Maddux again?

[YearofDaCubs]

In a second.

 

200 innings

<40 walks

combined 4.00 era (approx.)

One of the smartest pitchers to ever take the mound

Still a great fielder

Consumate professional

Always stays in shape

 

Hey, when playing for a winning team (the dodgers) he put up some very respectable #'s. If he'd have us, I'd take him TODAY

 

 

 

-He had a 4.20 ERA overall, and a 4.69 ERA with the Cubs. That's bad.

 

He won't be worth whatever he costs.

 

That's not bad, that's average. He puts up similar numbers to the free agent pitchers not named Zito or Schmidt, and they all are asking for 8-10 million dollars. Do you think Maddux will sign for more than that? I doubt it.

 

Zito and Schmidt are asking for around $12-15m per. I'd guess Maddux could get at least $6m or $7m. He's not worth that.

 

Regarding his ERA, if you take out April he had a Cub ERA well over 5. He was terrible for us. Why would you want him back when better options for a back end rotation guy are available via trade, FA or in house?

 

What I meant is that people like Padilla, Lilly, Meche are all asking for 8-10 per. I'd much rather sign Maddux for 1/6 than sign any of them to 3/27 or 4/36. I don't know of anybody in house of the youngsters besides Rich Hill that could be likely under a 5 ERA.

Trading? Well, there's been some rumors-but none of those players are significantly better than Maddux either except Jennings who will cost way too much talent.

 

What pitchers would you want for the starting rotation, and at what prices would be better enough to Maddux to both justify the difference in salary and years?

If that's the case we might as well leave one of our rookies to pitch. Maddux was terrible here and I expect an even more decline in numbers. He was getting worse and worse every year of his contract for us.

[CubColtPacer]

What pitchers would you want for the starting rotation, and at what prices would be better enough to Maddux to both justify the difference in salary and years?

 

Padilla and Lilly will both be better in 2007 than Maddux will be. Westbrook, Lee and Jennings will be. Suppan will probably be. Marshall will be close. Guzman is a year stronger; he should have much better command on his change, which was his best pitch. The Miller/Prior combo will be better.

 

There's no reason to spend any signifigant money on a guy who will put up back end numbers in the rotation, regardless of the warm fuzzy feelings Cubs fans get for him.

 

I don't really have any warm and fuzzy feelings about him. I just know he has had a better ERA than Padilla the last 3 seasons. He has had a better ERA than Lilly the past 3 years as well. He has been better than Lee 2 out of the last 3 seasons. Sean Marshall had over a 5.50 ERA last year, and would have to drop over a full point to catch Maddux. Guzman/Miller/Prior may be, but they all are pretty big risks.

 

The only 2 who are better than Maddux are Westbrook and Suppan, and the fact that probably every other pitcher will ask for more money and more years than Maddux, and the fact that Westbrook will require talent to be sent back, Maddux should still be seen as a good option for one of the rotation spots. I am also fine with saying that Westbrook is a good option for the rotation.

[jmajew]

Maddux will get a 2/18. Meche, Lilly, Padilla, etc with all get 3 or 4 years at 8 or 9 mil a year. I'd rather have Maddux.

[mhuber92211]

The Cubs are looking for a "Second Tier" starter. Maddux falls into this category. He is capable of putting up numbers similar to other pitchers about to get long term, expensive deals. Maddux would likely accept a 1 year deal but isn't going to take any deal right away which would drive his price up in a pitching starved market.

 

Maddux is always a good fit in Chicago and is a fan favorite no matter if he is classified as being bad. I would specualte that the majority of Cub fans would like to see Maddux put up a 5 ERA in the 5th starter spot then a young pitcher like Marshall. And who among us would not want to see Maddux get a ring with the Cubs?

 

I agree with the others who say that they would rather pay Maddux for a year then sign Meche/Padilla to a long term deal.

[KingCubsFan]

The Cubs are looking for a "Second Tier" starter. Maddux falls into this category. He is capable of putting up numbers similar to other pitchers about to get long term, expensive deals. Maddux would likely accept a 1 year deal but isn't going to take any deal right away which would drive his price up in a pitching starved market.

 

Maddux is always a good fit in Chicago and is a fan favorite no matter if he is classified as being bad. I would specualte that the majority of Cub fans would like to see Maddux put up a 5 ERA in the 5th starter spot then a young pitcher like Marshall. And who among us would not want to see Maddux get a ring with the Cubs?

 

I agree with the others who say that they would rather pay Maddux for a year then sign Meche/Padilla to a long term deal.

I wouldn't. I'd rather put the 9 million to better use

[CubColtPacer]

The Cubs are looking for a "Second Tier" starter. Maddux falls into this category. He is capable of putting up numbers similar to other pitchers about to get long term, expensive deals. Maddux would likely accept a 1 year deal but isn't going to take any deal right away which would drive his price up in a pitching starved market.

 

Maddux is always a good fit in Chicago and is a fan favorite no matter if he is classified as being bad. I would specualte that the majority of Cub fans would like to see Maddux put up a 5 ERA in the 5th starter spot then a young pitcher like Marshall. And who among us would not want to see Maddux get a ring with the Cubs?

 

I agree with the others who say that they would rather pay Maddux for a year then sign Meche/Padilla to a long term deal.

I wouldn't. I'd rather put the 9 million to better use

 

Yeah, same with me. If I thought Maddux was going to put up a 5 ERA next year, I wouldn't want to sign him. I don't think he will do that though at all.

[USSoccer]

The Cubs are looking for a "Second Tier" starter. Maddux falls into this category. He is capable of putting up numbers similar to other pitchers about to get long term, expensive deals. Maddux would likely accept a 1 year deal but isn't going to take any deal right away which would drive his price up in a pitching starved market.

 

Maddux is always a good fit in Chicago and is a fan favorite no matter if he is classified as being bad. I would specualte that the majority of Cub fans would like to see Maddux put up a 5 ERA in the 5th starter spot then a young pitcher like Marshall. And who among us would not want to see Maddux get a ring with the Cubs?

 

I agree with the others who say that they would rather pay Maddux for a year then sign Meche/Padilla to a long term deal.

I wouldn't. I'd rather put the 9 million to better use

 

Yeah, same with me. If I thought Maddux was going to put up a 5 ERA next year, I wouldn't want to sign him. I don't think he will do that though at all.

 

What about his 2006 Cubs season gives you the impression that he's going to put up an ERA near 4? He had a really good April, and was Shawn Estes-esque the next two and a half months.

[abuck1220]

i'd rather have one year of maddux at 5 mil than five years of meche at 50 mil.

[neely crenshaw]

i love maddux. he was good for us...at a big price. he did what we needed the last 2 years, he took the ball. which only he and z did.

his upside is he will make all his starts. he is an average pitcher. for a good team he would have a winning record but there are better guys out there for the potential cost. he is a 4. he is a darn good 4. the problem for us is that we lost wood and prior and maddux had to be a 2.

he pitches very well when the wind blows in or he is in a big park...but wrigley in summer is neither.

he would do well to stay in LA, or go to detroit or seattle.

if we are going to go "yankees" and spend for everything..ok i'll sign him as a 5 and the sign schmidt,lilly and meche(and carlos lee!) but i don't see that happening!

[USSoccer]

i'd rather have one year of maddux at 5 mil than five years of meche at 50 mil.

 

That's not the only choice available.

 

I'm going to go ahead and post Maddux's ERA and WHIP from last season as a Cub:

 

April (5 starts): 1.35 ERA, 0.88 WHIP

May (6 starts): 5.94 ERA, 1.69 WHIP

June (5 starts): 6.25 ERA, 1.31 WHIP

July (6 starts): 5.21 ERA, 1.32 WHIP

 

If that kind of production had any other name attached to it, you'd sceam bloody murder if Hendry signed that player. That's terrible, terrible production.

[neely crenshaw]

i agree maddux is better off in a pitchers park(he was 6-3 3.30 in LA)

 

BUT here are numbers..baby

maddux15-14 4.20

meche 11-8 4.48(AL)

lilly 15-13 4.31(AL)

they are people talking 10 mil for them

HERE IS OUR FUTURE...that many of you aren't screaming bloody murder about

hill 4.26

guzman 7.46

marmol 6.08

marshall 5.59

walrond 7.30

miller 4.57

mateo 5.32

prior 7.30

beauty is in the eye of the beholder....

[Ding Dong Johnson]

i agree maddux is better off in a pitchers park(he was 6-3 3.30 in LA)

 

BUT here are numbers..baby

maddux15-14 4.20

meche 11-8 4.48(AL)

lilly 15-13 4.31(AL)

they are people talking 10 mil for them

HERE IS OUR FUTURE...that many of you aren't screaming bloody murder about

hill 4.26

guzman 7.46

marmol 6.08

marshall 5.59

walrond 7.30

miller 4.57

mateo 5.32

prior 7.30

beauty is in the eye of the beholder....

 

I'm sure you had a point in there somewhere, but I missed it. Why compare a 40 something pitcher who's obviously getting worse to a bunch of kids who just made their debuts and are likely to improve?

[YearofDaCubs]

i agree maddux is better off in a pitchers park(he was 6-3 3.30 in LA)

 

BUT here are numbers..baby

maddux15-14 4.20

meche 11-8 4.48(AL)

lilly 15-13 4.31(AL)

they are people talking 10 mil for them

HERE IS OUR FUTURE...that many of you aren't screaming bloody murder about

hill 4.26

guzman 7.46

marmol 6.08

marshall 5.59

walrond 7.30

miller 4.57

mateo 5.32

prior 7.30

beauty is in the eye of the beholder....

Compare those numbers to maddux's when he was here last year and I will gladly take Mateo, Marshal and Miller over Maddux for the cost. Hill is a nobrainer.

[abuck1220]

i'd rather have one year of maddux at 5 mil than five years of meche at 50 mil.

 

That's not the only choice available.

 

I'm going to go ahead and post Maddux's ERA and WHIP from last season as a Cub:

 

April (5 starts): 1.35 ERA, 0.88 WHIP

May (6 starts): 5.94 ERA, 1.69 WHIP

June (5 starts): 6.25 ERA, 1.31 WHIP

July (6 starts): 5.21 ERA, 1.32 WHIP

 

If that kind of production had any other name attached to it, you'd sceam bloody murder if Hendry signed that player. That's terrible, terrible production.

 

yeah, but i'd rather pay 1 yr/5 mil for that production than 5 yr/50 mil for it.

 

of course, i'd probably prefer marshall to either of those guys, but i doubt hendry would.

[hawkcub]

Maddux wants 2 years and will get it from somebody. I hope the Cubs would not do that. He's just a guy you want to suceed. But the simple fact is that he's nothing more then a 4 or 5 starter. The Cubs have plenty of those, they need 2 and 3 type starters. Edited November 22, 2006 by hawkcub

[CuseCubFan69]

How was Maddux's velicity last year, did it fall from previous years?

[SaorsaDaonnan]

May I ask why we are still referring to ERA? :roll:

[Ding Dong Johnson]

May I ask why we are still referring to ERA? :roll:

 

Because wins are taboo?

[Zonk Moreland]

Well he put up those numbers last year so obviously he HAS to put up those numbers or worse this year because that's what all baseball players do. They can not improve their stats from year to year, only regression. It's a rule. /sarcasm

[YearofDaCubs]

Well he put up those numbers last year so obviously he HAS to put up those numbers or worse this year because that's what all baseball players do. They can not improve their stats from year to year, only regression. It's a rule. /sarcasm

Maddux's numbers as a cub and you tell me if you see a pattern:

 

2004: 16W 4.02 ERA 1.18WHIP .269BAA

2005: 13W 4.24 ERA 1.22WHIP .275BAA

2006: 9W 4.69 ERA 1.29WHIP .284BAA (136IP)

 

See the pattern? Do you think his numbers are going to get better when the stats clearly show his number declining every year? You throw away the April hot streak he was on and his numbers would look far worse.

 

No thanks to Maddux.

[Vinestal]

Well he put up those numbers last year so obviously he HAS to put up those numbers or worse this year because that's what all baseball players do. They can not improve their stats from year to year, only regression. It's a rule. /sarcasm

 

That seems to be, for some reason what alot of the posters on this baord believe.

[YearofDaCubs]

Well he put up those numbers last year so obviously he HAS to put up those numbers or worse this year because that's what all baseball players do. They can not improve their stats from year to year, only regression. It's a rule. /sarcasm

 

That seems to be, for some reason what alot of the posters on this baord believe.

Look at Maddux's numbers and you tell me what the likely scenario would be.

[Vinestal]

Well he put up those numbers last year so obviously he HAS to put up those numbers or worse this year because that's what all baseball players do. They can not improve their stats from year to year, only regression. It's a rule. /sarcasm

 

That seems to be, for some reason what alot of the posters on this baord believe.

Look at Maddux's numbers and you tell me what the likely scenario would be.

 

Oh I wasnt really refering to Maddux specificly. I do believe Maddux is likely to regress due to his age. I was just speaking in general.

[Zonk Moreland]

Well he put up those numbers last year so obviously he HAS to put up those numbers or worse this year because that's what all baseball players do. They can not improve their stats from year to year, only regression. It's a rule. /sarcasm

Maddux's numbers as a cub and you tell me if you see a pattern:

 

2004: 16W 4.02 ERA 1.18WHIP .269BAA

2005: 13W 4.24 ERA 1.22WHIP .275BAA

2006: 9W 4.69 ERA 1.29WHIP .284BAA (136IP)

 

See the pattern? Do you think his numbers are going to get better when the stats clearly show his number declining every year? You throw away the April hot streak he was on and his numbers would look far worse.

 

No thanks to Maddux.

 

The numbers tell one story but what happens on the field next season isn't in any of those stats.

 

And of course if you disregard the month of April his stats will look different. If you disregard the month of August they look different. Where is the reasoning behind cherry picking stats that a player put up? He put the numbers up, he owns the numbers, he made the pitches. To state the glaringly obvious, by doing this we can make anyone look good or bad.

 

Sorry but this type of logic is as flawed as any other type of prediction based logic.

 

Zambrano's ERA and has gone up 3 years in a row also (his WHIP was up and down) but strangely I don't know for sure that it will do the same in 2007. Do you? Then how can you be so sure that Maddux's will....

 

Either way, I do agree, as you said, Mateo, Marshall and Miller would be just fine as a 5th - especially considering the cost and the experience that Mateo and Marshall would gain. But I don't agree that Maddux's stats HAVE to be worse than the previous season's just because "the numbers say so". Numbers don't bat, field, pitch or run the bases - players do.

[YearofDaCubs]

Well he put up those numbers last year so obviously he HAS to put up those numbers or worse this year because that's what all baseball players do. They can not improve their stats from year to year, only regression. It's a rule. /sarcasm

Maddux's numbers as a cub and you tell me if you see a pattern:

 

2004: 16W 4.02 ERA 1.18WHIP .269BAA

2005: 13W 4.24 ERA 1.22WHIP .275BAA

2006: 9W 4.69 ERA 1.29WHIP .284BAA (136IP)

 

See the pattern? Do you think his numbers are going to get better when the stats clearly show his number declining every year? You throw away the April hot streak he was on and his numbers would look far worse.

 

No thanks to Maddux.

 

The numbers tell one story but what happens on the field next season isn't in any of those stats.

 

And of course if you disregard the month of April his stats will look different. If you disregard the month of August they look different. Where is the reasoning behind cherry picking stats that a player put up? He put the numbers up, he owns the numbers, he made the pitches. To state the glaringly obvious, by doing this we can make anyone look good or bad.

 

Sorry but this type of logic is as flawed as any other type of prediction based logic.

 

Zambrano's ERA and has gone up 3 years in a row also (his WHIP was up and down) but strangely I don't know for sure that it will do the same in 2007. Do you? Then how can you be so sure that Maddux's will....

 

Either way, I do agree, as you said, Mateo, Marshall and Miller would be just fine as a 5th - especially considering the cost and the experience that Mateo and Marshall would gain. But I don't agree that Maddux's stats HAVE to be worse than the previous season's just because "the numbers say so". Numbers don't bat, field, pitch or run the bases - players do.

How is this logic flawed? The stats I published was him as a Cub. I really don't think it would be fair to add his stats from last year when he was in LA due to the advantage he received pitching in Dodger stadium. Clearly, his numbers are dropping and chances are he will be even worse than last year. I just don't think it's a smart investment signing a declining Maddux to be our 5th starter when we have comparable starters available to us at a much cheaper cost.

Edited November 23, 2006 by YearofDaCubs