Zambrano 0-4 since signing

[Tracer Bullet]

 

Zambrano is not that good of a hitter.

 

He's as good as we've got........

 

04/02 - 08/29      AB    R    H   2B   3B   HR   TB  RBI   BB   SO     BA    OBP    SLG    OPS  BABIP
Zambrano           67    8   17    1    0    2   24    5    0   23  0.254  0.254  0.358  0.612  0.357
Miller              4    0    1    0    0    0    1    0    0    0  0.250  0.250  0.250  0.500  0.250
Marquis            59    9    9    3    0    1   15    4    1   20  0.153  0.167  0.254  0.421  0.211
R Hill             50    0    7    2    0    0    9    5    1   28  0.140  0.157  0.180  0.337  0.318
Lilly              60    5    8    0    0    0    8    4    1   26  0.133  0.148  0.133  0.281  0.235
Marshall           27    0    2    1    0    0    3    0    1   12  0.074  0.107  0.111  0.218  0.133
Guzman              7    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    2  0.000  0.000  0.000  0.000  0.000

Totals            274   22   44    7    0    3   60   18    4  111  0.161  0.173  0.219  0.392  0.256

 

He's easily the best hitting pitcher we have, but he's not that good of a hitter (which is the statement stitchface made).

[Fred Hornkohl]

 

Zambrano is not that good of a hitter.

 

He's as good as we've got........

 

 

He's easily the best hitting pitcher we have, but he's not that good of a hitter (which is the statement stitchface made).

 

That's very true, but I don't think it's any stretch of the imagination at all to infer the unstated "for a pitcher".

[David]

if you think he's the cubs' best pitcher, you clearly didn't watch tonight's game.

 

you're going to judge him on one night? every pitcher has a bad night. does webb suck because the padres scored 5 off of him last night? he must not be the diamondback's best pitcher by your logic.

 

Zambrano hasn't been the best pitcher on the Cubs this season. Hill and Lilly have been better.

 

 

who do you start game 1 in the playoffs (assuming they're all equally rested)?

 

don't know about you...but i start big Z.

 

Honestly, I wouldn't. I think he would be too jacked up for game 1 and be all over the place. Although, he might be jacked up any game of a playoff series that he starts. Kinda like 2003 when we gave him a 3-0 lead in game 1 of the NLCS and he preceded to give up 3 HRs in a span of 4 batters when he only gave up 9 HR all year.

 

i was at that game in atlanta.

he was what...21 yrs old then?

not sure its still relevant to today.

 

That game was actually in Chicago vs. the Marlins. We might've swept that series had we won that game (which we probably should've). Who knows if things would've gone at all differently thereafter had we won game 1, though. All we have are 'what ifs.'

[Soul]

So if Zambrano would have been Zambrano in August, we would be 5 1/2 games up. This division would be over.

 

He picked a bad time to start sucking.

[Ender]

This is Zambrano, this has been what he has been like his entire career. Crappy month, absolutely dominant month, absolutely dominant month, mediocre month, crappy month. Thats held true for almost his entire career now. No reason to try to make an excuse for it, its just who he is.

[C.C.]

So if Zambrano would have been Zambrano in August, we would be 5 1/2 games up. This division would be over.

 

He picked a bad time to start sucking.

 

It's a shame because I really though he was going to throw a gem last night, instead he gave them just what the Brewers needed.

[UMFan83]

This is Zambrano, this has been what he has been like his entire career. Crappy month, absolutely dominant month, absolutely dominant month, mediocre month, crappy month. Thats held true for almost his entire career now. No reason to try to make an excuse for it, its just who he is.

 

Except for this year, the result of this inconsistency is a 4.06 ERA when in previous years it was 3.41, 3.26, 2.75, 3.11.

[hardcorecubfan]

He is pitching like Marquis a shot of brilliance for three inning, in which the press look at and clap, and 4 inning of mediocre pitching and one lousy inning before being pulled. somehow the "glass half full people" point to the three good innings

[David]

This is Zambrano, this has been what he has been like his entire career. Crappy month, absolutely dominant month, absolutely dominant month, mediocre month, crappy month. Thats held true for almost his entire career now. No reason to try to make an excuse for it, its just who he is.

 

Except for this year, the result of this inconsistency is a 4.06 ERA when in previous years it was 3.41, 3.26, 2.75, 3.11.

 

He's still got time to continue this supposed trend and post a dominant September that takes him into the mid-3's, though.

[Derwood]

So if Zambrano would have been Zambrano in August, we would be 5 1/2 games up. This division would be over.

 

He picked a bad time to start sucking.

 

if by "being Z" you mean pitching a shutout last night....

[Mephistopheles]

if you think he's the cubs' best pitcher, you clearly didn't watch tonight's game.

 

you're going to judge him on one night? every pitcher has a bad night. does webb suck because the padres scored 5 off of him last night? he must not be the diamondback's best pitcher by your logic.

 

Zambrano hasn't been the best pitcher on the Cubs this season. Hill and Lilly have been better.

 

This isn't entirely true. Hill and Lilly have been more effective on the mound. I wouldn't say they've both have been better pitchers.

So Zambrano has been less effective, yet better?

 

I think we're going to need another longwinded rambling paragraph out of you to explain this one.

 

people got it.

 

if you think he's the cubs' best pitcher, you clearly didn't watch tonight's game.

 

you're going to judge him on one night? every pitcher has a bad night. does webb suck because the padres scored 5 off of him last night? he must not be the diamondback's best pitcher by your logic.

 

Zambrano hasn't been the best pitcher on the Cubs this season. Hill and Lilly have been better.

 

This isn't entirely true. Hill and Lilly have been more effective on the mound. I wouldn't say they've both have been better pitchers.

So Zambrano has been less effective, yet better?

 

I think we're going to need another longwinded rambling paragraph out of you to explain this one.

 

I believe he's saying that how much better of a hitter Zambrano is over Hill and Lilly make up for him being a slightly worse of a pitcher this year.

 

Zambrano is not that good of a hitter.

 

I don't think so either. Just offering a guess as to what he was trying to say.

 

you and

 

if you think he's the cubs' best pitcher, you clearly didn't watch tonight's game.

 

you're going to judge him on one night? every pitcher has a bad night. does webb suck because the padres scored 5 off of him last night? he must not be the diamondback's best pitcher by your logic.

 

Zambrano hasn't been the best pitcher on the Cubs this season. Hill and Lilly have been better.

 

This isn't entirely true. Hill and Lilly have been more effective on the mound. I wouldn't say they've both have been better pitchers.

So Zambrano has been less effective, yet better?

 

I think we're going to need another longwinded rambling paragraph out of you to explain this one.

 

I believe he's saying that how much better of a hitter Zambrano is over Hill and Lilly make up for him being a slightly worse of a pitcher this year.

 

Zambrano is not that good of a hitter.

 

you are incorrect. he certainly is. run through the numbers if you'd like.

 

and let me provide this link viewtopic.php?t=43717

[abuck1220]

so zambrano's hitting coupled with hill's inability to bunt makes up the difference between their pitching numbers? i have a hard time buying that.

[David]

They've been better pitchers than Z. Pitching is done on the mound. His effectiveness on the mound = his effectiveness as a pitcher. Z has been a better hitter.

 

 

What you're saying is tantamount to saying that, I don't know, Mike Piazza was a better catcher than Charles Johnson. It makes far more sense to say that Piazza is a better hitter than to say he's a better catcher. Sure, it wouldn't be entirely inaccurate, because it would be no different than saying something like, "Manny Ramirez is one of the top left fielders in the league." Phrases like that are pretty commonly accepted, even though they're obviously referring to the much more important skillset at the plate than his actual abilities as a left fielder. But intuitively, I don't think it makes much sense.

 

 

Cliffs: Even if you think that Z has been more valuable because of his hitting, which seems to be the point LoK is making, it makes more sense to say that Hill and Lilly have been better pitchers. Z is a better hitter and perhaps better overall.

[Soul]

So if Zambrano would have been Zambrano in August, we would be 5 1/2 games up. This division would be over.

 

He picked a bad time to start sucking.

 

if by "being Z" you mean pitching a shutout last night....

 

Not necessarily. What if Z only gives up 2? Maybe the offense finds a way to squeeze a couple across.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

what a worthless topic

 

Why don't you either add some actual substance to your posts or quit criticizing every post?

Not neccessary, IMO. THis topic is worthless.

[David]

So if Zambrano would have been Zambrano in August, we would be 5 1/2 games up. This division would be over.

 

He picked a bad time to start sucking.

 

if by "being Z" you mean pitching a shutout last night....

 

Not necessarily. What if Z only gives up 2? Maybe the offense finds a way to squeeze a couple across.

 

Besides, it's not like you were only referring to last night.

 

EDIT - I guess you sort of were, since he would've had to have won all 4, but whatever. Meh.

[Yestheydo]

Just brainstorming here -- what if Zambrano were to beat the crap out of Jason Kendall? It's something to try.

[Mephistopheles]

so zambrano's hitting coupled with hill's inability to bunt makes up the difference between their pitching numbers? i have a hard time buying that.

 

VORP

 

38.1 - Carlos Zambrano (31.4 + 6.7)

34.6 - Rich Hill (35.3 - 0.7)

33.9 - Ted Lilly (35.6 - 1.7)

[abuck1220]

so zambrano's hitting coupled with hill's inability to bunt makes up the difference between their pitching numbers? i have a hard time buying that.

 

VORP

 

38.1 - Carlos Zambrano (31.4 + 6.7)

34.6 - Rich Hill (35.3 - 0.7)

33.9 - Ted Lilly (35.6 - 1.7)

 

wow, that's hard to believe.

[davearm]

So Zambrano has been less effective, yet better?

 

I think we're going to need another longwinded rambling paragraph out of you to explain this one.

 

people got it.

 

Zambrano is not that good of a hitter.

 

you are incorrect. he certainly is. run through the numbers if you'd like.

 

and let me provide this link viewtopic.php?t=43717

So your argument is that Zambrano's hitting makes up for the pitching deficit, huh?

 

Well I took you up on your invitation to run through the numbers.

 

Zambrano has produced 11 runs (8 runs + 5 RBI - 2 HR = 11 RP).

Lilly has produced 9 runs (5 runs + 4 RBI - 0 HR = 9 RP).

Hill has produced 5 runs (0 runs + 5 RBI - 0 HR = 5 RP).

 

So let's just net those runs produced with the bat off of each guy's earned runs allowed on the mound and see what we get.

 

Lopping off 11 earned runs drops Zambrano's ERA from 4.06 to 3.51.

With 9 fewer ER, Lilly's ERA falls from 3.85 to 3.16.

5 fewer ER nudges Hill's ERA from 3.68 to 3.06.

[Bull]

Yup lets lay all the blame on Z while nobody is talking about this pathetic excuse for an offense that our GM has assembled. Guess what guys, if Z goes 9 innings and gives up 2 runs, we still lose this damn game.

 

Runs scored/Game

 

Cubs 4.60

NL Ave 4.64

 

average? yes

sub-par? maybe

pathetic? unjustifiable.

[Bull]

Just brainstorming here -- what if Zambrano were to beat the crap out of Jason Kendall? It's something to try.

 

It been suggested that he pitches better when he's a little tired (doesn't "overthrow")

 

lets get him a punching bag for before starts (maybe a cut-out of Barrett)

[CubColtPacer]

So Zambrano has been less effective, yet better?

 

I think we're going to need another longwinded rambling paragraph out of you to explain this one.

 

people got it.

 

Zambrano is not that good of a hitter.

 

you are incorrect. he certainly is. run through the numbers if you'd like.

 

and let me provide this link viewtopic.php?t=43717

So your argument is that Zambrano's hitting makes up for the pitching deficit, huh?

 

Well I took you up on your invitation to run through the numbers.

 

Zambrano has produced 11 runs (8 runs + 5 RBI - 2 HR = 11 RP).

Lilly has produced 9 runs (5 runs + 4 RBI - 0 HR = 9 RP).

Hill has produced 5 runs (0 runs + 5 RBI - 0 HR = 5 RP).

 

So let's just net those runs produced with the bat off of each guy's earned runs allowed on the mound and see what we get.

 

Lopping off 11 earned runs drops Zambrano's ERA from 4.06 to 3.51.

With 9 fewer ER, Lilly's ERA falls from 3.85 to 3.16.

5 fewer ER nudges Hill's ERA from 3.68 to 3.06.

 

I don't agree with that method of determining the impact, but that's not why I'm making this post. Let me just correct a little math:

 

5 fewer ER's drops Hill's ERA from 3.68 to 3.40

9 fewer ER's drops Lilly's ERA from 3.85 to 3.37

Z's is correct (it actually rounds to 3.50)

 

Again, I'll leave the criticism of the method to others (I think you have a short way of getting a general feel for their offensive production, but you're leaving out where base hits by the pitcher leads to runs later in the inning, which is going to throw your numbers off enough to not make it worthwhile to do it that way). I just wanted to correct those calculations though.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

Just brainstorming here -- what if Zambrano were to beat the crap out of Jason Kendall? It's something to try.

 

Soto might get a shot at playing time here. Win,Win situation IMO

[davearm]

Thanks for the correction CCP. My math was indeed off.

 

And I'd agree that the method isn't perfect, but does provide an approximation.