anyone else think this about prior and wood

[srbin84]

If it was a matter of making the playoffs or not making them, it was worth it. The 2003 team wasn't like 98; there was some serious talent on the 03 team, especially the pitching staff. We need to get a championship before we do anything conservative in a season that could compromise a legit chance at winning one.

[SoonerCubFan]

I just don't understand why only the Cubs have to deal with two of their star pitchers providing an average season between them for three years in a row. I'd love to just say it's all Dusty's fault, but it just doesn't happen to other teams. If it did, I would accept it. There's definitely some bad luck involved or something.

 

I don't get why you think it's just the Cubs. The Mets have a big Three that was highly touted and they all went down. Several teams have had great pitchers torn to shreds. The Cubs stand out because in the face of more and more evidence about abuse they ignored it and kept treating these kids like 36 year olds.

 

It's got nothing to do with luck. It's poor decision making on the part of the Cubs.

 

Actually, the worst example of modern abuse effects seems to emanate from the infallible Oakland A's. Guys like Mulder, Hudson and Zito (although doing better so far in 2006) all have been declining after a lot of early high IP seasons. Now they're abusing the latest crop (Haren, Harden and Blanton). Harden's already having problems and Blanton is getting worse results at this point.

 

There are other examples - the 1970s Reds staff, the 1980s Mets staff, the early 1990s Reds staff, and individual guys like Sam McDowell, Mark Fidrych, Mario Soto, and Jim Maloney. Frank Tanana was on a meteoric path in his early 20s, but quickly became just a soft-tossing lefty. For a real chill, take a look at Steve Busby's career.

[David]

If it was a matter of making the playoffs or not making them, it was worth it. The 2003 team wasn't like 98; there was some serious talent on the 03 team, especially the pitching staff. We need to get a championship before we do anything conservative in a season that could compromise a legit chance at winning one.

 

 

Pulling our overused ace pitchers in blowout games doesn't really amount to conservative, in my book. Just smart.

[srbin84]

If it was a matter of making the playoffs or not making them, it was worth it. The 2003 team wasn't like 98; there was some serious talent on the 03 team, especially the pitching staff. We need to get a championship before we do anything conservative in a season that could compromise a legit chance at winning one.

 

 

Pulling our overused ace pitchers in blowout games doesn't really amount to conservative, in my book. Just smart.

 

Agreed. If that is all we are talking about, I've always hated that crap. I don't mind, however, pitching a guy 130 pitches in a one or two run game when you are in the race.

[cubfan1955]

Maybe they figured a guy who has perfect, effortless mechanics could go an extra 10 pitches. Hindsight is 20-20 and no matter who was at fault for him getting hurt, if anybody, it's ancient history and time for him to move on from it.

 

That's not good enough. It wasn't hindsight when we were up in arms over the treatment as it was happening (many predicted it would happen before Baker officially signed). You can't just say, "Well, they might have ruined him, but that's in the past, let's move on." That's incompetence.

 

Another good point. I know I wasn't the only one upset throughout the 2003 season (and heck, that 135-pitch game for Prior in 2002). This isn't hindsight here.

You and anyone else that was upset during the 2003 season about pitcher abuse were a very smalll minority. A few million Cubs fans would have been very upset if the Cubs had not went for it. I'm not arguing that Dusty didn't abuse his pitchers. Just that there wasn't a wave of protests during the year over Wood, Priors and Zs pitch counts. So was it worth it? With the benefit of hindsight, of course it wasn't. Maybe 3 years down the line Prior will be dominating the league and people will say it's because the Cubs were overly cautious and didn't rush him back during the 2003 season. Who knows? I can't see into the future now just like no one could in 2003.

[bobbyd20]

If it was a matter of making the playoffs or not making them, it was worth it. The 2003 team wasn't like 98; there was some serious talent on the 03 team, especially the pitching staff. We need to get a championship before we do anything conservative in a season that could compromise a legit chance at winning one.

 

 

Pulling our overused ace pitchers in blowout games doesn't really amount to conservative, in my book. Just smart.

 

Especially when said pitchers are in their early to mid 20's. Why anyone would be willing to risk their future production to get an extra inning out of them today in a 5 or 6 run game is beyond me?

 

Not to mention, at some point, shouldn't the Cubs brain trust (and I use that term loosely) be working with these pitchers to pitch toward getting outs early in the count and not always going for the strikeouts.

[sonofsamiam]

I just don't understand why only the Cubs have to deal with two of their star pitchers providing an average season between them for three years in a row. I'd love to just say it's all Dusty's fault, but it just doesn't happen to other teams. If it did, I would accept it. There's definitely some bad luck involved or something.

 

I don't get why you think it's just the Cubs. The Mets have a big Three that was highly touted and they all went down. Several teams have had great pitchers torn to shreds. The Cubs stand out because in the face of more and more evidence about abuse they ignored it and kept treating these kids like 36 year olds.

 

It's got nothing to do with luck. It's poor decision making on the part of the Cubs.

 

Actually, the worst example of modern abuse effects seems to emanate from the infallible Oakland A's. Guys like Mulder, Hudson and Zito (although doing better so far in 2006) all have been declining after a lot of early high IP seasons. Now they're abusing the latest crop (Haren, Harden and Blanton). Harden's already having problems and Blanton is getting worse results at this point.

 

There are other examples - the 1970s Reds staff, the 1980s Mets staff, the early 1990s Reds staff, and individual guys like Sam McDowell, Mark Fidrych, Mario Soto, and Jim Maloney. Frank Tanana was on a meteoric path in his early 20s, but quickly became just a soft-tossing lefty. For a real chill, take a look at Steve Busby's career.

 

Thank you for using great, real examples.

 

May I direct everyone's attention to the 1980 A's -- check that starting staff, their innings and complete games, and what happened to them subsequently. Yikes.

 

Also, your very own Steve Stone had his own career ruined going for the CY that very year. And he was in his prime.