jjgman21

if Sheets qualified, he probably would have lead the league in BB/9 last year. as it was, the top of the list was Lieber Oswalt Maddux Bush Carpenter Capuano Webb Smoltz Harang Lowe (2.27) Aroyo just missed the top list as well (2.39) the Cubs will likely face these pitchers 12 or so times over the first three weeks of the season leading many to come to unfounded conclusions about what this lineup will do vis a vis the base on balls.

sorry my schedule couldn't accomodate you or the flow of the thread. dumb does not have a timeframe. Rhetorical statement? Apology accepted. Thanks, jjgman. yes, very rhetorical. apology retracted. so what if the coversation had dwindled, it was not a topical conversation that necessitated timely commentary. why your implication that I should not comment on it because a couple days had passed? you have a problem with the content, fine, comment on what I said, but if you don't like what I said simply because it lacks timeliness and therefore had some overwhelming urge to say so, well that's just down right lame, and out of character for you.

sorry my schedule couldn't accomodate you or the flow of the thread. dumb does not have a timeframe.

his back problems go back to at least 2002. Sheets had back surgery in October 2004. he missed five weeks in 2005 because of an ear infection, had back problems in the middle of 2005, missed five weeks for the shoulder tear at the end of 2005, missed the beginning of 2006 because of his back (not his shoulder), shoulder tendinitis/strain (not the same injury as 2005) in May shelved him most of the season. so in sum, you are completely wrong in your assessment of Ben Sheets' injury history.

geez, stop trolling. seriously, all this work up over who is trolling and who isn't. a Cubs fan can't rejoice in the poor performance of the best pitcher of the Cubs top rival? hell, Rich didn't even bump the thread, someone else did. an 'accepted' member who is a fan of that rival team can get away with responding to said rejoicing by repeatedly calling someone dumb because he has a hottie in his avatar? debating the technical definition of trolling to determine who is and who isn't trolling? dumb.

Wow-the Reds must have committed quite a few errors-that's 29 outs hit into by the Cubs, and that doesn't even count the pitcher's spot :D Exactly, 6 errors! Well 7 actually including this post Dunn could have been charged with 4 all by himself in last year's openner.

welcome.

biased? I can't look at the things people are saying objectively? what, I'm Fox News? I see nobody predicting the Cubs to be outstanding. I see some saying they should be a slight favorite in the division. attack? :roll: I stopped reading after that.

this is the standard? the Cubs have to have an organization that can go out and add Bobby Abreu and his salary when things go bad in order for a ray of optimism enter your world? how did they get by with only Jeter, Arod, Giambi, Posada, Cano, and Damon keeping that ship afloat? they also had alot of pitching injuries like the Cubs. you think the performances of their replacements, while not outstanding, had something to do with keeping them afloat? how did those replacement performances compare with the gaggle of 6+ ERA's the Cubs threw out there? you think maybe the three 197+ IP starters helped them stay afloat? so which team to they finish well behind, and is that based on reasonable expectations or a fluke, unpredictable performance by one team?

Agreed. What sure things are there on this team aside from Lee, Ramirez and Zambrano? There are a lot of question marks, IMO. Soriano could regress to his 2004-2005 numbers, DeRosa could very easily (some might even argue that it's likely) regress a great deal from 2006. Izturis is a good bet to be bad, injured or both. Jones' numbers were up from his previous two years in 2006 and could easily come back down. Marquis was obscenely bad last year and Lilly isn't exactly a great fit (pitching style wise) for the NL Central. Prior is a huge question mark and who the hell knows what Miller will provide. you see, here's the thing about the pessimism v. optimism thing. I don't think anyone here is overly optimistic. I do think several are overly pessimistic, and it screams at you with posts like this. with the strengths from last year that carry over it's 'regression regression regression.' with the question marks and bad recent past performances it's 'ain't gonna change.' people who do the rational thing, pick the middle ground, see the question marks but also see the opportunities, account for setbacks and regression and potential for improvement, balance out the PT from last year with what will probably happen this year, compare to the other teams in the division, have reason to be slightly optimistic about this team. what also screams at you is the fact that the same people who poopoo on the various projections that show the Cubs scoring over 800 runs this year come so strongly to the defense of predictions that have the Cubs finishing 5th.

agree 100%. we know Maddux and Hill's velocity and the gun on the broadcast was accurate for them. if what they are saying about the gun is true, than Maddux' fastball is about 82-83.

That's what I meant about the gun. If they're clocking Maddux near 90 and Hill at 95, then Prior was probably sitting at 87-91. But whatever, velocity is less important to me at this point than keeping the ball down and hitting his spots. Oh yeah, Rich Hill is still awesome. Most of Maddux's readings seemed accurate though, and Hill's other pitches were around 91. Could've just been a couple outliers. I just watched the replay and came in at the beginning of the second. I watched the radar on every pitch, and this is the best assessment of what was going on. I think the gun was pretty accurate a vast majority of the time and Prior was consistently at 91 and did in fact hit that 93 against Green (and to back up the '95 is off the bat speed' for hill, on a flyout to center by a Pad against Prior, a "97" flashed up). Maddux was consistently gunned at Maddux velocity (85-86). Len commented that 'Prior is around Greg Maddux' velocity, 85-86' during the top half of the second regarding Prior's performance in the first. where Roto got their "90" and whoever got "topped out at 89" is beyond me. he was consistently at 91 from the beginning of the second. oh, and the first batter he walked in the third was a result of dropping his arm slot. his velocity dropped to 87 and he had a ton of tailing movement. Barrett saw it, went out and talked to Prior, and he got right back in the groove of 90-91.

delete

ah, but let's look at the context of that 4.55 ERA. if in a different argument, let's say one about Andy Pettitte, folks like Mephistopheles will banty about how league average ERA in 2006 was 4.63. thus, Marquis' career ERA makes him better than the league average pitcher last year. further than that, Mephistopheles would add in a different context, relievers have better ERAs, so since Marquis is a starter, he would have been a borderline number 2 last year had he put up his career ERA. But the league average for MLB hasn't been 4.63 each year of his career, so you are confusing context by making this assertion. doesn't really matter. a 4.55 in 2005 would have made him an average number 3 starter. in 2004 it would have made him a very good number 3 starter. in 2003 it would have made him an average number 3 starter. we need Marquis to be an better than average 4th or outstanding 5th starter.

because in 2005 and 2004 the metaphorical Juan Pierre hit 25-30 HRs per year. Marquis G/F was 16 in the NL of all pitchers with 140+ IP in 2005. Marquis G/F was 2 in the NL of all pitchers with 140+ IP in 2004. look, I don't like his signing, but some of you are just taking the hatred of the guy too damn far.

ah, but let's look at the context of that 4.55 ERA. if in a different argument, let's say one about Andy Pettitte, folks like Mephistopheles will banty about how league average ERA in 2006 was 4.63. thus, Marquis' career ERA makes him better than the league average pitcher last year. further than that, Mephistopheles would add in a different context, relievers have better ERAs, so since Marquis is a starter, he would have been a borderline number 2 last year had he put up his career ERA.

I got my point across and didn't call anyone stupid or [expletive]. I guess I shouldn't have said some people don't "get it" or some people are naive. It's nothing personal, as some of you know I almost never read who I am replying to. I guess that's bad. I pretty much stopped posting here for getting threatened by the mods by using far less abusive language than you do. where's his warning mods? your point sucks. it changes the meaning of my point and is, quite simply, wrong. the most important thing for a pitcher to do is prevent runs from scoring. the most effective way to do that is to get people out instead of letting them reach base. how a pitcher does that is 100% completely irrelevent. K:BB is merely a peripheral stat. it is an indicator. it is a means to an end, with several other means to that same end. hundreds of pitchers throughout the history of baseball have been effective without great K:BB ratios. the question is, how do you define effective. you want 2007 Jon Leiber effective? 2007 El Duque effective? 2007 Brad Penny effective? all outstanding K:BB ratios. I'll take 2007 Jeff Suppan, Jason Jennings, and Carlos Zambrano effective myself, but that's just me. fact is, you look at a list of the best K:BB ratios from year to year, and you'll find some of the best and some of the worst pitchers from that year. by the same token, you look at a list of the best G/F ratios, it also will be populated with some of the best and some of the worst from that year. you like to use the "ugh" and "egad" and "some people just don't get it" openners to your responses. I say you are the one that needs these responses as you have gotten so tied up in stats you are failing to see the forest through the trees. the greats do tend to do very well in the statistical catagories you love so much, but reasonable minds are not asking certain players, such as Jason Marquis, to be great. they are asking them to be effective, defined as better than league average for the role they fill on a team. Marquis will not be spotted any runs in any ballgames, but I guaranty you that if he keeps throwing groundballs as well as he has up until this point of ST 2007, he will outpitch many pitchers with far greater K:BB ratios than his, and the Cubs will win many of those ballgames.

He isn't a strikeout pitcher. He goes into most every at bat trying to induce a ground ball. just because he tries to do something it doesnt mean its the right thing And what did you say the times when someone like Kerry Wood was at 100 pitches after five innings because he was trying to strike everyone out? He has to pitch to his strength. It makes little sense for him to waste more pitches in an effort to strike more people out if that isn't what he does best. ugh its not just strikeouts when i point that out. specifically it's dominance measured by K:BB. which will be relevant when we start asking Marquis to be our Ace. he's not going to "dominate" with his stuff, nor will he be asked to. but he's certainly capable of living up to his contract and performing above what you hope for out of a 4th or 5th starter by striking out 4.5-6.0/9 and a K:BB around 1.75.

has Wuertz appeared in a game at all, and if not, why not?

I had a couple thoughts. I think the nature of Prior's curve has changed. the 10-6 he used to throw seems to be gone, at least for now. either he doesn't throw it anymore or the curve on it has changed. he has quite a bit of tilt on all his breaking pitches, and I don't think he's learned how to use that. he keeps trying to throw the curve on the black, and almost invariably the pitch ends up way outside. this goes back to last year. he needs to learn to use that tilt and start throwing the curve inside to right handers, or at least start it out more towards the middle of the plate. regarding the velocity, he's not letting go. his arm action was that of a batting practice pitcher, yet he still reached 88 with consistency. it's just like Roth said a couple days ago. hopefully Prior will see Guz pushing him, decide he has to stop being cautious to keep his spot, and all of a sudden that arm action will be back as will the velocity. another thing. comparisons to Guz and Wood's velocity at this point really aren't fair. Guz played winter ball, and Kerry is much farther along in his re-hab and was throwing all winter as well. look for another three mph Prior's next time out. the key will be if he can start using that tilting curveball effectively.

no, we should use strategery

did you not think Lilly was being squeezed a bit in the top half?

both of them.

I think he's talking straight more right now that any other interview I've ever heard. quite critical, quite honest. What is he saying? got some other things going on right now. I have it TIVO'd and will try to give a recap tonight at the end of this thread. on Hill---thought he was ok. has to get velocity up on high fastball to get it by the hitter, but overall good outting. a little bit stonger today because has been sick in previous appearances. on split squads - wishes could see Cotts today (probably reconsidering that right now) but also wanted to see Hill on the pen --- if get chance to use situationally will be real good. thinks they will be able to use situationally. on Wood --- threw ball well. not only had strike three to get out of the inning, also had strike four because pitch before should have been a strike. bloop to lead off the inning (the much debated Izturis error), 0-2 on next hitter but, got under a slider resulting in a HBP. got in trouble trying to power fastball past Sledge. as long as healthy will do well, stuff is there. on Prior --- Len "what do you need to see tomorrow?" Roth "I don't know what I need to see, I know I would like to see," him throwing the ball similar to 2 years ago, even if results not there. from there can fix everything. just a matter of getting arm strenght back and not being cautious. alot of pitchers wait for something to happen, eventually it doesn't, and then the pitcher starts to let it go. Plesac likes to see the look in the eye/body language/pace/etc. Roth agrees. has told Prior results don't matter right now, want to see him throw ball the way he can because "we all know what's gonna happen when the stuff is back to where it should be." on Dempster --- last outting kept ball down in zone, good extension (got him stiff, but that's what they want). when Demp misses has to miss down, need to get him throwing the ball downhill. on Lilly/Marq --- been impressive, fun to work with, tough mentally, goals in mind. Marquis is all business, has something to prove, setting out to do so. worked with Roth, but alot of work on his own.

I think he's talking straight more right now that any other interview I've ever heard. quite critical, quite honest. What is he saying? got some other things going on right now. I have it TIVO'd and will try to give a recap tonight at the end of this thread.