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

[haltz]

Strikeouts vs. outs, numeric starter notation, and leadoff hitters. This thread is awesome.

[RammyFanny]

Belkast:

The surprise team is in the NL.

 

Would we be considered the surprise team? We've been linked to Bedard already. Other NL teams

 

Reds---already been linked

Dodgers---already been linked

Mets--haven't heard anything about them interested in Bedard, but we know theyre interested in Santana, so makes sense.

Nationals?---would they deal with the "cross-town rival"? They'd like to make a run at it with the new stadium.

Rockies?

 

The rest of the NL either doesn't need another starter, isn't in a position to contend in the next couple years, or doesnt have the players that'd tempt the O's to be interested IMO.

 

Like I said before, I think we could be. We've been half-assed linked to Bedard some this offseason, and we know Hendry has liked him for awhile. Orioles board thinks it might be Milwaukee, Colorado, or us.

[nilodnayr]

Belkast:

The surprise team is in the NL.

 

Would we be considered the surprise team? We've been linked to Bedard already. Other NL teams

 

Reds---already been linked

Dodgers---already been linked

Mets--haven't heard anything about them interested in Bedard, but we know theyre interested in Santana, so makes sense.

Nationals?---would they deal with the "cross-town rival"? They'd like to make a run at it with the new stadium.

Rockies?

 

The rest of the NL either doesn't need another starter, isn't in a position to contend in the next couple years, or doesnt have the players that'd tempt the O's to be interested IMO.

 

Like I said before, I think we could be. We've been half-assed linked to Bedard some this offseason, and we know Hendry has liked him for awhile. Orioles board thinks it might be Milwaukee, Colorado, or us.

 

Man, Milwaukee already have 6 starters, so I didn't include them, but that could be a possibility if Baltimore is looking for young pitching in return. That would suck for us.

 

Sheets, Bedard, Gallardo is a pretty awesome front 3.

Assuming they pull off the trade without including Gallardo, of course. If they include Gallardo then its probably a loss for the Brewers.

[Rob]

What do the Brewers have that could be traded for Bedard?

 

Sheets - Will be a free agent after this season. No real value to the Orioles, who are likely 3-4 years away from competing.

 

Capuano - coming off a down season

 

Gallardo - more valuable than Bedard straight up

 

Parra - Has real value.

 

Vargas - probably a toss-in

 

Fielder - more valuable than Bedard.

 

Weeks - A good possibility, but MacPhail does have that defense fetish, which may preclude him. Besides, the available 2B market consists almost entirely of has-beens or never-weres. Only Marcus Giles and Jorge Cantu might provide value, and they are shaky propositions.

 

Hardy - Another good possibility, but the FA SS market is even worse.

 

Braun - Even with his horrific defense, he's far more valuable than Bedard.

 

Hall - coming off a huge down season. Besides, the Brewers are already struggling to fill out their outfield.

 

Hart - Real value, but again, the Brewers are already shorthanded in the outfield.

 

LaPorta - Can't be traded until one year after he's drafted.

 

 

I just don't see the Brewers having the pieces to put a Bedard trade together while managing to actually improve their team. We should all be so lucky as to see the Brewers trade Hardy, Parra, and Hart for him. It'd cost them a few wins the next two seasons, and many more after that.

[nilodnayr]

What do the Brewers have that could be traded for Bedard?

 

Sheets - Will be a free agent after this season. No real value to the Orioles, who are likely 3-4 years away from competing.

 

Capuano - coming off a down season

 

Gallardo - more valuable than Bedard straight up

 

Parra - Has real value.

 

Vargas - probably a toss-in

 

Fielder - more valuable than Bedard.

 

Weeks - A good possibility, but MacPhail does have that defense fetish, which may preclude him. Besides, the available 2B market consists almost entirely of has-beens or never-weres. Only Marcus Giles and Jorge Cantu might provide value, and they are shaky propositions.

 

Hardy - Another good possibility, but the FA SS market is even worse.

 

Braun - Even with his horrific defense, he's far more valuable than Bedard.

 

Hall - coming off a huge down season. Besides, the Brewers are already struggling to fill out their outfield.

 

Hart - Real value, but again, the Brewers are already shorthanded in the outfield.

 

LaPorta - Can't be traded until one year after he's drafted.

 

 

I just don't see the Brewers having the pieces to put a Bedard trade together while managing to actually improve their team. We should all be so lucky as to see the Brewers trade Hardy, Parra, and Hart for him. It'd cost them a few wins the next two seasons, and many more after that.

Forgot Villanueva.

[RammyFanny]

What do the Brewers have that could be traded for Bedard?

 

Sheets - Will be a free agent after this season. No real value to the Orioles, who are likely 3-4 years away from competing.

 

Capuano - coming off a down season

 

Gallardo - more valuable than Bedard straight up

 

Parra - Has real value.

 

Vargas - probably a toss-in

 

Fielder - more valuable than Bedard.

 

Weeks - A good possibility, but MacPhail does have that defense fetish, which may preclude him. Besides, the available 2B market consists almost entirely of has-beens or never-weres. Only Marcus Giles and Jorge Cantu might provide value, and they are shaky propositions.

 

Hardy - Another good possibility, but the FA SS market is even worse.

 

Braun - Even with his horrific defense, he's far more valuable than Bedard.

 

Hall - coming off a huge down season. Besides, the Brewers are already struggling to fill out their outfield.

 

Hart - Real value, but again, the Brewers are already shorthanded in the outfield.

 

LaPorta - Can't be traded until one year after he's drafted.

 

 

I just don't see the Brewers having the pieces to put a Bedard trade together while managing to actually improve their team. We should all be so lucky as to see the Brewers trade Hardy, Parra, and Hart for him. It'd cost them a few wins the next two seasons, and many more after that.

On the Orioles board most of them want Hart, Parra, plus an A ball SS.

[Clem Fandango]

On the Orioles board most of them want Hart, Parra, plus an A ball SS.

 

Then wouldn't a Murton, Cedeno, and Gallagher proposal be equal, if not better than that? Even then I don't even know if I do it. I just don't think Bedard will stay healthy enough to be worth the loss of young promising players.

[XZero771679666304]

On the Orioles board most of them want Hart, Parra, plus an A ball SS.

 

Then wouldn't a Murton, Cedeno, and Gallagher proposal be equal, if not better than that? Even then I don't even know if I do it. I just don't think Bedard will stay healthy enough to be worth the loss of young promising players.

 

Hart > Murton

 

Parra > Gallagher

 

Cedeno > A ball SS

[Clem Fandango]

On the Orioles board most of them want Hart, Parra, plus an A ball SS.

 

Then wouldn't a Murton, Cedeno, and Gallagher proposal be equal, if not better than that? Even then I don't even know if I do it. I just don't think Bedard will stay healthy enough to be worth the loss of young promising players.

 

Hart > Murton

 

Parra > Gallagher

 

Cedeno > A ball SS

 

Yeah, guess I didn't realize at the time of posting that you can't bank on what Murton could do compared to what Hart has already done.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

How is Parra more valuable than Gallagher?

[nilodnayr]

How is Parra more valuable than Gallagher?

 

I'd say his former top prospect tag probably equates to more perceived value. Now whether thats true of actual value or not is debateable. He and Gallagher had nearly identical seasons. Except Sean is 3 years younger.

[Rob]

How is Parra more valuable than Gallagher?

 

Manny Parra

 

Sean Gallagher

 

If people actually think more highly of Parra, the only reason I can think of is that Parra is a southpaw. Gallagher has put up equal or better numbers at every level and at a younger age.

[haltz]

Parra posted excellent walk-rates in over 200 AA innings. Whereas Gallagher's control was a question mark in there in 2006, though he reeled it in for the most part last year. Being younger and not repeating levels is a definite point in Gallagher's favor.

 

Why did Manny get sent to the FSL after a 4.1 K/BB double-A performance in 2005? That seems odd.

[Irrelevant Dude]

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

 

Personally, I think he still has to prove that he IS a #2.

 

What more does he have to do? He was probably the best pitcher on the Cubs last year.

 

For starters, he has to win more than 11 games. Granted he had poor run support last season, but a #2 starter needs to do better than 11 wins regardless of run support. I like Rich Hill, but I agree that he still has more to prove to be a solid #2 starter.

[JimSorgi]

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

 

Personally, I think he still has to prove that he IS a #2.

 

What more does he have to do? He was probably the best pitcher on the Cubs last year.

 

For starters, he has to win more than 11 games. Granted he had poor run support last season, but a #2 starter needs to do better than 11 wins regardless of run support. I like Rich Hill, but I agree that he still has more to prove to be a solid #2 starter.

A pitcher's win total does not, in anyway, show how good a pitcher is.

[inari]

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

 

Personally, I think he still has to prove that he IS a #2.

 

What more does he have to do? He was probably the best pitcher on the Cubs last year.

 

For starters, he has to win more than 11 games. Granted he had poor run support last season, but a #2 starter needs to do better than 11 wins regardless of run support. I like Rich Hill, but I agree that he still has more to prove to be a solid #2 starter.

 

 

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:40 pm

Posts: 818

Location: Stuck in the 80's

[nilodnayr]

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

 

Personally, I think he still has to prove that he IS a #2.

 

What more does he have to do? He was probably the best pitcher on the Cubs last year.

 

For starters, he has to win more than 11 games. Granted he had poor run support last season, but a #2 starter needs to do better than 11 wins regardless of run support. I like Rich Hill, but I agree that he still has more to prove to be a solid #2 starter.

 

 

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:40 pm

Posts: 818

Location: Stuck in the 80's

 

Attach the post, not the posters location :lol:

[samhainn77]

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

 

Personally, I think he still has to prove that he IS a #2.

 

What more does he have to do? He was probably the best pitcher on the Cubs last year.

 

For starters, he has to win more than 11 games. Granted he had poor run support last season, but a #2 starter needs to do better than 11 wins regardless of run support. I like Rich Hill, but I agree that he still has more to prove to be a solid #2 starter.

 

 

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:40 pm

Posts: 818

Location: Stuck in the 80's

 

Attach the post, not the posters location :lol:

 

Not sure if you are being sarcastic, but I think he is insinuating that judging a pitcher's worth by wins is an archaic way of thinking. If you were being sarcastic, please disregard.

[NCCubFan]

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

 

Personally, I think he still has to prove that he IS a #2.

 

What more does he have to do? He was probably the best pitcher on the Cubs last year.

 

For starters, he has to win more than 11 games. Granted he had poor run support last season, but a #2 starter needs to do better than 11 wins regardless of run support. I like Rich Hill, but I agree that he still has more to prove to be a solid #2 starter.

 

 

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:40 pm

Posts: 818

Location: Stuck in the 80's

 

Attach the post, not the posters location :lol:

What is he supposed to attach the post to? :D

[Ender]

I'm not so sure the Cubs have a legit #1 given the 3 year regression of Zambrano. My money is on Hill being the team ace this year. Lilly is a tough read, is the improved control for real or is it sort of like Capuano's 2006 where he had abnormally good control and then it went away again the next season.

 

As for Parra vs Gallagher, part of it is the lefty thing and part is probably that Parra scouts even better than his numbers look, the numbers have been hurt by the injuries. That of course brings up a whole different question, don't the injuries kind of make Gallagher look like a better option anyway?

[rawaction]

I'm not so sure the Cubs have a legit #1 given the 3 year regression of Zambrano. My money is on Hill being the team ace this year. Lilly is a tough read, is the improved control for real or is it sort of like Capuano's 2006 where he had abnormally good control and then it went away again the next season.

 

One year does not a regression make. Carlos Zambrano is still one of the top 10 pitchers in baseball. He's 26, and he showed he can still pitch with the league's elite in June, July and down the stretch in September.

[Ender]

I'm not so sure the Cubs have a legit #1 given the 3 year regression of Zambrano. My money is on Hill being the team ace this year. Lilly is a tough read, is the improved control for real or is it sort of like Capuano's 2006 where he had abnormally good control and then it went away again the next season.

 

One year does not a regression make. Carlos Zambrano is still one of the top 10 pitchers in baseball. He's 26, and he showed he can still pitch with the league's elite in June, July and down the stretch in September.

 

If it were just one year I wouldn't be worried.

 

BB/9 - 3.5, 3.6, 4.9. 4.3

GB% - 50.5%, 50%, 46.9%, 46.5%

FiP - 3.41, 3.62, 4.15, 4.55

 

Those are some really ugly trends. Now he is only 26 and you don't expect regression from someone that age but Zambrano has had his arm abused big time at a young age and if you look at pitchers with similar histories it doesn't paint a good picture.

[Mephistopheles]

zambranos bat makes up for quite a bit of that regression.