Cubs Sign Marquis to 3/21

[cbbryan]

All I'll add to what I've already said is:

 

 

THANK GOD IT WASN'T 5 YEARS AND 55 MILLION!!!!!!!!!

[Balsa]

Marquis doesn't have a good K/BB ratio, which is mainly why his ERA suffers so much. At least he's young though, and a groundball pitcher.

He gives up far too many home runs to be considered an effective groundball pitcher, and those home runs are the bane of his existence even more so than his middling K/BB ratio.

Hmm...Any encouraging stats? How much did/will Park Factors play in this?

 

In response to the Groundball issue, I think it is the walks and lack of strikeouts that really hurt. If he let less people on base, those HRs wouldn't quite hurt so much. But then, I guess he does give up more than his share of taters.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

 

ah, decontextualize the flow of the discussion. getting more honsest in debate by the minute there aren't you Raisen. it's all there to be seen what the discussion was about and what tactics were used to "win."

 

The discussion went like this:

 

Why give this much money to marquis when we have cheap guys who could pitch as well as him?

 

I need proof that they will pitch as well as him!

 

Marshall has already done it.

 

 

YOU CANT USE LAST YEARS STATS TO PROVE MARSHALL WILL PITCH BETTER THAN MARQUIS NEXT YEAR!

 

 

 

 

the problem is that nobody said marshall will pitch better than marquis last year. Somebody said that he could and somebody else responded by saying that they needed to show evidence that suggests that he will. The only problem is why does the original poster need to show evidence to proove something that he never said? The proof that the original poster needed to show was that marshall could indeed pitch better than marquis and that proof is in the 2006 statistics.

 

that's my point about using selective stats. I could say that Soriano is going to put up .350/.560 next year. will you buy that Jon? you Raisen? he did it just last year.

 

But nobody was making any predictions in this discussion.

 

let's go back. the poster said

 

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

 

now to me that says make a case, not throw out a selective stat to show it is possible. so you are right, noone did make a prediction, but one poster requested a critic of the signing and advocate of a youngster over the signed player give a prediction. that is not what he got. he got a stat line from a single season as a proxy for the argument. that's as lame as it gets.

 

Seems like you've altered what really happened.

 

The stat line was used to point out that Marshall outperformed Marquis last season so it's possible he CAN do it again.

 

I think just the opposite. that you are trying to change it into what you say here, when it's pretty clear that is not the case.

 

edit - what makes it so clear is his use of the word "will" instead of "might, can, possibly," etc. which is necessary for the the discussion to have said what you claim it said.

 

I am trying to change nothing, this is what happened. Note that Disgrunlted used the word CAN. I don't know how you can think it's the opposite of what's actually on there.

 

It seems really strange that you're the only one who doesn't seem to get what I said or meant. My post was meant to show the stats behind coolhandluke84 saying Marshall outperformed Marquis last season.

 

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

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Jjgman21, you've said I've been dishonest 3 times now. Care to tell me what I've done that's dishonest, or are you just going to say negative things about me?

[Roast]

Oh my lord, can we PLEASE start cutting out some of those HUGE quotes. That last post was outrageous, Raisin.

[b_wiggy_66]

Its quite sad but this thread has gotten to the point that it should just be deleted

[TruffleShuffle]

SERENITY NOW!

 

weren't you gone until next year?

 

j/k

 

I'm suspending judgement until the contract details become official. But if they're confirmed at 3/$28M, then I've already said my goodbyes :D

[Balsa]

Oh my lord, can we PLEASE start cutting out some of those HUGE quotes. That last post was outrageous, Raisin.

QFT, just use the latest quote people.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

SERENITY NOW!

 

weren't you gone until next year?

 

j/k

 

I'm suspending judgement until the contract details become official. But if they're confirmed at 3/$28M, then I've already said my goodbyes :D

 

I edited the thread title so you can at least stay for a few more hours. I tend to think it's 3/$21 M with incentives that can make it 3/$ 28 M.

[jjgman21]

Raisin-

 

here's the problem with pointing to what Disgruntled said....Luke was responding to BW, so what Disgruntled said was essentially irrelevant. he asked for an argument that Marshal WILL outperform Marquis. my responding to you was essentially because you just backed Luke up, instead of doing what you would have done in other contexts, point out one year does not mean one player will or will not outperform another.

 

why you and other fail to see this is beyond me. it is quite obvious that is how the conversation went. its all there in black and white to see. look at BW's sentance before the part I bolded. are you really missing the shift he made in the debate here? seriously, is it not blatantly obvious that BW was calling for an argument that goes beyond just a bald statement of what can (and by implication will) happen and a request for a discussion of what will happen?

Edited December 10, 2006 by jjgman21

[FergieJ31]

But then, I guess he does give up more than his share of taters.

 

Yeah I can easily imagine Pujols and Rolen chuckling right about now, wherever they are, knowing they'll get plenty of ABs against Marquis. Those two want revenge after the whiplash brought on by Marquis' gopher balls last year.

[UK1679666180]

 

I think last year was a good step because it should limit the number of adjustments he's going to have to make to the major leagues once he's healthy again. He certainly hasn't made the complete adjustment, but even a half season in the big leagues where he's also getting acclimated to pitching healthy again has to help him down the road.

 

He had a taste of it, it was such a small sample being combined with getting back to 100%, I question how much it will help him.

 

At this stage, if he has an option left (I don't follow options too much anymore), I think he should start at Iowa (unless he does that well in AZ, it forces their hands). I expect him to do very well in ST. He'll be 100% and most likely he'll face the second tier guys and do quite well.

[A New Era]

SERENITY NOW!

 

weren't you gone until next year?

 

j/k

 

I'm suspending judgement until the contract details become official. But if they're confirmed at 3/$28M, then I've already said my goodbyes :D

 

Will you be back when we win the World Series?

[A New Era]

Oh my lord, can we PLEASE start cutting out some of those HUGE quotes. That last post was outrageous, Raisin.

QFT, just use the latest quote people.

 

I think 2-3, 4 MAX. Unless 1 of the 4 is more than 3 lines long. 4-6 lines quote MAX!! I think this should actually be put into the NSBB guidelines and rules.

[TruffleShuffle]

SERENITY NOW!

 

weren't you gone until next year?

 

j/k

 

I'm suspending judgement until the contract details become official. But if they're confirmed at 3/$28M, then I've already said my goodbyes :D

 

Will you be back when we win the World Series?

 

well I'll be back in January, so yeah, I think I'll make it back by then. But I expect to be underground in a wooden box by the time the Cubs win the World Series.

[A New Era]

SERENITY NOW!

 

weren't you gone until next year?

 

j/k

 

I'm suspending judgement until the contract details become official. But if they're confirmed at 3/$28M, then I've already said my goodbyes :D

 

Will you be back when we win the World Series?

 

well I'll be back in January, so yeah, I think I'll make it back by then. But I expect to be underground in a wooden box by the time the Cubs win the World Series.

 

Oh? Do you have something terminally wrong with you? (drum roll ready)

[Illini Iceman]

Seems to me that the consensus is that Marquis will most likely be better next year than any other option we have in house. Based on that I am glad Hendry signed him. If Marshall, Marmol, etc start lighting it up and in future years give the team a better chance to win then the Cubs will have no problem moving Marquis, Lilly, etc to make room. Even if the Cubs eat half the salary it will be a net gain. I have been hearing the song and dance about waiting a year or two on our prospects and not "blocking" them for my whole life. The Cubs need to try to get the best players they can to win NEXT year. They should keep doing that every year until they actually do win it all.

[jjgman21]

Jjgman21, you've said I've been dishonest 3 times now. Care to tell me what I've done that's dishonest, or are you just going to say negative things about me?

 

I don't know that I've directly called you dishonest at all. I think I did call one of your arguments dishonest, and I've made a couple of comments about dishonest arguments in general. I don't remember the exact words I used, but I can imagine that it might have come off as me accusing you as being a lier, as oppsed to making a dishonest argument, so I do apologize for not choosing my words better.

 

to give meaning to what I just said, the difference between being dishones and making a dishonest argument is the difference between lieing and spinning/framing/hidden agenda/parsing and argument. Stalinist journalis v. FoxNews as a metaphor. now I suppose this argument you are making about what the prior discussion was about might be an hosest argument, but for your sake I hope it is not.

 

now you are a mod and I know your first responsability is to enforce the code of conduct, but I think you should appreciate what I have been trying to say and what this has all been about. it is about not being FoxNews, but rather a source for meaningful even if vigorous and heated debate designed to get at the truth of the subject at hand.

[Guest]

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.

That's not a very fair comparison to make because it leaves out one very important item - IP. You simply cannot count on Sean Marshall to hold down a rotation spot for a year when he has yet to complete a season without significant DL time.

 

Now, you could make an argument that the pitcher who threw less innings at the above quality level was better, but that's kinda beside the point. :D

[UK1679666180]

Seems to me that the consensus is that Marquis will most likely be better next year than any other option we have in house. Based on that I am glad Hendry signed him. If Marshall, Marmol, etc start lighting it up and in future years give the team a better chance to win then the Cubs will have no problem moving Marquis, Lilly, etc to make room. Even if the Cubs eat half the salary it will be a net gain. I have been hearing the song and dance about waiting a year or two on our prospects and not "blocking" them for my whole life. The Cubs need to try to get the best players they can to win NEXT year. They should keep doing that every year until they actually do win it all.

 

It doesn't work like that, though. If you allocate so much towards one area, you're taking away some from another.

 

If you can tell me that Marquis' salary could not have been invested into another of need, then I think that has validity. But, it becomes a question does the probable production difference beween Marquis and whomever outweigh the potential improvement of another area that could've been gained thru monetary spending that can't be accomplished b/c of Marquis' salary.

 

The Cubs have to plan for areas that will hopefully be taken over by young, cheap, potentially higher ceiling prospects compared to established veterans that might bring some improvement but nothing that will like sway the outcome of a season.

 

I don't believe that having Marquis over Guzman, Marshall, or whomever will factor much into the Cubs getting or not getting into the players. At the same token, the freed salary might not matter depending on it used.

[Soul]

Seems to me that the consensus is that Marquis will most likely be better next year than any other option we have in house. Based on that I am glad Hendry signed him. If Marshall, Marmol, etc start lighting it up and in future years give the team a better chance to win then the Cubs will have no problem moving Marquis, Lilly, etc to make room. Even if the Cubs eat half the salary it will be a net gain. I have been hearing the song and dance about waiting a year or two on our prospects and not "blocking" them for my whole life. The Cubs need to try to get the best players they can to win NEXT year. They should keep doing that every year until they actually do win it all.

 

It doesn't work like that, though. If you allocate so much towards one area, you're taking away some from another.

 

If you can tell me that Marquis' salary could not have been invested into another of need, then I think that has validity. But, it becomes a question does the probable production difference beween Marquis and whomever outweigh the potential improvement of another area that could've been gained thru monetary spending that can't be accomplished b/c of Marquis' salary.

 

The Cubs have to plan for areas that will hopefully be taken over by young, cheap, potentially higher ceiling prospects compared to established veterans that might bring some improvement but nothing that will like sway the outcome of a season.

 

I don't believe that having Marquis over Guzman, Marshall, or whomever will factor much into the Cubs getting or not getting into the players. At the same token, the freed salary might not matter depending on it used.

 

Or whether the Cubs have thrown all notions of having a budget to the wind, which it is starting to look like they have.

[Guest]

What's interesting to me is that in 2 years, when we are still in the middle of these overpriced contracts, we could have an entire staff worth of young pitchers who are being blocked that could produce well above these guys. Veal, Gallagher, Pawelek, etc...

As a rough rule, count on 1 in 4 pitching prospects in A ball making it to the majors without getting injured or simply losing the edge on their stuff.

 

And that might be generous.

[frostwyrm]

If we had a competent GM one of Marquis/Lilly would be replaced with Ricky Nolasco.

[Mizzou]

Something that you won't find in the stat books is Marquis' likely desire to stick it to the Cardinals. After taking two huge ones for the team, and then being left off the postseason roster, I'd imagine the two sides didn't part on good terms.

[Guest]

I was travelling all day. Cliff notes on this thread, please.

jjg is trying to politely argue the merits of the young pitchers vs. Marquis with the Jon and Raisin (tough job just to keep up with those two!)

 

The majority of people feel it was an awful deal and have expressed themselves to that effect in various manners.

 

Much hyperbole has been used to describe how bad Marquis is.

 

Some people have come out in support of the signing as being something the Cubs didn't have much choice about and there really weren't that many other dependable (from a health perspective) starters on the market.

 

I think that's mostly it.