Farnsworth

[CardsFanInChiTown]

Dude would have never got over the hump in Chicago. He wouldn't have came close to doing what Dempster did this year in a Cub uniform.

 

I guess then the question is... Why?

[YearofDaCubs]

Dempster did an excellent job as our closer and I believe Farnsworth would not be as good in that role for us. We got peanuts for Farns, and maybe all he needed was a change of scenery because there is no denying he had a really good year as a setup man and closer but giving up a grand slam doesnt exactly help your case either. Bottom line, I would have liked to have him here as a setup role but Dempster is the man at closer.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Here's a fun little exercise. Let's try and find a Cubs reliever better than Farnsworth. To save some time, this is not possible, not even the man we just gave 15 million dollars to be our closer.

 

How many saves did Farns have as a Cubs?? How many years was he in Chicago?? Dude would have never got over the hump in Chicago. He wouldn't have came close to doing what Dempster did this year in a Cub uniform.

 

He was better than Dempster was this year in '03. The whole "Farnsworth never lived up to his potential" thing is nonsense. He was and is a great reliever, but when he had a less than spectacular '04 and got hurt, people make up nonsense about him being an alcoholic or a headcase or stupid or whatever.

[YearofDaCubs]

Here's a fun little exercise. Let's try and find a Cubs reliever better than Farnsworth. To save some time, this is not possible, not even the man we just gave 15 million dollars to be our closer.

 

How many saves did Farns have as a Cubs?? How many years was he in Chicago?? Dude would have never got over the hump in Chicago. He wouldn't have came close to doing what Dempster did this year in a Cub uniform.

 

He was better than Dempster was this year in '03. The whole "Farnsworth never lived up to his potential" thing is nonsense. He was and is a great reliever, but when he had a less than spectacular '04 and got hurt, people make up nonsense about him being an alcoholic or a headcase or stupid or whatever.

He was NOT better than Dempster this year so what are you talking about? Do not count the games that Demspter started.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Here's a fun little exercise. Let's try and find a Cubs reliever better than Farnsworth. To save some time, this is not possible, not even the man we just gave 15 million dollars to be our closer.

 

How many saves did Farns have as a Cubs?? How many years was he in Chicago?? Dude would have never got over the hump in Chicago. He wouldn't have came close to doing what Dempster did this year in a Cub uniform.

 

He was better than Dempster was this year in '03. The whole "Farnsworth never lived up to his potential" thing is nonsense. He was and is a great reliever, but when he had a less than spectacular '04 and got hurt, people make up nonsense about him being an alcoholic or a headcase or stupid or whatever.

He was NOT better than Dempster this year so what are you talking about? Do not count the games that Demspter started.

 

Farnsworth '03

 

0.88 WHIP

10.85 K/9

2.56 K/BB

.196 BAA

.580 OPS against

 

Dempster '05 as a reliever

 

1.25 WHIP

8.17 K/9

1.96 K/BB

.218 BAA

.580 OPS against

 

Yes, Farnsworth was better.

[goonys evil twin]

He was NOT better than Dempster this year so what are you talking about? Do not count the games that Demspter started.

 

However you want to compare those two, it doesn't really matter. Farnsworth was far and away better than any reliever the Cubs had this year, Dempster excluded.

 

The closer/non-closer talk is worthless. Set-up men are valuable, dominant set-up men making less than $2m are a great asset.

 

Making trades and signings based on BS like clubhouse chemistry is absolutely moronic and self defeating.

[don_kessinger_was_good]

The difference between Farnsworth and Dempster? Last I checked, Dempster doesn't drop a pant load the first time a critical situation arises on the mound. Farnsworth is a big time choke artist, always has been for us. that's why he was expendable. Who cares what you got back for him in return, the $2MM in salary relief was reason enough.

 

Same reason Patterson gets dumped. After enough chances, with continued failure and underperformance as a result, you need to cut the cord eventually.

 

Cripes, I can't believe how inured some are here to mediocrity. Think big. Demand excellence. Penalize underperformance. Fire deadbeats and has-beens. Or else you are doomed to never win a world series.

[YearofDaCubs]

Here's a fun little exercise. Let's try and find a Cubs reliever better than Farnsworth. To save some time, this is not possible, not even the man we just gave 15 million dollars to be our closer.

 

How many saves did Farns have as a Cubs?? How many years was he in Chicago?? Dude would have never got over the hump in Chicago. He wouldn't have came close to doing what Dempster did this year in a Cub uniform.

 

He was better than Dempster was this year in '03. The whole "Farnsworth never lived up to his potential" thing is nonsense. He was and is a great reliever, but when he had a less than spectacular '04 and got hurt, people make up nonsense about him being an alcoholic or a headcase or stupid or whatever.

He was NOT better than Dempster this year so what are you talking about? Do not count the games that Demspter started.

 

Farnsworth '03

 

0.88 WHIP

10.85 K/9

2.56 K/BB

.196 BAA

.580 OPS against

 

Dempster '05 as a reliever

 

1.25 WHIP

8.17 K/9

1.96 K/BB

.218 BAA

.580 OPS against

 

Yes, Farnsworth was better.

Why are we comparing 2003 numbers with 2005? I was talking about 05 vs 05, but even so Farns whip in 03 was 1.17 according to yahoo with a era of 3.30. So I personally would rather take the lower ERA above the other stats.

[YearofDaCubs]

He was NOT better than Dempster this year so what are you talking about? Do not count the games that Demspter started.

 

However you want to compare those two, it doesn't really matter. Farnsworth was far and away better than any reliever the Cubs had this year, Dempster excluded.

 

The closer/non-closer talk is worthless. Set-up men are valuable, dominant set-up men making less than $2m are a great asset.

 

Making trades and signings based on BS like clubhouse chemistry is absolutely moronic and self defeating.

Check my previous post. I'm def not against having Fanrsworth as a setup man for us, but to to say he is better than Dempster this year is just not true. The simple fact is though the organization was frustrated with Farns so they traded him. I didnt like it but whatever..the Cubs still suck with or without Farns.

Edited October 10, 2005 by YearofDaCubs

[LoneStarCubFan]

Kyle Farnsworth was, is, and always will be, a gutless choking dog. He'll pitch lights out up until you absolutely, positively need him to slam the door then he'll crap down his leg just like he did yesterday.

 

If the Braves had Ryan Dempster in that situation they'd be playing Game 5.

[USSoccer]

See sig for what I think of trades based on chemistry concerns.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Here's a fun little exercise. Let's try and find a Cubs reliever better than Farnsworth. To save some time, this is not possible, not even the man we just gave 15 million dollars to be our closer.

 

How many saves did Farns have as a Cubs?? How many years was he in Chicago?? Dude would have never got over the hump in Chicago. He wouldn't have came close to doing what Dempster did this year in a Cub uniform.

 

He was better than Dempster was this year in '03. The whole "Farnsworth never lived up to his potential" thing is nonsense. He was and is a great reliever, but when he had a less than spectacular '04 and got hurt, people make up nonsense about him being an alcoholic or a headcase or stupid or whatever.

He was NOT better than Dempster this year so what are you talking about? Do not count the games that Demspter started.

 

Farnsworth '03

 

0.88 WHIP

10.85 K/9

2.56 K/BB

.196 BAA

.580 OPS against

 

Dempster '05 as a reliever

 

1.25 WHIP

8.17 K/9

1.96 K/BB

.218 BAA

.580 OPS against

 

Yes, Farnsworth was better.

Why are we comparing 2003 numbers with 2005? I was talking about 05 vs 05, but even so Farns whip in 03 was 1.17 according to yahoo with a era of 3.30. So I personally would rather take the lower ERA above the other stats.

 

I apologize, I read the wrong column calculating his WHIP and then got a bunch of critical errors before I had to leave. ERA for relievers isn't a great metric, their smaller number of IP can skew it, and ERA in general has a lot out of the pitcher's control.

 

But, if you want to compare 2005 v. 2005:

 

Farnsworth: 2.19 ERA, 1.01 WHIP, 11.19 K/9, 3.22 K/BB, .180 BAA, .542 OPS Against

Dempster: 1.85 ERA, 1.25 WHIP, 8.17 K/9, 1.96 K/BB, .218 BAA, .580 OPS Against

 

Outside of a small advantage in ERA(which has problems like I mentioned earlier), Farnsworth is clearly more effective, just as he was in '03.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Also, just for fun:

 

Farnsworth in Close and Late Situations:

 

2005: .195/.257/.290/.547 line against in almost 200 PA's. (total numbers: .180/.267/.275/.542)

2004: .265/.346/.387/.733 in around 175 PA's. (total numbers: .260/.342/.426/.769)

2003: .218/.287/.347/.633 in around 115 PA's. (total numbers: .196/.285/.295/.580)

 

Looks to me like Farnsworth is pretty much the same pitcher as he is overall when the going gets tough.

[CubfaninCA]

Dude would have never got over the hump in Chicago. He wouldn't have came close to doing what Dempster did this year in a Cub uniform.

 

I guess then the question is... Why?

 

Head case. See yesterday and Mitch Williams for more.

[CubfaninCA]

Here's a fun little exercise. Let's try and find a Cubs reliever better than Farnsworth. To save some time, this is not possible, not even the man we just gave 15 million dollars to be our closer.

 

How many saves did Farns have as a Cubs?? How many years was he in Chicago?? Dude would have never got over the hump in Chicago. He wouldn't have came close to doing what Dempster did this year in a Cub uniform.

 

He was better than Dempster was this year in '03. The whole "Farnsworth never lived up to his potential" thing is nonsense. He was and is a great reliever, but when he had a less than spectacular '04 and got hurt, people make up nonsense about him being an alcoholic or a headcase or stupid or whatever.

He was NOT better than Dempster this year so what are you talking about? Do not count the games that Demspter started.

 

Farnsworth '03

 

0.88 WHIP

10.85 K/9

2.56 K/BB

.196 BAA

.580 OPS against

 

Dempster '05 as a reliever

 

1.25 WHIP

8.17 K/9

1.96 K/BB

.218 BAA

.580 OPS against

 

Yes, Farnsworth was better.

Why are we comparing 2003 numbers with 2005? I was talking about 05 vs 05, but even so Farns whip in 03 was 1.17 according to yahoo with a era of 3.30. So I personally would rather take the lower ERA above the other stats.

 

I apologize, I read the wrong column calculating his WHIP and then got a bunch of critical errors before I had to leave. ERA for relievers isn't a great metric, their smaller number of IP can skew it, and ERA in general has a lot out of the pitcher's control.

 

But, if you want to compare 2005 v. 2005:

 

Farnsworth: 2.19 ERA, 1.01 WHIP, 11.19 K/9, 3.22 K/BB, .180 BAA, .542 OPS Against

Dempster: 1.85 ERA, 1.25 WHIP, 8.17 K/9, 1.96 K/BB, .218 BAA, .580 OPS Against

 

Outside of a small advantage in ERA(which has problems like I mentioned earlier), Farnsworth is clearly more effective, just as he was in '03.

 

The bottom line is that Farns wouldn't have done this w/ the Cubs. If Farns was the closer in 2003, the team woulnd't have made the playoffs and Bartman would still be living in Chicago.

[LetsPlayTwo]

Here's a fun little exercise. Let's try and find a Cubs reliever better than Farnsworth. To save some time, this is not possible, not even the man we just gave 15 million dollars to be our closer.

 

How many saves did Farns have as a Cubs?? How many years was he in Chicago?? Dude would have never got over the hump in Chicago. He wouldn't have came close to doing what Dempster did this year in a Cub uniform.

 

He was better than Dempster was this year in '03. The whole "Farnsworth never lived up to his potential" thing is nonsense. He was and is a great reliever, but when he had a less than spectacular '04 and got hurt, people make up nonsense about him being an alcoholic or a headcase or stupid or whatever.

He was NOT better than Dempster this year so what are you talking about? Do not count the games that Demspter started.

 

Farnsworth '03

 

0.88 WHIP

10.85 K/9

2.56 K/BB

.196 BAA

.580 OPS against

 

Dempster '05 as a reliever

 

1.25 WHIP

8.17 K/9

1.96 K/BB

.218 BAA

.580 OPS against

 

Yes, Farnsworth was better.

Why are we comparing 2003 numbers with 2005? I was talking about 05 vs 05, but even so Farns whip in 03 was 1.17 according to yahoo with a era of 3.30. So I personally would rather take the lower ERA above the other stats.

 

I apologize, I read the wrong column calculating his WHIP and then got a bunch of critical errors before I had to leave. ERA for relievers isn't a great metric, their smaller number of IP can skew it, and ERA in general has a lot out of the pitcher's control.

 

But, if you want to compare 2005 v. 2005:

 

Farnsworth: 2.19 ERA, 1.01 WHIP, 11.19 K/9, 3.22 K/BB, .180 BAA, .542 OPS Against

Dempster: 1.85 ERA, 1.25 WHIP, 8.17 K/9, 1.96 K/BB, .218 BAA, .580 OPS Against

 

Outside of a small advantage in ERA(which has problems like I mentioned earlier), Farnsworth is clearly more effective, just as he was in '03.

 

The bottom line is that Farns wouldn't have done this w/ the Cubs. If Farns was the closer in 2003, the team woulnd't have made the playoffs and Bartman would still be living in Chicago.

 

Bartman IS still living in Chicago. At least if I remember that article I read awhile ago correctly.

[brfahey]

Let's not forget the bases loaded and bases clearing hite served up to hall of famer Mike Mordecai in game 6 of the 2003 NLCS when the Cubs were only down 2. Yesterday is the first time since he's been in a truly big situation. Does anyone really think the Braves wouldn't have won the division without him. Farnsworth is another example of numbers being deceiving at times. I wouldn't trust him in a big situation if you paid me.

[goonys evil twin]

The bottom line is that Farns wouldn't have done this w/ the Cubs. If Farns was the closer in 2003, the team woulnd't have made the playoffs and Bartman would still be living in Chicago.

 

The bottom line is the amount of hyperbole in this thread has been hilarious. You don't know what he would have done. Farns was a fantastic reliever for the Cubs in 03, and a big reason why they went anywhere.

[CubfaninCA]

He was NOT better than Dempster this year so what are you talking about? Do not count the games that Demspter started.

 

However you want to compare those two, it doesn't really matter. Farnsworth was far and away better than any reliever the Cubs had this year, Dempster excluded.

 

The closer/non-closer talk is worthless. Set-up men are valuable, dominant set-up men making less than $2m are a great asset.

 

Making trades and signings based on BS like clubhouse chemistry is absolutely moronic and self defeating.

 

So when Theo traded Nomar last year it was moronic? If chemistry's irrelevant, lets trade for Milton Bradley, Jeff Kent and Jose Guillen & see how that goes next year. Tell the Angels and White Sox that chemistry doesn't matter.

[oldcubsfan]

Here's a fun little exercise. Let's try and find a Cubs reliever better than Farnsworth. To save some time, this is not possible, not even the man we just gave 15 million dollars to be our closer.

 

How many saves did Farns have as a Cubs?? How many years was he in Chicago?? Dude would have never got over the hump in Chicago. He wouldn't have came close to doing what Dempster did this year in a Cub uniform.

 

He was better than Dempster was this year in '03. The whole "Farnsworth never lived up to his potential" thing is nonsense. He was and is a great reliever, but when he had a less than spectacular '04 and got hurt, people make up nonsense about him being an alcoholic or a headcase or stupid or whatever.

He was NOT better than Dempster this year so what are you talking about? Do not count the games that Demspter started.

 

Farnsworth '03

 

0.88 WHIP

10.85 K/9

2.56 K/BB

.196 BAA

.580 OPS against

 

Dempster '05 as a reliever

 

1.25 WHIP

8.17 K/9

1.96 K/BB

.218 BAA

.580 OPS against

 

Yes, Farnsworth was better.

 

Great fantasy baseball numbers, but he sure as heck chokes in the big games.

[goonys evil twin]

So when Theo traded Nomar last year it was moronic? If chemistry's irrelevant, lets trade for Milton Bradley, Jeff Kent and Jose Guillen & see how that goes next year. Tell the Angels and White Sox that chemistry doesn't matter.

 

Weren't you all about signing Kent before?

 

It wasn't chemistry that won games for those teams, it was great pitching. And in Boston's case, an amazing lineup with multiple great pitchers. Nomar was doing nothing for Boston, and he did nothing for the Cubs.

[CubfaninCA]

The bottom line is that Farns wouldn't have done this w/ the Cubs. If Farns was the closer in 2003, the team woulnd't have made the playoffs and Bartman would still be living in Chicago.

 

The bottom line is the amount of hyperbole in this thread has been hilarious. You don't know what he would have done. Farns was a fantastic reliever for the Cubs in 03, and a big reason why they went anywhere.

 

The Farns myopia's funny as well.

[goonys evil twin]

The bottom line is that Farns wouldn't have done this w/ the Cubs. If Farns was the closer in 2003, the team woulnd't have made the playoffs and Bartman would still be living in Chicago.

 

The bottom line is the amount of hyperbole in this thread has been hilarious. You don't know what he would have done. Farns was a fantastic reliever for the Cubs in 03, and a big reason why they went anywhere.

 

The Farns myopia's funny as well.

 

So he wasn't fantastic in '03 and didn't play a major part in that year's success?

[USSoccer]

Mariano Rivera has choked away W.S. clinching saves in 2001, and ALCS clinching saves twice in 2004. Does this mean he's a bad reliever?

 

Eckersley gave up a home run to a gimped out, old, bad Kirk Gibson in a W.S. save situation. Is he bad?

 

Also, keep in mind that the Braves got hosed on 2 calls that inning, one of which was an inning ending DP that wasn't because supposedly Franco's foot came off the bag. One of those calls falls differently and Farns gets out of the 8th.

 

I know Farns rubbed people the wrong way because of some off the field issues, but stats show he was always very reliable until Baker/Baylor ran him into the ground, usually around July.

[CubfaninCA]

So when Theo traded Nomar last year it was moronic? If chemistry's irrelevant, lets trade for Milton Bradley, Jeff Kent and Jose Guillen & see how that goes next year. Tell the Angels and White Sox that chemistry doesn't matter.

 

Weren't you all about signing Kent before?

 

It wasn't chemistry that won games for those teams, it was great pitching. And in Boston's case, an amazing lineup with multiple great pitchers. Nomar was doing nothing for Boston, and he did nothing for the Cubs.

 

Kent + Bradley is what a I posted. I have no problem w/ Kent alone. I think all 25 players on that Boston championship team would disagree with you and your numbers.