Thrilho

i think the faction of voters who care about the win total is getting smaller and smaller every year but, sure, i guess it could help a little with however many of those guys still remain Yeah, I'm looking forward to this year's Cy Young voting. There are some a couple interesting guys who will be litmus tests for old school/new school stuff. Syndergaard is leading fWAR, since his #3 ERA is matched by good FIP/xFIP lines. Strikes guys out, doesn't walk anyone. But he's only 12-8. Hendricks is leading ERA by a country mile, but his FIP trails a good bit. So his is a case of how much is defense vs soft contact. The soft contact stats are pretty new, so it seems like you have to take a follow some pretty advanced logic to balance it out and figure out how much is Hendricks and how much is the defense. I think he deserves credit for getting the soft contact, so lean more toward looking at his ERA. But to get to that point in logical loop you have to acknowledge FIP, lend it some credence, identify its short comings, and look at deep peripherals to understand how this pitcher is getting his results. I'm guessing a lot more guys will go through that process if he's got 18 wins.

Ok now I really want this one. Hendricks needs this W to stay in the mix for Cy Young. Finishing within 1-2 of the top guy while potentially having a half run lead in the ERA race could be be good enough to wipe out the IP/K shortage. Especially if he can get under 2.00. But need these dubs.

There is at least one Aaron that posts here... I'm an Aaron D but that's not me unless I've got some kind of Tyler Durdin/Mr Robot Cubs doom boner extra personality that posts when I'm not paying attention. I'd hope he'd at least make a better handle, but if doom boner Cubs fan is his shtick maybe it fits better that he uses this first name/last name/Jordan's number monstrosity.

Ok this is how you do it =D> MVP MVP MVP

lol espn. Bonds averaged .349/.559/.808 from 2001-2004. Maybe they're excluding the steroid era? Only counting guys within .010 of a 1.000 OPS? Guys who don't play on the east coast don't count maybe? Or just trying to draw clicks from NYers who want to see Ruth & Gehrigs names in print. KB is the guy for sure. Seems like a shoe in MVP right now, and to me the most valuable player/contract in the league. But seems like they'd want to choose their words more carefully when running his season up against the history of the league. I'm guessing they're talking about players who could check all of those boxes, and Bonds never had a season with 188 hits Good call, I figured it was something like. Taking 200 walks a season is gonna hurt you on counting stats for sure.

lol espn. Bonds averaged .349/.559/.808 from 2001-2004. Maybe they're excluding the steroid era? Only counting guys within .010 of a 1.000 OPS? Guys who don't play on the east coast don't count maybe? Or just trying to draw clicks from NYers who want to see Ruth & Gehrigs names in print. KB is the guy for sure. Seems like a shoe in MVP right now, and to me the most valuable player/contract in the league. But seems like they'd want to choose their words more carefully when running his season up against the history of the league.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/kyle-hendricks-as-arrietas-opposite/ Great article. First half about how great he's been against lefties, second half about how he's cut the sinker from 50% to 25% in lieu of the 4 seamer. Pretty sweet AB of him toying with Polanco.

Wow yes. This post right here. Please give me a righty and lefty facsimile of the same mashing .880 OPS player.

Btw I don't think davell's usage was a comp either. Saying a low walk, ground ball profile with low velocity might work due to pitchability is a reasonable assertion. By throwing in the "like Hendricks" I don't think he means "and he's got a shot to mold himself into one of the best pitchers in the games." Hendricks is just an easy guy to point to and say "that's pitchability in action, maybe this guy has some of that."

That is not small, especially at the levels of ball, and particularly in conjunction with Hendricks' even better control, better offspeed, throwing more innings, and being younger at this stage. The Hendricks thing wasn't legit with Williams last year, likely won't be legit with Hedges next year, but if we keep watering him down and throwing the comp out eventually one will hit. --- 19 YO Javier Assad starting game 2 for the AZL squad. He's quietly racked up 38 Ks in 30.2 IP this year. Perhaps he too....? It wasn't meant to be a comp. I put it out there to say not everyone needs a stellar minor league K rate to make it in the majors. A comp would be to compare the rest of his game and say "this guy is Hendricks-lite" or "he could be another Hendricks." Something like that. Hendricks is one of the best in MLB right now; I'm just hoping for a ground ball, low walk profile guy can fit into the back end of the rotation.

Ha, well I read this after posting. Luckily enough I mentioned Hendricks only in passing. As usual with pitchers I feel like I've got no idea because I'm uneducated on their stuff. But right now I'm hoping to pull at least one guy out of the system who can be free 2017 rotation filler, with close to league average performance over 175+ innings if they have an elite defense behind them. I don't see a lot of guys close enough, so I'm hoping Hedges can be something. But if someone who knows him better tells me he's probably no good I'll temper my excitement a bit.

I was just jumping on to comment on him. He's coming out of nowhere to looks like a legit contender for the 2017 rotation. Here are some things that stood out when I was reading about him. - The three articles below all reference him either adding velocity from the 89-91 he was working at last year https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#safe=strict&q=zach+hedges+scout+low+90s "commands a fastball in the low 90s" http://www.cubsinsider.com/cubs-milb-first-half-review-lot-surprising-performances-improved-development/ "gained some mph on his fastball" https://cubscentral.wordpress.com/2016/06/17/1st-half-breakouts-prospects-hits-misses-and-to-be-determined/ "gained a few pounds, and gained a couple miles an hour on his fastball" - In BA's tools article he got "Best Control" for the Carolina League. He's got a career 2.01 BB/9. 1.70 in 2016. - 1.94 GO/AO in 2016. 1.77 for career. 3.50 in 25 AA innings coming into this game. Supposedly the sinker is his best pitch and he goes for ground balls with it - 4 HR in 126.2 IP for 2015. 9 HR in 278 IP career - Good workload. 23 starts for 132 IP in 2015, 21 starts for 126.2 so far in 2016 - .235 BAA in 2016, .244 career - Has gotten stronger at AA, with a 1.80 ERA in AA innings - 6'4" 210 (or 195 according to FG, but he looks a lot more like the 210) The bad news is the career 6.03 K/9, but our boy Kyle "Dead Eyes" Hendricks was only at 7.45 through AA. So maybe the rest of that stuff will be good enough for this guy to slot into the bottom of our rotation for a while. I mean, why have the best defense in the league if you're not going to graduate sinker ballers to help batters feed baseballs into the thresher?

Lastly, I do like Kellogg and Zas (after the way he's thrown recently). They don't project as elite to fit my criteria above, but I'm about as excited about them as I would be a righty with their same stats. Maybe slightly less excited though due to handedness rather than more excited.

Well that teaches me for being lazy. According to the link below, 37% of MLB hitters are left handed and 27% of pitchers. Doesn't speak to how many are bench hitters or starters vs relief pitchers, but gives a general idea. http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/rosters But as far as a premium on LHP due to scarcity, I'm not sure you really need to get your lefty count up to league average. The Cubs have basically been functioning with one consistent high-ish quality left handed reliever for the last 2 years (Wood). They got some good innings out of Richard, but nothing that screams top value or "must have" where you'd look at him in the minors and get excited because you have this guy coming to the majors at some point. They got Chapman and Lester because they're top talents who happen to lefties. Even Wood doesn't have crazy good lefty splits. He's pretty good at getting lefties out but his value comes from multi-inning and higher leverage full inning stints. Which could just as easily go to someone a little like Grimm, who had the reverse splits. Montgomery is more LOOGYish, and they had to give up a decent prospect to get him. So he probably fits as an argument for "LHP have value because they're LHP and teams need them." But it takes kind of a lot for a pitching prospect to excite me, and it's almost always the guys who could be a legit starter rather than a Montgomery (in his current role) type. Then, even if there really are close to 40% LHH in MLB I still go with everything I wrote before about preferring to have a rotation full of righties. So I've painted myself into a bit of a corner where no LHP is going to excite me unless he's looking elite, but I guess that's not too far off from accurate. Still, I think much of my point was summarized in your one statement about not understanding the need for token lefties in the rotation.

One of the beautiful things about the Cubs' pitching approach is that they've stacked up a ton of lefties. Guys not listed like Sands and Twomey will be interesting just on their youth, pedigree, health, and handedness, Twomey also for his ability to pick up the K so far. Considering about 1/5 of the pitchers in the majors are LH, not from a lack of demand, that the Cubs field a much higher % among their prospect arms (Kellogg, Steele, Sands, Zastrzny, Twomey, Paulino, Carrera, Marquez, Rondon, Concepcion, Leathersich, whoever else) is probably a conscious effort similar to their stacking of RH power early in the rebuild. These guys know what teams want but don't have, have built prospect depth in those areas, and I think that will make all the difference once this FO seeks out major trades. Another great thing about the system's prospect pitching is that only Cease and Moreno have gone under the knife off the top of my head. I've seen you pushing LH pitching before, and I'm wondering why you put such a premium on it. Given equal stuff and ability to get guys out I'd prefer a righty starter over a lefty just about every time, regardless of the makeup of the rest of the starting pitching staff. I'm not sure the exact number, so I'll assume you're correct that only 1/5 of ML hitters are lefties. So on the day a tough lefty goes, most teams can probably sit most of their LH hitters. There will be some guys you can't sit, like Rizzo, but a lot of those guys have solid reverse splits. Then a lot of RH hitters are straight lefty mashers. Conversely, with a RH starter, there are only about 1/5 of the league that can burn you on te platoon splits. 4/5 of the league is same handed and some plain suck against same side pitching. And it doesn't seem like a lot of teams have a bunch of LHH off the bench where they can "stack up" against a right handed pitcher. If they're that good against righties they're probably already in the lineup on a daily basis. This isn't meant as a criticism, I've just seen this concept of left handers being a premium commodity before so I'm asking you to be the spokesman for why. I just tend to salivate when I see that a non-elite left hander is going against this team. And that's basically how I've felt (to varying degrees depending on quality of our lineup) for a number of years. If we're talking relievers, I get it a lot more. You need LOOGYs, and if they're good against RHH too then that's gold. But even then, since they're relievers its not quite gold. More like copper or topping out at silver. So when I see a lefty, unless they can be a pretty elite reliever or starter I don't get that excited. But this is all just like my opinion man. If you get a chance, let me know your thoughts on why I should change it. Thanks

But what if Jose Fernandez could eliminate them for us? I'm not sure who I want where yet but if the Fish make it in that has the potential for being cool. They could knock out pretty much any team in a one gamer, while also burning Fernandez. Obviously anything could happen, and the Marlins probably should've won the season series with us, but any scenario where the Cubs don't face the Giants or Mets sounds pretty cool.

Or whatever you call something that has never happened before

It would be awful nice for this series at Wrigley to be remembered as the four game sweep that buried the Cards in the WC race. It can be like an annual August tradition.

The number one story for me is 2015 4.9 fWAR ROY runner up was just traded for garbage ass below average hasn't had a FIP under 4.49 since 2013 Matt Moore. The Giants are hella scary now and going forward, so them selling low on that guy is looking real nice right now.

Haha ok then. Feel free to forget everything I just said and evaluate the trade based on the merits of half a season of Chapman. Certainly the points about keeping him away from the Giants and Nats sound like a good start.

I'm probably repeating myself, but there's 41 pages here. It seems like most people who are unhappy about the pure baseball side of this is that there's no extension. But seems to me like there's still a pretty good chance that one happens. From all the reports, it sounds like the Cubs want to sign him long term. Maybe that's a 4/60 deal or maybe they're willing to go more years and money. He's 28, so you figure they could easily give him 5 years or even 6 without too much of a sweat. And that's especially the case if they want to try him as a starter. If they wanted him to start, I'd think a longer term deal would get the most out of his prime and more of the years where he's up and running as a full season starter. And if it came to a bidding war I'm sure there would be a willingness to go higher in AAV for those teams who thought he could start. That would natural eliminate some teams from the bidding war. So I'm still at a spot, speaking strictly in baseball value terms, where I don't know how the Cubs did. If Chapman was on a contract that had 4-5 years left after this one and 15-20 million AAV, and the Cubs thought he could be a starter down the road, what kind of package would that bring in? I know I'm making a lot of leaps here with the idea that getting Chapman in the door gives us a great inside edge on getting him extend, then the idea that he could be a starter. But basically, I think this thing hasn't shaken out yet and it's not a given that he won't be extended. Also not a given that he isn't the long term starter some people wanted to save Torres for. Personally, I'm not sure this is the guy I want to see for 7 innings every fifth day for the next 4-5 years, but again just trying to evaluate the thing in pure baseball terms and I could see where that could be the Cubs plan.

i guess it comes down to that either A.) wasn't an option or B.) the front office determined those two werent worth the asking price. im ok with either Yeah, at the end of the day, Theo is incredibly good at his job, and that's basically the trump card in any argument on this. But I think everyone here realizes the answer to Tim's original question is that it doesn't move the needle much at all, nor would any realistic trade, for this year's World Series. And assuming this trade doesn't come with an extension, there's no way it makes us better from 2017 on, so it just strikes me as contradictory to Theo's stated goal of 'making the playoffs as many times as possible'. Obviously he thought the slight uptick this year was worth any potential sacrifice down the road. We'll see how it goes. And, as others have said, this is before all the personal [expletive]. If everyone here believed this trade doesn't move the needle much at all for 2016 then there would be no debate. Without an extension, we'd all be coming down hard on the "against" side. Right now I'm not buying the 2%, similar to how I don't buy that the Cubs chances of winning the division are 95%. These aggregate stats are a nice guy but I think the actual value is way more nuanced than some people are making it out to be. A true shutdown back end to a bullpen can change a series in a lot of ways. And having a lefty to go in to own Harper and Murphy would be real nice.

You said this last night too...wondering why you're so sure he'd rather be a Yankee than a Cub at equal salaries. Because he seems happy and has at least been quoted as saying he would be down with returning next season even if he got traded. No reason not to stay with what you know if you're happy and the money is the same. I think Girardi has already proven this theory wrong, with the same two teams involved. Unless maybe he's super happy about managing the team on the selling end of this deal. To put it another way, which team's future would you take, which manager would you rather play for, and which bunch of guys would you rather hang with for the next half decade? I'm guessing Chapman sees it the same way as JHey did and he signs up eventually.

On the handwringing, just wanted throw David's sig quote out there: "The Cubs’ transaction list under Epstein and Hoyer reads like a work of fiction, a wish-fulfillment list composed in hindsight" This quote is accurate. Practically everything they've done has been for surplus value. This may look like Boston Theo but it's Cubs Theo with Hoyer in the room. The dudes who have broken the game, assembling an insane pool of talent and the best team in the majors, comprised mainly of young guys with 5+ years of control remaining. All within 4 years of taking over. Many articles have been written on the rarity of such a thing being done so quickly. The Trust Theo thing isn't just fun tag line, it's common sense. He'll go get more Torreses. Enjoy the ride.

Seems like this move would fly in the face of the generally accepted 2% thing. A lot of stats work great on the aggregate but when you focus down to specific teams/scenarios there's a lot more variance. Making it a 6 inning game seemed to have helped KC a great deal. I think it would be tough to say that without one of their relievers they would've had only a 1-2% worse chance at it. For this team, it could be great to shorten up the game. For the second half, it will help keep the starters fresh. In the playoffs you can have a quicker hook and maybe ensure that Hendricks gets that #3 spot. You could potentially also Bumgarner it and pitch him for whacky amounts of innings if you get deep enough to make it worthwhile. And even without an extension, who's to say that they haven't had discussions and Chapman is amenable to to signing here long term, generally likes the terms the Cubs have but wants to see some bidding. Just like with Dex maybe you get him in here an he loves it and wants to stick around. Then the whole value proposition of the deal flips again. Mostly just wante to pop in to say that in this particular case it seems like Theo doesn't buy the concept of only a 1-2% pickup in WS probability and just because he's referred to the playoffs as a crapshoot before it doesn't mean that he agrees with every commonly held belief tied it that concept.