Cubs sign Scott Feldman

[Hairyducked Idiot]

He's entering his age-30 season and his career best to this point is either 125 innings of barely above averageness or 190 innings of slightly below averageness.

 

I'm willing to call this an acceptable 5th-starter move, but any higher praise than that is just a product of severely adjusted expectations.

[SouthSideRyan]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our current 2014 rotation has Travis Wood as the #2 starter?

[Guest]

He's entering his age-30 season and his career best to this point is either 125 innings of barely above averageness or 190 innings of slightly below averageness.

 

I'm willing to call this an acceptable 5th-starter move, but any higher praise than that is just a product of severely adjusted expectations.

 

The durability point is well taken, but he's been pretty good when he's been on the mound.

 

fWAR/200 IP

 

2009: 3.7

2010: 1.8

2011: injured after 32 IP

2012: 3.7

[Guest]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our current 2014 rotation has Travis Wood as the #2 starter?

 

Not in November 2012, no.

[SouthSideRyan]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our current 2014 rotation has Travis Wood as the #2 starter?

 

Not in November 2012, no.

 

When at least 4 of the starting rotation spots are already taken?

[pitchcs]

I get what you're saying but I have way too much else to be concerned with, in regards to the Cubs and life, that I can't even begin to think about 2014 right now. With these signings only being 1 year, maybe the plan is to sign a big name guy next offseason? It is frustrating this team probably won't be that good again next year but I just can't imagine they are willing to throw 3 years away at the major league level.

[Guest]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our current 2014 rotation has Travis Wood as the #2 starter?

 

Not in November 2012, no.

 

When at least 4 of the starting rotation spots are already taken?

 

Correct.

[Tracer Bullet]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our current 2014 rotation has Travis Wood as the #2 starter?

 

Not in November 2012, no.

 

When at least 4 of the starting rotation spots are already taken?

 

"Taken" in the sense that the players are set in stone?

[Guest]

Solid pickup. After watching the disaster that was 2012's pitching staff, I really want to see the Cubs go 7-8 deep on a rotation. Letting Casey Coleman out there is a recipe for disaster.

 

That was the goal last year too, and so far they've only added 2 SPs (which is how many they got rid of last year) so I'm not sure how, as of now, they've done anything more than make a lateral move in that particular regard.

 

I guess they have Vizcaino as an option now, but neither Dempster nor Maholm had concerns about innings limits like Vizcaino and Baker, so that's sort of a wash.

[Guest]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our current 2014 rotation has Travis Wood as the #2 starter?

 

Not in November 2012, no.

 

When at least 4 of the starting rotation spots are already taken?

 

If you wanna go that route, Vizcaino > Wood.

[toonsterwu]

I'm not concerned about our 2014 rotation as of now because I still have my doubts any of the current 5 (Garza/Samardzija/Wood/Baker/Feldman) are in the Cubs rotation in 2014. I guess the chance is high one or two of them (namely, Samardzija/Wood) are, but I'm not convinced that any will definitely be there.

[SouthSideRyan]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our current 2014 rotation has Travis Wood as the #2 starter?

 

Not in November 2012, no.

 

When at least 4 of the starting rotation spots are already taken?

 

"Taken" in the sense that the players are set in stone?

 

Well I guess it's possible they convert Garza to a closer, but yeah, I'd say I'm rather confident 4/5th of the rotation is set in stone right now.

 

ETA: Unless you're talking about a potential Shark trade, in which case Travis Wood or a guy who has maxed out at 110 innings is our #1 in '14.

Edited November 27, 2012 by SouthSideRyan

[Guest]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our current 2014 rotation has Travis Wood as the #2 starter?

 

Not in November 2012, no.

 

When at least 4 of the starting rotation spots are already taken?

At the very least, Shark and Vizcaino should be above Wood. The front office is also showing they can pick up decent pitching on one year deals in most offseasons, too.

[SouthSideRyan]

I get what you're saying but I have way too much else to be concerned with, in regards to the Cubs and life, that I can't even begin to think about 2014 right now. With these signings only being 1 year, maybe the plan is to sign a big name guy next offseason? It is frustrating this team probably won't be that good again next year but I just can't imagine they are willing to throw 3 years away at the major league level.

 

November 2011, I don't think you found many people on here who could imagine throwing away 2 years either.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm concerned with the fact that the roster still looks like crap and that all signs pointing to them not doing a whole hell of a lot about it before 2014. But as to the specific concern with Wood as #2, I'm not really sure how that fits.

[SouthSideRyan]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our current 2014 rotation has Travis Wood as the #2 starter?

 

Not in November 2012, no.

 

When at least 4 of the starting rotation spots are already taken?

At the very least, Shark and Vizcaino should be above Wood. The front office is also showing they can pick up decent pitching on one year deals in most offseasons, too.

 

You're missing the point. I'm not saying, gee I wonder what the 2014 roster will look like, it's that we're not building toward anything. If the 2014 rotation is Shark, Wood and one year flotsam we aren't going to try to compete until 2015 which is ridiculous.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our current 2014 rotation has Travis Wood as the #2 starter?

 

Not in November 2012, no.

 

When at least 4 of the starting rotation spots are already taken?

At the very least, Shark and Vizcaino should be above Wood. The front office is also showing they can pick up decent pitching on one year deals in most offseasons, too.

 

Beyond Shark and probably Wood, who have the other two spots locked down?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

At this point, I'm not convinced Travis Wood is in the 2013 rotation.

[toonsterwu]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our current 2014 rotation has Travis Wood as the #2 starter?

 

Not in November 2012, no.

 

When at least 4 of the starting rotation spots are already taken?

At the very least, Shark and Vizcaino should be above Wood. The front office is also showing they can pick up decent pitching on one year deals in most offseasons, too.

 

You're missing the point. I'm not saying, gee I wonder what the 2014 roster will look like, it's that we're not building toward anything. If the 2014 rotation is Shark, Wood and one year flotsam we aren't going to try to compete until 2015 which is ridiculous.

 

I get your point, but the hope is that you add one or two solid upper level arms with midseason moves, hope Arodys can be a starter, and then have Samardzija/Vizcaino/1 trade acquistion/FA as the core of your 2014 rotation, and some competition to fill out the back end (hence why I'm not too concerned about the rotation). That said, I've said for awhile that 2015 looks like the first real "push" year (and that's if all goes well), because it's hard to imagine too many "core" pieces being added to Castro/Rizzo in 2013 to really believe we can push in 2015. It sucks, but once they went down the path of the full rebuild, the "grand experiment" of building the right way (and righting their errors in Boston), this was basically the way it was going to be.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our current 2014 rotation has Travis Wood as the #2 starter?

 

Not in November 2012, no.

 

When at least 4 of the starting rotation spots are already taken?

At the very least, Shark and Vizcaino should be above Wood. The front office is also showing they can pick up decent pitching on one year deals in most offseasons, too.

 

You're missing the point. I'm not saying, gee I wonder what the 2014 roster will look like, it's that we're not building toward anything. If the 2014 rotation is Shark, Wood and one year flotsam we aren't going to try to compete until 2015 which is ridiculous.

 

There's no way of telling what Epstein has in mind for 2012-2014, but with all of the money and effort put into assembling the FO, I can't imagine that we'll still look like the Pirates by the halfway mark in Epstein's contract.

[Cubswin11]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our current 2014 rotation has Travis Wood as the #2 starter?

 

Not in November 2012, no.

 

When at least 4 of the starting rotation spots are already taken?

At the very least, Shark and Vizcaino should be above Wood. The front office is also showing they can pick up decent pitching on one year deals in most offseasons, too.

 

You're missing the point. I'm not saying, gee I wonder what the 2014 roster will look like, it's that we're not building toward anything. If the 2014 rotation is Shark, Wood and one year flotsam we aren't going to try to compete until 2015 which is ridiculous.

I think they are also waiting to see if they hit on any of the young guys added within the last year +/- (Maples, Vizcaino, Blackburn, Johnson, Underwood, Paniagua, etc.) to see what they have internally before they look to commit major money into the big league rotation. Not saying it's right or I agree with it, just what their line of thinking may be. Plus it's very possible we draft a college arm with the #2 pick in June.

[Guest]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our current 2014 rotation has Travis Wood as the #2 starter?

 

Not in November 2012, no.

 

When at least 4 of the starting rotation spots are already taken?

At the very least, Shark and Vizcaino should be above Wood. The front office is also showing they can pick up decent pitching on one year deals in most offseasons, too.

 

You're missing the point. I'm not saying, gee I wonder what the 2014 roster will look like, it's that we're not building toward anything. If the 2014 rotation is Shark, Wood and one year flotsam we aren't going to try to compete until 2015 which is ridiculous.

 

I'm saying that expressing worry about what the rotation looks like 1 year and 2 offseasons from now is an exercise in reading into a decision what you want to. Just as easily as they could bring in one year deals for decent SP(which is a better strategy than you're giving credit for) and roll the dice with that around Shark/Wood/Vizcaino, they could trade for young SP this offseason, they could sign another FA for a longer term, they could trade any non-Shark SP during the year for a piece of a future rotation, they could extend Garza/Baker/Feldman, they could trade for a SP next offseason, and they can still sign a FA SP next offseason as well. Throw in the extremely fickle nature of pitching performance and health, and it's not something that's a large worry for me right now.

[SouthSideRyan]

 

Beyond Shark and probably Wood, who have the other two spots locked down?

 

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8d5xmQArh1r2o6too1_500.gif

[Hairyducked Idiot]

There's no way of telling what Epstein has in mind for 2012-2014, but with all of the money and effort put into assembling the FO, I can't imagine that we'll still look like the Pirates by the halfway mark in Epstein's contract.

 

He signed for five offseasons and we're halfway through the second. Clock's ticking to not be the Pirates.

[pccubfan]

Somthing is wrong with the plan if you are looking at competing four years into the plan, if all things go well.