Trachsel a Cub (this should be fun)

[Keener98]

Strange argument. I'm shocked that anyone finds this deal to be a bad one. If Marquis and/or Lilly goes down to some sort of fluke injury, who gets inserted into the rotation? Some unproven arm? Some bullpen guy who would need weeks to get stretched out to 5 innings or more?

 

Tracshel is a safety valve, if nothing more.

 

He was also one of the better arms available at the deadline. Is it better to have him on your own roster or on a team that you might be playing in the playoffs?

 

St. Louis sure could have used him. He's probably better than Kip Wells.

 

I like Scott Moore, but there isn't a place for him in Chicago. Giving up Cherry hurts a little more, but no matter who traded for Tracshel, someone was going to have to give something up to get him.

 

Thats wrong BBB. Trachsel is starting against LA this week. The Cubs are going to go to a modified 6 man rotation for some dumbass reason. I would think you would want your better pitchers pitching more often while in a playoff race, and not have them pitch less.

[jjgman21]

Strange argument. I'm shocked that anyone finds this deal to be a bad one. If Marquis and/or Lilly goes down to some sort of fluke injury, who gets inserted into the rotation? Some unproven arm? Some bullpen guy who would need weeks to get stretched out to 5 innings or more?

 

Tracshel is a safety valve, if nothing more.

 

He was also one of the better arms available at the deadline. Is it better to have him on your own roster or on a team that you might be playing in the playoffs?

 

St. Louis sure could have used him. He's probably better than Kip Wells.

 

I like Scott Moore, but there isn't a place for him in Chicago. Giving up Cherry hurts a little more, but no matter who traded for Tracshel, someone was going to have to give something up to get him.

 

Thats wrong BBB. Trachsel is starting against LA this week. The Cubs are going to go to a modified 6 man rotation for some dumbass reason. I would think you would want your better pitchers pitching more often while in a playoff race, and not have them pitch less.

 

I imagine the dumbass reason is every starter on the staff is set to approach or fly by their career high in IP. if that is in fact the reason, it's not so dumbass, IMO.

 

the Cubs are also in a stretch where they play about 36 days in a row with one off day, with a DH upcoming mixed in, so 36 games in 36 days. while the typical is four days rest, I imagine the occasional fifth day that ordinarily comes due to an off day is quite welcome.

[Keener98]

Strange argument. I'm shocked that anyone finds this deal to be a bad one. If Marquis and/or Lilly goes down to some sort of fluke injury, who gets inserted into the rotation? Some unproven arm? Some bullpen guy who would need weeks to get stretched out to 5 innings or more?

 

Tracshel is a safety valve, if nothing more.

 

He was also one of the better arms available at the deadline. Is it better to have him on your own roster or on a team that you might be playing in the playoffs?

 

St. Louis sure could have used him. He's probably better than Kip Wells.

 

I like Scott Moore, but there isn't a place for him in Chicago. Giving up Cherry hurts a little more, but no matter who traded for Tracshel, someone was going to have to give something up to get him.

 

Thats wrong BBB. Trachsel is starting against LA this week. The Cubs are going to go to a modified 6 man rotation for some dumbass reason. I would think you would want your better pitchers pitching more often while in a playoff race, and not have them pitch less.

 

I imagine the dumbass reason is every starter on the staff is set to approach or fly by their career high in IP. if that is in fact the reason, it's not so dumbass, IMO.

 

the Cubs are also in a stretch where they play about 36 days in a row with one off day, with a DH upcoming mixed in, so 36 games in 36 days. while the typical is four days rest, I imagine the occasional fifth day that ordinarily comes due to an off day is quite welcome.

 

Im sorry but its Sept and you are in a playoff race I would prefer to have Z, Lilly, and Hill pitching as much as possible to try and get to the playoffs, instead of giving starts to mediocre pitchers like the human rain delay.

[SouthSideRyan]

Wow, Tim, no Moore on the top 30? I am an admitted Moore fanboy, but it seems like his last 2 seasons would have to warrant a spot.

[jjgman21]

Strange argument. I'm shocked that anyone finds this deal to be a bad one. If Marquis and/or Lilly goes down to some sort of fluke injury, who gets inserted into the rotation? Some unproven arm? Some bullpen guy who would need weeks to get stretched out to 5 innings or more?

 

Tracshel is a safety valve, if nothing more.

 

He was also one of the better arms available at the deadline. Is it better to have him on your own roster or on a team that you might be playing in the playoffs?

 

St. Louis sure could have used him. He's probably better than Kip Wells.

 

I like Scott Moore, but there isn't a place for him in Chicago. Giving up Cherry hurts a little more, but no matter who traded for Tracshel, someone was going to have to give something up to get him.

 

Thats wrong BBB. Trachsel is starting against LA this week. The Cubs are going to go to a modified 6 man rotation for some dumbass reason. I would think you would want your better pitchers pitching more often while in a playoff race, and not have them pitch less.

 

I imagine the dumbass reason is every starter on the staff is set to approach or fly by their career high in IP. if that is in fact the reason, it's not so dumbass, IMO.

 

the Cubs are also in a stretch where they play about 36 days in a row with one off day, with a DH upcoming mixed in, so 36 games in 36 days. while the typical is four days rest, I imagine the occasional fifth day that ordinarily comes due to an off day is quite welcome.

 

Im sorry but its Sept and you are in a playoff race I would prefer to have Z, Lilly, and Hill pitching as much as possible to try and get to the playoffs, instead of giving starts to mediocre pitchers like the human rain delay.

 

and then we'll have an excuse to bitch for five more years that our pitchers with long term contracts all had their arms blown out. huzzah.

 

inserting Trachsel into one game against the Dodgers allows Z to open the series in St. Louis. the way the calendar is stacked right now, Z has a chance to get 6 starts this month and Lilly 5, and there really isn't much anyone can do about stacking it differently short of giving either of these guys only three days rest. the two off days at the end of the month allows the rotation to be stacked to get Z and Lilly the optimum amount of starts. I imagine we will see Z on the 25 against Fla and on the 30 against Cincy.

[Keener98]

Strange argument. I'm shocked that anyone finds this deal to be a bad one. If Marquis and/or Lilly goes down to some sort of fluke injury, who gets inserted into the rotation? Some unproven arm? Some bullpen guy who would need weeks to get stretched out to 5 innings or more?

 

Tracshel is a safety valve, if nothing more.

 

He was also one of the better arms available at the deadline. Is it better to have him on your own roster or on a team that you might be playing in the playoffs?

 

St. Louis sure could have used him. He's probably better than Kip Wells.

 

I like Scott Moore, but there isn't a place for him in Chicago. Giving up Cherry hurts a little more, but no matter who traded for Tracshel, someone was going to have to give something up to get him.

 

Thats wrong BBB. Trachsel is starting against LA this week. The Cubs are going to go to a modified 6 man rotation for some dumbass reason. I would think you would want your better pitchers pitching more often while in a playoff race, and not have them pitch less.

 

I imagine the dumbass reason is every starter on the staff is set to approach or fly by their career high in IP. if that is in fact the reason, it's not so dumbass, IMO.

 

the Cubs are also in a stretch where they play about 36 days in a row with one off day, with a DH upcoming mixed in, so 36 games in 36 days. while the typical is four days rest, I imagine the occasional fifth day that ordinarily comes due to an off day is quite welcome.

 

Im sorry but its Sept and you are in a playoff race I would prefer to have Z, Lilly, and Hill pitching as much as possible to try and get to the playoffs, instead of giving starts to mediocre pitchers like the human rain delay.

 

and then we'll have an excuse to bitch for five more years that our pitchers with long term contracts all had their arms blown out. huzzah.

 

inserting Trachsel into one game against the Dodgers allows Z to open the series in St. Louis. the way the calendar is stacked right now, Z has a chance to get 6 starts this month and Lilly 5, and there really isn't much anyone can do about stacking it differently short of giving either of these guys only three days rest. the two off days at the end of the month allows the rotation to be stacked to get Z and Lilly the optimum amount of starts. I imagine we will see Z on the 25 against Fla and on the 30 against Cincy.

 

Id hope Hill can get 5 also, seeing as hes been this teams best pitcher lately(the whole season). I just think the Cubs are over analyzing things. Ive never heard of a team in 1st place, on Sept 1, going to a 6 man rotation, and playing matchups against sub 500 teams. The pitching staff has been near the top of the NL all year, and now they are really(in my opinion) over analyzing things.

[Guest]

Wow, Tim, no Moore on the top 30? I am an admitted Moore fanboy, but it seems like his last 2 seasons would have to warrant a spot.

Among players with a reasonable number of at bats, he was ninth on his own team in OPS. That's not that impressive.

[jjgman21]

Strange argument. I'm shocked that anyone finds this deal to be a bad one. If Marquis and/or Lilly goes down to some sort of fluke injury, who gets inserted into the rotation? Some unproven arm? Some bullpen guy who would need weeks to get stretched out to 5 innings or more?

 

Tracshel is a safety valve, if nothing more.

 

He was also one of the better arms available at the deadline. Is it better to have him on your own roster or on a team that you might be playing in the playoffs?

 

St. Louis sure could have used him. He's probably better than Kip Wells.

 

I like Scott Moore, but there isn't a place for him in Chicago. Giving up Cherry hurts a little more, but no matter who traded for Tracshel, someone was going to have to give something up to get him.

 

Thats wrong BBB. Trachsel is starting against LA this week. The Cubs are going to go to a modified 6 man rotation for some dumbass reason. I would think you would want your better pitchers pitching more often while in a playoff race, and not have them pitch less.

 

I imagine the dumbass reason is every starter on the staff is set to approach or fly by their career high in IP. if that is in fact the reason, it's not so dumbass, IMO.

 

the Cubs are also in a stretch where they play about 36 days in a row with one off day, with a DH upcoming mixed in, so 36 games in 36 days. while the typical is four days rest, I imagine the occasional fifth day that ordinarily comes due to an off day is quite welcome.

 

Im sorry but its Sept and you are in a playoff race I would prefer to have Z, Lilly, and Hill pitching as much as possible to try and get to the playoffs, instead of giving starts to mediocre pitchers like the human rain delay.

 

and then we'll have an excuse to bitch for five more years that our pitchers with long term contracts all had their arms blown out. huzzah.

 

inserting Trachsel into one game against the Dodgers allows Z to open the series in St. Louis. the way the calendar is stacked right now, Z has a chance to get 6 starts this month and Lilly 5, and there really isn't much anyone can do about stacking it differently short of giving either of these guys only three days rest. the two off days at the end of the month allows the rotation to be stacked to get Z and Lilly the optimum amount of starts. I imagine we will see Z on the 25 against Fla and on the 30 against Cincy.

 

Id hope Hill can get 5 also, seeing as hes been this teams best pitcher lately(the whole season). I just think the Cubs are over analyzing things. Ive never heard of a team in 1st place, on Sept 1, going to a 6 man rotation, and playing matchups against sub 500 teams. The pitching staff has been near the top of the NL all year, and now they are really(in my opinion) over analyzing things.

 

Hill will get 5. framing the matchup as "against sub 500 teams" is very clever, but there's a damn good chance that game on 9/14 will be gigantic in terms of the standings, especially going into the 9/15 where a 4 game swing in the standings will be on the line.

 

look at a calendar. basically the only way to get Lilly that sixth start would be if the Cubs went strictly 4 days rest with Z and Lilly from now until the end of the season. I think that is foolish, not only because of the wear on those two, but also because of how inconsistent it will make the rest of the rotations' rest. if you can come up with a better plan, I'd like to hear it, but without, you really have no basis on which to bitch.

[Keener98]

Strange argument. I'm shocked that anyone finds this deal to be a bad one. If Marquis and/or Lilly goes down to some sort of fluke injury, who gets inserted into the rotation? Some unproven arm? Some bullpen guy who would need weeks to get stretched out to 5 innings or more?

 

Tracshel is a safety valve, if nothing more.

 

He was also one of the better arms available at the deadline. Is it better to have him on your own roster or on a team that you might be playing in the playoffs?

 

St. Louis sure could have used him. He's probably better than Kip Wells.

 

I like Scott Moore, but there isn't a place for him in Chicago. Giving up Cherry hurts a little more, but no matter who traded for Tracshel, someone was going to have to give something up to get him.

 

Thats wrong BBB. Trachsel is starting against LA this week. The Cubs are going to go to a modified 6 man rotation for some dumbass reason. I would think you would want your better pitchers pitching more often while in a playoff race, and not have them pitch less.

 

I imagine the dumbass reason is every starter on the staff is set to approach or fly by their career high in IP. if that is in fact the reason, it's not so dumbass, IMO.

 

the Cubs are also in a stretch where they play about 36 days in a row with one off day, with a DH upcoming mixed in, so 36 games in 36 days. while the typical is four days rest, I imagine the occasional fifth day that ordinarily comes due to an off day is quite welcome.

 

Im sorry but its Sept and you are in a playoff race I would prefer to have Z, Lilly, and Hill pitching as much as possible to try and get to the playoffs, instead of giving starts to mediocre pitchers like the human rain delay.

 

and then we'll have an excuse to bitch for five more years that our pitchers with long term contracts all had their arms blown out. huzzah.

 

inserting Trachsel into one game against the Dodgers allows Z to open the series in St. Louis. the way the calendar is stacked right now, Z has a chance to get 6 starts this month and Lilly 5, and there really isn't much anyone can do about stacking it differently short of giving either of these guys only three days rest. the two off days at the end of the month allows the rotation to be stacked to get Z and Lilly the optimum amount of starts. I imagine we will see Z on the 25 against Fla and on the 30 against Cincy.

 

Id hope Hill can get 5 also, seeing as hes been this teams best pitcher lately(the whole season). I just think the Cubs are over analyzing things. Ive never heard of a team in 1st place, on Sept 1, going to a 6 man rotation, and playing matchups against sub 500 teams. The pitching staff has been near the top of the NL all year, and now they are really(in my opinion) over analyzing things.

 

Hill will get 5. framing the matchup as "against sub 500 teams" is very clever, but there's a damn good chance that game on 9/14 will be gigantic in terms of the standings, especially going into the 9/15 where a 4 game swing in the standings will be on the line.

 

look at a calendar. basically the only way to get Lilly that sixth start would be if the Cubs went strictly 4 days rest with Z and Lilly from now until the end of the season. I think that is foolish, not only because of the wear on those two, but also because of how inconsistent it will make the rest of the rotations' rest. if you can come up with a better plan, I'd like to hear it, but without, you really have no basis on which to bitch.

 

The sub .500 comment was in reference to the Cubs entire schedule in Sept minus LA(i think they are still over) and maybe Stl. I just find it odd that they are going to a 6 man rotation in the heat of a pennant race. Ive never seen another team still in the pennant race in Sept do this, and there arent any other teams doing it this year, so I dont see why my questioning of it is that far out of line.

[Guest]

ha - got a funny email comment from a friend...

 

he quipped that the "selective" use of Trachsel means that he'll pitch primarily in Cubs home games in a blatant effort to increase beer sales.

[jjgman21]

Wow, Tim, no Moore on the top 30? I am an admitted Moore fanboy, but it seems like his last 2 seasons would have to warrant a spot.

Among players with a reasonable number of at bats, he was ninth on his own team in OPS. That's not that impressive.

 

the worst part of the trade is losing Moore. OPS by month

 

A - .620

M - .817

J - .998

J - 1.148

A - .977

 

I think your analysis may have punished the guy for a slow start.

 

edited cuz minorleaguesplits and minorleaguebaseball have different numbers for some reason. the above are mlbb. for some reason mls doesn't have August stats up.

Edited September 1, 2007 by jjgman21

[jjgman21]

 

The sub .500 comment was in reference to the Cubs entire schedule in Sept minus LA(i think they are still over) and maybe Stl. I just find it odd that they are going to a 6 man rotation in the heat of a pennant race. Ive never seen another team still in the pennant race in Sept do this, and there arent any other teams doing it this year, so I dont see why my questioning of it is that far out of line.

 

again, I think your framing the argument to suit your bitch. the only evidence anyone has seen is that Trachsel will get a spot start. there is a vast difference in a spot start v. going with a six man rotation. if it becomes official that they are going to a six man rotation, then bitch away. until then, reserve judgment.

[Guest]

Wow, Tim, no Moore on the top 30? I am an admitted Moore fanboy, but it seems like his last 2 seasons would have to warrant a spot.

Among players with a reasonable number of at bats, he was ninth on his own team in OPS. That's not that impressive.

 

the worst part of the trade is losing Moore. OPS by month

 

A - .637

M - .786

J - .998

J - 1.148

A - .977

 

I think your analysis may have punished the guy for a slow start.

You cannot look at the numbers people are putting up at Iowa this year without considering the run environment there and in the PCL in general. Those look like really spiffy numbers (even though you really can't throw out his april & may numbers and just take his best ones), but darned near everyone was putting up spiffy numbers there. Cherry's ERA, while over 4, may have been more impressive than Moore's OPS.

[Keener98]

 

The sub .500 comment was in reference to the Cubs entire schedule in Sept minus LA(i think they are still over) and maybe Stl. I just find it odd that they are going to a 6 man rotation in the heat of a pennant race. Ive never seen another team still in the pennant race in Sept do this, and there arent any other teams doing it this year, so I dont see why my questioning of it is that far out of line.

 

again, I think your framing the argument to suit your bitch. the only evidence anyone has seen is that Trachsel will get a spot start. there is a vast difference in a spot start v. going with a six man rotation. if it becomes official that they are going to a six man rotation, then bitch away. until then, reserve judgment.

 

Its straight from Lous mouth.

 

Trachsel, 36, will enter the rotation, giving the Cubs six starters to get through the stretch run. Piniella said he will use a "modified" six-man rotation, and that Trachsel will start a game against the Los Angeles Dodgers next week.

[jjgman21]

 

The sub .500 comment was in reference to the Cubs entire schedule in Sept minus LA(i think they are still over) and maybe Stl. I just find it odd that they are going to a 6 man rotation in the heat of a pennant race. Ive never seen another team still in the pennant race in Sept do this, and there arent any other teams doing it this year, so I dont see why my questioning of it is that far out of line.

 

again, I think your framing the argument to suit your bitch. the only evidence anyone has seen is that Trachsel will get a spot start. there is a vast difference in a spot start v. going with a six man rotation. if it becomes official that they are going to a six man rotation, then bitch away. until then, reserve judgment.

 

Its straight from Lous mouth.

 

Trachsel, 36, will enter the rotation, giving the Cubs six starters to get through the stretch run. Piniella said he will use a "modified" six-man rotation, and that Trachsel will start a game against the Los Angeles Dodgers next week.

 

fine. how about reserving judgment until you see what is meant by "modified?"

[jjgman21]

Wow, Tim, no Moore on the top 30? I am an admitted Moore fanboy, but it seems like his last 2 seasons would have to warrant a spot.

Among players with a reasonable number of at bats, he was ninth on his own team in OPS. That's not that impressive.

 

the worst part of the trade is losing Moore. OPS by month

 

A - .637

M - .786

J - .998

J - 1.148

A - .977

 

I think your analysis may have punished the guy for a slow start.

You cannot look at the numbers people are putting up at Iowa this year without considering the run environment there and in the PCL in general. Those look like really spiffy numbers (even though you really can't throw out his april & may numbers and just take his best ones), but darned near everyone was putting up spiffy numbers there. Cherry's ERA, while over 4, may have been more impressive than Moore's OPS.

 

I think the unanalysis of the PCL is a little overblown, but the fact remains that, of qualified hitters, he's 12th in the league in OPS, despite that bad start, and has strikezone judgment, which we all bitch about the organizations lack thereof.

[Guest]

Wow, Tim, no Moore on the top 30? I am an admitted Moore fanboy, but it seems like his last 2 seasons would have to warrant a spot.

Among players with a reasonable number of at bats, he was ninth on his own team in OPS. That's not that impressive.

 

the worst part of the trade is losing Moore. OPS by month

 

A - .637

M - .786

J - .998

J - 1.148

A - .977

 

I think your analysis may have punished the guy for a slow start.

You cannot look at the numbers people are putting up at Iowa this year without considering the run environment there and in the PCL in general. Those look like really spiffy numbers (even though you really can't throw out his april & may numbers and just take his best ones), but darned near everyone was putting up spiffy numbers there. Cherry's ERA, while over 4, may have been more impressive than Moore's OPS.

 

I think the unanalysis of the PCL is a little overblown, but the fact remains that, of qualified hitters, he's 12th in the league in OPS, despite that bad start, and has strikezone judgment, which we all bitch about the organizations lack thereof.

He was behind:

 

Soto (385 ab/1.076 ops)

Murton (151/.977)

Pie (229/.973)

Cedeno (287/.958)

Fox (87/.939)

Kinkade (120/.937)

Fontenot (211/.925)

Hoffpauir (310/.917)

Moore (321/.899)

 

He may have been 12th amongst qualified batters in the PCL, but Iowa's run environment was just crazy in 2007. Those numbers almost have to be thrown away or at least taken within the context of the rest of the team.

[jjgman21]

Wow, Tim, no Moore on the top 30? I am an admitted Moore fanboy, but it seems like his last 2 seasons would have to warrant a spot.

Among players with a reasonable number of at bats, he was ninth on his own team in OPS. That's not that impressive.

 

the worst part of the trade is losing Moore. OPS by month

 

A - .637

M - .786

J - .998

J - 1.148

A - .977

 

I think your analysis may have punished the guy for a slow start.

You cannot look at the numbers people are putting up at Iowa this year without considering the run environment there and in the PCL in general. Those look like really spiffy numbers (even though you really can't throw out his april & may numbers and just take his best ones), but darned near everyone was putting up spiffy numbers there. Cherry's ERA, while over 4, may have been more impressive than Moore's OPS.

 

I think the unanalysis of the PCL is a little overblown, but the fact remains that, of qualified hitters, he's 12th in the league in OPS, despite that bad start, and has strikezone judgment, which we all bitch about the organizations lack thereof.

He was behind:

 

Soto (385 ab/1.076 ops)

Murton (151/.977)

Pie (229/.973)

Cedeno (287/.958)

Fox (87/.939)

Kinkade (120/.937)

Fontenot (211/.925)

Hoffpauir (310/.917)

Moore (321/.899)

 

He may have been 12th amongst qualified batters in the PCL, but Iowa's run environment was just crazy in 2007. Those numbers almost have to be thrown away or at least taken within the context of the rest of the team.

 

yet EPatt and his .817 and subpar defense makes your list.

[Guest]

yeah, but:

 

1) EPatt has a better history of success

2) he's a middle infielder

3) he probably won't be in my top 20

[jjgman21]

yeah, but:

 

1) EPatt has a better history of success

2) he's a middle infielder

3) he probably won't be in my top 20

 

on 1)....putting a helluva lot of stock into a great year at Peoria, and a small sample size at Iowa last year, aren't you?

 

2006, EPatt one year older, both at AA

 

EPatt - 738

Moore - 839

 

2005

 

EPatt at low A - 940

Moore at high A - 843

 

shouldn't recency, level, and age come into consideration when evaluating 'history of success?'

 

on 2)...yes, but not a very good one.

[NCCubFan]

 

The sub .500 comment was in reference to the Cubs entire schedule in Sept minus LA(i think they are still over) and maybe Stl. I just find it odd that they are going to a 6 man rotation in the heat of a pennant race. Ive never seen another team still in the pennant race in Sept do this, and there arent any other teams doing it this year, so I dont see why my questioning of it is that far out of line.

 

again, I think your framing the argument to suit your bitch. the only evidence anyone has seen is that Trachsel will get a spot start. there is a vast difference in a spot start v. going with a six man rotation. if it becomes official that they are going to a six man rotation, then bitch away. until then, reserve judgment.

 

Its straight from Lous mouth.

 

Trachsel, 36, will enter the rotation, giving the Cubs six starters to get through the stretch run. Piniella said he will use a "modified" six-man rotation, and that Trachsel will start a game against the Los Angeles Dodgers next week.

 

fine. how about reserving judgment until you see what is meant by "modified?"

Here's my concept of what a "modified" six-man rotation COULD mean (I'm not saying I think it's necessarily what he DOES mean). Start Zambrano, Lilly, and Marquis every time through the rotation since they're veterans, then start Trachsel for Hill one time through and for Marshall another time through to give the younger pitchers a bit of rest. I agree with you that we should see what he does mean before crucifying him.

[AlwaysaCub]

 

The sub .500 comment was in reference to the Cubs entire schedule in Sept minus LA(i think they are still over) and maybe Stl. I just find it odd that they are going to a 6 man rotation in the heat of a pennant race. Ive never seen another team still in the pennant race in Sept do this, and there arent any other teams doing it this year, so I dont see why my questioning of it is that far out of line.

 

again, I think your framing the argument to suit your bitch. the only evidence anyone has seen is that Trachsel will get a spot start. there is a vast difference in a spot start v. going with a six man rotation. if it becomes official that they are going to a six man rotation, then bitch away. until then, reserve judgment.

 

Its straight from Lous mouth.

 

Trachsel, 36, will enter the rotation, giving the Cubs six starters to get through the stretch run. Piniella said he will use a "modified" six-man rotation, and that Trachsel will start a game against the Los Angeles Dodgers next week.

 

fine. how about reserving judgment until you see what is meant by "modified?"

Here's my concept of what a "modified" six-man rotation COULD mean (I'm not saying I think it's necessarily what he DOES mean). Start Zambrano, Lilly, and Marquis every time through the rotation since they're veterans, then start Trachsel for Hill one time through and for Marshall another time through to give the younger pitchers a bit of rest. I agree with you that we should see what he does mean before crucifying him.

 

This is not only a good plan in the short term, as it'll leave them rested and therefore better, but in the long term as well. We need Hill and Marshall for the next several seasons in our rotation. There is ample evidence that pitchers who significantly exceed their career highs in innings pitched are at far greater risk of breaking down in the next season (see Prior, Mark). Trachsel will make no more than 5 starts this year for us, meaning he'll take away 2 starts from each of our young lefties. The worst case scenario is that this decision costs us a game this year. Odds are we come out even .

[CubinNY]

Trachsel will make no more than 5 starts this year for us, meaning he'll take away 2 starts from each of our young lefties. The worst case scenario is that this decision costs us a game this year. Odds are we come out even .

 

Can the Cubs afford to let him start those 5 games?

 

I'll take craps on that roll of the dice.

 

The only way this won't bother me is if the Cubs actually manage to win when he starts or he never starts.

[Keener98]

There is noway in hell under any circumstance, that Steve Freaking Trachsel should take any starts away from Hill.

[inari]

There is noway in hell under any circumstance, that Steve Freaking Trachsel should take any starts away from Hill.

 

Seconded. I'm okay with giving Marshall a break, but Hill can't be skipping every other start.