Jump to content


Recent Topics




Bleacher Nation is on Facebook, and you should totally "Like" us:
 


Bleacher Nation is also on Twitter, and you should totally follow us:




Upcoming Calendar Events

There are no forthcoming calendar events

Today's birthdays


Photo

Just curious... (THIS IS ABOUT THE ROTATION)


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 calicubsfan007

calicubsfan007

    The Guy Who Came Back From the Dead

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 540 posts
  • LocationWherever I Am, There I Am

Posted 01 February 2013 - 04:34 AM

How do you all think this year's rotation will do? At the very least, it is the same level as the rotation last year because there is more depth and no Volstadation. On a scale of 1-10? 1 being what the Astros' staff basically was at the end of the year, 10 being a rotation that includes guys like Feller, Eckersley (spelling?), etc.

#2 Cubbie Blues

Cubbie Blues

    The Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,365 posts
  • Twitter:@timhall76
  • LocationBloomington, IN

Posted 01 February 2013 - 06:58 AM

I'd probably give them a solid 7 as long as Garza comes back strong and Shark keeps it going.

"It's not the dress that makes you look fat, it's the fat that makes you look fat." - Al Bundy

 

"Ow" - Dylan Bundy


#3 Spriggs

Spriggs

    Bleacher Hero

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,018 posts
  • LocationArizona

Posted 01 February 2013 - 07:40 AM

How do you all think this year's rotation will do? At the very least, it is the same level as the rotation last year because there is more depth and no Volstadation. On a scale of 1-10? 1 being what the Astros' staff basically was at the end of the year, 10 being a rotation that includes guys like Feller, Eckersley (spelling?), etc.


Feller and Eckersley was a pretty odd pair to use for your example :) Indians fan?

#4 Spriggs

Spriggs

    Bleacher Hero

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,018 posts
  • LocationArizona

Posted 01 February 2013 - 07:45 AM

I doubt if most people expect too much, but it could be pretty solid. A lot depends on who is left (not traded) and who recovers from last years injuries and operations.

#5 SirCub

SirCub

    Bleacher Hero

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 908 posts
  • LocationCarrboro, NC

Posted 01 February 2013 - 08:37 AM

I would say a 6. Solid depth, but no star power as of yet. No "true ace" in the rotation right now, imo.

#6 Cubbie Blues

Cubbie Blues

    The Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,365 posts
  • Twitter:@timhall76
  • LocationBloomington, IN

Posted 01 February 2013 - 08:42 AM

I would say a 6. Solid depth, but no star power as of yet. No "true ace" in the rotation right now, imo.

No true ace but, 2 #2s and another solid #3. So, yeah, I guess you could definitely persuade me down to a 6.

"It's not the dress that makes you look fat, it's the fat that makes you look fat." - Al Bundy

 

"Ow" - Dylan Bundy


#7 fromthemitten

fromthemitten

    sleeps in too late to answer the calendar trivia

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,471 posts
  • Twitter:fromthemitten
  • Locationin a van down by the river

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:00 AM

6 before the trade deadline 4 or 3 after. I expect Baker, Garza, and Feldman to all be gone leaving us with Shark, Jackson, Wood, Villaneuva, and one of the AAA guys to fill in. Not great, but a hell lot better than the parade of scrubs with 6+ ERAs we trotted out last year.

#8 Morken

Morken

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 03 February 2013 - 10:32 AM

I'm a fan of the Cubs' rotation. However, I still don't understand the Scott Baker signing, both in money and in regards to his health.



#9 rcleven

rcleven

    Bleacher Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,069 posts

Posted 03 February 2013 - 01:43 PM

I'm a fan of the Cubs' rotation. However, I still don't understand the Scott Baker signing, both in money and in regards to his health.


If healthy, Will be second best pitcher on staff. Better than Garza. Feldman is the head scratchier for me.

#10 Mike Taylor (no relation)

Mike Taylor (no relation)

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 384 posts
  • LocationLouisville, KY

Posted 04 February 2013 - 11:36 AM

2012
28 GS, 174.2 IP = 6.24 AIPPG, 3.38 xFIP (Samardzija) 3.3 WAR
18 GS, 103.2 IP = 5.76 AIPPG, 3.59 xFIP (Garza) 1.2 WAR
16 GS, 104.0 IP = 6.50 AIPPG, 3.72 xFIP (Dempster) 2.1 WAR
20 GS, 120.0 IP = 6.00 AIPPG, 4.21 xFIP (Maholm) 1.4 WAR
12 GS, 063.0 IP = 5.25 AIPPG, 4.47 xFIP (Germano) 0.6 WAR
07 GS, 029.2 IP = 4.24 AIPPG, 4.53 xFIP (Rusin) 0.1 WAR
26 GS, 156.0 IP = 6.00 AIPPG, 4.62 xFIP (TWood) 0.7 WAR
21 GS, 111.1 IP = 5.30 AIPPG, 4.68 xFIP (Volstad) 0.2 WAR
04 GS, 018.2 IP = 4.67 AIPPG, 4.77 xFIP (Berken) 0.0 WAR
05 GS, 024.1 IP = 4.87 AIPPG, 5.19 xFIP (Raley) -0.4 WAR
04 GS, 015.1 IP = 3.83 AIPPG, 7.20 xFIP (Wells) -0.1 WAR (stats as starter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21 GS, 131.2 IP = 6.27 AIPPG, 3.64 xFIP (Baker) 2.7 WAR (2011 stats)
31 GS, 189.2 IP = 6.12 AIPPG, 3.79 xFIP (Jackson) 2.7 WAR
21 GS, 110.0 IP = 5.24 AIPPG, 3.89 xFIP (Feldman) 2.2 WAR
16 GS, 092.0 IP = 5.75 AIPPG, 3.97 xFIP (Villanueva) 0.6 WAR (stats as starter)


2012 = 9.1 Total WAR among starters,
2013 = +3.6 Total WAR among 6 starters in raw data alone.

#11 Cubbie Blues

Cubbie Blues

    The Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,365 posts
  • Twitter:@timhall76
  • LocationBloomington, IN

Posted 04 February 2013 - 12:20 PM

2012
28 GS, 174.2 IP = 6.24 AIPPG, 3.38 xFIP (Samardzija) 3.3 WAR
18 GS, 103.2 IP = 5.76 AIPPG, 3.59 xFIP (Garza) 1.2 WAR
16 GS, 104.0 IP = 6.50 AIPPG, 3.72 xFIP (Dempster) 2.1 WAR
20 GS, 120.0 IP = 6.00 AIPPG, 4.21 xFIP (Maholm) 1.4 WAR
12 GS, 063.0 IP = 5.25 AIPPG, 4.47 xFIP (Germano) 0.6 WAR
07 GS, 029.2 IP = 4.24 AIPPG, 4.53 xFIP (Rusin) 0.1 WAR
26 GS, 156.0 IP = 6.00 AIPPG, 4.62 xFIP (TWood) 0.7 WAR
21 GS, 111.1 IP = 5.30 AIPPG, 4.68 xFIP (Volstad) 0.2 WAR
04 GS, 018.2 IP = 4.67 AIPPG, 4.77 xFIP (Berken) 0.0 WAR
05 GS, 024.1 IP = 4.87 AIPPG, 5.19 xFIP (Raley) -0.4 WAR
04 GS, 015.1 IP = 3.83 AIPPG, 7.20 xFIP (Wells) -0.1 WAR (stats as starter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21 GS, 131.2 IP = 6.27 AIPPG, 3.64 xFIP (Baker) 2.7 WAR (2011 stats)
31 GS, 189.2 IP = 6.12 AIPPG, 3.79 xFIP (Jackson) 2.7 WAR
21 GS, 110.0 IP = 5.24 AIPPG, 3.89 xFIP (Feldman) 2.2 WAR
16 GS, 092.0 IP = 5.75 AIPPG, 3.97 xFIP (Villanueva) 0.6 WAR (stats as starter)


2012 = 9.1 Total WAR among starters,
2013 = +3.6 Total WAR among 6 starters in raw data alone.

Last years starters you show also had 26 more starts then the numbers this years rotation had last year (awkward sentence alert).

"It's not the dress that makes you look fat, it's the fat that makes you look fat." - Al Bundy

 

"Ow" - Dylan Bundy


#12 Morken

Morken

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 05 February 2013 - 01:22 PM


I'm a fan of the Cubs' rotation. However, I still don't understand the Scott Baker signing, both in money and in regards to his health.


If healthy, Will be second best pitcher on staff. Better than Garza. Feldman is the head scratchier for me.

Baker is not/will not be better than Garza.

Fieldman was an excellent buy-low signing.

Baker's health is a concern. He just seems like too much of a risk.

#13 Mike Taylor (no relation)

Mike Taylor (no relation)

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 384 posts
  • LocationLouisville, KY

Posted 06 February 2013 - 04:31 AM

Baker was actually better than Garza when comparing years they both were injured. Baker in 2011 had a higher average innings pitched per game at 6.27, while Garza in 2012 was at 5.76 - Baker's WAR was 2.7 that year and Garza's 1.2 (take into account Baker had 3 more starts).

#14 fromthemitten

fromthemitten

    sleeps in too late to answer the calendar trivia

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,471 posts
  • Twitter:fromthemitten
  • Locationin a van down by the river

Posted 06 February 2013 - 02:38 PM

Baker's health is a concern. He just seems like too much of a risk.


People said the same thing when the Cubs picked up Ryan Dempster (not to mention he had a WAR of almost -3 over the two seasons before he signed with him) and that turned out pretty well for the Cubs.

#15 Morken

Morken

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 06 February 2013 - 11:50 PM


Baker's health is a concern. He just seems like too much of a risk.


People said the same thing when the Cubs picked up Ryan Dempster (not to mention he had a WAR of almost -3 over the two seasons before he signed with him) and that turned out pretty well for the Cubs.


Dempster was signed as a reliever, and was only responsible for 20.2 innings, the season after his injury. It was 4 seasons until he became a starter, again.

Baker was signed to be a starter.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Bleacher Nation is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago National League Ballclub (that's the Cubs).