Sarcastic

I think it was pretty clear that he was pitching hurt in 2006. If he can't pitch decently once he is fully healthy, then we can say that he is done for good.

I think it is pretty clear that Prior is still important to the team. Sure, they have a shot without him, but a healthy Prior would be huge. I'm not saying it is going to happen, but his potential alone is reason enough to care.

Actually, I think people were trashing Miller (me included) for losing his velocity. Considering Prior is 5 years younger, and has never had surgery, I think he'll regain velocity before Miller. I don't think Miller's chances are better than Prior's. I think they're worse. Miller is old and Prior is young. Prior has a good chance, with time, to reinvent himself as a finesse pitcher. If he doesn't get his velocity back, he won't be the same as he was in 2003, but he still has the chance to be very effective. By the way, no one answered my question about how many pitches he threw. What pitches does he throw? Mostly he throws a 2 seam and a 4 seam fastball and a curveball, but I'm pretty he sure he also throws a changeup occasionally.

I didn't see the interview, but I can't say I can disagree with calling him "done" at this point. Recap, his last game he pitched against Milwaukee (06) got pounded. Never reached over 88-89. He spent the entire offseason working on his mechanics and strengthening his shoulder. Spring 2007, Cubs Nation gets excited over the fact that he has completed all drills and exercises along with the rest of the staff... wooo hooo. First game back, gets pounded again and again does not reach over 88. While I would love to see him back as the dominate Prior he once was, I am more inclined to think he is used and abused...over and done, call it a day! 40 pitches. In a spring training game. It is virtually meaningless. The only reason these columnists are all over it is because baseball fans want news and there is practically nothing new going on right now. You can argue that he'll never be healthy again, but until I see him suck for a healthy regular season, (2006 doesn't count), I see no reason to say that he's lost his talent.

For the last time, the reports after the game said that Prior hit 89, not the 83-85 that the Seattle announcers were talking about. You can't expect his velocity to be 100% in his first ST start. I'm not worried about his velocity at all. If there is anything to worry about, it would be his command, since that was his big problem last year. This is from Sullivan's article.. The velocity on Prior's fastball averaged 84-86 m.p.h., topping out at 89, whereas Wood threw in the mid-90s, hit 95 with consistency and said his "heart was racing" on the mound. Obviously WORKING from 84-86mph is not going to get it done. I'd bet the 84-86 was his 2 seamer, which he throws more often, in which case its only a 5 mph gap, since he usually threw the 2 seamer 89-91. Is a 5 mph gap in his first ST game in years really something to be concerned about?

For the last time, the reports after the game said that Prior hit 89, not the 83-85 that the Seattle announcers were talking about. You can't expect his velocity to be 100% in his first ST start. I'm not worried about his velocity at all. If there is anything to worry about, it would be his command, since that was his big problem last year.

For those who didn't read the beginning of the thread, Sullivan reported that Prior topped out at 89. Arg, that's a big difference. I read the post that said he was saying 83-85. So which is it actually? EDIT: OK, now I see, damn Mariners announcers causing a panic. Thanks Roast. Actually, I think it was both. A report he wrote minutes after Prior was pulled said low to mid 80s, but someone here posted that he more recently reported 89. My guess is he got low to mid 80s from the same source that the announcers got it, and it wasn't really reliable.

For those who didn't read the beginning of the thread, Sullivan reported that Prior topped out at 89.

Every Prior thread needs one.

I guess the announcers were right about Prior's velocity. :x Or Sullivan could have just been using them as a source. I doubt that it is uncommon. Or, even scarier, using US as a source. :shock: Heh, that'd make for a great article. "Cubs fans suffer simultaneous heart attack"

I guess the announcers were right about Prior's velocity. :x Or Sullivan could have just been using them as a source. I doubt that it is uncommon.

Considering the accuracy of the announcers on everything else, I don't trust them too much on Prior's velocity.

And as we all know, ST is the only determining factor in how well a player does in the regular season. :roll:

There's no way to listen to this game without buying something, is there?

He hasn't hit 96 since ... 2003? Its been a long time.

I hope it didn't contribute at all. Fan and press reactions and expectations should not even remotely be a factor in deciding how quickly an injured player returns. I can't help but be suspicious there's still something going on with Prior after the conflicting announcements recently. I just do not trust the Cubs when it comes to dealing with injured players. I love how the main fan reaction to this Prior thing is: a) the Cubs should never make decisions based on fan concerns and b) the fact that they are doing this concerns me. Its not hypocritical, but it is grand irony. Its human nature to want to have a cake and eat it too.

Unless he feels like giving a big hometown discount, why would Barrett sign a two year contract? He has developed into one of the best hitting catchers in the NL, and regardless of his age, there will be a market for that. I think the Cubs will probably resign him to a reasonable three year deal, if he really does want to stay. He may decline in his final year, but Barrett declining from his peak for one year is still better than Blanco or any of the other garbage that would be available in the near future.

Fixed. And overrated. Thanks, it's been awhile since I've seen his name. Oh how I wish we had his gridiness. (Sarcasm) http://mathworld.wolfram.com/images/eps-gif/SquareGrid_1000.gif We've still got it.

He'll be 38 this season. He is coming off a year in which he played no baseball. The year before that, he continued his rapid decline, had a few injury problems, and failed to post a .700 OPS. Resurgence? He might make the team on his name alone, but I doubt he's ready to serve in any more than a bench role. That would be a resurgence for Sammy.

Oh really? So it took about 1 week of ST for the whole "Prior is our 5th starter" thing to be thrown to the 4 winds ;) If he is healthy, it doesn't make any sense to make him the 5th starter. Rotation order doesn't especially matter if you aren't skipping starters anyway. I always thought the "Prior should be considered the 5th starter" thing was pointless anyway. Either he'll pitch or he won't.

And the Dodgers have since said they weren't going to trade top prospects for Maddux. B prospects or Izturis seems like the choice. Hendry went with the ML ready option, for better or worse. People can complain about Izturis all they want, but at least he's good enough to make the majors, which the vast majority of B prospects won't ever sniff. The other part of that trade was that it pushed Neifi into a backup role (with the trade of Walker, it would have been Neifi and Cedeno as the starters at short and second) which allowed Hendry to trade Neifi a couple of weeks later. It may not have been planned that way, but it is much less likely that Hendry is trading Neifi if Neifi seems like the only option for a starter at the time, so I connect those two deals especially with them being so close in time as well. It pains me to write it, but I'd rather have Neifi than Izturis. Well, I guess we'll have to see which Izturis shows up this season-at least there is a small possibility that Izturis will be ok this season, while Neifi passed ok a long time ago and continues to decline from his terrible level last year in which Neifi was worse than Izturis and Izturis was just coming back from the injury, while Neifi was healthy all year. I don't really understand why'd you take Neifi over Izturis, but that's just me. Two reasons: money and proximity. Izturis probably wouldn't get so much criticism here if he was on a major league minimum salary, but for a player who has been as bad as he is to get paid a substantial salary is not justifiable. Also, we haven't cringed at one of Neifi's plays as recently as we have with Izturis, and there is less of a threat of Neifi actually getting an AB as a Cub again. The grass is always greener on the other side. Overall, it seems likely to me that Izturis will have a better year than Neifi, but we'd probably be better off without either one.

I think the key point that you are missing is that you are assuming Hendry values players at the same level you do. And you know that just isnt true. While we think Izturis is a crap return, Hendry values Izturis way more than we do and thought he was bringing back something good. Which would actually be much worse than if he just was unable to get a decent player in return for him. I think it is probably a combination of both. Hendry likely overvalues Izturis, but I doubt that anyone was about to give up serious talent for mediocre pitcher in his 40's. We certainly have no evidence that some GM was considering it.

Link zambrano's only signing because jim lied to him about what happens if he doesnt accept the offer Don't tell Zambrano.

Assuming I did the math right, the numbers are accurate, and the number of double plays on double steals is insignificant, the break even points come out to 53.3% for double steals with no outs, and 79.1% for double steals with one out.

I'm with you. With Guzman and Hill possibly in Iowa, the I-Cubs may have nearly as good a rotation as the Cubs if Lilly and Marquis can't keep the ball in the park. Let's ask ZiPS.... 3.46 Zambrano 4.09 Prior 4.95 Marquis 4.26 Lilly 4.97 Miller Average ~ 4.35 3.65 Hill 4.90 Guzman 4.64 Mateo 5.34 Marshall 4.94 Gallagher Average ~ 4.69 I dunno if Gallagher will hold down the five spot in Iowa, but for the sake of argument let's include him. It's close but that's a very negatve projection for a healthy Angel Guzman. If you do the same averages using PECOTA it's: 4.64 ~ Chicago 4.83 ~ Iowa (only b/c of Mateo's 5.42 Last but certainly not least, Bill James Projections of Eternal Optimism would grant the Chicago Cubs with an average ERA of 4.06, thanks to the 3.98 projection to Wade Miller in all of 40 innings. Oh well. It is close. Which is sad. very sad. I know that these projections are much more accurate than the, "well, I think..." method, but doesn't it seem that they are a little optimistic about some of the minor league pitchers? Who really believes that Mateo could be a decent #4? All of those projections (barring Guzman's) seem pretty optimistic to me. In addition, they don't seem to project returns from injury well. If Prior and Miller are both completely healthy, it seems likely that they will be pitching a bit better than their projections. If Miller does that badly, it wouldn't be long before he gets replaced.