2015 Cubs Offseason: Building a Winner Around David Ross

[Oleg]

Can I request that we stop comparing all pitchers to Kyle Hendricks to make a point about either that pitcher or Kyle Hendricks because I think we should all just agree that Kyle Hendricks numbers are fucking bullshit.

What makes his numbers bullshit?

I compared them because Hendricks is a good comp.  Hendricks was far less "lucky" last year than Miller and Miller's peripherals have been in a bit of a decline since his rookie year.  I'm sorry that comp doesn't match you narrative (for whatever reason) but The Cubs already have a Shelby Miller.

[SKO]

because really I don't care how meatball it is I think it's fair to say there is a difference between Shelby Miller and Kyle Hendricks even if their FIPs are similar or even if some peripherals favor Hendricks because Miller has an actual major league fastball and he doesn't have the mogwai-esque set of rules one needs to coax the most out of Kyle Hendricks (don't ever let him face a better three times, remove him before the 7th inning even if he's only thrown 75 pitches because he will get hammered regardless, don't pitch him when the wind is blowing out, don't feed him after midnight, don't tell him that Dartmouth lost to Princeton in squash or he'll get that sad puppy dog face).

[Eli]

Jim Duquette over at mlb.com has a Cubs/Braves trade proposal that I'd hope Jepstink would do in a heartbeat.

I hate the idea of giving up Contreras--since I don't think Schwarber will pan out at Catcher-- but I don't hate the idea of acquiring a 25-year old Shelby Miller.

I don't have much insight on Contreras beyond his recent hype, but he's really the only long-term catching option in the organization at the moment. I'd imagine they're really hesitant to give him up.

They also have Victor Caratini in their system.  I don't know if he projects as quite the offensive player that Contreras does, but with a team that has Rizzo, Schwarber, Bryant et.al. that may not be necessary.  And besides, Caratini already seems to have good plate discipline (.342 OBP last year to go with a .257 BA and a .372 SLG (woof)).  It's possible that he might have some pop by the time he arrives.  He'll be 22 next year.

If there's some sort of catching equivalent for Chris Bosio, get him and tie him to Schwarber.  Man, if he can be a passable catcher, the world is wide open.

I want Schwarber to focus 100% on becoming passable in left field. Trying to fix his problems at multiple positions is only going to delay his improvement.

[Oleg]

because really I don't care how meatball it is I think it's fair to say there is a difference between Shelby Miller and Kyle Hendricks even if their FIPs are similar or even if some peripherals favor Hendricks because Miller has an actual major league fastball and he doesn't have the mogwai-esque set of rules one needs to coax the most out of Kyle Hendricks (don't ever let him face a better three times, remove him before the 7th inning even if he's only thrown 75 pitches because he will get hammered regardless, don't pitch him when the wind is blowing out, don't feed him after midnight, don't tell him that Dartmouth lost to Princeton in squash or he'll get that sad puppy dog face).

I don't care how meatball you are.  But I very much care about how unmeatball the FO is.

And, if Miller's fastball is so much better than Hendricks's, why isn't he getting the results one would expect compared to Hendricks?

By the way, Miller has similar issues 3rd time through the order that Hendricks does, just not as pronounced.

[SKO]

because really I don't care how meatball it is I think it's fair to say there is a difference between Shelby Miller and Kyle Hendricks even if their FIPs are similar or even if some peripherals favor Hendricks because Miller has an actual major league fastball and he doesn't have the mogwai-esque set of rules one needs to coax the most out of Kyle Hendricks (don't ever let him face a better three times, remove him before the 7th inning even if he's only thrown 75 pitches because he will get hammered regardless, don't pitch him when the wind is blowing out, don't feed him after midnight, don't tell him that Dartmouth lost to Princeton in squash or he'll get that sad puppy dog face).

I don't care how meatball you are.  But I very much care about how unmeatball the FO is.

And, if Miller's fastball is so much better than Hendricks's, why isn't he getting the results one would expect compared to Hendricks?

By the way, Miller has similar issues 3rd time through the order that Hendricks does, just not as pronounced.

Is it wrong that is what I want? To me that difference between 180 IP and 205 IP between the two is kinda big. I feel like the Cubs really need that third guy they can count to get 6 innings after Lester and Arrieta. I won't deny that Hendricks can be tremendously valuable in those 5 innings that he does pitch, but after seeing the mounting strain that came in the second half and in the playoffs from constantly needing 15+ outs from the bullpen, I'd like at least one more guy that can go deeper into games, even if his peripherals say he's not really "better" than Kyle.

I also want that because I just don't expect the Cubs to get the flukishly great long relief that they got last year out of guys like Cahill/Wood/Richard. Even if they bring some or all of those guys back, I just don't buy that they can consistently win as many games as they did last year while getting 5 IP or fewer from their starters so often.

So yeah, meatball or no I think it's fine to consider Miller a better pitcher than Hendricks, however negligible the difference in their peripherals may be, just becuase he's managed to go deeper into games on a more consistent basis.

[Oleg]

because really I don't care how meatball it is I think it's fair to say there is a difference between Shelby Miller and Kyle Hendricks even if their FIPs are similar or even if some peripherals favor Hendricks because Miller has an actual major league fastball and he doesn't have the mogwai-esque set of rules one needs to coax the most out of Kyle Hendricks (don't ever let him face a better three times, remove him before the 7th inning even if he's only thrown 75 pitches because he will get hammered regardless, don't pitch him when the wind is blowing out, don't feed him after midnight, don't tell him that Dartmouth lost to Princeton in squash or he'll get that sad puppy dog face).

I don't care how meatball you are.  But I very much care about how unmeatball the FO is.

And, if Miller's fastball is so much better than Hendricks's, why isn't he getting the results one would expect compared to Hendricks?

By the way, Miller has similar issues 3rd time through the order that Hendricks does, just not as pronounced.

Is it wrong that is what I want? To me that difference between 180 IP and 205 IP between the two is kinda big. I feel like the Cubs really need that third guy they can count to get 6 innings after Lester and Arrieta. I won't deny that Hendricks can be tremendously valuable in those 5 innings that he does pitch, but after seeing the mounting strain that came in the second half and in the playoffs from constantly needing 15+ outs from the bullpen, I'd like at least one more guy that can go deeper into games, even if his peripherals say he's not really "better" than Kyle.

I also want that because I just don't expect the Cubs to get the flukishly great long relief that they got last year out of guys like Cahill/Wood/Richard. Even if they bring some or all of those guys back, I just don't buy that they can consistently win as many games as they did last year while getting 5 IP or fewer from their starters so often.

So yeah, meatball or no I think it's fine to consider Miller a better pitcher than Hendricks, however negligible the difference in their peripherals may be, just becuase he's managed to go deeper into games on a more consistent basis.

I think it's great to want that.  I want that too.  I just don't think that Miller is that guy.  I want someone better.

[Quality Start Machine]

Jim Duquette over at mlb.com has a Cubs/Braves trade proposal that I'd hope Jepstink would do in a heartbeat.

I hate the idea of giving up Contreras--since I don't think Schwarber will pan out at Catcher-- but I don't hate the idea of acquiring a 25-year old Shelby Miller.

I don't have much insight on Contreras beyond his recent hype, but he's really the only long-term catching option in the organization at the moment. I'd imagine they're really hesitant to give him up.

They also have Victor Caratini in their system.  I don't know if he projects as quite the offensive player that Contreras does, but with a team that has Rizzo, Schwarber, Bryant et.al. that may not be necessary.  And besides, Caratini already seems to have good plate discipline (.342 OBP last year to go with a .257 BA and a .372 SLG (woof)).  It's possible that he might have some pop by the time he arrives.  He'll be 22 next year.

If there's some sort of catching equivalent for Chris Bosio, get him and tie him to Schwarber.  Man, if he can be a passable catcher, the world is wide open.

[R-V]

because really I don't care how meatball it is I think it's fair to say there is a difference between Shelby Miller and Kyle Hendricks even if their FIPs are similar or even if some peripherals favor Hendricks because Miller has an actual major league fastball and he doesn't have the mogwai-esque set of rules one needs to coax the most out of Kyle Hendricks (don't ever let him face a better three times, remove him before the 7th inning even if he's only thrown 75 pitches because he will get hammered regardless, don't pitch him when the wind is blowing out, don't feed him after midnight, don't tell him that Dartmouth lost to Princeton in squash or he'll get that sad puppy dog face).

I don't care how meatball you are.  But I very much care about how unmeatball the FO is.

And, if Miller's fastball is so much better than Hendricks's, why isn't he getting the results one would expect compared to Hendricks?

By the way, Miller has similar issues 3rd time through the order that Hendricks does, just not as pronounced.

Is it wrong that is what I want? To me that difference between 180 IP and 205 IP between the two is kinda big. I feel like the Cubs really need that third guy they can count to get 6 innings after Lester and Arrieta. I won't deny that Hendricks can be tremendously valuable in those 5 innings that he does pitch, but after seeing the mounting strain that came in the second half and in the playoffs from constantly needing 15+ outs from the bullpen, I'd like at least one more guy that can go deeper into games, even if his peripherals say he's not really "better" than Kyle.

I also want that because I just don't expect the Cubs to get the flukishly great long relief that they got last year out of guys like Cahill/Wood/Richard. Even if they bring some or all of those guys back, I just don't buy that they can consistently win as many games as they did last year while getting 5 IP or fewer from their starters so often.

So yeah, meatball or no I think it's fine to consider Miller a better pitcher than Hendricks, however negligible the difference in their peripherals may be, just becuase he's managed to go deeper into games on a more consistent basis.

I think it's great to want that.  I want that too.  I just don't think that Miller is that guy.  I want someone better.

This. I really don't want Shelby Miller or Jeff Samardzija to be the best starter the Cubs acquire this offseason. I want someone like that to be the 2nd best starter they acquire.

[InternetApex]

Jim Duquette over at mlb.com has a Cubs/Braves trade proposal that I'd hope Jepstink would do in a heartbeat.

I hate the idea of giving up Contreras--since I don't think Schwarber will pan out at Catcher-- but I don't hate the idea of acquiring a 25-year old Shelby Miller.

I don't have much insight on Contreras beyond his recent hype, but he's really the only long-term catching option in the organization at the moment. I'd imagine they're really hesitant to give him up.

They also have Victor Caratini in their system.  I don't know if he projects as quite the offensive player that Contreras does, but with a team that has Rizzo, Schwarber, Bryant et.al. that may not be necessary.  And besides, Caratini already seems to have good plate discipline (.342 OBP last year to go with a .257 BA and a .372 SLG (woof)).  It's possible that he might have some pop by the time he arrives.  He'll be 22 next year.

If there's some sort of catching equivalent for Chris Bosio, get him and tie him to Schwarber.  Man, if he can be a passable catcher, the world is wide open.

I want Schwarber to focus 100% on becoming passable in left field. Trying to fix his problems at multiple positions is only going to delay his improvement.

This. And I wish people understood the concept that catchers tend to get beaten up so badly that putting a guy with 50-homer potential behind the dish is dumber than owl shit. Stop doing this.

[Saul Goodman]

because really I don't care how meatball it is I think it's fair to say there is a difference between Shelby Miller and Kyle Hendricks even if their FIPs are similar or even if some peripherals favor Hendricks because Miller has an actual major league fastball and he doesn't have the mogwai-esque set of rules one needs to coax the most out of Kyle Hendricks (don't ever let him face a better three times, remove him before the 7th inning even if he's only thrown 75 pitches because he will get hammered regardless, don't pitch him when the wind is blowing out, don't feed him after midnight, don't tell him that Dartmouth lost to Princeton in squash or he'll get that sad puppy dog face).

I don't care how meatball you are.  But I very much care about how unmeatball the FO is.

And, if Miller's fastball is so much better than Hendricks's, why isn't he getting the results one would expect compared to Hendricks?

By the way, Miller has similar issues 3rd time through the order that Hendricks does, just not as pronounced.

Is it wrong that is what I want? To me that difference between 180 IP and 205 IP between the two is kinda big. I feel like the Cubs really need that third guy they can count to get 6 innings after Lester and Arrieta. I won't deny that Hendricks can be tremendously valuable in those 5 innings that he does pitch, but after seeing the mounting strain that came in the second half and in the playoffs from constantly needing 15+ outs from the bullpen, I'd like at least one more guy that can go deeper into games, even if his peripherals say he's not really "better" than Kyle.

I also want that because I just don't expect the Cubs to get the flukishly great long relief that they got last year out of guys like Cahill/Wood/Richard. Even if they bring some or all of those guys back, I just don't buy that they can consistently win as many games as they did last year while getting 5 IP or fewer from their starters so often.

So yeah, meatball or no I think it's fine to consider Miller a better pitcher than Hendricks, however negligible the difference in their peripherals may be, just becuase he's managed to go deeper into games on a more consistent basis.

I think it's great to want that.  I want that too.  I just don't think that Miller is that guy.  I want someone better.

This. I really don't want Shelby Miller or Jeff Samardzija to be the best starter the Cubs acquire this offseason. I want someone like that to be the 2nd best starter they acquire.

That.

I also don't buy the crap about the Cubs not having the money to do anything but sign a Samardzija and hope for the best. The Rickettses have buttloads of money and the championship window is now open. This is not the time to start fucking around and pinching pennies. If a guy fills a need and is a fit for what they're trying to do, then do it. I trust this front office to get it right more often than not.

[Chuck to Chuck]

because really I don't care how meatball it is I think it's fair to say there is a difference between Shelby Miller and Kyle Hendricks even if their FIPs are similar or even if some peripherals favor Hendricks because Miller has an actual major league fastball and he doesn't have the mogwai-esque set of rules one needs to coax the most out of Kyle Hendricks (don't ever let him face a better three times, remove him before the 7th inning even if he's only thrown 75 pitches because he will get hammered regardless, don't pitch him when the wind is blowing out, don't feed him after midnight, don't tell him that Dartmouth lost to Princeton in squash or he'll get that sad puppy dog face).

I don't care how meatball you are.  But I very much care about how unmeatball the FO is.

And, if Miller's fastball is so much better than Hendricks's, why isn't he getting the results one would expect compared to Hendricks?

By the way, Miller has similar issues 3rd time through the order that Hendricks does, just not as pronounced.

Is it wrong that is what I want? To me that difference between 180 IP and 205 IP between the two is kinda big. I feel like the Cubs really need that third guy they can count to get 6 innings after Lester and Arrieta. I won't deny that Hendricks can be tremendously valuable in those 5 innings that he does pitch, but after seeing the mounting strain that came in the second half and in the playoffs from constantly needing 15+ outs from the bullpen, I'd like at least one more guy that can go deeper into games, even if his peripherals say he's not really "better" than Kyle.

I also want that because I just don't expect the Cubs to get the flukishly great long relief that they got last year out of guys like Cahill/Wood/Richard. Even if they bring some or all of those guys back, I just don't buy that they can consistently win as many games as they did last year while getting 5 IP or fewer from their starters so often.

So yeah, meatball or no I think it's fine to consider Miller a better pitcher than Hendricks, however negligible the difference in their peripherals may be, just becuase he's managed to go deeper into games on a more consistent basis.

I think it's great to want that.  I want that too.  I just don't think that Miller is that guy.  I want someone better.

This. I really don't want Shelby Miller or Jeff Samardzija to be the best starter the Cubs acquire this offseason. I want someone like that to be the 2nd best starter they acquire.

That.

I also don't buy the crap about the Cubs not having the money to do anything but sign a Samardzija and hope for the best. The Rickettses have buttloads of money and the championship window is now open. This is not the time to start fucking around and pinching pennies. If a guy fills a need and is a fit for what they're trying to do, then do it. I trust this front office to get it right more often than not.

You shouldn't, because no one with intelligence or without an agenda is saying this.

[Saul Goodman]

because really I don't care how meatball it is I think it's fair to say there is a difference between Shelby Miller and Kyle Hendricks even if their FIPs are similar or even if some peripherals favor Hendricks because Miller has an actual major league fastball and he doesn't have the mogwai-esque set of rules one needs to coax the most out of Kyle Hendricks (don't ever let him face a better three times, remove him before the 7th inning even if he's only thrown 75 pitches because he will get hammered regardless, don't pitch him when the wind is blowing out, don't feed him after midnight, don't tell him that Dartmouth lost to Princeton in squash or he'll get that sad puppy dog face).

I don't care how meatball you are.  But I very much care about how unmeatball the FO is.

And, if Miller's fastball is so much better than Hendricks's, why isn't he getting the results one would expect compared to Hendricks?

By the way, Miller has similar issues 3rd time through the order that Hendricks does, just not as pronounced.

Is it wrong that is what I want? To me that difference between 180 IP and 205 IP between the two is kinda big. I feel like the Cubs really need that third guy they can count to get 6 innings after Lester and Arrieta. I won't deny that Hendricks can be tremendously valuable in those 5 innings that he does pitch, but after seeing the mounting strain that came in the second half and in the playoffs from constantly needing 15+ outs from the bullpen, I'd like at least one more guy that can go deeper into games, even if his peripherals say he's not really "better" than Kyle.

I also want that because I just don't expect the Cubs to get the flukishly great long relief that they got last year out of guys like Cahill/Wood/Richard. Even if they bring some or all of those guys back, I just don't buy that they can consistently win as many games as they did last year while getting 5 IP or fewer from their starters so often.

So yeah, meatball or no I think it's fine to consider Miller a better pitcher than Hendricks, however negligible the difference in their peripherals may be, just becuase he's managed to go deeper into games on a more consistent basis.

I think it's great to want that.  I want that too.  I just don't think that Miller is that guy.  I want someone better.

This. I really don't want Shelby Miller or Jeff Samardzija to be the best starter the Cubs acquire this offseason. I want someone like that to be the 2nd best starter they acquire.

That.

I also don't buy the crap about the Cubs not having the money to do anything but sign a Samardzija and hope for the best. The Rickettses have buttloads of money and the championship window is now open. This is not the time to start fucking around and pinching pennies. If a guy fills a need and is a fit for what they're trying to do, then do it. I trust this front office to get it right more often than not.

You shouldn't, because no one with intelligence or without an agenda is saying this.

Ken Rosenthal's sources are, and it's on BN right now. It's been a steady drumbeat all offseason.

[Quality Start Machine]

Jim Duquette over at mlb.com has a Cubs/Braves trade proposal that I'd hope Jepstink would do in a heartbeat.

I hate the idea of giving up Contreras--since I don't think Schwarber will pan out at Catcher-- but I don't hate the idea of acquiring a 25-year old Shelby Miller.

I don't have much insight on Contreras beyond his recent hype, but he's really the only long-term catching option in the organization at the moment. I'd imagine they're really hesitant to give him up.

They also have Victor Caratini in their system.  I don't know if he projects as quite the offensive player that Contreras does, but with a team that has Rizzo, Schwarber, Bryant et.al. that may not be necessary.  And besides, Caratini already seems to have good plate discipline (.342 OBP last year to go with a .257 BA and a .372 SLG (woof)).  It's possible that he might have some pop by the time he arrives.  He'll be 22 next year.

If there's some sort of catching equivalent for Chris Bosio, get him and tie him to Schwarber.  Man, if he can be a passable catcher, the world is wide open.

I want Schwarber to focus 100% on becoming passable in left field. Trying to fix his problems at multiple positions is only going to delay his improvement.

This. And I wish people understood the concept that catchers tend to get beaten up so badly that putting a guy with 50-homer potential behind the dish is dumber than owl shit. Stop doing this.

This. Left Field isn't that hard, and by all accounts Schwarber has a good work ethic. He'll never be great, but he can be passable. And him having his bat and a passable glove should make him a consistent 5+ win player. Keep those knees healthy.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

Jim Duquette over at mlb.com has a Cubs/Braves trade proposal that I'd hope Jepstink would do in a heartbeat.

I hate the idea of giving up Contreras--since I don't think Schwarber will pan out at Catcher-- but I don't hate the idea of acquiring a 25-year old Shelby Miller.

I don't have much insight on Contreras beyond his recent hype, but he's really the only long-term catching option in the organization at the moment. I'd imagine they're really hesitant to give him up.

Some interesting tidbits about Contreras from Brett, who thankfully managed for once to not drive his readers to perpetual ennui by  including pointless milquetoast factoids about his personal life.

--Contreras was so far off people's radar last year that he was exposed in the Rule V and nobody took him.
-- He had been exposed to Rule V in previous years also
--He was on nobody's Top Prospect list last season and now he's #2.

I now find myself a little concerned about Conterars' sudden ascension (*cough*cough*performance enhancers? *cough*cough*) and am curious to see if last season was an out-of-the-blue anomaly or if he really just arrived--even though not a single scout saw it coming. 

In any event consider me a little concerned about his ability to repeat his performance from last year which I suppose means I'm not as attached to him as I was when I woke up today. 

[SKO]

Jim Duquette over at mlb.com has a Cubs/Braves trade proposal that I'd hope Jepstink would do in a heartbeat.

I hate the idea of giving up Contreras--since I don't think Schwarber will pan out at Catcher-- but I don't hate the idea of acquiring a 25-year old Shelby Miller.

I don't have much insight on Contreras beyond his recent hype, but he's really the only long-term catching option in the organization at the moment. I'd imagine they're really hesitant to give him up.

Some interesting tidbits about Contreras from Brett, who thankfully managed for once to not drive his readers to perpetual ennui by  including pointless milquetoast factoids about his personal life.

--Contreras was so far off people's radar last year that he was exposed in the Rule V and nobody took him.
-- He had been exposed to Rule V in previous years also
--He was on nobody's Top Prospect list last season and now he's #2.

I now find myself a little concerned about Conterars' sudden ascension (*cough*cough*performance enhancers? *cough*cough*) and am curious to see if last season was an out-of-the-blue anomaly or if he really just arrived--even though not a single scout saw it coming. 

In any event consider me a little concerned about his ability to repeat his performance from last year which I suppose means I'm not as attached to him as I was when I woke up today. 

Yeah, like I mentioned yesterday, a good part of his success might just come from being a 23 year old in AA who finally started hitting after 6 years of adjusting to pro ball. People seem to like his tools, but there are legitimate question marks, too.