Rogers: Cubs Could Be #1 in NL IF They Acquired a #2 Starter

[HoopsCubs]

In the same blog where Phil discussed the Orlando Cabrera options, he made this statement reacting to the Dan Haren trade to Arizona:

 

"Looking at NL rosters right now, the serious contenders, in order, are Arizona, Los Angeles, the Cubs (who could be first if they had a No. 2 starter), Milwaukee and the Mets."

 

http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports_hardball/2007/12/fast-food-for-1.html

[rocket]

i guess ted lilly and rich hill weren't 2 starterish enough.

[HoopsCubs]

Besides Haren and Santana (#1 for sure), are there any #2 starters currently being actively shopped or even rumored to be on the block? Does Bedard qualify as a #2?

 

Hoops

[HoopsCubs]

i guess ted lilly and rich hill weren't 2 starterish enough.

 

I recall late last summer even when Lilly was pitching very well, Rogers thought of him as a #3. And maybe that's accurate.

[A New Era]

I personally would consider Bedard a #2, yes.

[Smack]

I think you could make a good argument that Bedard is a #2.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

now that Hill has 1 full season under his belt, let him prove he's not a #2

 

and maybe Lilly pitched a bit over his head last season, but if those are #3 numbers...

[nilodnayr]

I think you could make a good argument that Bedard is a #2.

 

I think you could make a good arguement that Bedard and his 13th place VORP last year is a #1.

[rocket]

i guess ted lilly and rich hill weren't 2 starterish enough.

 

I recall late last summer even when Lilly was pitching very well, Rogers thought of him as a #3. And maybe that's accurate.

 

well phil rogers is a moron.

 

now, if rogers said we were a competent shortstop away from being the #1 nl team...

[Smack]

I think you could make a good argument that Bedard is a #2.

 

I think you could make a good arguement that Bedard and his 13th place VORP last year is a #1.

 

What were his VORP rankings in 05' and 06'?

[BigbadB]

No love for Colorado? Hmm. I might like them more than the Dodgers.

[wrigley23]

we are a traditional leadoff hitter, a real closer & a #2 starter away.

[nilodnayr]

I think you could make a good argument that Bedard is a #2.

 

I think you could make a good arguement that Bedard and his 13th place VORP last year is a #1.

 

What were his VORP rankings in 05' and 06'?

 

#33 in 2006 (borderline #1)

#65 in 2005 (he was injured)

[rawaction]

we are a traditional leadoff hitter, a real closer & a #2 starter away.

 

Cubs are a little grit, heart and toughness away from being really unbeatable.

[CubColtPacer]

now that Hill has 1 full season under his belt, let him prove he's not a #2

 

and maybe Lilly pitched a bit over his head last season, but if those are #3 numbers...

 

For some reason, people continue to overrate most hitters while underrating pitchers. There are plenty of hitters that are labeled stars or highly productive players that are slightly above average or even worse, but the criteria to be a #1, #2, or #3 starter is absolutely ridiculous when you compare it to the actual production of pitchers.

 

For example, the Cubs rotation last year. Rogers claims there was no good #2. In reality, Lilly, Hill, and Z were all good number 2 starters last year. Marshall was a #2 by production knocked down a little bit because of durability, and most people would have labeled him as a #4 or 5. Marquis was a #3, but his perception would put him at #5 or worse.

 

There's a reason why everybody complains about their rotation (except for a truly dominant pitching team) and that's because the expectations for pitchers are way too high. The Cubs were 2nd in the NL in E.R.A. by starters and 2nd in WHIP, but there were still lots of complaints about the rotation by media and fans alike about the rotation. My guess is if the Cubs had been 2nd in runs scored and OPS, a lot fewer fans would be complaining about the offense than complained about the rotation.

[BigbadB]

we are a traditional leadoff hitter, a real closer & a #2 starter away.

 

2007 lead off hitter: 97 runs scored in 135 games

2006 lead off hitter: 87 runs scored in 162 games

 

2007 lead off hitter: not a traditional leadoff hitter.

2006 lead off hitter: traditional lead off hitter.

 

2007 lead off hitter: .299 .337 .560

2006 lead off hitter: .292 .330 .388

 

2007 lead off hitter: Alfonso Soriano

2006 lead off hitter: Juan Pierre

 

Many "traditional" lead off hitters should never hit higher than 8th on any line up card.

 

I'll take Soriano hitting lead off for the Cubs over Juan Pierre 8 days a week for many reasons, not just one.

[nilodnayr]

we are a traditional leadoff hitter, a real closer & a #2 starter away.

 

Cubs are a little grit, heart and toughness away from being really unbeatable.

 

Grinder Rule #7: Fill holes that aren't really holes with inferior white guys who get dirty while ignoring the glaring weaknesses of your team.

[Smack]

I think you could make a good argument that Bedard is a #2.

 

I think you could make a good arguement that Bedard and his 13th place VORP last year is a #1.

 

What were his VORP rankings in 05' and 06'?

 

#33 in 2006 (borderline #1)

#65 in 2005 (he was injured)

 

Thanks.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Blanton

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

Cubs could be #1 if they aquired a SS.

[wrigley23]

i never said juan pierre was a good leadoff hitter either. I want a guy that gets on base & does not waste outs by striking out 25% of the time like alfonso does.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

i never said juan pierre was a good leadoff hitter either. I want a guy that gets on base & does not waste outs by striking out 25% of the time like alfonso does.

As opposed to "grounding out" or "flying out". Those are outs are not wasted.

[CUBZ99]

i never said juan pierre was a good leadoff hitter either. I want a guy that gets on base & does not waste outs by striking out 25% of the time like alfonso does.

 

:lol: You really know how to rile other posters up don't you. Be prepared for the "strikeouts are just the same as any other out" avalanche that is coming your way.

 

BTW I don't disagree with the OBP, the Cubs could use a guy that gets on base at a better clip than Soriano leading off.

[98navigator]

i never said juan pierre was a good leadoff hitter either. I want a guy that gets on base & does not waste outs by striking out 25% of the time like alfonso does.

 

Why do strikeouts matter? An out is an out. Wishing that he had a higher OBP is one thing but I don't agree with your criticism.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

i never said juan pierre was a good leadoff hitter either. I want a guy that gets on base

you should have stopped there