I agree with you, but my overall point was that you can't dismiss Rusch as being a horrible starter when his stats show that in the NL central he is an above avg. 5th starter. And it is possible that the other options the Cubs have could actually be worse than Rusch (like last year). Sometimes I think it is too easy to make over uninformed over-generalized statements about role players like Rusch. How do the statistics show he is an above average 5th starter? I haven't looked at them compared to the league, but I find it hard to believe that Rusch's 90ish ERA+, 1.4 - 1.5 WHIP, and lack of noteworthy peripherals would rank that well. Believe it or not if you look at the NL Central the Cardinals are the only team that had a better 5th starter based on ERA. Houston #4 - Backe 4.76 ERA WHIP 1.46 #5 - Rodriquez 5.53 ERA WHIP 1.46 #5 - Astacio 5.67 ERA WHIP 1.54 Reds #2 - Milton 6.47 ERA WHIP 1.55 #3 - Ortiz 5.36 ERA WHIP 1.50 #4 - Clausen 4.21 ERA WHIP 1.41 #5 - Hudson 6.38 ERA WHIP 1.57 Pirates #1(?) - Wells 5.29 ERA WHIP 1.57 #2 - Redman 4.90 ERA WHIP 1.37 #3 - Perez 5.85 ERA WHIP 1.67 #4 - Williams 4.41 ERA WHIP 1.41 #5 - Fogg 5.05 ERA WHIP 1.47 Brewers Santos 4.57 ERA WHIP 1.50 Ohka 4.35 ERA WHIP 1.37 Glover 5.57 ERA WHIP 1.45 Obermueller 5.26 ERA WHIP 1.69 Sorry, I didn't notice you said Central and not just central. Rusch's career numbers or numbers from last year put him either barely in the top 80(5 starters) or at the bottom of the NL among starters.