Neal Cotts for David Aardsma

[Andy]

i certainly hope that cotts is the last option the cubs will have for the rotation. i hope that 2 of meche, westbrook, iwaga & lilly are the major pitching targets of the cubs.

Westbrook and Lilly please

I'd much rather Cotts start than Meche.

 

But give me Westbrook.

[mg420]

i certainly hope that cotts is the last option the cubs will have for the rotation. i hope that 2 of meche, westbrook, iwaga & lilly are the major pitching targets of the cubs.

Westbrook and Lilly please

I'd much rather Cotts start than Meche.

 

But give me Westbrook.

 

somehow i think a guy who has pitched a total of 179 innings in 3 years might have a problem as a starter.

[goonys evil twin]

i certainly hope that cotts is the last option the cubs will have for the rotation. i hope that 2 of meche, westbrook, iwaga & lilly are the major pitching targets of the cubs.

Westbrook and Lilly please

I'd much rather Cotts start than Meche.

 

But give me Westbrook.

 

somehow i think a guy who has pitched a total of 179 innings in 3 years might have a problem as a starter.

 

He's not going to give you 33 starts and 220 innings, but you can convert a reliever to a starter in 1 season. If he's a 6th starter/swingman guy, then you could get 12-15 starts and 100 innings without stretching him too much.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

If he's a 6th starter/swingman

 

Last time that discussion was held led to Glendon Rusch being signed for another 2 seasons.

[mg420]

i certainly hope that cotts is the last option the cubs will have for the rotation. i hope that 2 of meche, westbrook, iwaga & lilly are the major pitching targets of the cubs.

Westbrook and Lilly please

I'd much rather Cotts start than Meche.

 

But give me Westbrook.

 

somehow i think a guy who has pitched a total of 179 innings in 3 years might have a problem as a starter.

 

He's not going to give you 33 starts and 220 innings, but you can convert a reliever to a starter in 1 season. If he's a 6th starter/swingman guy, then you could get 12-15 starts and 100 innings without stretching him too much.

 

i would agree that it's possible but why bother? he will most likely be a 5 inning pitcher at best for a while and with other options like meche, iwaga & lilly who are already used to pitching 180+ innings, i highly doubt that cotts would be that much better as a starter than those other guys to justify taking him out of the bullpen.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

i certainly hope that cotts is the last option the cubs will have for the rotation. i hope that 2 of meche, westbrook, iwaga & lilly are the major pitching targets of the cubs.

Westbrook and Lilly please

I'd much rather Cotts start than Meche.

 

But give me Westbrook.

 

somehow i think a guy who has pitched a total of 179 innings in 3 years might have a problem as a starter.

 

He's not going to give you 33 starts and 220 innings, but you can convert a reliever to a starter in 1 season. If he's a 6th starter/swingman guy, then you could get 12-15 starts and 100 innings without stretching him too much.

 

i would agree that it's possible but why bother? he will most likely be a 5 inning pitcher at best for a while and with other options like meche, iwaga & lilly who are already used to pitching 180+ innings, i highly doubt that cotts would be that much better as a starter than those other guys to justify taking him out of the bullpen.

 

Having someone capable of putting up 5 solid innings is a much better alternative that what happened in 2006 when a bunch of kids who were not ready for MLB were thrown into the mix. Angel Guzman >>>> Neal Cotts, but I would have rather had Neal Cotts making the starts Angel made last season so he could continue developing. After watching them last season, it's also pretty clear that most of them will not be ready in 2007 either so why not add someone who gives you another starting option?

[goonys evil twin]

i certainly hope that cotts is the last option the cubs will have for the rotation. i hope that 2 of meche, westbrook, iwaga & lilly are the major pitching targets of the cubs.

Westbrook and Lilly please

I'd much rather Cotts start than Meche.

 

But give me Westbrook.

 

somehow i think a guy who has pitched a total of 179 innings in 3 years might have a problem as a starter.

 

He's not going to give you 33 starts and 220 innings, but you can convert a reliever to a starter in 1 season. If he's a 6th starter/swingman guy, then you could get 12-15 starts and 100 innings without stretching him too much.

 

i would agree that it's possible but why bother? he will most likely be a 5 inning pitcher at best for a while and with other options like meche, iwaga & lilly who are already used to pitching 180+ innings, i highly doubt that cotts would be that much better as a starter than those other guys to justify taking him out of the bullpen.

 

His numbers last year make a pretty good case for taking him out of the bullpen. It's not like he's a sure thing stud reliever and we're risking wasting that value. Why bother? Because you need starting pitchers more than relievers. It's an insurance policy.

[Deeg]

Cotts is young and, as far as we know, healthy - I don't see any problem stretching him out to the point where he can start. His metrics point towards the conclusion that he's better suited to be a starter - he simply doesn't have any lefty-lefty advantage. My big concern is that his wildness would limit his ability to go deep into games, but I'd certainly be willing to give him a look.

[mg420]

i certainly hope that cotts is the last option the cubs will have for the rotation. i hope that 2 of meche, westbrook, iwaga & lilly are the major pitching targets of the cubs.

Westbrook and Lilly please

I'd much rather Cotts start than Meche.

 

But give me Westbrook.

 

somehow i think a guy who has pitched a total of 179 innings in 3 years might have a problem as a starter.

 

He's not going to give you 33 starts and 220 innings, but you can convert a reliever to a starter in 1 season. If he's a 6th starter/swingman guy, then you could get 12-15 starts and 100 innings without stretching him too much.

 

i would agree that it's possible but why bother? he will most likely be a 5 inning pitcher at best for a while and with other options like meche, iwaga & lilly who are already used to pitching 180+ innings, i highly doubt that cotts would be that much better as a starter than those other guys to justify taking him out of the bullpen.

 

His numbers last year make a pretty good case for taking him out of the bullpen. It's not like he's a sure thing stud reliever and we're risking wasting that value. Why bother? Because you need starting pitchers more than relievers. It's an insurance policy.

 

if they can sign a few of the much better options out there that i listed, there is no reason the experiment with cotts in the rotation imo. failure in the pen does not justify having him start. in most cases, guys go to the pen to try to work out their issues and not the reverse. going from a loogy for 3 years to starting will not be an easy transition in any case. when was the last time he pitched 3 innings let alone 5? there are much better insurance policies in the minors imo.

[mg420]

Cotts is young and, as far as we know, healthy - I don't see any problem stretching him out to the point where he can start. His metrics point towards the conclusion that he's better suited to be a starter - he simply doesn't have any lefty-lefty advantage. My big concern is that his wildness would limit his ability to go deep into games, but I'd certainly be willing to give him a look.

 

neither did remlinger but he was very effective as a reliever when used properly as he was with the braves.

[baseball7897]

i certainly hope that cotts is the last option the cubs will have for the rotation. i hope that 2 of meche, westbrook, iwaga & lilly are the major pitching targets of the cubs.

Westbrook and Lilly please

I'd much rather Cotts start than Meche.

 

But give me Westbrook.

 

somehow i think a guy who has pitched a total of 179 innings in 3 years might have a problem as a starter.

 

He's not going to give you 33 starts and 220 innings, but you can convert a reliever to a starter in 1 season. If he's a 6th starter/swingman guy, then you could get 12-15 starts and 100 innings without stretching him too much.

 

i would agree that it's possible but why bother? he will most likely be a 5 inning pitcher at best for a while and with other options like meche, iwaga & lilly who are already used to pitching 180+ innings, i highly doubt that cotts would be that much better as a starter than those other guys to justify taking him out of the bullpen.

 

His numbers last year make a pretty good case for taking him out of the bullpen. It's not like he's a sure thing stud reliever and we're risking wasting that value. Why bother? Because you need starting pitchers more than relievers. It's an insurance policy.

 

if they can sign a few of the much better options out there that i listed, there is no reason the experiment with cotts in the rotation imo. failure in the pen does not justify having him start. in most cases, guys go to the pen to try to work out their issues and not the reverse. going from a loogy for 3 years to starting will not be an easy transition in any case. when was the last time he pitched 3 innings let alone 5? there are much better insurance policies in the minors imo.

 

Cotts could be like a Glendon Rusch type pitcher. Make a spot start here and there, and the Cubs could use him in the bullpen when needed. Cotts excells in the bullpen. I don't see why you would move him from a spot he has success in.

[goonys evil twin]

Cotts could be like a Glendon Rusch type pitcher. Make a spot start here and there, and the Cubs could use him in the bullpen when needed. Cotts excells in the bullpen. I don't see why you would move him from a spot he has success in.

 

He excelled in the bullpen for one year. He stunk last year.

[goonys evil twin]

The Cubs rotation could easily look like this:

 

Zambrano

Marquis

Westbrook

Hill

??????????

 

That ??????? could be Prior, Miller, Cotts, Marshall, Guzman, etc. The Cubs currently have 2 starters for next year. If they acquire two more, there is one spot that nobody within the organization has a strong hold on. It would be silly to refuse to see if Cotts can do the job, considering he's about the only candidate for whom health is not an issue. Ideally he doesn't start any games next year. But that doesn't mean he's not worth taking a look at as a starter. He's clearly not a glock to be a great reliever. We're not talking about moving Howry or Wuertz out of the pen.

[YearofDaCubs]

The Cubs rotation could easily look like this:

 

Zambrano

Marquis

Westbrook

Hill

??????????

 

That ??????? could be Prior, Miller, Cotts, Marshall, Guzman, etc. The Cubs currently have 2 starters for next year. If they acquire two more, there is one spot that nobody within the organization has a strong hold on. It would be silly to refuse to see if Cotts can do the job, considering he's about the only candidate for whom health is not an issue. Ideally he doesn't start any games next year. But that doesn't mean he's not worth taking a look at as a starter. He's clearly not a glock to be a great reliever. We're not talking about moving Howry or Wuertz out of the pen.

There are much better options than Marquis.

[mg420]

The Cubs rotation could easily look like this:

 

Zambrano

Marquis

Westbrook

Hill

??????????

 

That ??????? could be Prior, Miller, Cotts, Marshall, Guzman, etc. The Cubs currently have 2 starters for next year. If they acquire two more, there is one spot that nobody within the organization has a strong hold on. It would be silly to refuse to see if Cotts can do the job, considering he's about the only candidate for whom health is not an issue. Ideally he doesn't start any games next year. But that doesn't mean he's not worth taking a look at as a starter. He's clearly not a glock to be a great reliever. We're not talking about moving Howry or Wuertz out of the pen.

 

i could also look like

 

z

hill

meche/iwaga

westbrook/lilly

miller

 

although he's not a lock to have a great year in the pen, i think it's much more likely that he does as opposed to being an effective starter.

[goonys evil twin]

The Cubs rotation could easily look like this:

 

Zambrano

Marquis

Westbrook

Hill

??????????

 

That ??????? could be Prior, Miller, Cotts, Marshall, Guzman, etc. The Cubs currently have 2 starters for next year. If they acquire two more, there is one spot that nobody within the organization has a strong hold on. It would be silly to refuse to see if Cotts can do the job, considering he's about the only candidate for whom health is not an issue. Ideally he doesn't start any games next year. But that doesn't mean he's not worth taking a look at as a starter. He's clearly not a glock to be a great reliever. We're not talking about moving Howry or Wuertz out of the pen.

 

i could also look like

 

z

hill

meche/iwaga

westbrook/lilly

miller

 

although he's not a lock to have a great year in the pen, i think it's much more likely that he does as opposed to being an effective starter.

 

Yeah, it could. But that doesn't mean you don't go into the spring and have more options than Miller. If everybody is 100%, obviously Prior gets that job. Then I think Miller is next on that list, and Cotts is way down there. But everybody isn't healthy, and there's no way to know now, or even in February, who will be the most effective option.

[goonys evil twin]

There are much better options than Marquis.

 

I agree. I didn't say he should be there, I said the rotation could look like that. It's been reported that Hendry likes Marquis.

[don_kessinger_was_good]

What exactly is wrong with Cotts in the former Glendon Rusch role? Every team needs a sixth/emergency starter, who can do spot relief, long relief on days the starter gets killed, etc...I don't see anyone on the Cubs current roster other than one of the kids that could fill that role.

 

I am surmising that Hendry thinks Rusch v. 2004 was a real asset for the Cubs, and he took on Cotts to try and recreate that element of his bullpen. If so, I like the move more, now that I've had time to think it out, Aardsma is a guy I like but he is another short-stint guy, we have plenty of those.

 

Off-topic, but why the hell isn't Roberto Novoa out of here? Now that's one guy we definitely do not want or need. Ugh.

[mg420]

What exactly is wrong with Cotts in the former Glendon Rusch role? Every team needs a sixth/emergency starter, who can do spot relief, long relief on days the starter gets killed, etc...I don't see anyone on the Cubs current roster other than one of the kids that could fill that role.

 

I am surmising that Hendry thinks Rusch v. 2004 was a real asset for the Cubs, and he took on Cotts to try and recreate that element of his bullpen. If so, I like the move more, now that I've had time to think it out, Aardsma is a guy I like but he is another short-stint guy, we have plenty of those.

 

Off-topic, but why the hell isn't Roberto Novoa out of here? Now that's one guy we definitely do not want or need. Ugh.

i think pignatello might be a better option in this role than cotts. he came up as a starter and has done well in the az leauge and in the minors last year. if they trade either eyre or ohman, the have cotts and pignatello to go along with whichever one they keep for the lefties from the pen.

[Andy]

Off-topic, but why the hell isn't Roberto Novoa out of here? Now that's one guy we definitely do not want or need. Ugh.

Offhand, probably because Novoa couldn't net us Cotts.

[Uber]

Off-topic, but why the hell isn't Roberto Novoa out of here? Now that's one guy we definitely do not want or need. Ugh.

 

Probably because that's one guy no one else wants or needs?

[YearofDaCubs]

Off-topic, but why the hell isn't Roberto Novoa out of here? Now that's one guy we definitely do not want or need. Ugh.

 

Probably because that's one guy no one else wants or needs?

Haha nice avatar.

[craig]

The Cubs rotation could easily look like this:

 

Zambrano

Marquis

Westbrook

Hill

??????????

 

That ??????? could be Prior, Miller, Cotts, Marshall, Guzman, etc. .....

 

i could also look like

 

z

hill

meche/iwaga

westbrook/lilly

miller

 

although he's not a lock to have a great year in the pen, i think it's much more likely that he does as opposed to being an effective starter.

 

I agree with both of these posts. Most likely Cotts is not going to be in the rotation. Hopefully that will be because somebody from the wildcard pool emerges as satisfactory for the #5 spot. Whether that be Prior, or Miller, or Marshall, or Guzman, or whomever. But, I think it would be awfully risky to go into the season with Z+Hill + two other pickups, and assume Prior/Miller/kids can satisfactorily staff the 5th spot. What if nobody does emerge, as is hopefully not probable but certainly possible? Or, what happens the minute Z has a bad back, or Hill or one of the other pickups has an oblique strain or whatever? The miscellaneous pool might need to cover not only #5 but also one of the 1-4 spots for some period of time.

 

Cotts adds some additional option that Aardsma, who is strictly a short/late guy, does not. Again, hopefully there would be no need to even think about it, because not only one but 2 or 3 of the miscellaneous pool are doing well.

 

Plus, the Cubs are sold on having two lefties, and whatever posters might say, Rapada and Pigs are not in the picture for this year.

 

But, Ohman is cheap, interesting, and under club control for years. Some really jazzy peripherals. He's got real trade value, I'd think. Hendry's not dealing him if it leaves him with Pigs as his 2nd lefty.

 

But, now Ohman can be involved in a trade. And I think he could be a significant chip, more so than Aardsma could have been. I'm not suggesting that Ohman is going to get you Jason Jennings or something like that. But Ohman plus some other prospects and maybe you can getg somewhere.

 

I also think having Cotts perceived as a possible depth option might reduce Hendry's urgency to sign an overpriced FA to that role. He might have been so concerned about the wildcard pool that he'd spend zillions not only on Padilla and Lilly but also on Marquis, or something like that. Perhaps acquiring Cotts might eliminate the urgency to pick up that 3rd free agent, and save a bundle of dollars that can be profitably spent elsewhere.

[mg420]

The Cubs rotation could easily look like this:

 

Zambrano

Marquis

Westbrook

Hill

??????????

 

That ??????? could be Prior, Miller, Cotts, Marshall, Guzman, etc. .....

 

i could also look like

 

z

hill

meche/iwaga

westbrook/lilly

miller

 

although he's not a lock to have a great year in the pen, i think it's much more likely that he does as opposed to being an effective starter.

 

I agree with both of these posts. Most likely Cotts is not going to be in the rotation. Hopefully that will be because somebody from the wildcard pool emerges as satisfactory for the #5 spot. Whether that be Prior, or Miller, or Marshall, or Guzman, or whomever. But, I think it would be awfully risky to go into the season with Z+Hill + two other pickups, and assume Prior/Miller/kids can satisfactorily staff the 5th spot. What if nobody does emerge, as is hopefully not probable but certainly possible? Or, what happens the minute Z has a bad back, or Hill or one of the other pickups has an oblique strain or whatever? The miscellaneous pool might need to cover not only #5 but also one of the 1-4 spots for some period of time.

 

Cotts adds some additional option that Aardsma, who is strictly a short/late guy, does not. Again, hopefully there would be no need to even think about it, because not only one but 2 or 3 of the miscellaneous pool are doing well.

 

Plus, the Cubs are sold on having two lefties, and whatever posters might say, Rapada and Pigs are not in the picture for this year.

 

But, Ohman is cheap, interesting, and under club control for years. Some really jazzy peripherals. He's got real trade value, I'd think. Hendry's not dealing him if it leaves him with Pigs as his 2nd lefty.

 

But, now Ohman can be involved in a trade. And I think he could be a significant chip, more so than Aardsma could have been. I'm not suggesting that Ohman is going to get you Jason Jennings or something like that. But Ohman plus some other prospects and maybe you can getg somewhere.

 

I also think having Cotts perceived as a possible depth option might reduce Hendry's urgency to sign an overpriced FA to that role. He might have been so concerned about the wildcard pool that he'd spend zillions not only on Padilla and Lilly but also on Marquis, or something like that. Perhaps acquiring Cotts might eliminate the urgency to pick up that 3rd free agent, and save a bundle of dollars that can be profitably spent elsewhere.

 

why not? rapada is obviously ready and even if pignatello starts off the year in iowa, whose to say he wont get a call to the bigs sometime in 07? they also have campusano as a lefty bullpen guy.

[Wes Mantooth]

I may be missing something, but if Rapada was this close to being ready why did we see Marshal and Walrond? I am not as in touch with the minor leagues as alot of others,but last season would have been easy to see if he was actally ready.