Wade Miller

[Bruno7481]

Bring him back? Let him go?

 

Only thrown 17.2 innings this year. Hs control has been shaky, but some of that caqn be expected coming back from injury.

 

The good, his BAA is only .206, but again that is in limited duty.

 

I'd be OK bringing him back, if they shore up the front end of the rotation. I wouldn't want to count on him being more than a #4 or #5.

 

But, the Cubs have a surplus of young guys that could fill that role as well. Could Miller be signifcantly better than a guy like Marmol, Marshall, Guzman?

 

Agian, all this assuming the front end of the rotation is strengthened.

[Sammy Sofa]

As long as it's for only 1 year and for less than what Neifi made, definitely. It's a gamble, but there's at least some hope being shown, sample size that it is, that it could pay off. If he can be anywhere near the old Wade Miller if even only just for a season it helps in a number of valuable ways.

[rynefan]

Bring him back. We're desperate!

[Irrelevant Dude]

Assuming we bring back both Wood and Prior, then we have enough gambles on the staff already and I'd prefer not to mess around with Miller.

[Electron Blue]

I really don't see him being siginificantly better than, like you said Marmol, Marshall, Mateo, Guzman, etc. . .

 

And for that reason, he's gone unless he is willing to sign a really cheap deal - - and I can't imagine why he would.

[ToupeeOnFire]

I really don't see him being siginificantly better than, like you said Marmol, Marshall, Mateo, Guzman, etc. . .

 

And for that reason, he's gone unless he is willing to sign a really cheap deal - - and I can't imagine why he would.

I don't think there is going to be a whole lot of demand for Miller from other teams. That said, Hendry will probably bid against himself and give him multiple years.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Yes, Houston Wade Miller at 100% would be significantly better than Marmol, Marshall, Mateo, Guzman, etc. next season.

[CuseCubFan69]

Assuming we bring back both Wood and Prior, then we have enough gambles on the staff already and I'd prefer not to mess around with Miller.

 

Plus the obligation to pitch him if he's healthy. Miller has thrown better than I expected these past couple of outings and I think if he pitches like this one more time some team like the Cards will give him a couple year deal.

[Sammy Sofa]

I really don't see him being siginificantly better than, like you said Marmol, Marshall, Mateo, Guzman, etc. . .

 

The only young pitcher (besides Hill) I want to see get serious face time is Guzman. He should be the next priority because if he can finally turn the corner a la Hill, he's gonna be impressive. If he can't, it needs to be figured out ASAP. We've been hearing he's "practically" ready for over 3 years now...let's see it. I have hopes for Marmol, Marshall, and Mateo but I think they're better served refining their game pitching full time in the minors and being called up to cover for injuries...Mateo or Marmol I'd consider putting into the bullpen over someone like Novoa, as long as they'd get regular relief time.

[Electron Blue]

Yes, Houston Wade Miller at 100% would be significantly better than Marmol, Marshall, Mateo, Guzman, etc. next season.

 

Sure, Houston Wade Miller at 100% would be better - but I'm not counting on 1999 Wood and 2003 Prior . . .

[Sammy Sofa]

Yes, Houston Wade Miller at 100% would be significantly better than Marmol, Marshall, Mateo, Guzman, etc. next season.

 

Sure, Houston Wade Miller at 100% would be better - but I'm not counting on 1999 Wood and 2003 Prior . . .

 

Wade Miller even just close to what he was is better than everyone you listed.

 

It all hinges on how cheap he can be had for. As long as he doesn't keep the team from going out and getting at LEAST one other quality starter, I can live with it.

[soccer10k]

Give him a one year incentive laden deal starting out around $1M and let him pitch his way to more money.

[David]

Yes, Houston Wade Miller at 100% would be significantly better than Marmol, Marshall, Mateo, Guzman, etc. next season.

 

Sure, Houston Wade Miller at 100% would be better - but I'm not counting on 1999 Wood and 2003 Prior . . .

 

I wouldn't count on fresh off Tommy John and still rehabbing Kerry Wood either. :wink:

[A New Era]

I'd rather count on Miller than having Wood back in the pen. Wade Miller is rehabing and pitching in games NOW, and looking decent without his full velocity. Kerry Wood is still not able to pitch in game situations and spring training starts in FIVE MONTHS.

 

Who's closer to be able to pitch in MLB games? Answer: Wade Miller.

[Sammy Sofa]

I'd rather count on Miller than having Wood back in the pen. Wade Miller is rehabing and pitching in games NOW, and looking decent without his full velocity. Kerry Wood is still not able to pitch in game situations and spring training starts in FIVE MONTHS.

 

Who's closer to be able to pitch in MLB games? Answer: Wade Miller.

 

It's a good point. It's only 3 starts, but the guy has already rebounded much quicker and further than Prior or Wood did.

[goonys evil twin]

I'd rather count on Miller than having Wood back in the pen. Wade Miller is rehabing and pitching in games NOW, and looking decent without his full velocity. Kerry Wood is still not able to pitch in game situations and spring training starts in FIVE MONTHS.

 

Who's closer to be able to pitch in MLB games? Answer: Wade Miller.

 

It's a good point. It's only 3 starts, but the guy has already rebounded much quicker and further than Prior or Wood did.

 

What? Much quicker than Prior did? He was out for over a year. He's missed most of 3 straight seasons.

[A New Era]

I'd rather count on Miller than having Wood back in the pen. Wade Miller is rehabing and pitching in games NOW, and looking decent without his full velocity. Kerry Wood is still not able to pitch in game situations and spring training starts in FIVE MONTHS.

 

Who's closer to be able to pitch in MLB games? Answer: Wade Miller.

 

It's a good point. It's only 3 starts, but the guy has already rebounded much quicker and further than Prior or Wood did.

 

What? Much quicker than Prior did? He was out for over a year. He's missed most of 3 straight seasons.

 

My arguement is for next season. I do not care what happened 2 or 3 seasons ago. Who seems the most ready to contribute next year out of the 3? It's certainly not Prior or Wood based on my observations. Because I haven't observed Prior or Wood do much of anything. .

[goonys evil twin]

My arguement is for next season. I do not care what happened 2 or 3 seasons ago. Who seems the most ready to contribute next year out of the 3? It's certainly not Prior or Wood based on my observations. Because I haven't observed Prior or Wood do much of anything. .

 

Disregarding what has happened the past 2 or 3 seasons is exactly why the Cubs are in the predicament they are currently in. 17 moderatly successful innings should never be the determining factor in any baseball decision.

[A New Era]

My arguement is for next season. I do not care what happened 2 or 3 seasons ago. Who seems the most ready to contribute next year out of the 3? It's certainly not Prior or Wood based on my observations. Because I haven't observed Prior or Wood do much of anything. .

 

Disregarding what has happened the past 2 or 3 seasons is exactly why the Cubs are in the predicament they are currently in. 17 moderatly successful innings should never be the determining factor in any baseball decision.

 

Not highly considering what has happened THIS SEASON has been a determining factor on why they are so bad the next season. That was the case in 2005, and will also be the case in 2006 if they count on Wood or Prior to do anything more than deliver pizzas. Giving Wade Miller a $2 mil + incentives contract is a much less risky move than wasting $2-3 mil on Wood to do nothing but sit on the bench all year.

[goonys evil twin]

Not highly considering what has happened THIS SEASON has been a determining factor on why they are so bad the next season. That was the case in 2005, and will also be the case in 2006 if they count on Wood or Prior to do anything more than deliver pizzas. Giving Wade Miller a $2 mil + incentives contract is a much less risky move than wasting $2-3 mil on Wood to do nothing but sit on the bench all year.

 

I have my doubts about that. I think the odds of Wood being a good reliever next year are at least as good as Miller being a good starter.

[A New Era]

Not highly considering what has happened THIS SEASON has been a determining factor on why they are so bad the next season. That was the case in 2005, and will also be the case in 2006 if they count on Wood or Prior to do anything more than deliver pizzas. Giving Wade Miller a $2 mil + incentives contract is a much less risky move than wasting $2-3 mil on Wood to do nothing but sit on the bench all year.

 

I have my doubts about that. I think the odds of Wood being a good reliever next year are at least as good as Miller being a good starter.

 

OH YEAH!!? :D

[Sammy Sofa]

I'd rather count on Miller than having Wood back in the pen. Wade Miller is rehabing and pitching in games NOW, and looking decent without his full velocity. Kerry Wood is still not able to pitch in game situations and spring training starts in FIVE MONTHS.

 

Who's closer to be able to pitch in MLB games? Answer: Wade Miller.

 

It's a good point. It's only 3 starts, but the guy has already rebounded much quicker and further than Prior or Wood did.

 

What? Much quicker than Prior did? He was out for over a year. He's missed most of 3 straight seasons.

 

Both Wood and Prior made "comebacks" this year where they were supposedly ready to go. Both, with a few exceptions, didn't do so hot. Miller's had 3 straight quality starts now. I dare say that's better than anything Wood AND Prior mustered this year. Prior was not out "for over a year" when he took the mound this year.

 

Keep in mind, I'm not insulting or attacking Wood or Prior. I hope Prior can get back to fighting form and I defiite would like to seee Wood back for cheap and working out of the bullpen. I also want to see Miller back on the cheap and starting. I do not want any of these options if they hinder the Cubs from making significant steps to repairing the rest of the starting lineup.

[NCCubFan]

I'd bring Miller back for one year. I think Marshall, Guzman, Marmol, etc. could use a little more seasoning in the minors that they should have gotten this year had the Cubs not needed them before they were really ready to fill in for injured pitchers.

[CubsWin]

I'd bring Miller back for one year. I think Marshall, Guzman, Marmol, etc. could use a little more seasoning in the minors that they should have gotten this year had the Cubs not needed them before they were really ready to fill in for injured pitchers.

I agree. Bring him back with an incentive-laden deal if he'll take it.

 

Frankly its a gamble going with one of Marshall, Guzman, Mateo or Marmol and its a gamble going with Miller. Who knows how they'll do? Miller is a different pitcher than he was three years ago and the statistical history on who he is now is very short. Just as short as the young arms listed. That's why, if he'll do it, its smart to bring him back with heavy incentives. The more chances you have at having a successful 5th starter, the better, I say.

[Backtobanks]

Bring him back on an incentive-heavy contract. It's pretty much a no risk situation. If he helps great, if he doesn't it cost you a little. Zambrano, Schmidt (assuming Hendry can sign him) , Hill, Prior, Miller/Guzman/Mateo/Marshall could end up a very strong rotation. Better to have 6 or 7 starters than 3 or 4.