Opening Day rotation

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It's not posting about baseball. It's fretting about a non-existent problem about a team that has a hell of a lot more to worry about and of which there are much more rational decisions then forcing a trade the last two weeks of spring.

 

 

This isn't fretting.

 

Fretting is my concern that Scott McClain Joe Mather is going to get a roster spot over Sappelt.

[SouthSideRyan]

So is everyone in agreement that Wells is probably going to the pen?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Yeah, I'm baffled by the sense of urgency. It's not like they'd be banished to Iowa for the long run.

 

It's not so much urgency as it just seems a little wasteful. All three of those guys, and maybe even four with Wells, have long-term potential that can be maximized by doing what's best for their development (putting them in the appropriate level of competition). Garza definitely has more potential trade value than Dempster, and I'd say Maholm has a lot more potential trade value as well.

 

Dempster just looks like the obvious odd man out to me. He's a one-year placeholder without a ton of upside at his age.

[Sammy Sofa]

Right, but Dempster's coming off of a bad year. Ideally you hope for him to rebound so you can maximize what value he has left. Yes, there's the incentive now that teams would be getting him for the whole year, but I think that they'd get more for him if he's decent from teams in contention looking at or desperate for starters as the deadline gets closer. I just don't see the "waste" in guys having to wait a few months before entering the rotation on a terrible team that's also likely going to be terrible next year, too.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Maybe we could put Dempster back in the closer's spot if Marmol disappoints.

[Guest]

We don't learn anything by having Wood or Volstad pitch in Iowa. They might be able to improve just as well in Iowa as in MLB(I'm skeptical), but keeping them in Iowa doesn't do anything to help decide which one to keep/cut/trade/etc going forward in more important seasons. There's very clearly a downside to having anyone not named Samardzija pitch regularly in the minors.

 

For 2-3 months at most? How is that a downside. Those future decisions don't need to be made in May.

 

It doesn't need to be made in May, but there needs to be a number of MLB innings in order to better understand if changes in performance are sustainable. While injuries are inevitable, I don't think it's quite appropriate to anticipate a season ending or 3-4 month injury that would enable a promotion. Plus, Wells is lingering as well, so unless we're lucky enough to get another Cashner/Wells injury tandem in the first week, you're likely leaving someone out of the MLB rotation for the whole year. It's a good problem to have, but it's a problem nonetheless. We need way more starting IP than we have to give at the moment, and the contract/option situation does not lend itself to a great solution.

[toonsterwu]

My hunch is that it's Garza/Dempster/Volstad/Samardzija/Maholm, with Wood in AAA and Wells in the pen.

 

Now is not the right time to trade Dempster. Around mid-season, perhaps. We'd get better value then.

 

And yes, I do think a decent run from Dempster could net us decent value. Capable starting pitching is always desired at the trade deadline. Yes, there's a risk that Father Time catches up even more with Dempster, but I think it's a risk worth taking when his trade value right now is probably quite minimal, since most teams have their rotations filled (unless an injury occurs).

[CubmanPi]

They aren't just challenging themselves against hitters. If their only job in the minors is to put up notches in the wins and Ks column, the system has plenty more wrong with it than where the rotation filler is playing. Pitchers can always be better at hitting their spots with different pitches and changing speeds effectively.

 

Respectfully disagree. The quality of hitters definitely matters in terms of how the pitcher develops. If it didn't matter, we could just hole up all our pitchers in extended spring training rather than waste all that time with far-flung farm teams.

My opinion was in the context of having an otherwise ML-ready talent without the roster space for the immediate future, and finding ways to keep them gainfully employed for up to 2 or 3 months while resolving an issue. It wasn't an attempt to justify not needing a farm system in the first place. Those were your words.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

But it's not binary, "MLB-ready or not MLB-ready" with nothing else mattering.

 

Guys like Volstad, Wood and probably Samardzija have nothing to gain from the minors, but they still have some development to do. Putting them in the major-league rotation maximizes the chance that they realize all that upside.

 

Wasting a chunk of development time asking them to repeat a level they don't need to repeat may not be a tragedy, but it's a waste, especially when the opportunity cost is hoping a 35-year-old Dempster pitches well enough to convince some team to give you a C prospect or two for him.

[jersey cubs fan]

While injuries are inevitable, I don't think it's quite appropriate to anticipate a season ending or 3-4 month injury that would enable a promotion.

 

So you don't think it's appropriate to anticipate the need for 6 pitchers?

[Guest]

While injuries are inevitable, I don't think it's quite appropriate to anticipate a season ending or 3-4 month injury that would enable a promotion.

 

So you don't think it's appropriate to anticipate the need for 6 pitchers?

 

I think it's appropriate to anticipate the need for 6 pitchers. I don't think it's ideal to have the 6th and 7th guys be pitchers with 500 MLB IP of varying success that need more MLB innings to show the front office their value for future seasons.

[jersey cubs fan]

While injuries are inevitable, I don't think it's quite appropriate to anticipate a season ending or 3-4 month injury that would enable a promotion.

 

So you don't think it's appropriate to anticipate the need for 6 pitchers?

 

I think it's appropriate to anticipate the need for 6 pitchers. I don't think it's ideal to have the 6th and 7th guys be pitchers with 500 MLB IP of varying success that need more MLB innings to show the front office their value for future seasons.

 

What does ideal have to do with anything? Nothing about this organization's players is ideal at the moment. The point is there is no good reason to fret about insisting Dempster be traded before April 5th so we can keep all these guys in the rotation from the get go. There are options, so there is no reason to refuse to use them.

[Guest]

Because it would suck to give up assets for Wood/Volstad and then essentially waste a year and still have a very muddled idea of their value to the team in 2013 and beyond. I never said to trade Dempster or Maholm. The point is that it's a hard decision because there isn't a choice that doesn't have significant downside on the scale of "we tried this last year and ended up with Doug Davis in the rotation" or "we traded the best reliever in the game for this guy and we still won't know if he's a consistent 3 WAR SP or Randy Wells redux".

[davearm2]

LOL at "the best reliever in the game"

[Sammy Sofa]

I'll be very surprised if Volstad and Wood "essentially waste a year."

 

And yes, dave, Marshall was pretty [expletive] phenomenal last season.

[davearm2]

I bet you're bright enough to understand that "pretty [expletive] phenomenal last season" /= "the best reliever in the game"

[Sammy Sofa]

The case can easily be made.

[davearm2]

I can hardly wait...

[SouthSideRyan]

From 2010-2011 he had the highest WAR of all relievers with 5. Next closest was Papelbon with 4.2 You can disagree with the evaluation is fine, but to lol it is ignorant.

[davearm2]

From 2010-2011 he had the highest WAR of all relievers with 5. Next closest was Papelbon with 4.2 You can disagree with the evaluation is fine, but to lol it is ignorant.

That's wonderful.

 

If every player in MLB was suddenly a free agent, which reliever would receive the biggest contract? The best one, right?

 

If every player in MLB was available in an expansion draft, which reliever would be selected first? The best one, right?

 

If every manager in MLB was asked which reliever in the league he'd pick to pitch the 9th inning of game 7, which reliever would be named most? The best one, right?

 

Anyone here think Sean Marshall would be the answer to any of those questions?

[Guest]

From 2010-2011 he had the highest WAR of all relievers with 5. Next closest was Papelbon with 4.2 You can disagree with the evaluation is fine, but to lol it is ignorant.

That's wonderful.

 

If every player in MLB was suddenly a free agent, which reliever would receive the biggest contract? The best one, right?

 

If every player in MLB was available in an expansion draft, which reliever would be selected first? The best one, right?

 

If every manager in MLB was asked which reliever in the league he'd pick to pitch the 9th inning of game 7, which reliever would be named most? The best one, right?

 

Anyone here think Sean Marshall would be the answer to any of those questions?

 

There are plenty of executives, coaches and players in the NBA who would say that Kobe Bryant is the best player in the league because he's got 5 rings and he's clutch, and they'd take him over LeBron any day. That doesn't mean they're right.

[Sammy Sofa]

From 2010-2011 he had the highest WAR of all relievers with 5. Next closest was Papelbon with 4.2 You can disagree with the evaluation is fine, but to lol it is ignorant.

That's wonderful.

 

If every player in MLB was suddenly a free agent, which reliever would receive the biggest contract? The best one, right?

 

If every player in MLB was available in an expansion draft, which reliever would be selected first? The best one, right?

 

If every manager in MLB was asked which reliever in the league he'd pick to pitch the 9th inning of game 7, which reliever would be named most? The best one, right?

 

Anyone here think Sean Marshall would be the answer to any of those questions?

 

Yes, but too many would say no because he's not a power pitcher. Think of the guys who the meatballs traditionally declare to be the "best relievers."

[SouthSideRyan]

From 2010-2011 he had the highest WAR of all relievers with 5. Next closest was Papelbon with 4.2 You can disagree with the evaluation is fine, but to lol it is ignorant.

That's wonderful.

 

If every player in MLB was suddenly a free agent, which reliever would receive the biggest contract? The best one, right?

 

Is the player signed to the most lucrative contract every offseason the best player?

 

If every player in MLB was available in an expansion draft, which reliever would be selected first? The best one, right?

 

Is the #1 pick in the amateur draft always the best player?

 

If every manager in MLB was asked which reliever in the league he'd pick to pitch the 9th inning of game 7, which reliever would be named most? The best one, right?

 

Are managers not prone to bias or outright idiocy?

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Damn, that is a pretty dumb argument.

[jersey cubs fan]

Because it would suck to give up assets for Wood/Volstad and then essentially waste a year and still have a very muddled idea of their value to the team in 2013 and beyond. I never said to trade Dempster

 

Yeah, well the point of this entire thread is the insistence on trading Dempster immediately.

 

Your argument is all over the place. You say it is innapropriate to think there will be any need for a 6th starter but then backtrack. Then you inexplicably assume that a 6th guy starting the season in AAA will essentially waste a year. This makes no sense. There will be plenty of opportunity for everybody capable of making starts for the Chicago Cubs this year to get starts for the Chicago Cubs this year. There is no need to force a trade immediately to avoid a logjam (which was where this discussion started).