Starting Pitching

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 3:28 PM CST

As I, and several other posters, believe and have advocated the Cubs need another starter with 1-2 or 2-3 potential. mlbtraderumors.com (Yeah, I know) has a good breakdown of available starters via trade or free agency. I, and others, have advocated mostly for Erik Bedard, believing him to be cheaper than Santana, but one of the pitchers listed on mlbtraderumors.com (Yeah, I know) piqued my interest:

Joe Blanton.

The mlbtradetrumors.com article (Yeah, I know):

"Starting Pitching Market Starts Moving

In recent days the starting pitching market has finally started moving. Dan Haren was traded to the Diamondbacks, and Hiroki Kuroda signed with the Dodgers. Now that the ball is rolling, what's next?

* There are no aces available via free agency, but Kuroda might've been the best anyway. There are three free agents with ace potential but checkered histories: Roger Clemens, Bartolo Colon, and Mark Prior. Colon is the only one with a shot at 200 innings in 2008, and he probably won't require more than a two-year deal. Healthy pitchers with lower ceilings comprise the next tier - Carlos Silva, Kyle Lohse, Josh Fogg, Josh Towers, and Livan Hernandez.
* The injury tier of once-decent free agents, who are garnering plenty of attention: Kris Benson, Matt Clement, Freddy Garcia, Jason Jennings, Jon Lieber, Rodrigo Lopez.
* There are some ace starters available via trade, if you're willing to give up half of your farm system. Johan Santana and Erik Bedard are the game-changers. Joe Blanton will be slightly cheaper, but isn't as nasty. A.J. Burnett can compete with Bedard's stuff but he has injury concerns and one year left on his deal before he can opt out. After that we see a dropoff in trade candidates - Kevin Millwood, Dave Bush, Chris Capuano, Matt Morris, Jason Marquis. The Brewers are definitely holding some nice cards here.
* Teams looking to add pitching: Yankees, Royals, Mariners, Rangers, Nationals, Mets, Phillies, Reds, Astros, Cardinals, Giants, and Rockies. "

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2007/12/starting-pitchi.html

Blanton's numbers from last seasons:

34 Gs 230 IP 14-10 3.95 ERA 140 Ks 40 BBs 1.22 WHIP

His ERA was higher in '06 and '04. but was lower in '05

Perhaps he's not a #2 starter, at least not now, but would be a solid addition to our rotation, who also happens to be right-handed. that would split up our lefties nicely:

Z
Lilly
Blanton
Hill
Marquis, Demp, Marshall, Petrick, Hart, Guzman, Gallagher

I'm not sure what we'd have to give up for him, but probably one of Marshall or Gallagher, plus a position prospect, ect.

What do you guys think?

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

Tweet Comment 89 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

hill is better than blanton

i guess wed split them up in the rotation, but i think hill is better than lilly, so id swap those two. blanton would be a nice pickup, i think hes a #3 at best, but a sub-4 era with OK strikeout ability, it would definitely make the staff stronger. but what would it cost? if its marshall and another prospect or two then id do it, but i wouldnt give up a lot.

Kevin Hart Watch: IP: 11 K: 13 ERA: 0.82 WHIP: 1.00 K/BB: 3.25 a productive farm system is a wonderful thing.

by kylejo on Dec 15, 2007 3:14 PM CST reply actions

Hill is the same as Bedard actually

I know, I couldn't believe it either when I read it too. But if you look at the numbers that matter, K's, WHIP, ERA, K's per 9, ERA+, Hill's numbers stack up with Bedard's favorably. Granted, this a pitcher in the NL central vs. the AL East, but considering how much cheaper Hill is for now and the near future, and the fact that he's YOUNGER than Bedard, anything that involves giving up Hill has us moving in place. Now if only we could get Hill's brain in line...

The thought of Burnett in what amounts to a free agent year is intriguing, but the power right hander with injury problems is a movie we've seen before. If he were cheap enough though...

by SamFels on Dec 15, 2007 3:25 PM CST reply actions

What about Blanton?

...

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 3:26 PM CST up reply actions

Umm, what???

2007 ERA
Bedard - 3.165
Hill - 3.923

2007 K's per Inning
Bedard - 1.21
Hill - 0.94

2007 WHIP
Bedard - 1.08
Hill - 1.19

It's clear that Bedard has taken the next step and is one of the top starting pitchers in baseball (top 10-15 for sure). Hill may get there, but he hasn't proven it on the field yet.

While quality starts probably isn't a stat you value, I do.

2007 QS
Bedard - 21 out of 28
Hill - 17 out of 32

One big question in regards to Bedard is his health. If you want to factor that in, you may have a point, but you didn't, so I'm not sure if you do.

by NO100 on Dec 15, 2007 4:18 PM CST up reply actions

I think the poster meant career progression

Before Bedard's 2007, he had a good, but not great 2006: 3.76 ERA, 1.35 WHIP, .258 BAA. Then compare that to Hill's 2007: 3.92, 1.19 WHIP, .235BAA.

If Bedard can make the jump he did in 2007, why not Hill in 2008?

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 15, 2007 4:34 PM CST up reply actions

I'm a big Rich Hill fan

If the Cubs (as currently constructed) want to be a great team, I don't think there is any player more important to the Cubs making that jump than Hill. I think he has the capability of making that jump.

However, Bedard has made that jump and Hill is yet to. While thier career progressions are similar, this last step is the hardest step of all. To say, right now, that they are the same, I think is doing a disservice to what Bedard has accomplished.

They are not now the same, yet I fully acknowledge that a year from now they may be.

by NO100 on Dec 15, 2007 5:52 PM CST up reply actions

This will be Rich Hill's year ..

.. his fate will be in his hands.

His resiliency is good and his learning curve is still a big factor, but I think he will arise into his own this year. Clearly, Rich has the horses and the arm to do well in the NL and he has can be as dominating a pitcher as Zambrano when he's in his zone. I am looking forward to greater things for this young guy.

Well, Next Year is here .. and Jack's century's gotta end some time .. GO CUBBIES!

by cubnational on Dec 15, 2007 11:08 PM CST up reply actions

same staff?

we will NOT get to the promise land with the same rotation as last year!i say get a righty since we already have plenty of lefties.and PLEASE hendry stay away from the injury prone question marks since we just got rid of one!also,good riddance to marquis.i would give guzman and/or gallagher a shot before i would continue to allow marquis weaken in the second half of the season!

by cubz409 on Dec 15, 2007 4:10 PM CST reply actions

Ah reactionaries

Gotta love them!

First of all, the Cubs were 4th in MLB this year. As for Marquis, he's one of the best fourth starters in baseball. That's his role. You won't find better than him.

Guzman isn't healthy. Gallagher hasn't shown he is ready yet. We need to solidify the 5th starter position before we talk about getting rid of Marquis.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 15, 2007 4:26 PM CST up reply actions

Blanton

The Cubs had teh 4th best ERA this year, but we had a revolving door for the back end of the rotation. That was Lou putting guys in the right spot to succeed, and kudos to him for it. But, we can't rely on that forever.

In the playoffs, Lou had so little comfidence in his starters that he was going to pitch Z in Game 4 if we got there (which we didn't).

Now, obviously, I'm the first to say "we have to worry about winning game q...of Spring training", I'm just using last season's playoffs as an example.

You won't find better than Marquis in the 4th hole? Try Joe Blanton! You know, what the thread's about. I'm not saying Dump Marquis, but I would consider him in a trade.

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 5:02 PM CST up reply actions

Yes

Be open to trading Marquis, but he's not a plague like the poster seems to think he is. Yeah Joe Blanton would be better than Marquis, but Blanton isn't the 4th starter on the A's. What I'm saying is we don't lose any competitive edge by having Marquis as the 4th starter. In fact it is a benefit to us to have him there.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 15, 2007 5:10 PM CST up reply actions

But we need a 1-2-3 Starter

I agree, Marquis is not a plague, but we need another good to great starter to seetle this rotation down a bit.

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 5:24 PM CST up reply actions

What part of the 4th best MLB ERA

Don't you understand?

If trades are there, go for it, but I'm not going to sweat if this is our opening day rotation.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 15, 2007 8:03 PM CST up reply actions

What part of that was luck and Lou

Don't YOU understand.

The back end of our rotation was a revolving door. Do you really want to go into this next season with that situation again?

We have an ace in Z, who struggled somewhat. We have a #3 in Liily in our #2 hole, we have a young and inconsistent Hill, and after that a hodge podge of Marquis, Dempster, Marshall, Hart, Petrick, ect.

Luck and the managerial skill of Lou Pinella saved our pitching asses last season. How can you not want to improve, and try to nail some of this down, as opposed to relying on what WAS the 4th best era in MLB?

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 8:42 PM CST up reply actions

Luck and Lou

Crap man, I didn't realize we were losing Lou! I figured this would be HUGE news. I'm not seeing anything on the Internet so I'll file this under 'rumor' and assume that Lou will still be bringing his managing expertise.

Zambrano was UNlucky last year. He was off of his career numbers. If anything, he'll be better next year.

Lilly went from having 33% of his games against the two teams that have been No. 1 and No. 2 in OBP for the past 5 years+ and dealing with DHs to the NL. There's no reason to believe he can't keep it up.

Hill was No. 37 in the league in ERA this year. There are 30 teams in the MLB. Even if Lilly regresses, Hill is a top No. 2 pitcher. Lilly interestingly enough had an ERA better than Hill, so one of them would have to drop 25 spots or so and the other would have to drop 55 spots just to enter the 3rd starter area.

Marquis was right on top of his career numbers. No luck one way or the other here.

As for the No. 5 spot, no team has a consistent No. 5 starter. Only Julian Tavarez, John Danks, Claudio Vargas, David Wells, Matt Morris, Horacio Ramirez, and Jesse Litsch had more starts in the No. 5 spot. Of those guys, only Litsch had numbers comparable to Marshall:
M: 3.92ERA, 1.37WHIP, .267BAA
L: 3.81ERA, 1.37WHIP, .270BAA

Why you and everyone else thinks this team needs a top of the line starter or no playoffs just shows how far fantasy baseball has gone into your baseball minds. We'll be just fine if C.C. Sabathia is not our No. 5 starter folks.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 15, 2007 9:41 PM CST up reply actions

Oh My God

SO much of what you base your opinion on is assumption: Z will do better, Liily will repeat his career year, Hill will step it up...

I f you need proof as to why we need a solid #2, please see A) our playoff record last year (even though we need to focus on winning game 1...of Spring Training) and B) the Boston Red Sox rotation.

If you still don't get it by then, you're hopeless.

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 10:20 PM CST up reply actions

Well....

Zambrano pitched worse than his career numbers this year.

Lilly's career numbers are 4.46/1.34/.248
This year: 3.83/1.14/.236
Much better, especially in WHIP, but it's the AL East vs. NL. Even if he slips back a little, he's still a good pitcher. Please tell me how bad you think he will fall and WHY.

I'm not saying Hill will step it up. I'm saying he will be just as good as he was this year.

"If you need proof as to why we need a solid #2, please see A) our playoff record last year (even though we need to focus on winning game 1...of Spring Training) and B) the Boston Red Sox rotation."

We have at least two #2 pitchers.
Ramirez, Lee, and Soriano left 30 runners on base and had zero RBIs. Zambrano, Lilly, Hill could have pitched awesome games and we still could have lost.
The Red Sox? Beckett, Schilling, Dice-K, Wakefield? They are beatable.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 16, 2007 12:15 AM CST up reply actions

young and incosistent hill...

you describe him as if his era was four and a half last year. the guy had a sub-4 era in his first full season in the majors, and was 5th in the NL in K's. he's the second best pitcher on this team right now. if zambrano goes back to normal zambrano, the rotation is fine, 1. Z, 2. Hill, 3. Lilly

Kevin Hart Watch: IP: 11 K: 13 ERA: 0.82 WHIP: 1.00 K/BB: 3.25 a productive farm system is a wonderful thing.

by kylejo on Dec 16, 2007 6:25 PM CST up reply actions

L, DL, & S

You can spin it however you want. Did you know the Cubs had the best ERA in all of Chicago? Did you know the Cubs starters were twice as good as the former WS champ Cardinals in 2007?

That the Cubs were 4th in 2007 MLB ERA is only relevant if
a) all 5 starters will start games in the playoffs for all playoff teams
b) that 2007 team ERA is predictive of 2008 ERA

Neither a) nor b) is true.

Marquis was extremely lucky in the first half. Statistics I'd rather not have to explain here show that a ton of his balls batted in the first half failed to fall in for hits at a rate that is explainable only by luck for a pitcher like Marquis. His ERA will not be as good next year unless he is traded to a team with a pitcher's park. ERA is just not predictive.

Indeed, there are several possible scenarios in which Cubs pitching falls off a cliff in 2008.
We can hope Z will right his ship and Hill will take a step forward, and Lilly will continue at this rate, and Marshall will stay healthy, but Z's arm might fall off, Hill's second half numbers might reflect the league figuring him out, Lilly might rediscover the physical limitations that kept his inning total down nearly every other year he has pitched except last year, and Sean Marshall might keep reaching his limit at 75 innings.

Sure, there are more optimistic scenarios, but that one's not unrealistic or overly pessimistic. I mean I didn't mention a comebacker tearing off someone's hand or Z breaking a bat over Lilly's knee.

Furthermore, the Cubs team ERA looks so shiny and nice because their 4th and 5th starters were excellent (with the exception of Wade Miller). I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs' 5th starter had a full run over the league average 5th starter. (Anyone know where to find a statistic like that?) But in the playoffs, you lop off those 5th starters and sometimes the 4th starters, too. The Cubs chances of winning the WS would be incredibly higher if Marquis' or Dempster's spot in the rotation was taken by someone with the potential to be a 1 or a 2. Ideally, Ted Lilly is our #4 playoff starter. That's a recipe for success.

And this is why the Cubs would be much better off holding that 5th starter spot open for a guy like Freddy Garcia who may throw the dreaded towel drill all through spring training rather than wasting it on Marquis, a guy you know won't throw a pitch in the playoffs. If/when a Garcia-type comes back healthy he could actually be an improvement on a playoff rotation. Meanwhile, Gallagher is no downgrade from Marquis.

All I am saying is give Pie a chance!

by DGU on Dec 15, 2007 8:59 PM CST up reply actions

Except.....

Marquis' year was in line with his career stats. He's a streaky pitcher. It's how he operates.

Hill had a better July and August than he did May and June. His numbers don't show a steady decline.

What are Lilly's physical limitations? I haven't read anything like this. I'm not saying it's not out there. If you've got info, please share.

Now your playoff argument is something I'm more willing to give some ground too. I was more writing in response to the idiots who are saying this rotation can't get the team to the playoffs. I'll let the irony of the 2007 season sink in.

In the end, I think it's fair to say that Lilly and Hill match up with the majority of No. 2 starters in the league. Guys always say they aren't, but then fail to actually talk about real No. 2 starters. Again, they think of the No. 2 starter on their Fantasy team in a league with 12 teams and fail to think about the fact the MLB has 30.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 15, 2007 9:59 PM CST up reply actions

Lilly's IP count

Until last year, Lilly had 3 seasons of under 130 IP and 3 seasons over 130, but none over 200. Part of this was that Lilly threw a ton of pitches and always went short outing because of high pitch counts. Part was a lack of durability. It's not unrealistic to hope that Lilly learned to use less pitches (his walk rate was down), but you can't learn durability.

I guess the question for me is - what would it hurt to sign Freddy Garcia to an incentive based contract?

All I am saying is give Pie a chance!

by DGU on Dec 16, 2007 7:04 AM CST up reply actions

when is he coming back?

i think that would be a smart idea, getting reinforcements towards the end of the season can never hurt.

Kevin Hart Watch: IP: 11 K: 13 ERA: 0.82 WHIP: 1.00 K/BB: 3.25 a productive farm system is a wonderful thing.

by kylejo on Dec 16, 2007 9:10 PM CST up reply actions

My take

Marquis = cold weather, he is good, warm weather the balls fly out of the park

Lilly = solid pitcher, but the league has seen him now, and his effectiveness will drop a notch

Zambrano = his performance (specifically throwing strikes) has been on a consistent downward trend since 05. You just don't know what you are getting each time he takes the ball.

Hill = is a good change up away from being a solid top of the rotation guy. The more he pitched, the more he got hit and that tells me the big breaker alone won't do it for him, especially when he can't throw it for a strike.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Dec 18, 2007 2:39 PM CST up reply actions

Sorry

I meant we have to worry about winning game 1...of Spring training, not game q!

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 5:22 PM CST up reply actions

Ummm, Guzman

will likely miss all of 2008. Even if he wasn't how could you even consider slotting an unknown extremely injury prone pitcher in a starting rotation?

At the end back end of the rotation, Marquis isn't that bad. Gallagher and Marshall will get their shots this year.

by rlpete on Dec 15, 2007 4:42 PM CST up reply actions

Follow-up: Guzman had TJS

Here's a previous post on BCB I gave re: Guzman's surgery. He likley will be out all of 2008... and when he returns, he may be destined to be in the bullpen.

http://bleedcubbieblue.com/comments/2007/11/27/05637/772/64#64

This is who I think the Cubs #1 should be...

by initram on Dec 15, 2007 10:02 PM CST up reply actions

I can't see the A's trading Blanton...

... right after they traded Haren. I think Billy Beane would look for more than what you're asking, and further, is it possible Gallagher could turn into Blanton? If so, why do this?

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 15, 2007 4:15 PM CST reply actions

The A's

I think Beane is moving into a rebuilding period. I emphasize that that's my opinion looking at their roster. However, there is speculation out there that Blanton is on the table, including from mlbtraderumors.com (Yeah, I know.

I'm not sure when Blanton is eligible for arbitration or free Agency, but he's been in 3 years, so not long. When that occurs, and more to the point, the season before his trade value goes down, and the A's will get less. they won't keep him since The pitching-starved Yankees will fall all over themselves to get him if he becomes a Free Agent, and so, naturally, will the Red Sox. The A's won't be able to compete, and they know it.

And, for all his promise, Gallagher is an unknown quantity. Yeah he might turn in to Blanton, or better or worse, or he might not make it. Or he might not make it next season. You see my point.

I'm not saying shoot ourselves in the foot for Blanton, but I would consider a reasonable offer for him. Yeah, probably more than what I outlined, but not out of reach.

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 5:16 PM CST up reply actions

The problem is....

... I don't think the A's will take a "reasonable" offer for Blanton; I think anyone wanting him will have to overpay.

That's too much of a risk, I think, especially dealing with Billy Beane.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 15, 2007 5:32 PM CST up reply actions

Perhaps

Dealing with Beane is always hard, but look at what he got for Haren. Yes, top prospects, but 4 of 6 either in single-A or barely double-A, and no major league ready starting pitching. Smith is the closest in that deal, but his ERA and WHIP went up nicely when he jumped from double-A to triple-A. Maybe as a fifth starter, he could fit in. Eveland the only other triple-Aer and the only other triple-A pitcher he tore a tendon in his pitching hand last season.

Beane could have gotten more, especially in terms of major league ready talent.

The Haren trade and the current roster of the A's suggests to me Beane is looking to the future once again. The only players on their team making more than $3.5 million are Chavez and Kotsay.

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 6:19 PM CST up reply actions

Blanton is eligible for arb

this year.

visiting A's fan.

by rfloh @ Bleed Cubbie Blue on Dec 17, 2007 2:35 AM CST up reply actions

Beane had no problems...........

Getting rid of Hudson, Mulder, or Zito, so why is Blanton untouchable?

We need to win now, so we need to get help for now.

If you can't get Bedard, and I mean, do whatever it takes to reasonably get him, this means offering Hill because there is no way Hill is as valuable as Bedard is, not a chance.

If you can't, then get Blanton and Roberts, then the team is set.

by zam on Dec 15, 2007 4:34 PM CST reply actions

What's so special about Bedard

Don't just give me stats, because he had one really good year last year where he missed the last month with an injury.

How do we know it wasn't a career year for Bedard? What kind of plus pitches does he have? What's the difference in pitches thrown by Hill and Bedard?

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 15, 2007 5:01 PM CST up reply actions

I wouldn;t trade Hill

For Bedard or blanton. You and I agree on that one, IllinoisCubs

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 5:16 PM CST up reply actions

More speculation on A's rebuilding Blanton moving

This from Oakland's own website:

http://oakland.athletics.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071214&content_id=2326969&vkey=news_ oak&fext=.jsp&c_id=oak

Some of the key passages:

"After trading ace right-hander Dan Haren and a Minor League reliever to the Arizona Diamondbacks for a package of six prospects, Beane emphatically confirmed that he's in full rebuilding mode.

"I don't think it's unfair to say that at all," Beane said. "I don't think there's any reason to dance around the subject. I think it's something we need to do." "

"Righty Joe Blanton, a strong and healthy No. 2 behind Haren in 2007, could be the next Athletic dealt. Closer Huston Street, with whom the A's have been discussing a multiyear contract, also might find himself on the block if Beane is looking to further fortify the farm system."

"Beane was evasive when asked about what his next move might be, saying the Haren deal has been his focus since he returned from last week's Winter Meetings in Nashville, Tenn.

"We just finished this [trade] about an hour ago," he said. "I've only got one mouth."

Minutes later, however, he again called the Haren deal the "first major step" in the rebuilding process.

"We finally know where we're going," he said, "and we're going to go full bore.""

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 6:44 PM CST reply actions

rotation

The Cubs, as currently constructed, don't have the kind of pitching that can really carry a team in the playoffs.

There are plenty of examples of teams with two knockout starters (Wood and Prior in '03) that allow a team to pull an upset in the LDS and go further.

Z's start against the D-Backs was the only good thing to come out of that series. I think it will make him a more confident and relaxed pitcher. I expect bigger things next year from him.

I'm a big Ted Lilly fan. But he's not a shut down guy. He's a good No. 3. Marquis and Dempster are probably fourth starters at best.

So it comes down to Hill. I'm not convinced, sadly.

My thinking: Go with the current rotation unless Bedard or some better and reasonably priced option comes around. If not, start the year with Z, Lilly, Hill, Marquis and Dempster.

Assuming the team is healthy and Fukudome isn't a pumpkin, the Cubs will at the least be in the thick of it in July. And if Hill hasn't progressed enough, mortgage the future and find another starter at the trade deadline.

Finally, this is why we should have kept Prior, even if only for one year. Not saying he WOULD have returned to form, but if he had -- and Hill plateaus -- there would be no need to make a trade.

by elgato on Dec 15, 2007 7:20 PM CST reply actions

So what was that we were in this year?

I thought we were in the playoffs, but this rotation can do that kind of thing, so I must have been dreaming. I really really wish we had a rotation like the Rockies. I mean they went to the World Series.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 15, 2007 8:08 PM CST up reply actions

You took his comment out of context

He said the rotation currently can't take us far IN the playoffs, not that it didn't get us to the playoffs. And, of course, that was LAST season not THIS COMING season.

I'm the first to be concerned about and to say "we need to worry about winning game 1...of Spring Training" but in case you didn't notice, we were swept in the playoffs by a Rockies rotation that just got a whole lot better. Again, we obviously need to worry about winning game 1...of Spring Training, but I hear what he says.

Another example that I already posted, but you clearly didn't read:

"In the playoffs, Lou had so little confidence in his starters that he was going to pitch Z in Game 4 if we got there (which we didn't)."

What do you say that?

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 8:48 PM CST up reply actions

We need an edit button

We wer sewpt by the D-Backs, not the Rockies, and it was the D'Backs rotation that just got a lot better.

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 8:49 PM CST up reply actions

thank you

for getting what I was talking about.

We can win the Central with the current rotation. And it's possible that we could go further than that.

But another starter (or an improved Hill) would make things much easier. That's all I was saying.

by elgato on Dec 16, 2007 9:43 AM CST up reply actions

I think you're missing the point here

You and every other Cub fan who keeps hiding behind "well the Cubs had the 4th best starting ERA yada yada yada" are:

1) Apparently are missing the fact that all that means, is the Cubs 4th and 5th starters, are better than everyone elses, because the Cubs dod not have a starter in ERA in the top 15 So that stat is a little deceiving.

2) 4th and 5th starters do not contribute in the playoffs. Since you remember the Cubs in the Playoffs last season, then surely you saw what happened to the Cubs starters after Zambrano. You need a solid 1,2 punch in the playoffs. Imagine if the Cubs had a better pitcher starting game 2 against Doug Davis? They probably win that game and then Lilly would've started game 3, where he should be pitching in a playoff series and who knows.Lilly had a career year last year and if you think he's going to replicate that, you will be wrong

Now, couple that with the DBacks who could easily have the top 2 pitchers in the league in ERA next year, will most likely be a playoff and opponent.

This rotation is not good enough to carry the team in the playoffs. They proved that last year. Unless you're content with mediocrity, then you better hope the Cubs pick up another solid pitcher to stick in behind Zambrano. I an no longer satisfied with Cub teams making the playoffs.

I actually am optimistic that Hendry will do that. I believe he will go out and grab another starter. Call me guilty of drinking the cubbyade, but I believe that. Then and only then, will I start to believe this team is good enough to advance in the playoffs and get truly excited about 2008.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. ` Adam Savage Mythbusters

by lemon20pie on Dec 15, 2007 8:50 PM CST up reply actions

This pretty much sums up how

I feel about the Cubs going into next season. I just can't get excited about this team until we pick up another 1-2 starter.

The rotation hasn't been improved so I don't see any reason to believe the Cubs will get any further next season. Infact, Lilly and Marquis will probably regress.

Seeing us get swept last year by the Diamondbacks really showed the need for another solid starter and proved to me the rotation was not built to win a playoff series. The way Hendry built the rotation was one designed to pitch alot of innings and stay healthy. He had to do this considering all the problems we had the year before. Now that we have a good line up and good 3-5 starters, we now need somebody to make us elite at the top along with big Z.

If an improvement doesn't get done before spring training then I think Hendry will have to make a move at the AS break. My worry is that there won't be a solid 1-2 starter available at the break. If Bedard can be had now then I do whatever it takes to get him. Our window is small and our prime players are at their peaks now, we need to pull the trigger now.

THE FONZ HAS ARRIVED!

by amaru on Dec 15, 2007 9:40 PM CST up reply actions

Soriano, Lee, and Ramirez

left 30+ runners stranded on base and had 0 RBIS in the series... and you guys think the rotation was our downfall and needs to be overhauled.

It all makes sense now!

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 15, 2007 10:03 PM CST up reply actions

Overhauled...

... means changing out 4 or 5 pitchers. We ain't doing that.

One more 2-3 starter will do it. Marquis will be pushed - not entirely because of his numbers, but because he and Piniella (and others) had a falling out down the stretch. Remember that interview after the last game of the season when he came in to pitch as the long-man? The announcers knew that was going to be his role for that game (as a precursor to the playoffs) - heck, the fans even knew. After he got lit up, though, and was interviewed after the game, he said that he wasn't prepared. What?!?

Remember, we are stock piling the 'pen. Hendry will use that as trading bait. Marshall, Gallagher are ripe for the picking...

And I agree with posters here and what Hendry has been quoted as saying... do not trade Pie, Marmol, or Hill unless the deal blows us away!

This is who I think the Cubs #1 should be...

by initram on Dec 15, 2007 10:10 PM CST up reply actions

Sure did

Our starting pitching in the playoffs still sucked, except for Z.

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 10:25 PM CST up reply actions

Wait you mean

our starting pitching wasn't our downfall?

Game 2: Lilly - 3.1 IP, 7 H, 6 ER, 4 BB
Game 3: Hill - 3 IP, 6 H, 3 ER, 2 BB

So our supposed #2 and #3 guys pitched less than four innings and according to you that's NOT the reason we lost??!!

Umm, if we play anybody in the playoffs and we get this production from the starting pitching I promise you we won't we going anywhere. Yes, our hitting didn't show up against the Diamondbacks but 3.1 innings out of your starter is cutting it. If those lines don't open your eyes then I don't know what would.

THE FONZ HAS ARRIVED!

by amaru on Dec 15, 2007 10:43 PM CST up reply actions

Oh no

You have opened my eyes! We need Doug Davis NOW!

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 16, 2007 1:22 AM CST up reply actions

meaningless

Yeah way to prove your point by arguing through reasoning. Why do you post if you don't want to hear other peoples opinions?

My point was that if we want to match up with Peavy/Young, Webb/Haren, Sabathia/Carmona, Beckett/Schilling/Dice-k/Santana?, Weaver/Lackey we're going to need another stud behind Zambrano. Do you ever wonder why the Cubs aren't in the thick of things in October year after year like these other teams?

I, like many other Cubs fans, feel like this is the time for the Cubs to become a great team. Somebody, like Bedard could make the Cubs one of the elite teams in the game. The mentality of the organization, IMO, has started to shift and I hope that landing another top starter is part of that shift.

THE FONZ HAS ARRIVED!

by amaru on Dec 16, 2007 3:30 AM CST up reply actions

Reasoning?

How is your reasoning? People are citing

Peavy did a real great job giving up 6 runs to the Rockies in the playoff game this year. Chris Young had a nice little 4.80 ERA in the second half.

Dan Haren with his fantastic 4.50+ ERAs in the second half the past two years?

Sabathia with his 8.80ERA playoff ERA and Carmona with his spotless 7.20 ERA playoff ERA?

I'll give you that the replies to this thread inside of a thread have been short and not with reason, but you don't exactly provide a ton of reasoning yourself.

"Infact, Lilly and Marquis will probably regress."
Why?! Why does everyone think Marquis will regress? I'm sick of arguing this. Marquis' career ERA is 4.62, his 2007 ERA was 4.63. Why will Lilly regress? You don't provide any reasoning either pal.

Why is Bedard the answer? He was Rich Hill until this year and he even got injured in the last month. Tell me why he has turned the corner. Tell me why Dan Haren is so great. It's not reasoning enough to say, "We got swept by the Diamondbacks so I think we need another pitcher".

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 16, 2007 4:14 AM CST up reply actions

Add people are citing 'shutdown' pitchers

When really there aren't any shutdown pitchers out there.

Also, your 'reasoning' for getting new pitchers is Lilly and Hill in Game 2 and Game 3. If you can be swayed by such a small playoff sample size, then why don't we need a new 3rd baseman since Ramirez went 0-12? Clearly he doesn't have what it takes.

You haven't cited any statistical trends for any pitchers at all. Don't come after me for not having enough reasoning.

The most absurd thing is I have no problem kicking the tires on guys like Blanton and Bedard, but you are FOOLING yourself into thinking they will be the absolute answer. You have a terrible case of finding the grass to be greener.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 16, 2007 4:24 AM CST up reply actions

Where to find a shutdown pitcher

Look for injured guys who have done it in the past and invest in their rehab. Warnining: Requires patience. Example: Bartolo Colon and Freddy Garcia.
Look for players whose stuff is better than their results and ask Larry if he thinks he can help. Warning: Requires even more patience. Examples: Ervin Santana and Daniel Cabrera

All I am saying is give Pie a chance!

by DGU on Dec 16, 2007 7:23 AM CST up reply actions

or ...

take a $3 million flyer on Prior. I know we're all sick of towel drills, but it beats trading for Steve Trachsel.

by elgato on Dec 16, 2007 9:46 AM CST up reply actions

Well...

... why would Prior come back, after rejecting the Cubs' offer (which I thought was pretty generous)?

The only way I see him slinking back to Hendry's office and signing a deal with the Cubs is if the offers he gets from other teams don't meet what he thinks is his due (which appears to be a two-year contract, no option year).

Frankly, I don't think he's going to get anything from anyone else that's better than what the Cubs have on the table. We shall see.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 16, 2007 12:38 PM CST up reply actions

I think the point is that

unless the Cubs are convinced Prior wasn't going to pitch effectively this year, it was a mistake to non-tender him. Even if he does walk next year, 3 mill for 6 quality starts, if four of them come in the playoffs, is worth it given the Cubs budget.

All I am saying is give Pie a chance!

by DGU on Dec 16, 2007 9:36 PM CST up reply actions

right

I was saying that's what we should have done. Sorry if I wasn't clear.

by elgato on Dec 16, 2007 9:46 PM CST up reply actions

I Highly Doubt We Will Get a 1-2...

... but a 2-3 may not be out of the question.

I agree. We likely have enough in house to get to the playoffs. But, as we all know, that's not the goal.

I would venture to say that 2008 is the year to do it.

.
.
.

2009 would be perfect to repeat! ;-)

This is who I think the Cubs #1 should be...

by initram on Dec 15, 2007 10:05 PM CST up reply actions

I am going to run through a wall...

...if people keep talking about "number 1" or "number 5" starters or whatever like those terms have actual meaning.

Seriously. What ERA does one have to have to qualify as a true Number One starter? Do any of you know? Do any of you even think that way?

The Hardball Times has put way too much thought into this, and actually come up with ERAs for Starters 1-5:

#1 3.60
#2 4.14
#3 4.58
#4 5.10
#5 6.24

Now, your Cubs 2007 starting rotation:

Lilly 3.83
Hill 3.92
Marshall 3.92
Zambrano 3.95
Marquis 4.60

Realistically the Cubs had four number two starters and a number three, by that account.

Ok, I know, I know. Off the cuff, I would expect Lilly and Marshall to get a little worse, Marquis to get a lot worse, Hill to get better, and Zambrano to do who-the-hell-knows. But teams who have starting pitchers who pitched better than those guys did last season generally don't give them up, and there aren't any on the free agent market.

If Zambrano and/or Hill goes ahead and takes a step forward next season (and both of them have that potential) you'll get your "number one" starter. I'm much more worried about the back end of the rotation, which is traditionally where problems lie. The Reds had an ace and a number two starter last season; they sucked because they couldn't shore up the back end of the rotation.

I would suggest you learn to truly interrupt all stats before using any selective stats. -- cubswin

by cwyers on Dec 15, 2007 10:13 PM CST up reply actions

#1

Is about numbers, but also attitude.

You're worried about the back end, so am I. What I'm saying, is go get another 1-2-3 starter, that will push everyone back a spot thereby settling the back end of the rotation.

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 10:29 PM CST up reply actions

Who will be our saviour then?

Who are all the No. 1 pitchers in the MLB?

You seem to have all the answers.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 16, 2007 12:17 AM CST up reply actions

Those stats about ERAs of #1-5 starters

Are weighted toward the high eras. In other words, there are more crappy pitchers than good ones, and they inflate the ERA numbers, especially in the back end.

And, no, there's not much 1-2-3 pitchers out there, which is why we need to move now, and move on bedard of Blanton in trades.

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 10:34 PM CST up reply actions

Yes, but,

those crappy pitchers actually pitched. Their crappiness hurt their teams.

Or to put it another way, good starting pitching is VERY DIFFICULT to find.

visiting A's fan.

by rfloh @ Bleed Cubbie Blue on Dec 17, 2007 2:41 AM CST up reply actions

You are right

I wish we had Ubaldo Jiminez, Curt Schilling, Kenny Rogers, Jeff Weaver or other great No. 2 pitchers of previous World Series.

I have seen the error of my ways.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 15, 2007 10:01 PM CST up reply actions

All those stats about what a #1-5 ERAs

Are weighted toward the high eras. In other words, there are more crappy pitchers than good ones, and they inflate the era numbers.

Look, we need pitching, not a faster Mark DeRosa, period.

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 10:31 PM CST up reply actions

actually

we probably need both.

by elgato on Dec 16, 2007 9:39 AM CST up reply actions

Knock out starters is the key here

you said it the right way,we need two guys in a 5 game series that can keep opponents off the bases and if they get a guy on, strikout the rest. A nasty twosome that will get you in the 7th or 8th inning with a shutout (or at least only one run). We don't have that, I don't trust Z, Hill or Lilly to be the one. We will face that type of pitching from another playoff team and we have to counter. Beddard seems to me like the best available. If we were really serious about the world series, like the Yankess are serious, Santana would be our target.

This is only the beginning....Lou Pinella end of '07 season and Chicago Transit Authority (the band when they were really good).

by mrcubsfan on Dec 16, 2007 9:49 AM CST up reply actions

Not trusting Z, Lilly, or Hill

But trusting Peavy, Carmona, and Sabathia this year would have actually been worse.

Do you not trust Marmol too? I mean, it was he who gave up the HR in Game 1. What about Ramirez, Lee, or Soriano with no RBIs in the entire series? Zambrano was the only star who did his job.

Your feeling just comes from the gut and has litte going for it in reality.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 16, 2007 11:22 AM CST up reply actions

My gut

has had a lot of$6 beer at Wrigley over the past 25 years so that also means nothing. If we don't hit, we don't win, we saw that this year. In those type of games it's easier to try to get that one or two runs across than four or five. That is what good pitching will bring, a chance to win close games. My gut also says that looking at playoff winning teams the winning pitchers are shutting down opponents and keeping them off the bases. If Z pitches like I've seen him at his best, we win; if he pitches like he did too many times last year, we lose. Can't trust him. Hill and Lilly could be a playoff winner, but I just don't have confidence in either to go out and shut another playoff team completely out. If we score 5 runs, maybe, but that's not what we're looking at here in this discussion. We want to try to insure a chance to win and the best way to do that is with stoppers going to the mound as many times as possible. I would like another starting pitcher to go #1 or #2 in a short series. BTW, I think Marmol learned something and will be OK next time he is in that situation. Last year was his first time in the playoffs.

This is only the beginning....Lou Pinella end of '07 season and Chicago Transit Authority (the band when they were really good).

by mrcubsfan on Dec 17, 2007 12:10 PM CST up reply actions

It was also Rich Hill and Ted Lilly's first

time in the playoffs, although Lilly is a veteran (he just played for the blue jays). Why won't you apply the same line of thinking to them?

by philadelphiacub on Dec 17, 2007 12:49 PM CST up reply actions

It's okay to admit you are wrong

Citing Marmol will learn but Hill and Lilly won't just makes you look foolish.

What stopper did you have in mind for the Cubs to pick up?

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 17, 2007 1:42 PM CST up reply actions

Playoffs!! Don't talk about playoffs!!

This is the whole problem. The cubs NEED one more shut down starter (assuming Z gets back to form). Period. There is NO WAY we can compete in the playoffs with some of these 1-2 punches like Webb/Haren, Lackey/Escobar, Beckett/Schilling (and I only hope that Santana's name is not in there soon) Carmona/Sabathia and so on. We will need to beat one of these shut down duos, and I have confidence Z, when on his game, can take down anybody. But from then on, the cubs are screwed. If we get Bedard, the whole game changes. He can go straight up with anyone and beat them. If we have to depend on Ted Lilly to take down DanHaren/Schilling/Sabathia or an elite pitcher in the playoffs next year, we are absolutely doomed.

by WUSTLCubsFan on Dec 16, 2007 12:21 AM CST reply actions

Haren

This Haren 'shutdown' guy, are you confusing him with Dan Haren the guy who had a 4.15 ERA, 1.50 WHIP, and .298 BAA after the All-Star Break in 2007 and 4.91 ERA, 1.31 WHIP, .280 BAA in 2006?

Haren is good, but he is hardly 'shutdown'.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 16, 2007 1:21 AM CST up reply actions

The other thing to mention about Haren...

...is that Oakland's park effect goes a long way towards offsetting the league difference for starting pitching. You cannot simply assume that Haren's ERA will drop coming to the NL -- even assuming no change in true talent level OR batting average on balls in play. That goes double if Wrigley happens to be a hitter's park again next season.

I would suggest you learn to truly interrupt all stats before using any selective stats. -- cubswin

by cwyers on Dec 16, 2007 1:34 AM CST up reply actions

thank you

people around here are talking about haren like johan santana just came to the nl, the guys good, but his era is deceptive. twenty bucks his era goes up this year.

Kevin Hart Watch: IP: 11 K: 13 ERA: 0.82 WHIP: 1.00 K/BB: 3.25 a productive farm system is a wonderful thing.

by kylejo on Dec 16, 2007 9:18 PM CST up reply actions

His ERA is certain to go up

Oakland is a pretty extreme pitcher's park, Arizona an extreme hitter's park.

ERA+, park adjusted ERA, is a far better tool than ERA.

visiting A's fan.

by rfloh @ Bleed Cubbie Blue on Dec 17, 2007 2:44 AM CST up reply actions

well...

Sure, Haren didn't have the greatest second half, but, he is moving to the NL where his era will definitely be lower and into the prime of his career. However, you are missing my point, I don't trust Ted Lilly to take down a number 2 starter, like the other pitchers above I mentioned, in a playoff game.

by WUSTLCubsFan on Dec 16, 2007 1:35 AM CST reply actions

I don't think he's missing your point...

...so much as he is pointing out that he thinks your trust may be misplaced.

And -- see above -- the Colliseum offsets a lot of the advantage a pitcher might expect in coming over to the NL.

I would suggest you learn to truly interrupt all stats before using any selective stats. -- cubswin

by cwyers on Dec 16, 2007 1:39 AM CST up reply actions

Typical Cubbie fan attitude...

..take a good pitcher and nit pick what you can so as to try and fit to your opinon that the Cubs are fine and that their rotation is just fine and dandy the way it is and hey, we signed Fukudome, everything's cool.

I thought as Cub fans we were over that? I thought the conscience of content with mediocrity was a thing of the past?

Yet here have we it at work again and someone saying that the Cubs certainly don't need to improve. God forbid they try to improve or make a trade for another starter, solidifying their rotation in the process. I know if the Cubs got Haren, you wouldn't be pulling for stats like "park factor". The Cubs could've easily matched what the DBacks gave up for Haren. DBacks knew the importance of a pitcher of Haren's caliber, starting after Webb every 5 days. You don't see their fans crying about all these "great" prospects they gave up. Because they know that Haren makes them a better team and those prospects are just that, prospects.

If you're going to pick and choose what stats you can to support your POV, make sure you mention stats like Rich Hill haveing a 4.06 ERA after the all star break, instead of Haren's "park factor" or his 2nd half. Mention Hill getting absolutely shelled in the playoffs and in the process looking like he needed to be wearing diapers, cuz he looked so scared.

Bottomline is Rich Haren had a 3.09 ERA in the AL league and I would've been damn appreciative and genuinely thrilled about the Cubs in 2008, if the Cubs would've made the deal to acquire him.

But instead I'm supposedly supposed to be excited about Ted Lilly and Rich Hill?? Well, I'm not.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. ` Adam Savage Mythbusters

by lemon20pie on Dec 16, 2007 2:29 AM CST up reply actions

Ah the irony

Have you thought about why the price for Haren was so relatively low? Obviously not!

http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=3155987&name=law_keith&action=login&a ppRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fespn%2fblog%2findex%3fentryID%3d3155987%26name%3dlaw_k eith
From Keith Law:

"Haren is coming off of a career year that saw him start the All-Star Game for the American League with a 2.30 ERA up to that point, but after the break he was more like he'd been in the previous two years, a very durable strike-thrower with a three-pitch arsenal but no knockout pitch. His four-seamer is 89-93 mph with just a little arm-side run, but he commands it well. His best secondary pitch is his splitter, 82-85 mph with good bottom, and it's particularly effective against left-handed pitchers, which is important for Haren because he doesn't pitch well to his glove side. His curveball, 78-81 mph, is fringe-average with a somewhat soft break. He has good tempo and pounds the strike zone, and he's been very durable, making every start since he was traded to Oakland in the Mark Mulder heist before the 2005 season."

So Haren has no plus pitch. Do you realize how much of a problem that is? If not, you have some reading to do. No one is saying the Cubs couldn't use Haren in the rotation. What I am saying is the difference between Haren, Hill and Lilly is minimal if it's even there. To pretend like Haren is the answer is foolish and to not think about why his price was 'so low' is naive.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 16, 2007 2:47 AM CST up reply actions

Agree...

...but its DAN Haren not Rich Harden

by WUSTLCubsFan on Dec 16, 2007 3:19 AM CST up reply actions

You should use ERA+

it's park adjusted and league adjusted.

Haren's ERA+ last 3 years, from 2005: 117, 108, 137. 100 is average. Above 100 is above average, below 100 is below average; the higher the better. A 137 ERA+ means that Haren's park adjusted ERA in 2007 was 37 percent better than league average.

Rich Hill, last 2 years: 111, 119.

visiting A's fan.

by rfloh @ Bleed Cubbie Blue on Dec 17, 2007 2:48 AM CST up reply actions

I am not missing your point at all

I'm saying you have no reason to trust Haren more than Lilly. Right now it seems to be all in your gut when you should be thinking with your head.

Haren has had two very domestic second halves. I don't know if you realize this, but that's when the playoffs are. Joking aside, I would perhaps agree with you if you could provide some concrete information as opposed to just dumping on Lilly.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 16, 2007 2:34 AM CST up reply actions

I'm not dumping on Lilly

I'm just being realistic with my outlook of him and that is, he is a solid #3 and if the Cubs make the playoffs and he's starting game 2, they're in trouble. If he's starting in game 3, I like the Cubs chances.

If you want anymore concrete evidence, take a look at his stats in Game 2 of the playoffs last year, when he pitched poorly and gave his team no chance to win. If you remember they tried getting into the game only for him to let it get out of hand. You keep bringing up the Cubs terrible offensive stats and blaming the playoff debacle on the offense, but coincidentally forgetting how poorly your 2 boys Lilly and Hill pitched.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. ` Adam Savage Mythbusters

by lemon20pie on Dec 16, 2007 2:45 AM CST up reply actions

So you would feel better with Sabathia/Carmona?

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 16, 2007 2:54 AM CST up reply actions

You really don't understand

I don't want to acquire Haren, (it would be nice, but that WAS NOT what I was talking about). I want a better 2 starter because Ted Lilly is going to have to take down an ace of another team, and if you don't consider Haren an ace (he only started the all star game for the AL, thats pretty good), fine with me. However, Carmona/Schilling/Escobar are all the kind of ACES that Lilly will have to take down in the playoffs, and I would much rather have Bedard on the mound facing them than Lilly. Forget I even mentioned Dan Haren because it is honestly irrelevent.

by WUSTLCubsFan on Dec 16, 2007 12:50 PM CST up reply actions

Ted Lilly

The Blue Jays stadium is no hitters park, but when Lilly came to Wrigley his ERA went down....likely due to the NL factor. Also, Haren's road last season was 3.25. That seems pretty good to me.

by WUSTLCubsFan on Dec 16, 2007 1:40 AM CST reply actions

Guzman?

why not give guzman a shot instead of marquis?

by cubz409 on Dec 16, 2007 3:17 PM CST reply actions

Because...

... he had Tommy John surgery and isn't likely to even pick up a baseball until midseason 2008.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 16, 2007 3:23 PM CST up reply actions

ok...

agree totally with amaru!we should absolutely get a top tier pitcher.we have improved our everyday lineup now let's get another starter and win this thing!!NOW!a guy who has been around for awhile i think would be wise!not someone who needs "time".personally,i desire to be better than last year not the same!!

by cubz409 on Dec 16, 2007 9:46 PM CST reply actions

Glad to see many comments on the rotation

The rotation as built will not win the WS. I cringe every time I think either/both Dempster and Marquis will be in the rotation. I'm also not sold that Lilly is anything more than a #3 or #4.

Hill, Z and Lilly are it for now. With that, here's a comparison of the 1yr and 3yr numbers for Bedard, Blanton and Hill. Of course not all the 3yr numbers for Hill are fair (like W/L and ERA) but you get the point.

Hope these numbers line up on the post.

Bedard 07
Overall ERA W L SV SVO G GS CG IP H R ER HR BB SO AVG

3.17 13 5 0 0 28 28 1 182.0 141 66 64 19 57 221 .212

Blanton 07
Overall ERA W L SV SVO G GS CG IP H R ER HR BB SO AVG

3.95 14 10 0 0 34 34 3 230.0 240 106 101 16 40 140 .269

Hill 07
Overall ERA W L SV SVO G GS CG IP H R ER HR BB SO AVG

3.92 11 8 0 0 32 32 0 195.0 170 89 85 27 63 183 .235

Bedard 05-07
Overall ERA W L SV SVO G GS CG IP H R ER HR BB SO AVG

3.62 34 24 0 0 85 85 1 520.0 476 224 209 45 183 517 .243

Blanton 05-07
Overall ERA W L SV SVO G GS CG IP H R ER HR BB SO AVG

4.09 42 34 0 0 99 98 6 625.2 659 303 284 56 165 363 .271

Hill 05-07
Overall ERA W L SV SVO G GS CG IP H R ER HR BB SO AVG

4.39 17 17 0 0 59 52 2 318.0 278 164 155 46 119 294 .235

Like I mentioned in other diaries about Bedard, I would be willing to give up some youngsters like Gallagher, Colvin, Pie, Fontenot, Petrick and Hart to land Blanton. How many of them would depend on what Beane is going to ask. The price won't be as high as Haren and could also be less than Bedard; though if that were part of a Roberts deal, who knows.

Our grandparents used to say, "I hope the Cubs win the Series before I die". Now the teenagers are saying it.

by blackhawk24 on Dec 17, 2007 7:56 AM CST reply actions