starts a year, which he has done every year except 2004 in which he made 24 starts. I didn't say it made Zito a better pitcher than Schmidt. I just answered your question.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Its harder to find a Ace lefty than it is a Ace righty. If you have a chance to sign Zito you do it.

 

It's also harder to find pitchers who are as good as Schmidt. He's better than Zito. Zito makes a bunch of starts, that's great. It still doesn't mean that he's immune to injury. Schmidt has had very little in the way of injury problems. Yes, he's been ridden hard, but considering how long he's been worked in this fashion, it's not illogical to think he can handle it. Schmidt will likely have less of a market than Zito, is a better pitcher, and isn't a significant injury risk. Zito is a big name pitcher based on what he did before the Cubs even hired Baker. He's been good but not great since, and he won't be worth the contract he signs.

 

As I asked before, how is Schmidt a better pitcher? You have stated this a couple times and haven't backed it up yet.

 

Last three seasons ERA.

 

Schmidt

2005: 4.40

2004: 3.20

2003: 2.34

 

Zito

2005: 3.86

2004: 4.48

2003: 3.30

 

Schmidt's numbers look better.

 

Schmidt's ERA has also been consistently rising. I know his ERA this year is 2.84 and Zito's is 3.36 but who's more likely to get tired as the season progresses and watch his ERA grow? Most likely Schmidt. And, as I said before, don't forget about the Zito being in the AL and Schmidt in the NL.

 

ERA+ the last 3 years (03, 04, 05)

Schmidt: 183, 139, 94

Zito: 129, 105, 116

 

Why is Schmidt more likely to tire? It seems you're projecting there based on your own feelings with little facts.

 

And looking at ERA+ for the last season, I notice this.

 

Zito has been above average those seasons, but not necessarily an ace. Schmidt has been better in 2 of the three seasons, and his best blows away Zito. Also, Schmidt's weakest season, while his most recent, was the one he struggled with health issues. Now healthy, his numbers look more in line with his best season...

 

Schmidt has been the better pitcher. Schmidt has been the pitcher that is more likely to dominate a game. For less money and fewer years, Schmidt is still the better choice.

 

As I've stated before, Schmidt is older and a power pitcher. Who is more likely to tire, a guy that throws in the mid to upper 90's on his fastball - and throws a ton of fastballs - or a guy that rarely hits 90? Factor in that the older pitcher also throws harder and you have a guy that is more likely to tire. Also notice that I didn't say he would tire, just that he was more likely too.

 

I'm not opposed to getting Zito. Also, I'm not saying we should pursue Schmidt at all cost. Just looking at ability and projecting the dollars and years likely needed to sign one of them, Schmidt not only is the better pitcher, but likely the better buy.

 

Furthermore, which kind of pitcher is more likely to dominate in the post season? Right---a power pitcher.

 

Furthemore, while run of the mill power pitchers may flame out soon, elite ones seem to hold out a bit longer...ex: Clemens, Ryan, Schilling, Johnson...

 

Schmidt is 32. A three year deal would take him through 36. I think he'll be good for that amount of time. I'd rather pay Schmidt 11-12 million than Zito.

[soccer10k]

Allow me to put it out there that I don't want the Cubs to sign either Zito or Schmidt in the offseason. We have 8 pitchers for sure that could contend for starting spots this year.

 

Z

Marshall

Marmol

Guzman

Hill

Prior

Miller

Ryu

 

I know that some of them haven't performed that well this year but Mike Maroth lost 21 games in 2002 and posted a 5.73 ERA then dropped that ERA to 4.31 in 2003 so a turnaround isn't out of the question. I think we can find a solid rotation out of those 8 players.

[soccer10k]

Minor detail but Schmidt is 33 and will be 34 in January of 2007. But at the end of a three year deal he would still be 36.