Opening Day rotation

[Hairyducked Idiot]

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

 

No, it isn't. The point of this entire thread is that the Chicago Cubs have some interesting questions facing them regarding their rotation.

 

Trading Dempster is my preferred solution. There are many other possibilities, including putting some guys in a holding pattern in AAA and seeing what happens.

 

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).

 

He's acknowledging all the possibilities.

 

If you just hold on to everyone assuming you'll need a sixth and seventh starter later, then you've wasted at least some important MLB development time for some important young pitchers.

 

If you trade someone, you leave yourself thin enough that you are two rotation injuries away from Casey Coleman or Rodrigo Lopez in your rotation.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If Samardzija does make the rotation, how many innings can we expect from him? At what sort of projection?

 

Usually, people lose a bit of stuff in the transition from reliever to starter, but Samardzija has always been difficult to project reliably.

[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

 

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).

 

The point of this thread is to discuss the rotation, that's why it's called Opening Day rotation. Kyle brought up trading Dempster, but it's hardly the only purpose of discussing the rotation.

 

 

The argument is not hard to follow. You need more than 5 starters, there are going to be injuries. But not all starters are made equal. In other years, you have guys who won't be anything more than rotation filler and/or you have guys who are propsects on the cusp of MLB that make it easy to be 6th or 7th guys in the pecking order. They can be put in the bullpen because you know what they are, or you can put them in Iowa because they still have some things to prove but are ready in case of injury. This is not the case for the current Cubs rotation. If Samardzija is in the rotation, then you have 3 guys competing for 1 spot, and they all have 500+ IP of MLB experience, and they all have had at least one strong season of MLB success. These are guys who need MLB innings to distinguish themselves. They will in all likelihood get some innings, but it's not enough to make that determination. If two of Wood, Wells, and Volstad only make like 10 starts or throw 80 IP, then this season is wasted in terms of evaluating them. Their past MLB success means that little can be gleaned from AAA performance, and a handful of starts as an injury fill in does little to help as well. I don't know how else to articulate that. Having depth is great, having 6th and 7th starters be guys who need MLB innings to distinguish themselves is an annoyance.

[jersey cubs fan]

The point of this thread is to discuss the rotation, that's why it's called Opening Day rotation. Kyle brought up trading Dempster, but it's hardly the only purpose of discussing the rotation.

 

No. He didn't "bring up" trading Dempster. He said it was his preferred option that should be done ASAP. The follow-up responses were primarily on that very topic and you vacillated between supporting the notion that they need to trade him immediately because even one week in AAA would be a waste and realizing that the idea of forcing a trade in the next two weeks is silly.

 

The nonsensical ramblings about "wasting" development time and throwing away years is just pointless.

 

I can't believe all this worry about a bunch of guys who are so far from "must be in your starting rotation" pitchers in the first place. We aren't wasting Strasburg's development here. It's a flawed roster with a whole bunch of take or leave type guys. Maybe the people who went gaga for some of the moves this winter are now just realizing the makeup of the 2012 team is going to be disappointing. But you can't praise the efficient utilization of assets this winter and then insist on trading Dempster before opening day for whatever you can get because you just can't bare the thought of Chris Volstad, Travis Wood or Jeff Samardzija not getting an opportunity to make 34 starts in the major leagues this year.

[CubColtPacer]

The issue becomes that while the Cubs have players they can send to the minors, it clouds the future for them to do so. Travis Wood for example has one minor league option left. If the Cubs are convinced that he's a valuable starting pitcher right now, then he should be pitching for the Cubs. If they're not, then using the last option and getting maybe 100-140 innings out of him in the major league level if things shake out well is not that much of an audition. Then they're left at the beginning of next season having to decide what to do with a player who is out of options and hasn't even had one full major league season in his career. Do you guarantee a starting spot to a player in that situation?

 

Volstad and Wells are both already in their arbitration and would also have to clear optional waivers. It's not clear that either of them would clear, and are the Cubs really going to pay them 2.5 million to stay in the minors?

 

Samardzija of course if out of options, so he'll be either in the rotation or in the pen.

 

Having depth is great, but there is a definite downside to sending any of them to the minors. Having a 6th starter primarily pitching out of the pen is fine. But where does the 7th one go? And is it worth the downside just to have a 7th starter available?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

[Little Slide Rooter]

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

 

Why is nobody entertaining the idea of trading Wells? We could likely get something similar to what we got for Gorzo, maybe a bit less because he throws with the other hand.

 

As for Demp, if someone made a reasonable offer for him now, I'd take it and run. If not, no harm waiting a few months and see if anyone gets desperate for mid rotation starters. Hell, even if we traded Demp and Wells we still have Garza, Maholm, Wood, Volstad and Shark, and if shark can't cut it as a starter we have more than enough replacements between Lopez, Sonnenstine, Jackson, Coleman, and Robertson.

[dew1679666265]

Does it really matter if we don't have much rotation depth this year? I realize you still have to pretend you want to win games this year, but ultimately it's pretty obvious the goal is not contention this season (and contention is really, really unlikely), so does it really matter if we end up giving Lopez or Sonnanstine starts this year? If they see Wood, Volstad, or Shark as potentially important parts of the future, a fear of dropping from mid-70s to high-60s in wins shouldn't keep them from ensuring those pitchers are in the rotation.

 

That said, I don't see any of the three as being particularly likely to be anything more than run-of-the-mill mid-back rotation starters. Thus, I have no problem with sending one of them to AAA to give Dempster time to build back trade value - especially since the goal of the organization is to bring in assets and getting a bit more trade value for Dempster would jive with that stated goal. That, and I think it's pretty unlikely we compete in 2013 as well, so that gives us two years to try to figure out what we have in the rotation.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Out of curiosity, what do people see as Dempster's peak potential trade value.

[Sammy Sofa]

Out of curiosity, what do people see as Dempster's peak potential trade value.

 

 

He's gonna go from ashy to classy.

[dew1679666265]

Out of curiosity, what do people see as Dempster's peak potential trade value.

 

I think it depends a lot on how well he pitches to open the year and whether another team suffers an injury in the rotation. Right now, the trade value isn't very high since he's an older pitcher coming off a down year. However, I think the veteran-ness would help him out if he can come out of the gates pitching anything like 2008 (or even 09-10) for even just 1-2 months, I think teams would see him as a proven guy who still has some left in the tank. Adding a little desperation into the equation if a starter goes down somewhere could only serve to increase his trade value.

 

As far as how likely he is to rebound, his 2011 xFIP was only .01 points off his 2008 season and his FIP was very comparable to 09-10. On a quick glance at his stats, the only one that really took a hit from 09-10 to 2011 was ERA.

 

I'm not sure if that actually answered your question, though. I'm terrible at putting letter grades on what prospects a guy might garner, so I was trying to avoid doing that. As a rough estimate, though, maybe we can get a C+ prospect now, a B- prospect if he has a strong start to the year and maybe a B prospect if a team gets desperate and overpays. Maybe add in a secondary prospect as well, but the main point here is that I think his trade value can improve a decent amount if things go well early on.

[davell]

Out of curiosity, what do people see as Dempster's peak potential trade value.

If he's having a great season, let's say a 3ish ERA, solid WHIP, solid K/9 rate, probably best case for him.....I'd still think we'd have to pay quite a bit of his contract, in order to get something solid for him. He won't net draft picks for his next team and he's pretty old as well. If there's not much else available, I could see him bringing in a borderline top 10 guy from an average system, along with a pair of top 30 types with upside. Maybe something like a Rhee, Ha, and Beeler from our system.

[toonsterwu]

Out of curiosity, what do people see as Dempster's peak potential trade value.

If he's having a great season, let's say a 3ish ERA, solid WHIP, solid K/9 rate, probably best case for him.....I'd still think we'd have to pay quite a bit of his contract, in order to get something solid for him. He won't net draft picks for his next team and he's pretty old as well. If there's not much else available, I could see him bringing in a borderline top 10 guy from an average system, along with a pair of top 30 types with upside. Maybe something like a Rhee, Ha, and Beeler from our system.

 

That'd be an awful nice return, but I have my doubts that you could get two solid pitching prospects in the upper levels for him (assuming Rhee/Beeler pitch well in AA). I tend to think a positive scenario would be one upper level 2nd/3rd tier prospect that's close to ready and two lower level "lottery ticket" guys, or maybe 3 low level guys, with one having a high ceiling, maybe a notch above the DeRosa deal. But it's hard to speak in specifics this early, and you also never know what type of pressure a team may feel at the deadline.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Out of curiosity, what do people see as Dempster's peak potential trade value.

If he's having a great season, let's say a 3ish ERA, solid WHIP, solid K/9 rate, probably best case for him.....I'd still think we'd have to pay quite a bit of his contract, in order to get something solid for him. He won't net draft picks for his next team and he's pretty old as well. If there's not much else available, I could see him bringing in a borderline top 10 guy from an average system, along with a pair of top 30 types with upside. Maybe something like a Rhee, Ha, and Beeler from our system.

 

That'd be an awful nice return, but I have my doubts that you could get two solid pitching prospects in the upper levels for him (assuming Rhee/Beeler pitch well in AA). I tend to think a positive scenario would be one upper level 2nd/3rd tier prospect that's close to ready and two lower level "lottery ticket" guys, or maybe 3 low level guys, with one having a high ceiling, maybe a notch above the DeRosa deal. But it's hard to speak in specifics this early, and you also never know what type of pressure a team may feel at the deadline.

 

Yup. It all depends which and how many teams need pitching, how desperately they need it, and what else is on the market.

[Guest]

Out of curiosity, what do people see as Dempster's peak potential trade value.

 

 

He's gonna go from ashy to classy.

 

So weird. I was listening to this for the first time in a few years at around 8 o'clock last night.

[Sammy Sofa]

The only weird part is not having listened to that in years.

[Guest]

The only weird part is not having listened to that in years.

 

I hate having to skip the first :50 every time.

[ctcf]

Cliff Lippert ‏ @Cliffy46405

Levine projecting Cubs rotation to be, Garza, Dempster,Maholm, Volstad and Smarj. Cubs bench coach Jamie Quirk to be interviewed next up.

 

I'd be pretty happy with that setup. I'd really like to see what Shark can do as a starter this year.

[Sammy Sofa]

Out of curiosity, what do people see as Dempster's peak potential trade value.

 

 

He's gonna go from ashy to classy.

 

So weird. I was listening to this for the first time in a few years at around 8 o'clock last night.

 

SHE LOST HER SON, DAMMIT.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Cliff Lippert ‏ @Cliffy46405

Levine projecting Cubs rotation to be, Garza, Dempster,Maholm, Volstad and Smarj. Cubs bench coach Jamie Quirk to be interviewed next up.

 

I'd be pretty happy with that setup. I'd really like to see what Shark can do as a starter this year.

 

That would be an interesting and potentially good rotation with plenty of depth behind it. We'd then likely have a pen of

 

Marmol, Wood, Russell, Corpas, Dolis, Wood, and Wells, unless someone like Castillo, Maine, Miller, or Sonnenstine impress enough.

 

Wells, T. Wood or even Coleman could also draw some interest toward the end of ST by teams looking for last minute back end guys. Of course there's also Dempster for the right price.

[toonsterwu]

While it's not impossible, I'm still going to be mildly surprised if Travis Wood is sent to the pen instead of the minors if he fails to make a rotation spot. It would seem to behoove them to not waste both of their "extra" starters in the pen, and instead, keep one stretched out in the minors, to go with Jay Jackson, Chris Rusin, etceteras. There's still Maine and Trever Miller in camp, along with Russell, enough options to not move Wood into the pen off the bat, IMO.

 

I also wondered, based on his comments about Mateo's slider as a true out pitch or something like that, if Mateo might sneak in there.

[Guest]

I think Shark starts in the rotation but doesn't last long. The second time around the line up teams are going to tee off on him. He's going to have to be really efficient.

[Post Count Padder]

I really wish we'd keep Shark in the pen. Though it's good to finally the SP depth if/when he falters

[Little Slide Rooter]

I really wish we'd keep Shark in the pen. Though it's good to finally the SP depth if/when he falters

 

When we went mega-over slot for him 7 years ago it wasnt so he could be a middle reliever. Our system is thin on starting pitching, so I'm willing to risk his future as a 7th or even 8th inning guy if he can potentially be a decent mid rotation starter and if he looks good we can lock him up.

[Rob]

Rotoworld says Sveum called Samardzija a "near lock" for the rotation.

 

It was probably posted on the last page, but I'm too lazy to check.