GO
Cubs in '10
CurtOne - Jan 1, 2010 10:28 am
Edited by Dave23 Jan 14, 2010 10:19 am
keepergoin
(1580 previous messages)DaveP
- Mar 11, 2010 12:41 pm (#1581 of 1592)
The only proven vets that we could get right now would be those that have "proven" to be mediocre.
Garland for Karchner.
Lohse for Aguilera?
Ceda for Grege.
Even if they had been as good as they had been in the past, they would have been mediocre.
Reb66
- Mar 11, 2010 1:06 pm (#1582 of 1592)
This is an interesting group of young bullpen arms---probably a better group than we've seen here in some time. They will all do whatever they're going to do. And, in principle, I have no problem in having a slot(s) for somebody who rises to the top.
You can do that, fine, but from my perspective it's still very important to have a legit middle guy with a track record for late inning work going into the season.
It scares me to see a 26 year old rookie with less than 20 major league innings as the primary RH setup guy going into the season---a guy who didn't pitch out of the bullpen once in AAA last season and wasn't always stellar at Iowa either.
And, it's not that Cubs have a knockout late inning guy from the lefty side either. Grabow is fine, but anybody really excited about him?
Some of the positive feelings about the bullpen here also seem to be based on the notion that the losing starting pitcher candidates will be assets in the bullpen. Other than Marshall, I don't see it.
I'm guessing that Gorzelanny and Silva would be worthless out of the bullpen and if Samardjiza is good this season, he'll be in the rotation. If he's not good, he won't be all that good in the bullpen either.
And, in any case, starting pitchers can and do get hurt and you may need the above as starters.
It is fair to ask, well, what will Capps, Park, etc do elsewhere? (Capps is already scaring the Nats with his early spring work). But, it is Hendry running the Cubs---not any of us--and if the bullpen sucks, he's the one to blame for the inaction. He has a staff, inside info, what have you.
In the end, I fully expect Hendry to trade for somebody before the season starts. I think he could have got a better deal by either signing a free agent by now or having made a trade by now. Very tough to make a good trade at this point with relievers going down with injuries on other clubs and everybody knowing you're a little desperate to deal.
harrylives - Mar 11, 2010 1:08 pm (#1583 of 1592)
Garland starting today against the Cubs. Odd that Dave would bring it up today.
- Mar 11, 2010 2:02 pm (#1584 of 1592)
Let me just state, for the record, I'm disappointed no one ran with that superb joke about Diamond.
I considered using the "downhill" angle also, but would have had to actually look up his stats, and was too lazy!
- Mar 11, 2010 2:07 pm (#1585 of 1592)
It is fair to ask, well, what will Capps, Park, etc do elsewhere? (Capps is already scaring the Nats with his early spring work). But, it is Hendry running the Cubs---not any of us--and if the bullpen sucks, he's the one to blame for the inaction. He has a staff, inside info, what have you.
And it is fair to assume that his staff, inside info, what have you has been telling him that he has a better chance of picking up a veteran sometime later this spring. FWIW, that was being floated out there as far back as December.
In the end, I fully expect Hendry to trade for somebody before the season starts. I think he could have got a better deal by either signing a free agent by now or having made a trade by now.
Teams release veterans for budget purposes during spring all the time. Right before releasing them they look around for a decent trade partner looking to get some B prospect somewhere. In this type of economy you generally find deals like that or guys after they get cut (Reed Johnson) or free agent guys who don't have a team (as I said, Cashman expected to be able to get Park that way this year).
Very tough to make a good trade at this point with relievers going down with injuries on other clubs and everybody knowing you're a little desperate to deal.
As has been said here many times, it doesn't matter how hungry I am. If there is only one buyer for the hotdog the advantage goes to the buyer. If there are two buyers for the hotdog then the price war is on. If there is a hamburger for sale as well then the buyers have options. The Cubs "hunger" is of no consequence unless there is a bidding war.
Reb66
- Mar 11, 2010 2:31 pm (#1586 of 1592)
>(Reed Johnson)<<
It is a lot easier to find a utility OFer like Reed Johnson at the end of spring than it is to find a good dumped reliever.
The closest guy last year may have been Chad Gaudin. There are some unsigned guys of that ilk out there right now. Not what I'm talking about.
Cubs don't need just another body in the bullpen. We have lots of candidates now.
The most intriguing guy who has been mentioned in the media is Gregerson with the Padres. But, Pads have no need at all to trade him, so it would cost a lot to get him. Might be worth it. I would be all for going after him.
>The Cubs "hunger" is of no consequence unless there is a bidding war.<<
Is there really any doubt that there will be strong competition for any good relievers that come on to the market this spring? That is a no-brainer.
brjones - Mar 11, 2010 2:52 pm (#1587 of 1592)
I have no problem going after Jason Frasor pretty hard. I wouldn't give up a ton for him, but a guy with a career 3.78 ERA and 1.28 WHIP while playing in the AL East is going to be a very good pitcher if he moves to the NL Central.
Jes Beard
- Mar 11, 2010 2:57 pm (#1588 of 1592)
First, usage will be a meritocracy. When Heilman or Howry are intended veterans tabbed in winter as primary setup guys, Lou will ride with them through quite a few ineffective appearances.
This is very important, and likely to result in far better appearances from the pen than a meaningful committment of budget or bodies to to get a "proven vet" who would still be quite likely to fail, but with the committment made for him still get trotted out there.
Reb66
- Mar 11, 2010 3:02 pm (#1589 of 1592)
>a "proven vet" who would still be quite likely to fail<<
Put me down against acquring that guy who is quite likely to fail.
Put me down in the column for the guy who figures to be a success.
DaveP
- Mar 11, 2010 4:50 pm (#1590 of 1592)
The most intriguing guy who has been mentioned in the media is Gregerson with the Padres. But, Pads have no need at all to trade him, so it would cost a lot to get him.
According to the Padres announcers today, the Padres do not want to trade Gregorson, and the bidding by the Cubs would have to start with Vitters and Castro, and go from there.
Jes Beard
- Mar 11, 2010 5:09 pm (#1591 of 1592)
Put me down in the column for the guy who figures to be a success
Reb, that is just it, there are VERY few "proven vets" who are not pretty likely to fail, and those would be extremely expensive.
Who should the Cubs have gotten?
Park? I would bet he fails. The other guy you mentioned? I would be he fails.
- Mar 11, 2010 6:52 pm (#1592 of 1592)
It is a lot easier to find a utility OFer like Reed Johnson at the end of spring than it is to find a good dumped reliever.
...Not what I'm talking about.
Reb, you were talking about:
Both of those guys are "quite likely to fail."
Cubs in '10