« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 700 701 [702] 703 704 ... 728   Go Down

Author Topic: Cubs in '12  (Read 203036 times)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2132
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10515 on: December 14, 2012, 03:44:35 pm »
I'd like to see Derek Johnson(and maybe Bosio) take a look at some video of Liriano and see if there is anything he sees that might explain Liriano's great inconsistency since his surgery.  If there are any fixable flaws, he'd definitely be worth a flyer.  He had a low walk rate before the injury, and actually a decent one in his one decent year since(2010...fip of 2.66 that year also).  You'd think there might be some noticeable difference that a keen eye could recognize and put to right.
Logged

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16442
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10516 on: December 14, 2012, 04:08:25 pm »
Although TJ surgery is very successful in restoring a pitcher's velocity and even movement, one thing it often does NOT restore is the pin point command that they may have had previous to the surgery.  A case in point that most of us are familiar with is that of Kerry Wood, who went on to have  a decent career after his surgery, but never returned to the "Hall of Fame" kind of production that he seemed to have before it.

Some doctors have said that although the tendon taken from the leg serves the purpose as far as strength is concerned, it just doesn't have the same "feel" in some pitchers to allow them the same level of control over their fine movements.  But whatever the reason, I would be very reluctant to commit a lot of money to a pitcher who hasn't returned to form 4 years after the surgery.

One reason why we got Vizcaino for such a low price is because until he starts to pitch in live games, we won't have a good idea of whether or not he will have the great command that he needs to become a top pitcher.  And one reason why the Cubs seem quite high on Rondon is that in the Winter League, he IS exhibiting that command.
Logged

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10517 on: December 14, 2012, 04:32:58 pm »
Quote from: davep on December 14, 2012, 01:17:25 pm
We can rule out Dombrowski, since he could not be in on the Cubs negotiations, and would have absolutely no motivation to reveal it if he DID find out.

Whether the information leaked or not was doing to make no difference to what Dombrowski was going to offer, meaning that he might have let someone know for any number of reasons -- doing so was not going to hurt him or the Tigers.

Perhaps he liked a reporter, or perhaps he had a grudge against Theo and wanted to make him look bad.... and for each of the principles we can identify, as I mentioned before there would be at least one assistant, secretary or aid who was also going to know what was going on.

Plenty of different avenues for leaks.

Quote from: davep on December 14, 2012, 01:17:25 pm
And the Cubs FO certainly have shown the ability to keep secrets.

After Dempster, Marmol and now Sanchez, you may be seeing more ability than I do.

That is three rather significant leaks, and the only commonality in all of them is that the Cubs front office was involved each time.

Now they might not have been responsible any of the three times, but after three times in less than 6 months, it might make sense to wonder.
Logged

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10518 on: December 14, 2012, 04:56:55 pm »
Quote from: CUBluejays on December 14, 2012, 02:02:34 pm
Dombrowski had to increase his offer by 1 year and $32 million.  He had nothing to gain by letting it out.  The Cubs didn't have his name on the dotted line, they had nothing to gain.

Dombrowski also had nothing to lose by letting it out.

He wanted to sign Sanchez.  To sign him he had to increase his offer, and apparently he decided to increase it enough that he thought the Cubs would not come back and top it.

Whether the Cubs' offer to Sanchez was reported or not, Dombrowski would have had to increase the offer to sign Sanchez.

Even with Theo, the fact that the Cubs' offer was reported before the signing was final changed nothing in the negotiations with Sanchez.  The only possible effect was to let Garza know that the Cubs were willing to go that high, but if it had NOT been reported, Garza would still have seen what Sanchez and other comparable pitchers were getting, so it likely would not be a meaningful factor in Garza's demands if the Cubs try to extend him.

Did the agent leak it?

Perhaps, but the idea that everyone else would have somehow been hurting themselves by leaking, and that therefor the agent MUST have been the source, really doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
Logged

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16442
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10519 on: December 14, 2012, 05:40:03 pm »
"After Dempster, Marmol and now Sanchez, you may be seeing more ability than I do."

We know that the Marmol leak came from Marmol himslef, so that eliminates one of the names mentioned,

We know that the Dempster leak came from the Atlanta front office, so that eliminates the second name on the list.

There wasn't even a whisper of rumor that the Cubs were negotiation with Sanchez, so that indicates that the Cubs front office can keep things quiet if they want to.  Just as there were few prior reports when they traded for Rizzo, Stewart, Dempster to the Rangers, Soto, and a handful of others.

It is quite possible that someone that had NO reason to leak, actually DID leak.  But when one person has NO reason to leak information, while a SECOND person would make a lot of money leaking that same information, you are a fool if you bet on the first guy.
Logged

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2132
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10520 on: December 14, 2012, 06:56:55 pm »
Quote from: davep on December 14, 2012, 04:08:25 pm
Although TJ surgery is very successful in restoring a pitcher's velocity and even movement, one thing it often does NOT restore is the pin point command that they may have had previous to the surgery.  A case in point that most of us are familiar with is that of Kerry Wood, who went on to have  a decent career after his surgery, but never returned to the "Hall of Fame" kind of production that he seemed to have before it.

Some doctors have said that although the tendon taken from the leg serves the purpose as far as strength is concerned, it just doesn't have the same "feel" in some pitchers to allow them the same level of control over their fine movements.  But whatever the reason, I would be very reluctant to commit a lot of money to a pitcher who hasn't returned to form 4 years after the surgery.

This is true and most likely the cause of his troubles.  Liriano's 2010 season just made me wonder if a different pitching coach and organization could perhaps get something more out of him.  I would want Johnson or Bosio see to see if there was something identifiable first that might would make a difference, and if so, then i'd try and give him a contract with a 2014 club option in case he did work out. 

And while 2010 could just be a flash-in-the-pan post-surgery career year with no significance, not only was his walk rate the best by far post-surgery(2.72/9, which was pretty close to his great 2006 season), but it coincided with a career best in hr/9(.42), and his best velocity post surgery(94.2 average fastball...93.5 with 2 seam).  It also seems like his fastball velocity variates more on a year-to-year basis than most pitchers, perhaps signifying some sort of mechanical issue.  His fastball last year was above his career average so it seems like he still has the stuff if someone can figure him out. 

Of course, it could be that he's a nut case and not worth the trouble.  And definitely not worth a big multi-year contract to find out...just speculating on a value signing if the price is right and Bosio and/or Johnson see something in him fixable.
Logged

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10521 on: December 14, 2012, 07:00:02 pm »
dave, none of those examples is eliminated.

All happened under Theo.

And if he had been really concerned about not having anything leaked, he could have impressed on Marmol and Dempster not to leak.  He apparently did not.

But you keep going back to the agent as having a motivation to leak it, suggesting that he "would make a lot of money leaking that same information,"

How?

If it is not leaked, he still goes back to Dombrowski with the Cubs offer, the same as he did when the offer was leaked.  Not a thing would have been changed.

How is it that the leak played to the advantage of Sanchez' agent?
Logged

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16442
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10522 on: December 14, 2012, 07:16:21 pm »
He certainly have impressed upon Marmol that he should keep things secret.  But even so, Marmol might have let something slip.  He is really at fault because he didn't kill Marmol, thus eliminating his ability to leak.

And you are right that he must not have impressed upon Dempster and Marmol that they shouldn't leak.  Everyone knows that if he had just impressed that upon them, it would have been impossible for them to disregard him and leak otherwise.

And if you think that the agent telling Dombrowske that he had another offer would be as effective as the press telling Dombroski the same thing, I am glad you are not the one doing the negotiations.
Logged

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8857
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10523 on: December 14, 2012, 07:20:38 pm »
I gather that Jes must have suggested that Dempster was or could have been the leak in his faux trade.   Problem is that he was the guy most upset about the leak. He clearly was not to blame for that.  Not that it matters that much, at this point, but just in the interest of accuracy ... for those who care about such things.
Logged

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10524 on: December 14, 2012, 07:38:43 pm »
Quote from: davep on December 14, 2012, 07:16:21 pm
And if you think that the agent telling Dombrowske that he had another offer would be as effective as the press telling Dombroski the same thing, I am glad you are not the one doing the negotiations.

davep, actually think about it for just a moment, and that is really all that it takes.

If the agent tells reporters he has an offer of 5 years at $75M/year and they report it, you contend that is more likely to get Dombrowski to cough up more money than if the agent tells Dombrowski that the Cubs have made that offer.  (I am assuming that you agree that either way Dombrowski is going to be told of the offer and given the opportunity to top the offer, that you are not suggesting that the only way Dombrowski was going to learn of the offer was if the media reported it.)

Why?

You offer no explanation for that conclusion, but you seem to hold it fiercely.

You are a reasonably articulate guy.

Explain it.
Logged

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16442
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10525 on: December 14, 2012, 07:47:53 pm »
If I were Dombrowski, I would be more likely to believe a published leak that MIGHT have come from an independent source than I would a claim by someone that had every reason to lie to me.

Perhaps it comes from 45 year of making a living by negotiating with people.

But you are probably right.  There is absolutely no reason to "follow the money", or look for other motivation.  For instance, everyone knows that when a crime is committed, the last person that the police suspect is the one with the greatest motive.
Logged

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16248
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10526 on: December 14, 2012, 08:00:16 pm »
Quote from: Ray on December 14, 2012, 06:56:55 pm
....  Liriano's 2010 season just made me wonder if a different pitching coach and organization could perhaps get something more out of him.  I would want Johnson or Bosio see to see if there was something identifiable first that might would make a difference, and if so, then i'd try and give him a contract with a 2014 club option in case he did work out. 

And while 2010 could just be a flash-in-the-pan post-surgery career year with no significance, not only was his walk rate the best by far post-surgery(2.72/9, which was pretty close to his great 2006 season), but it coincided with a career best in hr/9(.42), and his best velocity post surgery(94.2 average fastball...93.5 with 2 seam).  It also seems like his fastball velocity variates more on a year-to-year basis than most pitchers, perhaps signifying some sort of mechanical issue.  His fastball last year was above his career average so it seems like he still has the stuff if someone can figure him out. 

Of course, it could be that he's a nut case and not worth the trouble.  ....just speculating on a value signing if the price is right and Bosio and/or Johnson see something in him fixable.

Good thinking and analysis, Ray.  He's been good post surgery, for the 2010 season and within games or over periods of games.  So the velocity and stuff is still there.  It's the command, the consistency, and the self-control that have been lacking.  I agree with you, if the pitching analysts think they can ID why and think the problem is mechanical and correctible. he could be a good investment.  He can tease with some ace-ish stuff, he just can't sustain it. 

His reputation here in Minnesota is that he's kind of a head case, and lacks toughness and the mental game.  Keyed up too much in some situations, keyed up too little in others, can look great for several innings or several starts and then lose it fast, particularly if an umpiring call or an error goes wrong.   Whether that reputation is valid, I have no idea, fans and radio shows often have unfair caricatures of players. 
Logged

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10527 on: December 14, 2012, 08:41:06 pm »
Quote from: davep on December 14, 2012, 07:47:53 pm
If I were Dombrowski, I would be more likely to believe a published leak that MIGHT have come from an independent source than I would a claim by someone that had every reason to lie to me.

Perhaps it comes from 45 year of making a living by negotiating with people.

But you are probably right.  There is absolutely no reason to "follow the money", or look for other motivation.  For instance, everyone knows that when a crime is committed, the last person that the police suspect is the one with the greatest motive.

And in EITHER case, wouldn't you get on the phone to call Theo to see if he had made that offer, or insist on seeing a copy of the contract the other team would have to have presented?

Any agent could leak the news report which you say you would consider more credible than the word of the agent, even though you would have the opportunity to ask the agent directly.... and apparently in neither case would you ask for anything resembling independent confirmation.

Those are not really issues of negotiation, but they are issues of making intelligent decisions.
Logged

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16442
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10528 on: December 14, 2012, 09:08:50 pm »
I can't imagine a situation where Dombrowski would call theo and ask him details about his offers.  If that wouldn't be tampering, I can't imagine what would be.  And even if he DID call, why in the world would Theo tell him that he had made an offer?

But if you want to maintain that someone with no motivation is as likely to commit an act as someone with strong  motivation, go ahead.
Logged

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '12
« Reply #10529 on: December 14, 2012, 09:51:54 pm »
dave, two very simple points:

1) I have never even suggested that someone with no motivation is as likely to commit an act as someone with strong  motivation, but simply pointed out that the information could have come from several people other than Sanchez' agent, AND that we don't know what motivation many of those folks might have (it is not at all unusual for a government official or corporate exec to serve as the source of leaks involving them because they often believe that doing so curries favor with reporters who will then provide favorable coverage in the future).

2) Sanchez' agent did not have nearly the motivation you attribute to him.

If Dombrowski was not going to want to SEE the contract the Cubs had offered, or would not call Theo (and it is not tampering when the player is not under contract) to check the report, and the mere report itself served the purpose, why would the agent only leak the real figure?  Why not leak an offer which was for an additional year and 20% beyond what had actually been offered?

You appear to believe that Dombrowski or other GM's do nothing to determine whether another team has made an offer better than what they had last put on the table, and that as a result, they will believe an annonymous rumor they see reported in a tweet on hear on ESPN or see in a newspaper.... but will not believe what they hear from the agent directly, even though the agent could easily be the source for the rumor.

Hard to believe you don't see the logical problems in that and are simply refusing to acknowledge your position makes no sense, even when you understand that is that case.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 700 701 [702] 703 704 ... 728   Go Up
« previous next »