CubColtPacer

I beg to differ. I don't see anything in his numbers that would scream best player in the nation. His counting stats are down because he only plays less than 28 minutes per game. His rate stats aren't that impressive either. 1.41 Assist/Turnover ratio, only makes 1.41 points per shot along with only shooting 70 percent from the line. His numbers, especially for a point guard, look very ugly against good competition (most of the games he has poor shooting percentages and low assist/turnover ratio).

Good old Coach Cal. If you play in a conference that doesn't prep you at all for the tournament you might want to play those games on the road. Memphis traveled to both Tennessee and Gonzaga last year. They are just returning to complete the home and home deal. Maybe they should have been scheduled it in alternate years (one at home and one away each year) but this isn't a case of Calipari ducking competition.

it kind of is when you could get equal production for 10% of the cost by giving the job to gallagher. the lieber signing alone isn't going to break the cubs. it doesn't really improve them either. but you combine lieber's 3.5 million with dempster's 5 million, marquis' 6 million, eyre's 4 million, and blanco's 3 million that's around 21-22 million that could be easily replaced by cheaper players and spent on 1 or 2 very good players. jon lieber was a pointless signing. it wasn't a horrible signing that's going to cost the cubs the season, but it's jim hendry's usual pointless signing done for the sole purpose that he doesn't trust rookies to fill less-important jobs. How could you know that? oh crap, sorry. i meant sean marshall. Marshall can't pitch a full season, which means somebody has to fill in for him. What would you rather have, Marshall for 120 innings and Dempster/Hart for 80, or Lieber for 130 innings and Marshall for 70? I'd much rather have the latter as that is most likely going to give you better production.

Do you want to hear another Ryan Theriot love fest? You don't publicly talk about upgrading a position unless you're sure you can find that upgrade. That isn't the case for SS, and so Hendry would just talk on and on about how satisfied they are with Theriot there, even if they aren't. As for the starter thing, it's for the offseason training program (it's very much different for starters and relievers) and also for player morale. Look at the quotes from Lieber about how he isn't upset about being a bullpen pitcher, but he was very upset about the Phillies springing in on him during spring training.

I didn't hear it, but I don't think I came in at the very start of the interview (my stream re-loaded right before the interview started). Obviously, the Lieber deal would have been the first question. Sorry. Maybe somebody can fill in that part who heard it?

Let us know if it's anything substantial. I'll wager on that not being the case though. North asked him about steroids, Miggy, and Selig (and I think he was alluding to Roberts). Hendry tried to stay neutral on the subject of commenting on other team's players ( and GMs) in general. He also refused to discuss the names of players that have been mentioned in trade rumors (tampering). Finally, Hendry's hoping to pull off "two more trades" before Spring Training. He also said that the only players that are untouchable are those with no trade clauses; it is possible that another team could convince him to part with guys they assume are on the Cubs untouchable list. FYI: the podcast will be posted later on The Score website. Hmm, I didn't hear that quote. What question was that a part of? My guess is those two trades would be Roberts and a platoon outfielder to go with Pie. That would probably mean that Murton is gone in the Roberts deal, but who knows for sure.

Are Pie and Colvin untouchable? Hendry likes them both a lot, both well respected in the baseball community, tradeable in the right deal. Do you ever talk to a free agent about steroid concerns or not trade for somebody becaus e of steroids? Absolutely not. Hendry doesn't know which players used and which players don't (and so it's pointless to speculate and possibly miss out on good talent), and he trusts his scouts that have gathered plenty of info about the character of any person they would go after. Anybody on the team untouchable? Only the ones with no-trade clauses. Everybody else should know that if I can make the team better by trading them, then they should know that's my job. Do you like being the favorite in the division? I don't know how much we can be labeled the favorite. Milwaukee is good, only had some defensive issues last year that have been addressed with the Cameron move (moving Hall and Braun to better defensive positions for them. Milwaukee struggling was the only reason the Cubs were able to dig out of their early hole. Also mentioned that he thought the Reds would be better, and the closer situation was a big reason for that. Mark Prior? Easy decision. Our medical people felt he didn't have a chance to be even reasonably productive until the late second half of the season at best. We tried to give him an option that would protect both us and him, but he didn't want to go that way. We couldn't rehab him and then let him go in October. I still feel he can be productive down the line, but not for most of 08. Second to last question was about the ownership situation, I didn't hear most of the answer but it was nothing special. Hendry feels the Cubs are better than they were last year, but of course would like to get better with the competition in the division. Some of that is paraphrased and some of that is pretty close to a quote (the second sentence of the Prior answer starting with our medical people is almost a direct quote).

Meh. 5th starter numbers. High 4th if he meets the optimistic there. They're definitely worthy of 3.5 million in this market. Once again, I think people are being spoiled by the 03 rotation. Lieber's projection equates to a good 4th starter. How can it be 5th starter numbers if he puts up better numbers than the average starter (average starter has a 96 ERA+)? If he hits his optimistic projection, that's borderline #2/#3 numbers. Only 19 pitchers in the NL threw at least 165 innings and had an ERA of 4.11 or better. That's less than 1.5 starters per team. Add in a few people who threw over 100 innings but not quite 165, and you can see how those numbers would be borderline #2/#3.

This topic was just who would throw the first complete game when it was made last year, not the first complete game shutout. That's significantly different. I'll say Z for this one in a close call over Hill.

I am reserving judgment on this point until the end of the offseason. If Marquis and/or Dempster are traded, then there could still be a slot for Gallagher. Why? We're hearing Dempster being talked about, now Lieber is signed, Marquis is still up in the air. Still pretty quiet about the rooks. I'm hoping that that both Seans and Kevin have been told privately that their hard work over the off-season (hopefully Marshall getting stronger and Gallagher cont. his off-season conditioning) can be rewarded with a verbal commit. from the Cubs that they'll be given a shot. It seems like Hart has been dismissed from the rotation talk. Everything I've read today from multiple places indicates that the Cubs see him as the long reliever to open 2008. Gallagher doesn't get a mention other than saying he's a rotation candidate.

I honestly think this move might help Marshall and/or Gallagher if they stay with the organization. If Dempster had won the job coming out of spring training, he's the type of pitcher who would have just enough good starts to not be replaced but be just bad enough to really hurt the team. Lieber will come in, throw some average innings, and then if/when he gets hurt again Dempster will either be on another team or firmly entrenched in the bullpen again. That will give either Marshall or Gallagher a crack at the rotation for a while that they may be able to keep. I hope the Cubs are very careful with Marshall's arm this year. If they can limit his innings at times in the minors, he will be fresh for the periods in which they might need him starting in the majors.

Sean Marshall pitching 180 innings? It would be interesting to see if he could possibly continue to be effective that long considering he has never pitched 150 innings in a single year and the two years he got above 120 he wore down at the end of the year.

So if he's a pretty good option for a 5th starter, what is Marquis? The whole basis for people supporting him seems to have been, "he's okay for a 5th starter". So I guess now we have two? I get what you're saying and don't necessarily disagree, but I don't care to see both Lieber and Marquis in the same rotation. Lieber's actually fine for a 4th starter. A good 4th starter is league average, and a lower end 4th starter is a little below league average. That's Lieber, and he's consistently there. Projecting him for a 4.75 ERA or so would put him as an average 4th starter. Marquis jumps around. Last year he was a #3 starter. He's had years where he shouldn't have been in a rotation at all. It's hard to project what Marquis is because of his huge inconsistency. Lieber and Marquis as the #4 and #5 will likely outproduce most of the #4's and #5's around the National League, unless 1 of 2 things happen: 1) Marquis absolutely collapses (another season above 5.50 ERA) 2) Lieber gets hurt, only pitches 70 innings again, and his replacement from the minors is awful. If #2 happens, then it would have happened anyway because the alternative is that replacement from the minors getting all 200 innings. We just have to hope #1 doesn't happen. As I said in another thread, the Cubs were #2 in the NL in their starting rotation last year. Their #5 spot had a combined 5.10 ERA (Miller, Guzman, Marshall, and Trachsel). Z is not likely to drop off much more and might improve back to numbers of a previous year. Lilly will drop off. Hill will likely get a little better. Marquis might stay the same, might drop off a little bit, might drop off significantly. Lieber and anybody who replaces him will likely do better than a 5.10 ERA, so the #5 spot will be better than last year. That makes this rotation of Z, Lilly, Hill, Marquis, and Lieber almost as good as last year. The rotation will likely be top 5 in the NL once again.

Just to put a little bit out there, Bill James projections Lieber to have a 4.04 ERA. Not sure what park or team he's putting him on. This prediction seems really inaccurate. Chone projects him as a 4.63 ERA. Again, not sure what park or team. Marcel projects him at a 4.74 ERA. Not sure what park or team. ZIPS projects Lieber to have a 4.85 ERA (in Philadelphia). Add park factors and a much better defense in Chicago and that projection probably moves down to 4.60 or better. PECOTA's of course haven't come out yet. The projections have him at right about league average for a starting pitcher. I would be interested to see what happens if they re-ran those projections now that he's a Cub. At the same time, pitcher projections are still very, very shaky.

If your #5 starter can give you a great shot at an ERA under 5, that's typically better than most teams. Lieber has had an ERA under 5 each of the last 11 years. He is regressing, but at the same time he is moving from a horrible ballpark to pitch in and a ballpark he always struggled in, and he's moving to a ballpark he dominated in. His away numbers the last 3 years: 2005: 4.05 ERA, 115.2 IP, 111 H, 81:21 K/BB, 1.25 HR/9, .251/.288/.422 OPS against 2006: 4.64 ERA, 77.2 IP, 90 H, 43:15 K/BB, 1.39 HR/9, .289/.325/.460 OPS against 2007: 4.19 ERA, 38.2 IP, 36 H, 25:15 K/BB, 0.46 HR/9, .248/.327/.366 OPS against Even if he put up his 2006 away numbers or even worse than that, he'd still be a pretty good option for the 5th starter. When you look at his home half of his starts, a good note would be that Lieber was significantly better in Wrigley Field than outside of Wrigley Field when he was a Cub. Wrigley has a great shot to improve his numbers once again just like Philadelphia devalued his numbers. Now, the concern with Lieber. The declining K/BB rate, and the injuries. He is definitely regressing, but the injuries may have made his regression on the K:BB rate artificially inflated. The injuries are still a concern though, and I doubt Lieber gets through the full season without spending some time on the DL. With just a somewhat low priced one year deal though, that's fine. He'll still be a good 5th starter option for this team, even without the nostalgia factor, and the two biggest reasons why are consistency and park factors.

The Cubs return the same pitchers who gave them the 2nd best staff in the N.L. last year. I think 4th is very fair even with the regression of some of the pitchers, especially if Zambrano steps up like the magazine thinks he will and becomes a top half #1 again. The only huge concern is the 5 spot. Z is a 1 or 2, Lilly is a 2 or 3, Hill is most likely a 2, Marquis is a 3 or 4 (he's been a 3 or better 3 of the last 4 years), and the last starter is a question mark. The Cubs ranking could vary wildly depending on who that last starter is (and which Marquis shows up, the one from 04/05/07, or the one from 03/06), but it is very likely that the staff will be above average once again. But its not the same pitchers because Marshall and his 3.92 ERA is seemingly being benched for Dempster. I just think the Giants and possibly Dodgers rotations are better. True, but really it's Marshall+Guzman+Miller+Trachsel. Those 7 stats by Trachsel and Miller are killers on the overall ERA out of the 5 spot (5.10 combined out of the 5 spot last year). Whoever mans the 5 spot this year has a decent shot to come very close to that 5.10 if not a lot better. Now that it looks like we will sign Lieber, he has a very good shot at actually making the 5 spot better than it was last year.

The Cubs return the same pitchers who gave them the 2nd best staff in the N.L. last year. I think 4th is very fair even with the regression of some of the pitchers, especially if Zambrano steps up like the magazine thinks he will and becomes a top half #1 again. The only huge concern is the 5 spot. Z is a 1 or 2, Lilly is a 2 or 3, Hill is most likely a 2, Marquis is a 3 or 4 (he's been a 3 or better 3 of the last 4 years), and the last starter is a question mark. The Cubs ranking could vary wildly depending on who that last starter is (and which Marquis shows up, the one from 04/05/07, or the one from 03/06), but it is very likely that the staff will be above average once again.

That's less about his talent and more about who is picking first, and the fact that their best player happens to be a RB.

He didn't play the full season. Only 1 IP in the regular season and 7 so far in the playoffs. In those 8 innings, he's given up exactly 1 hit, 0 runs, 14 strikeouts, and 0 walks. That's pretty good I think :D

cool. Hopefully by getting this up early, we should be able to get enough people lined up. Go ahead and add Exile as a second person for the Colts Vance (we talked about it in the other thread). Thanks so much for all your efforts in organizing this.

If the Cubs were willing to let Fukudome play center, they wouldn't need another corner outfielder. They'd just use Murton. The fact that they are chasing a backup CF suggests they are not comfortable moving Fukudome, which is why they possibly would want Payton over Huff.

Hill was re-signed quite a while ago. He seems to be the first catcher that will be called up from the minors with an injury, and of course clubs always love to see as many catchers as possible come to spring training. The two names I like to see on that list are Ceda and Donaldson. I think they can get some good experience in ST.

Have you been talking to Ryan or Mike? Cause the Bayou Basher isn't a Cub any longer. Huh? Who isn't a Cub? Todd Walker. I see. That's what was strange about it. When I searched for Bayou Basher, the first thing that popped up was an article or two about Mike Fontenot, and the second reference to Bayou Basher was an article or two about Ryan Theriot. Nowhere on the first two pages of results is a reference to Todd Walker as the Bayou Basher. Since the term seemed to reference two current Cubs, it didn't make sense that he said the Basher was not a Cub anymore without some type of knowledge.

Have you been talking to Ryan or Mike? Cause the Bayou Basher isn't a Cub any longer. Is that sarcasm, knowledge of something upcoming, or some technicality I'm not noticing? Out of all the strange posts in this thread especially the last 10 pages, this one had me thinking, so I'm just trying to clarify.

Penn State can rebound, but they can't shoot foul shots, so Wiscy just needs to "hack-a-shaq" them and they'll win Unless the Badgers are down towards the end of the game, they just don't foul. They are very sound fundamentally, don't reach, and move their feet. They play great man to man, position defense. I hate them. Wisconsin has always been fundamentally sound. I think Bo Ryan could coach a team of walk-ons to 20 wins. Always a tough matchup for IU because they don't make mistakes. Bo Ryan is the best coach in the conference. Wisconsin is superbly coached. Interesting games for both 3-0 Big Ten teams this week. Wisconsin at Penn State tonight, and Indiana at Minnesota Thursday night. The Barn has been a veritable house of horrors for IU historically, and Tubby has had great success against the Hoosiers (though mostly against the incompetent Davis). This will be IU's toughest, most likely loss since playing Xavier. If either team moves to 4-0, they'll be ahead of the curve. Ohio State at Michigan State tonight is also a big game. Minnesota really hasn't beaten anybody to date, unless you count Penn State, which didn't play very well. I think IU wins that game easy, D.J. White and Gordon will have big games. I think IU fans would be worried about a game at Minnesota if they were playing a Minnesota middle school team. IU has been better than Minnesota most of the last 10-15 years, and yet they've been absolutely terrible up there. It's a really cool court, but it's just turned into a house of horrors for the Hoosiers, including a long pass that probably would have tied the game in OT smacking off of the scoreboard and going straight out of bounds a few years ago.