FoxSports-Cubs ink Lilly to four-year deal

[erik316wttn]

This year worries me. There are too many "ifs" with it.

[treebird]

This guy is going to be the white Jacque Jones. Everyone is going to hate him. He better take advantage of the cold weather and start 4-0 or the natives will be restless at Clark & Addison. Good luck Ted...

 

Not necessarily. If Prior's healthy and Hill returns to 2nd-half form, Lilly would be 4 starter (depending on who else we get). A 4 starter does not have to go 4-0. If Prior's unhealthy and Hill regresses ...

 

if prior is healthy sounds like to the start of a lame joke. our rotation needs to start with the phrase "assuming prior's dead and makes zero starts . . ."

[Post Count Padder]

This year worries me. There are too many "ifs" with it.

As if we've never gone into a season with a bunch of "ifs" before. :roll:

[RichHillIsABeast]

I think we're also counting on one or two guys being in the starting lineup making the league minimum. That frees up quite a bit of cash.

Who? The only positional prospects who look to contribute anything in the next couple of years are Pie and Patterson (perhaps Soto), and the two guys they would likely replace (Jones and DeRosa) are two of our cheapest guys as it stands.

 

Position players: Murton, Pie, Patterson (maybe)

 

Pitchers: Rapada (LOOGY), Veal, Gallagher, Pawelek, Marmol (pen)

 

We'll be fine. If we get 2-3 pitchers making the league min or first year arbi money (Hill), we're pretty much set.

 

Ramirez is making below market value. So is DLee.

 

We're not flooded with bad contracts. If we are pressed for cash, guys like Lilly will be very movable. Geez, Howry and Eyre are very movable right now and everyone was complaining about their price tags last season.

Edited December 7, 2006 by RichHillIsABeast

[TruffleShuffle]

This year worries me. There are too many "ifs" with it.

 

well, it's better than last year. At least this year we can see things coming together where a lot of the "ifs" are positive. Last year there weren't any "ifs" because the team sucked on paper and on the field.

[NewUserName]

What do you get when you have a disgruntled fanbase, poor talent in the system, a lot of money to spend and a poor free agent class?

 

 

I have a feeling that the George Bell, Dave Smith and Danny Jackson offseason will be remembered warmly in about 3 years.

[erik316wttn]

This year worries me. There are too many "ifs" with it.

As if we've never gone into a season with a bunch of "ifs" before. :roll:

 

I don't appreciate the eyeroll.

 

Yes, we've gone into seasons with "ifs" before, but I think we're all setting ourselves up for a massive dissapointment.

 

Soriano alone won't fix the lineup. We're status quo with Ramirez (but that's a good thing), and we added Lilly and Cotts to the pitching staff. Wowie.

 

But looking at all these posts.... "IF Prior is healthy" and "IF Hill can pitch like he did in the 2nd half" and "IF Wood's shoulder can hold up" and "IF we can do better than Izturis and SS"... just far too many unknowns to be absolutely certain of any type of success this year.

[TruffleShuffle]

just far too many unknowns to be absolutely certain of any type of success this year.

 

Yeah it's not like going into 2004, when we had 4 very good, healthy, young starting pitchers, a solid lineup and a good closer. We could be certain of success that year.

[treebird]

just far too many unknowns to be absolutely certain of any type of success this year.

 

Yeah it's not like going into 2004, when we had 4 very good, healthy, young starting pitchers, a solid lineup and a good closer. We could be certain of success that year.

 

we were as certain of success as anybody's been in a while. the fact that it didn't happen to work out is irrelevant. if you could have that situation again, you'd be a fool to turn it down.

[TruffleShuffle]

just far too many unknowns to be absolutely certain of any type of success this year.

 

Yeah it's not like going into 2004, when we had 4 very good, healthy, young starting pitchers, a solid lineup and a good closer. We could be certain of success that year.

 

we were as certain of success as anybody's been in a while. the fact that it didn't happen to work out is irrelevant. if you could have that situation again, you'd be a fool to turn it down.

 

my point was that it's the cubs, the only thing you can be certain of is that there won't be success

[Post Count Padder]

This year worries me. There are too many "ifs" with it.

As if we've never gone into a season with a bunch of "ifs" before. :roll:

 

I don't appreciate the eyeroll.

 

Yes, we've gone into seasons with "ifs" before, but I think we're all setting ourselves up for a massive dissapointment.

 

Soriano alone won't fix the lineup. We're status quo with Ramirez (but that's a good thing), and we added Lilly and Cotts to the pitching staff. Wowie.

 

But looking at all these posts.... "IF Prior is healthy" and "IF Hill can pitch like he did in the 2nd half" and "IF Wood's shoulder can hold up" and "IF we can do better than Izturis and SS"... just far too many unknowns to be absolutely certain of any type of success this year.

Last year was somewhat of the same thing. "IF Prior and Wood are healthy" and "IF Miller could come back and help the rotation" and "IF Pierre can be a good leadoff hitter" and "IF Dempster can prove he wasn't a fluke" and "IF Cedeno and Murton could repeat their rookie years" and so on and so forth. Granted, these are on a lesser scale than this year. I know what you're trying to say and I concur, but I'm also saying "ifs" are nothing new to this franchise.

[VanceJergins]

just far too many unknowns to be absolutely certain of any type of success this year.

 

Yeah it's not like going into 2004, when we had 4 very good, healthy, young starting pitchers, a solid lineup and a good closer. We could be certain of success that year.

 

Ugh...I hate thinking about that almost as much as '03. We were SOOOOO good!!!

[treebird]

just far too many unknowns to be absolutely certain of any type of success this year.

 

Yeah it's not like going into 2004, when we had 4 very good, healthy, young starting pitchers, a solid lineup and a good closer. We could be certain of success that year.

 

we were as certain of success as anybody's been in a while. the fact that it didn't happen to work out is irrelevant. if you could have that situation again, you'd be a fool to turn it down.

 

my point was that it's the cubs, the only thing you can be certain of is that there won't be success

 

well duh of course. we're going to lose. all that's up for debate is whether it's our fault or not.

[erik316wttn]

just far too many unknowns to be absolutely certain of any type of success this year.

 

Yeah it's not like going into 2004, when we had 4 very good, healthy, young starting pitchers, a solid lineup and a good closer. We could be certain of success that year.

 

If you had the option of having the 2004 team back at the 2004 talent level, would you turn it down?

[RichHillIsABeast]

This year worries me. There are too many "ifs" with it.

As if we've never gone into a season with a bunch of "ifs" before. :roll:

 

I don't appreciate the eyeroll.

 

Yes, we've gone into seasons with "ifs" before, but I think we're all setting ourselves up for a massive dissapointment.

 

Soriano alone won't fix the lineup. We're status quo with Ramirez (but that's a good thing), and we added Lilly and Cotts to the pitching staff. Wowie.

 

But looking at all these posts.... "IF Prior is healthy" and "IF Hill can pitch like he did in the 2nd half" and "IF Wood's shoulder can hold up" and "IF we can do better than Izturis and SS"... just far too many unknowns to be absolutely certain of any type of success this year.

 

DLee will be healthy and that's a HUGE improvement over Mabry/Nevin/Walker at 1B. An OBP monster in front of Ramirez is a very good thing. That's not an "if."

 

Having Lilly keep you in games, usually giving you 6 innings is a huge improvement over running a rookie out there that loses you the game by the 2nd inning.

 

Hill will be fine, but expecting his 2nd half numbers for a full season is a little much to expect from just about anyone. Wood isn't a SP anymore. We have plenty of quality bullpen options should he spent significant time on the DL. Prior isn't being counted on in the rotation.

 

There are very few "ifs" this season.

 

We'll be competitive if Wood and Prior don't pitch one inning. If they do, this team has a ton of potential.

[jjgman21]

This year worries me. There are too many "ifs" with it.

As if we've never gone into a season with a bunch of "ifs" before. :roll:

 

I don't appreciate the eyeroll.

 

Yes, we've gone into seasons with "ifs" before, but I think we're all setting ourselves up for a massive dissapointment.

 

Soriano alone won't fix the lineup. We're status quo with Ramirez (but that's a good thing), and we added Lilly and Cotts to the pitching staff. Wowie.

 

But looking at all these posts.... "IF Prior is healthy" and "IF Hill can pitch like he did in the 2nd half" and "IF Wood's shoulder can hold up" and "IF we can do better than Izturis and SS"... just far too many unknowns to be absolutely certain of any type of success this year.

 

the definition of setting ones self up for disappointment is expecting few or no ifs. going into a season with no ifs is also setting up for disappointment because no team goes into October with the same team they go into October with. somebody will fail, somebody will be a pleasant surprise.

 

but one thing I am certain of, the Cubs have considerably fewer ifs going into the season than any other team in the division.

[treebird]

Having Lilly keep you in games, usually giving you 6 innings is a huge improvement over running a rookie out there that loses you the game by the 2nd inning.

 

Ted Lilly pitched 4 or fewer innings/gave up 5 or more earned runs in a quarter of his starts last year. How many times do you really think the cubs' best assortment of rookies would do this?

[nilodnayr]

Don't know if anyone heard the interview with Lilly's agent on XM. Basically he said that Soriano was a big part of Lilly signing. Said that Lilly helped Soriano learn english when they were roomates and teammates with the Yankees.

 

WFAN reported that Lilly's agent called the Yankees and to see if they would match the deal so that Lilly could go there and Cashman declined. I didn't hear any audio of Lilly's agent saying this though, so I'm not sure that that's true.

 

Doesn't that second paragraph completely contradict the first paragraph?

[nilodnayr]

Levine confirms via Larry O' Brien.

 

Levine says first year will be lower than the following years.

Is the glut of backloaded contracts the Cubs have handed out this winter worrying anyone else?

 

Guys like Lilly and Meche will be very movable two years from now. The market for SP will continue to be ridiculous.

 

I think we're also counting on one or two guys being in the starting lineup making the league minimum. That frees up quite a bit of cash.

 

Yeah, that was the general feeling coming out of the winter meetings in Dallas in 2000. Good thing that worked out for all those teams. Ohh wait...

[CoolHandLuke]

I do not like this move one single bit. :x

[rocket]

lame.

[jjgman21]

Having Lilly keep you in games, usually giving you 6 innings is a huge improvement over running a rookie out there that loses you the game by the 2nd inning.

 

Ted Lilly pitched 4 or fewer innings/gave up 5 or more earned runs in a quarter of his starts last year. How many times do you really think the cubs' best assortment of rookies would do this?

 

let's change the perameters slightly.

 

Carlos Zambrano gave up 5 or more runs in 9 of his 33 starts.

Ted Lilly gave up 5 or more runs in 8 of his 32 starts.

 

he's not going to shut an offense down completely like Z, but our "Ace" is just as likely to get blown out as Lilly.

[Chocolate Milk]

Remember when everyone was all upset about Maddux's option that vested and how it was going to be an albatross? There was like a 55 page thread where everyone lost their minds about it.

 

Kind of funny to think back on that now considering this contract.

[Post Count Padder]

Remember when everyone was all upset about Maddux's option that vested and how it was going to be an albatross? There was like a 55 page thread where everyone lost their minds about it.

 

Kind of funny to think back on that now considering this contract.

I recall that. Sigh, those were the good ole days.

[RichHillIsABeast]

Having Lilly keep you in games, usually giving you 6 innings is a huge improvement over running a rookie out there that loses you the game by the 2nd inning.

 

Ted Lilly pitched 4 or fewer innings/gave up 5 or more earned runs in a quarter of his starts last year. How many times do you really think the cubs' best assortment of rookies would do this?

 

Z did the same in roughly 18% of his starts last season. What's your point?

 

Z is a #1 starter. Lilly is a 3. I don't expect Lilly to be a world burner. All he has to do is not get blown out early, which happened only 3 times last season out of 32 starts. One of our rookies isn't going to do that for us. We'd be lucky to be in half the games they pitch.

 

We have some good young arms, but most of them are a year away from really establishing themselves in the rotation (excepting Hill of course).