Another "not keeping up?" question.... The Cubs and Cubs-reporters seem really fired up about their pitch lab and it's value. So, "if" the pitch lab is so valuable, why do they only have that in Arizona, where a limited fraction of pitchers have access? Might it not be appropriate to have one in Chicago, where big-league Cubs could more easily visit it, and Hottovy? Where Midwest-League Cub pitchers could more easily visit? Maybe Southern-League and Midwest-League guys, too?
I don't know how it works. But it seems like for all the benefits they talk about, those have tended to apply to offseason stuff; to new pickups (Wieck comes over, spends a week in the pitch lab, and then starts to apply); to D-caliber prospects (Effross, etc..), etc.. Might it not be helpful to have one in Chicago? If Edwards is in a slump, give him a one-week break to fool around in the pitch lab? If Q's curve isn't working, what if you sent him over to pitch lab to try to figure out why? Might The Professor like to do a between-starts throwing session in there, to do some experimenting?
I guess I'm just thinking that having an on-site pitch lab where big-league players could do some maintenance checkups, or could get some quantification on some things they're playing with or wondering about, might that not be helpful? I'm just thinking that whatever value it has, being able to visit a couple of times in February is one thing; but I assume finesse mechanical factors probably tend to drift over the ensuing 7 months. So being able to pop in more conveniently to a Chicago-based lab and do some maintenance measurements might be helpful?
Not sure how hard and competitively you need to throw for it to be useful? Maybe Hendricks doing a between-starts throwing session doesn't help, because he's not throwing as seriously as in a real game? And Lester can pump it up to 89-91 with game-day adrenaline; but the data in a pitch lab when he's at 83-84 might not be that valuable? Beats me.