stop spending big $ on setup men, please

[frostwyrm]

Howry's been doing it for 2.5 years running now. I have no problem with his signing. Not EVERY reliever is unpredictable, at some point a reliever proves himself.

 

Just for the sake of making a point, let's accept that Howry was a good signing. Just by random chance if you sign 10 expensive FA relievers you are bound to get one who is actually worth the money. The sticking point is that there is no reliable way to tell which is the one. You might have to sign 7 or 8 overpriced salary sumps before you get to the right guy. Look at all the pricy relievers Hendry has gambled on before hitting paydirt with Howry. Even if Howry was the guy to get amongst the whole group, Hendry still would have been better off doing as Jocketty and not gambling on any expensive relievers. It's like drawing to an inside straight in poker. It's a fool's bet. You'll lose way more often than you win, but if you do it often enough, you will win at least once.

[Guest]

I think the overall point is valid in that it would be nice to see more of our relievers come from within.

 

Yes, but we're never going to get a pen of mostly homegrown kids as long as we keep drafting people with "teh awesome stuff" and hoping they develop control.

Why? You can teach mechanics, increased control, etc. You can't teach 98 mph fastballs and unhittable breaking balls

 

maybe someone can teach mechanics and increased control, but that someone doesn't work for the cubs

Ask Rich Hill who helped him.

 

good point. But seriously, it seems like Baseball America always loves the pitchers in the Cubs organization, but there's really not enough to show for how good they're supposed to be. BA tends to look at raw talent more than results, so in terms of physical ability, the Cubs are among the best at identifying it.

 

Because of injuries and inability to throw strikes, the physical skills too frequently don't translate to success at the major league level. I blame coaching throughout the organization for this - both in not teaching proper mechanics, and in not emphasizing the importance of throwing strikes.

Actually, the study I'm referencing is based on major league service time, so the Cubs have graduated pitchers who have pitched significantly more innings than any other org in the past 10 years. It's not based upon potential at all.

[TruffleShuffle]

Howry's been doing it for 2.5 years running now. I have no problem with his signing. Not EVERY reliever is unpredictable, at some point a reliever proves himself.

 

Just for the sake of making a point, let's accept that Howry was a good signing. Just by random chance if you sign 10 expensive FA relievers you are bound to get one who is actually worth the money. The sticking point is that there is no reliable way to tell which is the one. You might have to sign 7 or 8 overpriced salary sumps before you get to the right guy. Look at all the pricy relievers Hendry has gambled on before hitting paydirt with Howry. Even if Howry was the guy to get amongst the whole group, Hendry still would have been better off doing as Jocketty and not gambling on any expensive relievers. It's like drawing to an inside straight in poker. It's a fool's bet. You'll lose way more often than you win, but if you do it often enough, you will win at least once.

 

Your "point" is only valid if this statistic is valid, which it probably isn't. Yeah, if you dump a lot of money on an aging pitcher or a flash in the pan, it's a stupid move. But if you sign a guy who's only going into his late 20s or early 30s, and has had three good years going into his free agent year, he's a pretty good bet to keep pitching well.

 

And boy, I'm glad you're not the Cubs' GM. We'd have a salary about equal with the Pirates.

[frostwyrm]

Howry's been doing it for 2.5 years running now. I have no problem with his signing. Not EVERY reliever is unpredictable, at some point a reliever proves himself.

 

Just for the sake of making a point, let's accept that Howry was a good signing. Just by random chance if you sign 10 expensive FA relievers you are bound to get one who is actually worth the money. The sticking point is that there is no reliable way to tell which is the one. You might have to sign 7 or 8 overpriced salary sumps before you get to the right guy. Look at all the pricy relievers Hendry has gambled on before hitting paydirt with Howry. Even if Howry was the guy to get amongst the whole group, Hendry still would have been better off doing as Jocketty and not gambling on any expensive relievers. It's like drawing to an inside straight in poker. It's a fool's bet. You'll lose way more often than you win, but if you do it often enough, you will win at least once.

 

Your "point" is only valid if this statistic is valid, which it probably isn't. Yeah, if you dump a lot of money on an aging pitcher or a flash in the pan, it's a stupid move. But if you sign a guy who's only going into his late 20s or early 30s, and has had three good years going into his free agent year, he's a pretty good bet to keep pitching well.

 

And boy, I'm glad you're not the Cubs' GM. We'd have a salary about equal with the Pirates.

 

If you have a reliable method to determine which relievers merit fat multi-year contracts you ought to be a GM yourself, because you've solved a puzzle nobody else has been able to crack.

[TruffleShuffle]

If you have a reliable method to determine which relievers merit fat multi-year contracts you ought to be a GM yourself, because you've solved a puzzle nobody else has been able to crack.

 

what makes middle relievers unreliable from year to year, but closers, batters and starters are?

[CubinNY]

If you have a reliable method to determine which relievers merit fat multi-year contracts you ought to be a GM yourself, because you've solved a puzzle nobody else has been able to crack.

 

what makes middle relievers unreliable from year to year

 

Lack of talent.

 

Really I think it has a lot to do with discrete components. What I mean is that relivers work at most 1 or 2 innings per outing. Such a small performance sample is unduely influenced by luck, both bad and good.

[TruffleShuffle]

If you have a reliable method to determine which relievers merit fat multi-year contracts you ought to be a GM yourself, because you've solved a puzzle nobody else has been able to crack.

 

what makes middle relievers unreliable from year to year

 

Lack of talent.

 

Really I think it has a lot to do with discrete components. What I mean is that relivers work at most 1 or 2 innings per outing. Such a small performance sample is unduely influenced by luck, both bad and good.

 

I don't think so. In terms of ERA it is, but for looking at the rate at which a pitcher gets people out. OBP against, stuff like that.

 

I think it's more that there aren't a lot of consistently good middle relievers, and teams too often jump at the flash in the pan or the guy in his early to mid 30s who's right about to go downhill.

[CubinNY]

If you have a reliable method to determine which relievers merit fat multi-year contracts you ought to be a GM yourself, because you've solved a puzzle nobody else has been able to crack.

 

what makes middle relievers unreliable from year to year

 

Lack of talent.

 

Really I think it has a lot to do with discrete components. What I mean is that relivers work at most 1 or 2 innings per outing. Such a small performance sample is unduely influenced by luck, both bad and good.

 

I don't think so. In terms of ERA it is, but for looking at the rate at which a pitcher gets people out. OBP against, stuff like that.

 

I think it's more that there aren't a lot of consistently good middle relievers, and teams too often jump at the flash in the pan or the guy in his early to mid 30s who's right about to go downhill.

 

I think you have a good point. If I were going to judge a reliever I would look at secondary stats like WHIP.

 

I haven't given my "discrete component" theory much thought recently, but I think it is so hard to judge a reliever because we doen't yet have real good metrics.

 

Anyway, giving a 38 year old reliever who was comming off of high IP totals the last two years is a receipe for disaster. I'm look at you Mike Remmlinger.

[TruffleShuffle]

I haven't given my "discrete component" theory much thought recently, but I think it is so hard to judge a reliever because we doen't yet have real good metrics.

 

Anyway, giving a 38 year old reliever who was comming off of high IP totals the last two years is a receipe for disaster. I'm look at you Mike Remmlinger.

 

Yeah, that was bad. Didn't help that Dusty continually tried to use him as a LOOGY even though he was better against LH batters.

 

As far as consistently good middle relievers, I'm thinking of guys like Jeff Nelson, Mike Timlin, Scott Linebrink, Scott Shields, Juan Rincon. The latter four are still active. Timlin is about 75 now, but I'd feel confident that any of the next three will have another good season.

[abuck1220]

nice work, eyre.

 

this bullpen obviously just needs one more high-priced, middle-aged middle reliever coming off a career year.

[Guest]

nice work, eyre.

 

this bullpen obviously just needs one more high-priced, middle-aged middle reliever coming off a career year.

Hey, at least we're paying less than the Phillies will be for Brett Myers.

 

(no, I'm not twisting the knife, abuck!)

[abuck1220]

nice work, eyre.

 

this bullpen obviously just needs one more high-priced, middle-aged middle reliever coming off a career year.

Hey, at least we're paying less than the Phillies will be for Brett Myers.

 

(no, I'm not twisting the knife, abuck!)

 

he'll be back in the rotation in time for the fantasy postseason.

 

:D

[RichHillIsABeast]

Eyre is really sucking early on.

[KyHen]

I think maybe a good way to judge a reliever would be look over 2-3 year span, as opposed to just one year. Like has already been expressed, I believe that the success of a reliever is hard to truly determine, due to them being involved in small(er) sample sizes...

[CaliforniaRaisin]

nice work, eyre.

 

this bullpen obviously just needs one more high-priced, middle-aged middle reliever coming off a career year.

Hey, at least we're paying less than the Phillies will be for Brett Myers.

 

(no, I'm not twisting the knife, abuck!)

 

he'll be back in the rotation in time for the fantasy postseason.

 

:D

 

You hope.

[98navigator]

The defense let Eyre down; Izzy needed to make sure he got that third out instead of double clutching. Beyond that, Cox was smart to send a boat load of righties to the plate because he knew the Cubs' bullpen was short...

 

 

[broken record]Zambrano's fault for not pitching 7 innings[/broken record]

[Rob]

The defense let Eyre down; Izzy needed to make sure he got that third out instead of double clutching. Beyond that, Cox was smart to send a boat load of righties to the plate because he knew the Cubs' bullpen was short...

 

 

[broken record]Zambrano's fault for not pitching 7 innings[/broken record]

 

Bullpen wouldn't have been short if Hendry had exercised the good sense to bring up a guy like Marmol after Soriano went down and we had a 14 inning game yesterday.

[TruffleShuffle]

thanks for eyre, hendry.... another marvelous investment by our man jim

[frostwyrm]

The defense let Eyre down; Izzy needed to make sure he got that third out instead of double clutching. Beyond that, Cox was smart to send a boat load of righties to the plate because he knew the Cubs' bullpen was short...

 

 

[broken record]Zambrano's fault for not pitching 7 innings[/broken record]

 

Bullpen wouldn't have been short if Hendry had exercised the good sense to bring up a guy like Marmol after Soriano went down and we had a 14 inning game yesterday.

 

Bench was short too, as evidenced by Marquis pinch hitting down 2 runs in the 9th. The whole team is short.

[biittner77]

I think maybe a good way to judge a reliever would be look over 2-3 year span, as opposed to just one year. Like has already been expressed, I believe that the success of a reliever is hard to truly determine, due to them being involved in small(er) sample sizes...

 

I'm not sure it's a question of sample size so much as use. An effective middle reliever can and usually will make upwards of 75-80 appearances. That amount of pitching eventually catches up with most of them. So a 3 year split might not even tell when the decline will begin since historically relievers tend to fall hard and fast.

 

The solution is to never give big contracts to FA relievers.

[soapy]

The defense let Eyre down; Izzy needed to make sure he got that third out instead of double clutching. Beyond that, Cox was smart to send a boat load of righties to the plate because he knew the Cubs' bullpen was short...

 

 

our......he could have not walked two people. call me crazy.

[Chocolate Milk]

Eyre should have made that routine play to SS that would have ended the inning.

[rynefan]

Eyre's ERA is now 14.40. I don't see it improving, the way he's going right now.

[liekomgj4ck]

Eyre's ERA is now 14.40. I don't see it improving, the way he's going right now.

 

Oh yeah? Prior has a ERA of 0, beat that. Best pitcher in the league hands down! :P

[98navigator]

Eyre's ERA is now 14.40. I don't see it improving, the way he's going right now.

 

Oh yeah? Prior has a ERA of 0, beat that. Best pitcher in the league hands down! :P

 

The one problem is Prior isn't in this League. LOL, he's property of AAA Iowa. :P