Z to the Pen

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=96811:date=May 18 2010, 06:04 PM:name=funkster)-->QUOTE (funkster @ May 18 2010, 06:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->It's about time they corrected this massive fuck up. This will definitely go down as one of the dumbest Cub moves.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


I keep hearing people say this. Why was it such a fuck up? The rotation was (and still is) completely fine. There was a grand total of ONE bad start by Gorz and Silva the entire time Z was in the pen, and Z was actually the one to lose that game. The ONLY thing that went wrong was the 8th inning hasn't been fixed. In other words, we are no worse off than before. So what was the fuck up?

The Cubs tried an unusual fix for getting through the 8th inning. It didn't work, and as soon as that was evident, they moved Z back to the rotation, just like I said they would do.

Explain the massive fuck up to me.


edit: actually 2 bad outings, but the Cubs won Silva's bad start.

[funkster]

Because he's much more valuable as a starter to your organization then as a reliever. Even if he was good in the 8th inning he's still more valuable pitching 200+ innings a season. That's why. And tbh, I know the numbers don't show it, I don't think Gorzelanny has been all that great. I know Z has looked bad, but I think he's a better option than Gorzelanny.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=96882:date=May 18 2010, 09:50 PM:name=funkster)-->QUOTE (funkster @ May 18 2010, 09:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Because he's much more valuable as a starter to your organization then as a reliever. Even if he was good in the 8th inning he's still more valuable pitching 200+ innings a season. That's why. And tbh, I know the numbers don't show it, I don't think Gorzelanny has been all that great. I know Z has looked bad, but I think he's a better option than Gorzelanny.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Assuming everything you just said is 100 percent, it still doesn't matter. None of it backs up the claim that this move was a massive fuckup. I will grant you that the move didn't work, but that in and of itself doesn't make it a massive fuckup.

More importantly, none of what you said changes the fact that Gorzelanny isn't going to take 200 innings away from Z. He had almost NO chance of doing that. The ONLY way he does that is if both he and Z were effective. He was effective, Z was not. Z will now get his inning back. IF the Cubs had left Gorzy in the rotation, even though he sucked monkey ass, THEN it would have been a massive fuckup. That didn't happen.

[Ace]

Your points are good, BT, but most of us are coming from a place where we already believed the move was a massive fuck-up - the day it was made.

Thus, it's still a massive fuck-up because the move did not prove to be a success.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=96887:date=May 18 2010, 10:10 PM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ May 18 2010, 10:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Your points are good, BT, but most of us are coming from a place where we already believed the move was a massive fuck-up - the day it was made.

Thus, it's still a massive fuck-up because the move did not prove to be a success.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


But to call every move the Cubs make that we dont' like and doesn't work out a massive fuckup basically makes the term "massive fuckup" meaningless.

[funkster]

BT I understand what you're saying, but I didn't think it had much of a chance of being successful from the beginning anyway.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=96887:date=May 18 2010, 10:10 PM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ May 18 2010, 10:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Your points are good, BT, but most of us are coming from a place where we already believed the move was a massive fuck-up - the day it was made.

Thus, it's still a massive fuck-up because the move did not prove to be a success.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


and actually, more to my point when this move was made, there were all sorts of dire predictions about how badly this would fuck us. The move was at worst inconsequential, yet people still point to it as if it were the equivalent to selling Babe Ruth to pay for a Broadway show.

[funkster]

<!--quoteo(post=96889:date=May 18 2010, 10:12 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ May 18 2010, 10:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=96887:date=May 18 2010, 10:10 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ May 18 2010, 10:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Your points are good, BT, but most of us are coming from a place where we already believed the move was a massive fuck-up - the day it was made.

Thus, it's still a massive fuck-up because the move did not prove to be a success.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


But to call every move the Cubs make that we dont' like and doesn't work out a massive fuckup basically makes the term "massive fuckup" meaningless.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If we're arguing about my exact choice of words, then we can use something else. We can use bad move.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=96892:date=May 18 2010, 10:14 PM:name=funkster)-->QUOTE (funkster @ May 18 2010, 10:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=96889:date=May 18 2010, 10:12 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ May 18 2010, 10:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=96887:date=May 18 2010, 10:10 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ May 18 2010, 10:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Your points are good, BT, but most of us are coming from a place where we already believed the move was a massive fuck-up - the day it was made.

Thus, it's still a massive fuck-up because the move did not prove to be a success.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


But to call every move the Cubs make that we dont' like and doesn't work out a massive fuckup basically makes the term "massive fuckup" meaningless.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If we're arguing about my exact choice of words, then we can use something else. We can use bad move.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


I'm not making a argument based on semantics. I said from the beginning that people were overreacting. I feel they still are. You are not the only person I've heard describe the move as a massive fuckup.

[funkster]

I'll agree that the move probably wasn't detrimental to the season, but it seemed like a desperate hairbrained idea that was doomed for failure. And as I write this Z looks as filthy as ever.

[biggz]

The silver lining might be the possibility of this motivating and fueling Z? Not that I think it'll change much about this season...

[veryzer]

<!--quoteo(post=96895:date=May 18 2010, 10:18 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ May 18 2010, 10:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=96892:date=May 18 2010, 10:14 PM:name=funkster)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (funkster @ May 18 2010, 10:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=96889:date=May 18 2010, 10:12 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ May 18 2010, 10:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=96887:date=May 18 2010, 10:10 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ May 18 2010, 10:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Your points are good, BT, but most of us are coming from a place where we already believed the move was a massive fuck-up - the day it was made.

Thus, it's still a massive fuck-up because the move did not prove to be a success.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


But to call every move the Cubs make that we dont' like and doesn't work out a massive fuckup basically makes the term "massive fuckup" meaningless.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If we're arguing about my exact choice of words, then we can use something else. We can use bad move.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


I'm not making a argument based on semantics. I said from the beginning that people were overreacting. I feel they still are. You are not the only person I've heard describe the move as a massive fuckup.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


See, I think the overreaction was putting Zambrano in the bullpen in the first place. That was the true overreaction. The Cubs struggled out of the gate and Lou panicked and made a move that most of us thought would fail. Then it did fail and now Zambrano is being moved back. Both decisions seemed knee-jerk to me. If Lou really thought that Zambrano was the answer in the bullpen, he should have left him there for a little longer than a couple weeks.

Lou overreacted to a slow start making a dumb move and then he overreacted again by not giving his dumb move a chance to succeed.

The irony is that, even though the bullpen has struggled, it's the lack of scoring that's really killed us. Maybe Zambrano can play 1st?

[jstraw]

Part of what made it such a high-risk, low-return move was the potential for it to really fuck up Z. We probably won't know how it went on that score till he's had about three starts back in the rotation. Z is not Ted Lilly. I'm not even sure that in the head is the brain. It's a miracle to me that Z bit his tongue as much as he did and that there isn't a trail of Gatorade machines bearing the scars of his wrath.

[Coach]

If Z pitched like he is capable of, then this would be a non-issue.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=96931:date=May 19 2010, 07:16 AM:name=jstraw)-->QUOTE (jstraw @ May 19 2010, 07:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Part of what made it such a high-risk, low-return move was the potential for it to really fuck up Z. We probably won't know how it went on that score till he's had about three starts back in the rotation. Z is not Ted Lilly. I'm not even sure that in the head is the brain. It's a miracle to me that Z bit his tongue as much as he did and that there isn't a trail of Gatorade machines bearing the scars of his wrath.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

If you guys read between the lines of what Hendry and Lou (and probably Rothschild as well) are saying, it seems to me they truly believed that Z was our 6th best starter when they moved him. They are clearly worried about his velocity. They think something is wrong. They thought moving him to the 8th might help him, and at that same time keep our best 5 starters starting. That obviously failed.

The problem is, there is no possible way to prove them right. If Zambrano comes back and completely sucks, it will all be blamed on the move to the bullpen. So even if they were 100 percent correct (and I have no way of knowing if they were), they will still be blamed, because they will be faulted for creating the problem rather than trying to fix it.