mg420

How would the Cubs flip Padilla? Well, he'll have one less year on his deal, which will make him much more "moveable" at that time. Let's say the Cubs sign him to a 3/30 deal (which I don't believe it will take). After this year, he'll only be 2/20 and will be much more attractive when compared to next season's FA's. Kinda like Westbrook looks good to you now. Umm...who cares how he compares to the Cards starters? They got damn lucky to have even made the playoffs with that team, let alone to have won anything. Besides, that still doesn't argue for trading value for someone you can easily replace with a FA signing. the point is that you dont need 4 or 5 stud pithcers to get to the post season. look at padilla's last 3 years and westbrook's and tell me who is the better pitcher?

Same package for Peavy and Giles. Sign Drew for CF. Sign Lugo for SS. Lugo Giles Lee Drew Aram Murton DeRosa Blanco barrett & gallagher alone are too much to give up for peavy imo. giles is a waste of money at this point in his career.

Pitchers with high GB rates tend to be overrated because people fixate on their earned run average ignoring their run average. Yes it's not their fault the player made the error, but the simple fact is an extreme groundball pitcher like Westbrook puts a lot more pressure on his defense and it should lead to a higher unearned run rate. He's allowed 38 unearned runs the last three season. Some of those are not his fault, but a lot certainly are. how is it a pitchers fault when a fielder doesnt make a play? unless he is making the error, there is no way he can be blamed because he throws ground balls instead of fly balls or k's. Yes, he can be blamed that he's putting additional pressure on the defense by allowing the ball to put in play so often. again, tell that to kenny rodgers and jeff suppan. they seem to function ok by pitching like westbrook.

The Cards signed Carp as a reclamation project that didn't start for the major league team for over a year after the signing. They also didn't give up any talent to get him or guarantee him a spot in their rotation. He doesn't walk a lot of guys, but he's walked more than 55 batters in each of the past four years, so his control is not spectacular or anything. It's not like it's helping him keep guys off the bases at all, he's had a WHIP over 1.4 in three of the past five years. And it was over 1.3 in another one. He is durable. That's where about 80% of his value as an acquisition would lie. But you're likely to get 200IP of less than league average production from him...which doesn't really excite me a whole lot. I'm definitely okay with that in the fourth spot, but certainly not excited about it. As for the complete games...who cares? The Cubs are likely to carry a seven man pen again in 2007. It's really not that bad of a thing to have a reliever pitch in each game. Here are his ERA's going backwards in time: 2006: 4.17 2005: 4.49 2004: 3.38 2003: 4.33 I was going to add the years before that, but it wouldn't really be fair as those were the years he was trying to establish himself in the majors. Just for reference: 2002: 5.83 2001: 5.85 So for the four years in question, he was well under 4.00 in 2004, but it's not like he narrowly missing it in the other seasons. The gap in those other three years adds up to 0.99, so he's averaging a third of a run over 4.00 those seasons. Don't get me started on measuring pitchers by wins. Would he be a nice addition to the bottom of the rotation if it doesn't cost much? Sure, why not. But we could sign Padilla, it would cost us only money, and then we could flip him after a year and get some talent in return instead of giving up guys to acquire a bottom of the rotation pitcher. how are the cubs going to flip padilla if he wants 10 mil a year? unless he is outstanding, not many teams are going to want him for that price. other than carpenter, westbrook had a better year than any starter on the cards last year. he seems to compare favorably to suppan who has proven to be quite valuable btw.

Pitchers with high GB rates tend to be overrated because people fixate on their earned run average ignoring their run average. Yes it's not their fault the player made the error, but the simple fact is an extreme groundball pitcher like Westbrook puts a lot more pressure on his defense and it should lead to a higher unearned run rate. He's allowed 38 unearned runs the last three season. Some of those are not his fault, but a lot certainly are. how is it a pitchers fault when a fielder doesnt make a play? unless he is making the error, there is no way he can be blamed because he throws ground balls instead of fly balls or k's.

kottaras went to the red sox for wells.

i guess they aren't too interested in cedeno (i wonder why?) but maybe izturis, eyre & ohman might be enough? heck, why not throw in novoa too. out of all those, ohmani the only one i would miss.

if the cards thought that way they never would have signed carpenter. westbrook doesnt have many k's but he doesnt walk many either, throws 200 + innings per year and had 3 cg's (with a total of 10 in the past 3 years) while the whole cubs staff only had 1 between them. he has had an era around 4.00 the last 3 years in the much more offensive AL and averaged 15 wins a year. assuming he wouldnt cost alot in talent (a few young bullpen arms as has been suggested) i think he would be a great fit for the cubs rotation. compared to what padilla offers for 10 mil a year he's quite a bargin imo.

i think pignatello might be a better option in this role than cotts. he came up as a starter and has done well in the az leauge and in the minors last year. if they trade either eyre or ohman, the have cotts and pignatello to go along with whichever one they keep for the lefties from the pen.

Dunno, but I would do Murton for Westbrook straight up, especially if we ink Soriano and Drew as rumored. i would rather the cubs keep murton and not sign soriano. drew and westbrook would be great if they can get them. I think that's crazy, assuming the Cubs have the money to spend and it won't hurt other areas of the club. Soriano's bat is loads & loads better than Matty's. While I like Matt, his defense has never impressed me either, so I don't think we lose much on that side of the ball. And the offensive gains, IMO, are massive. If it was an either/or between Murt & Soriano I'd send Matt packing right now. i think it's crazy to expect soriano to be worth anywhere near what he is going to be paid at the end of his contract. how many times has a player gotten a big contract only to watch his production go down the tubes. murton has a chance to be a soild .300 25 hr .850 ops left fielder in the near future imo. i would much rather see the cubs keep murton, put some $ into their starting pitching by going after westbrook & signing him to an extention than paying 100 mil to soriano for what he did last year.

i could also look like z hill meche/iwaga westbrook/lilly miller although he's not a lock to have a great year in the pen, i think it's much more likely that he does as opposed to being an effective starter.

neither did remlinger but he was very effective as a reliever when used properly as he was with the braves.

Westbrook and Lilly please I'd much rather Cotts start than Meche. But give me Westbrook. somehow i think a guy who has pitched a total of 179 innings in 3 years might have a problem as a starter. He's not going to give you 33 starts and 220 innings, but you can convert a reliever to a starter in 1 season. If he's a 6th starter/swingman guy, then you could get 12-15 starts and 100 innings without stretching him too much. i would agree that it's possible but why bother? he will most likely be a 5 inning pitcher at best for a while and with other options like meche, iwaga & lilly who are already used to pitching 180+ innings, i highly doubt that cotts would be that much better as a starter than those other guys to justify taking him out of the bullpen. His numbers last year make a pretty good case for taking him out of the bullpen. It's not like he's a sure thing stud reliever and we're risking wasting that value. Why bother? Because you need starting pitchers more than relievers. It's an insurance policy. if they can sign a few of the much better options out there that i listed, there is no reason the experiment with cotts in the rotation imo. failure in the pen does not justify having him start. in most cases, guys go to the pen to try to work out their issues and not the reverse. going from a loogy for 3 years to starting will not be an easy transition in any case. when was the last time he pitched 3 innings let alone 5? there are much better insurance policies in the minors imo.

i hope jones can fix whatever was wrong with his shoulder. i cant take too many more throws to the plate that either go into the stands or hit the grass 5 feet in front of him. it's like watching a little leauge game.

Westbrook and Lilly please I'd much rather Cotts start than Meche. But give me Westbrook. somehow i think a guy who has pitched a total of 179 innings in 3 years might have a problem as a starter. He's not going to give you 33 starts and 220 innings, but you can convert a reliever to a starter in 1 season. If he's a 6th starter/swingman guy, then you could get 12-15 starts and 100 innings without stretching him too much. i would agree that it's possible but why bother? he will most likely be a 5 inning pitcher at best for a while and with other options like meche, iwaga & lilly who are already used to pitching 180+ innings, i highly doubt that cotts would be that much better as a starter than those other guys to justify taking him out of the bullpen.

I pity your skeleton. actually there are much better sources of calcium than milk including broccolli and other green vegatable. they also are free of growth hormones unlike cows milk.

Westbrook and Lilly please I'd much rather Cotts start than Meche. But give me Westbrook. somehow i think a guy who has pitched a total of 179 innings in 3 years might have a problem as a starter.

Dunno, but I would do Murton for Westbrook straight up, especially if we ink Soriano and Drew as rumored. i would rather the cubs keep murton and not sign soriano. drew and westbrook would be great if they can get them.

they are both horrible beverages. if you want a real drink look here: http://www.reedsinc.com/ they cost more but you get to keep your teeth.

i only drink soy milk

i certainly hope that cotts is the last option the cubs will have for the rotation. i hope that 2 of meche, westbrook, iwaga & lilly are the major pitching targets of the cubs.

In another thread--maybe the rotoworld rumors thread, not sure--there was talk about Murton possibly being used in drawing Westbrook from Cleveland. If they're shopping Murton as trade bait, then we'll likely end up settling for Soriano/Drew/Jones. It would be great if the Indians wanted Jones instead of possibly Murton. aren't the indian's pretty well stacked in the of? why in the world would they want murton? i thought they were asking for young bullpens arms. Beats me. I'm just commenting on the Rotoworld article. i wasnt questioning you, just the article. sometimes i think they just make alot of this stuff up.

In another thread--maybe the rotoworld rumors thread, not sure--there was talk about Murton possibly being used in drawing Westbrook from Cleveland. If they're shopping Murton as trade bait, then we'll likely end up settling for Soriano/Drew/Jones. It would be great if the Indians wanted Jones instead of possibly Murton. aren't the indian's pretty well stacked in the of? why in the world would they want murton? i thought they were asking for young bullpens arms.

i would MUCH rather see drew on the cubs than soriano. he would be an ideal #2 hitter & can play cf.

the only way this will be a good move is if it lets the cubs get westbrook without trading wuretz. i guess signing wood for the pen also had a factor in the decision. again, i wish they could have gotten the sox to take novoa instead.