Peter Gammons on Marmol pitching in DR

by KButler on Jan 24, 2009 2:43 PM CST

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=3857199&name=gammons_peter

Just wanted to see what everyones thoughts were on this article about Marmol not only pitching the DR getting ready for the WBC. Personally, I like the WBC but selfishly would like a total of 0 Cubs players, especially pitchers, participating in the event. I understand that position players are more likely to get hurt because they are playing more, but the thought of Marmol pitching from now until at least October of next year is pretty troubling. Especially with how much Lou used him last year and will probably use him this year. Even if he is the closer, I would expect him to frequent those 4 out saves that we often see by certain closers. Anyways, just a little non-Peavy, non TR/tribune company, talk for a cold saturday in Chi.

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 34 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I didnt realize that Gammons

also specualted that the Cubs will miss Marquis more than we thought because of his reliability. (I thought Marquis was certainly one of the best 5th starters in league, but it isn’t that difficult to find a “is what he is” kind of pitcher such as Garland)

as well as Harden, stating that the Cubs will be happy with only 15-20 starts. Seems rather low but probably realistic. I know that his injury has been understated, but I was not aware that he had to make a decision between surgery and rehab.

by KButler on Jan 24, 2009 2:49 PM CST reply actions

We will miss Marquis

but we needed to dump his salary.

"Pounding sand since 1982...."

by cubswynn on Jan 24, 2009 3:14 PM CST up reply actions

I'm probably the minority in this...

I don’t mind the moves we’ve made this offseason, but I tend to think that we’ve essentially made moves because we’ve convinced ourselves that change is always an improvement.

Hence our “need” to move Marquis…It wouldn’t surprise me if we regret it though. (Admittedly, Marquis’ pay was high for a #5 though…)

by CubsWin!Oregon on Jan 24, 2009 4:17 PM CST up reply actions

To me the moves are all budget and habit driven...

Budget dictates that the total payroll may limit signings, but if were that budget conscious then why pay Dempster for a season he won’t repeat and keep paying over and over again for it? Because Hendry has a habit of paying for past performance…But then why not keep Wood for at least one year? Because Lou wants to use Marmol and Lou wants us to get more left handed…so we dump salary to add salary that is left handed.

Is this team better? pitching wise I’d say no. Hitting wise it could be if Bradley acts professionally and Fukudome and Lee bounce back.

Now, back to Marmol pitching in the Dr and the WBC, I don’t like it. He’s been ridden hard by Lou and he’s had some real slumps from over use. These are exhibitions and the Cubs, to the extent that they can contractually, should prevent his participation. The arm needs to be saved for Lou to destroy it.

by DudeVf11 on Jan 24, 2009 4:29 PM CST up reply actions

But we only dumped half

and got a likely useless player we have to give the other half to. I would rather have kept him.

"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry

by Doggie Stalker on Jan 24, 2009 5:18 PM CST up reply actions

i believe that the cubs are only paying

approximately 850k of his contract, leaving the other 8 million to the rockies.

There's nothing wrong with this team that more pitching, more fielding and more hitting couldn't help......"--Bill Buckner

by laidbackliam on Jan 24, 2009 8:02 PM CST up reply actions

She's talking about Vizcaino's salary

which is 4 or 5 million to a guy the Cubs didn’t really need/want.

"Who's Bob Brenly? The guy that used to be the manager for Arizona?" ~ Alfonso Guilleard Soriano

by JohnM on Jan 25, 2009 4:12 AM CST up reply actions

I disagree.. I think we needed to get rid of Marquis and his salary

because we have a ton of starters and not enough spots. Obviously we have 4 spots set in stone with Zambrano, Dempster, Lilly, Harden (assuming his health). So we are going to have 1 spot open and we have guys like Samardzija, Marshall, and Gaudin who could all start so we have a few extra guys who could start.

And thats assuming we dont sign anybody or trade for ah hem, Peavy. But thats a whole nother discusion.

by dlee25 on Jan 24, 2009 5:29 PM CST up reply actions

We Won't Miss Marquis...

… if Harden becomes our #5 – even if he only makes 25 starts at $7M.

My 2008 Christmas wish list includes this jersey. In Hendry We Trust! Current 2009 payroll.

by initram on Jan 24, 2009 8:05 PM CST up reply actions

We won't miss Marquis

Because we will still add another SP by opening day. That could be Peavy, or guys like Odalis Perez, Jon Garland, Randy Wolf or Braden Looper.

by cubsfan25 on Jan 24, 2009 4:48 PM CST up reply actions

I can't see the Cubs...

… adding Perez, Wolf or Looper. I wouldn’t mind Garland, but he might cost as much as Marquis did, which would negate the point.

Peavy? Who knows? It’s too early to tell if the sale to Ricketts will allow the Cubs to do this before Opening Day.

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

by Al Yellon on Jan 24, 2009 5:49 PM CST up reply actions

I wouldn't mind Wolf or Perez

and I feel both would be an upgrade over Marquis. But I have to agree that I don’t see the Cubs offering contracts to any of them. Garland would be too pricy for me and I feel like he’s a downgrade from Marquis by about .4 of an ERA. He has been the AL though, but still.

I always ask myself, why is it guys like Marquis that stay healthy and consistently give you 200 innings of 4.5eras and the guys like Harden give you 100 innings of 2.0era….ce la vie

by KButler on Jan 24, 2009 6:30 PM CST up reply actions

I'll let you kow what I think

In Oct/Nov

If you could choose one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.

by Clutche on Jan 24, 2009 3:03 PM CST reply actions

They play all winter long anyway

In mexico, DR, venezula etc…..the WBC is no bigger deal that that, people are over reacting

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Jan 24, 2009 3:33 PM CST reply actions

I liked Marquis

but the salary had to go. I think the Cubs will add a arm, not Perez or Garland.
Marmol throwing in the WBC, not much we can do. Who knows Spellcheck or Gregg will get some closing shots I am sure as the season moves along.

"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"

by Grockcubs on Jan 24, 2009 6:43 PM CST reply actions

Is there an arm you can add for 5 million for one year ?

That is what we saved by trading/dumping Marquis. Short of a Peavy miracle I expect an in house solution. As I have mentioned before I think the Cubs will miss Marquis on the bench especially given the way Lou goes through it.

"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry

by Doggie Stalker on Jan 24, 2009 7:43 PM CST up reply actions

Who knows...

… maybe someone like Mitch Atkins will impress in spring training. The brass seems to like him.

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

by Al Yellon on Jan 24, 2009 7:49 PM CST up reply actions

Well, an in house solution is almost always preferable to an outhouse solution... ;-)

Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."

by ballhawk on Jan 24, 2009 7:50 PM CST up reply actions

Well there was that time Kingman's errant throw

( which I know is redundant ) went in the dugout and NEVER came out. It had gone into a port o potty.

"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry

by Doggie Stalker on Jan 24, 2009 8:09 PM CST up reply actions

The marginal gain of switching to Marshall as our 5th starter

Is worth more than $5M.

by Wreckard on Jan 25, 2009 9:34 AM CST up reply actions

the more you pitch

the more arm strength you gain. no way around it. now if he’s out there pitching 3 innings everyday that’d be something to worry about, but come on.

bring up felix.

by kylejo on Jan 24, 2009 6:58 PM CST reply actions

Cubs WILL miss Marquis

Marquis was dumped in order to shave payroll. That’s understandable given the offseason objectives of the Cubs to get better in other areas. But bottom line the Cubs will miss the fact that he took the ball every 5th day and gave this team innings. Most of those innings being good innings. I’m not sold on Sean Marshall replacing Marquis one bit. The other concern is having the depth available to weather any injury storm within the rotation and to handle the fact that Rich Harden is unlikely to go more than 22 or so starts given his history.

by BLou on Jan 24, 2009 10:38 PM CST reply actions

Most of his innings good innings???

That’s a stretch considering he averaged giving up a run more than half of his innings.

by thehat34 on Jan 25, 2009 6:35 AM CST reply actions

BLou has spoken..

its official, apparentley we WILL mis Marquis. I respectfully disagree. Half the pitchers in the league could have done what Marquis did, and at HALF the price

"The more i practice, the luckier i seem to get" -Yogi Berra

by ChiCubsFever on Jan 25, 2009 11:16 AM CST reply actions

I disagree.

Maybe the price was too steep, but take a look at the fifth starters for all other teams. Marquis did better than the overwhelming majority of them.

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

by Al Yellon on Jan 25, 2009 1:56 PM CST up reply actions

I've never understood that argument

Who cares what crap other people are trotting out there every 5th day?

Marquis isn’t a good pitcher. If you can find a better pitcher to trot out there (say, Sean Marshall, or better yet Jake Peavy) then you’re even better off.

Sure you lose Marshall in the pen, but he’s more valuable to us in the rotation (since he’ll get more innings that way).

by Wreckard on Jan 26, 2009 7:51 AM CST up reply actions

Marquis did the job he was asked to do...

… throw 5 or 6 decent innings and keep his team in the game.

The Jake Peavy argument isn’t relevant, because Peavy isn’t a “fifth starter”. It IS relevant to compare him to other fifth starters.

As far as Marshall is concerned, the concern about him is that he doesn’t have the stamina to be a fulltime starter. Thus putting him in the rotation fulltime and giving him more innings — last year — might have been counterproductive.

Whether he can handle such a workload is still not proven.

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

by Al Yellon on Jan 26, 2009 8:47 AM CST up reply actions

Peavy is relevant if the Marquis move enables the Cubs to trade for him

The whole numbered starters thing is kind of silly. If you get rid of Marquis and add Peavy to the rotation, it really doesn’t matter what “number” Peavy gets – he’s taking starts that would have been Marquis’. It’s kind of irrelevant that Harden gets arbitrarily numbered the 5th starter (other than the fact that he’ll be skipped more often than the other pitchers).

The point is: you want to put the 5 best starters you can in the rotation – it doesn’t really matter whether they fit the mold of a typical “#1 starter” or “#5 starter”. If you can afford to, why not have 5 “top of the rotation” kind of guys in your rotation, whatever that means?

Marquis is so bad, and Marshall has been so good, that there’s no reason to believe there won’t be a net improvement there. Marshall hasn’t been able to go deep into games, but neither does Marquis so that’s not really relevant.

by Wreckard on Jan 26, 2009 10:16 AM CST up reply actions