CaliforniaRaisin

Wow, that's ridiculous. I agree with goony...imagine what Willamson, Howry, Eyre or Dempster could net in this market.

Mesa is up 6-5 in the 7th inning. Renshaw went 2, gave up 2 ER on 3 H and a walk. Donald Walters then came in and went 3, giving up 3 more ER. Albuqerque went the next 2, giving up 1 ER on 1 H, striking out 3 and walking one. Cody Gilbert has a solo HR - it's only the second HR for Mesa all season. Gilbert is 3 for 4 with 3 RBI.

Actually Renshaw is starting for Mesa (0-0, 0.00 ERA, 2 IP, 2/0, 1.50 WHIP). Whoops.

Poor Berg. :(

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D I gotta agree with Outshined too. He's struggled in WT, but it's only been 48 ABs. Nic Jackson is close, but he's doing it at A+ and AA at age 26. Fuld is third, I really didn't expect his OPS to be that high.

so what????? Its the only reason we play the games!!! If wins didnt matter, Dusty wouldnt be on your guys' hot seat. If wins didnt matter we wouldn't play.... Yes, wins are good. But not a good way to evaluate a pitcher. A pitcher's W-L record and his teams' W-L record in his starts aren't basd on just what the pitcher does. It also consider's the team's offense, bullpen, etc. Why not use other stats that are more dependent on the pitcher himself?

How do you figure? um lets see. 1. More wins doesn't matter 2. lower era incorrect 3. less walks 4. less hits allowed incorrect 5. lewss homers allowed incorrect 6. more ground ball outs 7. more team wins in his starts doesn't matter 8. much more consistent is that enough or should i keep going for you? Veal gave up fewer runs and baserunners, and struck out many more. He walked more, but his K/BB ratio was better too. You can see the numbers here. apparently i should have qualified my answer with WHEN VEAL LEFT.....or maybe you have seen all their starts this season....? When you are trying to figure who was best in the entire first half, why randomly cut off Atkins' numbers? We're already ignoring that Veal went to the next level and didn't give up a run for 20 IP(or whatever it was). There's no point in disregarding Atkins' performance after Veal was promoted. If you read the posts, I said that Atkins was the Chiefs best pitcher in the first half.....thats why you cut off the stats there....unlike others, i try not to evaluate guys that I don't see in person....thats why baseball america sucks.... Since they rely on scouts and managers who actually see the players? They're right more often than they're wrong and are the best at the business.

Go Petrick!

Probable Starters: Iowa: RHP Angel Guzman (2-4, 4.62 ERA, 48.2 IP, 52/14, 1.25 WHIP) @ RHP Jeff Fulchino (2-5, 3.69 ERA) West Tenn: RHP Sean Gallagher (4-1, 2.43 ERA, 29.2 IP, 31/17, 1.38 WHIP) @ RHP Jack Cassel (0-0, 2.25 ERA) Daytona: RHP Justin Berg (6-6, 4.58 ERA, 92.1 IP, 75/45, 1.58 WHIP) Peoria: LHP Jesus Yepez (4-4, 3.35 ERA, 86 IP, 45/43, 1.42 WHIP) vs. LHP Jose Escalona (4-8, 4.98 ERA) Boise: RHP Billy Petrick (3-0, 2.18 ERA, 20.2 IP, 12/6, 4 HBP, 1.16 WHIP) vs. RHP T.J. Franco (1-0, 1.17 ERA) Mesa: RHP Alberto Albuquerque (0-1, 6.00 ERA, 6 IP, 8/5, 1.83 WHIP)

I guess this sort of fits in here: And on top of that, Pawelek has not done well at Boise.

They start playing night games later in the summer, when it starts getting blisteringly hot in AZ with random rain storms popping up infrequently. Arizona's monsoon storms have long started already (heck, a few drifted over to the LA area a few weeks ago!) - it's normally better to get the games in the morning during monsoon season since the storms really get going with the help of the sun during the afternoons and evenings.

Only 1 K in 2.2 for Campusano? He's slipping!

How do you figure? um lets see. 1. More wins doesn't matter 2. lower era incorrect 3. less walks 4. less hits allowed incorrect 5. lewss homers allowed incorrect 6. more ground ball outs 7. more team wins in his starts doesn't matter 8. much more consistent is that enough or should i keep going for you? Veal gave up fewer runs and baserunners, and struck out many more. He walked more, but his K/BB ratio was better too. You can see the numbers here. apparently i should have qualified my answer with WHEN VEAL LEFT.....or maybe you have seen all their starts this season....? So I went through and tabulated Atkins' stats at the time of Veal's promotion: Mitch Atkins: 72.1 IP, 53 H, 5 HR, 68 K/25 BB, 2.24 ERA 1.08 WHIP, .196 BAA Donnie Veal: 73.2 IP, 45 H, 4 HR, 86 K/40 BB, 2.69 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, .169 BAA To go over Nathan's list: 1. More wins: Yes, Atkins had 6 and Veal had 5 (though I think this is a poor stat to judge a pitcher). 2. lower era - Yes, 2.24 to 2.69. 3. less walks - Yes, 25 to 40. Of course Veal has the K advantage. 4. less hits allowed - No, Veal had 45 Hs, Atkins 53. 5. lewss homers allowed - No, Veal had 4 HR to Atkins 5 6. more ground ball outs - Not going to look it up but I'm sure Atkins wins this in a landslide. 7. more team wins in his starts - Eh, so what? 8. much more consistent - I guess...though in the stat line I showed above, Veal was better than Atkins in 4 out of 7 categories. So, of the corrections TT made to your list based on Atkins' current stats, he was only wrong on the ERAs at the time of Veal's promotion.

I understand Nate's argument, though. At the time of Veal's promotion, he and Atkins were similarly rated. Veal and Atkins both had their upsides at the time...but Atkins is a year younger. Things are different since then, but at the time, Nate's got a good argument. Regarding my choice, I was evaluating performance more than anything else, though. But why use the "at the time" argument when we're talking about the entire season to date? Because we also started talking about the best performance level-by-level.

How do you figure? um lets see. 1. More wins doesn't matter 2. lower era incorrect 3. less walks 4. less hits allowed incorrect 5. lewss homers allowed incorrect 6. more ground ball outs 7. more team wins in his starts doesn't matter 8. much more consistent is that enough or should i keep going for you? Veal gave up fewer runs and baserunners, and struck out many more. He walked more, but his K/BB ratio was better too. You can see the numbers here. apparently i should have qualified my answer with WHEN VEAL LEFT.....or maybe you have seen all their starts this season....? I can't check right this moment (I will check later), but I'm pretty sure Veal had fewer hits and a better WHIP when he was promoted.

I think Veal is talked about moreso for a few reasons. For one, he's lefthanded...that tends to go farther with pitchers. Two, his scoreless streak at Daytona vaulted him into the spotlight. Three, he was a much higher draft pick than Atkins, which lends itself to more hype and more in-depth scouting reports. Finally, Atkins didn't establish his prospect status until this season. Veal's prospect status was well above Atkins last season due to where he was drafted and some of the numbers he put up at Boise. Also (though this of course is related to a few things you mentioned like his draft spot and his quicker promotion), Veal has better stuff.

Hill topped out at 92 mph in the first, mostly was at 90-91. The 92 mph was the strikeout pitch to Josh Fields. Geovany Soto is the starting catcher.

This time of year, with a team this far out of the race is no time to be saying "is veteran player X's stats slightly better than young player Y's?" This time of year is not about stats. Its about finding out what you have. There's a simple question that should be asked about every player on this team right now. The answer will tell you if that player should be playing or sitting/traded. The question is "the next time the Cubs challenge for a division or (dare I say) World Series title, will this player be a part of the mix?" If the answer is no, get rid of them immediately. If the answer is "maybe," then you absolutely owe it to the organization to see if that answer will be yes or no. I agree with your entire post. But, I still dont' believe the argument that Dusty failed to play younger players this year or won't play them down the stretch. Could he have played more? Sure, but he has for the most part stuck with Cedeno, Marshall, and Murton the entire first half of the season. When Hill was with the Cubs he pitched regularly, when Aardsma was with the team he pitched, Novoa has gotten into some critical innings, etc. The only guy I can think of that got shafted was Theriot. Just because the Cubs fire Dusty, doesn't mean that Jim Hendry is all of the sudden going to call up Hill, Guzman, Aardsma, and Theriot. I'd have to say Guzman has been shafted too.

If we stop consideration at the time Veal was promoted, Atkins had just started to struggle while Veal had come on strong. Veal had reduced his BB numbers, had the advantage in WHIP, BAA and Ks and the ERA gap had really been decreased. Atkins started out hot while Veal struggled in April, but ever since, I'd say Veal has had the advantage.

To say they are better than guys who are getting playing time - like Rusch and Perez - makes them worthy of playing time on this team. The Cubs aren't going anywhere and guys like Hill and Guzman, who are pretty much ready for the big leagues (in Hill's case, as ready as he will ever be) need to play so the Cubs can get a chance to properly evaluate them for 2007.

Been a rough go of it for Dylan recently.

Yep...playing time for younger guys to see what you have, instead of playing older guys because they're your "horses". I don't buy that argument. Dusty has been playing the "younger guys" to see what they have. Unfortunately, they were not quite ready to be played. Tell that to Angel Guzman, who essentially was a spectator for two weeks during his last call-up. Angel Guzman of the 5+ ERA? It was fairly obvious in his time with the club that he is rusty and still has some work to do in the minors. His first promotion was ill-timed, in my opinion. He was much more ready for his second promotion, but it was pointless to have him go up just to be the long reliever used once every 2 weeks. But the strangest thing of all is he had a dominant outing relieving Rusch (as IPT pointed out), and then sat on the bench for the next 18 days. So Gooz shows steady improvement and then isn't used for 18 days.

Chris Walker has really put together a great season at WT, and he has had to to be considered in the Cubs' plans, given his more advanced age.

It's what the Cubs *should* do. I think we all agree on that, since the season is lost.

1. Youngsters like Murton, Theriot, Guzman and Hill could be played more regularly - especially before the call-ups in September - to get a better read on their abilities. 2. Dusty won't get a chance to finish what he and Joey Cora have valiantly tried to do to Z's arm. 3. The interim manager might be the best candidate for the job and could be hired beyond this season.