Cubs Negotiating with Paul Maholm

[davell]

Tim, as much as I want to include Cashner in the rotation talk, I just don't see it happening in 2012. He needs innings, but gradual ones. I think if we can get him 70 or 80 next year, then get him 20 or 30 more in some winter ball, maybe we can up him to 150 or so in 2013. And hope that in 2014 he's a fulltime, possible 180ish inning guy by then. As far as Shark goes, I have no clue what to think, other than I am highly skeptical of switching him up again, after he's finally found success and looked comfortable. I look at him as Marmol's successor myself. Maholm? I think he can be a mid rotation guy, much better than what I ultimately see Rusin, Struck, or even Wells from here on out becoming. That said, unless we plan on signing a big name or two, Maholm doesn't seem necessary.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

assuming the cubs are not in on fielder or darvish, and don't plan on making a big splash this season: what's the point of signing maholm?

 

We have money and we don't have any prospects to give the spot to and losing 100 games will hurt future revenues.

Garza

Dempster

Zambrano

Wells

Samardzija

Cashner

 

I'd anticipate all those guys being as good or better than Maholm. With the way his season ended, I'm not sure he's any better of a health risk, either.

 

Coleman

Rusin

 

If we're not signing guys to compete in 2012, these guys would be better performance / cost.

 

In the second half, we could have:

 

McNutt

Beeler

Rhee

Searle

 

In short, we've got plenty of mediocre -> lousy pitching depth. What we really need are top of the rotation guys. That ain't Maholm.

 

I think you are way, way, way underselling Maholm, who probably slots in at fourth on that rotation list pretty comfortably.

[Guest]

The biggest difference between Randy Wells and Paul Maholm is that Wells has actually pitched a 200IP season in the past three years.

 

Well, that and the whole handedness thing.

[d_money]

Didn't we have Maholm a couple of years ago? Oh, my mistake - that was T Gorzelanny.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Didn't we have Maholm a couple of years ago? Oh, my mistake - that was T Gorzelanny.

 

Or you could be thinking Pat Maholmes.

[dew1679666265]

I think you are way, way, way underselling Maholm, who probably slots in at fourth on that rotation list pretty comfortably.

 

Wells has a better career ERA, xFIP and K/9 than Maholm, even considering his poor 2011. He's also younger and both are coming off injury-filled seasons. What is it about Wells that makes Maholm slot in "comfortably" in front of him?

 

As for Cashner and Shark, I've been skeptical of Shark slotting into a rotation spot next season and being good (though I'd love it if he could), but Cashner is far more talented than Maholm and both have durability questions (though they're more significant for Cashner than Maholm).

 

What it comes down to is if we're simply spending money because it's there and trying not to be too horrendous, I'd rather go for a guy like Jeff Francis - who is more likely to be had on a one-year deal - or Wei-Yin Chen - who actually has some upside. Not a mediocre lefty, coming off an injury, who is likely to want 2-3 years.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I think you are way, way, way underselling Maholm, who probably slots in at fourth on that rotation list pretty comfortably.

 

Wells has a better career ERA, xFIP and K/9 than Maholm, even considering his poor 2011. He's also younger and both are coming off injury-filled seasons. What is it about Wells that makes Maholm slot in "comfortably" in front of him?

 

 

My complete and total lack of faith in Wells to maintain even the modest success he's had in his career to date. As far as I can tell, they are similar except Maholm is a better ground-ball pitcher, which is huge with their skill set.

[dew1679666265]

My complete and total lack of faith in Wells to maintain even the modest success he's had in his career to date. As far as I can tell, they are similar except Maholm is a better ground-ball pitcher, which is huge with their skill set.

 

So Wells has been a little better in almost every way possible except for a 6% difference in groundball rates and a .4% HR/FB ratio, and because of that Maholm is much more likely to be mediocre than Wells going forward?

[Rob]

There's something about Wells that people just do not trust. Even me. I wish I knew why.

[mookie]

There's something about Wells that people just do not trust. Even me. I wish I knew why.

 

I am glad I am not the only one.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

My complete and total lack of faith in Wells to maintain even the modest success he's had in his career to date. As far as I can tell, they are similar except Maholm is a better ground-ball pitcher, which is huge with their skill set.

 

So Wells has been a little better in almost every way possible except for a 6% difference in groundball rates and a .4% HR/FB ratio, and because of that Maholm is much more likely to be mediocre than Wells going forward?

 

Yes.

[mookie]

I would say they both have an equal chance to post rather underwhelming outings for the foreseeable future.

[Clem Fandango]

Any time a player comes out of nowhere and succeeds right off the bat despite there being virtually no reason for them to based on their minor league numbers, I kind of always chalk it up to a lack of scouting reports. That's just me though, and it's probably wrong, but I kind of always default to that mode when a nobody breaks out to perform well. Then the league adjusts and so do their numbers. I think Wells is a fine pitcher, but the league obviously adjusted in 2010, but he was still valuable. A 4.00 ERA type pitcher is nothing to gawk at, but they serve their purpose, and Wells was still a 3 win pitcher (3.2 fWAR, 3.0 rWAR) in 2010 and if that's the kind of pitcher he is we should all be happy leaving him in the rotation.

 

But yeah, I irrationally don't trust him

[dew1679666265]

There's something about Wells that people just do not trust. Even me. I wish I knew why.

 

I'm kind of in the same boat (I was in favor of trading him for Heath Bell a couple years ago, after all) and I think for me it's because he's such a smoke-and-mirrors type of pitcher. He doesn't have great stuff, doesn't strike people out, but is able to skate by with moderate success.

 

Thing is, that's the exact reason I don't like Maholm. He seems like a left handed version of Wells and Wells only has value because he's really cheap - that won't be the case with Maholm.

[dew1679666265]

Yes.

 

Two things:

 

1) You're going to have to explain that one to me, because while I could see favoring Maholm because of that, but not favoring him by a lot. Especially when price becomes a factor.

 

2) The potential of signing a mediocre, soft tossing, semi-old, expensive lefty seems very much like a Hendry move, not a Theo move - I'm confused. That wasn't directed at you Kyle, just a thought that's been nagging at me.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Yes.

 

Two things:

 

1) You're going to have to explain that one to me, because while I could see favoring Maholm because of that, but not favoring him by a lot. Especially when price becomes a factor.

 

2) The potential of signing a mediocre, soft tossing, semi-old, expensive lefty seems very much like a Hendry move, not a Theo move - I'm confused. That wasn't directed at you Kyle, just a thought that's been nagging at me.

 

Maholm has 1143 MLB innings that says this is what he is. Wells has 500, and the most recent 135 were the worst. Maholm's never put up anything like Wells' 5.11 FIP last season. I'm just convinced that Wells doesn't have MLB stuff and he's going to continue to get rocked now that hitters have caught up to him and he's lost a little on his fastball.

 

 

As far as No. 2, I'm just completely snakebit by what happened last season. This could have been a competitive team a little bit more starting pitching depth. Moar = better at this point, because I don't want to rely on Rodrigo Lopez and Casey Coleman again.

[dew1679666265]

Maholm has 1143 MLB innings that says this is what he is. Wells has 500, and the most recent 135 were the worst. Maholm's never put up anything like Wells' 5.11 FIP last season. I'm just convinced that Wells doesn't have MLB stuff and he's going to continue to get rocked now that hitters have caught up to him and he's lost a little on his fastball.

 

I understand that and I'd concede to you that Maholm is probably a better option than Wells, I just question that he's a much better option since his upside is still mediocre, he's older, and much more expensive.

 

As far as No. 2, I'm just completely snakebit by what happened last season. This could have been a competitive team a little bit more starting pitching depth. Moar = better at this point, because I don't want to rely on Rodrigo Lopez and Casey Coleman again.

 

I guess my thinking is we can fill up all kinds of pitching depth without paying for the 2012 version of Glendon Rusch for 2-3 years. I've said their names a lot, but Francis and Chen are two guys who could be had more cheaply and either would likely require just 1 year commitment (Francis) or actually have a little upside (Chen). I'm sure I could find a half dozen more pitchers who could be mediocre at less commitment than that as well.

 

My view this offseason has been don't get locked into pointless mid-term deals. I've been staunchly against guys like Buerhle, Edwin Jackson, Maholm, etc, because I've wanted to focus on guys with either impact talent (Prince, Pujols, Darvish, Wilson) or are value upside guys (Stewart, Headley, W-Y Chen, Soler, maybe Cespedes). DeJesus fairly well fits the second qualification (he was certainly a value), but without impact talent we're too far away from contention for guys like Buerhle, Jackson, and Maholm to make any type of a difference.

[davell]

I'm OK with a year deal for Maholm. To me, it's all about his shoulder. If he's a guy we can get on the cheap, say 2/10 or less, I think it's an excellent move. If he's a guy we pay 3/27 for? I don't see how it makes any sense whatsoever.

[dew1679666265]

I'm OK with a year deal for Maholm. To me, it's all about his shoulder. If he's a guy we can get on the cheap, say 2/10 or less, I think it's an excellent move. If he's a guy we pay 3/27 for? I don't see how it makes any sense whatsoever.

 

If he'll sign a one-year, prove-it type deal, I'm perfectly fine with that. I just don't like the idea of a multi-year deal to a mediocre pitcher.

[Guest]

I still trust Theo and Jed, but jesus man, he's nothing to get excited about even if they do sign him to a cheap contract.

[Cubs Evangelist]

I still trust Theo and Jed, but jesus man, he's nothing to get excited about even if they do sign him to a cheap contract.

 

Exactly where I am, my selfish side of me wishes this wasn't reality, but hey... they are the experts and I do believe in them.

[Game time is 120]

These must be intense negotiations.

[BeerHere]

There's something about Wells that people just do not trust. Even me. I wish I knew why.

 

I am glad I am not the only one.

I don't know what it is either, but it's there for me as well.

[C.C.]

Same here.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I trust him to be a good 5 starter or a passible 4 starter but if there's room for an upgrade, I'll take it. If you look over the pitching rotation of every big league team you'll find a lot of 5 starters and some 4 starters that I'd take Wells over any day. Have people completely forgotten what a Chicago Cubs starting pitching rotation looked like prior(no pun intended) to 2002?