Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 40 of 76 FirstFirst ... 30383940414250 ... LastLast
Results 586 to 600 of 1134
  1. #586
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    2,608

    2020 Cubs Spring Training Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by La_bibbers View Post
    I won't speak for anyone else, but I haven't got an issue with anyone talking about who gets the last spot. I think it's a fruitless battle because all of our options leave a lot to be desired, but it's whatever, there's not really much to talk about this time of the year anyway. I just think it's wrong to say that ST stats are or should be a determinent. Anyway, it's not calling you out, I don't even know you, much less have anything against you. I just thought your comment was wrong so I said it. If you think it's not wrong, tell me how it's not in a way that isn't a sarcastic quip with no substance attached to it.
    Which comment did you think was wrong? Rcal said Chatwood looked good this spring. I made a joke, because when I said watch Ian Miller, you said nothing he does this spring matters (for lack of better words). Iím not exactly sure what youíre wanting me to back up? I canít back up an opinion on whether spring stats matter? I mean I wish I was tight with David Ross and I could call him up and ask him, but unfortunately Iím not. This isnít the type of discussion where you can make the argument that Iím not posting facts. Itís your opinion that ST numbers donít matter. I also agree with that. Iíve said it multiple times. I donít care what Hendricks, Darvish, Rizzo, Bryant, Contreras, Caratini, Baez, so on and so forth do. I will pay attention to what fringe guys do. I mean Chatwood isnít a fringe guy, but heís competing for 5th starter. I donít want to see Chatwood walk 5 guys in every ST start. That would concern me. I think the 26th roster spot is down to Miller or Phegley. Itís your opinion that whoever wins was a predetermined outcome. I disagree. Nothing you nor I say will change each otherís minds. We are not discussing ďwhich player is better,Ē so no I canít post any facts to support what Iím saying.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by ivyboys; 03-11-2020 at 07:58 AM.

  2. #587
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    27,222
    Quote Originally Posted by ivyboys View Post
    All of my opinions leave a lot to be desired? Uh what? Which comment did you think was wrong? Rcal said Chatwood looked good this spring. I made a joke, because when I said watch Ian Miller, you said nothing he does this spring matters (for lack of better words). Iím not exactly sure what youíre wanting me to back up? I canít back up an opinion on whether spring stats matter? I mean I wish I was tight with David Ross and I could call him up and ask him, but unfortunately Iím not. This isnít the type of discussion where you can make the argument that Iím not posting facts. Itís your opinion that ST numbers donít matter. I also agree with that. Iíve said it multiple times. I donít care what Hendricks, Darvish, Rizzo, Bryant, Contreras, Caratini, Baez, so on and so forth do. I will pay attention to what fringe guys do. I mean Chatwood isnít a fringe guy, but heís competing for 5th starter. I donít want to see Chatwood walk 5 guys in every ST start. That would concern me. I think the 26th roster spot is down to Miller or Phegley. Itís your opinion that whoever wins was a predetermined outcome. I disagree. Nothing you nor I say will change each otherís minds. We are not discussing ďwhich player is better,Ē so no I canít post any facts to support what Iím saying.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    That's not even close to what I said. I said "our options" as in, all the options for who ends up the 26th man leave a lot to be desired, so the conversation is fruitless. And before anyone gets mad at me and yells at me because it's ST and "what else are we supposed to talk about?" read my last post because I already threw out that olive branch. There's not much else to talk about. If you want to talk about it, it's fine, I'm anything but annoyed by it. I just think not everything needs to have so much emphasis/importance put into it. Phegley, Descalso, Miller, whatever. I don't think it matters which scrub ends up on the roster. Ideally none of them would be and we'd have someone who could actually hit on the bench.

    I think it's pretty obvious that spring stats don't mean anything. The sample sizes alone are too small to draw anything from, but other than that, there's guys every year who have monster Springs that everyone obsesses over that amount to nothing come the regular season. Ian Happ was supposed to break out in 2018, but he took a big step down from 2017 and ended up not even making the roster in 2019. I'd guess those kinds of things are more common than they are the exception to the rule.

    I'm sure there's ways someone could go about testing these things, but it'd be time consuming. In any sense, if there's not evidence for something that you're aware of, I think it's best to avoid making such a strong case for it.
    Last edited by La_bibbers; 03-11-2020 at 08:17 AM.

  3. #588
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    27,222
    https://www.baseball-reference.com/t...training.shtml Albert Almora, Mark Zagunis, Christian Adames, Johnny Field, & Addison Russell also had great ST stats last year. Bote was fine last year, but he sure didn't hit like superman the way he did in Spring.

  4. #589
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    27,222
    https://www.foxsports.com/mlb/chicag...group=1&time=1 2018 Mike Freeman, Ian Happ, Addison Russell, Mark Zagunis, Peter Bourjos all had great springs and underwhelming/unmentionable years. Javy's spring sucked but he proceeded to have his breakout MVP season.

  5. #590
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    2,608
    Quote Originally Posted by La_bibbers View Post
    That's not even close to what I said. I said "our options" as in, all the options for who ends up the 26th man leave a lot to be desired, so the conversation is fruitless. And before anyone gets mad at me and yells at me because it's ST and "what else are we supposed to talk about?" read my last post because I already threw out that olive branch. There's not much else to talk about. If you want to talk about it, it's fine, I'm anything but annoyed by it. I just think not everything needs to have so much emphasis/importance put into it. Phegley, Descalso, Miller, whatever. I don't think it matters which scrub ends up on the roster. Ideally none of them would be and we'd have someone who could actually hit on the bench.

    I think it's pretty obvious that spring stats don't mean anything. The sample sizes alone are too small to draw anything from, but other than that, there's guys every year who have monster Springs that everyone obsesses over that amount to nothing come the regular season. Ian Happ was supposed to break out in 2018, but he took a big step down from 2017 and ended up not even making the roster in 2019. I'd guess those kinds of things are more common than they are the exception to the rule.

    I'm sure there's ways someone could go about testing these things, but it'd be time consuming. In any sense, if there's not evidence for something that you're aware of, I think it's best to avoid making such a strong case for it.
    Iíll read and respond when I get a chance. I also edited my post. I replied late last night and just misread what you said.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  6. #591
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by BDawk4Prez View Post
    Guess not.
    I'm in Dawk, I just spent 2K on Pappy Van Winkle so what the hell- you pick this up and I'll bring the Pappy.

  7. #592
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    14,935
    Quote Originally Posted by La_bibbers View Post
    That's not even close to what I said. I said "our options" as in, all the options for who ends up the 26th man leave a lot to be desired, so the conversation is fruitless. And before anyone gets mad at me and yells at me because it's ST and "what else are we supposed to talk about?" read my last post because I already threw out that olive branch. There's not much else to talk about. If you want to talk about it, it's fine, I'm anything but annoyed by it. I just think not everything needs to have so much emphasis/importance put into it. Phegley, Descalso, Miller, whatever. I don't think it matters which scrub ends up on the roster. Ideally none of them would be and we'd have someone who could actually hit on the bench.

    I think it's pretty obvious that spring stats don't mean anything. The sample sizes alone are too small to draw anything from, but other than that, there's guys every year who have monster Springs that everyone obsesses over that amount to nothing come the regular season. Ian Happ was supposed to break out in 2018, but he took a big step down from 2017 and ended up not even making the roster in 2019. I'd guess those kinds of things are more common than they are the exception to the rule.

    I'm sure there's ways someone could go about testing these things, but it'd be time consuming. In any sense, if there's not evidence for something that you're aware of, I think it's best to avoid making such a strong case for it.
    I feel this whole argument started because I said Chatwood is having a nice spring and that is encouraging to see. And I still stand by that statement. I am not suggesting Chatwood is going to be this ace pitcher, or anything like that. But the fact is the Cubs saw something in him in 18'. And up until now he has not lived up to whatever it was they saw. It would be nice if this year he did live up to his contract. And if he can harness his control, he can do it. He is still the same guy who throws hard, has a solid spin rate, and get a lot of ground balls. Yes, he is the 5th starter, but that doesn't mean he can't pitch closer to a MOR starter, that I believe they thought they were getting when they signed him. And, if he can do that, the rotation would get a huge boost.
    For a guy like Chatwood, or even Mills, spring training does matter. For pen guys (and bibbs has said this as well) spring training does matter. For that last spot or 2 on the roster, again, spring does matter. Sure, just because a guy has a great spring or a terrible spring that does not dictate his entire season. But it might be the difference between making a roster or not, or making the rotation or not, to start the season.

  8. #593
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    27,222
    Quote Originally Posted by rcal10 View Post
    I feel this whole argument started because I said Chatwood is having a nice spring and that is encouraging to see. And I still stand by that statement. I am not suggesting Chatwood is going to be this ace pitcher, or anything like that. But the fact is the Cubs saw something in him in 18'. And up until now he has not lived up to whatever it was they saw. It would be nice if this year he did live up to his contract. And if he can harness his control, he can do it. He is still the same guy who throws hard, has a solid spin rate, and get a lot of ground balls. Yes, he is the 5th starter, but that doesn't mean he can't pitch closer to a MOR starter, that I believe they thought they were getting when they signed him. And, if he can do that, the rotation would get a huge boost.
    For a guy like Chatwood, or even Mills, spring training does matter. For pen guys (and bibbs has said this as well) spring training does matter. For that last spot or 2 on the roster, again, spring does matter. Sure, just because a guy has a great spring or a terrible spring that does not dictate his entire season. But it might be the difference between making a roster or not, or making the rotation or not, to start the season.
    I don't think Chatwood's 8 IP of Spring should be looked at as encouraging. I've made it perfectly clear I think there's really no evidence that people should believe he's gonna be anything more than what he's ever been in his career. There's no evidence to believe he'll "harness" his control any more than he has. He's had sub 3.5 BB/9 IP rates in certain seasons in the past. I don't think there's any reason he might not be able to do something like that again next year and be a competent backend starter, but I see no reason other than randomness to believe he'll be anything resembling a MORP next year. He wasn't bad in his mopup role last year. I think there's reason to believe he won't be 2018 Chatwood again, which I suppose is a victory. But he's never had good K:BB rates in any significant sample size in his entire career. These are things I'm asking for when I ask people to give me evidence. Chatwood has had good spin rates and velocity his whole career. It's been 9 years and if anything, he's regressed since he got to the Cubs. What reason other than an arbitrary, statistically insignificant 32 bullpen innings from last year are there to suggest he's suddenly gonna be better than he's ever been? You can't just ignore his 1st half from last year where he was bad Chatwood, much less the rest of his career.

    When did I say ST mattered for bullpen guys? I definitely don't think it does. My stance is exactly the same in that regard. Give me evidence it matters. The Cubs have decisions to make, it doesn't mean those decisions should be made based on ST.
    Last edited by La_bibbers; 03-11-2020 at 09:23 AM.

  9. #594
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    14,935
    Quote Originally Posted by La_bibbers View Post
    I don't think Chatwood's 8 IP of Spring should be looked at as encouraging. I've made it perfectly clear I think there's really no evidence that people should believe he's gonna be anything more than what he's ever been in his career. There's no evidence to believe he'll "harness" his control any more than he has. He's had sub 3.5 BB/9 IP rates in certain seasons in the past. I don't think there's any reason he might not be able to do something like that again next year and be a competent backend starter, but I see no reason other than randomness to believe he'll be anything resembling a MORP next year. He wasn't bad in his mopup role last year. I think there's reason to believe he won't be 2018 Chatwood again, which I suppose is a victory. But he's never had good K:BB rates in any significant sample size in his entire career. These are things I'm asking for when I ask people to give me evidence. Chatwood has had good spin rates and velocity his whole career. It's been 9 years and if anything, he's regressed since he got to the Cubs. What reason other than an arbitrary, statistically insignificant 32 bullpen innings from last year are there to suggest he's suddenly gonna be better than he's ever been? You can't just ignore his 1st half from last year where he was bad Chatwood, much less the rest of his career.

    When did I say ST mattered for bullpen guys? I definitely don't think it does. My stance is exactly the same in that regard. Give me evidence it matters. The Cubs have decisions to make, it doesn't mean those decisions should be made based on ST.
    OK, bibbs. Fine. I will refrain form posting anything else until I do a deep dive into stats to back my OPINION. This is getting ridiculous.

  10. #595
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    27,222
    Quote Originally Posted by rcal10 View Post
    OK, bibbs. Fine. I will refrain form posting anything else until I do a deep dive into stats to back my OPINION. This is getting ridiculous.
    To say something is encouraging, to me, is more than an opinion. It suggests there's substance where there's not in this case. Similarly, when you say ST matters for bullpen guys, that's more than an opinion. It's a statement. You don't need to take it personally either when I refute claims you're making.

  11. #596
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Godfrey, IL
    Posts
    89
    If we get the Chatwood from 50% of his career innings pitched, I will take that in a heartbeat. In 2013, 2016, and 2017 he averaged 2.97 WAR. Is he a wildcard? Absolutely, as evidenced by the 50/50 performance of his career so far. But to dismiss his career performance to date as something we can't use is a little pessimistic. I would gladly take that in our rotation. I also don't think there is anything wrong with being encouraged by how he is performing in ST. It doesn't predict anything for 2020 and beyond but it can at least be discussed as something to be hopeful about.

  12. #597
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    27,222
    What I think is ridiculous is that people feel like they should just be able to say anything they want without me asking them to elaborate or justify what they're saying.

    Anyone can say and believe anything, but why is it such an insult for me to show evidence to the contrary? I'm not trying to shut anyone down, just have a discussion. If you think the evidence I'm presenting is wrong, tell me how it's wrong.

    If I ask you to present a basis for what you're saying and you can't or don't want to, just say it. It's perfectly fine to feel something, but just present it that way instead of something that's just as valid as a statement made with evidence.

  13. #598
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    27,222
    Quote Originally Posted by putter84 View Post
    If we get the Chatwood from 50% of his career innings pitched, I will take that in a heartbeat. In 2013, 2016, and 2017 he averaged 2.97 WAR. Is he a wildcard? Absolutely, as evidenced by the 50/50 performance of his career so far. But to dismiss his career performance to date as something we can't use is a little pessimistic. I would gladly take that in our rotation. I also don't think there is anything wrong with being encouraged by how he is performing in ST. It doesn't predict anything for 2020 and beyond but it can at least be discussed as something to be hopeful about.
    My guess is you're using bWAR, which relies more on ERA. For fWAR, which depends on FIP, he's never had a greater than a 2 WAR season. At best, he's never been more than a backend starter.

  14. #599
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Godfrey, IL
    Posts
    89
    Quote Originally Posted by La_bibbers View Post
    My guess is you're using bWAR, which relies more on ERA. For fWAR, which depends on FIP, he's never had a greater than a 2 WAR season. At best, he's never been more than a backend starter.
    ...and this is exactly what we need him to be. Anything more would be some extra gravy. We need Darvish and Hendricks to be at the top with Lester and Q anchored in the middle. Point taken on fWAR, I'm not here to debate the pro/con of those metrics.

  15. #600
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    27,222
    Quote Originally Posted by putter84 View Post
    ...and this is exactly what we need him to be. Anything more would be some extra gravy. We need Darvish and Hendricks to be at the top with Lester and Q anchored in the middle. Point taken on fWAR, I'm not here to debate the pro/con of those metrics.
    I've acknowledged that at this point. I'd be fine with him just being a competent 5th starter this year. I just don't see that there's evidence to justify a position that he's going to be more than that. People are welcome to think it anyway, but people are technically also welcome to believe in a flat Earth, so.

Page 40 of 76 FirstFirst ... 30383940414250 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •