Cubs Sign Marquis to 3/21

[A New Era]

fair, reasoned, logical analysis please.

 

Unfortunately, something this place has had very little of this offseason! It's been hard at points to read this board when you have to wade through pages and pages of arguements that lack reason, an objective view, and have some really skewed logic. The negativity (and I can understand it a bit) on this board has been SO bad this offseason it's crazy! Despite that, this is still head and shoulders above any other forum, I just wish more people would heed jjgman21's advise above.

 

 

And posts like this one ^^^^ What do they accomplish? This isn't a thread on debate tactics, its a thread on the signing of Jason Marquis.

 

I don't like it. There is a good chance that he will not get better and you will be on the hook for 21+ over 7 years. The following young pitchers can outperform Marquis.

 

Sean Marhsall

Carlos Marmol

Juan Mateo

 

There was really no point to this signing.

 

Just trying to remind people about what made this board great and how it seems as though it has gotten completely out of hand this year (96 loss season do tend to do stuff like this though). There are a lot of stubborn people on here and I doubt that much will change, hopefully people realize how they have been acting and try to tone it down.

Now what does your post accomplish? You tell me that 3 of our young guys can outperform Marquis, fair enough, but where is your logic behind it? Tell me why they will outpitch him, otherwise your post is just as pointless as you think mine was. I can say player A will outpeform player B all I want, give me something of substance to prove that point. BTW, personally I dont really like the signing much either.

 

Sean Marshall outperformed Jason Marquis last year. Is that not the kind of evidence you are looking for.

 

Exactly.

 

Marshall: 5.59 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .270 BAA, 77 K/59 BB, 20 HR

Marquis: 6.02 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .289 BAA, 96 K/75 BB, 35 HR

 

Marshall will be good in a couple of years. But he does not have a 4.45 carreer ERA like Marquis does. I don't like this signing particularly. But counting on Marshall is not a good idea. Seasoning him in AAA and viewing him as a possible future Cub, is a good idea.

[Soul]

3/28 now?!! i just vomited all over my copy of "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde"

 

Not that I'm taking credit or anything, but this is the exact contract I speculated at a few days back :)

 

OK, yeah I'm taking credit for it even though it was just a blind guess.

 

This pitching market is insane. Wait until you see what Suppan gets.

[jjgman21]

fair, reasoned, logical analysis please.

 

Unfortunately, something this place has had very little of this offseason! It's been hard at points to read this board when you have to wade through pages and pages of arguements that lack reason, an objective view, and have some really skewed logic. The negativity (and I can understand it a bit) on this board has been SO bad this offseason it's crazy! Despite that, this is still head and shoulders above any other forum, I just wish more people would heed jjgman21's advise above.

 

 

And posts like this one ^^^^ What do they accomplish? This isn't a thread on debate tactics, its a thread on the signing of Jason Marquis.

 

I don't like it. There is a good chance that he will not get better and you will be on the hook for 21+ over 7 years. The following young pitchers can outperform Marquis.

 

Sean Marhsall

Carlos Marmol

Juan Mateo

 

There was really no point to this signing.

 

Just trying to remind people about what made this board great and how it seems as though it has gotten completely out of hand this year (96 loss season do tend to do stuff like this though). There are a lot of stubborn people on here and I doubt that much will change, hopefully people realize how they have been acting and try to tone it down.

Now what does your post accomplish? You tell me that 3 of our young guys can outperform Marquis, fair enough, but where is your logic behind it? Tell me why they will outpitch him, otherwise your post is just as pointless as you think mine was. I can say player A will outpeform player B all I want, give me something of substance to prove that point. BTW, personally I dont really like the signing much either.

 

Sean Marshall outperformed Jason Marquis last year. Is that not the kind of evidence you are looking for.

 

Exactly.

 

Marshall: 5.59 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .270 BAA, 77 K/59 BB, 20 HR

Marquis: 6.02 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .289 BAA, 96 K/75 BB, 35 HR

 

I'd much prefer looking at the totality of the body of work and at least an attempt to make a reasoned prediction of the future based thereon rather than unfairly plucking stats selectively to make the worst case scenerio appear to be the likely outcome. is that really too much to ask?

[BWcubs21]

Exactly.

 

Marshall: 5.59 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .270 BAA, 77 K/59 BB, 20 HR

Marquis: 6.02 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .289 BAA, 96 K/75 BB, 35 HR

 

How much does Marshall make? That is just mind boggling that we are going to give 9 or so million to a guy who was outperformed by someone who is probably making under a million. Sorry dont know where to find the exact numbers that Marshall makes.

[frostwyrm]

This is what happens when you attempt an instant transformation from 66 wins to a World Series while in the most inflated market in the history of sports. Committing to one retooling year would have been infinitely preferrable to how this offseason has played out for the Cubs.

[Amazing_Grace]

sigh....

 

This is galactically stupid. Signing AAAA ballplayers to huge contracts rather than playing young guys. It's the same Cubs MO. This is why the Cardinals are consistently good year in and year out and the Cubs aren't. They spend their smaller payroll wisely while the Cubs fritter theirs away. I thought signing Soriano might be a signal for a change of direction, but it wasn't. This is par for the course. This team will not be good until Jim Hendry is fired and the next GM has had 3 or 4 seasons to undo all the damage he did.

 

This whole offseason reminds me of this commercial I saw on TV (I forget what it was for). There was a king and some knights around this table and there was a disheveled wizard giving them advice on how to defeat some dragon and he suggested that they load all the kingdoms gold in the catapults and fling it at the dragon. The king asks the wizard "So, basically, you think we should throw money at the problem."

 

Perfect. Someone tell Hendry to send me $20 million and I'll contribute more than Marquis by not showing up and blocking a prospect for 3 seasons.

Edited December 9, 2006 by Amazing_Grace

[Kellehers homer]

I'm pretty stunned/disappointed by this signing. First off, obviously, it's a pretty exorbitant amount of money for a guy who, at best, is a middle-of-the-road pitcher. But more disturbing, it's a pretty damning indictment of the team's inability to produce their own players. Are you telling me we couldn't produce one pitcher, over the years, who's better than Jason Marquis? I understand the idea of wanting to win now. I'm all for it -- it's been long enough. And, for the most part, I've been in favor of Hendry's signings. But I'm afraid this signing will be used, for years, as The Case Study of baseball's economics going out of wack again, and poor players getting absurd cash.

 

For a really good article on the Cubs inability to produce their own talent, check out this article:

 

http://www.beachwoodreporter.com/sports/post_6.php

 

Oh, and one last thought: Doesn't the thinking behind this -- i.e., we can fix this guy -- imply an huge, and unearned, amount of hubris? How can they think they can turn pitchers around? What's happened to Prior -- who was called by some THE best pitching prospect to ever come out of college -- since coming to the Cubs? How did Maddux do last year, after leaving the Cubs? How's Kerry Wood been, the last few years? How many Cy Youngs have the Cubs racked up, over the years? Where does this belief come from, that they can wave a Magic Wand and turn this guy into a decent pitcher?

[C.C.]

fair, reasoned, logical analysis please.

 

Unfortunately, something this place has had very little of this offseason! It's been hard at points to read this board when you have to wade through pages and pages of arguements that lack reason, an objective view, and have some really skewed logic. The negativity (and I can understand it a bit) on this board has been SO bad this offseason it's crazy! Despite that, this is still head and shoulders above any other forum, I just wish more people would heed jjgman21's advise above.

 

 

And posts like this one ^^^^ What do they accomplish? This isn't a thread on debate tactics, its a thread on the signing of Jason Marquis.

 

I don't like it. There is a good chance that he will not get better and you will be on the hook for 21+ over 7 years. The following young pitchers can outperform Marquis.

 

Sean Marhsall

Carlos Marmol

Juan Mateo

 

There was really no point to this signing.

 

Just trying to remind people about what made this board great and how it seems as though it has gotten completely out of hand this year (96 loss season do tend to do stuff like this though). There are a lot of stubborn people on here and I doubt that much will change, hopefully people realize how they have been acting and try to tone it down.

Now what does your post accomplish? You tell me that 3 of our young guys can outperform Marquis, fair enough, but where is your logic behind it? Tell me why they will outpitch him, otherwise your post is just as pointless as you think mine was. I can say player A will outpeform player B all I want, give me something of substance to prove that point. BTW, personally I dont really like the signing much either.

 

Sean Marshall outperformed Jason Marquis last year. Is that not the kind of evidence you are looking for.

 

Exactly.

 

Marshall: 5.59 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .270 BAA, 77 K/59 BB, 20 HR

Marquis: 6.02 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .289 BAA, 96 K/75 BB, 35 HR

 

Marshall will be good in a couple of years. But he does not have a 4.45 carreer ERA like Marquis does. I don't like this signing particularly. But counting on Marshall is not a good idea. Seasoning him in AAA and viewing him as a possible future Cub, is a good idea.

 

Yep. Why rush these kids? Didn't we learn our lesson with Wood and Prior? Let them build up the proper arm strength.

[Soul]

 

At least your crow is going to be enjoyable.

 

LOL. Are you taking a list of posters who don't like the Marquis signing, then(should Marquis actually pitch decent in 2007) call them out in every thread like this:

 

 

"OMG Dude, you send Marquis would suck in Dec, but now he is good man! Dude you have to eat some major crow man! just eat the crow "

 

Yep! And me too! I'm doing the same for Soriano, Hill, Derosa, Izturis, Lilly, and many other players posters are tossing aside as garbage.

 

LOL, it's silly to do this but for some reason I laughed at this post.

[Jon]

 

At least your crow is going to be enjoyable.

 

LOL. Are you taking a list of posters who don't like the Marquis signing, then(should Marquis actually pitch decent in 2007) call them out in every thread like this:

 

 

"OMG Dude, you send Marquis would suck in Dec, but now he is good man! Dude you have to eat some major crow man! just eat the crow "

 

Nope. I'm just pointing out that saying the rotation is worse off than last season isn't going to be true. Those that are negative right now will be pleasantly surprised.

 

Lilly and Marquis will be fine. Hill will pitch well. Z is a beast. Maybe we'll get a nice surprise from Prior or Miller or one of the many rookies with potential.

Who is saying the rotation will be worse than last year's?

[EastonBlues22]

I'm ok with Marquis at 3/20 but not 3/28. We could have had Suppan for that much. We could have gone after Zito and Batista for that much. I have been defending the Marquis signing all day, but I can't defend a guy getting $9Mil+ a year after having an ERA over 6.

Suppan will cost more than 3/28.... Probably a fourth year at about 10 million per or more. Same goes for Zito...except he'll probably get five years or more and be in the neighborhood of 16 million per.

 

Batista you could have had for that much...but honestly, and this is from a Cards fan who hates Jason mind you, Marquis probably has a lot more upside than Batista.

[CoolHandLuke]

fair, reasoned, logical analysis please.

 

Unfortunately, something this place has had very little of this offseason! It's been hard at points to read this board when you have to wade through pages and pages of arguements that lack reason, an objective view, and have some really skewed logic. The negativity (and I can understand it a bit) on this board has been SO bad this offseason it's crazy! Despite that, this is still head and shoulders above any other forum, I just wish more people would heed jjgman21's advise above.

 

 

And posts like this one ^^^^ What do they accomplish? This isn't a thread on debate tactics, its a thread on the signing of Jason Marquis.

 

I don't like it. There is a good chance that he will not get better and you will be on the hook for 21+ over 7 years. The following young pitchers can outperform Marquis.

 

Sean Marhsall

Carlos Marmol

Juan Mateo

 

There was really no point to this signing.

 

Just trying to remind people about what made this board great and how it seems as though it has gotten completely out of hand this year (96 loss season do tend to do stuff like this though). There are a lot of stubborn people on here and I doubt that much will change, hopefully people realize how they have been acting and try to tone it down.

Now what does your post accomplish? You tell me that 3 of our young guys can outperform Marquis, fair enough, but where is your logic behind it? Tell me why they will outpitch him, otherwise your post is just as pointless as you think mine was. I can say player A will outpeform player B all I want, give me something of substance to prove that point. BTW, personally I dont really like the signing much either.

 

Sean Marshall outperformed Jason Marquis last year. Is that not the kind of evidence you are looking for.

 

Exactly.

 

Marshall: 5.59 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .270 BAA, 77 K/59 BB, 20 HR

Marquis: 6.02 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .289 BAA, 96 K/75 BB, 35 HR

 

I'd much prefer looking at the totality of the body of work and at least an attempt to make a reasoned prediction of the future based thereon rather than unfairly plucking stats selectively to make the worst case scenerio appear to be the likely outcome. is that really too much to ask?

 

4.16

2.69

 

those are the career minor league era's of marshall and marquis. Guess which is which.

[Rob]

I can't decide which I would rather have...

 

Russ Ortiz at 4 years and 33 mil, or Jason Marquis at 3 and 28.

[Soul]

I'm pretty stunned/disappointed by this signing. First off, obviously, it's a pretty exorbitant amount of money for a guy who, at best, is a middle-of-the-road pitcher. But more disturbing, it's a pretty damning indictment of the team's inability to produce their own players. Are you telling me we couldn't produce one pitcher, over the years, who's better than Jason Marquis? I understand the idea of wanting to win now. I'm all for it -- it's been long enough. And, for the most part, I've been in favor of Hendry's signings. But I'm afraid this signing will be used, for years, as The Case Study of baseball's economics going out of wack again, and poor players getting absurd cash.

 

For a really good article on the Cubs inability to produce their own talent, check out this article:

 

http://www.beachwoodreporter.com/sports/post_6.php

 

Oh, and one last thought: Doesn't the thinking behind this -- i.e., we can fix this guy -- imply an huge, and unearned, amount of hubris? How can they think they can turn pitchers around? What's happened to Prior -- who was called by some THE best pitching prospect to ever come out of college -- since coming to the Cubs? How did Maddux do last year, after leaving the Cubs? How's Kerry Wood been, the last few years? How many Cy Youngs have the Cubs racked up, over the years? Where does this belief come from, that they can wave a Magic Wand and turn this guy into a decent pitcher?

 

I don't disagree with most of what you said.

 

The only thing though-----this year $9m/yr is pretty much the market for a middle-of-the-road pitcher.

[BWcubs21]

Marshall will be good in a couple of years. But he does not have a 4.45 carreer ERA like Marquis does. I don't like this signing particularly. But counting on Marshall is not a good idea. Seasoning him in AAA and viewing him as a possible future Cub, is a good idea.

 

Good point, do you know what went wrong with Jason last year? Was he playing through injury? I still find it mind boggling that we gave that contract to him, when based on last year we had better in house options. Here's hoping that he regains form!

[Vinestal]

 

At least your crow is going to be enjoyable.

 

LOL. Are you taking a list of posters who don't like the Marquis signing, then(should Marquis actually pitch decent in 2007) call them out in every thread like this:

 

 

"OMG Dude, you send Marquis would suck in Dec, but now he is good man! Dude you have to eat some major crow man! just eat the crow "

 

Nope. I'm just pointing out that saying the rotation is worse off than last season isn't going to be true. Those that are negative right now will be pleasantly surprised.

 

Lilly and Marquis will be fine. Hill will pitch well. Z is a beast. Maybe we'll get a nice surprise from Prior or Miller or one of the many rookies with potential.

 

Well Rich, I for one am greatful for your possitive post. I'm really looking forward to watching this team. I think we will be exciting and competetive. There are things Im not happy with (like this Marquis signing) but there are things that I am ecstatic about (Soriano signing). Im really looking forward to seeing what Lee/Aram/Soriano are able to accomplish and I think Z and Hill are going to be very good and then there is the possibility that Lilly could improve quite a bit with the move fromt he AL to the NL. I also think that the bulpen is a strength. All is not lost just because Jim didnt sign Schimdt and signed a huge risk in Marquis.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

If you think an argument is overly negative, then state your case, show them why you think they're wrong. But to sit back and chalk up negativity as some sort of character flaw while not contributing anything else is ridiculous, uncalled for, and basically attacking the poster IMO.

 

I completely agree with this.

 

People don't like the tone of the board of this transaction but they're not helping by just criticizing posters or the board as a whole. Why not defend your side of the argument, I would think it'd be easy since the other side doesn't use fair, reasoned or logical responses?

 

I'm not the other side. I don't like this signing. I just find it absurd when people say things like "best case scenerio is a 4.5 ERA" or "we have a #1 and four #5's" or when people make illogical jumps to come to overly pessimistic conclusions.

 

these things don't need debate. they need to not make it on the board in the first place because they are completely lacking in factual basis. we used to call it flaming.

 

If you noticed, just about everyone got on the case of the poster who said "we have a #1 and four #5s."

 

I don't get the point in just criticizing the whole board - you're basically doing what you're complaining about the rest of the board is in being negative.

[frostwyrm]

Too bad Nolasco is gone. He would have outproduced Marquis for $350K.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

fair, reasoned, logical analysis please.

 

Unfortunately, something this place has had very little of this offseason! It's been hard at points to read this board when you have to wade through pages and pages of arguements that lack reason, an objective view, and have some really skewed logic. The negativity (and I can understand it a bit) on this board has been SO bad this offseason it's crazy! Despite that, this is still head and shoulders above any other forum, I just wish more people would heed jjgman21's advise above.

 

 

And posts like this one ^^^^ What do they accomplish? This isn't a thread on debate tactics, its a thread on the signing of Jason Marquis.

 

I don't like it. There is a good chance that he will not get better and you will be on the hook for 21+ over 7 years. The following young pitchers can outperform Marquis.

 

Sean Marhsall

Carlos Marmol

Juan Mateo

 

There was really no point to this signing.

 

Just trying to remind people about what made this board great and how it seems as though it has gotten completely out of hand this year (96 loss season do tend to do stuff like this though). There are a lot of stubborn people on here and I doubt that much will change, hopefully people realize how they have been acting and try to tone it down.

Now what does your post accomplish? You tell me that 3 of our young guys can outperform Marquis, fair enough, but where is your logic behind it? Tell me why they will outpitch him, otherwise your post is just as pointless as you think mine was. I can say player A will outpeform player B all I want, give me something of substance to prove that point. BTW, personally I dont really like the signing much either.

 

Sean Marshall outperformed Jason Marquis last year. Is that not the kind of evidence you are looking for.

 

Exactly.

 

Marshall: 5.59 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .270 BAA, 77 K/59 BB, 20 HR

Marquis: 6.02 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .289 BAA, 96 K/75 BB, 35 HR

 

I'd much prefer looking at the totality of the body of work and at least an attempt to make a reasoned prediction of the future based thereon rather than unfairly plucking stats selectively to make the worst case scenerio appear to be the likely outcome. is that really too much to ask?

 

What are you talking about? I didn't pluck stats here - these are the stats I think are best to look at with pitchers (would rather use HR/9 and ERA+, but couldn't find the baseball-reference site in time).

[frostwyrm]

this year $9m/yr is pretty much the market for a middle-of-the-road pitcher.

Yep. In this market all you have to do to get $10m/yr is not suck. If you do suck somewhat you might have to endure the shame of taking only $9m/yr.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

fair, reasoned, logical analysis please.

 

Unfortunately, something this place has had very little of this offseason! It's been hard at points to read this board when you have to wade through pages and pages of arguements that lack reason, an objective view, and have some really skewed logic. The negativity (and I can understand it a bit) on this board has been SO bad this offseason it's crazy! Despite that, this is still head and shoulders above any other forum, I just wish more people would heed jjgman21's advise above.

 

 

And posts like this one ^^^^ What do they accomplish? This isn't a thread on debate tactics, its a thread on the signing of Jason Marquis.

 

I don't like it. There is a good chance that he will not get better and you will be on the hook for 21+ over 7 years. The following young pitchers can outperform Marquis.

 

Sean Marhsall

Carlos Marmol

Juan Mateo

 

There was really no point to this signing.

 

Just trying to remind people about what made this board great and how it seems as though it has gotten completely out of hand this year (96 loss season do tend to do stuff like this though). There are a lot of stubborn people on here and I doubt that much will change, hopefully people realize how they have been acting and try to tone it down.

Now what does your post accomplish? You tell me that 3 of our young guys can outperform Marquis, fair enough, but where is your logic behind it? Tell me why they will outpitch him, otherwise your post is just as pointless as you think mine was. I can say player A will outpeform player B all I want, give me something of substance to prove that point. BTW, personally I dont really like the signing much either.

 

Sean Marshall outperformed Jason Marquis last year. Is that not the kind of evidence you are looking for.

 

Exactly.

 

Marshall: 5.59 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .270 BAA, 77 K/59 BB, 20 HR

Marquis: 6.02 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .289 BAA, 96 K/75 BB, 35 HR

 

Marshall will be good in a couple of years. But he does not have a 4.45 carreer ERA like Marquis does. I don't like this signing particularly. But counting on Marshall is not a good idea. Seasoning him in AAA and viewing him as a possible future Cub, is a good idea.

 

Yep. Why rush these kids? Didn't we learn our lesson with Wood and Prior? Let them build up the proper arm strength.

 

Prior nor Wood were rushed.

[Soriano12]

If you noticed, just about everyone got on the case of the poster who said "we have a #1 and four #5s."

 

even the site admin

 

 

It may not be as bad as a #1 and 4 #5's but it is pretty close

 

We have a:

 

#1 - Z - Can we even re-sign him now?

no #2

a # 3 Ted Lilly

a #4 Rich Hill

 

2 ?'s - Miller and Prior

 

and a guy pretty close to useless Marquis

[Soul]

If you noticed, just about everyone got on the case of the poster who said "we have a #1 and four #5s."

 

even the site admin

 

 

It may not be as bad as a #1 and 4 #5's but it is pretty close

 

We have a:

 

#1 - Z - Can we even re-sign him now?

no #2

a # 3 Ted Lilly

a #4 Rich Hill

 

2 ?'s - Miller and Prior

 

and a guy pretty close to useless Marquis

 

Prior's coming back to be the #2. Believe it, and it will be so :)

 

Z

Prior (a notch below 2003 levels)

Hill

Lilly

Marquis

 

That's not a bad rotation. Not too bad at all.

[A New Era]

Exactly.

 

Marshall: 5.59 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .270 BAA, 77 K/59 BB, 20 HR

Marquis: 6.02 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .289 BAA, 96 K/75 BB, 35 HR

 

Marshall will be good in a couple of years. But he does not have a 4.45 carreer ERA like Marquis does. I don't like this signing particularly. But counting on Marshall is not a good idea. Seasoning him in AAA and viewing him as a possible future Cub, is a good idea.

 

Yep. Why rush these kids? Didn't we learn our lesson with Wood and Prior? Let them build up the proper arm strength.

 

Prior nor Wood were rushed.

 

However, Marshall, if counted on next year, would be rushed. What Marquis and Lilly do is give the Cubs rotation STABILITY. You've got 2 guys who have the talent to be good pitchers, and who have can also pitch alot of innings. If we get the upside of them, we've got 2 good picthers giving us alot of innings. That's a whole hell of alot better than relying on Rusch and is 9.0 ERA or Guzman and his 7.0 ERA. I'm fine with Marshall as a #5. Now we've got the depth where he TRUELY has to earn it. He has to beat out Miller, Prior, Hill, Marmol, and so on. Not be an emergancy back-up plan. I like our situation MUCH better than last year. I see the upside in these pitchers, and I hope for the best. I trust Piniella and Rothschild. I think alot of you will be plesantly suprised next year. But that's just me. Optomistic Cubs fan.

[jjgman21]

Exactly.

 

Marshall: 5.59 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .270 BAA, 77 K/59 BB, 20 HR

Marquis: 6.02 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .289 BAA, 96 K/75 BB, 35 HR

 

I'd much prefer looking at the totality of the body of work and at least an attempt to make a reasoned prediction of the future based thereon rather than unfairly plucking stats selectively to make the worst case scenerio appear to be the likely outcome. is that really too much to ask?

 

What are you talking about? I didn't pluck stats here - these are the stats I think are best to look at with pitchers (would rather use HR/9 and ERA+, but couldn't find the baseball-reference site in time).

 

what do you fail to understand about "totality of the body of work and at least an attempt to make a reasoned prediction?"