badnews

I think Francisco Rodriguez was a better set-up man than a closer. Percival 2001-2003 was plenty good.

Scott Taylor... the only thing distinguishing about him was that he was young for his level and seemed to have decent control. He was a starter and went to the pen this year. I never had much hope for him anyway. The Brewers' Jeremy Jeffress was suspended 50 games. Now that's a blow.

He beat out Cardinals farmhand Christopher Perez to have the lowest BAA in the minors. There may be a downside to his numbers, but now is not the time to dwell on such things. Congratulations!

Heck, let's just take a jaw-dropping moment to look at Duncan's 2006 season at AAA. A 25 year old whose best position is 1b, his second year in the PCL, he struck out in over 29% of his ABs, posted an .807 OPS, and a .177 Isolated Power does not bespeak mammoth power, numbers like those should be the kiss of death. It sure doesn't say anything about his major league career .260+ Isolated Power. The Cubs have been waiting 15 years for an improbability like Duncan, saints preserve us. Chris Duncan needs his own topic, something like "Where do you think Chris Duncan hides his contract with Lucifer signed in blood?"

You're being glib. Just saying "park factors" doesn't explain away anything. And you didn't answer the question you said you did. The Twins didn't fit the bill of being as low as 19th in team ERA and as bad as 25th in runs scored. There's a difference between being outscored and being bad in both facets of the game. The Mariners have allowed more runs than they've scored. But they're 13th in runs and 21st in ERA. The problem here is you acknowledge everything as "luck, luck, luck, luck" but then don't concede that no team gets this lucky with this many players for this long. People have been going on about the "Cardinal Illusion" for some years now. It's comforting to know that that the Cardinals doing better than they should and us worse than we should just happens to be a half decade of luck, until the Cardinals actually get legitimately good. I think that's a bit of a cop-out. It's just too much excuse making. Oh yeah, Spezio, a hot 300 ABs. It's a "hot something" with too many guys, too many years. Sure, why don't we throw them in? Heck, the Cardinals ought to bring in Matt Mantei while they're at it. Again, small sample size and luck. Funny how we're so short on the small sample size luck thing from guys like Springer, Franklin, etc. I never said everything goes 100% smoothly for the Cardinals. But let's face it, if we had what they had this season, we'd be like the 2003 Tigers, and no one would blame us. You've had to half-heartedly explain away a lot of amazing resurgences, improbalities, etc, and then success in what should be statistical disaster. A couple of these things would be acceptable. There are too many of them. Answer this question - why them, and why not us? Oh, this is the most outrageous thing yet. When does a guy whose minor league career numbers are a .262 BA, .340 OBP, .415 SLG, for a whopping .755 OPS translate into a .900+ OPS juggernaut? You've got to be kidding. There's no way you're going to make this fly with me. Dig up some Cubs minor leaguers who do that in the majors. The problems with Duncan doing this are numerous. Duncan could always hit for power? Yeah, a minor league Isolated Power of .153 from a 1b/LF type does not strike me the same way it does you. That's like Matt Murton power. #1- It was a lot more plausible in the steroid era. #2- I'd be one thing if Duncan were young for his minor league level. He most certainly wasn't. #3- A .755 OPS with a healthy dose of strikeouts for a guy's Duncan age should not translate into 2 900+ OPS seasons. He was basically an 800 OPS guy in the PCL, Buck Coats and Ronny Cedeno smoked that. Look, you're an intelligent guy, but this argument isn't going to go anywhere, because you're too stubborn and unyielding. I understand that you don't think a lot of exceptions to the rule mean anything. But this idea of trying to play off Chris Duncan as nothing unusual just shows me you're being disingenuous. Chris Duncan wasn't a 21 year old rushed up through the minors who exploded at the minor league level. Even the scouts didn't like Duncan. This is well documented. It's not like he's one of many prospects who the scouts love, the minor league numbers stink, and they do well in the majors. There was essentially nothing good about Duncan. He wasn't young for his level, his position value was nil, he struck out too much, didn't hit for enough power or average, or anything really, frankly Chris Duncan was like the Cardinal version of Brandon Sing, and I don't know about you, but if Brandon Sing was giving us two .900+ OPS seasons I'd be pretty damned amazed by that. Ankiel could hit but he hit in that same "no way is he doing anything in the majors" line like Justin Leone et al. Anyway, no offense to you personally but I'm not going to argue this any more. What you were saying was interesting until you tried the Duncan whitewash, that convinced me you were more about being right than honestly discussing baseball and conceding another poster's good points. This idea that Duncan's .153 Isolated Power is "always hitting for power"... ugh. There's simply no way around it, Duncan's minor league numbers at his age correlated with his major league numbers is very odd, the fact that you tried to play it off like it was some kind of totally natural growth, like Hanley Ramirez, who scouts worshipped for years and was younger, kind of shows you're just more about being right than being honest - that the Cardinals really have a lot of very odd good fortune on their side, the type that the Cubs clearly don't have. I apologize if any of that insulted you, it wasn't my intent. That Duncan stuff just disappointed me. I've read the Baseball Ameica reports on Duncan back in the day. At no time did they like him or suggest, like Alex Rios, he just needed to pack on some muscle, or anything of the sort. 25 year olds who've been in the majors a long time and posted an assload of strikeouts and an OPS of .800 in the PCL don't often have a lot of room for growth. Some of your talk reminds me of the more stubborn people on Miguel Cabrera. "His BABIP hasn't dropped below .348 ever since he's hit the majors! But his luck is bound to run out one of these decades." Yeah. At some point consistent, overly strange luck that no other organization has so consistently enjoyed over the past few years (even in spite of what might seem like bad luck but is simply another obstacle to be triumphantly overcomed) may seem indisguishiable from the world of Harry Potter.

The Cardinals "get lucky" and "engage in smoke and mirrors" far more often than your average franchise. They had the most talent in 2003, probably. What teams does nothing but get worse for 3 years and wins the World Series? How many World Series winners have a regular season winning percentage of .516? The playoffs are a crap shoot, blah blah blah - bottom line, how often does it happen? How often does a team that was 29th in ERA and 27th in runs scored around July 20th (I remember checking those numbers around then) end up a game out of 1st now? Every year their playoff runs are supported by "illusions." They conjure more illusions than, dare I say, a magician? Scott Spezio going from a .286 OPS in 2005 to an .862 in 2006, yeah, smoke and mirrors, the smoke and mirrors they get from different sources every year. Russ Springer, 2007 contrasted with his career numbers. Smoke and mirrors. Same for Ryan Franklin. A pitcher who comes back from the dead to hit like Harmon Killebrew. A guy like Chris Duncan, who should be another Jason Dubois, nothing odd there. Hemohhraging at-bats away with a guy like Adam Kennedy, what team wouldn't that sink? Losing your ace pitcher and your 2nd and 3rd best hitters, no problem. Yeah, there's nothing odd about any of this at all. It's not about a weak division. They shouldn't even be anywhere near .500. As for the uniforms, you're essentially saying a player can't get better by joining an extremely well-run and coached organization with a long tradition of success and competence. But let's not get away from the kicker. The Cardinals won the World Series with a regular season .516 winning percentage. Even now, their team ERA is 19th and baseball and 25th in runs scored. Find me a time when that's happened before. Heck, I'll make it easier. Find me a team when a team 19th in ERA and 25th in runs scored have been 1 game out in their division. No, wait, I'll make it yet easier. Find me a team that's been 1 game over .500 any time after July 1st being at least 19th in ERA and 25th in runs scored. Come on, baseball is a game of luck and has been going on a long time. Can't be that hard, right?

You're being flip but the point is that the Cards perform miracles with absolute garbage, and to me it looks like SORCERY. They've used their dark arts to reanimate the corpse of Ryan Franklin and get quality innings out of him. It's like something out of a Harry Potter book. "Harry Potter and the Secret of Ryan Franklin." I just know, for most of the season their team numbers have been awful, their roster has been a joke, I think if the Cubs had to work with what they had, we'd have won 30 games as year, and that's plenty galling.

Oh there's magic. It's called, near the end of July, being 29th in the majors in team ERA and 27th in runs scored, at now being 1 game out. It's called trotting out a rotation of Wellemeyer, 0-10 Anthony Reyes, Wainwright, Mike Maroth, and Braden Looper and not having a record that resembles the 2003 Tigers. "Magic" is keeping stiffs like Adam Kennedy and Aaron Miles in the lineup, having Encarnacion, Molina, Eckstein, Edmonds, Rolen, Carpenter, Mulder, all missing time and still being in first. Magic is Tony Womack's improbable season with the Cardinals, or that a guy with Chris Duncan's minor league numbers could do what he does, or that a year after being the worst bench guy in baseball with the Mariners, Scott Spezio could suddenly be a hero after donning the Cardinals uniform (this would be before the drug admissions obviously. Or that John Mabry somehow hit 13 home runs before we got him and found out how useless he is without the uniform. That happened with Womack too. Magic is Ryan ****ing Franklin. His ERA is below 2! He's awful. I refuse to believe it. If you don't think the Cardinals have a contract with Satan I don't know what to tell you, because I've too much of Ryan Franklin, he's crap, it would be like if Dave Veres pitched like Jonathan Papelbon in 2008. So what is it? Franklin is wearing the Cardinals uniform, which may as well be the Superman uniform.

A Cardinals uniform doesn't help? I can only imagine what our record would be if we had to use the guys the Cardinals have had to this year.

He doesn't need HGH. He has something better, something that guarantees great success to some of the most talentless stiffs and walking cans of garbage in baseball - a Cardinals uniform.

1. Do you think if Marmol were closer there would be fewer leads that made it to the 9th? 2. Do you acknowledge that the biggest threats often don't come in the 9th inning? 3. Do you think the Tigers would've been more successful last year if Joel Zumaya had been the closer instead of Todd Jones? 4. Do you think the Indians this year would be more successful if Rafael Betancourt were the closer instead of Joe Borowski? 5. Marmol is the best reliever in the NL at stranding inherited runners. Isn't this skill somewhat wasted in the closer's role?

Why mess with a good thing? Well, I suppose Twins and Angels fans are glad their organizations didn't let that them frighten them. As I've said earlier, I think quality relievers are relatively easy to find if you use your opportunities and resources well, which the Cubs don't always. I can just hear Twins fans back in 2003: "You can't move Santana to the rotation! Strikeout bullpen lefties who can get out lefties and righties are too rare!"

Yeah, but Ronny Cedeno was a top hitter in the PCL in 2005, and as guys like Jason Dubois and Dallas Mac have shown, PCL numbers don't mean much in the majors if you don't make contact.

Like "two pitch" Lincecum? "Two pitch" Rich Hill, who, last time I checked, was 2nd in the NL in K/9 for guys who have at least 160 innings, behind only Peavy? Brad Penny is a one pitch pitcher. Jason Schmidt, during his best years, was a two pitch pitcher. Dontrelle Willis was a 2 pitch pitcher during his best years. Most of the time I've seen Bedard pitch in years past (I've actually not seen him this year) it's been two pitches. I don't know where people think that the average major league starter has a Matsuzaka-like repetoire. There's been ample documentation of Brad Penny throwing 95% of his pitches fastballs during games, and a lot of talk about Schmidt only having a fastball-changeup during his best years, or Willis's fastball-slider only repetoire. Anyway, he might have something else up his sleeve, but doesn't need it in the pen. Lincecum does not have a third pitch. So for me, two pitch complaints are cop-outs. If I seem overly annoyed by the two pitch argument, it's because I've had my fill of it with people moaning about Rich Hill. They'd rather have Livan Hernandez and his 5 trash pitches.

If the Cubs were that concerned about his arm action I doubt they would've used him as a starter in the minors then. Also, I don't see why Marshall gets (assuming the above post where he gets another year to "develop") 70 starts to "figure it out" but people have already decided that Marmol can't be a starter. I don't have anything against Marshall but I'd like to see people be as open-minded about Marmol as they are Marshall. Marmol was a healthier starter than Marshall.

I've always been a big Russell Branyan fan. When he's going good he strikes out 40% of the time and like 80% of his hits are XBHs. I'm way past the stage where I laugh at anything the Cardinals do. In late July, the Cardinals were 29th in team ERA and 27th in runs scored, and were 10+ games out. Their lineup looked like junk, their pitching rotation was an "AAAA" looking Braden Looper, Todd Wellemeyer, Kip Wells, Adam Wainwright, and an 0-10 (at the time) Anthony Reyes. They had Aaron Miles, So Taguchi, Juan Encarnacion, David Eckstein, Adam Kennedy, and Yadier Molina larding up their lineup doing absolutely nothing. Carpenter and Mulder were gone; Rolen and Edmonds were not the same guys by far. How the hell are they so close to us? Ask me if I'm laughing now. Russell Branyan should be picked up on everyone's fantasy team. 8 home runs in September.

Well, we're more or less on the same side... I don't think I'd commit that far, but my point is, whenever you dare to have an opinion on a draft pick, people freak out and say "He's 17 and you already think he's awful! Give me some time!" Well, you can "give him time" but still have an opinion, is what I'm saying to the others. I don't think you can't have an opinion for 5 years because it "takes away" the players' time.

Then what comparable do you favor? I mean, it's fine to not like what I suggested. But please offer up something else then. Olivo did walk more in the minors. I don't think a guy like Kelly Shoppach works. Shoppach was a consistent power hitter and did it in a tougher hitting league.

Neither would have been I imagine if a GM had fallen over themselves to get fleeced like Hendry's been doing. As I've said, I can't think of a pitcher of Trachsel's level traded for so much the past few years. The Phillies didn't give up a prospect of Moore's ranking to us in the Jamie Moyer trade, or the Kyle Lohse trade for that matter. Looking at this, if the Cubs were interested in Jamie Moyer Hendry would've probably played hardball for two seconds before handing over Sean Gallagher.

I don't think Wood's upside is particularly huge at all. I don't even think he can outpitch Dempster. Dempster is simply not bad. Look at his numbers, I particularly like the home run prevention. Dempster's fine. I think the idea of moving him to the starting rotation is a poor one. I'm getting a little weary on Wood. I'd rather we use his roster spot to steal a young flamethrower from another team, but seeing as how this club doesn't have that foresight (they passed on Fernando Cabrera, a guy who I think could be the next Jenks/Turnbow) go with Wood, fine. To me though it'll be like the Wade Miller signing - I expect nothing. Wood, to me, has reached that spot Matt Mantei was at in his career a few years ago, where you take a shot on him but almost wonder why you do it.

The trade idea is not a bad one, but honestly Marquis and Marshall make me nervous so I don't know if we could afford to deal from starting pitching even with Marmol in the rotation. What could you trade? Rich Hill for Alex Rios or Brad Hawpe? Somebody else for Jonny Gomes?

Why is everyone so high on Soto? Haven't we been here before? A guy hits poorly up until Iowa, then he hits like a fiend. Ronny Cedeno, circa 2005? I'd be quite reluctant to just hand Soto the starting job. If he tanks, what then? We saw Cedeno look like a slugger at Iowa, and a lot of guys hit well in Iowa. Heck, Buck Coats hit well in Iowa, Buck Coats is no major leaguer. What worries me the most is the strikeouts - 25% of his ABs. His BABIP is somewhere around .425. That's just preposterously high. It's not going to hold up. What do people expect from Soto in the majors? I think he could be solid, but I'm hesitant to commit beyond that. I don't think he'll be a complete bust, then again, I thought Murton and Cedeno would do better than they have. Anyone see a Miguel Olivo type of guy? Not bad by any means, but not particularly exciting?

Santana had control issues as a reliever. Escobar had severe control problems. I don't recall Escobar as having a third pitch early in his career. Marmol had a change-up in Tennessee, or maybe that was just "subtraction." I just don't think he uses it because he doesn't have to. Everyone said Tim Lincecum would enter the Giants as a dominant closer. Instead he's been a good starter. I've watched 3 starts by Lincecum, and if he has a third pitch, it's only to flash once a game, because I haven't seen it. All I've seen is the heat and the hammer curveball. Marmol did come up through the system as a starter. It's not like he was a reliever right after being a catcher. I think he's too good and too smart to waste in that role. Furthermore, I don't think the way he's been used in games now (quite strenuously as times) is particularly less taxing than a starter.

Trachsel's strikeout-to-walk ratio is one of the worst in baseball history. He's pure crap. Sorry, there is no pitcher with 24 more walks than strikeouts, a righthander with a K/9 of 2.88, a WHIP above 1.50, and a G/F ratio below 1.50 that is any good at all. None. Dig through the stats and see if you can find one to prove me wrong. You can't. A K/BB ratio of 0.65 is trash. No good pitcher has that. You've got to be kidding. As for talking about giving up Moore and Cherry is "nothing," that's more than the Phillies gave up for Jamie Moyer, that's more than they gave up for Kyle Lohse, it's more than the Dodgers gave up for Greg Maddux, it's more than the Mets gave up for Kris Benson, it's more than the Rockies gave up for Mark Redman, it's more than the A's gave up for Joe Kennedy, basically, except for maybe David Wells at the deadline, it's more given up than any comparable pitcher at the deadline the past few years. The Cubs always get cheated on these spare parts deals. You can bet when we're shopping pitching as shitty as Trachsel, we won't get a deal as good as this one. Heck, the proposed Jacque Jones deal that would've had us pay most of his salary and get no one in return wouldn't (reportedly) have netted us anyone as good as the Tigers got from Monroe. People don't understand - the Cubs get ripped off on these deals more than any other team. Other teams don't give up one of their top prospects for these guys, and sadly, Moore was a top prospect in this club. Let me put it this way - the Padres had to give up nothing to acquire Morgan Ensberg and Marcus Giles this year. If it were the Cubs after those guys they'd probably be out 4 prospects. In conclusion, Trachsel is crap. If he pitches well, it's just a fluke, like Eric Milton pitching well or Jay Payton getting traded to the A's from the Red Sox and hitting like a monster for 40 days.

I didn't compare Chamberlain to Vitters. I said it usually takes very little time for our prospects to get leapfrogged by guys drafted lower than them, and if you look at our past drafts, that is certainly the case. It took Chamberlain no time at all to look like a better pick than Colvin. People make a big deal out of how quick some are to get pessimistic about our signings. But the pessimists have been right the vast majority of the time. How does a team go, what, 14 years, without developing a true impact position player? Until that happens, I think the burden of proof is on the organization. Vitters recently turned up on Baseball America's Not So Hot sheet, I don't understand why people have to wait 5 years to say they don't like a pick. I don't like picks like Aaron Poreda or Nick Schmidt in the first round either. Waiting 5 years to say it just makes it look like you're afraid to put down any feelings at all until you have nothing to lose by doing so. Message boards are for speculating. I didn't say Vitters was the worst pick, but I have no faith in the Cubs' ability to develop a high school positional talent, and with their track record, it's up to the organization to prove my doubts wrong. How much benefit of the doubt would you give to a drunk who fell off the wagon this many times? "But this time is different and has nothing to do with last time." Well, I've heard that before. Also, these extravagant promises don't help either. When Wilken came aboard people kept talking about his 2004 draft. Wade Davis in the 3rd! Jacob McGee in the 5th! Andy Sonnanstine in the 14th! It took mere months after they were drafted for people to see they were steals for their round, Jacob McGee wasn't a high priced signing, I ask, where is the Cubs' Jacob McGee from the 2006 draft? People say "The drafts take time." Well, the 2004 draft didn't need time to look like a success. I guess they should stop referencing it then.