Guzman shut down

[Sammy Sofa]

Guzman is Guzman. Anyone pinning any kind of hopes on him is pretty loopy to begin with. If he's there, great. If not, oh well.

[RammyFanny]

Kaplan just said the Cubs people are expecting the worst and for him to be out a long long time.

[Wolfgangbucks]

Part of it, I'd say, is due to Guzman's storied injury past. If he had been healthy throughout his career, this wouldn't be something to even mention, I'd say.

 

Which is certainly fair, I'm simply pointing out the speed at which people rush to panic and the voracity with which the panic commences.

 

You'd think the story was that both of Guzman's arms fell off at the shoulder as he was trying to throw today, crawled in the dirt over to a passing jackrabbit, killed it and then used its blood to write "YOUR CURSE WILL CONTINUE FOR ANOTHER 100 YEARS".

 

That would be cool if it happened it would be sort of RAMBO like - I mean killing a jackrabbit and writing with no arms! Are there a lot of jackrabbits in Arizona? Would be even cooler if it was a JACKALOPE...

[Little Slide Rooter]

 

 

Angel Guzman-R-Cubs Mar. 5 - 7:53 pm et

 

Paul Sullivan of the Chicago Tribune writes that right-hander Angel Guzman (shoulder) may be "cooked" for the 2010 season.

 

"It seems like the kid is jinxed," Cubs manager Lou Piniella said about the 28-year-old, who is also rehabbing from knee surgery. Guzman was scheduled to undergo an MRI on his sore right shoulder on Friday, but it's not clear if the results have been released. Guzman was expected to be a major cog in the Cubs' bullpen this season after posting a a 2.95 ERA and 1.05 WHIP in 55 appearances last season.

 

 

 

Man,I do not like the looks of the pen.

 

We all know wild and unpredictable Marmol can be, and hes the best of the bunch. Other than that we have the decent but way over paid Grabow, some combination or Marshall, Silva, and Gorzolanny, and a bunch of unprovens. I just hope someone can step up.

[17 Seconds]

frasor or downs is a must

[KaiserCesar]

 

 

Angel Guzman-R-Cubs Mar. 5 - 7:53 pm et

 

Paul Sullivan of the Chicago Tribune writes that right-hander Angel Guzman (shoulder) may be "cooked" for the 2010 season.

 

"It seems like the kid is jinxed," Cubs manager Lou Piniella said about the 28-year-old, who is also rehabbing from knee surgery. Guzman was scheduled to undergo an MRI on his sore right shoulder on Friday, but it's not clear if the results have been released. Guzman was expected to be a major cog in the Cubs' bullpen this season after posting a a 2.95 ERA and 1.05 WHIP in 55 appearances last season.

 

 

 

Man,I do not like the looks of the pen.

 

We all know wild and unpredictable Marmol can be, and hes the best of the bunch. Other than that we have the decent but way over paid Grabow, some combination or Marshall, Silva, and Gorzolanny, and a bunch of unprovens. I just hope someone can step up.

 

Yeah, there's a lot of unprovens, but the fact is that there are a lot of them who could potentially contribute. It may take a little while to figure out who's reliable and who's not, but there's definitely enough adequate guys in the mix.

[dew1679666265]

Jeff Stevens should get a more prominent role now.

[dew1679666265]

frasor or downs is a must

 

I don't think so. We've got Marmol as the closer either way and Grabow should be decent enough. After that, we've got Marshall, Gaub, Stevens and Caridad who all either have shown their ability or have a lot of talent. I'd wait a while, see how the pen falls together and then see what's available.

 

That said, I wouldn't be opposed to a Downs deal if we didn't trade much.

[UMFan83]

The bullpen could be good, who knows? Pens are a crapshoot. There are very few people who can be consistent bullpen arms. Most of the ones that are end up as closers. So maybe we'll get lucky and they'll be good.

[17 Seconds]

frasor or downs is a must

 

I don't think so. We've got Marmol as the closer either way and Grabow should be decent enough. After that, we've got Marshall, Gaub, Stevens and Caridad who all either have shown their ability or have a lot of talent. I'd wait a while, see how the pen falls together and then see what's available.

 

That said, I wouldn't be opposed to a Downs deal if we didn't trade much.

 

i think that if john grabow is your second best reliever, you've got problems.

 

and what if marmol pitches like last year? then it's a complete disaster.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Both sides have a point. Bullpens are so variable you might get a good or bad one out of almost anything. But you can also definitely shade the odds in your favor by having a handful of awesome arms. The Cubs really only have one.

[KaiserCesar]

frasor or downs is a must

 

I don't think so. We've got Marmol as the closer either way and Grabow should be decent enough. After that, we've got Marshall, Gaub, Stevens and Caridad who all either have shown their ability or have a lot of talent. I'd wait a while, see how the pen falls together and then see what's available.

 

That said, I wouldn't be opposed to a Downs deal if we didn't trade much.

 

i think that if john grabow is your second best reliever, you've got problems.

 

and what if marmol pitches like last year? then it's a complete disaster.

 

He may or may not end up being the second best reliever, who knows. I share the sentiment with the other posters who are saying it's all variation. Some guys are bound to have good years and other's aren't. Like any other year, this could be a good or bad bullpen.

[Sammy Sofa]

But you can also definitely shade the odds in your favor by having a handful of awesome arms. The Cubs really only have one.

 

What teams typically have a "handful of awesome arms" for their bullpen? Maybe you meant to say "a couple," since that's infinitely more realistic and even then isn't the norm. The Cubs have more than enough in house options to cycle through the bullpen before anyone even needs to think about wasting money or trade bait to strengthen it.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

A couple is probably a better way of putting it, thank you.

 

I'm having trouble thinking of teams with two, I guess. Wood and Marmol were a good bet to produce a solid bullpen no matter what.

 

Doing some BRing, it's surprising (to me) how often teams only have one consistently awesome bullpen arm, and they are almost all closers.

[Sammy Sofa]

Yeah, it's unusual when teams have more than one "sure thing" in the bullpen. It's definitely a luxury if that's the case, and it's either the result of lucky development from within or paying way too much to make it happen.

[dew1679666265]

frasor or downs is a must

 

I don't think so. We've got Marmol as the closer either way and Grabow should be decent enough. After that, we've got Marshall, Gaub, Stevens and Caridad who all either have shown their ability or have a lot of talent. I'd wait a while, see how the pen falls together and then see what's available.

 

That said, I wouldn't be opposed to a Downs deal if we didn't trade much.

 

i think that if john grabow is your second best reliever, you've got problems.

 

and what if marmol pitches like last year? then it's a complete disaster.

 

I actually think Stevens has a real shot to be our second best reliever, even with Grabow pitching well. Marshall could also be the second best reliever for us.

 

Without making a move, I understand we're relying heavily on potential (with Stevens, Gaub, Caridad) and rebounds (Silva, Gorzo), but I don't know that Frasor is much of an improvement over what we've got. Downs could be and that's why I'd be open to possibly acquiring him. Basically, if there's a really good arm out there we can bring in, fine. Otherwise, let's see who steps up in the pen and reassess in a month or two.

[imb]

But you can also definitely shade the odds in your favor by having a handful of awesome arms. The Cubs really only have one.

 

What teams typically have a "handful of awesome arms" for their bullpen? Maybe you meant to say "a couple," since that's infinitely more realistic and even then isn't the norm. The Cubs have more than enough in house options to cycle through the bullpen before anyone even needs to think about wasting money or trade bait to strengthen it.

 

i really love the dodgers pen, and that's about it

[Little Slide Rooter]

Yeah, it's unusual when teams have more than one "sure thing" in the bullpen. It's definitely a luxury if that's the case, and it's either the result of lucky development from within or paying way too much to make it happen.

 

Its not about sure things. Its about having that dependable set up man to get you to the closer. For the past 3 years, at least for the most part Marmol has been that guy. Now hes the closer, and while I dont mind a lot of the guys we have as middle relievers or mop up men, theres not a one Id trust to consistantly take a 1-2 run lead from the 8th to the 9th. I dont mind Grabow despite his foolish contract, which is hardly his fault but hes not that guy. Marshall or Silva? I dont think so either. There more long men if your starter burns out early. Then theres the pool of Stevens, Gaub, Berg, Samardzjia, Parisi, Caridad and maybe even Cashner. Granted, I wouldnt be surprised if at least one of these guys gave us a pleasant surprise as Marmol did in '07, but Id feel more comfortable with another vet, and at something like 1.5 mil, Calero would have been a nice gamble.

[illiniguy]

But you can also definitely shade the odds in your favor by having a handful of awesome arms. The Cubs really only have one.

 

What teams typically have a "handful of awesome arms" for their bullpen? Maybe you meant to say "a couple," since that's infinitely more realistic and even then isn't the norm. The Cubs have more than enough in house options to cycle through the bullpen before anyone even needs to think about wasting money or trade bait to strengthen it.

 

i really love the dodgers pen, and that's about it

I like the Yankees pen.

[Sammy Sofa]

Yeah, it's unusual when teams have more than one "sure thing" in the bullpen. It's definitely a luxury if that's the case, and it's either the result of lucky development from within or paying way too much to make it happen.

 

Its not about sure things. Its about having that dependable set up man to get you to the closer. For the past 3 years, at least for the most part Marmol has been that guy. Now hes the closer, and while I dont mind a lot of the guys we have as middle relievers or mop up men, theres not a one Id trust to consistantly take a 1-2 run lead from the 8th to the 9th. I dont mind Grabow despite his foolish contract, which is hardly his fault but hes not that guy. Marshall or Silva? I dont think so either. There more long men if your starter burns out early. Then theres the pool of Stevens, Gaub, Berg, Samardzjia, Parisi, Caridad and maybe even Cashner. Granted, I wouldnt be surprised if at least one of these guys gave us a pleasant surprise as Marmol did in '07, but Id feel more comfortable with another vet, and at something like 1.5 mil, Calero would have been a nice gamble.

 

Waste of money. Why spend so much more gambling on a player when you can do it for much cheaper using someone already in the system? I'll never understand why some people are so quick to dump money on the most unreliable roles in baseball.

[illiniguy]

Yeah, it's unusual when teams have more than one "sure thing" in the bullpen. It's definitely a luxury if that's the case, and it's either the result of lucky development from within or paying way too much to make it happen.

 

Its not about sure things. Its about having that dependable set up man to get you to the closer. For the past 3 years, at least for the most part Marmol has been that guy. Now hes the closer, and while I dont mind a lot of the guys we have as middle relievers or mop up men, theres not a one Id trust to consistantly take a 1-2 run lead from the 8th to the 9th. I dont mind Grabow despite his foolish contract, which is hardly his fault but hes not that guy. Marshall or Silva? I dont think so either. There more long men if your starter burns out early. Then theres the pool of Stevens, Gaub, Berg, Samardzjia, Parisi, Caridad and maybe even Cashner. Granted, I wouldnt be surprised if at least one of these guys gave us a pleasant surprise as Marmol did in '07, but Id feel more comfortable with another vet, and at something like 1.5 mil, Calero would have been a nice gamble.

 

Waste of money. Why spend so much more gambling on a player when you can do it for much cheaper using someone already in the system? I'll never understand why some people are so quick to dump money on the most unreliable roles in baseball.

Because they don't understand you can't just throw money at it like you can every other part of a team?

[Formerly Snayke]

You should give up that battle right now because few fans understand that only a small amount of payroll space should go towards the bullpen. I argued that to no end with someone a few weeks ago who never grasped that the best relievers are usually the closers and there's only a handful of dependable relievers year in, year out.

 

I should give up talking baseball on the Internet.

[SouthSideRyan]

frasor or downs is a must

 

I don't think so. We've got Marmol as the closer either way and Grabow should be decent enough. After that, we've got Marshall, Gaub, Stevens and Caridad who all either have shown their ability or have a lot of talent. I'd wait a while, see how the pen falls together and then see what's available.

 

That said, I wouldn't be opposed to a Downs deal if we didn't trade much.

 

We definitely need somebody else now. I was in favor of a Marmol/Gooz/Grabow/minor league filler pen, but we need somebody down there that we know will be good. I'm as big a fan as anyone of the AAAA express bus filling half the pen until we sort out who's good, but you can't stock a full pen with it

[Sammy Sofa]

Sure you can. And it's a pipe dream to think the Cubs could get a reliever you "know will be good" at this point because they're all signed and nobody is trading them right now and even when they do it's for way too much. Plenty of pitching prospects to cyle through the bullpen.

[dew1679666265]

Sure you can. And it's a pipe dream to think the Cubs could get a reliever you "know will be good" at this point because they're all signed and nobody is trading them right now and even when they do it's for way too much. Plenty of pitching prospects to cyle through the bullpen.

 

That's the thing. I'm all for going after the good, consistent relievers out there (of which there are some). However, I don't know of any currently available. That's why I'm promoting the idea of going with what we've got and assessing again in a month or two.