CoolHandLuke

Shouldn't Joe Borowski be in that little closer study?

:?

There is no such thing as a wrong opinion!

ya know, Haren's a nice pitcher, but has he really proven anything other than being a Ted Lilly type starter? Nolasco looks to have a future, but 89 ERA+ isn't anything to set your hair on fire about. Hirsch hasn't done anything at all in the majors. I guess my point is, those trades look lopsided in terms of potential and what they brought the receiving team in the long term, but potential hasn't been met and the long term yet to be seen. Haren's already made the Cards look a little silly, but if Nolasco doesn't step his game up and Hirsch doesn't pan out...so what that those players were traded for those players? Haren accomplished something in each of the last two years that Lilly has not ever done.

Your unsubstantiated optimism is just as annoying as the pessimism that everyone complains about. Blanco is not awesome. He is a decent backup catcher. Signing a pitcher coming off of a year in which he allowed more than 6 runs per nine for multiyears and more than twenty million is indeed a bad signing. Why do you think DeRosa will shock cub fans in a good way? How can you make the claim that Lilly will have an era under 4? I can understand hoping or thinking but to say for sure that he will, when he has only once before is crazy.

If Guzman doesn't figure it out until he is 30, he will be with another organization. :(

I don't see the big deal about Blanton. I would definately not trade Murton for him.

the problem is, there's probably no way hill pitches like he did in the 2nd half. I've heard a few scout-types say Hill is possibly the best pitching prospect in the majors right now, based on his K/inn numbers in the minors and what he did in the last 2 months of the season. I'm no scout, but I don't think it's a stretch to think Rich Hill can be a solid pitcher in this league. In the second half of last year he pitched like one of the top pitchers in baseball, though. He can still pitch very effectively and not pitch nearly as good as his second half of 06.

There has been a lot of arguing in this thread, but is there anyone that likes this signing? I think we can probably almost all agree that this signing (without thinking about who would get starts instead of Marquis) is pretty bad. I'm just curious to see if there is anyone out there that likes this signing.

The discussion went like this: Why give this much money to marquis when we have cheap guys who could pitch as well as him? I need proof that they will pitch as well as him! Marshall has already done it. YOU CANT USE LAST YEARS STATS TO PROVE MARSHALL WILL PITCH BETTER THAN MARQUIS NEXT YEAR! the problem is that nobody said marshall will pitch better than marquis last year. Somebody said that he could and somebody else responded by saying that they needed to show evidence that suggests that he will. The only problem is why does the original poster need to show evidence to proove something that he never said? The proof that the original poster needed to show was that marshall could indeed pitch better than marquis and that proof is in the 2006 statistics. that's my point about using selective stats. I could say that Soriano is going to put up .350/.560 next year. will you buy that Jon? you Raisen? he did it just last year. But nobody was making any predictions in this discussion. let's go back. the poster said now to me that says make a case, not throw out a selective stat to show it is possible. so you are right, noone did make a prediction, but one poster requested a critic of the signing and advocate of a youngster over the signed player give a prediction. that is not what he got. he got a stat line from a single season as a proxy for the argument. that's as lame as it gets. Seems like you've altered what really happened. The stat line was used to point out that Marshall outperformed Marquis last season so it's possible he CAN do it again. Exactly! what is so hard to understand here?

The discussion went like this: Why give this much money to marquis when we have cheap guys who could pitch as well as him? I need proof that they will pitch as well as him! Marshall has already done it. YOU CANT USE LAST YEARS STATS TO PROVE MARSHALL WILL PITCH BETTER THAN MARQUIS NEXT YEAR! the problem is that nobody said marshall will pitch better than marquis last year. Somebody said that he could and somebody else responded by saying that they needed to show evidence that suggests that he will. The only problem is why does the original poster need to show evidence to proove something that he never said? The proof that the original poster needed to show was that marshall could indeed pitch better than marquis and that proof is in the 2006 statistics. that's my point about using selective stats. I could say that Soriano is going to put up .350/.560 next year. will you buy that Jon? you Raisen? he did it just last year. But nobody was making any predictions in this discussion. let's go back. the poster said now to me that says make a case, not throw out a selective stat to show it is possible. so you are right, noone did make a prediction, but one poster requested a critic of the signing and advocate of a youngster over the signed player give a prediction. that is not what he got. he got a stat line from a single season as a proxy for the argument. that's as lame as it gets. That poster was way off base for asking for some substance to prove that A will outperform B. Previous post didn't say A will outperform B, it said A could outperform B. Previous poster has no obligation to provide evidence to back up something he didn't say.

Totally agree. People on this board hate everything. They hate the sun. They hate air. Have you seen the sun's isolated discipline?!?! yuck

Jacque turned out to be a bargain. I was referring to the frenchness. :D

The discussion went like this: Why give this much money to marquis when we have cheap guys who could pitch as well as him? I need proof that they will pitch as well as him! Marshall has already done it. YOU CANT USE LAST YEARS STATS TO PROVE MARSHALL WILL PITCH BETTER THAN MARQUIS NEXT YEAR! the problem is that nobody said marshall will pitch better than marquis last year. Somebody said that he could and somebody else responded by saying that they needed to show evidence that suggests that he will. The only problem is why does the original poster need to show evidence to proove something that he never said? The proof that the original poster needed to show was that marshall could indeed pitch better than marquis and that proof is in the 2006 statistics. that's my point about using selective stats. I could say that Soriano is going to put up .350/.560 next year. will you buy that Jon? you Raisen? he did it just last year. But nobody was making any predictions in this discussion.

It's a darn shame we no longer have Pierre and probably wont have Jacque. Marquis would have fit in quite well.

I just hope he's not on the Ryan Harvey track. He probably has better plate discipline than Harvey.

The discussion went like this: Why give this much money to marquis when we have cheap guys who could pitch as well as him? I need proof that they will pitch as well as him! Marshall has already done it. YOU CANT USE LAST YEARS STATS TO PROVE MARSHALL WILL PITCH BETTER THAN MARQUIS NEXT YEAR! the problem is that nobody said marshall will pitch better than marquis last year. Somebody said that he could and somebody else responded by saying that they needed to show evidence that suggests that he will. The only problem is why does the original poster need to show evidence to proove something that he never said? The proof that the original poster needed to show was that marshall could indeed pitch better than marquis and that proof is in the 2006 statistics.

This is my opinion: Jason Marquis is a puzzling guy who has put up good ERAs in the past, but just put up a 6+ era last year. Even when he was good, his peripheral numbers were nothing special. I would take a flyer on him if he would take a low base one year contract with an option. But guaranteeing at least 20 million dollars to a guy coming off of a year that bad is insane.

This is news to me.

Unfortunately, something this place has had very little of this offseason! It's been hard at points to read this board when you have to wade through pages and pages of arguements that lack reason, an objective view, and have some really skewed logic. The negativity (and I can understand it a bit) on this board has been SO bad this offseason it's crazy! Despite that, this is still head and shoulders above any other forum, I just wish more people would heed jjgman21's advise above. And posts like this one ^^^^ What do they accomplish? This isn't a thread on debate tactics, its a thread on the signing of Jason Marquis. I don't like it. There is a good chance that he will not get better and you will be on the hook for 21+ over 7 years. The following young pitchers can outperform Marquis. Sean Marhsall Carlos Marmol Juan Mateo There was really no point to this signing. Just trying to remind people about what made this board great and how it seems as though it has gotten completely out of hand this year (96 loss season do tend to do stuff like this though). There are a lot of stubborn people on here and I doubt that much will change, hopefully people realize how they have been acting and try to tone it down. Now what does your post accomplish? You tell me that 3 of our young guys can outperform Marquis, fair enough, but where is your logic behind it? Tell me why they will outpitch him, otherwise your post is just as pointless as you think mine was. I can say player A will outpeform player B all I want, give me something of substance to prove that point. BTW, personally I dont really like the signing much either. Sean Marshall outperformed Jason Marquis last year. Is that not the kind of evidence you are looking for. Exactly. Marshall: 5.59 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .270 BAA, 77 K/59 BB, 20 HR Marquis: 6.02 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .289 BAA, 96 K/75 BB, 35 HR Marshall will be good in a couple of years. But he does not have a 4.45 carreer ERA like Marquis does. I don't like this signing particularly. But counting on Marshall is not a good idea. Seasoning him in AAA and viewing him as a possible future Cub, is a good idea. Yep. Why rush these kids? Didn't we learn our lesson with Wood and Prior? Let them build up the proper arm strength. bump. see the bold Jon. see the bold jjg

I wish I could say "He gone" when talking about Harrelson.

Fake tree's are terrible.

If you want to read the articles, google them. I've already read them. It's not important enough to me to be your librarian. And regardless, it is a gauge of his value of Hill over and against the other player involved. I hope this is not what you do for any bibliographies you have to write. You are trying to prove your point about Hill, so the burden of backing up your point is on you.

Unfortunately, something this place has had very little of this offseason! It's been hard at points to read this board when you have to wade through pages and pages of arguements that lack reason, an objective view, and have some really skewed logic. The negativity (and I can understand it a bit) on this board has been SO bad this offseason it's crazy! Despite that, this is still head and shoulders above any other forum, I just wish more people would heed jjgman21's advise above. And posts like this one ^^^^ What do they accomplish? This isn't a thread on debate tactics, its a thread on the signing of Jason Marquis. I don't like it. There is a good chance that he will not get better and you will be on the hook for 21+ over 7 years. The following young pitchers can outperform Marquis. Sean Marhsall Carlos Marmol Juan Mateo There was really no point to this signing. Just trying to remind people about what made this board great and how it seems as though it has gotten completely out of hand this year (96 loss season do tend to do stuff like this though). There are a lot of stubborn people on here and I doubt that much will change, hopefully people realize how they have been acting and try to tone it down. Now what does your post accomplish? You tell me that 3 of our young guys can outperform Marquis, fair enough, but where is your logic behind it? Tell me why they will outpitch him, otherwise your post is just as pointless as you think mine was. I can say player A will outpeform player B all I want, give me something of substance to prove that point. BTW, personally I dont really like the signing much either. Sean Marshall outperformed Jason Marquis last year. Is that not the kind of evidence you are looking for. Exactly. Marshall: 5.59 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .270 BAA, 77 K/59 BB, 20 HR Marquis: 6.02 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, .289 BAA, 96 K/75 BB, 35 HR I'd much prefer looking at the totality of the body of work and at least an attempt to make a reasoned prediction of the future based thereon rather than unfairly plucking stats selectively to make the worst case scenerio appear to be the likely outcome. is that really too much to ask? 4.16 2.69 those are the career minor league era's of marshall and marquis. Guess which is which.

Unfortunately, something this place has had very little of this offseason! It's been hard at points to read this board when you have to wade through pages and pages of arguements that lack reason, an objective view, and have some really skewed logic. The negativity (and I can understand it a bit) on this board has been SO bad this offseason it's crazy! Despite that, this is still head and shoulders above any other forum, I just wish more people would heed jjgman21's advise above. And posts like this one ^^^^ What do they accomplish? This isn't a thread on debate tactics, its a thread on the signing of Jason Marquis. I don't like it. There is a good chance that he will not get better and you will be on the hook for 21+ over 7 years. The following young pitchers can outperform Marquis. Sean Marhsall Carlos Marmol Juan Mateo There was really no point to this signing. Just trying to remind people about what made this board great and how it seems as though it has gotten completely out of hand this year (96 loss season do tend to do stuff like this though). There are a lot of stubborn people on here and I doubt that much will change, hopefully people realize how they have been acting and try to tone it down. Now what does your post accomplish? You tell me that 3 of our young guys can outperform Marquis, fair enough, but where is your logic behind it? Tell me why they will outpitch him, otherwise your post is just as pointless as you think mine was. I can say player A will outpeform player B all I want, give me something of substance to prove that point. BTW, personally I dont really like the signing much either. Sean Marshall outperformed Jason Marquis last year. Is that not the kind of evidence you are looking for. I know that Marshall was a better player last year than Marquis. No I dont like this signing. Yes I would have much rather went a completely different direction. That's not the point I was making to him though, I was asking for him to give a little substance to his post and give me some kind of proof as to why he believes that all those pitchers will do better. But he wasn't taking a hardline stance that each of those pitchers will in fact do better than Marquis next year. He just said that they could. And considering Marquis' 06 I don't think its such a ridiculous statement that needs a considerable amount of statistical support.