I saw the title of this article a couple days ago, but didn't bother reading it. I don't believe the Cubs have attempted to be competitive in the short term in any way whatsoever so the title made me laugh. I thought I'd answer the questions just for fun.
1. Are Matt Garza, Scott Baker and Arodys Vizcaino healthy?
Yes. Probably. Not for awhile.
I'm confident Garza is going to be healthy. He's had plenty of time to recover and while there's always a chance a pitcher reaggravates an arm injury, I think he'll at least be healthy when the season starts. After that? It's really anybody's guess to whether or not a pitcher is going to be healthy, which makes this question all that more odd.
Baker? He's returning from TJS and there's a solid track record of success. The question isn't so much whether or not he'll be healthy, it's how will he perform? Based on research, it suggests he'll underperform his projections quite a bit in 2013 and should be back to normal in 2014 when he's no longer a Cub.
Vizcaino? The Yankees traded him to the Braves because he was an injury risk and the Braves traded him to the Cubs because he was injured and even when he returned, he'll be a significant injury risk. Vizcaino will still be out for some time and we won't get a look at him until September at the earliest (that would be my guess). That's a lot of time for an injury-risk to get injured so if you're going to bet money on whether or not he'll be healthy, you'd probably be wise to bet on not healthy.
2. Can Anthony Rizzo carry the team?
No. Rizzo is a good ballplayer, especially for his age, but even among 1st basemen in the NL Central, he comes out trailing many of them. It's entirely possible Rizzo continues to develop and becomes the awesome ballplayer so many think he can become, but odds are in favor of him just being a good and valuable player for the Cubs.
3. Can Brett Jackson have a Rizzo moment?
Yes. Jackson has been a very good prospect in his career with the Cubs and there's plenty of reason to believe he'll be a productive player at the MLB level. Not to mention, Rizzo wasn't exactly a superstar. Rizzo hit .285/.342/.463, which is good for a wOBA of .349 and a wRC+ of 116. Of the 25 qualified 1st basemen last season (Rizzo is not one of them), there were 12 who had a wRC+ of 116 or greater. Rizzo's moment was going from awful to basically league average for a 1st baseman. Rizzo should improve somewhat on those numbers though.
For Jackson to be in the middle of qualified CF last year he'd need only a 106 wRC+ so yeah, Jackson can definitely have a Rizzo moment. And then some.
Can and will are two different things. Jackson has significant strikeout issues. He's going to strike out a lot, but he can't do it as many times as he did last year. Really, he can't even do it as many times as he did in the minor leagues either. So it's going to be difficult, but he can do it.
4. Is Welington Castillo ready?
I'm sure he's ready. I don't know what he's ready for, but surely there is something that Castillo is ready for. Is he ready to be an every day MLB catcher? Maybe. Maybe not. His projections are promising so there's that. I remain unconvinced, but I'm wrong a lot.
5. Will Starlin Castro benefit from new deal?
I don't see how. The New Deal was established during the Depression and while the economy kind of sucks, it's not that bad. Even if it was, I'm pretty sure Castro would not qualify for any of the programs seeing he's making millions of dollars.
6. Is Ian Stewart healthy?
Shouldn't this have been included with question 1? Stewart is likely healthier than he was last year, but he also likely still sucks so I don't see the point in this question.
7. Is Kyuji Fujikawa the new closer?
If Carlos Marmol gets traded, Fujikawa might have a chance to earn that role, but I highly doubt that will be given to him considering he has had no success against MLB pitching. Stranger things have happened so who knows?
8. Can Alfonso Soriano stay young?
No. Soriano, like everyone else, will only get older.
9. Who's in right field?
I think the answer is Nate Schierholtz. At least until the Cubs find someone better than Nate Schierholtz, which wouldn't take long if they're looking.
10. Will they lose 100 games again?
My gut says yes, but brain says no. It's damn hard to lose 100 games so more than likely the Cubs will not lose that many again, but they are bad. Just as bad as last year.
Comments
Muskat isn’t asking the hard-hitting questions, like Who Owns the Cubs?
BerseliusQuote Reply
Don’t you like anything?
MuckerQuote Reply
Bubbs wanted to point out how amazing Jadeveon Clowneys hit was on Michigans RB yesterday..
Carry on
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
What was it like before the New Deal, SK?
Aisle424Quote Reply
@ Aisle424:
Fixed.
mikeakaleroyQuote Reply
Who is on first!
Aisle424Quote Reply
Damn, I was really hoping that my age would roll back to 28 on my birthday.
BerseliusQuote Reply
(dying laughing)
Also, refreshing the cache worked. Thanks.
WaLiQuote Reply
I was going to just comment
but Aisley et al ruined it for me. Fuck. You. All.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
bubblesdachimp wrote:
Has there ever been a cooler name than Jadeveon Clowney? I think that’s gotta be up there with the all-timers. Barkevious Mingo is another sweet one from college football.
MylesQuote Reply
Myles wrote:
Those are good. Drungo Larue Hazewood is my favorite from baseball.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
WaLi wrote:
No problem.
dmick89Quote Reply
Another sweet Play Index tidbit.
The all-time record for games with 10 or more strikeouts pitched in a season is 23, held by 2 players. The first was Nolan Ryan, in 1973. The second was Randy Johnson in 1999. And in 2000. And in 2001. Randy Johnson was straight ridiculous. This is the list by year of games with 10 strikeouts or more (from 97 to 04):
1997: 14
1998: 20
1999: 23
2000: 23
2001: 23
2002: 15
2003: 05
2004: 13
Kerry Wood holds the all-time mark for a Cub, with 11. The Big Unit did 11 or more games in a year 10 fucking times.
MylesQuote Reply
@ Myles:
I do say Randy Johnson belongs in the HOF.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
@ Myles:
He was unbelievably good. The Hall of Fame has really been fucked over by the BBWAA. Next year you have Maddux, Frank Thomas, Mussina and Glavine becoming eligible and all of them deserve to be in the HOF. They’re poised to not elect a single fucking person this year because they’ve created a situation in which they’re just splitting the vote and it’s only going to get worse. The following year you add Pedro, Smoltz and RJ to the list. It’s entirely possible that in 2015 you’ll have the following list of eligible HOFers.
Maddux
Thomas
Mussina
Glavine
Pedro
Smoltz
RJ
Biggio
Bagwell
Raines
Piazza
Clemens
Bonds
Schilling
E. Martinez
McGwire
Raffy
Sosa
L. Walker
All of those guys could be on the 2015 ballot and it will be difficult for anyone to get elected. That’s 19 players who are either better than the average hall of famer (most of them) or they have a strong argument to be in. And since the BBWAA can only vote for 10 and instead average something like 4 to 6, it’s going to be tough for even a guy like Maddux to get in.
dmick89Quote Reply
The following year you add Griffey Jr. and Edmonds (probably be overlooked) and then the next year you get Pudge Rodriguez, Manny and Vlad.
dmick89Quote Reply
You know what? The best thing for the HOF may be that you end up with a list like I had above and nobody gets in. They’ll make changes if that is the case. There’s no way the HOF will continue to be associated with the BBWAA if there are upwards of 20 candidates on the ballot who belong in the HOF.
dmick89Quote Reply
@ Rice Cube:
That was the first of many Captain Obvious moments for 2013.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Even the possibility that a guy like Unit or Maddux doesn’t get in on the first ballot just makes my head explode.
Maddux had a legitimate claim to 6 Cy Youngs. He won the award 4 consecutive years. He was robbed of the 1995 MVP. Maddux/Martinez/Johnson are 3 of the 10 best pitchers of ALL TIME. They aren’t just inner-circle HOFers, they are inner-inner circle guys. The BBWAA is awful.
MylesQuote Reply
@ Myles:
Not to mention Roger Clemens who might be the best pitcher in history. Barry Bonds might be the best player in history (probably 2nd best, but offensively as impressive as Babe Ruth).
dmick89Quote Reply
@ dmick89:
Is the 90’s the best age of baseball ever?
EdwinQuote Reply
@ Edwin:
RJ was good into the early 2000s and so was Bonds, and those were two of my favorite players. I think the post-strike era as a whole was pretty awesome, but that’s just me.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
@ Rice Cube:
I was just thinking that the late 90’s had so many great players just starting to peak, or still peaking. Bonds, Griffey, A-rod…it’s incredible.
I wonder if you go by WAR or other metrics, if you could isolate which individual season had the most elite performances? Sort of “what was the best season of baseball ever?” question. For example, 98 was incredible, at least pitching wise. Kevin Brown had 9.3 WAR. The next five were Roger Clemens (8.8), Curt Schilling (8.6), Randy Johnson (7.7), Greg Maddux (7.6), and Pedro (6.7). That’s possibly 6 HOF pitchers all having great seasons during the same season.
EdwinQuote Reply
@ Edwin:
1998 was definitely a good year. Lots of great performances, the home run chase, and I didn’t think the Yankees were evil just yet (dying laughing)
Rice CubeQuote Reply
@ Edwin:
I think Tangotiger showed that the pitchers born between 1962-1971 was the best decade ever (stretched from 62-71 to include Pedro). I’m not sure about position players, but I will say that I have a hard time believing that we didn’t just see the best era for superstar pitchers. Clemens, RJ, Maddux, Pedro, Glavine, Smoltz, Rivera, Schilling, and more. Unreal. Had Pedro managed to stay healthy we may be talking about him easily being the best pitcher of all time. He did have the best peak among pitchers all time.
dmick89Quote Reply
New Shit
MylesQuote Reply
dmick89 wrote:
I was thinking this the other day. Someone on Twitter was talking about the strategy of voting for guys ahead of other more deserving guys because it’s possible that some very deserving players may end up with less than 5% of the vote because of the glut of talent on the ballot and he wanted to throw a vote their way to make sure they at least made it to the next ballot.
But what is happening seems to be the issue we had on our voting where the there are more than 10 worthy candidates, but nobody can agree on a ranking so they’ll all end up with less than 75% of the vote. It’s crazy.
Aisle424Quote Reply
Good Lord! 90’s best era ever???? 1890’s, I hope. God save us from SAbremetrics and fans with no historical perspective. I don’t know of anyone who can begin to make a case for best era period. Each era in baseball is unique and unto itself with the incredible changes in equipment, rules, conditions, health and nutrition, NOT TO MENTION the incredible dilution of talent to other sports and expansion. The game today is a sissy sport compared to just 50 years ago and THOSE guys were wimps compared to 50 years before them! Add the incredible money factor (all ballplayers but the top 10 or 20 had second jobs before about 1960) and you have something entirely different than the sport I began playing 50 years ago.
Think for just a second about the effect having NO BATTING HELMET OF ANY KIND, having only 4 or 5 balls used in a game (they get very brown), no lights for late afternoon, and NO RESTRICTIONS against throwing at any batter’s head. Forget any other changes. Those changes alone make baseball then a game completely unrelated to baseball now. No body armor a la Barry Bungles Bonds. I dare you to play a competitive game now under the equipment and rules I began with. You’d all need Depends. And the play around second base — brutal. Take guy’s knees and ankle out on double plays. Intentionally throw at the sliding baserunner to make a point and lose the double play. Hit three guys in a row and stay in the game as a pitcher because somebody dug in at the plate against you. I once started an inning by drilling my much hated opponent in the head with a first pitch high fastball. The next batter struck out looking at three fastballs after the first one made him drop to the ground. I drilled the third batter in the shoulder. Struck out the next the same way. Drilled the fifth batter with a fastball on his forearm. He had to leave the game. Struck out the sixth batter with the bases loaded. Why did I do it. Because they did it to me and the rules allowed me to. Baseball was a real man’s game. Tough, mean, and everyone always alert and on edge, looking for the advantage.
Tell me about the “best players of their era” but don’t insult me with best of all times. Get educated BEFORE you make an argument.
coachleifQuote Reply
coachleif wrote:
Hahaha what the fuck is that
The WreckardQuote Reply
@ Berselius:
but they are bad. Just as bad as last year.
Really i disagree totally. She said that it wouldn’t be hard for the Cubs to find a right fielder better then Nate Schierholtz . How do you figure this idea out ? Nate has never gotten 500 ab for any team in the mlb. His potential is a high ceiling kind of deal which is what we are use to with this F.O. Second off Ian Stewart still sucks if healthy ? Your defiantly got a cob in one of your holes. I look for the Cubs to win 80 this year with shark getting better and jackson is good against the nl central and if Garza is healthy our 1-3 is pretty good and Rizzo will excel in 2013
mike durbinQuote Reply