CubColtPacer

If this ends up happening (what I'm quoting), this makes the move a lot better-because it makes the pen a lot better, without hurting the rotation too much: The only part I'm not sure about is that if Marshall is called up, it better be as a starter. And for the previous poster in this thread: http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-070519citybits,1,3884184.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

Yup. Blowout games probably boost that way up. the cubs are 4th in the nl in hitting in close and late games. I'm not sure where you're getting that-they are 10th in the NL in runs scored in close and late, and 8th in OPS. That number has really improved though the last couple of weeks. It seems like that the Cubs either score an insurance run or two, or the bullpen blows the game. The Cubs offense has become pretty good at coming back in games though (Pitsburgh game, Philly Saturday game, Washington Sunday game, last two games all are examples off the top of my head of comebacks in May in the late innings-of course the bullpen gave the Philly game right back).

i think he had a pitch count in his first game. in his second game he wasn't pitching well, in his third game he was taken out as what I would assume was a precautionary measure due to the cramp. I don't think it's fair to say he'll usually/probably pitch 5 innings per start. it's not like he had a high pitch count in any of his 3 starts. He could have pitched more, but Lou didn't let him. His highest pitch count of the 3 starts was 82. This is what scares me a little about Guz. I looked back into his minor league and major league starts from last year, as far back as when he came back down from the ML in the middle of June. He made 8-9 starts in the minors, then 10 more in the majors. This year, he's made 3 starts in the minors and 3 in the majors. So that's 24-25 starts-Guzman made it into the 7th inning whatsoever in exactly 1 of those ballgames-notice I didn't even say completed, but rather simply started the 7th inning. He started the 6th inning in less than half of those starts. While I would expect that number to be lower than a normal pitcher due to coming back from injury/called up to the major leagues/some games being on a pitch count due to conversion from bullpen to starter, the fact that he has only 1 game over 6 innings concerns me. He hasn't shown that he can be stretched out very long, and that could tax the bullpen heavily. When you consider also that 3 of those starts he left early due to cramps after going 3.2 innings or more, it makes you wonder about his body's ability to handle those innings/pitch counts. And Sean Marshall is the leading option to replace Guzman. He's got a long injury history too and averaged 85.8 pitches/game last season in the bigs. That's a good point. At the same time, Marshall has shown in the past couple weeks that he can handle the pitch counts at the moment. Guzman hasn't made it to 85 pitches in any of his last 9 starts, dating back to last year, twice coming out because of cramps. His stats show that he wears down in ballgames, and he hasn't been able to break 85 pitches, something he was able to do only a few times last year. However effective he might have been in the rotation had he been left there, he wasn't likely going to be a guy this year who was going to give you 90-100 pitches an outing before leaving on a regular basis, and the fact that he has had trouble going over that pitch count since last year (and as far as I can tell, he only broke 100 once last year) means that the bullpen would be getting a lot of work. Even while rehabbing, Marshall has been higher recently-87, 92, and 97 pitches in his last 3 starts.

I really dont disagree with anything you are saying here. I just would like to know what are the better options though. If we had even some semi option this would make sense. I dont think the Cubs really have another option at starter. Yup, we're in a bit of a bind. Marshall had a couple decent starts in AAA, but he's pretty similar stuff-wise to Lilly and Hill. Having 3 similar pitchers go every 5 days is not a good idea. I'm really hoping for a trade. Hopefully we get rid of either Murton or Jones and nab a serviceable 5th starter who can keep you in the game for 6-7 innings. I like Gooz. He's a lot better than his limited numbers in Chicago indicate, but he's got a lot to prove IMO. I'd be fine keeping him in the rotation if we had a steady pen. We don't. He usually only goes 5 innings when he starts. Not good. It just puts that much more pressure on the pen. With the crap that's been going on lately, you can almost guarantee the Cubs lose that game. Wuertz/Dempster can't pitch 4 innings every time Gooz starts. i think he had a pitch count in his first game. in his second game he wasn't pitching well, in his third game he was taken out as what I would assume was a precautionary measure due to the cramp. I don't think it's fair to say he'll usually/probably pitch 5 innings per start. it's not like he had a high pitch count in any of his 3 starts. He could have pitched more, but Lou didn't let him. His highest pitch count of the 3 starts was 82. This is what scares me a little about Guz. I looked back into his minor league and major league starts from last year, as far back as when he came back down from the ML in the middle of June. He made 8-9 starts in the minors, then 10 more in the majors. This year, he's made 3 starts in the minors and 3 in the majors. So that's 24-25 starts-Guzman made it into the 7th inning whatsoever in exactly 1 of those ballgames-notice I didn't even say completed, but rather simply started the 7th inning. He started the 6th inning in less than half of those starts. While I would expect that number to be lower than a normal pitcher due to coming back from injury/called up to the major leagues/some games being on a pitch count due to conversion from bullpen to starter, the fact that he has only 1 game over 6 innings concerns me. He hasn't shown that he can be stretched out very long, and that could tax the bullpen heavily. When you consider also that 3 of those starts he left early due to cramps after going 3.2 innings or more, it makes you wonder about his body's ability to handle those innings/pitch counts.

He's not been determined to be an "effective starter" based on 2 starts. what? I'm determining him to be effective based on his talent + his 3 starts this year + a body of minor league work. And it doesn't really matter if he's effective or not, his replacement is probably going to be worse than he would have been in the same situation. That minor league work hasn't been amazing since the injuries. He hasn't faced a full ML lineup since he came back. He faced the worst team in the majors in runs per game, then he faced a good offensive team without its top slugger, then he faced a complete forfeit lineup without its top 3 guys. His level of competition hasn't been good at all. His talent I would give you-and his talent is the reason I wish they would have started him until he proved he wasn't effective there this year.

A few quick points 1) Guzman will likely be better than Marshall in the rotation, but that isn't for sure. There were legitimate concerns about Guzman in the rotation post-injury, and so far I don't think there has been much proof to convince otherwise. His numbers starting in Triple A both 06 and 07 were not great. His numbers starting in the major leagues were terrible last year, and this year he's faced 2 absolutely awful lineups out of 3 starts, and those were his 2 good outings. He has the stuff to become a very good ML starting pitcher, and it is reasonable to think he would be a pretty good ML pitcher, but I don't think you can just pencil him in to be better than Marshall for sure 2) Guzman does have very good numbers in the pen, partly because he can let loose with his fastball a little more in relief. Whatever numbers he has a starter, he will likely have even better numbers in relief. So the loss in innings will partly be helped with more effective production. With that, the big issue is who replaces him in the rotation, and who does Guzman replace in the bullpen. If Marshall replaces him in the rotation and Guzman sends somebody like Eyre to the DL, the team likely gets better. If Marshall comes in to the rotation and Marmol has sent down, then it's not that bad, but it shouldn't have been done (because Guzman is likely better than Marshall and there won't likely be a huge difference between Guz and Marmol in the pen). If Miller or Dempster replaces Guzman in the rotation, this is an awful switch.

I wouldn't say no reason (Z could blow up again, and pitchers making their major league debut are usually dangerous because of the lack of scouting) but you're right, the Cubs should win this game. Tim has to be one of the most interested people in the outcome as well-that's quite a difference in his operating costs. Masset isn't making his major league debut, it's just his frst major league start. Ok-that makes it better, I think.

I wouldn't say no reason (Z could blow up again, and pitchers making their major league debut are usually dangerous because of the lack of scouting) but you're right, the Cubs should win this game. Tim has to be one of the most interested people in the outcome as well-that's quite a difference in his operating costs.

Interesting point about this game-Ramirez, Floyd, and Soriano are 6 of 17 combined against Contreras. All 6 hits have been home runs.

Yes and no-he's available, but Lou doesn't really want to use him in case he's not ready for a few days, and they want to DL him retroactive to a week ago.

With the way the lineup was constructed today and where the last out was made, there wasn't a really good double switch option available. The closest one would really be Murton, but he's at the 2 spot-which doesn't help very much.

That's not uncommon amongst bad baseball players. ??? DeRosa isn't a "bad baseball player." He's certainly not what I would call starter quality. Last 28 days for DeRosa: .224/.375/.310/.685 2B around the league isn't exactly a great position-there aren't very many great ones. DeRosa is average around the league, and still having a better season than some of the others that people wanted instead (Ray Durham, Marcus Giles)

As several people have pointed out, there are other setup otions besides Eyre and Howry. There are 3 bloody lefties in the pen, along with 2 options in AAA. There are 2 perfectly acceptable RH setup options in Marmol and Wuertz that you can use before Howry, and a couple more in AAA and AA that you can use. There's no good reason to justify this lunacy. Maybe Piniella ought to learn from his own mistakes and not put those two gascans in a position to blow games until they fix their issues, instead of crippling his starting rotation. For the most part, Piniella has stopped using Eyre. Only 6 appearances since April 24th, and half of those were either blowouts (the 9th inning of a 7-1 win or a 10-1 win) or extra innings after most everybody else had pitched. So, then, why call up Marmol and then demote Guzman to the pen? All on account of Howry? That's stupid. You don't need to hurt two guys in order to hide one. If they plan on Marmol starting, they're stupid. If they demote him just so Marshall can pitch, they're equally stupid, because Marshall is not going to be better than Guzman, has a good chance to be worse, and Marmol would be better suited to relief than Guzman would be anyway. This move can't be justified any way you look at it. I truly believe that Lou thinks this is the best thing for Guzman's health. Do I agree with him? A little bit, but not really. I would have much rather seen Guzman stay in the rotation. However, Lou has been very frank about what he sees as a problem whenever he sees it, and if he was sending Guzman down to the bullpen just in order to strengthen it, I think he would say that-his quote does not say that though. So I think (at least for now) he's doing it for medical reasons-but if it's Lou who is misinformed or the training staff giving him really bad information, I'm not sure which, because it is most likely a mistake.

As several people have pointed out, there are other setup otions besides Eyre and Howry. There are 3 bloody lefties in the pen, along with 2 options in AAA. There are 2 perfectly acceptable RH setup options in Marmol and Wuertz that you can use before Howry, and a couple more in AAA and AA that you can use. There's no good reason to justify this lunacy. Maybe Piniella ought to learn from his own mistakes and not put those two gascans in a position to blow games until they fix their issues, instead of crippling his starting rotation. For the most part, Piniella has stopped using Eyre. Only 6 appearances since April 24th, and half of those were either blowouts (the 9th inning of a 7-1 win or a 10-1 win) or extra innings after most everybody else had pitched.

whaaa, for who? They don't know-here's the quote from Lou: He didn't say anything about who the 5th starter would be though.

I don't believe it. And I am pretty sure it was 2 starts - one for Iowa last season and the one on Thursday. Z has had to leave as many games over the past few years because of cramping. He had to leave the start on Sept 3 for the Cubs last year with cramping as well.

So my guess is that nobody believes Lou that he thinks the problems with cramping will continue if Guzman continues to start? I'm not sure I do either, but it has been at least 3 starts that he has had to leave in either the second half of last year or the first half of this year with cramps. I guess it is reasonable to consider that they may continue.

That at least sounds like they are doing that to keep Guzman healthy, and not because they think he'd be more valuable in the pen. My vote would be for Marshall in the rotation.

Why couldn't we have rode the hot hand for once and stuck with Ohman? I know that Dempster hasn't been getting regular work lately, but when Ohman has struck out 4/5 batters he's face and he typically struggles why not let him go on? The first batter of the 9th (Newhan) was a lefty anyways so it isn't like there was a bad matchup. Ohman could have possibly neutralized the threat of Beltran's LH bat lurking as well...the decision just doesn't make sense to me. Ohman is a guy who is used to throwing 1, maybe 2 batters at a time. He had already thrown 23 pitches yesterday-the chances of him starting to struggle with the high pitch count at the beginning of the 9th was higher than another reliever coming in and being completely ineffective.

You have got to be kidding me. Murton or any other right fielder had no shot at that runner. Watch the play over I think Soriano would have had a good shot at him, but he has an exceptional arm. I don't think any average RF arm gets him there.

A question about NTCs...do they prohibit the front office from trading the player to ANY club at all, or do they just limit the choices of teams that the player can be traded to? A full NTC means that the player has to approve any deal that is made in order for it to go through. Some players, like Scott Eyre, have limited NTC, where they can block trades to up to 10 teams.

Soriano and Lee are not in the prime of their careers. Well, if they are starting to go down from the prime of the careers that just makes it more likely that whatever group comes in will want to play for next year. Changes will have to be made though. I fear that they may not even be able to be made this offseason, because if the Cubs don't go up for sale until the season ends the sale might not be completed until it's too late to make changes for 2008.

They might want a fresh start, but what you're proposing is firing every coach in the system, plus a few assorted others. No ownership group could possibly hire a GM who could do that in a single season, and only maybe in 2-3 seasons. There's simply no way to have a good chance to find, interview and hire that many people while at the same time trying to get done the business of the ML offseason. Meh. I think it can be done, and I'm not sure what real business there is to have at this coming offseason. This team is beyond more than one or two offseasons worth of tweaks. With the players the Cubs have right now in the prime of their careers (Lee, Ramirez, Soriano are 3 examples) I'm not sure you're going to find an ownership group out there that will want that. They will either treat it as a business, which means they will cut costs and the team will suffer greatly, or they will want to take advantage and try to win now and throw more money at the problem. When you consider that those 3 have NTC and probably aren't going anywhere, a new ownership group that actually cares is not going to try to play for 2009 or 2010, even if it is the best long-term solution.

Player development? Yes. Scouting? No. Why should anyone be exempt for a massive, organization-wide failure to develop ML talent? Because Wilken and his scouts just came in last year. And Wilken has one of the best track records in the game. Okay, everyone who arrived with Wilken can stay. Everyone who was here pre Wilken (including Oneri Flieta) should be axed. I'd be fine with Wilken and his people staying and EVERYBODY else going. But I don't see it happening that cleanly. I just hope the Hendry/Hughes types are gone first and foremost. Why wouldn't new ownership want a fresh start? It's not like the guys here have any real positive track record to speak of. I want everyone gone. Everyone. This is a rudderless ship with no real plan to find direction. They might want a fresh start, but what you're proposing is firing every coach in the system, plus a few assorted others. No ownership group could possibly hire a GM who could do that in a single season, and only maybe in 2-3 seasons. There's simply no way to have a good chance to find, interview and hire that many people while at the same time trying to get done the business of the ML offseason.

Because they brought him in to face Shawn Green, who was 2 for 22 against Scott Eyre, then they threw in David Wright after they brought him in, who is David Wright Did Lou forget that Wright was on the bench? It pretty much came down to Eyre facing Wright/ Dempster facing Green....Wright is a good amount better than Green, Dempster is a decent amount better than Eyre. Green is 9 for 21 against Dempster Eyre is 1 for 3 against Wright Dempster couldn't get his pitches located at all-letting him stay in to face Green would have been worse. There were just no good options at that point.