Did we overpay for Dempster?

[17 Seconds]

Yes, would you give Mike Bielecki, Kent Bottenfield or Carl Pavano big deals?

 

Have you watched Dempster pitch? He's so much better than those guys.

 

I don't understand the people who don't think that Dempster is good. Watch his stuff; it's filthy!

 

He was mis-cast as a reliever and still wasn't terrible. He will continue to put up 15+ win seasons for the Cubs.

 

His stuff has always been good, that's never been the question. You talk about his being "mis-cat" as a reliever. He was a starter for several years and sucked as that also.

 

Really the difference this year was that he limited his walks, which he's never been able to do. His stuff has never been in question. He's sucked with good stuff before and he can do it again if he doesn't maintain his control.

[Monco]

Yes.

 

I have questioned the signing because I believe he won't pitch at last years level. I'm guessing his numbers will be closer to Marquis' numbers.

 

The space between how excellent Dempster pitched last year and how Jason Marquis usually pitches over a season is pretty gigantic. I agree he almost certainly won't repeat last year, but to just assume he'll plunge all the way down to Marquis' level is incredibly pessimistic.

 

Dempster and Marquis both have a 4.55 career era. Marquis career 198 starts 79 wins,Dempster 195 starts 76 wins.Marquis has averaged 13 wins a year for the last 5. Dempster was a regular starter from 98-03. Only once in that span was his era under 4.50. Dempsters history suggests that if he makes 30 starts,he'll pitch more innings than Marquis. But,Marquis making 30 starts is more likely.

[17 Seconds]

Yes.

 

I have questioned the signing because I believe he won't pitch at last years level. I'm guessing his numbers will be closer to Marquis' numbers.

 

The space between how excellent Dempster pitched last year and how Jason Marquis usually pitches over a season is pretty gigantic. I agree he almost certainly won't repeat last year, but to just assume he'll plunge all the way down to Marquis' level is incredibly pessimistic.

 

Dempster and Marquis both have a 4.55 career era. Marquis career 198 starts 79 wins,Dempster 195 starts 76 wins.Marquis has averaged 13 wins a year for the last 5. Dempster was a regular starter from 98-03. Only once in that span was his era under 4.50. Dempsters history suggests that if he makes 30 starts,he'll pitch more innings than Marquis. But,Marquis making 30 starts is more likely.

 

So your basis for this argument is wins and ERA?

[17 Seconds]

Yes, would you give Mike Bielecki, Kent Bottenfield or Carl Pavano big deals?

 

Have you watched Dempster pitch? He's so much better than those guys.

 

I don't understand the people who don't think that Dempster is good. Watch his stuff; it's filthy!

 

He was mis-cast as a reliever and still wasn't terrible. He will continue to put up 15+ win seasons for the Cubs.

 

Wow, a "use your eyes" AND using wins as a measurement in the same post. That was a gritty post.

 

 

You can use any measurement you like, Dempster was awesome last year and it should continue.

 

Remember how awesome Adrian Beltre was in 2004? Man, he was so awesome.

[Monco]

Yes.

 

I have questioned the signing because I believe he won't pitch at last years level. I'm guessing his numbers will be closer to Marquis' numbers.

 

The space between how excellent Dempster pitched last year and how Jason Marquis usually pitches over a season is pretty gigantic. I agree he almost certainly won't repeat last year, but to just assume he'll plunge all the way down to Marquis' level is incredibly pessimistic.

 

Dempster and Marquis both have a 4.55 career era. Marquis career 198 starts 79 wins,Dempster 195 starts 76 wins.Marquis has averaged 13 wins a year for the last 5. Dempster was a regular starter from 98-03. Only once in that span was his era under 4.50. Dempsters history suggests that if he makes 30 starts,he'll pitch more innings than Marquis. But,Marquis making 30 starts is more likely.

 

So your basis for this argument is wins and ERA?

 

Partially.Last year was a career year for him. It was a contract year and he was able to keep the walks down (until the playoffs). If his walks per inning reverts to his usual standard,most likely his era will rise,win total will drop etc.

[Illini Iceman]

Yes.

 

I have questioned the signing because I believe he won't pitch at last years level. I'm guessing his numbers will be closer to Marquis' numbers.

 

The space between how excellent Dempster pitched last year and how Jason Marquis usually pitches over a season is pretty gigantic. I agree he almost certainly won't repeat last year, but to just assume he'll plunge all the way down to Marquis' level is incredibly pessimistic.

 

Dempster and Marquis both have a 4.55 career era. Marquis career 198 starts 79 wins,Dempster 195 starts 76 wins.Marquis has averaged 13 wins a year for the last 5. Dempster was a regular starter from 98-03. Only once in that span was his era under 4.50. Dempsters history suggests that if he makes 30 starts,he'll pitch more innings than Marquis. But,Marquis making 30 starts is more likely.

 

So your basis for this argument is wins and ERA?

 

Partially.Last year was a career year for him. It was a contract year and he was able to keep the walks down (until the playoffs). If his walks per inning reverts to his usual standard,most likely his era will rise,win total will drop etc.

 

The playoffs was only one game for him and clearly he was trying to be too perfect and that threw him off his game. I think from the way he pitched and what he said last year he figured out that he has to pound the strike zone and get ahead of hitters early in order to be successful. I don't think it is unreasonable to believe that a guy could figure out as he matures a better approach to pitching and that could make him more effective.

[Monco]

Yes.

 

I have questioned the signing because I believe he won't pitch at last years level. I'm guessing his numbers will be closer to Marquis' numbers.

 

The space between how excellent Dempster pitched last year and how Jason Marquis usually pitches over a season is pretty gigantic. I agree he almost certainly won't repeat last year, but to just assume he'll plunge all the way down to Marquis' level is incredibly pessimistic.

 

Dempster and Marquis both have a 4.55 career era. Marquis career 198 starts 79 wins,Dempster 195 starts 76 wins.Marquis has averaged 13 wins a year for the last 5. Dempster was a regular starter from 98-03. Only once in that span was his era under 4.50. Dempsters history suggests that if he makes 30 starts,he'll pitch more innings than Marquis. But,Marquis making 30 starts is more likely.

 

So your basis for this argument is wins and ERA?

Partially.Last year was a career year for him. It was a contract year and he was able to keep the walks down (until the playoffs). If his walks per inning reverts to his usual standard,most likely his era will rise,win total will drop etc.

 

The playoffs was only one game for him and clearly he was trying to be too perfect and that threw him off his game. I think from the way he pitched and what he said last year he figured out that he has to pound the strike zone and get ahead of hitters early in order to be successful. I don't think it is unreasonable to believe that a guy could figure out as he matures a better approach to pitching and that could make him more effective.

 

Hope so.

[Sammy Sofa]

Yes.

 

I have questioned the signing because I believe he won't pitch at last years level. I'm guessing his numbers will be closer to Marquis' numbers.

 

The space between how excellent Dempster pitched last year and how Jason Marquis usually pitches over a season is pretty gigantic. I agree he almost certainly won't repeat last year, but to just assume he'll plunge all the way down to Marquis' level is incredibly pessimistic.

 

Dempster and Marquis both have a 4.55 career era. Marquis career 198 starts 79 wins,Dempster 195 starts 76 wins.Marquis has averaged 13 wins a year for the last 5. Dempster was a regular starter from 98-03. Only once in that span was his era under 4.50. Dempsters history suggests that if he makes 30 starts,he'll pitch more innings than Marquis. But,Marquis making 30 starts is more likely.

 

So your basis for this argument is wins and ERA?

Partially.Last year was a career year for him. It was a contract year and he was able to keep the walks down (until the playoffs). If his walks per inning reverts to his usual standard,most likely his era will rise,win total will drop etc.

 

The playoffs was only one game for him and clearly he was trying to be too perfect and that threw him off his game. I think from the way he pitched and what he said last year he figured out that he has to pound the strike zone and get ahead of hitters early in order to be successful. I don't think it is unreasonable to believe that a guy could figure out as he matures a better approach to pitching and that could make him more effective.

 

Hope so.

 

Marquis never had a year like Dempster did last year...not even close. It seems unlikely Dempster is just going to forget to keep his walks down simply because it's not a contract year. Will he repeat? Probably not. But looking at his year, it's pretty clear he wasn't just lucky or that it was the result of smoke and mirrors.

[jiml60]

I just hope he never starts Game 1 of a playoff series again.

[Monco]

The hits and home runs per inning were down from his norm also.

[Sammy Sofa]

The hits and home runs per inning were down from his norm also.

 

Yes, and he maintained it all season (single playoff game at the end aside). That's not say he'll regress, but again, to say he's likely to fully regress to a Marquis-like season would be a really impressive downfall.

[Monco]

The hits and home runs per inning were down from his norm also.

 

Yes, and he maintained it all season (single playoff game at the end aside). That's not say he'll regress, but again, to say he's likely to fully regress to a Marquis-like season would be a really impressive downfall.

 

13 wins,era 4.00-4.60 ?

[Sammy Sofa]

The hits and home runs per inning were down from his norm also.

 

Yes, and he maintained it all season (single playoff game at the end aside). That's not say he'll regress, but again, to say he's likely to fully regress to a Marquis-like season would be a really impressive downfall.

 

13 wins,era 4.00-4.60 ?

 

What did you see last year that indicates you think that's likely? And what about the other pitching stats that are far more valuable to evaluating a pitcher...what's your prediciton for those? I know his past history as a starter, but what do you base such regression on besides that?

[17 Seconds]

The hits and home runs per inning were down from his norm also.

 

Yes, and he maintained it all season (single playoff game at the end aside). That's not say he'll regress, but again, to say he's likely to fully regress to a Marquis-like season would be a really impressive downfall.

 

13 wins,era 4.00-4.60 ?

 

why are you predicting wins?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Dempster made mechanical changes for this year, most notably the glove flip. I believe Ping pointed out something else too(maybe with pitch selection) that was different. Statistically, Dempster isn't quite as good as he was last year, but clearly improved from his previous self before making changes. "He's going to regress to career norms, he's never been this good" doesn't quite cut it for me as an explanation without anything else to explain him falling all the way back.

[sneakypower]

Yes, would you give Mike Bielecki, Kent Bottenfield or Carl Pavano big deals?

 

Have you watched Dempster pitch? He's so much better than those guys.

 

I don't understand the people who don't think that Dempster is good. Watch his stuff; it's filthy!

 

He was mis-cast as a reliever and still wasn't terrible. He will continue to put up 15+ win seasons for the Cubs.

 

Wow, a "use your eyes" AND using wins as a measurement in the same post. That was a gritty post.

 

 

You can use any measurement you like, Dempster was awesome last year and it should continue.

 

Remember how awesome Adrian Beltre was in 2004? Man, he was so awesome.

he still is

 

i really hope Dempster earns his entire contract like Beltre has

[17 Seconds]

Yes, would you give Mike Bielecki, Kent Bottenfield or Carl Pavano big deals?

 

Have you watched Dempster pitch? He's so much better than those guys.

 

I don't understand the people who don't think that Dempster is good. Watch his stuff; it's filthy!

 

He was mis-cast as a reliever and still wasn't terrible. He will continue to put up 15+ win seasons for the Cubs.

 

Wow, a "use your eyes" AND using wins as a measurement in the same post. That was a gritty post.

 

 

You can use any measurement you like, Dempster was awesome last year and it should continue.

 

Remember how awesome Adrian Beltre was in 2004? Man, he was so awesome.

he still is

 

i really hope Dempster earns his entire contract like Beltre has

 

Beltre is awesome?

 

Beltre has not come even remotely close to matching his 2004 season in any year since then. Adrian Beltre is not "aqwesome". He's a good defender and a crappy hitter.

 

 

1.017

.716

.793

.801

.784

 

Those are his yearly OPSs over the last 5 seasons.

 

Beltre was awesome in 2004 and hasn't come anywhere near that level again.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Beltre isn't great offensively, but those raw OPS numbers are suppressed by Safeco. He's also an elite defender, making him a valuable commodity, even compared to other 3B. That doesn't mean he was worth his contract, but that wasn't the point cro magnon was making(I don't think so anyway).

[17 Seconds]

Beltre isn't great offensively, but those raw OPS numbers are suppressed by Safeco. He's also an elite defender, making him a valuable commodity, even compared to other 3B. That doesn't mean he was worth his contract, but that wasn't the point cro magnon was making(I don't think so anyway).

 

Yeah you're right aobut Safeco, but that doesn't cange anything. He's an elite defender and an average to slightly above average offensive player.

 

The point is that he's not even remotely close to his 2004 self, which is what he got paid for. It was for the people saying"Dempster was awesome in 2008! Didn't you watch?". Yeah, well beltre was awesome in 2004 and hasn't come close to duplicating it.

 

That doesn't mean he was worth his contract, but that wasn't the point cro magnon was making(I don't think so anyway

 

He literally said right in his post that he's earned his contract.

[Monco]

Dempster made mechanical changes for this year, most notably the glove flip. I believe Ping pointed out something else too(maybe with pitch selection) that was different. Statistically, Dempster isn't quite as good as he was last year, but clearly improved from his previous self before making changes. "He's going to regress to career norms, he's never been this good" doesn't quite cut it for me as an explanation without anything else to explain him falling all the way back.

 

Last year he had alot to prove. His 2006 and 2007 seasons weren't that impressive. He was being given the chance to go back to starting in 2008,which has been his preference. It was the last year of his contract and he has a career year. I hope i'm wrong but....

[Transmogrified Tiger]

He literally said right in his post that he's earned his contract.

 

Put together the analogy. Beltre was unreal one year, then has been consistently good over his big contract. He's hoping for the same from Dempster.

[RedFlash]

Getting back to the topic at hand:

 

This might not be saying much, but.......I much rather have Dempster at 4 yrs $52 mill over AJ Brunett at 5 yr $82.5 million. Heck, I might rather have Dempster at his new deal over CC Sabathia and his deal. Considering that pitchers like CC and AJ got there money, and others like Lowe, Sheets, Perez and Wolf have struggle to find available money, I would say no the Cubs didn't overpay for Dempster. Ryan was smart and had decent foresight to sign before the big boys do and the money drying out.

[17 Seconds]

He literally said right in his post that he's earned his contract.

 

Put together the analogy. Beltre was unreal one year, then has been consistently good over his big contract. He's hoping for the same from Dempster.

 

I don't really see how you're getting that out of his post. I commented on how awesome Beltre was and he said "he still is", which he's not, especially what I was comparing him to (his 2004 self). He also said very clearly that Beltre has earned his contract, which he clearly has not. When they signed him I'm pretty sure they weren't hoping for great defense and sub-.800 OPS. He got paid for his 2004 season. I don't see any analogy.

 

Actually, if you want to use an analogy, let's use one about how he says he hopes Dempster will live up to his contract the same way Beltre has lived up to his.

 

So if Beltre went from a 1.000+ OPS guy to a sub .800 OPS guy and Dempster "lived up to his contract" the same way, what would that mean for him? An ERA over 4.

[Monco]

Getting back to the topic at hand:

 

This might not be saying much, but.......I much rather have Dempster at 4 yrs $52 mill over AJ Brunett at 5 yr $82.5 million. Heck, I might rather have Dempster at his new deal over CC Sabathia and his deal. Considering that pitchers like CC and AJ got there money, and others like Lowe, Sheets, Perez and Wolf have struggle to find available money, I would say no the Cubs didn't overpay for Dempster. Ryan was smart and had decent foresight to sign before the big boys do and the money drying out.

 

Dempsters contract does look better than Burnetts.

[Sammy Sofa]

Dempster made mechanical changes for this year, most notably the glove flip. I believe Ping pointed out something else too(maybe with pitch selection) that was different. Statistically, Dempster isn't quite as good as he was last year, but clearly improved from his previous self before making changes. "He's going to regress to career norms, he's never been this good" doesn't quite cut it for me as an explanation without anything else to explain him falling all the way back.

 

Last year he had alot to prove. His 2006 and 2007 seasons weren't that impressive. He was being given the chance to go back to starting in 2008,which has been his preference. It was the last year of his contract and he has a career year. I hope i'm wrong but....

 

You're still making a huge leap without explaining why. You keep saying "career year" like it's some magic cure-all that allows a pitcher to have an Cy Young-sniffing year. I understand why the perception of the "career year" exists, but how would he have just turned it on like he did and then either totally forget all of his changes or, what? Choose to suck or be mediocre because he got paid? What is the thinking here?