Jump to content
North Side Baseball
  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
I still don't see Hendry being done. He wants to honor Jacque's request, and there's no reason to have all these bullpen arms or all the kids if they are just going to be blocked.
Posted
I still don't see Hendry being done. He wants to honor Jacque's request, and there's no reason to have all these bullpen arms or all the kids if they are just going to be blocked.

 

He better be getting us Dunn or A-Rod, because with this rotation we're going to need a lot of offense.

Posted

 

there was a thread a couple months back when the Cards re-upping Marquis was a rumor where a Card fan defended him on this same basis. the way I looked at it was what his ERA would have been if he was pulled at the right time in the game, but for resting the bullpen. it didn't dip the ERA as much but it still put a dent in it. the next question is which of the 6-7 inning affairs went the same way, Marquis being left in when he rightfully should have been pulled.

 

The opp. BA last year against him was .289, compared to Marmol's at .250, Hill at .227 (wow), and Marshall's at .270

 

His BAA even in his 'good' years arent very good either. His BB/K/IP's ratios aren't very good. He doesnt have any stat that could be construed as "stuff stats", and by that i find it hard to believe he will ever be better than 4.50 ERA guy.

 

One year ok. 3 years not so ok.

Posted

Seriously guys, I'm not so sure this is something to throw a hissy fit about. It seems like we have unrealistic expectations sometimes as Cubs fans. This is a #4 or #5. They can't all be aces. He's just a John Thomson or a Brett Tomko type.

 

My only concern is whether one of our younger guys couldn't have done the same thing, for about 1/10th the cost.

Posted
Did I get the title changed correctly? I never did see anything official and am trusting that 3/20 is correct.

 

Hello?

 

Link please to confirm that I got the title changed correctly?

Posted (edited)
Did I get the title changed correctly? I never did see anything official and am trusting that 3/20 is correct.

 

Hello?

 

Link please to confirm that I got the title changed correctly?

 

here ya go

Edited by CoolHandLuke
Posted
On the bright side, since we didn't get a major FA pitcher, maybe Z will get locked up to a long term deal before the season starts.

 

another tangential effect of this and the Lilly deal is it allows the Cubs to trade away some minor league pitching without worrying about the depth chart. A trade or two before April is inevitable.

 

Good point. Nice issue spotting counselor.

Posted
Seriously guys, I'm not so sure this is something to throw a hissy fit about. It seems like we have unrealistic expectations sometimes as Cubs fans. This is a #4 or #5. They can't all be aces. He's just a John Thomson or a Brett Tomko type.

 

My only concern is whether one of our younger guys couldn't have done the same thing, for about 1/10th the cost.

 

I think most of us are wondering why sign a #4 or #5 type when we needed a #2 type.

Posted
he sucks...good luck. It wasn't just his era, he led the league in long balls for a reason and with all the pitching questions the Cards had going into the post season everyone knew the Cards did not trust him to pitch...he is a headcase that arguably the 2 best pitching coaches in the game had to give up on. He will show some flashes of what could be, and you think man this guy can pitch and then bam...it is like he forgets what he is doing out there...

 

you know, all I heard (not necessarily from you of course) when the Braves traded him to the Cards was what a coup it was to get all this great young pitching talent for that bum JD Drew. I also heard so much 'Duncan was able to straighten him out' talk for his first two years as a Card when Cubs fans all predicted his eminant decline.

 

now Cox and Duncan couldn't straighten him out? will someone provide me with a link to anybody ever saying that Cox and/or Duncan couldn't straighten him out? or is this all just a conclusion reached without any exploration of cause and effect?

Posted

 

Marquis pitched 194º innings this year and exceeded 200 innings in each of the previous two seasons with the Cardinals. Over the past three seasons, Marquis is 42-37. He won the Silver Slugger Award in 2005 as the National League’s top hitting pitcher. In 2006, he batted .179 with 4 doubles, a triple and 5 RBI. He has hit 2 homers in his career.

 

Well at least he's durable and can swing the stick a bit. :?

Posted
Seriously guys, I'm not so sure this is something to throw a hissy fit about. It seems like we have unrealistic expectations sometimes as Cubs fans. This is a #4 or #5. They can't all be aces. He's just a John Thomson or a Brett Tomko type.

 

My only concern is whether one of our younger guys couldn't have done the same thing, for about 1/10th the cost.

 

I think most of us are wondering why sign a #4 or #5 type when we needed a #2 type.

 

Indeedly doodely. Definitely need a 1-2 punch.

Posted

He was the scheduled starter each day & in the game vs. the Sox, he gave 9ER thru the 1st 2. He still would've likely given up 5-6 runs and not have been pulled with a rested pen.

 

So, instead of assuming maybe 5-6 runs thru 1 2/3 rather than 13 thru 5, it's better to assume that it never happened?

 

Same thing with the Braves game, that was spread out I don't think he allowed more than 3 runs in any inning and the Braves scored in almost every inning he pitched.

 

He still would've pitched and likely given up the 4-6 runs thru 2-3IP and been pulled rather than going 5 and giving up 12.

 

It makes no sense.

No, I definitely agree that that's the best way to look at it. I just didn't feel like looking to see when exactly he should have been pulled. What I was basically trying to say was that Marquis had (at least) two outtings last year where he would've been pulled in normal circumstances, but wasn't. Therefore he wasn't as bad as he ERA makes him out to be.

 

By how much? Telling me it dropped to 5.12 doesn't say anything. You can do that with anything any pitcher, every pitcher has a game where he was left in too long and his numbers were hurt.

 

His ERA is just one of the indicators about his performance, I wouldn't judge solely based on '06 or his ERA alone. Still come to the same conclusion that at this stage, I don't think he'll provide what the Cubs are paying him to produce. Hope I'm wrong, but it doesn't look good.

Posted
Earlier this week, the Cubs agreed to a four-year, $40 million deal with free-agent righty Ted Lilly.

 

Bruce: surely a slip. Lilly's a lefty

Posted
This is a 3 year, $20 million minor league contract with Marquis having to fight for a spot on the 25-man roster, right?
Posted
This is a 3 year, $20 million minor league contract with Marquis having to fight for a spot on the 25-man roster, right?
:roll: :?:
Posted
I knew I threw up for a reason earlier today.

 

Ugh.

 

Me: "Cognac" vomit

You: "Sub-mediocre pitcher making lots more dough than I'll make in my life" vomit

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Cubs community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of North Side Baseball.

×
×
  • Create New...