Rotation

[sherwood921]

Call me crazy (and you will), but I think you've got to count on Prior as the #2 starter. The recovery period is over. Either he can pitch or he can't. If his arm is hurty, send him down or DFA. If not, run him out for 200 innings. If he's lost his control, demote or DFA. None of this #5 starter garbage. He's shown he's an Ace, but if his arm is shot you can't just make him a #5.

 

No way are we going to DFA Mark Prior. I don't understand why Prior either has to be amazing or a bust. Can't he be a good pitcher in the future? Just because he doesn't live up to your original expectations does not make him worthless.

 

And for some more blasphemy, is Wood ever going to start again? Has he lost interest in the role? Are the doctors saying his arm will fall off if he ever goes 9 innings? Again, if his arm is good he should pitch like he used to, if it's shot...to the scrap-heap! He's never going to embrace the role of middle relief, but does he want to make himself a closer? (serious question) That would be fine too, but if it's a lingering injury concern I'd start over with a fresh arm.

 

Actually he said he understands that he needs to try to pitch out of the pen this year because of his arm problems. Again, just becuase he doesn't live of up to original expectations does not make him worthless. I'd rather have Wood be a solid BP arm than nothing.

 

To summarize: These guys aren't marginal pitchers. If they're healthy but no longer great then they're flamed out so just cut your losses.

 

Again, if they're healthy but not great, they can still be very good. I'd rather have someone who could be great but is just very good than someone who we know is going to be marginal.

[Ivy Walls]

First thing there is little rotation status outside the first week. Rarely does the ace line up with another team's ace because the schedule is so unbalanced.

 

That said there are ace's and stoppers and there are pitchers who are inning burners.

 

That said the goal of a 5-man rotation first objective is to exceed 900 IP (out of 1450 or IP) or 60%, each percentage point above that mark usually equates to more wins above 90 and those below knock you under 90.

 

This is why a quality start is 6-IP or above.

 

Secondly, let us talk about Prior. If he is healthy he should be effective, how much stamina and how effective remains to be seen in the competitive arena. If the Cubs are going to compete for the WS with this roster construction, Prior needs to become an ace and stopper in '07, whether he starts before or after Zambrano. It would be ideal that he is separated by one other pitcher from Zambrano.

 

Thirdly, Marquis's '06 was an abberration, and was contrary to his relative talent/stuff. Was he tipping his pitches, maybe, tipping a change up is disasterous for it is a timing pitch, meaning competitive athletes can anticipate. If Rothschild was able to figure it out that is why there are comeback players of the year.

 

Fourth: Lilly and Marquis over the last two years are ranked 30 and 37th in each respective leagues so they are middle of the rotation pitchers. At their age they should be at the apex of their career. Hill: had 6 good weeks but still needs to develop one more solid pitch and he could be devastatitng, but he is still a young MLB pitcher, just like Zam was in '03.

 

Five: Those who never competed and prepared for a collegiate or professional athletic competition don't know John Crapper about what they are talking about.

 

Six: Miller is in the same role as Rusch last year. Marshall, Guzman, Marmol, Mateo, Ryu are AAA or AAAA pitchers right now. My guess is that Hendry is probably working a pretty big trade to finish revamping the OF and possibly the middle infield.

[CoolHandLuke]

Five: Those who never competed and prepared for a collegiate or professional athletic competition don't know John Crapper about what they are talking about.

 

 

:?

[Prior4CyYoung]

If Prior and Miller are healthy how viable would a 6 man rotation be? I know every team goes with the traditional 5 man rotation but to me it would be hard to leave out Prior or Miller from the rotation. If it was me I wouldnt have picked up Marquis because I think our other options are better but now that he has signed for like 6-7 mill hes gonna get a rotation spot.

[goonys evil twin]

If Prior and Miller are healthy how viable would a 6 man rotation be? I know every team goes with the traditional 5 man rotation but to me it would be hard to leave out Prior or Miller from the rotation. If it was me I wouldnt have picked up Marquis because I think our other options are better but now that he has signed for like 6-7 mill hes gonna get a rotation spot.

 

If they were healthy they should bump Marquis, the worst of the group, from the rotation. But that won't happen.

[Prior4CyYoung]

If Prior and Miller are healthy how viable would a 6 man rotation be? I know every team goes with the traditional 5 man rotation but to me it would be hard to leave out Prior or Miller from the rotation. If it was me I wouldnt have picked up Marquis because I think our other options are better but now that he has signed for like 6-7 mill hes gonna get a rotation spot.

 

If they were healthy they should bump Marquis, the worst of the group, from the rotation. But that won't happen.

 

exactly that would be the logical move but it wont happen so would a 6 man rotation throw off all the pitchers rythem and preparations to much to go with it?

[goonys evil twin]

If Prior and Miller are healthy how viable would a 6 man rotation be? I know every team goes with the traditional 5 man rotation but to me it would be hard to leave out Prior or Miller from the rotation. If it was me I wouldnt have picked up Marquis because I think our other options are better but now that he has signed for like 6-7 mill hes gonna get a rotation spot.

 

If they were healthy they should bump Marquis, the worst of the group, from the rotation. But that won't happen.

 

exactly that would be the logical move but it wont happen so would a 6 man rotation throw off all the pitchers rythem and preparations to much to go with it?

 

Oh, I should have added, yes, a 6 man rotation would be bad. I wouldn't want guys with control issues (pretty much all of them) changing their routines and risking further problems. Zambrano on 5 days rest doesn't excite me. If you did something crazy, like pair Hill with Miller and try to get 5 out of the starter and 4 out of the 2nd guy, then maybe you could. But I think that would be hard to get right.

[cheapseats]

 

exactly that would be the logical move but it wont happen so would a 6 man rotation throw off all the pitchers rythem and preparations to much to go with it?

 

I'd rather see a 4-man rotation than a 6-man rotation.

[Jerry Mumphrey]

How's this for non-traditional? Maybe they could do some sort of 4x2 man rotation with a strict pitch count of 90 for everybody.

 

Day 1 -- Zambrano/Marshall

Day 2 -- Lilly/Marquis

Day 3 -- Hill/Miller

Day 4 -- Prior/Rusch

 

Of course those back end spots would all be open for consideration, but it seems it would help save the arms and negate any L/R lineup stacking. Yes I know, some of their agents would get pissed about the stat-sheet.

[baseball7897]

 

exactly that would be the logical move but it wont happen so would a 6 man rotation throw off all the pitchers rythem and preparations to much to go with it?

 

I'd rather see a 4-man rotation than a 6-man rotation.

 

Why is that?

[Soul]

 

exactly that would be the logical move but it wont happen so would a 6 man rotation throw off all the pitchers rythem and preparations to much to go with it?

 

I'd rather see a 4-man rotation than a 6-man rotation.

 

Why is that?

 

Too hard to get your good SP's the appearances they need to lift the ballclub on their shoulders.

 

Also---many people believe SP's start to get rusty after too much time off. There's a school of thought that says the old way (4 man rotations) was actually better because it taught SP's to lay off their arms and learn to pitch, and it also made them do it more often so they got better at the "art" of pitching. Now guys take the extra day of rest and just try to destroy everyone without investing the energy into learning to hit spots, choose the correct pitch, etc. I'm not saying I totally buy it, but I accept it as a decent argument.

 

Really hard to put together 6 good pitchers, too...

[Jerry Mumphrey]

I wonder how much better a SP can be if given days to prepare for an appearance where he will just air it out over 4-5 innings. I think Brad Penny talked about that being a luxury after his impressive All-star appearance. I guess you could basically script a couple of pitchers to appear in each game in advance.

[samhainn77]

If Prior and Miller are healthy how viable would a 6 man rotation be? I know every team goes with the traditional 5 man rotation but to me it would be hard to leave out Prior or Miller from the rotation. If it was me I wouldnt have picked up Marquis because I think our other options are better but now that he has signed for like 6-7 mill hes gonna get a rotation spot.

 

If they were healthy they should bump Marquis, the worst of the group, from the rotation. But that won't happen.

 

exactly that would be the logical move but it wont happen so would a 6 man rotation throw off all the pitchers rythem and preparations to much to go with it?

 

Oh, I should have added, yes, a 6 man rotation would be bad. I wouldn't want guys with control issues (pretty much all of them) changing their routines and risking further problems. Zambrano on 5 days rest doesn't excite me. If you did something crazy, like pair Hill with Miller and try to get 5 out of the starter and 4 out of the 2nd guy, then maybe you could. But I think that would be hard to get right.

 

 

Has anyone even heard anything about Prior? I mean even with Woody you're hearing that he's going to be throwing from a mound soon. Prior just kind of disappeared. Do we even know if he's going to be throwing in ST?

[cheapseats]

How's this for non-traditional? Maybe they could do some sort of 4x2 man rotation with a strict pitch count of 90 for everybody.

 

Day 1 -- Zambrano/Marshall

Day 2 -- Lilly/Marquis

Day 3 -- Hill/Miller

Day 4 -- Prior/Rusch

 

Of course those back end spots would all be open for consideration, but it seems it would help save the arms and negate any L/R lineup stacking. Yes I know, some of their agents would get pissed about the stat-sheet.

 

I'm against using Rusch, but I really like the idea of tandem starters.

 

And I don't think agents would mind so much if it were sold correctly. Z would be throwing fewer pitches per game, obviously, but he would be getting more innings per year, giving him a chance to increase strikeout numbers and some other counting stats.

[CubinNY]

How's this for non-traditional? Maybe they could do some sort of 4x2 man rotation with a strict pitch count of 90 for everybody.

 

Day 1 -- Zambrano/Marshall

Day 2 -- Lilly/Marquis

Day 3 -- Hill/Miller

Day 4 -- Prior/Rusch

 

Of course those back end spots would all be open for consideration, but it seems it would help save the arms and negate any L/R lineup stacking. Yes I know, some of their agents would get pissed about the stat-sheet.

 

I'm against using Rusch, but I really like the idea of tandem starters.

 

And I don't think agents would mind so much if it were sold correctly. Z would be throwing fewer pitches per game, obviously, but he would be getting more innings per year, giving him a chance to increase strikeout numbers and some other counting stats.

 

I like the idea too. However, there are other costs as well, mostly unimportant in the grand scheme, No wins for the guy who pitched first/second so no Cy Youngs, a team would also have to probably carry more pitchers which might limit bench options.

 

There are probably a few more, but I'm not interested enough to continue.

[treebird]

How's this for non-traditional? Maybe they could do some sort of 4x2 man rotation with a strict pitch count of 90 for everybody.

 

Day 1 -- Zambrano/Marshall

Day 2 -- Lilly/Marquis

Day 3 -- Hill/Miller

Day 4 -- Prior/Rusch

 

Of course those back end spots would all be open for consideration, but it seems it would help save the arms and negate any L/R lineup stacking. Yes I know, some of their agents would get pissed about the stat-sheet.

 

I'm against using Rusch, but I really like the idea of tandem starters.

 

And I don't think agents would mind so much if it were sold correctly. Z would be throwing fewer pitches per game, obviously, but he would be getting more innings per year, giving him a chance to increase strikeout numbers and some other counting stats.

 

I like the idea too. However, there are other costs as well, mostly unimportant in the grand scheme, No wins for the guy who pitched first/second so no Cy Youngs, a team would also have to probably carry more pitchers which might limit bench options.

 

There are probably a few more, but I'm not interested enough to continue.

 

obviously, the solution is to show people that wins are a worthless stat that should not be considered when evaluating pitchers. unfortunately, our gm gets excited jason freaking marquis because he won more games than zito or something stupid like that.

[cheapseats]

 

I like the idea too. However, there are other costs as well, mostly unimportant in the grand scheme, No wins for the guy who pitched first/second so no Cy Youngs, a team would also have to probably carry more pitchers which might limit bench options.

 

Actually, using tandem starters would probably free up a bench spot. You'd have two guys ready to throw 90 pitches (ideally - with guys returning from injury you may want fewer than that), so you'd need maybe three bullpen guys, tops.

 

Also, history shows that a guy that starts on Sunday could throw an inning or two of relief on Tuesday instead of throwing a side session.

 

GM's and managers don't do such things not because of science but because of the scrutiny involved when one stands out.

[baseball7897]

 

exactly that would be the logical move but it wont happen so would a 6 man rotation throw off all the pitchers rythem and preparations to much to go with it?

 

I'd rather see a 4-man rotation than a 6-man rotation.

 

Why is that?

 

Too hard to get your good SP's the appearances they need to lift the ballclub on their shoulders.

 

Also---many people believe SP's start to get rusty after too much time off. There's a school of thought that says the old way (4 man rotations) was actually better because it taught SP's to lay off their arms and learn to pitch, and it also made them do it more often so they got better at the "art" of pitching. Now guys take the extra day of rest and just try to destroy everyone without investing the energy into learning to hit spots, choose the correct pitch, etc. I'm not saying I totally buy it, but I accept it as a decent argument.

 

Really hard to put together 6 good pitchers, too...

 

Pitcher's have their routines. The mechanical work, the conditioning and throwing phase and the mental game are part of that routine. Now, if you take that pitcher out of a routine he has been using for years, he is not going to have the same results in my opinion. The single most important thing when you look at a pitcher is his daily routines.

[CubinNY]

Pitcher's have their routines. The mechanical work, the conditioning and throwing phase and the mental game are part of that routine. Now, if you take that pitcher out of a routine he has been using for years, he is not going to have the same results in my opinion. The single most important thing when you look at a pitcher is his daily routines.

 

Where do you come up with this stuff?

[cheapseats]

 

Pitcher's have their routines. The mechanical work, the conditioning and throwing phase and the mental game are part of that routine. Now, if you take that pitcher out of a routine he has been using for years, he is not going to have the same results in my opinion. The single most important thing when you look at a pitcher is his daily routines.

 

Is that you, Jay Marriotti?

 

Did you know that rotations of any kind didn't exist prior to 1960? I wonder how Whitey Ford survived not knowing when his next start would be five days in advance. :twisted:

[baseball7897]

 

I like the idea too. However, there are other costs as well, mostly unimportant in the grand scheme, No wins for the guy who pitched first/second so no Cy Youngs, a team would also have to probably carry more pitchers which might limit bench options.

 

Actually, using tandem starters would probably free up a bench spot. You'd have two guys ready to throw 90 pitches (ideally - with guys returning from injury you may want fewer than that), so you'd need maybe three bullpen guys, tops.

 

Also, history shows that a guy that starts on Sunday could throw an inning or two of relief on Tuesday instead of throwing a side session.

GM's and managers don't do such things not because of science but because of the scrutiny involved when one stands out.

 

I am not a fan of that idea. The whole idea of a bullpen is for you to work on the things you didn't do well in the game. The majority of the SP's in the league don't throw a bullpen at maxium effort. For example; Tom Glavine will throw a bullpen for 10-12 minutes at 70% effort. During that time he will be working on his command. He will also work on backdooring his curveball, and he might also work on staying on top and behind his 2-seemer so it's more solid. At the end of his bullpen he will work on throwing specific pitches in various count situations.

[baseball7897]

Pitcher's have their routines. The mechanical work, the conditioning and throwing phase and the mental game are part of that routine. Now, if you take that pitcher out of a routine he has been using for years, he is not going to have the same results in my opinion. The single most important thing when you look at a pitcher is his daily routines.

 

Where do you come up with this stuff?

 

Someone by the name of Tom Glavine.

[cheapseats]

 

I like the idea too. However, there are other costs as well, mostly unimportant in the grand scheme, No wins for the guy who pitched first/second so no Cy Youngs, a team would also have to probably carry more pitchers which might limit bench options.

 

Actually, using tandem starters would probably free up a bench spot. You'd have two guys ready to throw 90 pitches (ideally - with guys returning from injury you may want fewer than that), so you'd need maybe three bullpen guys, tops.

 

Also, history shows that a guy that starts on Sunday could throw an inning or two of relief on Tuesday instead of throwing a side session.

GM's and managers don't do such things not because of science but because of the scrutiny involved when one stands out.

 

I am not a fan of that idea. The whole idea of a bullpen is for you to work on the things you didn't do well in the game. The majority of the SP's in the league don't throw a bullpen at maxium effort. For example; Tom Glavine will throw a bullpen for 10-12 minutes at 70% effort. During that time he will be working on his command. He will also work on backdooring his curveball, and he might also work on staying on top and behind his 2-seemer so it's more solid. At the end of his bullpen he will work on throwing specific pitches in various count situations.

 

To me this sounds like a defense of the status quo because it's the status quo, not because it's a better option.

[RichHillIsABeast]

Pitcher's have their routines. The mechanical work, the conditioning and throwing phase and the mental game are part of that routine. Now, if you take that pitcher out of a routine he has been using for years, he is not going to have the same results in my opinion. The single most important thing when you look at a pitcher is his daily routines.

 

Where do you come up with this stuff?

 

I agree with him. You can't just go to a 4 man rotation b/c it makes statistical sense. If we brought guys up through the minors using a 4 man rotation, the mental approach and physical approach (limiting pitch counts, getting your body adjusted to the different strain and healing processes) would be different. Expecting to take a crowd of guys raised on the 5 man rotation to go to a 4 man rotation and put up similar numbers and avoid injury is silly.

 

I'd be all for going to the 4 man rotation in the minors and raising the next gen of pitchers on it, but converting current ML pitchers to the 4 man is just asking for injuries.

Edited December 14, 2006 by RichHillIsABeast

[Flames24Rulz]

Yeah, how about we just stick with a 5 man rotation?