Cubs too remiss about so-so starters

Mr. Morrissey, you are absulutely correct about the pitching but i believe Santana would only go to a east coast team, But i think the cubs should have gone after Bedard from baltimore. That would make more sense than Roberts because there would be no room for Derosa who i believe is a very good clutch hitter. If i were general manager i would go after guys who can hit when you need it not nessessarily a 300 hitter who gets his hits when they don't count.

finally, i do believe Roberts would be a asset to the team but not as important as a really good pitcher. Our team at the present could possibly win the division but would have no chance against say Detroit in a World Series and that is what we really want isn't it?

serf wrote:

Mr. Morrissey, you are absulutely correct about the pitching but i believe Santana would only go to a east coast team,

Not only that, but also only a team that trained in Florida!

serf wrote:

But i think the cubs should have gone after Bedard from baltimore.

The Cubs did not have enough decent prospects to acquire Bedard: they could not have matched Seattle's offer. The Cubs system is very thin in the eyes of the trade market because so many "can't miss" Cubs prospects have missed badly in the last few years.

serf wrote:

If i were general manager i would go after guys who can hit when you need it not nessessarily a 300 hitter who gets his hits when they don't count.

"Clutch hitting" is a myth: no players consistently do better or worse in "clutch" situations than they normally do. It is a combination of selective fan memory and small sample sizes. Indeed, what has hurt the Cubs is trying to acquire "clutch" ("situational") hitters instead of high OBP hitters: the latter is a trait of hitters year in and year out, whereas the former is just the latter plus/minus sampling error.
Also, with a team like the Cubs (pretty good pitching, pretty mediocre offense), there will be few hits that do not count. Even dominating teams (like the Sox last year) only average just over one more run per game per game than the opposition. The Cubs problem is that they just do not get on base very well: and Roberts is good for getting on base.(So is DeRosa: his OBP is just as good as Roberts!)
We can lament the Cubs lack of quality pitching. However, this is the state of baseball: the 30 teams need 150 starting pitchers, and there are not 150 quality starting pitchers to be had.

This is a great article and Morrisey once again proves that you can criticize your hometown teams without being a Rosen-arse.

That said, I think the radio shows I've heard simply say the rotation is enough to win the CENTRAL. After that, I think we'll just have to wait and see.

So, after having the 4th best ERA in baseball last year and, once again, leading the Major Leagues in strikeouts, this is your major concern? They have seemingly improved on their rotation from last year. I suppose you felt the need to write about something, but this is borderline comical.

Cubs will not make the playoffs. You read it here first.

PJW wrote:

<quoted text>
The Cubs problem is that they just do not get on base very well: and Roberts is good for getting on base.(So is DeRosa: his OBP is just as good as Roberts!)

Absolutely correct ... this team has a problem getting on base and moving runners over and scoring runs through base running and timely (not clutch) hitting. Stealing bases and using the hit and run -- small ball, if you must call it that -- are important if this team is going to win games consistently. I think the pitching will be there, but last year the problem was getting runners across the plate. For all their inconsistency last year, the Cubs were consistent when it came to stranding runners. They couldn't get bunts down when they needed to and they weren't aggressive enough in terms of stolen bases - Roberts would help there.

Roger wrote:

Cubs will not make the playoffs. You read it here first.

Silly Cardinals fan, drugs are for kids.

The problem with the Cubs lately is this preception that they can buy themselves a pennant. They have now in the past year thrown millions to Lilly, Marquis and Leiber for their rotation. They have also thrown money to Fukodome. The most insane thing Hendry did was spending $138 million or whatever on Soriano, a player who really doesn't fit anywhere. The fact that the Cubs are a rich big market team makes them lazy in that they will overpay for veteran talent rather than develop outstanding young talent. The playoff humiliation of last year at Arizona shows what you can do with a talented young team that is allowed to grow together.

The Cubs better watch out for the Brewers who have a great young core of players similar to Arizona and Colorado. This group came up together in the farm system. Economic reality is such that the Brewers are a small market team that can afford roughly half the Cubs payroll. I would rather have on my team the likes of Fielder-Bruaun-Hart-Hardy-Week s then Lee-Soriano-Ramirez etc. The Brewers also have three outstanding young pitchers, Gallardo, Villanueva and Parra to go with the brilliant but often injured Sheets.

I am a transplanted Chicagoan and Cub fan who is appreciating this Brewer team and the way it was put together and is not at all impressed with what Jim Hendry has put done.

Am in Arizona this week and have a number of observations: what took so long to get Sean Gallagher a bus ticket? The article is on point about the starting rotation. Saw Ryan Dempster pitch a solid game, but he intimidated not one hitter. Of equal concern should be the Soriano-Lee-Ramirez spots in the lineup. Lee and Ramirez got extra base hits in the games I've seen so far, but without folks on. I continue to be impressed by Mark DeRosa, Ryan Theriot and the defense of Fukodome. Yes, it is early and while Catcus League games don't count, they do give us some insight into what we're likely to see during the real season. Saddle up folks - gonna be rocky road to repeating in the division

I agree the Cubs need to upgrade at starter, but that's water under the bridge. And, the only real starter upgrades possibly available were Santana and Haren.

My thought is the Cubs should take the players being offered for Roberts and offer them for Joe Nathan (maybe less players even b/c Nathan's contract is up at the end of this year) That way, the average rotation is supported by what should be a dominant bullpen. The result, a significantly better pitching staff in total. For example, five innings from Lieber, then any combination of Marmol, Howry, Wood and Nathan.

I have no earthly idea why the lineup isn't set up like this:
1.Theriot
2.Derosa
3Lee
4.Ramirez
5.Soriano
6.Fukodome
7.Soto
8.Pie
...Makes more sense than the lineup Pinela has now, and we wouldn't need Roberts, so we could keep our prospects...
...As for our rotation, I think it's waaaay too early to be worried about them...
...I think they're gonna be alright...

Doesn't matter. Brewers will win the division!

But whatever happened to the thinking that you can't win without great pitching?
the 06 Cardinals?

MJV wrote:

Doesn't matter. Brewers will win the division!

Well, cancell the season, boys!!!
...Let's just give the world series trophy to the almighty Brewers...
...Oh, yeah, I remembered...
...Weren't they this invincible team LAST year, and didn't they collapse in september?
...YES, they did...
...I think we can go ahead and play this season, and you best hold off on presenting that trophy for a while...

I think this is right. While the starting staff is above average, that will not win the world series. We should still be shopping for an improvement in a number 2 starter.

Cubs Win Cubs Win

even with a descent rotation, we still have a gap up the middle and forget about the lineup if Derrick lee doesn't produce like he should makin all that "money" he also chokes when we need him most. I really hope we can make this a memoriable 100 years of Cub baseball.

Rick, I'm no journalism expert, but next time I would recommend researching anything about what you're gonna write about. I think some actually valid statements would make your column that much better.

problem last year was lack of timely/clutch hitting for 3/4 of the season, not a lack of quality starts and or efforts by the rotation. RBI totals don't lie. solo HR's are a dubious stat to lead the league in. focusing your column on the rotation is a waste of ink and mor importantly, paper.

"Zambrano finally follows through on the promise..."

Um, hello? He's had a 3.50 ERA since 2004?