5th Starter Battle Down to Miller vs Guzman

[Danny82]

if it comes down to ease of roster management, Miller is the obvious choice. You also don't start the year with a disgruntled veteran in the pen

 

I don't like the idea of making roster decisions based on service time, and who is going to put up the biggest stink.

 

I agree with your premise, but we don't really know what the Cubs told Miller to entice him to sign again, either. If they told him he would be starting or traded, then he has every right to be upset if they send him to the bullpen.

 

Regardless, he should make the rotation because he wins the job with everything else being equal, not because of ancillary concerns.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

if it comes down to ease of roster management, Miller is the obvious choice. You also don't start the year with a disgruntled veteran in the pen

 

I don't like the idea of making roster decisions based on service time, and who is going to put up the biggest stink.

 

I agree with your premise, but we don't really know what the Cubs told Miller to entice him to sign again, either. If they told him he would be starting or traded, then he has every right to be upset if they send him to the bullpen.

 

Regardless, he should make the rotation because he wins the job with everything else being equal, not because of ancillary concerns.

 

It really doesn't matter what they told him. We paid him 1 million to let him use the Cubs to rehab last season. We got nothing in return from that. If he can pitch well enough to win the spot, great. If Guz is better, Guz it should be.

[Danny82]

if it comes down to ease of roster management, Miller is the obvious choice. You also don't start the year with a disgruntled veteran in the pen

 

I don't like the idea of making roster decisions based on service time, and who is going to put up the biggest stink.

 

I agree with your premise, but we don't really know what the Cubs told Miller to entice him to sign again, either. If they told him he would be starting or traded, then he has every right to be upset if they send him to the bullpen.

 

Regardless, he should make the rotation because he wins the job with everything else being equal, not because of ancillary concerns.

 

It really doesn't matter what they told him.

 

It doesn't? Let's not be too short-sighted here. Baseball players talk to each other, after all.

[goonys evil twin]

if it comes down to ease of roster management, Miller is the obvious choice. You also don't start the year with a disgruntled veteran in the pen

 

I don't like the idea of making roster decisions based on service time, and who is going to put up the biggest stink.

 

I agree with your premise, but we don't really know what the Cubs told Miller to entice him to sign again, either. If they told him he would be starting or traded, then he has every right to be upset if they send him to the bullpen.

 

Regardless, he should make the rotation because he wins the job with everything else being equal, not because of ancillary concerns.

 

It really doesn't matter what they told him.

 

It doesn't? Let's not be too short-sighted here.

 

In what way? Wade Miller is a washed up rag tag arm that wasn't getting much attention from anybody the past couple years. The Cubs paid him to rehab. They owe him nothing. They don't risk alienating future free agents by putting him in the bullpen if they feel that is what is best for the team. They didn't have to entice him to sign, they offered money, when most others weren't interested.

[CubColtPacer]

if it comes down to ease of roster management, Miller is the obvious choice. You also don't start the year with a disgruntled veteran in the pen

 

I don't like the idea of making roster decisions based on service time, and who is going to put up the biggest stink.

 

I agree with your premise, but we don't really know what the Cubs told Miller to entice him to sign again, either. If they told him he would be starting or traded, then he has every right to be upset if they send him to the bullpen.

 

Regardless, he should make the rotation because he wins the job with everything else being equal, not because of ancillary concerns.

 

It really doesn't matter what they told him.

 

It doesn't? Let's not be too short-sighted here.

 

In what way? Wade Miller is a washed up rag tag arm that wasn't getting much attention from anybody the past couple years. The Cubs paid him to rehab. They owe him nothing. They don't risk alienating future free agents by putting him in the bullpen if they feel that is what is best for the team. They didn't have to entice him to sign, they offered money, when most others weren't interested.

 

Last year, that is true. I'm not sure you can claim that this year because no other team even got a chance to show interest in him before he signed. I don't think it matters here though, because I doubt Wade was guaranteed a rotation spot, and so the Cubs can really do anything they want with him.

[Danny82]

double Edited March 14, 2007 by Danny82

[Danny82]

if it comes down to ease of roster management, Miller is the obvious choice. You also don't start the year with a disgruntled veteran in the pen

 

I don't like the idea of making roster decisions based on service time, and who is going to put up the biggest stink.

 

I agree with your premise, but we don't really know what the Cubs told Miller to entice him to sign again, either. If they told him he would be starting or traded, then he has every right to be upset if they send him to the bullpen.

 

Regardless, he should make the rotation because he wins the job with everything else being equal, not because of ancillary concerns.

 

It really doesn't matter what they told him.

 

It doesn't? Let's not be too short-sighted here.

 

In what way? Wade Miller is a washed up rag tag arm that wasn't getting much attention from anybody the past couple years. The Cubs paid him to rehab. They owe him nothing. They don't risk alienating future free agents by putting him in the bullpen if they feel that is what is best for the team. They didn't have to entice him to sign, they offered money, when most others weren't interested.

Fine, you are right. The Cubs can make as many empty-promises as they want in an effort to sign free agents and it will never bite them in the butt when they don't follow through with said promises. Got it.

 

That said, I merely set forth a realistic hypothetical situation that might give Miller a legitimate reason for sulking if he is sent to the bullpen. I've never said he was actually given such a promise. In fact, I've agreed all along that the best man should win the job. I don't see the point of the nitpicking.

[thedaymen]

The thing I don't get is why the Cubs are absolutely certain they need to get Marquis into the rotation...don't they remember last year?

[Peoriaman]

so if we have 6 good starters, we immediately trade one? Have we not learned anything about starpitchers the last few years?

[CubColtPacer]

so if we have 6 good starters, we immediately trade one? Have we not learned anything about starpitchers the last few years?

 

That's why if it's close, we should keep Miller-that way Guzman can be the insurance policy.

[USSoccer]

 

In what way? Wade Miller is a washed up rag tag arm that wasn't getting much attention from anybody the past couple years. The Cubs paid him to rehab. They owe him nothing. They don't risk alienating future free agents by putting him in the bullpen if they feel that is what is best for the team. They didn't have to entice him to sign, they offered money, when most others weren't interested.

Fine, you are right. The Cubs can make as many empty-promises as they want in an effort to sign free agents and it will never bite them in the butt when they don't follow through with said promises. Got it.

 

That said, I merely set forth a realistic hypothetical situation that might give Miller a legitimate reason for sulking if he is sent to the bullpen. I've never said he was actually given such a promise. In fact, I've agreed all along that the best man should win the job. I don't see the point of the nitpicking.

 

Free agents follow the money. No one will care what Wade Miller has to say about he organization if they stick him in long relief after paying him to rehab last season.

 

Seriously, if you're advocating that the team should put the objections of Wade Miller over the rest of the team, you're wrong. That's how you end up losing games, and being a perennial loser will do more to offset money than the feedback from a no name has been pitcher.

[Guest]

so if we have 6 good starters, we immediately trade one? Have we not learned anything about starpitchers the last few years?

If Guzman is clearly out pitching Miller at the end of camp, do you send Guzman down just so you can retain all six? Do you put Miller in the pen where he has stated he does not want to go? Or do you trade Miller to make room for Guzman?

 

If Miller wins the job, it's all easy.

[Electron Blue]

am I the only one who didn't realize Prior was so far behind?

[USSoccer]

so if we have 6 good starters, we immediately trade one? Have we not learned anything about starpitchers the last few years?

 

No, you stick Miller in the pen in long relief and expect him to act like a professional if Guzman continues to outperform him.

[Danny82]

 

In what way? Wade Miller is a washed up rag tag arm that wasn't getting much attention from anybody the past couple years. The Cubs paid him to rehab. They owe him nothing. They don't risk alienating future free agents by putting him in the bullpen if they feel that is what is best for the team. They didn't have to entice him to sign, they offered money, when most others weren't interested.

Fine, you are right. The Cubs can make as many empty-promises as they want in an effort to sign free agents and it will never bite them in the butt when they don't follow through with said promises. Got it.

 

That said, I merely set forth a realistic hypothetical situation that might give Miller a legitimate reason for sulking if he is sent to the bullpen. I've never said he was actually given such a promise. In fact, I've agreed all along that the best man should win the job. I don't see the point of the nitpicking.

 

Free agents follow the money. No one will care what Wade Miller has to say about he organization if they stick him in long relief after paying him to rehab last season.

 

Seriously, if you're advocating that the team should put the objections of Wade Miller over the rest of the team, you're wrong. That's how you end up losing games, and being a perennial loser will do more to offset money than the feedback from a no name has been pitcher.

 

Please see above.

[CubColtPacer]

The thing I don't get is why the Cubs are absolutely certain they need to get Marquis into the rotation...don't they remember last year?

 

They aren't going to pay him that much money and then not basically guarantee a rotation spot anyway. Besides, even if he had come into camp as simply one of the front-runners for one of the spots and not guaranteed, he already would have earned one of the spots with his ST performance so far, so it doesn't really matter now that the spot was his from the beginning.

[Guest]

am I the only one who didn't realize Prior was so far behind?

Have you not been watching the games? If Prior makes rapid progress, I think he's still got a chance. But it will have to be very rapid.

 

Lou said he's going to take his best pitchers north with him. I guess he meant it.

[USSoccer]

 

In what way? Wade Miller is a washed up rag tag arm that wasn't getting much attention from anybody the past couple years. The Cubs paid him to rehab. They owe him nothing. They don't risk alienating future free agents by putting him in the bullpen if they feel that is what is best for the team. They didn't have to entice him to sign, they offered money, when most others weren't interested.

Fine, you are right. The Cubs can make as many empty-promises as they want in an effort to sign free agents and it will never bite them in the butt when they don't follow through with said promises. Got it.

 

That said, I merely set forth a realistic hypothetical situation that might give Miller a legitimate reason for sulking if he is sent to the bullpen. I've never said he was actually given such a promise. In fact, I've agreed all along that the best man should win the job. I don't see the point of the nitpicking.

 

Free agents follow the money. No one will care what Wade Miller has to say about he organization if they stick him in long relief after paying him to rehab last season.

 

Seriously, if you're advocating that the team should put the objections of Wade Miller over the rest of the team, you're wrong. That's how you end up losing games, and being a perennial loser will do more to offset money than the feedback from a no name has been pitcher.

 

Please see above.

 

And see the rest of my post where I refute the notion that ticking off Wade Miller is somehow going to harm the club down the road.

[Bruce Miles]

If all things are equal, the club would probably choose Miller over Guzman, who has minor-league options. If you read Larry Rothschild's quotes the other day, he correctly noted that Guzman pitched for the first time in three years last year. He still needs to show he can throw strikes. He also needs to prove he can maintain his arm strength into a second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth inning.

The competition is good, and maybe they can work a trade for Miller if Guzman clearly is the better choice. But my guess is things will be pretty close to equal, and the Cubs will bide their time.

[UK1679666180]

If all things are equal, the club would probably choose Miller over Guzman, who has minor-league options. If you read Larry Rothschild's quotes the other day, he correctly noted that Guzman pitched for the first time in three years last year. He still needs to show he can throw strikes. He also needs to prove he can maintain his arm strength into a second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth inning.

The competition is good, and maybe they can work a trade for Miller if Guzman clearly is the better choice. But my guess is things will be pretty close to equal, and the Cubs will bide their time.

 

Was Wade Miller able to maintain his velocity beyond the 1st two innings? He was making minor league rehab starts last year where he would touch 87-89 and a maybe flirt with 90 once or twice and by the 3rd end up around 84-85.

[Danny82]

 

In what way? Wade Miller is a washed up rag tag arm that wasn't getting much attention from anybody the past couple years. The Cubs paid him to rehab. They owe him nothing. They don't risk alienating future free agents by putting him in the bullpen if they feel that is what is best for the team. They didn't have to entice him to sign, they offered money, when most others weren't interested.

Fine, you are right. The Cubs can make as many empty-promises as they want in an effort to sign free agents and it will never bite them in the butt when they don't follow through with said promises. Got it.

 

That said, I merely set forth a realistic hypothetical situation that might give Miller a legitimate reason for sulking if he is sent to the bullpen. I've never said he was actually given such a promise. In fact, I've agreed all along that the best man should win the job. I don't see the point of the nitpicking.

 

Free agents follow the money. No one will care what Wade Miller has to say about he organization if they stick him in long relief after paying him to rehab last season.

 

Seriously, if you're advocating that the team should put the objections of Wade Miller over the rest of the team, you're wrong. That's how you end up losing games, and being a perennial loser will do more to offset money than the feedback from a no name has been pitcher.

 

Please see above.

 

And see the rest of my post where I refute the notion that ticking off Wade Miller is somehow going to harm the club down the road.

I was responding to your statement that I was advocating the team putting the objections of Wade Miller over the rest of the team. I say it again, may the best man win.

 

If it's not Miller, I'm simply saying that he should be traded if he had an agreement with Hendry regarding starting or being traded. I do believe in maintaining the franchise's integrity with these sorts of arrangements because I see it as only helping the team down the road with other acquisitions that the Cubs are perceived in the industry as keeping their word, no matter what the talent level of the promisee.

 

You didn't refute anything. You stated your opinion. Which I happen to disagree with. That's probably all that can really be said.

Edited March 14, 2007 by Danny82

[Bruce Miles]

If all things are equal, the club would probably choose Miller over Guzman, who has minor-league options. If you read Larry Rothschild's quotes the other day, he correctly noted that Guzman pitched for the first time in three years last year. He still needs to show he can throw strikes. He also needs to prove he can maintain his arm strength into a second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth inning.

The competition is good, and maybe they can work a trade for Miller if Guzman clearly is the better choice. But my guess is things will be pretty close to equal, and the Cubs will bide their time.

 

Was Wade Miller able to maintain his velocity beyond the 1st two innings? He was making minor league rehab starts last year where he would touch 87-89 and a maybe flirt with 90 once or twice and by the 3rd end up around 84-85.

 

It appeared he was. This also falls under the category of "all things being equal." In fact, even if Miller's velocity does drop during games, the Cubs will figure that he'll "know how to pitch" without it. I'm not saying that's right or wrong; it's just what they'll figure. And don't discount the minor-league option that Guzman has.

[moorecg]

Any chance they send Guzman down...and if he pitches well for a couple weeks and Marquis happens to struggle they bring Guzman back up, move Miller to long relief and tell Miller that if he can show he can out pitch Marquis the starting spot is is...if not he's the long reliever?

 

(this assumes Cotts is, and remains worthless)

[Twiggy]

I'd hope that Guzman would be the fifth but I can see them giving it to Miller just to get his trade value up. Time will tell still plenty of time left in ST.

[Bruce Miles]

Any chance they send Guzman down...and if he pitches well for a couple weeks and Marquis happens to struggle they bring Guzman back up, move Miller to long relief and tell Miller that if he can show he can out pitch Marquis the starting spot is is...if not he's the long reliever?

 

(this assumes Cotts is, and remains worthless)

 

For $21 million, Marquis is not going to be a long reliever. Even if he does struggle (he's pitched well down here), they're going to stick with him a long time.