Westbrook

[Guest]

if the cards thought that way they never would have signed carpenter.

The Cards signed Carp as a reclamation project that didn't start for the major league team for over a year after the signing. They also didn't give up any talent to get him or guarantee him a spot in their rotation.

 

westbrook doesnt have many k's but he doesnt walk many either, throws 200 + innings per year and had 3 cg's (with a total of 10 in the past 3 years) while the whole cubs staff only had 1 between them.

He doesn't walk a lot of guys, but he's walked more than 55 batters in each of the past four years, so his control is not spectacular or anything. It's not like it's helping him keep guys off the bases at all, he's had a WHIP over 1.4 in three of the past five years. And it was over 1.3 in another one.

 

He is durable. That's where about 80% of his value as an acquisition would lie. But you're likely to get 200IP of less than league average production from him...which doesn't really excite me a whole lot. I'm definitely okay with that in the fourth spot, but certainly not excited about it.

 

As for the complete games...who cares? The Cubs are likely to carry a seven man pen again in 2007. It's really not that bad of a thing to have a reliever pitch in each game.

 

he has had an era around 4.00 the last 3 years in the much more offensive AL and averaged 15 wins a year.

Here are his ERA's going backwards in time:

 

2006: 4.17

2005: 4.49

2004: 3.38

2003: 4.33

 

I was going to add the years before that, but it wouldn't really be fair as those were the years he was trying to establish himself in the majors. Just for reference:

 

2002: 5.83

2001: 5.85

 

So for the four years in question, he was well under 4.00 in 2004, but it's not like he narrowly missing it in the other seasons. The gap in those other three years adds up to 0.99, so he's averaging a third of a run over 4.00 those seasons.

 

Don't get me started on measuring pitchers by wins.

assuming he wouldnt cost alot in talent (a few young bullpen arms as has been suggested) i think he would be a great fit for the cubs rotation. compared to what padilla offers for 10 mil a year he's quite a bargin imo.

Would he be a nice addition to the bottom of the rotation if it doesn't cost much? Sure, why not.

 

But we could sign Padilla, it would cost us only money, and then we could flip him after a year and get some talent in return instead of giving up guys to acquire a bottom of the rotation pitcher.

[Guest]

And I am willing to bet that a guy who keeps his walk rate average and keeps a decent HR rate because of his high groundball rate can keep his ERA pretty low IF he can count on his fielders making enough errors to have 15 unearned runs a season.

LOL - now there's a ringing endorsement!

I'm not arguing either side, I'm playing devil's advocate. If it means trading for him to get rid of Cesar Izturis, then so be it.

If the trade is Cesar for Westbrook, sign me up in a heartbeat.

[Guest]

I think he's a good #3 pitcher. If the asking price is cheap I say go for it. I feel that he's in the same category as Lilly and Padilla and if he can be traded it won't limit us to any FA B and A signings so we can still pick up new players.

Are your standards for a "good #3 pitcher" to be worse than league average in ERA most years?

 

What's your standard for a "good #3 pitcher"? Westbrook isn't a stud, but he doesn't walk people, doesn't give up home runs, throws a TON of ground balls, and (likely as a combination of the previously mentioned) has solid defense independent numbers.

Well, my idea of a #3 starter on a championship team is someone who can actually generate a few outs on his own. At least once in a while!

 

And he's given up 19 home runs in two of the past three years. He's not that good at avoiding the longball.

[Guest]

There's a very slim possibility that acquiring Westbrook could mean Izturis is what we use to get him?

i guess they aren't too interested in cedeno (i wonder why?) but maybe izturis, eyre & ohman might be enough? heck, why not throw in novoa too. out of all those, ohmani the only one i would miss.

See, this is the kind of thing I'm talking about. You're going to trade three players to get Westbrook? Two of those guys you're trading even have positive value for a team!

[Soriano12]

He's mentioned in several threads as a target that people here are excited about. I just don't see the reason for excitement. But I'm willing to be convinced.

 

Anyone care to give it a go?

 

He gives you 200+ innings a year.

[mg420]

if the cards thought that way they never would have signed carpenter.

The Cards signed Carp as a reclamation project that didn't start for the major league team for over a year after the signing. They also didn't give up any talent to get him or guarantee him a spot in their rotation.

 

westbrook doesnt have many k's but he doesnt walk many either, throws 200 + innings per year and had 3 cg's (with a total of 10 in the past 3 years) while the whole cubs staff only had 1 between them.

He doesn't walk a lot of guys, but he's walked more than 55 batters in each of the past four years, so his control is not spectacular or anything. It's not like it's helping him keep guys off the bases at all, he's had a WHIP over 1.4 in three of the past five years. And it was over 1.3 in another one.

 

He is durable. That's where about 80% of his value as an acquisition would lie. But you're likely to get 200IP of less than league average production from him...which doesn't really excite me a whole lot. I'm definitely okay with that in the fourth spot, but certainly not excited about it.

 

As for the complete games...who cares? The Cubs are likely to carry a seven man pen again in 2007. It's really not that bad of a thing to have a reliever pitch in each game.

 

he has had an era around 4.00 the last 3 years in the much more offensive AL and averaged 15 wins a year.

Here are his ERA's going backwards in time:

 

2006: 4.17

2005: 4.49

2004: 3.38

2003: 4.33

 

I was going to add the years before that, but it wouldn't really be fair as those were the years he was trying to establish himself in the majors. Just for reference:

 

2002: 5.83

2001: 5.85

 

So for the four years in question, he was well under 4.00 in 2004, but it's not like he narrowly missing it in the other seasons. The gap in those other three years adds up to 0.99, so he's averaging a third of a run over 4.00 those seasons.

 

Don't get me started on measuring pitchers by wins.

assuming he wouldnt cost alot in talent (a few young bullpen arms as has been suggested) i think he would be a great fit for the cubs rotation. compared to what padilla offers for 10 mil a year he's quite a bargin imo.

Would he be a nice addition to the bottom of the rotation if it doesn't cost much? Sure, why not.

 

But we could sign Padilla, it would cost us only money, and then we could flip him after a year and get some talent in return instead of giving up guys to acquire a bottom of the rotation pitcher.

 

how are the cubs going to flip padilla if he wants 10 mil a year? unless he is outstanding, not many teams are going to want him for that price. other than carpenter, westbrook had a better year than any starter on the cards last year. he seems to compare favorably to suppan who has proven to be quite valuable btw.

[Guest]

What's your standard for a "good #3 pitcher"? Westbrook isn't a stud, but he doesn't walk people, doesn't give up home runs, throws a TON of ground balls, and (likely as a combination of the previously mentioned) has solid defense independent numbers.

 

Pitchers with high GB rates tend to be overrated because people fixate on their earned run average ignoring their run average. Yes it's not their fault the player made the error, but the simple fact is an extreme groundball pitcher like Westbrook puts a lot more pressure on his defense and it should lead to a higher unearned run rate. He's allowed 38 unearned runs the last three season. Some of those are not his fault, but a lot certainly are.

 

how is it a pitchers fault when a fielder doesnt make a play? unless he is making the error, there is no way he can be blamed because he throws ground balls instead of fly balls or k's.

Yes, he can be blamed that he's putting additional pressure on the defense by allowing the ball to put in play so often.

[Mephistopheles]

how is it a pitchers fault when a fielder doesnt make a play? unless he is making the error, there is no way he can be blamed because he throws ground balls instead of fly balls or k's.

 

Overall the last three years Carlos Zambrano has been a nuetral G/F guy. He has allowed 882 groundballs in in 647 innings. Westbrook has pitched 10 less innings, but has allowed 1345 grounders. Grounders turn into errors at a higher rate than flyballs or linedrives. Not to mention grounders turn into hits at a higher rate than flyballs, but eh that's a different story entirely.

[Guest]

This guy basically needs really good defense behind him on the infield. From everything I am seeing statwise his BB and K rates have been consistent for 3 straight years. As a few others have said his ERA and WHIP are going to be tied to his BABIP. If he can get his LD% down just a few points he can be even more successful. Being the NL should help raise his K-rate a smidge maybe.

 

He's an average pitcher that appears to rely on luck. Not a guy you give up a lot for but cheaper than a lot of the FA the Cubs are rumored to be interested in and seemingly just as effective. He may not have the "ceiling" of a Meche or Padilla but you know what you're going to get.

 

I'd have no problem giving up an Eyre or Wuertz and marshall as I believe the original rumor has stated. Marshall probably could do just as well but his health seems to be a question mark and Westbrook is definitely an innings eater that is going to give the Cubs an ERA around league average.

Wuertz is a potential closer and provides superb value out of the pen.

 

I've got no issues trading Eyre or Izturis for Westbrook and would welcome him with open arms if that's the price we pay. We can add in a Marshall without causing me too much heartburn. But I don't want to trade anyone that I actually want on the team in 2007 for him when we can sign an equivalent guy without losing talent.

[Guest]

He's mentioned in several threads as a target that people here are excited about. I just don't see the reason for excitement. But I'm willing to be convinced.

 

Anyone care to give it a go?

 

He gives you 200+ innings a year.

yeah...

[mg420]

What's your standard for a "good #3 pitcher"? Westbrook isn't a stud, but he doesn't walk people, doesn't give up home runs, throws a TON of ground balls, and (likely as a combination of the previously mentioned) has solid defense independent numbers.

 

Pitchers with high GB rates tend to be overrated because people fixate on their earned run average ignoring their run average. Yes it's not their fault the player made the error, but the simple fact is an extreme groundball pitcher like Westbrook puts a lot more pressure on his defense and it should lead to a higher unearned run rate. He's allowed 38 unearned runs the last three season. Some of those are not his fault, but a lot certainly are.

 

how is it a pitchers fault when a fielder doesnt make a play? unless he is making the error, there is no way he can be blamed because he throws ground balls instead of fly balls or k's.

Yes, he can be blamed that he's putting additional pressure on the defense by allowing the ball to put in play so often.

again, tell that to kenny rodgers and jeff suppan. they seem to function ok by pitching like westbrook.

[Guest]

how are the cubs going to flip padilla if he wants 10 mil a year? unless he is outstanding, not many teams are going to want him for that price. other than carpenter, westbrook had a better year than any starter on the cards last year. he seems to compare favorably to suppan who has proven to be quite valuable btw.

How would the Cubs flip Padilla? Well, he'll have one less year on his deal, which will make him much more "moveable" at that time. Let's say the Cubs sign him to a 3/30 deal (which I don't believe it will take). After this year, he'll only be 2/20 and will be much more attractive when compared to next season's FA's. Kinda like Westbrook looks good to you now.

 

Umm...who cares how he compares to the Cards starters? They got damn lucky to have even made the playoffs with that team, let alone to have won anything.

 

Besides, that still doesn't argue for trading value for someone you can easily replace with a FA signing.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I think he's a good #3 pitcher. If the asking price is cheap I say go for it. I feel that he's in the same category as Lilly and Padilla and if he can be traded it won't limit us to any FA B and A signings so we can still pick up new players.

Are your standards for a "good #3 pitcher" to be worse than league average in ERA most years?

 

What's your standard for a "good #3 pitcher"? Westbrook isn't a stud, but he doesn't walk people, doesn't give up home runs, throws a TON of ground balls, and (likely as a combination of the previously mentioned) has solid defense independent numbers.

Well, my idea of a #3 starter on a championship team is someone who can actually generate a few outs on his own. At least once in a while!

 

And he's given up 19 home runs in two of the past three years. He's not that good at avoiding the longball.

 

It's not like Westbrook is completely immune to striking guys out. His HR allowed are at the bottom of the AL each of the last three years, he's pretty good at keeping the ball in the park. I don't think you're allowing much separation from "really good" starters and "bottom of the rotation" guys. Westbrook is a pretty solid 3.

[jtownie]

This guy basically needs really good defense behind him on the infield. From everything I am seeing statwise his BB and K rates have been consistent for 3 straight years. As a few others have said his ERA and WHIP are going to be tied to his BABIP. If he can get his LD% down just a few points he can be even more successful. Being the NL should help raise his K-rate a smidge maybe.

 

He's an average pitcher that appears to rely on luck. Not a guy you give up a lot for but cheaper than a lot of the FA the Cubs are rumored to be interested in and seemingly just as effective. He may not have the "ceiling" of a Meche or Padilla but you know what you're going to get.

 

I'd have no problem giving up an Eyre or Wuertz and marshall as I believe the original rumor has stated. Marshall probably could do just as well but his health seems to be a question mark and Westbrook is definitely an innings eater that is going to give the Cubs an ERA around league average.

Wuertz is a potential closer and provides superb value out of the pen.

 

I've got no issues trading Eyre or Izturis for Westbrook and would welcome him with open arms if that's the price we pay. We can add in a Marshall without causing me too much heartburn. But I don't want to trade anyone that I actually want on the team in 2007 for him when we can sign an equivalent guy without losing talent.

 

that's a valid point concerning Wuertz. However, for what Westbrook costs compared to what the FA market is commanding I'd rather just stick with a guy like Westbrook and invest that money into the offense.

[Guest]

again, tell that to kenny rodgers and jeff suppan. they seem to function ok by pitching like westbrook.

Shall I start rattling off guys who pitch like Westbrook that get abysmal results? There's a whole lot more of them out there than there are successes, you know.

[mg420]

how are the cubs going to flip padilla if he wants 10 mil a year? unless he is outstanding, not many teams are going to want him for that price. other than carpenter, westbrook had a better year than any starter on the cards last year. he seems to compare favorably to suppan who has proven to be quite valuable btw.

How would the Cubs flip Padilla? Well, he'll have one less year on his deal, which will make him much more "moveable" at that time. Let's say the Cubs sign him to a 3/30 deal (which I don't believe it will take). After this year, he'll only be 2/20 and will be much more attractive when compared to next season's FA's. Kinda like Westbrook looks good to you now.

 

Umm...who cares how he compares to the Cards starters? They got damn lucky to have even made the playoffs with that team, let alone to have won anything.

 

Besides, that still doesn't argue for trading value for someone you can easily replace with a FA signing.

 

the point is that you dont need 4 or 5 stud pithcers to get to the post season. look at padilla's last 3 years and westbrook's and tell me who is the better pitcher?

[Mephistopheles]

I hope you aren't talking about Rogers' in the playoffs. He decided that strikeouts were good then.

 

A lot of pitchers try to limit hits, limit walks and not strike out a lot of players. Most of them are in AAA. Rogers career K rate is a bit higher, and he's left-handed. He's got more working for him. He's an anamoly, not the standard.

 

Jeff Suppan's allowed almost 30 unearned runs the last two seasons. And he strikes out more.

[mg420]

again, tell that to kenny rodgers and jeff suppan. they seem to function ok by pitching like westbrook.

Shall I start rattling off guys who pitch like Westbrook that get abysmal results? There's a whole lot more of them out there than there are successes, you know.

who cares? westbrook like rogers and suppan gets results.

[mg420]

I hope you aren't talking about Rogers' in the playoffs. He decided that strikeouts were good then.

 

A lot of pitchers try to limit hits, limit walks and not strike out a lot of players. Most of them are in AAA. Rogers career K rate is a bit higher, and he's left-handed. He's got more working for him. He's an anamoly, not the standard.

 

Jeff Suppan's allowed almost 30 unearned runs the last two seasons. And he strikes out more.

 

does he? the last 3 years he's had 110, 114 & 104 k's.

[Mephistopheles]

It's not like Westbrook is completely immune to striking guys out.

 

He's in the bottom quarter.

[VanceJergins]

He's mentioned in several threads as a target that people here are excited about. I just don't see the reason for excitement. But I'm willing to be convinced.

 

Anyone care to give it a go?

 

I dont know if I've seen anyone that thinks he's the 2nd ace we've been hoping for, but he's above average. With his groundballs he seems pretty well suited for Wrigley, he eats innings, and he's still fairly cheap. He was 16/39 in ERA for qualified AL SP with 4.17. I'd bet he could consistently have an ERA in the high 3's in the NL, which would put him at Glavine's level for this year. My biggest reason for wanting him is that the Indians seem to want relief pitchers and a backup ss, so it seems like an Izturis/Eyre deal could get him. And the way I see it, we have an ace, I'd bet that either Miller or Prior will put up above avg numbers, I bet Hill will put up above avg numbers, and I bet Westbrook would put up above avg numbers, that would give us a front four of:

 

Awesome

Above Avg

Above Avg

Above Avg

???

 

So its less about desperately wanting Westbrook and more about him being very good for our situation.

[Mephistopheles]

does he? the last 3 years he's had 110, 114 & 104 k's.

 

That is 16 less strike outs in 65 less innings.

 

You do the math.

[Guest]

It's not like Westbrook is completely immune to striking guys out. His HR allowed are at the bottom of the AL each of the last three years, he's pretty good at keeping the ball in the park. I don't think you're allowing much separation from "really good" starters and "bottom of the rotation" guys. Westbrook is a pretty solid 3.

You know what I notice from that? A pitcher who had a .340 OBP against last season. And he was 31st out of 39 in K/9, so yeah, he's pretty allergic to strikeouts.

 

(as a side note...I also noticed that only 39 pitchers qualified for the ERA title in the AL last year?!? Wow)

[Transmogrified Tiger]

does he? the last 3 years he's had 110, 114 & 104 k's.

 

That is 16 less strike outs in 65 less innings.

 

You do the math.

 

That's what, 5 k's per year? In different leagues too? It doesn't really matter either way because it's tangent to the example you were using, but still, there's not much difference between those two in that aspect.

[mg420]

does he? the last 3 years he's had 110, 114 & 104 k's.

 

That is 16 less strike outs in 65 less innings.

 

You do the math.

considering westbrook faces a dh & suppan a pitcher i wouldnt consider such a small the difference as meaningful.