Miller will be skipped

[USSoccer]

if we're only going can a guy for one start, why even have him on the team in the first place?

 

If I had been the GM, he wouldn't have been on the team in this capacity.

 

well okay, except he is on the team. Now, the Cubs didn't hand him the job - they had an open competition between Prior, Miller and Guzman. Miller pitched better than Prior and Guzman. Which begs the question, why have a competition for the 5th spot in the rotation if you're not going to give the winner a fair shot in the regular season?

 

Eh? Guzman looked to have better stuff in ST than Miller & Prior.

 

Miller: 3.64 ERA, 17.1 IP, 22 H, 4 BB, 16 K

Guzman: 5.79 ERA, 13.2 IP, 18 H, 1 BB, 7 K

 

 

They were both hittable, but Miller struck guys out at a better rate. "Stuff" is great but isn't worth a whole lot if you don't know how to locate it.

 

And K rates are great against spring training lineups with guys in spring training mentalities, but if you can't miss bats and be able to throw hard to compensate for mistakes, you're going to get lit up like Miller did in Milwaukee.

[TruffleShuffle]

if we're only going can a guy for one start, why even have him on the team in the first place?

 

If I had been the GM, he wouldn't have been on the team in this capacity.

 

well okay, except he is on the team. Now, the Cubs didn't hand him the job - they had an open competition between Prior, Miller and Guzman. Miller pitched better than Prior and Guzman. Which begs the question, why have a competition for the 5th spot in the rotation if you're not going to give the winner a fair shot in the regular season?

 

Eh? Guzman looked to have better stuff in ST than Miller & Prior.

 

But good stuff is not the only measurement of a pitcher. Miller produced better results in the eyes of the Cubs. That's why he won the job.

 

Relying on results in spring training games is a stupid and ignorant way of constructing a baseball team.

 

Okay, well let's go on Guzman's spectacular 7.39 ERA and 1.88 WHIP in the majors last year. And oh by the way, I think his next healthy season will be his first one.

[papabear58]

if we're only going can a guy for one start, why even have him on the team in the first place?

 

If I had been the GM, he wouldn't have been on the team in this capacity.

 

well okay, except he is on the team. Now, the Cubs didn't hand him the job - they had an open competition between Prior, Miller and Guzman. Miller pitched better than Prior and Guzman. Which begs the question, why have a competition for the 5th spot in the rotation if you're not going to give the winner a fair shot in the regular season?

 

Eh? Guzman looked to have better stuff in ST than Miller & Prior.

 

But good stuff is not the only measurement of a pitcher. Miller produced better results in the eyes of the Cubs. That's why he won the job.

 

Relying on results in spring training games is a stupid and ignorant way of constructing a baseball team.

 

No, open competition is the best way to hand out jobs. Everyone has an equal chance and you see who can step up and deliver. It was a simple competition facing the same type of competition. One person produced better results.

[TruffleShuffle]

And K rates are great against spring training lineups with guys in spring training mentalities, but if you can't miss bats and be able to throw hard to compensate for mistakes, you're going to get lit up like Miller did in Milwaukee.

 

Again, Guzman hasn't proven he can do this either. And all the stuff in the world doesn't get guys out... go ask Juan Cruz if you don't believe me.

[Soul]

if we're only going can a guy for one start, why even have him on the team in the first place?

 

If I had been the GM, he wouldn't have been on the team in this capacity.

 

well okay, except he is on the team. Now, the Cubs didn't hand him the job - they had an open competition between Prior, Miller and Guzman. Miller pitched better than Prior and Guzman. Which begs the question, why have a competition for the 5th spot in the rotation if you're not going to give the winner a fair shot in the regular season?

 

Eh? Guzman looked to have better stuff in ST than Miller & Prior.

 

Miller: 3.64 ERA, 17.1 IP, 22 H, 4 BB, 16 K

Guzman: 5.79 ERA, 13.2 IP, 18 H, 1 BB, 7 K

 

 

They were both hittable, but Miller struck guys out at a better rate. "Stuff" is great but isn't worth a whole lot if you don't know how to locate it.

 

It's misguided to allow ST results to guide the endgame though. Stuff counts for more in ST than it should in the regular season.

 

I'd have preferred Guzman because I believe he's the future......and Miller isn't. Regardless of Miller's results in ST it was clear to me he would struggle in the regular season based on the fact that he's a former power pitcher who now struggles to hit 88 on the gun. Prior's not ready, period. That leaves Guzman.

[papabear58]

And K rates are great against spring training lineups with guys in spring training mentalities, but if you can't miss bats and be able to throw hard to compensate for mistakes, you're going to get lit up like Miller did in Milwaukee.

 

Again, Guzman hasn't proven he can do this either. And all the stuff in the world doesn't get guys out... go ask Juan Cruz if you don't believe me.

 

=D>

[USSoccer]

if we're only going can a guy for one start, why even have him on the team in the first place?

 

If I had been the GM, he wouldn't have been on the team in this capacity.

 

well okay, except he is on the team. Now, the Cubs didn't hand him the job - they had an open competition between Prior, Miller and Guzman. Miller pitched better than Prior and Guzman. Which begs the question, why have a competition for the 5th spot in the rotation if you're not going to give the winner a fair shot in the regular season?

 

Eh? Guzman looked to have better stuff in ST than Miller & Prior.

 

But good stuff is not the only measurement of a pitcher. Miller produced better results in the eyes of the Cubs. That's why he won the job.

 

Relying on results in spring training games is a stupid and ignorant way of constructing a baseball team.

 

No, open competition is the best way to hand out jobs. Everyone has an equal chance and you see who can step up and deliver. It was a simple competition facing the same type of competition. One person produced better results.

 

And again, basing your roster on spring training outcomes and not talent and ability is a stupid way of constructing your baseball team.

 

Even if Miller had pitched 6 innings of 3 run baseball Sunday, it wouldn't change the fact that he's not going to have sustained success locating his pitches like he still throws hard, and having no movement. It's not the outcome, but the actual act that's concerning. I'd rather have the guy who can miss bats and throw hard and deal with the growing pains knowing he's got much more ability and long term value, that middle about with the veteran security blanket pitching who's never going to be able to come close to his former ability, and who's unlikely to be better than league average.

[papabear58]

if we're only going can a guy for one start, why even have him on the team in the first place?

 

If I had been the GM, he wouldn't have been on the team in this capacity.

 

well okay, except he is on the team. Now, the Cubs didn't hand him the job - they had an open competition between Prior, Miller and Guzman. Miller pitched better than Prior and Guzman. Which begs the question, why have a competition for the 5th spot in the rotation if you're not going to give the winner a fair shot in the regular season?

 

Eh? Guzman looked to have better stuff in ST than Miller & Prior.

 

Miller: 3.64 ERA, 17.1 IP, 22 H, 4 BB, 16 K

Guzman: 5.79 ERA, 13.2 IP, 18 H, 1 BB, 7 K

 

 

They were both hittable, but Miller struck guys out at a better rate. "Stuff" is great but isn't worth a whole lot if you don't know how to locate it.

 

It's misguided to allow ST results to guide the endgame though. Stuff counts for more in ST than it should in the regular season.

 

I'd have preferred Guzman because I believe he's the future......and Miller isn't. Regardless of Miller's results in ST it was clear to me he would struggle in the regular season based on the fact that he's a former power pitcher who now struggles to hit 88 on the gun. Prior's not ready, period. That leaves Guzman.

 

Who based on a deliverd comparason, would do just as good, if not worse then Miller. That might not be the case, but if it is, well, see yesterdays string on rotating pitchers from the minors

[Soul]

And K rates are great against spring training lineups with guys in spring training mentalities, but if you can't miss bats and be able to throw hard to compensate for mistakes, you're going to get lit up like Miller did in Milwaukee.

 

Again, Guzman hasn't proven he can do this either. And all the stuff in the world doesn't get guys out... go ask Juan Cruz if you don't believe me.

 

=D>

 

The question is, shall we trot out a veteran in the #5 spot who will get lit up and then be run out of the league? Or should we get a young gun with some upside the experience to find out if he has a future?

 

I'll go the latter, all day and all night. The Cubs went with Miller instead. I'm not going to cry about it, but I strongly suspect Guzman will be that #5 fairly soon anyway. If that's the case, then right now we're just burning starts for little reason.

[E.J.]

if we're only going can a guy for one start, why even have him on the team in the first place?

 

If I had been the GM, he wouldn't have been on the team in this capacity.

 

well okay, except he is on the team. Now, the Cubs didn't hand him the job - they had an open competition between Prior, Miller and Guzman. Miller pitched better than Prior and Guzman. Which begs the question, why have a competition for the 5th spot in the rotation if you're not going to give the winner a fair shot in the regular season?

 

Prior isn't ready. He shouldn't be in the 5th spot in the rotation. Guzman has much better stuff than Miller. Are we really going to go by the 20 innings they threw in spring training? Talk about a huge sample size there.

 

The truth of the matter is Miller isn't the same pitcher he used to be. He's topping out at 87mph and has absolutely no movement on his fastball. To make things worse, he actually struggles to command that fastball on occasion. How many pitchers are successful throwing in the mid-80's these days? Not too many.

[USSoccer]

And K rates are great against spring training lineups with guys in spring training mentalities, but if you can't miss bats and be able to throw hard to compensate for mistakes, you're going to get lit up like Miller did in Milwaukee.

 

Again, Guzman hasn't proven he can do this either. And all the stuff in the world doesn't get guys out... go ask Juan Cruz if you don't believe me.

 

So if Guzman hasn't proven he can harness his stuff, and Miller hasn't proven he can adjust his pitching style post injury, why start Miller over the guy with more talent and upside? Miller's not going to be great. Guzman might.

[papabear58]

if we're only going can a guy for one start, why even have him on the team in the first place?

 

If I had been the GM, he wouldn't have been on the team in this capacity.

 

well okay, except he is on the team. Now, the Cubs didn't hand him the job - they had an open competition between Prior, Miller and Guzman. Miller pitched better than Prior and Guzman. Which begs the question, why have a competition for the 5th spot in the rotation if you're not going to give the winner a fair shot in the regular season?

 

Eh? Guzman looked to have better stuff in ST than Miller & Prior.

 

But good stuff is not the only measurement of a pitcher. Miller produced better results in the eyes of the Cubs. That's why he won the job.

 

Relying on results in spring training games is a stupid and ignorant way of constructing a baseball team.

 

No, open competition is the best way to hand out jobs. Everyone has an equal chance and you see who can step up and deliver. It was a simple competition facing the same type of competition. One person produced better results.

 

And again, basing your roster on spring training outcomes and not talent and ability is a stupid way of constructing your baseball team.

 

Even if Miller had pitched 6 innings of 3 run baseball Sunday, it wouldn't change the fact that he's not going to have sustained success locating his pitches like he still throws hard, and having no movement. It's not the outcome, but the actual act that's concerning. I'd rather have the guy who can miss bats and throw hard and deal with the growing pains knowing he's got much more ability and long term value, that middle about with the veteran security blanket pitching who's never going to be able to come close to his former ability, and who's unlikely to be better than league average.

 

And you are assuming that Guzman will improve and stay healthy.

[TruffleShuffle]

I'd have preferred Guzman because I believe he's the future......and Miller isn't. Regardless of Miller's results in ST it was clear to me he would struggle in the regular season based on the fact that he's a former power pitcher who now struggles to hit 88 on the gun. Prior's not ready, period. That leaves Guzman.

 

who pitched like crap last year. If we don't sign Miller, then we're going into the season with our fifth starter being:

 

a) Mark Prior, who can't stay healthy and when he was healthy last year, he got hammered... or...

 

(b) Angel Guzman, who can't stay healthy and was really, really bad for the Cubs last year.

 

 

I'd rather have more options, even if it turns out that Miller doesn't have what it takes to get big league hitters out.

[papabear58]

I'd have preferred Guzman because I believe he's the future......and Miller isn't. Regardless of Miller's results in ST it was clear to me he would struggle in the regular season based on the fact that he's a former power pitcher who now struggles to hit 88 on the gun. Prior's not ready, period. That leaves Guzman.

 

who pitched like crap last year. If we don't sign Miller, then we're going into the season with our fifth starter being:

 

a) Mark Prior, who can't stay healthy and when he was healthy last year, he got hammered... or...

 

(b) Angel Guzman, who can't stay healthy and was really, really bad for the Cubs last year.

 

 

I'd rather have more options, even if it turns out that Miller doesn't have what it takes to get big league hitters out.

 

Agreed, if we don't want Miller in there, then like I said yesterday, it's best to go and find a trade for someone who can fill the spot well and let Guzman develop.

[USSoccer]

 

No, open competition is the best way to hand out jobs. Everyone has an equal chance and you see who can step up and deliver. It was a simple competition facing the same type of competition. One person produced better results.

 

And again, basing your roster on spring training outcomes and not talent and ability is a stupid way of constructing your baseball team.

 

Even if Miller had pitched 6 innings of 3 run baseball Sunday, it wouldn't change the fact that he's not going to have sustained success locating his pitches like he still throws hard, and having no movement. It's not the outcome, but the actual act that's concerning. I'd rather have the guy who can miss bats and throw hard and deal with the growing pains knowing he's got much more ability and long term value, that middle about with the veteran security blanket pitching who's never going to be able to come close to his former ability, and who's unlikely to be better than league average.

 

And you are assuming that Guzman will improve and stay healthy.

 

You're doing the same with Miller. I'll take my chances with talent over feeling a false sense of security with a pitcher who used to be good.

[Soul]

I'd have preferred Guzman because I believe he's the future......and Miller isn't. Regardless of Miller's results in ST it was clear to me he would struggle in the regular season based on the fact that he's a former power pitcher who now struggles to hit 88 on the gun. Prior's not ready, period. That leaves Guzman.

 

who pitched like crap last year. If we don't sign Miller, then we're going into the season with our fifth starter being:

 

a) Mark Prior, who can't stay healthy and when he was healthy last year, he got hammered... or...

 

(b) Angel Guzman, who can't stay healthy and was really, really bad for the Cubs last year.

 

 

I'd rather have more options, even if it turns out that Miller doesn't have what it takes to get big league hitters out.

 

Agreed, if we don't want Miller in there, then like I said yesterday, it's best to go and find a trade for someone who can fill the spot well and let Guzman develop.

 

I'd never turn down the prospect of more options, but there's no indication that Hendry is going to seek a trade at the moment. Guzman still has upside, which is why I'd prefer to find out if he can realize it.

[USSoccer]

I'd have preferred Guzman because I believe he's the future......and Miller isn't. Regardless of Miller's results in ST it was clear to me he would struggle in the regular season based on the fact that he's a former power pitcher who now struggles to hit 88 on the gun. Prior's not ready, period. That leaves Guzman.

 

who pitched like crap last year. If we don't sign Miller, then we're going into the season with our fifth starter being:

 

a) Mark Prior, who can't stay healthy and when he was healthy last year, he got hammered... or...

 

(b) Angel Guzman, who can't stay healthy and was really, really bad for the Cubs last year.

 

 

I'd rather have more options, even if it turns out that Miller doesn't have what it takes to get big league hitters out.

 

Agreed, if we don't want Miller in there, then like I said yesterday, it's best to go and find a trade for someone who can fill the spot well and let Guzman develop.

 

Develop, pitching once a week out of the bullpen in a role that's better suited for a pitcher learning how to pitch with a different style...like Wade Miller should be doing.

[TruffleShuffle]

You're doing the same with Miller. I'll take my chances with talent over feeling a false sense of security with a pitcher who used to be good.

 

I really don't think it's a terrible thing to give Miller 4-5 starts at the outset of the year to find out whether he can still be effective. Maybe Guzman would do a better job, but probably not a whole lot better. And it gives Prior time to get his stuff together in extended spring training and hopefully be ready to step into the rotation.

[TruffleShuffle]

Develop, pitching once a week out of the bullpen in a role that's better suited for a pitcher learning how to pitch with a different style...like Wade Miller should be doing.

 

A lot of people are also of the opinion that since Guzman's arm seems to fall off every time he's in a starting rotation, maybe he'd have a better chance staying healthy and being successful if he became a relief pitcher.

[soapy]

I'd have preferred Guzman because I believe he's the future......and Miller isn't. Regardless of Miller's results in ST it was clear to me he would struggle in the regular season based on the fact that he's a former power pitcher who now struggles to hit 88 on the gun. Prior's not ready, period. That leaves Guzman.

 

who pitched like crap last year. If we don't sign Miller, then we're going into the season with our fifth starter being:

 

a) Mark Prior, who can't stay healthy and when he was healthy last year, he got hammered... or...

 

(b) Angel Guzman, who can't stay healthy and was really, really bad for the Cubs last year.

 

 

I'd rather have more options, even if it turns out that Miller doesn't have what it takes to get big league hitters out.

 

I do agree with that. I had no problem with signing Miller. That was under the assumption that he is pretty much an insurance policy in case Guzman or Prior, etc. aren't ready. I think Guzman is. Put Miller in the pen. If he throws a fit, then you might have to consider a trade or DFA.

[soapy]

You're doing the same with Miller. I'll take my chances with talent over feeling a false sense of security with a pitcher who used to be good.

 

I really don't think it's a terrible thing to give Miller 4-5 starts at the outset of the year to find out whether he can still be effective. Maybe Guzman would do a better job, but probably not a whole lot better. And it gives Prior time to get his stuff together in extended spring training and hopefully be ready to step into the rotation.

 

Okay, but the Cubs are seemingly so uncomfortable with Miller being out there that they are skipping him whenever they get the chance. If they are that uncomfortable with him in there, they have another option; Guzman.

 

Whether or not skipping Miller taxes the other starters to the point that it hurts their effectiveness in the long term is debatable, but I'm still not a big fan of it.

[papabear58]

I have someone I consider a good board friend who went by Goonygoogoo as I recall on the ESPN board. He was always about developing minor leaguers, and I agreed with him 99.9% of the time. I don't know why, but this time it's striking a nerve in me. This is just one of those .1% times where I can't agree.

 

Maybe I've just been soured on the way the Cubs develop pitchers. I CAN'T STAND the throw every pitcher we can to the wolves and see who can fight them off mentality that the Cubs seem to have, and have had from Baylor and Baker. I'd like to see us develop more pitchers, and other organizations have been successful bringing up prospects and allowing them to pitch in the pen for a year to get aclimated. It seems to me to be a better idea then shredding through good kids who get shelled, lose confidence, and then suffer setbacks over and over again. Maybe it's just sour grapes, but I'd like to see something different, anything different, a higher success rate then I've seen and I'm at about wits end with it.

[Derwood]

You can't say "Marquis may have been good in one start, but he'll suck this year" out of one side of your mouth and "Miller had one bad start, so he's guaranteed to suck" out the other.

[jersey cubs fan]

part of the developmental process is starting in the majors leagues.

[papabear58]

part of the developmental process is starting in the majors leagues.

 

Yes, but no one said it can't be after a month or so of pitching out of the pen and then some spot starts to stretch out. This would allow a pitcher to adjust to the hitting at this level while working closely with the pitching coach. Then when it looks like he's got it, you begin to spot start him to see where he is and stretch out his arm. It's not like I'm suggesting leaving him in the pen for two or three seasons, but he's struggled on this level before and if he's going to develop, in my opinion, it's because someone is working with him and the best way to do that is out of the pen for now.

 

As far as the fifth starter, I'm not in love with Miller. I'd like him to get 4-5 starts to see where he is, but if he's not there then release him or package him in a trade for what you can get. As long as we can get a decent fifth starter in return for him + not to high prospect, it would be good for the rotation, and it would allow for Guzman to be coached.