Cubs acquire Kevin Gregg from Florida

[Milltownhooker]

I've read Wood is seeking 3 yrs 36 million.

[MJLiverock]

I'd rather offer Sheets 3/36 than Wood. Wood's elbow and injury history scare me more than Sheet's injury history.

[Ennder]

Gregg was pretty decent before the injuries so pretty hard to know what to expect out of him, just pointing at blown saves doesn't tell the whole picture at all. It is obviously a downgrade from Wood of 08 though.

[Patrick425]

TooLiveBrew wrote:

 

Nope, because using your best RP as closer is not using him correctly. But I'm sure you've already encountered that on the BF forums so I won't bother trying any convincing.

Actually, I have never run across that argument before. I know I'm probably opening up a big can o' worms here but someone please explain why it a bad idea to use your best RP as a closer? I'm really hoping that this has nothing to do with some pitching stat that focuses on walks and HRs.

 

I would argue that it's not about whether he's the "best" pitcher in the bullpen, but about what type of stuff the pitcher has. I definitley think that Marmol has the makeup of a closer.

[fallingleaves]

I think Gregg will be an eighth inning guy, its time for Marmol.

[zzzmanwitz]

Its not that you shouldn't use your best RP as the closer if the situation calls for it. The argument is that your best pitcher should be saved for the most crucial situations. If you save a "closer" for the 3 run lead in the ninth with their 7-8-9 hitters coming up situation rather than put him out when your team is tied in the bottom of the 7th with their 3-4-5 hitters up to bat, then you aren't using him to your biggest advantage.

 

99% of the time, managers save their closers for the save and closers want saves because that gets them the big contracts.

 

Edit: Its also saying that 3 outs in the 9th are more crucial than 3 outs in the 7th, when they are really exactly the same.

[Ennder]

Edit: Its also saying that 3 outs in the 9th are more crucial than 3 outs in the 7th, when they are really exactly the same.

 

They are higher leverage though. You would be smarter to use your best RP in the 9th than the 7th if the situations were 100% the same. The rest of what you said I completely agree with. You want your best RP in the game at the most important parts of the game and that is not always the 9th inning.

[zzzmanwitz]

Ennder wrote:

 

They are higher leverage though. You would be smarter to use your best RP in the 9th than the 7th if the situations were 100% the same. The rest of what you said I completely agree with. You want your best RP in the game at the most important parts of the game and that is not always the 9th inning.

Then I would say it would come down which batters the pitcher had to face. But yes, it is higher leverage, but in my eyes, 3 outs is 3 outs.

[jjfanec]

I don't know how much better Marmol will be than Wood it will probably be a near wash as Wood had a nice year. I don't think Gregg will be anywhere near as good or versatile as Marmol. In my mind Marmol loses some value because he will go from pitching 87 innings (most of any reliever that I could see) to likely at most around 72 (which was the highest of any full time closer this year). That is around 15 less innings which is quite a bit of difference. It could be okay for him though because he seemed to wear down in June and July from overuse.

[splitterpfj]

What Keith Law says here mirrors my own opinion. The kid the Cubs gave up in this trade has real talent, there's a good chance he'll be better than Gregg in the first place, and now the Marlins will control him for six years.

 

On top of that, they're going to move Marmol out of the role where he helped them most, instead of using him when he's needed most, they'll only be using him in 9th innings.

 

Thanks, Florida!

 

http://sports.espn.go.com...blog/index?name=law_keith

[Patrick425]

zzzmanwitz wrote:

---

Its not that you shouldn't use your best RP as the closer if the situation calls for it. The argument is that your best pitcher should be saved for the most crucial situations. If you save a "closer" for the 3 run lead in the ninth with their 7-8-9 hitters coming up situation rather than put him out when your team is tied in the bottom of the 7th with their 3-4-5 hitters up to bat, then you aren't using him to your biggest advantage.

That makes a lot of sense. I never really thought of it that way.

 

edit: Although, I still think Marmol is the best option for their closer in the correct situation.

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

I wouldn't sign Wood if we had to give up a 1st round draft pick. Yuck.

[Fatter than Joey]

I wouldn't sign Wood if we had to give up a 1st round draft pick. Yuck.

 

Assuming the terms were reasonable I sure would.

[fondybrewfan]

I wouldn't sign Wood if we had to give up a 1st round draft pick. Yuck.

 

Assuming the terms were reasonable I sure would.

I am also OK with giving up the pick because it seems very likely will get a 1st round pick from CC anyways and possibly from Sheets.

[JohnBriggs12]

The Cubs had Ceda in spring training for a look. There was a lot of buzz about him because he threw really, really hard. Not surprisingly given his lack of experience, he was in over his head though in major league camp. It sort of reminded me of the Jose Capellan hype.

 

He's had control issues, and no doubt the Cubs feared that he'd struggle under the pressure playing for the Cubs. Playing in front of the sparse crowds in Florida, he'll probably flourish.

 

As for Wood, Brewer fans need to ask themselves this question. Why would the Cubs and Jim Hendry (who loves Kerry Wood like a son) not want to give him a multi year deal?

 

There can be only 2 explanations. One is they feel Marmol is ready to close, and it would be a slap in the face to Wood to go back to the 8th inning, or they still believe Wood will break down at any moment. I believe it's the latter or otherwise why give up a raw but talented though not ready young guy like Ceda for Gregg? If healthy, Wood is probably a cut above Gregg.

[endaround]

Because even the Cubs have a budget? They likely can't afford Wood, Peavy and Dempster.