BigbadB

Maybe it's the PR rep in me, but this doesn't bother me because it smells like classic spin. I'm guessing this was made sometime around the signing, when basically the choices were Burnitz and nobody. Ever seen a team sign a person and say, "Well, he sucks, but he was all we could find. Maybe if we hadn't drug our feet so long on the Sosa deal maybe we could have found a warm bucket of spit instead." Now, if he picks up the option. . . :roll: :shaking:

But, how did Fanzone know Ryno was going to pick that number? :P

96-66 in 2003 91-71 in 2004 88-74 in 2005 After '03, he lost Miguel Tejada, Ramon Hernandez and Mark Ellis. After '04, he lost Tim Hudson, Mark Mulder, Mark Redman and Jermaine Dye I don't know if terrible or sucky would be the proper adjective for a guy working with a 55m payroll.

Well, as I stated before, that was off the top of my head. I wouldn't be sure that the White Sox wouldn't make a big offer. They have a lot of decent stuff in place right now and question marks with Thomas and Konerko. LA can move the horrible fielding Kent to 1st if he's under contract for another year. Izturis can move to 2nd. Seattle might be a team that be interested in Furcal. Anyway, the intent of my post wasn't to specify who might be interested in Furcal, but to express that there is no guarantee that he'll come to Chicago. He could just stay in Atlanta. Wouldn't it be a huge gamble to release the inhouse guy in hopes of signing someone else? As much as I'd like to see Giles, Furcal and/or Nomar, Millwood and Lofton all playing for the Cubs next year, I don't see the Cubs getting all those guys, and there is no guarantee they will get any of them. What's worse is that they don't seem the slightest bit interested in retaining guys that are easier to come by, Nomar and Walker. Last year, they set their sights on Beltran and didn't get him. They thought at worst, they could trade Sosa for Cliff Floyd. The Mets weren't biting and took Beltran instead. We are competing with 29 other teams for these players services. They won't all sit around waiting to see what the Cubs will do before they make up their minds what they want to do. Hendry has a little history of sitting back and watching everything unfold. I don't think that philosophy will work this offseason. He also won't be able to back down from overbidding for the services of a JD Drew or a Carlos Beltran. I don't think there will be any teams letting the Cubs bid against themselves for Brian Giles or Rafael Furcal either. The market is thin, and you can expect that whoever gets these guys will have to pay a premium. That's why, to me, it makes much more sense to at least lock up Nomar and Walker early, THEN worry about how you get Giles, Furcal and others to fill out the rest of the roster. Letting those guys walk just adds more holes that need to be filled and rather than penciling in the best candidates at each postion, assume Preston Wilson or Jacque Jones or Neifi Perez at some of those spots, which puts the team right back to where they were. Nomar is a gamble because of health. However, Cedeno as protection allows you to make that gamble. If you can get Furcal, go ahead and get him too. Move Nomar to 2nd or the outfield and he protects Aramis at 3rd. You can then consider trading Walker. That is a gamble. But, letting Nomar simply walk away and hoping you can sign Furcal is the biggest gamble of them all. I ask the question again. Will Nomar sit on hold while you work on a plan to sign Furcal to replace him? I don't think he will.

I doubt Houston will be adding any big time FA's. Here's a cursory glance at their payroll for 2006. Pettitte 17 million Bagwell 17 million Biggio 4.5 million Berkman 10 million Those four players account for 48 million in payroll. Assume they keep Clemens, he'll command around 18 million again. That's 66 million for five players. Ensberg, Everett, Oswalt, and Lidge are arbitration eligible. Ensberg will likely get 5 million. Oswalt is in his sixth year, so he'll get 10 at least. Lidge will likely get 6. That's 87 million for eight players. Some of that money in Bagwell and Pettitte's deals are deferred, but we're still at 75 million for eight players. Also some of Kent's and Clemens' money has been deferred until this year, so that's added back in, putting us roughly at 80 million.Unless they significantly up payroll from the 85-88 million that it's been set at, Houston will not be too active in the FA market. My guess is that they'll stick with Everett at SS. Will Bagwell play again? If not, that frees up some money. With Biggio playing one more year, you can expect that money to be freed up the following year.

I don't understand what your beef is. I personally didn't have a problem having Neifi on the team. The fact Dusty Baker doesn't know how to use him properly makes it a problem he's on the team. If Baker was fired and his replacement batted him 7th in the line up on off days for the starter, I'd still be fine having him on the team. But, it doesn't sound like that is going to happen. I haven't vilified him. I haven't seen many others do it either. I'd say Neifi gets no more hate posts than any of the previously mentioned players. There are a whole lot of people who don't want Maddux back next year. I'd say the biggest complaint about having Neifi on the team has more to do with Dusty's use of Neifi Perez rather than Neifi Perez himself. Neifi=adequate back up Neifi=below average everyday player Are you mad at the people who wanted to see what Cedeno could do playing everyday over Neifi playing everyday? Are you mad because I posted Neifi's OBP as a lead off hitter? This is not a reflection of Neifi, since he isn't the one who filled out the line up card with Neifi batting lead off. I just don't understand your woe is Neifi posts. I can make a whole list of people who get more negative attention at this place than Neifi Perez.

What happened to Cole Hamels?

Letting Nomar go is not a precursor to automatically signing Furcal. How many teams might be interested in a good fielding SS that has a decent OBP and has + speed? Off the top of my head, the White Sox, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Houston come to mind. Atlanta could resign him as well. What will happen first? Nomar will be turned loose. Now you have Nomar gone, Furcal signed somewhere else, and all that's left is Cedeno. I like Cedeno, but I'd prefer Cedeno as protection if a middle infielder gets hurt. How high could Furcal end up going? We saw what Renteria got. We saw what Guzman and Cabrera got. That was in a year there was a lot of SS options. That's not the case this year, and Furcal's agent knows it. To me, bringing Nomar back is a no brainer. He wants to come back and he'd probably sign an incentive based contract to come back. He knows his injuries have let Chicago down. He has even made the claim that a position change would be acceptable as long as he could remain a Cub. That might just be him being all nicey-nice, but with Cedeno as his back up, SS is not an issue. By letting Nomar go, we potentially turn SS into an issue. The money spent to lure Furcal and the desire to spend money for another rotation arm reduces the available money to throw at Brian Giles. Letting Nomar go is a huge gamble. A bigger gamble than seeing if he can play in 2006 at full health. I don't like playing the I told you so game. I wouldn't do it. However, if Nomar walks and we don't get Furcal, I told you that might happen. To add fuel to the fire, let Walker go and you now have another hole to fill. Who plays 2nd when Nomar walks, Furcal signs somewhere else and Cedeno is slotted at SS? Hairston? Would these moves give Brian Giles the impression that the Cubs are trying to improve the team? Giles wants a ring. To lure Giles to a team that has the history of losing that Chicago does, you are going to have to impress him with more than letting two productive hitters walk and using roster filler to replace them. I've stated before that I'm very afraid of this offseason. I'm afraid that Chicago is not even going to discuss bringing Nomar back. I'm afraid they will just let Walker take a hike. I'm afraid that Furcal, Giles, Millwood, Burnett and others opt for better futures elsewhere. What is the likelihood you can work on a deal for Furcal while keeping Nomar on hold on the other line in case a deal can't be worked out? I find that highly unlikely.

Wasn't Guzman's last setback a forearm problem, one that isn't typically difficult for a pitcher to recover from? Wouldn't this last "minor injury" only give him more time to recover from his serious pitching injury (shoulder)? I'm not giving up on him, and I sure hope no one else in the Cubs organization has either.

And Wood, Nomar and Patterson haven't been vilified here this year? :roll:

Ha! I just didn't want any confusion that we were one and the same.

No thoughts on Macias and Perez?

The post time says 6:45pm. According to my fuzzy math, my post was made at 5:45pm Pacific. Sullivan's article was posted at 7pm Pacific.

It wouldn't be the first time that I've had suspicions that Sullivan ripped off something from the site. To be fair, I really can't tell what was posted first. The article has an official post time. My post has a post time, but the post time doesn't match my clock. For example, it's 5:20pm Pacific time as I click submit.

Peavy has 2 broken ribs. A much bigger loss for the Padres than Reyes.

Peavy has 2 broken ribs. He's done for the rest of the year. Bye bye Padres.

Looks like my post went up before his article did.

Whoops, I was quoting the person who originally put Rogers. Yikes, do my preachings sound like Sullivan?

wins and era also. what other #'s indicate a pitcher's effectivness better? A pitcher could pitch a whole year with an ERA of 0.00 and not win 14 games. If the OFFENSE doesn't score any runs in any of those games, the pitcher gets a no decision. In 2003, Kerry should have been a 20 game winner. The blown saves and the lack of run support in games he pitched that year cost him a lot of wins. ERA is definitely a good measure. WHIP is a good measure. K/BB is a good measure. There are many others, but wins should never be taken into consideration. Kerry Wood was 12-11 in 2002 with a 3.67 ERA Matt Clement was 9-13 last year with a 3.68 ERA Brandon Webb was 7-16 last year with a 3.59 ERA Brandon Webb was 10-9 in 2003 with a 2.84 ERA. Russ Ortiz was 21-7 in 2003 with a 3.81 ERA Last year, Russ was 15-9 with a 4.31 ERA I could go on. a pitcher could also have an era of 6.00 and win 15 games but how likely is that? if wins & losses shouldnt be taken into consideration then clemens should win the cy young this year instead of carpenter or wills but he wont. i agree they dont tell the whole story but i would rather have a guy with a 4.00 era who wins 15 games year after year than a guy with a 2.50 era who only wins 10 every year. Here is the list of games Roger Clemens played in and the amount of earned runs he gave up in each game: 1,0,0,0,3 in April 2,0,2,2,0,2 in May 4,1,0,1,1 in June 0,2,1,0,2 in July 1,0,0,5,2,0 in August 2,5,1,4 in September 1 in October He finished the season with a 13-8 record. 10 starts with zero earned runs 19 starts with 1 earned run or less 27 starts with 2 earned runs or less. 32 total starts. You would think that a guy who could go out there 27 times and leave the game giving up only 2 runs could win a few more games than less than half. Chris Carpenter's earned run history for 2005: 1,8,3,0,3 in April 2,5,2,3,1,3 in May 0,3,0,1,0 in June 0,1,0,1,3 in July 1,2,2,3,3,1 in August 2,0,4,4,9,5 in September He finished the season with a 21-5 record. 7 starts with zero earned runs. 14 starts with 1 earned run or less 19 starts with 2 runs or less 33 starts total. Dontrelle Willis' earned run history for 2005: 0,0,3,2,0 in April 0,1,3,2,2 in May 3,4,1,0,0,5 in June 0,8,8,7,0 in July 1,0,1,0,2,1 in August 1,1,2,2,1,5 He finished the season with a 21-5 record. 10 starts with zero earned runs. 18 starts with 1 earned run or less 24 starts with 2 runs or less 33 starts total Looking over the 3 guys, Clemens clearly was the better starter of the 3. He had more quality starts and never gave up more than 5 runs in any game. It's Houston's poor offensive run support that will cost Clemens another Cy Young trophy. Personally, if I had a vote, it would go to Clemens. The stuff listed above isn't all that factors either. K/9, K/BB, WHIP, ERA, BAA should all be factored in as well. But, there is no way you can truly factor in wins/losses when evaluating a pitcher. That said, I'd take Willis, Clemens or Carpenter in my rotation.

Wow, it almost looks like someone ripped off my material. But at least Rogers plays to a bigger audience. Rogers also touched on things I didn't bother with. The OBP issue alone should be enough to consider making some changes around here.

wins and era also. what other #'s indicate a pitcher's effectivness better? A pitcher could pitch a whole year with an ERA of 0.00 and not win 14 games. If the OFFENSE doesn't score any runs in any of those games, the pitcher gets a no decision. In 2003, Kerry should have been a 20 game winner. The blown saves and the lack of run support in games he pitched that year cost him a lot of wins. ERA is definitely a good measure. WHIP is a good measure. K/BB is a good measure. There are many others, but wins should never be taken into consideration. Kerry Wood was 12-11 in 2002 with a 3.67 ERA Matt Clement was 9-13 last year with a 3.68 ERA Brandon Webb was 7-16 last year with a 3.59 ERA Brandon Webb was 10-9 in 2003 with a 2.84 ERA. Russ Ortiz was 21-7 in 2003 with a 3.81 ERA Last year, Russ was 15-9 with a 4.31 ERA I could go on.

Uh oh. Measuring a pitcher's talent based on wins/losses.

This thread has officially been hijacked. We aren't finished patting ourselves on the back quite yet. Back to the showering of compliments. Feel free to throw money at Tim as well. :P

But, since you don't know which game you are currently playing falls within that grouping (shooting self in foot, other team shooting self in foot, or other), you have to play every game as if it is a game that must be won.

Spoken as eloquently as only Goony can.