Amazing_Grace

About the only thing we have other than rampant sportswriter speculation on this subject is the comments made by Piniella that Hill will have a "leg up" on Prior and Miller when it comes to deciding the starting rotation, as opposed to him saying something like "come hell or high water Rich Hill will be in the rotation". I'd like to point out that very few managers, if any, ever publicly "guarantee" that a young player will start. They all pay lip service to the old MLB cliche of "earning your way" onto the team, even when they don't even halfway mean it. Remember they said all those times about CPatt that CF was "his job to lose." CPatt started in CF almost every one of those times no matter how terrible he was. How is that different from saying Hill has a "leg up" for a rotation spot? I don't know why MLB managers do things this way, but we ought to know by now that this is how things operate. We shouldn't wring our hands over Hill being out of the rotation until Hill is actually out of the rotation. An awful lot of things have to happen for this to even be an issue, and some of them are rather improbable. Allow me to list them. 1.) All 6 possible rotation candidates must be healthy, including everyone, Hill, Prior, Miller, Marquis, Lilly, and Zambrano. Everyone has to get through ST injury free. Is that likely to happen? With Prior and Miller in the list, I think not. 2.) Miller and Prior must BOTH pitch better than Hill in ST. I have no reason not to take Lou at his word that Hill has a "leg up" and one of these other players will have to actually outperform him in ST to displace him. 3.) Assuming that both 1. and 2. occur, the Cubs organization must then decide that it is better to use Miller and Prior in the rotation this season and let Hill pitch in AAA, rather than trading Miller or Prior to improve the team in some other area of need. 4.) Assuming that 1. 2. and 3. occur, and Hill is pitching better than Marquis, the Cubs and Piniella must make a tough choice on whether to stick to their word that they are dedicated to winning first, or allow the logic of 21 million dollars invested to decide for them. I don't think the odds of all of the above happening are very good. The Cubs are among the most incompetent organizations in sports, but they still will place a high value on a young, left-handed, starting pitcher. None of us really knows what Lou or Jim is thinking. They may be thinking that if everyone is healthy, they'll trade someone. They may be more than willing to make Marquis the long man. We don't know that, and until the decisions are actually made, we won't know. Honestly, I think everyone is getting really worked up prematurely. If this actually happens, then I'll be as pissed as all of you guys are.

I remember Coomer. Wasn't he playing 1b for a good part of the playoff run in 1998 while Grace was injured?

I really have a hard time believing that Hill won't be in the rotation, barring a really really terrible showing in ST. I think Miller is likely to be the odd man out. He's the oldest, and has had a worse series of injuries than Prior. He's not making a ton of money so it's not financially awkward to bench him as it would be Marquis. I expect a lot depends on what happens in ST. If Miller and Prior are both healthy and effective, and one of Marshall/Guzman/O'Malley looks decent, I expect we'll see Miller traded, probably to the AL, for prospects. The Cubs will have their 5-man, and one of the 3 prospects could come in and replace Prior if he goes down with injury, or Marquis if he tanks. There are always a few teams looking for a pitcher at the end of ST, and it might be a good opportunity to move Miller for maybe a B or C prospect at a thin position like SS or C.

Albert Pujols didn't break into the majors until he was 30 :) That's not right, Pujols was born in 1980 which makes him 26, the same age I am.

Assuming everyone is healthy? Z, Prior, Hill, Lilly, Gooz I like. They aren't going to pay Marquis $7million to not be in the rotation. Like it or not, it's just reality I'm not so sure about that. I believe when Lou says that he's going to have the top 5 guys in the rotation. I don't. For the Cubs to bench a guy making that much money would be absolutely unprecedented. Let's remember this is a team that wouldn't bench Alex Gonzalez, Todd Hundley, Shawn Estes, Eric Karros, Mark Grudzielanek. Some of those turned out OK, but for every single one, we had a better option in ST that wasn't given a full time slot. A Cubs team owned by the Tribune will not bench/cut a player making 5M+ and eat his contract voluntarily, not ever, period. There is zero chance of Jason not being in the starting rotation to start the year. However, there's a chance, slim though it be, that Marquis would accept a long relief role gracefully and become one of the highest paid relievers in baseball. There's also a chance that if he stinks bad enough the first half, the Cubs management will be forced to deal him by fan and media pressure a la Todd Hundley. It's also possible that if the team is struggling, Lou will get tired of it and start benching people that aren't performing. Still, I think Marquis is going to have to have an ERA above 5.00 for either of the above to happen. On the other hand, if Marquis's ERA is in the range of 4.50-5.00, I think he becomes someone who's tradeable, if the Cubs are willing to pick up 2-3M of his deal per year. Either way, I think the Cubs will have a chance to correct their mistake. If Marquis performs reasonably well, say a 4.60 ERA, the Cubs have a chance to use that to make a wise trade and improve the team down the stretch or get a prospect for the future. If Marquis performs badly, the Cubs still have a chance to prove that they really meant it last offseason when they said they were committed to winning. Either way, I can't crucify them for trying to get some value out of a 21M investment, no matter how misguided that investment was. I'll give them a half season of leeway. After July, if Marquis is in the rotation and Rich Hill isn't, he needs to go. As for Guzman, I don't know that he's even a factor. If he does well at Iowa, he might be worth more as a trading chip than as a starter this season.

I'll believe Prior's healthy when he's out on the mound pitching in actual baseball games every fifth day, and not before. I'll believe Wood's healthy when he pitches in 3 games in one week out of the pen. The Cubs have said before every ST that Prior and Wood will be healthy and ready to go, and they've been wrong most of the time. Now I just ignore them like I ignore the weatherman. I'll believe it's gonna snow when I look out the window and see it snowing.

Theriot gives the team the same kind of flexibility that Neifi Perez did, but at a fraction of the cost and without being a completely worthless hitter.

I don't mind Theriot as a backup. I'm not sure he's going to be any kind of option as a starter. He's 27 so he's not exactly a "prospect", and it's rare for guys to suddenly figure it out that far into their careers. I think it's reasonable to believe he'll give us better numbers than Neifi for a fraction of the cost, but I don't think he'll be able to duplicate last seasons .412 OBP over a whole season. Does anyone else know of many guys that didn't break into the majors until age 27 that amounted to anything? Up until last season, DeRosa had never been considered anything other than a back-up either. Yeah, that's true, and he's much older than Theriot. Now that I look at the stats, DeRosa didn't any significant at-bats until 2001, when he was about the same age Theriot is.

This may be more that The Powers That Be see DeRosa as a better RF backup or platoon option since he has experience there. I've heard that he has a good outfield arm. It would make more sense to have him play RF and Theriot 2B than the reverse if you want them both in the lineup. Eric Patterson will hopefully earn a look later this season. I'm all for positional flexibility when it makes sense. That's true, and I could see Piniella putting DeRosa in RF over Jones with Theriot coming in to play 2b against lefties. Man this team really needs another infielder.

I don't mind Theriot as a backup. I'm not sure he's going to be any kind of option as a starter. He's 27 so he's not exactly a "prospect", and it's rare for guys to suddenly figure it out that far into their careers. I think it's reasonable to believe he'll give us better numbers than Neifi for a fraction of the cost, but I don't think he'll be able to duplicate last seasons .412 OBP over a whole season. Does anyone else know of many guys that didn't break into the majors until age 27 that amounted to anything?

Floyd, Murton, Jones, Soriano, Ward, DeRosa, Theriot, Pagan Pagan is not needed. I agree. I'd rather see Moore, McGehee, B. Hill, or even Fontenot make the team before Pagan.

It also seems as if Piniella wants to see him in a variety of places in the field. Who could the Cubs possibly have been thinking of bringing in to play 2b next season other than DeRosa? Who do the Cubs have that would also have a "shot" at starting 2b. Are they really that high on Cedeno still? That seems really odd as I never heard of the Cubs pursuing any other 2b options via trade or free agency.

I disagree about a back up 3b. Here's what I have for depth based on Pagan, Ward, Floyd, Theriot and Blanco: 1b: Lee, Ward, Floyd 2b: DeRosa, Theriot, Izturis SS: Izturis, DeRosa, Theriot 3b: Aramis, DeRosa, Barrett, Theriot LF: All outfielders CF: Soriano, Jones, Pagan, Theriot? RF: All outfielders C: Barrett, Blanco The 25th guy can be anyone since DeRosa can play 3b and Jones can play CF. It probably comes down to Hill, Cedeno, Pagan, Moore or McGehee. Hill is on the outside since he's not on the 40 man roster. Someone on the 40 man that goes on the 60 day DL opens up a spot for Hill. I don't believe the coaching staff believes the bolded point. They desperately try to trade Jones and look for any center fielder, and they only stop when Soriano agrees to play center so Jones can play right. It seems pretty likely that they don't believe that Jones can handle the position. BTW-Ryan Theriot has played 3rd 1 inning in his entire professional career, so unless they work on him with that like they are planning to do with center and he is as promising, I can't see him as a backup option at 3B yet. I hope that the Cubs don't keep Pagan on the roster just to have a backup CF. Whether they use Theriot or Jones as the backup it's better for the team to carry one more IF. Unless you count Daryle Ward as an IF, which I don't because he can only really play 1B, there will be 6 outfielders and only 5 infielders on the team next year with Pagan as the 25th man.

I agree either B. Hill either makes the MLB team or gets cut. I think if he does make the team it's going to be because somebody *cough*Prior*cough*Miller*cough is getting put on the DL and we have a 40 man roster spot freed up. I can't see the Cubs going with just a single backup IF. I know Ward can play a little 1B but nobody can really play 3rd. Haven't they made comments about Theriot being able to play CF? If he can, then it really makes Pagan completely unnecessary. Pagan only looked decent last year because we got to compare him to the likes of Neifi Perez and Freddy Bynum. He's not really worth keeping from a prospect standpoint. If Hill doesn't make the team, I'd prefer the Cubs go with one of their own farmhands for the other backup IF role.

The Cubs have done it. Or at least came very close. 2006: 5th in AVG, 16th in OBP 2005: 2nd in AVG, 11th in OBP 2004: 6th in AVG, 11th in OBP 2003: 11th in AVG, 13th in OBP During the 4 years that Hendry/Baker have been in charge, the Cubs have walked 1795 times. Atlanta: 2192 Philadelphia: 2561 NY Mets: 2034 Washington: 2103 Florida: 2023 St. Louis: 2193 Houston: 2213 Cincinnati: 2348 Milwaukee: 2120 Pittsburgh: 1874 San Diego: 2295 Colorado: 2257 LA Dodgers: 2085 San Francisco: 2223 Arizona: 2082 Cubs walks in 2006: 395 League average walks in 2006: 537 Cubs walks in 2005: 419 League average in walks in 2005: 525 Cubs walks in 2004: 489 League average walks in 2004: 546 Cubs walks in 2003: 492 League average walks in 2003: 541 The league average in walks stays pretty consistent year after year. The Cubs walk rate has plummeted each year of Hendry's tenure. In the Baylor/Kimm year, the Cubs walked 585 times. That team just couldn't hit. I think we need to nail this post to Hendry's front door, his desk, his office door, his fridge, and on the door to the Cubs home locker room. The really odd thing is, both Baker and Hendry loved speed players, but speed is far more useful when the speedy guy can get on base consistently. If the Cubs OBP improves by more points than their batting average, I'll give the coaching staff a lot of the credit, because Hendry certainly hasn't earned any.

Has anyone else noticed how like every thread the past week has downward spiraled into a discussion of just how bad and stupid Jason Marquis's contract is? Can we now say that his contract is so bad that it's badness is consuming all of northsidebaseball.

I wouldn't be that surprised with top 10 in OBP. I would be with top 10 in walks. The team is a good hitting for average team. And they could lead the league in that stat. It wouldn't take an enormous increase in walks to crack the top 10 in OBP. That's a good point. It would take a really impatient team to lead the league in BA and still be in the bottom 6 in OBP. There's something to be said here for not having OBP voids like Perez and Bynum sucking up so many ABs from the bench. Theriot, Ward, Floyd, and I'm hoping B. Hill will be a huge OBP improvement over last year's crap. Still I think the over/under top 10 in NL OBP comes down to Lee staying healthy and whether Piniella has enough sense to bench Jones vs. lefties (doesn't really matter for who, almost anyone is better).

This is funny, if he'd posted stuff like that on NSBB, he'd be called out for not checking his facts before posting. Mussina doesn't have much of a leg to stand on here. He's probably just trying to win points with the fans so they continue to not notice how decidedly mediocre his stint with the Yanks has been.

But most interesting was the quotes about the final spots in the rotation. Once again, it looks like Marquis is guaranteed a spot. Hill isn't. I don't like that one bit. Prior hopes his injuries are behind him. I hope a million dollars falls through the roof of my house. I think Piniella is wise not to stir up this hornet's nest unless it turns out to be necessary. He didn't say anyone was guaranteed a spot, just that Hill has a "leg up" on Prior and Miller. To me, that means Hill has to totally stink in ST and Prior and Miller both have to be completely healthy and lights out to edge him out of the rotation. What are the odds of that, and if it happens, I can't really be too upset about Hill getting sent to AAA. You can't have too much pitching. On the other hand, yeah, it still looks like they're guaranteeing Marquis a spot. They are paying him 21M and he's only worth it if he becomes a decent starter. I'm not opposed to giving him up to half a season or so to prove he's worth that contract and make Hendry look really smart. After all, our one chance to trade him and get out from under his already stupid looking contract is for him to pitch well as a starter. Now, if we're in the heat of a pennant race in July, and we're still watching Marquis put up a 5+ ERA while Hill is stuck in Iowa, THEN, I'll be pissed, very pissed.

So this means just 5 bench players. I guess Theriot, Floyd, Ward, Blanco for sure and one more. Probably a 2nd infielder. Cedeno or Hill? This almost certainly will put Pagan off the ML roster barring injury. I actually like his fifth starter logic. It doesn't make any sense to have a fifth starter if you're not going to use him. It also saves pitches for the top four pitchers. I always hated when Dusty would skip the fifth guy because it was just racking up that many more pitches on the already overworked Wood, Prior, Z, etc. for a better chance to win one game.

I don't know how much of an impact a hitting coach, or any coach, can have on a team that's made of mostly developed players in the middle to late stages of their careers. Picking players is the task of the GM and our GM does not value OBP or the walk. I think the younger guys, Theriot, Cedeno, Murton, Pagan, maybe even Barrett, might benefit from him. I doubt he'll have much impact on Soriano, Lee, Ramirez, Floyd but really those guys don't need the help. I doubt he'll be able to fix Jones or Izturis, the former because I think he's too far gone and the latter because he doesn't have any offensive talent to work with. If the Cubs crack the top 10 in the NL in OBP this season, I'll be surprised. We're really the same team as last year plus Soriano and minus Pierre. There's some improvement there, but I don't know how much. Of course, if our players stay healthier this year, that would be an improvement too, but that's true of any team in any season. A full season of Lee will be a bigger gain than Soriano over Pierre.

I don't see any reason why he needs that. He's not lacking playing time on his resume. I don't see him learning anything more by playing everyday in AAA as opposed to subbing at the major league level. At some point guys have to sink or swim. The time for keeping guys in the minors playing everyday is when they are 21/22 with minimal professional experience. Cedeno is 24 and has plenty of experience. Now he has to establish himself as a major leaguer, and hope to be good enough to one day start. He had a good '04, was blistering in '05, and started out '06 on fire. Then he slumped after being overexposed to Dusty. I really think he can turn it back around with a little patience, and I think he's young enough to get it with the right coaching. If the choice is Izturdis or Cedeno, I'd rather see what Perry can do with Cedeno over the course of the year. At least with Ronny, there's a sliver of hope. Izturdis is going to hit like, well, like a turd. That's already known. This is the best reason to give Cedeno some more time in AAA. We should also remember the Cubs are going to need some inexpensive starters somewhere. There isn't going to be a ton of money to sign a FA SS next year or the year after. It's likely that the Cubs are going to be starting Theriot or Cedeno at SS next season.

It's true that this one ad isn't going to destroy the mystique of Wrigley. It's more like the collective effect of all the successive times that we've seen "just one ad" be put up in Wrigley will eventually diminish the mystique considerably. It's a slippery slope. An ad here, an ad there, and we always say, it's just one, it's OK if it's tasteful, and before you know it Wrigley is no different from any other park in baseball as a way to sell people crap. On an mostly unrelated note, there's way way way way way too much advertising in pro sports (and college for that matter, at my 10,000 student mid major college alma mater there are no fewer than 5 sponsored half-time and timeout events during the basketball games). The way things are going, all sports will end up like Nascar, with ads every conceivable place from the tiny decals for every piece of the automobile to the ginormous NEXTEL in front of the name of the league. I'm not looking forward to watching the Seattle Windows take on the St. Louis Buds for the Wal-Mart championship trophy in the General Electric World Series, played on beautiful Pepsi field in the spacious Citipark. Everyone always cites the NASCAR example. The fans of NASCAR love the ads. They've basically adopted the advertisers of each driver. It's viewed as a positive, not a negative. I don't think baseball will ever be like NASCAR. But I also don't view advertising as inherently bad, either. It's not that advertising is "bad", it's that we're bombarded with it constantly every single day in almost every conceivable place. It's nice to have a few places free of the visual clutter. Wrigley is eventually going to be one fewer of these to some extent.

I really don't understand the value in letting him play everyday in AAA. He's not going to be learning anything new there. If anything he can benefit from a different coaching staff in the bigs, and seeing major league pitching. I want what's best for the major league team. And at this point, they'd have to go outside the organization to find any better option than Cedeno for a backup MI position, and that will cost them. There's no justification to spend to find a guy that in all likelihood won't be any better than Cedeno in that role. I think it depends a lot on if Theriot can play SS. I see your point about just getting someone else that is about the same and I agree but I'm thinking 2 things...what is coming up from the lower minor levels at SS and a righty with a little pop off the bench instead of Cedeno. I think Izturis is going to get a lot of innings in this year if he hits 270 or better weather we like it or not. If Izturis hits above .270, it will only be the 2nd time in his career that he has done so for a season.

Hendry has made sure he won't go quietly. That 75-80M payroll won't pay for the players he's already signed in a couple of years. I'm assuming they can be traded, but I guess Soriano couldn't because of the NTC.