Re: New GM/Cubs Future News Articles

[Guest]

1-2 looks good, and you can probably make a reasonable argument for whatever combination of 3-7 you like best. Of course, that assumes that step 1 is having LaHair deported, but that’s a triviality really.

[jersey cubs fan]

1-2 looks good, and you can probably make a reasonable argument for whatever combination of 3-7 you like best. Of course, that assumes that step 1 is having LaHair deported, but that’s a triviality really.

 

Considering who is on the team, it's hard to argue against what is there, but Byrd/Lahair as 3/4 is atrocious. Byrd needs to be your 6th or 7th hitter at this point. And Lahair needs to be on your bench.

[davell]

Based on potential upside, the best possible rotation we could hope for is for Wood, Volstad, and Shark to all be in it, without Maholm. Obviously, the 3 of those guys aren't going to bust out all at once, hell, never is more likely. But each has more upside individually than Maholm does. Not a knock either on Maholm, he'll earn his spot out of consistency, but he'd get left out if they all pitched to their abilities.

[Backtobanks]

-and Sveums tentative lineup of choice:

 

1. DeJesus

2. Castro

3. Byrd

4. LaHair

5. Soriano

6. Soto

7. Stewart

8. Barney

 

I don't hate this, relatively speaking.

 

I love 1-2. Like 6-7, especially if we can at least strike silver wit Stewart. If we could get a lefty platoon mate for Soriano, I'd like 5 a lot more. 8-whatever. It's the 3-4 which are an eye sore.

 

Garza-Demp-Maholm-Wood-Volstad could end up a formiddable rotation if the stars align and all goes our way. Same goes for the lineup, with DeJesus, LaHair, Soriano, Soto, and Stewart all huge ?s. We could hover around .500 and in July trade for some guy we never even thought about in the offseason. Add the right amount sugar, and Kool-Aid is a wonderful beverage.

 

I would avoid that Kool-Aid that has a 2012 on it because it needs way to much sugar to sweeten it.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I love 1-2. Like 6-7, especially if we can at least strike silver wit Stewart. If we could get a lefty platoon mate for Soriano, I'd like 5 a lot more. 8-whatever. It's the 3-4 which are an eye sore.

 

Garza-Demp-Maholm-Wood-Volstad could end up a formiddable rotation if the stars align and all goes our way. Same goes for the lineup, with DeJesus, LaHair, Soriano, Soto, and Stewart all huge ?s. We could hover around .500 and in July trade for some guy we never even thought about in the offseason. Add the right amount sugar, and Kool-Aid is a wonderful beverage.

 

 

I want Smardz over Volstad.

 

If if were up to me, it would be Smardz over Dempster. I like Dempster, but there's the guy we should have traded because he's simply not a part of the future. I'd like to give Maholm, Wood, Shark, and Volstad each a spot in 2012. Sprinkle in an ace FA next year and a Garza extension and there could potentially have a top rotation going forward.

[Little Slide Rooter]

-and Sveums tentative lineup of choice:

 

1. DeJesus

2. Castro

3. Byrd

4. LaHair

5. Soriano

6. Soto

7. Stewart

8. Barney

 

I don't hate this, relatively speaking.

 

I love 1-2. Like 6-7, especially if we can at least strike silver wit Stewart. If we could get a lefty platoon mate for Soriano, I'd like 5 a lot more. 8-whatever. It's the 3-4 which are an eye sore.

 

Garza-Demp-Maholm-Wood-Volstad could end up a formiddable rotation if the stars align and all goes our way. Same goes for the lineup, with DeJesus, LaHair, Soriano, Soto, and Stewart all huge ?s. We could hover around .500 and in July trade for some guy we never even thought about in the offseason. Add the right amount sugar, and Kool-Aid is a wonderful beverage.

 

I would avoid that Kool-Aid that has a 2012 on it because it needs way to much sugar to sweeten it.

 

I think that we need to admit while there's no reason to be over optimistic, this isn't the epically awful Rachel Phelps team that some had been making it out to be.

[dew1679666265]

1. DeJesus

2. Castro

3. Byrd

4. LaHair

5. Soriano

6. Soto

7. Stewart

8. Barney

 

I'd swap Soto and LaHair, but otherwise that's probably about as good as this lineup can get.

[dew1679666265]

I think that we need to admit while there's no reason to be over optimistic, this isn't the epically awful Rachel Phelps team that some had been making it out to be.

 

I'm not sure our offense is any better than that one, to be honest. It's really atrocious.

[Guest]

Nobody is going to pitch to Castro. It will be interesting if he learns a little more discipline this year.

[davearm2]

Nobody is going to pitch to Castro. It will be interesting if he learns a little more discipline this year.

Why wouldn't they? He's not a bigtime power threat.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I think that we need to admit while there's no reason to be over optimistic, this isn't the epically awful Rachel Phelps team that some had been making it out to be.

 

I'm not sure our offense is any better than that one, to be honest. It's really atrocious.

 

It could be very atrocious, but it could surprise us. Give us at least 2010 Soriano and Soto and a .775-.800 OPS from Stewart and we could end up scoring some runs here and there. Still, our best bet at relevance in 2012 will be pitching. The 3-5 rotation spots will be a big X factor.

[XZero771679666304]

A lot would have to break the Cubs' way for the team to be relevant and you'd have to be a fool to bet on that happening.

 

That said, it wouldn't shock me, either. If DeJesus has a good year, Soto has an "on" year and Stewart hits like he did a couple years ago, the offense could be decent (I'm assuming Castro continues to progress).

 

I think the pitching staff has a good chance of being above average (slightly).

 

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the team improves on last year's record, at least. I just don't think it'll be an abysmally bad year.

[Backtobanks]

A lot would have to break the Cubs' way for the team to be relevant and you'd have to be a fool to bet on that happening.

 

That said, it wouldn't shock me, either. If DeJesus has a good year, Soto has an "on" year and Stewart hits like he did a couple years ago, the offense could be decent (I'm assuming Castro continues to progress).

 

I think the pitching staff has a good chance of being above average (slightly).

 

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the team improves on last year's record, at least. I just don't think it'll be an abysmally bad year.

 

I think it's going to be hard to improve on last year's record because of the anemic offense. Our pitching might be okay, but I don't see them holding other teams to 1-3 runs to give the offense a chance to outscore the opponents.

[dew1679666265]

It could be very atrocious, but it could surprise us. Give us at least 2010 Soriano and Soto and a .775-.800 OPS from Stewart and we could end up scoring some runs here and there. Still, our best bet at relevance in 2012 will be pitching. The 3-5 rotation spots will be a big X factor.

 

We'd still have a mid-.700s OPS guy as our 3-hitter and a AAAA player as our cleanup guy. I'm expecting a rebound from Soto this year (which is why I want him as the cleanup hitter over LaHair) and if Sveum gives Soriano plenty of days off I think he can show some improvement. However, I think the most upside this offense has is to be average to above average and that's if absolutely everything goes right.

[dew1679666265]

I think it's going to be hard to improve on last year's record because of the anemic offense. Our pitching might be okay, but I don't see them holding other teams to 1-3 runs to give the offense a chance to outscore the opponents.

 

I don't think it will be, actually. While the offense will almost certainly be worse than it was last year, the pitching will almost certainly be vastly improved over last year. Replacing the mess we had in the 4-5 slots of the rotation with consistency (even if it's average consistency) will give us a big boost.

 

I'll be surprised if this team isn't right around the win total of last year's team.

[Backtobanks]

I think it's going to be hard to improve on last year's record because of the anemic offense. Our pitching might be okay, but I don't see them holding other teams to 1-3 runs to give the offense a chance to outscore the opponents.

 

I don't think it will be, actually. While the offense will almost certainly be worse than it was last year, the pitching will almost certainly be vastly improved over last year. Replacing the mess we had in the 4-5 slots of the rotation with consistency (even if it's average consistency) will give us a big boost.

 

I'll be surprised if this team isn't right around the win total of last year's team.

 

I might agree on "right around the win total of last year's team", but improving on the win total is something else. Also, I agree with the word "consistency", but I'm not sure about "average consistency". Maholm, Wood, Wells, Volstad, and Samardzija are an improvement, but none of them have shown anything better than #5 stuff.

[Derwood]

I think the win total can stay the same as 2011 while also showing great improvement

[Little Slide Rooter]

While offensive output is sure to be down, it's hard to imagine the pitching being worse considering the carousel of junkballers and middle relievers that made up the back end of the rotation last year.

[Backtobanks]

While offensive output is sure to be down, it's hard to imagine the pitching being worse considering the carousel of junkballers and middle relievers that made up the back end of the rotation last year.

 

The pitching won't be worse because the guys we were throwing out there last year were #6, #7, & #8 quality starters. Maholm, Wood, Volstad, Wells, and Samardzija are at least #5 starters on most teams and maybe #4, but we are putting them at #3-#5.

[CubColtPacer]

While offensive output is sure to be down, it's hard to imagine the pitching being worse considering the carousel of junkballers and middle relievers that made up the back end of the rotation last year.

 

The pitching won't be worse because the guys we were throwing out there last year were #6, #7, & #8 quality starters. Maholm, Wood, Volstad, Wells, and Samardzija are at least #5 starters on most teams and maybe #4, but we are putting them at #3-#5.

 

What sort of numbers would you expect out of a #3 starter?

 

Edit: I somewhat agree with you, but only in the current depressed offensive environment, and one of them will likely be good enough to be a #3 (but it's impossible to tell which one right now). Of course that same bad offensive environment will help the Cubs lineup to not be as horrific as it would have been in the middle of the decade.

[Little Slide Rooter]

DailySoxScores: RED SOX - ESPN Boston - Henry: 'Misunderstanding' with Cubs' Ricketts http://t.co/GkbfwYS1 #redsox

 

It was all just a big misunderstanding. A 4 month long misunderstanding.

[Backtobanks]

While offensive output is sure to be down, it's hard to imagine the pitching being worse considering the carousel of junkballers and middle relievers that made up the back end of the rotation last year.

 

The pitching won't be worse because the guys we were throwing out there last year were #6, #7, & #8 quality starters. Maholm, Wood, Volstad, Wells, and Samardzija are at least #5 starters on most teams and maybe #4, but we are putting them at #3-#5.

 

What sort of numbers would you expect out of a #3 starter?

 

Edit: I somewhat agree with you, but only in the current depressed offensive environment, and one of them will likely be good enough to be a #3 (but it's impossible to tell which one right now). Of course that same bad offensive environment will help the Cubs lineup to not be as horrific as it would have been in the middle of the decade.

 

Contrary to what Ricketts is saying, this team is rebuilding. I'm sure they're hoping to have Wells and Maholm show enough to make them trade bait at some point. I would think developing Wood, Volstad, Samardzija, McNutt, etc. into solid BOR starters for next year while adding a FOR starter is the plan for next year. They would still have to add a MOR guy to be serious about possibly contending next year.

[Little Slide Rooter]

While offensive output is sure to be down, it's hard to imagine the pitching being worse considering the carousel of junkballers and middle relievers that made up the back end of the rotation last year.

 

The pitching won't be worse because the guys we were throwing out there last year were #6, #7, & #8 quality starters. Maholm, Wood, Volstad, Wells, and Samardzija are at least #5 starters on most teams and maybe #4, but we are putting them at #3-#5.

 

What sort of numbers would you expect out of a #3 starter?

 

Edit: I somewhat agree with you, but only in the current depressed offensive environment, and one of them will likely be good enough to be a #3 (but it's impossible to tell which one right now). Of course that same bad offensive environment will help the Cubs lineup to not be as horrific as it would have been in the middle of the decade.

 

Contrary to what Ricketts is saying, this team is rebuilding. I'm sure they're hoping to have Wells and Maholm show enough to make them trade bait at some point. I would think developing Wood, Volstad, Samardzija, McNutt, etc. into solid BOR starters for next year while adding a FOR starter is the plan for next year. They would still have to add a MOR guy to be serious about possibly contending next year.

 

A healthy Maholm could be that MOR guy.

[dew1679666265]

I might agree on "right around the win total of last year's team", but improving on the win total is something else.

 

Depends on how big an improvement that statement is implying. We won 71 games last year, so 72 wins would be an improvement on the win total from last year. What I meant by "right around the win total of last year" is that this team is probably going to be in that 71-win area, with the upside to maybe win upwards of 75-76 and the downside to fall into the high 60s (if almost everything goes wrong). A slight improvement on last year's win total wouldn't surprise me at all. A big improvement (say, closing in on .500) would surprise me because a whole lot would have gone right.

 

Also, I agree with the word "consistency", but I'm not sure about "average consistency". Maholm, Wood, Wells, Volstad, and Samardzija are an improvement, but none of them have shown anything better than #5 stuff.

 

As you said, 2 of those 5 guys will be expected to produce exactly what they're capable of - a BOR pitcher. If whoever gets slotted in between them and Garza/Demp can at least stay healthy and not be awful, then the pitching staff will be much better than last year.

[dew1679666265]

A healthy Maholm could be that MOR guy.

 

More likely, I think, next year Dempster will be that MOR type guy (if he's back) and we'll be looking for somebody to pair with Garza as a TOR type guy. I'm not a big Maholm fan anyway, and tend to doubt he'll be pitching his best at 32.