Carlos Marmol

[Flames24Rulz]

Our bullpen has actually been pretty damn solid lately. Would it be nice to add another arm? Yeah of course it would, but not if the price is real steep. Like others have mentioned, we have much more pressing needs on offense than our bullpen right now.

[CubColtPacer]

 

So long as Gregg gets the job done he's fine, and thus far he's getting the job done. It may not always be pretty, but it's the end result that matters.

I would disagree with that. In the regular season, he might manage to just barely get out of jams... but in the postseason, I think it would be a different story. In a world series game, you can't bank on your closer walking a couple guys, throwing a wild pitch, and then finding some way to just barely close the game out.

 

Gregg hasn't exactly been doing that though. His last 22 outings have gone this way:

 

20 scoreless outings out of 22.

 

4 of those outings have had an inning where Gregg allowed 2 or more combined hits/walks.

 

That means 18 of his last 22 outings have had 1 combined hit/walk or less. He hasn't really gotten into many jams anytime recently.

 

Adding another reliever basically means that one of the Cubs good relievers is now pitching with deficits on a routine basis. That's a waste of either Gregg, Ascanio, or Guzman's talent. Not only would the Cubs then have to pay much more than the value that a good to great reliever actually gives you, but they'd also have to put a good reliever in a bad role. It's a terribly inefficient way of going about roster management and should really only be done if the Cubs are convinced that 2009 is their last chance (which is a supposition that I don't agree with whatsoever). Right now, it's simply a luxury that the Cubs cannot afford to have.

[Cubbie Swagger]

Planning for the postseason is not the way to win over the regular season. You can't hinge 162 games on the ideal lineup for the very limited sample size of 19 games, max. I understand what you're saying, but it's just not realistic. If guys can get the job done over the regular season then the smart move is to count on them to get it done for 11-19 more games. Any closer, no matter how good, can tank it in the limited sample size of the three playoff series. Trying to play to those hypotheticals is ultimately a futile effort.

My point there, is that the postseason exposes who is really good, and who isn't. Look at Soriano... he can't hit good pitching, period. I wouldn't be surprised to see him go 0-for in the 2009 playoffs (or close to it). I guess we can agree to disagree on that, though, because I agreed with everything else you said.

 

If Heilman is the last man in the pen, the Cubs probably have the best pen in the league.

I don't see a problem with that. :grin:

 

The only reason you don't want him to be the last guy in the pen is because he costs so much. You certainly wouldn't want to spend more money and tradable assets to get another 6th or 7th reliever.

I see your point, but for the record, I wasn't saying we should get another 6th or 7th reliever. I was saying we should get someone better than that... and then move people down a notch (Heilman becomes the last guy, Patton is gone, etc).

 

And judge the player on their actual merits as opposed to what posters on a message board say, especially after a bad game. They're going to be hyperbolic at that moment anyways. It's a long season.

Oh come on, man. Give me more credit than that :-)) I wasn't judging anyone based off of the message board consensus. I was just making a side comment that a couple weeks ago, most people would have agreed with me, but now, it seems like I'm the only one concerned about our pen still.

 

Oh well... I just hope we can all agree that we don't want to see Neal Cotts in a Cubs uniform ever again :-)) Now that I think about it... is there any chance he would have any kind of value in a trade? Maybe someone will see what we saw in him (the fact that he had ONE good year). I would love to maybe throw him into a trade and save ourselves a prospect (in whatever deal we end up making, be it for offense or whatever).

[Cubbie Swagger]

Hmm... is Kevin Gregg still a reliable closer?

 

:roll:

[UMFan83]

Hmm... is Kevin Gregg still a reliable closer?

 

:roll:

 

Hmm... I don't know. What I do know is that one game shouldn't change anyone's opinion on any player.

[Sammy Sofa]

Hmm... is Kevin Gregg still a reliable closer?

 

:roll:

 

Reliable enough, yes.

 

I like how you bumped this as if people were saying Gregg would never blow another save for the rest of the season.

[SouthSideRyan]

Hmm... is Kevin Gregg still a reliable closer?

 

:roll:

 

I'm more interested to hear your opinions on Alfonso Soriano as a leadoff hitter. I think he's great.

[Cubbie Swagger]

Hmm... is Kevin Gregg still a reliable closer?

 

:roll:

 

Reliable enough, yes.

 

I like how you bumped this as if people were saying Gregg would never blow another save for the rest of the season.

Well it only took 2 days after all the talk about how he had been good lately.

 

I'm more interested to hear your opinions on Alfonso Soriano as a leadoff hitter. I think he's great.

I'm having trouble figuring out your intent here. I can't tell if you're mocking me or being sarcastic, or both.

[dew1679666265]

Hmm... is Kevin Gregg still a reliable closer?

 

:roll:

 

Reliable enough, yes.

 

I like how you bumped this as if people were saying Gregg would never blow another save for the rest of the season.

Well it only took 2 days after all the talk about how he had been good lately.

 

If it was a week or two weeks between us talking him up and him blowing a save, would that have been better?

 

One bad game doesn't negate a month of being excellent and a season of being decent.

[Tracer Bullet]

Hmm... is Kevin Gregg still a reliable closer?

 

:roll:

 

This is reminding me of last year's "Kerry Wood is a sham closer" nonsense. Let's not repeat that crap again.

[UK1679666180]

Hmm... is Kevin Gregg still a reliable closer?

 

:roll:

 

This is reminding me of last year's "Kerry Wood is a sham closer" nonsense. Let's not repeat that crap again.

 

It's valid as far as Gregg is concerned. Wood was a solid #2 reliever.

[Sammy Sofa]

Well it only took 2 days after all the talk about how he had been good lately.

 

2 days, 2 weeks, 2 months...what's the difference? Nobody thought he wasn't going to blow another save. When it happened is meaningless.

[Cubbie Swagger]

Well it only took 2 days after all the talk about how he had been good lately.

 

2 days, 2 weeks, 2 months...what's the difference? Nobody thought he wasn't going to blow another save. When it happened is meaningless.

Just don't be surprised when it keeps happening. Over, and over, and over.

[Sammy Sofa]

Well it only took 2 days after all the talk about how he had been good lately.

 

2 days, 2 weeks, 2 months...what's the difference? Nobody thought he wasn't going to blow another save. When it happened is meaningless.

Just don't be surprised when it keeps happening. Over, and over, and over.

 

Wait, you're predicitng that Kevin Gregg will have more blown saves this year?

 

Gee, I wonder if they call you "swami."

[JimSorgi]

I bet Gregg gets another save

 

 

bookmarked this page so I can brag about it later

[InconspicuousZ28]

Today's line for Marmol:

 

0.1 IP, 2 H, 2 ER, 3 BB, 24 pitches, 10 strikes.

[SouthSideRyan]

Marmol really needs to be moved to mopping up til he straightens himself out. Ideally Marshall would move into the setup role, but we've gotta save him to throw 2 pitches per game, so I guess Ascanio to the 8th, Heilman to the 7th.

[Fred Hornkohl]

Today's line for Marmol:

 

0.1 IP, 2 H, 2 ER, 3 BB, 24 pitches, 10 strikes.

 

That's an ERA of 54.00, a WHIP of 15.00, a BB/9 of 81.00 and 72 pitches per inning.

 

Not so good, eh?

[TruffleShuffle]

Hmm... is Kevin Gregg still a reliable closer?

 

:roll:

 

well your boy marmol gave up 2 runs and only got 1 out, so if he'd been closing in a situation like what gregg had against the tigers, he would've had a blown save. in fact, he needed sean marshall to bail him out of a bases loaded situation or else he might have blown a 3 run lead.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Marmol just needs a stint in Iowa. If hes still walking everything in site by the time Guz comes back, it needs to happen, even if it is just a short one to find his control.

[CubColtPacer]

Marmol just needs a stint in Iowa. If hes still walking everything in site by the time Guz comes back, it needs to happen, even if it is just a short one to find his control.

 

Marmol would be claimed very quickly. The Cubs would pull him back, but it would be pretty pointless to even try.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Marmol just needs a stint in Iowa. If hes still walking everything in site by the time Guz comes back, it needs to happen, even if it is just a short one to find his control.

 

Marmol would be claimed very quickly. The Cubs would pull him back, but it would be pretty pointless to even try.

 

Is he out of options? I thought he was only up and down once.

[CubColtPacer]

Marmol just needs a stint in Iowa. If hes still walking everything in site by the time Guz comes back, it needs to happen, even if it is just a short one to find his control.

 

Marmol would be claimed very quickly. The Cubs would pull him back, but it would be pretty pointless to even try.

 

Is he out of options? I thought he was only up and down once.

 

He isn't out of options but he has been in the major leagues for long enough that he would have to clear revocable waivers in order to get to the minors. The Cubs could always pull him back if somebody claimed him, but they still wouldn't get him to the minor leagues.

 

He would only have 1 option left anyway. He got added to the 40 man after the 05 season. He was sent down after Spring Training 06, and then he was sent down again after Spring Training 07. That burned two of his three options.