|
Rich Hill To The O's?
|
01-31-2009, 08:00 PM
I'm fine with Marshall, who i'm sure will be solid. But with Samardzija, and even Heilman to an extent, there's the chance - just a small chance - they could be spectacular.
However they could also both do a fine job in relief, which I don't think is Marshall's forte so much (as much)... so...
01-31-2009, 08:01 PM
Of course they could all also be shit! But at least then we will have saved the money to go and get X-Y-Z at the deadline.
01-31-2009, 08:28 PM
<!--quoteo(post=15058:date=Jan 31 2009, 05:00 PM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Jan 31 2009, 05:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=15057:date=Jan 31 2009, 05:54 PM:name=Brock)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brock @ Jan 31 2009, 05:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->For me, unless we somehow end up with Peavy, Marshall has earned his spot in the starting rotation. He's done everything he's been asked to do and has done it successfully, with ERAs under 4 the last 2 seasons. The whole "let them battle it out in Spring Training" idea is generally pretty retarded if you ask me. I think we know what we have in Marshall by now, and a limited # of innings in Spring Training shouldn't really change anything.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree, unless Marshall's stuff looks like shit in ST, and someone else is missing every bat. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm thinking the Heilman deal was made to enable Marshall to be the 5th with Heilman going into Marshall's swigman role.
01-31-2009, 08:37 PM
<!--quoteo(post=15083:date=Jan 31 2009, 07:28 PM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jan 31 2009, 07:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=15058:date=Jan 31 2009, 05:00 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Jan 31 2009, 05:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=15057:date=Jan 31 2009, 05:54 PM:name=Brock)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brock @ Jan 31 2009, 05:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->For me, unless we somehow end up with Peavy, Marshall has earned his spot in the starting rotation. He's done everything he's been asked to do and has done it successfully, with ERAs under 4 the last 2 seasons. The whole "let them battle it out in Spring Training" idea is generally pretty retarded if you ask me. I think we know what we have in Marshall by now, and a limited # of innings in Spring Training shouldn't really change anything.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree, unless Marshall's stuff looks like shit in ST, and someone else is missing every bat. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm thinking the Heilman deal was made to enable Marshall to be the 5th with Heilman going into Marshall's swigman role. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't know that it had quite that level of purpose - I assume it was just more depth, and a guy that Hendry hearts. I hope it plays out that way, though.
Cubs News and Rumors at Bleacher Nation.
01-31-2009, 08:45 PM
Marshall's going to get his starts regardless with Harden in the rotation. What worries me about having him as an official part of your rotation is that he usually goes no more than 5-6 innings a start. That's the same with Harden. So then you're putting pressure on your other starters and the bullpen to carry the load. If you don't buy into the Marshall "tiring" stuff, look at these stats:
Innings 1-3: 655 PA, 17 HR, 59 BB, 106 K, .260 AVG, .333 OBP, .405 SLG, .738 OPS Innings 4-6: 509 PA, 21 HR, 52 BB, 73 K, .267 AVG, .350 OBP, .466 SLG, .816 OPS Times Facing Batter In Game: 1st Time: 591 PA, 18 HR, 48 BB, 104 K, .232 AVG, .301 OBP, .384 SLG, .685 OPS 2nd Time: 435 PA, 12 HR, 41 BB, 73 K, .269 AVG, .343 OBP, .431 SLG, .773 OPS 3rd Time: 262 PA, 12 HR, 28 BB, 25 K, .327 AVG, .409 OBP, .549 SLG, .958 OPS Pretty much every pitcher's numbers are going to get worse as the game goes on but those numbers are alarming. I love Sean Marshall and certainly won't complain if he's our "#5", but I think we're better off with him in the swing role.
@TheBlogfines
02-02-2009, 12:44 PM
<!--quoteo(post=15413:date=Feb 2 2009, 10:43 AM:name=Clapp)-->QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 2 2009, 10:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->It's a done deal.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
what are the details?
Wang.
02-02-2009, 12:45 PM
<!--quoteo(post=15414:date=Feb 2 2009, 09:44 AM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Feb 2 2009, 09:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=15413:date=Feb 2 2009, 10:43 AM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 2 2009, 10:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->It's a done deal.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
what are the details? <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Hill for a PTBNL
@TheBlogfines
02-02-2009, 12:46 PM
I've gotta say, I'm finally getting a little bit happy about Cubs baseball after getting rid of Pie, Cedeno, and Hill.
@TheBlogfines
02-02-2009, 12:51 PM
<!--quoteo(post=15417:date=Feb 2 2009, 10:46 AM:name=Clapp)-->QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 2 2009, 10:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I've gotta say, I'm finally getting a little bit happy about Cubs baseball after getting rid of Pie, Cedeno, and Hill.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img] It's too bad we didn't get rid of them a year or two ago. We might've gotten something worthwhile in return. 
02-02-2009, 01:01 PM
<!--quoteo(post=15419:date=Feb 2 2009, 10:51 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Feb 2 2009, 10:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=15417:date=Feb 2 2009, 10:46 AM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 2 2009, 10:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I've gotta say, I'm finally getting a little bit happy about Cubs baseball after getting rid of Pie, Cedeno, and Hill.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img] It's too bad we didn't get rid of them a year or two ago. We might've gotten something worthwhile in return. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yeah, that could have been a blockbuster a couple of years ago. Now I hope they all suck forever. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
