Miller will be skipped

[papabear58]

Guzman Career Stats:

 

Career W:0 L:6 ERA:7.41 G:17 GS:10 CG:0 SO:0 S:0 SO:0 IP:58.1 H:72 R:50 ER:48 HR:9 BB:37 K:62

 

So, what about these non-spring training stats make you believe that he is this phenomonal pitcher waiting to destroy oposing hitters at the plate? Hell this year he's pitched two innings and given up two earned runs and his numbers are looking right along those averages (since we're making comparasons on short data volumes anyway).

 

Miller might not be the guy, but Guzman hasn't show that he's it yet either. Make him earn it.

 

how is he going to earn it if there's no open spot in the rotation?

 

small sample size for guzman aside, miller is a pitcher on the downside of his career without any effective pitches. lou, despite professing his love for the 5-man roattion recently, is skipping miller at every opportunity. what does that say about his faith in the man's ability to get people out?

 

miller's just not good unless his fastball suddenly makes a reappearance. why not try a guy who has had past success at the minor league level, still has effective pitches, and will probably only improve as oppsed to a crafty veteran that isn't crafty?

 

What does it say abou this faith in Guzman that he won't start him over Miller. This is the manager who won 115 games with Seattle let's not forget (I lived there in that season.... wow)

[soapy]

 

Making a change now would reek of panic, and would cast doubt on the conviction of the coaching staff and the confidence they have in their decisionmaking process.

 

So they should stick to a bad decision because they don't have the guts to admit a mistake sooner rather than later?

 

No. They should instead skip said fifth starter because that...er...doesn't reek of panic?

[Magnetic Curses]

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.

 

Then you'd have had your way and he wouldn't have been on the team. Do you remember that he stated clearly that if he didn't win the fifth starters spot that he didn't want to be here?

 

Hendry also said that it would be "unfair" to Miller if he didn't start and would seek to trade or release him. The long relief spot is not an option for Miller.

 

I could care less what Wade Miller wants, or what he feels is unfair. What's unfair is losing winnable games because your starting pitcher can't crack 90mph and throws the ball straight down the middle.

 

.

 

Players would be lining up to play in your organization.

 

:?

 

i don't understand this post. i think many players understand that if they suck, they shouldn't have the ability to guilt the GM into ordering the manager to play them.

 

bad players shouldn't play, despite what hendry tells them or doesn't tell them.

[USSoccer]

Guzman Career Stats:

 

Career W:0 L:6 ERA:7.41 G:17 GS:10 CG:0 SO:0 S:0 SO:0 IP:58.1 H:72 R:50 ER:48 HR:9 BB:37 K:62

 

So, what about these non-spring training stats make you believe that he is this phenomonal pitcher waiting to destroy oposing hitters at the plate? Hell this year he's pitched two innings and given up two earned runs and his numbers are looking right along those averages (since we're making comparasons on short data volumes anyway).

 

Miller might not be the guy, but Guzman hasn't show that he's it yet either. Make him earn it.

 

how is he going to earn it if there's no open spot in the rotation?

 

small sample size for guzman aside, miller is a pitcher on the downside of his career without any effective pitches. lou, despite professing his love for the 5-man roattion recently, is skipping miller at every opportunity. what does that say about his faith in the man's ability to get people out?

 

miller's just not good unless his fastball suddenly makes a reappearance. why not try a guy who has had past success at the minor league level, still has effective pitches, and will probably only improve as oppsed to a crafty veteran that isn't crafty?

 

What does it say abou this faith in Guzman that he won't start him over Miller. This is the manager who won 115 games with Seattle let's not forget (I lived there in that season.... wow)

 

It says that maybe the decision was taken out of his hands by a GM who doesn't manage his rosters very well.

 

If Angel Guzman is going to develop, it's going to be starting. He shouldn't be in the bullpen rotting away, being used sparingly. He should either be in Iowa or starting in place of Miller. The fact that he's sitting on a bullpen bench means that Lou wanted him on the team, but the GM didn't do the right thing for the organization and the player. Likewise, Miller should not be starting; he should be in the pen, by your logic, learning how to pitch again, but the player wouldn't go to the pen, and the GM and manager acquiesced.

 

And in case you try and say that Miller "won" the job, I'll post this again:

 

Miller gave up more hits, walks, home runs, had a higher WHIP, gave up an equal number of runs, and only one fewer earned run in 1.2 more innings. That's not winning a job. That's being given one because a GM wouldn't stand up to a player.

Edited April 10, 2007 by USSoccer

[Magnetic Curses]

Guzman Career Stats:

 

Career W:0 L:6 ERA:7.41 G:17 GS:10 CG:0 SO:0 S:0 SO:0 IP:58.1 H:72 R:50 ER:48 HR:9 BB:37 K:62

 

So, what about these non-spring training stats make you believe that he is this phenomonal pitcher waiting to destroy oposing hitters at the plate? Hell this year he's pitched two innings and given up two earned runs and his numbers are looking right along those averages (since we're making comparasons on short data volumes anyway).

 

Miller might not be the guy, but Guzman hasn't show that he's it yet either. Make him earn it.

 

how is he going to earn it if there's no open spot in the rotation?

 

small sample size for guzman aside, miller is a pitcher on the downside of his career without any effective pitches. lou, despite professing his love for the 5-man roattion recently, is skipping miller at every opportunity. what does that say about his faith in the man's ability to get people out?

 

miller's just not good unless his fastball suddenly makes a reappearance. why not try a guy who has had past success at the minor league level, still has effective pitches, and will probably only improve as oppsed to a crafty veteran that isn't crafty?

 

What does it say abou this faith in Guzman that he won't start him over Miller. This is the manager who won 115 games with Seattle let's not forget (I lived there in that season.... wow)

 

so did i. i moved there in april and went to a ton of games. it was sad to see interest in the mariners wane in the successive seasons.

[davearm]

 

Making a change now would reek of panic, and would cast doubt on the conviction of the coaching staff and the confidence they have in their decisionmaking process.

 

So they should stick to a bad decision because they don't have the guts to admit a mistake sooner rather than later?

They shouldn't let one start change the conclusion they drew after having 8 weeks of performance to consider.

 

If Miller was their guy out of ST, he's still got to be their guy one week/one start into the season.

 

And you're the one jumping to the "bad decision" and "mistake" conclusions. The rational reaction is to recognize that it's too early to make such determinations.

Edited April 10, 2007 by davearm

[papabear58]

 

Making a change now would reek of panic, and would cast doubt on the conviction of the coaching staff and the confidence they have in their decisionmaking process.

 

So they should stick to a bad decision because they don't have the guts to admit a mistake sooner rather than later?

 

No. They should instead skip said fifth starter because that...er...doesn't reek of panic?

 

Damned if you do and damned if you don't. Hmmmmm, sounds like a circular arguement to me as far as which one is more paicky (is that even a word :)). The fact is that we have no backup plan if Guzman continues his same old in the majors. If Miller isn't the guy then it's time to go get someone who is.

[CubColtPacer]

The tough thing about the Guzman/Miller debate is that there is very little information about both of them. They both are trying to come back, and so there is a limited sample size on each of them.

 

In 06, Miller pitched better than Guzman in the ML:

Miller-21.2 IP, 4.57 ERA, 1.71 WHIP, 20K/18BB

Guzman-56.0 IP, 7.39 ERA, 1.88 WHIP, 60K/37BB

Here are Guzman's numbers broken down as starter and reliever

Starter: 42.2 IP, 9.28 ERA, 2.11 WHIP, 46K/29BB

Reliever: 13.1 IP, 1.35 ERA, 1.13 WHIP, 14K/8 BB

 

 

Then, in ST Miller outpitched him again:

Miller-17.1 IP, 3.64 ERA, 1.56 WHIP, 16K/4BB

Guzman-13.2 IP, 5.79 ERA, 1.54 WHIP, 7 K/1BB

 

When looking through the box scores, I actually found an extra outing for Guzman that they missed (if you add up the IP, they don't quite add up, neither do a few of the statistics).

 

Here are his starter relief numbers for spring:

Starter: 3.1 IP, 13.50 ERA, 2.40 WHIP, 0K/1BB

Reliever: 13.2 IP, 3.29 ERA, 1.02 WHIP, 8K/1BB

 

Even though Guzman was doing worse overall, it was Guzman who was benefiting by pitching later in games against minor league hitters while Miller usually pitched to the major league ones.

 

They admittedly didn't give Guzman enough chances to start during ST. The one start that he did, he struggled mightily to miss bats. After that start, they also had him relieve Miller the next start so they could see both of them against the same lineup (although the team was starting to substitute their minor leaguers in at the end). Miller clearly outperformed Guzman that day as well.

 

Between last year and spring, Guzman has had 46 IP starting in the major leagues compared to Miller's 40 IP. Miller outperformed Guzman in those IP, and it wasn't even somewhat close.

The same can be said for Guzman that can be said for Miller-when his FB drops in velocity because of him starting and Guzman cannot simply throw it past major league hitters, he struggles, and the results are a lot worse than Miller's.

 

Finally, if Guzman has the much better stuff, then when he's on he should be much better than Miller could ever be with his limited stuff. Here are their best 3 outings of either last year or spring against major league lineups:

Pitcher A: 6.0 IP, 4 H, 1 ER, 8K/3BB

5.1 IP, 3H, 1 ER, 8K/3BB

4.2 IP, 3 H, 3 ER, 4K/2BB

Pitcher B: 5.0 IP, 3 H, 0 ER, 2K/3BB

5.0 IP, 3H, 0 ER, 5K/0BB

4.2 IP, 4 H, 2 R/1ER, 8K/4BB

 

Even though Guzman had more starts in able to put up 3 great starts, I don't really see much of a difference between the two's best starts based on the numbers. The difference is that Miller has other starts that could legitimately be put up there, while Guzman does not have any others that would qualify.

 

Finally, it comes to upside. Clearly, Guzman is the better option here, and if Miller continues to struggle as much as he did on Sunday Guzman will be given the chance to continue learning on the job. However, based on all of this, Miller has earned the right to start for now in a year where the Cubs cannot let Guzman struggle in the way that he's struggled as a starter. If Miller proves to be similar to how Guzman has shown he can start right now, then he needs to go after another start or two because Guzman could produce that or improve.

However, that is not going to be the case necessarily. You don't dominate a lineup like Miller did against San Fran a couple of weeks ago and then forget how to do it against similar lineups during the regular season. Now, Miller is not going to consistently do that-he's going to have a decent amount of outings where he gets rocked if his pitches don't have the movement on them that he showed during September and the spring. Hopefully he also can give a decent amount of good outings as well, which Guzman has not shown he can do from the starter's position.

[papabear58]

Guzman Career Stats:

 

Career W:0 L:6 ERA:7.41 G:17 GS:10 CG:0 SO:0 S:0 SO:0 IP:58.1 H:72 R:50 ER:48 HR:9 BB:37 K:62

 

So, what about these non-spring training stats make you believe that he is this phenomonal pitcher waiting to destroy oposing hitters at the plate? Hell this year he's pitched two innings and given up two earned runs and his numbers are looking right along those averages (since we're making comparasons on short data volumes anyway).

 

Miller might not be the guy, but Guzman hasn't show that he's it yet either. Make him earn it.

 

how is he going to earn it if there's no open spot in the rotation?

 

small sample size for guzman aside, miller is a pitcher on the downside of his career without any effective pitches. lou, despite professing his love for the 5-man roattion recently, is skipping miller at every opportunity. what does that say about his faith in the man's ability to get people out?

 

miller's just not good unless his fastball suddenly makes a reappearance. why not try a guy who has had past success at the minor league level, still has effective pitches, and will probably only improve as oppsed to a crafty veteran that isn't crafty?

 

What does it say abou this faith in Guzman that he won't start him over Miller. This is the manager who won 115 games with Seattle let's not forget (I lived there in that season.... wow)

 

so did i. i moved there in april and went to a ton of games. it was sad to see interest in the mariners wane in the successive seasons.

 

Yes, it was after that season that I moved.... hmmmm, maybe I need to move to Chicago.... :lol:

[USSoccer]

 

Making a change now would reek of panic, and would cast doubt on the conviction of the coaching staff and the confidence they have in their decisionmaking process.

 

So they should stick to a bad decision because they don't have the guts to admit a mistake sooner rather than later?

They shouldn't let one start change the conclusion they drew after having 8 weeks of performance to consider.

 

If Miller was their guy out of ST, he's still got to be their guy one week/one start into the season.

 

Why? Give me a good reason. Is there some sort of honor or toughness associated with sticking to a stupid and poorly reasoned decision?

[soapy]

 

Making a change now would reek of panic, and would cast doubt on the conviction of the coaching staff and the confidence they have in their decisionmaking process.

 

So they should stick to a bad decision because they don't have the guts to admit a mistake sooner rather than later?

They shouldn't let one start change the conclusion they drew after having 8 weeks of performance to consider.

 

If Miller was their guy out of ST, he's still got to be their guy one week/one start into the season.

I would agree with that. If they actually think Miller is better than Guzman by all means, they shouldn't pull the plug based on one start. I just do not agree with the Cubs that he should be their guy. I also don't understand why they would start skipping him if they think he can handle it.

[Magnetic Curses]

Guzman Career Stats:

 

Career W:0 L:6 ERA:7.41 G:17 GS:10 CG:0 SO:0 S:0 SO:0 IP:58.1 H:72 R:50 ER:48 HR:9 BB:37 K:62

 

So, what about these non-spring training stats make you believe that he is this phenomonal pitcher waiting to destroy oposing hitters at the plate? Hell this year he's pitched two innings and given up two earned runs and his numbers are looking right along those averages (since we're making comparasons on short data volumes anyway).

 

Miller might not be the guy, but Guzman hasn't show that he's it yet either. Make him earn it.

 

how is he going to earn it if there's no open spot in the rotation?

 

small sample size for guzman aside, miller is a pitcher on the downside of his career without any effective pitches. lou, despite professing his love for the 5-man roattion recently, is skipping miller at every opportunity. what does that say about his faith in the man's ability to get people out?

 

miller's just not good unless his fastball suddenly makes a reappearance. why not try a guy who has had past success at the minor league level, still has effective pitches, and will probably only improve as oppsed to a crafty veteran that isn't crafty?

 

What does it say abou this faith in Guzman that he won't start him over Miller. This is the manager who won 115 games with Seattle let's not forget (I lived there in that season.... wow)

 

so did i. i moved there in april and went to a ton of games. it was sad to see interest in the mariners wane in the successive seasons.

 

Yes, it was after that season that I moved.... hmmmm, maybe I need to move to Chicago.... :lol:

 

i kept telling my friends there that it would be a cubs-mariners WS. ah well.

[papabear58]

 

Making a change now would reek of panic, and would cast doubt on the conviction of the coaching staff and the confidence they have in their decisionmaking process.

 

So they should stick to a bad decision because they don't have the guts to admit a mistake sooner rather than later?

They shouldn't let one start change the conclusion they drew after having 8 weeks of performance to consider.

 

If Miller was their guy out of ST, he's still got to be their guy one week/one start into the season.

I would agree with that. If they actually think Miller is better than Guzman by all means, they shouldn't pull the plug based on one start. I just do not agree with the Cubs that he should be their guy. I also don't understand why they would start skipping him if they think he can handle it.

 

Maybe they don't think Miller is the guy, but they think that he's better then Guzman. Who's to say what goes on their minds.

[RynoRules]

Here's the reason not to cut Miller from the rotation just yet:

 

The team has only played 7 games. You aren't out of any race until at least Memorial Day, IMO. If I were Lou I'd give him two or three more starts and see what happens. If he is still putrid, yank him back to the pen as the 11th or 12th man or send him down to work out his issues, and insert Guzman (the guy I wanted to see in the 5th slot to begin with) into the rotation. My gut tells me this will happen sooner rather than later.

 

And before you say it again, I know that this team doesn't have a large margin of error - I get it. But the division stinks and we have greater depth in our pitching staff than we have had in recent years. Give him a chance - not an endless one, but give it to him.

[soapy]

The tough thing about the Guzman/Miller debate is that there is very little information about both of them. They both are trying to come back, and so there is a limited sample size on each of them.

 

In 06, Miller pitched better than Guzman in the ML:

Miller-21.2 IP, 4.57 ERA, 1.71 WHIP, 20K/18BB

Guzman-56.0 IP, 7.39 ERA, 1.88 WHIP, 60K/37BB

Here are Guzman's numbers broken down as starter and reliever

Starter: 42.2 IP, 9.28 ERA, 2.11 WHIP, 46K/29BB

Reliever: 13.1 IP, 1.35 ERA, 1.13 WHIP, 14K/8 BB

 

 

Then, in ST Miller outpitched him again:

Miller-17.1 IP, 3.64 ERA, 1.56 WHIP, 16K/4BB

Guzman-13.2 IP, 5.79 ERA, 1.54 WHIP, 7 K/1BB

 

When looking through the box scores, I actually found an extra outing for Guzman that they missed (if you add up the IP, they don't quite add up, neither do a few of the statistics).

 

Here are his starter relief numbers for spring:

Starter: 3.1 IP, 13.50 ERA, 2.40 WHIP, 0K/1BB

Reliever: 13.2 IP, 3.29 ERA, 1.02 WHIP, 8K/1BB

 

:snip for length:

 

Finally, if Guzman has the much better stuff, then when he's on he should be much better than Miller could ever be with his limited stuff. Here are their best 3 outings of either last year or spring against major league lineups:

Pitcher A: 6.0 IP, 4 H, 1 ER, 8K/3BB

5.1 IP, 3H, 1 ER, 8K/3BB

4.2 IP, 3 H, 3 ER, 4K/2BB

Pitcher B: 5.0 IP, 3 H, 0 ER, 2K/3BB

5.0 IP, 3H, 0 ER, 5K/0BB

4.2 IP, 4 H, 2 R/1ER, 8K/4BB

 

Even though Guzman had more starts in able to put up 3 great starts, I don't really see much of a difference between the two's best starts based on the numbers. The difference is that Miller has other starts that could legitimately be put up there, while Guzman does not have any others that would qualify.

 

:snip for length:

 

IMO, Guzman's K/BB ratio and WHIP seem indicate Guzman pitched about as well as Miller, but didn't get the same results ERA wise. Guzman also has (again, IMO) the better upside. He has a far better chance for improvement than Miller.

[papabear58]

The tough thing about the Guzman/Miller debate is that there is very little information about both of them. They both are trying to come back, and so there is a limited sample size on each of them.

 

In 06, Miller pitched better than Guzman in the ML:

Miller-21.2 IP, 4.57 ERA, 1.71 WHIP, 20K/18BB

Guzman-56.0 IP, 7.39 ERA, 1.88 WHIP, 60K/37BB

Here are Guzman's numbers broken down as starter and reliever

Starter: 42.2 IP, 9.28 ERA, 2.11 WHIP, 46K/29BB

Reliever: 13.1 IP, 1.35 ERA, 1.13 WHIP, 14K/8 BB

 

 

Then, in ST Miller outpitched him again:

Miller-17.1 IP, 3.64 ERA, 1.56 WHIP, 16K/4BB

Guzman-13.2 IP, 5.79 ERA, 1.54 WHIP, 7 K/1BB

 

When looking through the box scores, I actually found an extra outing for Guzman that they missed (if you add up the IP, they don't quite add up, neither do a few of the statistics).

 

Here are his starter relief numbers for spring:

Starter: 3.1 IP, 13.50 ERA, 2.40 WHIP, 0K/1BB

Reliever: 13.2 IP, 3.29 ERA, 1.02 WHIP, 8K/1BB

 

:snip for length:

 

Finally, if Guzman has the much better stuff, then when he's on he should be much better than Miller could ever be with his limited stuff. Here are their best 3 outings of either last year or spring against major league lineups:

Pitcher A: 6.0 IP, 4 H, 1 ER, 8K/3BB

5.1 IP, 3H, 1 ER, 8K/3BB

4.2 IP, 3 H, 3 ER, 4K/2BB

Pitcher B: 5.0 IP, 3 H, 0 ER, 2K/3BB

5.0 IP, 3H, 0 ER, 5K/0BB

4.2 IP, 4 H, 2 R/1ER, 8K/4BB

 

Even though Guzman had more starts in able to put up 3 great starts, I don't really see much of a difference between the two's best starts based on the numbers. The difference is that Miller has other starts that could legitimately be put up there, while Guzman does not have any others that would qualify.

 

:snip for length:

 

IMO, Guzman's K/BB ratio and WHIP seem indicate Guzman pitched about as well as Miller, but didn't get the same results ERA wise. Guzman also has (again, IMO) the better upside. He has a far better chance for improvement than Miller.

 

But he also raised a good point that i hadn't though about. Guzman pitched later in games that were against more of the AAAA or AAA talent.

[USSoccer]

Here's the reason not to cut Miller from the rotation just yet:

 

The team has only played 7 games. You aren't out of any race until at least Memorial Day, IMO. If I were Lou I'd give him two or three more starts and see what happens. If he is still putrid, yank him back to the pen as the 11th or 12th man or send him down to work out his issues, and insert Guzman (the guy I wanted to see in the 5th slot to begin with) into the rotation. My gut tells me this will happen sooner rather than later.

 

And before you say it again, I know that this team doesn't have a large margin of error - I get it. But the division stinks and we have greater depth in our pitching staff than we have had in recent years. Give him a chance - not an endless one, but give it to him.

 

The problem with giving him a couple more starts is that people will be focused on the outcome and not the process. If he gets lucky with BABIP and wins a game despite having lousy stuff again, he'll get more rope with which to hang himself, and that will cost the team more in the long run.

[davearm]

 

Making a change now would reek of panic, and would cast doubt on the conviction of the coaching staff and the confidence they have in their decisionmaking process.

 

So they should stick to a bad decision because they don't have the guts to admit a mistake sooner rather than later?

They shouldn't let one start change the conclusion they drew after having 8 weeks of performance to consider.

 

If Miller was their guy out of ST, he's still got to be their guy one week/one start into the season.

 

Why? Give me a good reason. Is there some sort of honor or toughness associated with sticking to a stupid and poorly reasoned decision?

You're the one using terms like "stupid" and "poorly reasoned".

 

If Guzman was a better option than Miller today, then he would've been so a week ago too. But he wasn't -- not in the Cubs' eyes anyway.

 

Obviously the Cubs didn't think Guzman was a better option than Miller a week ago, and little has happened in the interim to cause them to rethink that judgement -- Miller had one bad outing, and Guzman has been hit out of the 'pen.

 

The first major flaw in your reasoning here is to assume Guzman would be good if he was just allowed to start. There's no reason to assume that, and in fact Guzman's been pretty godawful in his prior ML starts.

 

The second is to assume that you know better than the Cubs who would be better.

[frostwyrm]

I have no problem with giving Miller 2 more starts to show something. I agree with the people who say that if you give a guy a spot in the rotation you shouldn't yank him after one bad game. I advocated a short leash on Miller but one game is too short.

[Banedon]

 

Making a change now would reek of panic, and would cast doubt on the conviction of the coaching staff and the confidence they have in their decisionmaking process.

 

So they should stick to a bad decision because they don't have the guts to admit a mistake sooner rather than later?

They shouldn't let one start change the conclusion they drew after having 8 weeks of performance to consider.

 

If Miller was their guy out of ST, he's still got to be their guy one week/one start into the season.

 

Why? Give me a good reason. Is there some sort of honor or toughness associated with sticking to a stupid and poorly reasoned decision?

You're the one using terms like "stupid" and "poorly reasoned".

 

If Guzman was a better option than Miller today, then he would've been so a week ago too. But he wasn't -- not in the Cubs' eyes anyway.

 

Obviously the Cubs didn't think Guzman was a better option than Miller a week ago, and little has happened in the interim to cause them to rethink that judgement -- Miller had one bad outing, and Guzman has been hit out of the 'pen.

 

The first major flaw in your reasoning here is to assume Guzman would be good if he was just allowed to start. There's no reason to assume that, and in fact Guzman's been pretty godawful in his prior ML starts.

 

The second is to assume that you know better than the Cubs who would be better.

 

Actually it's your reasoning that's flawed here. You don't have to assume that Guzman would be good. Just as effective or better than Miller.

[papabear58]

Here's the reason not to cut Miller from the rotation just yet:

 

The team has only played 7 games. You aren't out of any race until at least Memorial Day, IMO. If I were Lou I'd give him two or three more starts and see what happens. If he is still putrid, yank him back to the pen as the 11th or 12th man or send him down to work out his issues, and insert Guzman (the guy I wanted to see in the 5th slot to begin with) into the rotation. My gut tells me this will happen sooner rather than later.

 

And before you say it again, I know that this team doesn't have a large margin of error - I get it. But the division stinks and we have greater depth in our pitching staff than we have had in recent years. Give him a chance - not an endless one, but give it to him.

 

The problem with giving him a couple more starts is that people will be focused on the outcome and not the process. If he gets lucky with BABIP and wins a game despite having lousy stuff again, he'll get more rope with which to hang himself, and that will cost the team more in the long run.

 

[hypothetical] Guzman comes in as the fifth starter and Miller gets released. Roberto Novoa comes up to fill the long relief role. Guzman puts up a 7.50+ ERA and racks up a 1-4 record. He's getting shelled.[/hypothetical]

 

Now what do you do? You've released Miller and now you have to cut deeper into the farm to make a trade to bring in someone you should have brought in when you determined Miller wasn't going to cut it.

[davearm]

 

Making a change now would reek of panic, and would cast doubt on the conviction of the coaching staff and the confidence they have in their decisionmaking process.

 

So they should stick to a bad decision because they don't have the guts to admit a mistake sooner rather than later?

They shouldn't let one start change the conclusion they drew after having 8 weeks of performance to consider.

 

If Miller was their guy out of ST, he's still got to be their guy one week/one start into the season.

 

Why? Give me a good reason. Is there some sort of honor or toughness associated with sticking to a stupid and poorly reasoned decision?

You're the one using terms like "stupid" and "poorly reasoned".

 

If Guzman was a better option than Miller today, then he would've been so a week ago too. But he wasn't -- not in the Cubs' eyes anyway.

 

Obviously the Cubs didn't think Guzman was a better option than Miller a week ago, and little has happened in the interim to cause them to rethink that judgement -- Miller had one bad outing, and Guzman has been hit out of the 'pen.

 

The first major flaw in your reasoning here is to assume Guzman would be good if he was just allowed to start. There's no reason to assume that, and in fact Guzman's been pretty godawful in his prior ML starts.

 

The second is to assume that you know better than the Cubs who would be better.

 

Actually it's your reasoning that's flawed here. You don't have to assume that Guzman would be good. Just as effective or better than Miller.

How is my reasoning flawed? I'm not the one making assumptions here.

[Magnetic Curses]

I have no problem with giving Miller 2 more starts to show something. I agree with the people who say that if you give a guy a spot in the rotation you shouldn't yank him after one bad game. I advocated a short leash on Miller but one game is too short.

 

i agree totally.

[soapy]

I have no problem with giving Miller 2 more starts to show something. I agree with the people who say that if you give a guy a spot in the rotation you shouldn't yank him after one bad game. I advocated a short leash on Miller but one game is too short.

I pretty much agree with that. I just found it alarming that they are going to skip him now. Either put him out there as your 5th starter and see what he can do, or put someone else in there. Skipping him is just delaying the inevitable.

[CubColtPacer]

I have no problem with giving Miller 2 more starts to show something. I agree with the people who say that if you give a guy a spot in the rotation you shouldn't yank him after one bad game. I advocated a short leash on Miller but one game is too short.

I pretty much agree with that. I just found it alarming that they are going to skip him now. Either put him out there as your 5th starter and see what he can do, or put someone else in there. Skipping him is just delaying the inevitable.

 

Z is the one who is in danger of abuse-if you're going to start him every 5th day anyway, you might as well skip the 5th starter and let everyone else pitch on the 5th day as well. Until a 5th starter option that will be better than the top 4 pitchers emerges, the less starts that spot gets and the more the team will win.