Dayn Perry's Cubs vs. Brewers comparison

[Gopher74]

or the Rox with the fireballer who's name escapes me at the moment.

Ubaldo Jimenez.

Ahh yes, that's it.

 

[logan82]

Weeks put almost as good of numbers offensivley as DeRosa over the last 3 years. That was including over 1/3 of those at bats being from last year when most would say he had a pretty bad year. Seeing as how he is only 25 he should have some improvement, wheras DeRosa is 33 and should start seeing decline. I am not big on stolen bases, but Weeks had twice as many SB last year as DeRosa has had in his whole career. Outside of BA Weeks even had a better year last year than DeRosa. I don't know who I would pick defensivley either to be honest.

 

Weeks/DeRosa

FP .976/.984

RF 4.74/4.59

OOZ 35/15

ZR .737/.850

 

To say anybody would take DeRosa over Weeks, who's the homer now?

[baseballguy25]

That's ridiculous. The fact is, you're not well educated on the Brewers, and you're making some ridiculous statements. Suggesting that Gallagher is every bit the prospect that Parra is, despite the fact that no ranking sources have them even close? Please, you want to talk about biased?

 

 

Please give me some links were it says Manny Parra is this high quality pitching prospects ? How is this ridiculous?

 

Manny Parra- Age 25

 

38-18 3.05 ERA in the minors, with 528 career SO, and 1.25 WHIP in Six minor league seasons

 

Sean Gallagher- Age 21

36-15, 2.75 ERA in the minors, wiht 452 career SO, and 1.25 WHIP in four minor league seasons

 

You bashed me for not looking at the stat sheet, well here it is. So please give me a reason to believe otherwise? Hmm... sounds like someone is being biased again. Maybe Parra use to be this top notch prospect but I haven't heard anything about having ace potential recently at all.

 

First of all, Weeks was a top 5 prospect in all of baseball and has had ONE injury, a wrist injury that he struggled with all of last year. His OBP was .422 the second half of last year, and he hit 11 HR's in the last 6 weeks or so.

But you then go from using the logic that if you take the younger player(Weeks 24) over the older player(DeRossa-33),

 

 

Who was the better player last year? I don't recall DeRosa getting sent down to the minors last season. I said Weeks has alot more upside and potential, but he hasn't shown it yet. So should Weeks have the edge on potential and not production? I never said Hall/Pie should be equal, I'm just saying if were going to base stuff on potential.

 

 

 

 

And no, the Cubs are not as good as the Brewers farm system. I'm just using rankings, but the Brewers are still a top 5-9 whereas the Cubs are in the low teens. I don't know what they've done to get "so much better", but the Brewers, while bringing a lot of players up, still have a very strong farm system, it's just not very good on the top(AAA) with prospects who are near the majors, but they do have another wave of guys coming through.

 

Again would like to see some proof of the Brewers still so high, and the Cubs in the lower teens? I bet this is more of your bias talking up how great the Brewers are and how low the Cubs are. The Cubs have a pretty strong top 10 with Vitters, Soto, Colvin, Ceda, Gallagher,Veal,Donaldson, Samardjiza,Thomas and Hart. All of those guys have potential to be quality ML players, I can't imagine the Brewers would have much more then that right now.

 

 

Like I said, it's clear you just look at stats. What else has he done? He was up ALL YEAR last year. Exactly when are these hitters going to adjust to him? He was up the end of 06 and threw very well, then broke camp with the team last year. I know I said this already, so it'd be nice if you didn't make me repeat it, but since you're suggesting that he's only been up for a handful of games, I feel as though I must. He was one of the best Middle/Long men in the first half last year, and was once again an excellent starter for us down the stretch posting a 2.06 ERA. It's funny, if he was on the Cubs, he'd be a superstar, but because you'd never heard of him, it's "crazy" to say he'll be more than a 4". I guess I don't know what it is, if you're a homer, or just uneducated, but your posts are laughable.

 

Yes my uneducation is laughable, your bias for the Brewers is laughable. Villanueva has started 12 ML games in two years. Not to mention he had a 4.77 era as a reliever last year. If he was on the Cubs I would be excited to see what he could do, but he would need to start alot more games in a row then he has before I started saying he could be better then a 3-4 starter.Saying he's way better then a starter who had a 3.92 era in 19 starts(21 games) last year(2.08 era in five minor league starts), shows how bias you really are. Yes he pitched well in his chances to start, but thats a limited sample size. But hey lets live in your world, and think the Brewers are so much more talented then the Cubs. I'm sorry but I'm done responding your post because I can no longer take you seriously. 08 Brewers vs 27 Yankees who's more talented Gopher replys Brewers!

[baseballguy25]

Weeks put almost as good of numbers offensivley as DeRosa over the last 3 years. That was including over 1/3 of those at bats being from last year when most would say he had a pretty bad year. Seeing as how he is only 25 he should have some improvement, wheras DeRosa is 33 and should start seeing decline. I am not big on stolen bases, but Weeks had twice as many SB last year as DeRosa has had in his whole career. Outside of BA Weeks even had a better year last year than DeRosa. I don't know who I would pick defensivley either to be honest.

 

Weeks/DeRosa

FP .976/.984

RF 4.74/4.59

OOZ 35/15

ZR .737/.850

 

To say anybody would take DeRosa over Weeks, who's the homer now?

I'm not a Cubs fan(and I dislike the Cubs), I'm a huge White Sox fan but I watch alot of Cubs games because I live in Chicago. From watching them I think their a pretty good team, and if Soto/Fukudome play as good as most experts say they are, the Cubs are going to be tough to beat for the division next year. But DeRosa was better the last three years, and played Alot more. Why wouldn't you take DeRosa your pretty much answering your own questions. Has Weeks been better then DeRosa yet? No. So why because of Weeks potential should he get the edge over DeRosa, that makes no sense to me. Like I said before were not picking this thing on potential are we. Do we know for sure Weeks will ever get better then he showed the last few years or will be healthy next year? So why should he get the edge over someone who was better? So to pick a guy who wasn't as good as the other guy is pretty biased no matter how you try to swing it.

[trwi7]

Who was the better player last year?

 

Weeks. Despite batting only .235 he had the edge in OBP and SLG% as well as much more speed despite a wrist injury that plagued him through most of the year (which is why he was sent to the minors.)

[logan82]

I'm not a Cubs fan(and I dislike the Cubs), I'm a huge White Sox fan but I watch alot of Cubs games because I live in Chicago. But DeRosa was better the last three years, and played Alot more. Why wouldn't you take DeRosa your pretty much answering your own questions. Has Weeks been better then DeRosa yet? No. So why because of Weeks potential should he get the edge over DeRosa, that makes no sense to me. Like I said before were not picking this thing on potential are we. Do we know for sure Weeks will ever get better then he showed the last few years or will be healthy next year? So why should he get the edge over someone who was better? So to pick a guy who wasn't as good as the other guy is pretty biased no matter how you try to swing it.

I wouldn't call 1170 AB vs 1128 AB playing a lot more. I wouldn't call .002 points of OBP, .027 points SLG and .029 points of OPS a big enough difference to call one or the other better. The 2 guys have pretty much the same statistics over the last 3 years, so saying the guy who is 8 years younger is going to have a better year is just logical. Add to that the fact that Weeks had a better year last year than DeRosa and really there shouldn't be a question of who is better. I am not even basing most of this on potential like you seem to suggest. They have been practically equal the past 3 years and guys over 30 tend to decline while guys under 28 tend to improve. I guess you call that potential, I call it being realistic. Old guys get worse, young guys improve.

[baseballguy25]

DeRosa-293, 10 HR, 72 RBI's, 371 OBP, 791 OPS-149 games

 

Weeks-235, 16 HR, 36 RBI, 374 OBP, 807 OPS-118 games

 

 

Weeks barely wins OBP, and has 16 point higher OPS. But DeRosa had 58 points higher average then Weeks and double the RBI's as Weeks. But DeRosa was better because he played more games, and overall did more. But I can understand some saying Weeks if you value OPS the most, but I personally would rather have a guy who hits for average and good OBP, then a guy who gets very few hits but walks alot.

 

 

The only reason I brought it up was because fans on here were complaining that more Brewers players should have a edge. I just said Cubs fans could easily make a debate for DeRosa being picked over Weeks, especially when DeRosa was better the last three years, and maybe would say DeRosa was better last year. I guess it matters on what stats you value the most.

[TooLiveBrew]

I'll stay outta this one... just want to point out that baseball guy's first ever post here was a much more informative, accurate, and well-researched than Dayn Perry's similar position-by-position 'article' that's being discussed here.

[logan82]

I just said Cubs fans could easily make a debate for DeRosa being picked over Weeks, especially when DeRosa was better the last three years, and maybe would say DeRosa was better last year. I guess it matters on what stats you value the most.

He was only marginally better at best over the last 3 years and is 8 years older. RBI's, are you serious? You are talking about a guy who batted mostly 5th or 6th in the order. Of course he is going to have more RBI's. Unless you highly value BA and mostly ignore everything else, Weeks is the better player.

[trwi7]

But DeRosa had 58 points higher average then Weeks and double the RBI's as Weeks.

Yeah and? RBI's are a terrible way to judge a hitter, as is batting average. Weeks was a leadoff hitter most of the year, you obviously aren't going to get many RBI oppurtunities when you're batting leadoff. Also for batting average what line would you rather have? .302/.328/.444/.772 or .235/.374/.433/.807? I'd rather take the guy who gets on base.


But DeRosa was better because he played more games, and overall did more.

This isn't an evaluation based on who played more games it's an evaluation of who played better when they were actually playing and Weeks played better. Also, could you please expand on what DeRosa "did more"?

[TooLiveBrew]

DeRosa did more choking come playoff time. Sorry, shouldn't have said that.

I'd rather take the guy who gets on base.

 

Plus, Rickie's SLG% is completely contraindicative towards his performance for next year (& the finish of '07).

[baseballguy25]

They have been practically equal the past 3 years and guys over 30 tend to decline while guys under 28 tend to improve. I guess you call that potential, I call it being realistic. Old guys get worse, young guys improve.

 

 

It's only realistic with some players, DeRosa at 33 next year could have another good year, and might even have two more good years. It all depends on the player, his body, health and his talent level. For example Kendall is 33 now and 34 next year, but his body has been through so much over the years. So he is more likely to decline at a younger age then most big leaguers. With Weeks injury history I wouldn't say he will for sure improve next year. I'm not saying Weeks shouldn't be picked over DeRosa for sure.The point I was making is if you guys question Soto over Kendall and other stuff. That Cubs fans could easily debate DeRosa over Weeks was my point.(when I first made that comment) I was just was trying to point out this whole time that many on this board overrate the Brewers players, but think to low of the Cubs players. As much as I hate to say it, the Cubs have a pretty good baseball team(with alot of talent), so I wouldn't think so low of some of these players.

[TooLiveBrew]

It's only realistic with some players.

 

I think that's accurate if you replace "some" with "most"

 

The point I was making is if you guys question Soto over Kendall and other stuff, but Cubs fans could easily debate DeRosa over Weeks then was my point.(when I first made that comment)

 

This is a fair point.

[Gopher74]

So your saying that a breaking ball and Curve ball is the same pitch? Yes a curveball is a form of a breaking ball but obviously he's throwing something else. Please do some research and it will tell you Hill throws more then two pitches.

 

This is absolutely ridiculous. You're SERIOUSLY trying to argue that a "breaking ball" isn't a curve ball? How can one have a serious discussion about baseball when the most rudimentary points have to be explained?

 

 

Please give me some links were it says Manny Parra is this high quality pitching prospects ? How is this ridiculous?

 

I'm not going to spend the time going through and looking for links. He is a very highly touted prospect, and he was an even higher rated prospect before his shoulder issues. Again, don't pleade ignorance, just don't argue a point that you're not informed on. It's funny, you readily admit that you may be wrong on it, then you come back and try to use minor league stats. Again, this is very much like the "he throws a curve ball and is working on a breaking ball" argument. If you're seriously so clueless that you're going to use minor league stats, after using W's and L's to evaluate a pitcher/prospect, then I don't know what to say to you.

 

Bottom line, Parra's stuff blows Gallagher's out of the water, and Marshall's as well for that matter. Heck, it's quite possibly better than Gallardo's. The ONLY issue with him is his injury concerns.

He throws in the mid 90's, is a power lefty with a very good change, a curve ball, and a breaking ball. You know, in a world where the last two are difference.

 

Oh, and by the way, he threw a perfect game last year in Triple A, and was extremely dominant down there. Honestly, just ask a fellow Cubs fan if Gallagher and Parra are in the same league. If they have any clue what they're talking about, they'll let you know how ridiculous this sounds.

 

You bashed me for not looking at the stat sheet, well here it is. So please give me a reason to believe otherwise? Hmm... sounds like someone is being biased again. Maybe Parra use to be this top notch prospect but I haven't heard anything about having ace potential recently at all.

 

I don't know when I "bashed" you for using or not using a "stat" sheet for minor leaguers, but once again, I think what we can conclude is that what YOU know, or what YOU'VE heard certainly doesn't make something fact. The kid was dominant last year, and had a huge comeback year, and now you're trying to say that he's not longer a potential ace? I just don't get it. You're clearly not well versed on the Milwaukee Brewers, yet here you are, running your mouth? Doesn't make sense.

 

As I said, he's the Brewers 2nd rated prospect, and the Brewers have one of the top farm systems in the game according to baseballamerica, and will very likely be a top 50 prospect, so I wouldn't use the "I haven't heard of him" argument. It only serves to make you look foolish.

Who was the better player last year? I don't recall DeRosa getting sent down to the minors last season. I said Weeks has alot more upside and potential, but he hasn't shown it yet. So should Weeks have the edge on potential and not production? I never said Hall/Pie should be equal, I'm just saying if were going to base stuff on potential.

 

Actually, Weeks did. Weeks had the better year. And again, this is where you get clueless. You really think the difference in potential between Weeks and DeRossa is the same between Pie and Hall? Many would argue that Hall's got MORE potential than Pie making that argument REALLY silly.

 

Again would like to see some proof of the Brewers still so high, and the Cubs in the lower teens? I bet this is more of your bias talking up how great the Brewers are and how low the Cubs are. The Cubs have a pretty strong top 10 with Vitters, Soto, Colvin, Ceda, Gallagher,Veal,Donaldson, Samardjiza,Thomas and Hart. All of those guys have potential to be quality ML players, I can't imagine the Brewers would have much more then that right now.

 

I just wonder where you get your info from? Once again, ANOTHER example of you being uninformed. BaseballAmerica ranks the Brewers farm system as one of the elite, and the Cubs were in the middle of the pack. The Brewers by the way, had I believe the higher ***. winning pct among their farm systems.

 

Man, this is getting really frustrating. You're complete and utter lack of knowledge as related to the Brewers makes you think what? That i'm making these things up? Why don't you read up for a bit and then come back. I won't even make you apologize for not knowing what you're talking about.

 

Yes my uneducation is laughable, your biased is laughable. Villanueva has started 12 ML games in two years. Not to mention he had a 4.77 era as a reliever last year. Yes he pitched well in his chances to start, but thats a limited sample size. But hey lets live in your world, and think the Brewers are so much more talented then the Cubs. I'm sorry but I'm done responding your post because I can no longer take you seriously. I bet its 08 Brewers vs 27 Yankees who's more talented Gopher replys Brewers!

 

That's great. You've said you were done responding to me several times now. The amount of just inaccurate nonsensical BS that you throw out is astounding. Honestly, Marshall is a stud why? Because of his vast experience?

 

And look at what Villy did last year the first half? His ERA as a reliever was about 2.50 before he fatigued. He'd never thrown that often before. He took some time off, and came back and posted a 2.06 ERA down the stretch.

 

And again, your overwhelming ignorance, and me trying to explain things to you, once again has you thinking that I'm biased towards the Brewers. Do me a favor, go to baseballamerica, read up on them, and then come back, and like I said, you don't even need to admit you're wrong.

[trwi7]

FWIW Parra was the 69th best prospect according to Baseball America a few years back.

[Gopher74]

FWIW Parra was the 69th best prospect according to Baseball America a few years back.

Yea, I've seen him as high as 53 in top 100's when he was in the low minors.

 

At one point, he was ranked ahead of Prince Fielder by BA in one of those prospects lists that rank the top 20 prospects in a league as voted by the managers. I don't know though how you can argue how good a guy is without knowing anything about him.

 

[Gopher74]

It's only realistic with some players, DeRosa at 33 next year could have another good year, and might even have two more good years. It all depends on the player, his body, health and his talent level. For example Kendall is 33 now and 34 next year, but his body has been through so much over the years. So he is more likely to decline at a younger age then most big leaguers. With Weeks injury history I wouldn't say he will for sure improve next year. I'm not saying Weeks shouldn't be picked over DeRosa for sure.The point I was making is if you guys question Soto over Kendall and other stuff. That Cubs fans could easily debate DeRosa over Weeks was my point.(when I first made that comment) I was just was trying to point out this whole time that many on this board overrate the Brewers players, but think to low of the Cubs players. As much as I hate to say it, the Cubs have a pretty good baseball team(with alot of talent), so I wouldn't think so low of some of these players.

First of all, nobody's argued Soto of Kendall. I think Cubs fans are a little too high on Soto who never really did much before last year, but still, I haven't seen anyone argue that.

 

Second, I suppose that Derek Lee's got a really bad injury history, huh? I mean, he's had similar wrist problems as Weeks, and since that's ALL Weeks has had, I'm assuming that you consider him to be very injury prone? There's nothing wrong with Weeks. He hurt his wrist diving into second two years ago, they said it'd take a year after the surgery for it to be 100 pct, and almost to the day, Weeks got red hot and strated killing the ball. His OBP was .422 in the second half, and he hit for a ton of power.

 

Third, you want to talk about "thinking so low" of players? I don't know that anyone's arguing so much that the Cubs AREN'T good, rather trying(and failing) to educate you about the Brewers players, Manny Parra and Carlos Villanueva in particular.

 

 

[Gopher74]

Sheets - 3.80

Gallardo - 3.65

Villanueva - 4.16

Suppan - 4.55

Capuano - 4.37

Bush - 4.49

 

Zambrano - 3.74

Hill - 3.75

Lilly - 4.05

Marshall - 4.51

Marquis - 4.50

I could agree with those numbers on the Cubs part and Sheets/Gallardo/Villanueva. I just don't know how Bush, Capuano, and Suppan are going to improve that much with the Brewers defense just as bad.

 

So you can't see how Cappy, who had ERA's of 3.99 and 4.03 the two seasons prior to last year can possibly come back to 4.37, how Suppan who's ERA has been 4.12/3.56/4.16 the three prior years can possibly get back to 4.55 and Bush can get back to his career norms. Yea, how can anyone look at you as being biased? C'mon.

I was actually talking about his final 2 starts of the season and postseason actually.

 

Wait, aren't you the one who's arguing that 12 starts isn't a big enough sample size to judge Villanueva on? 12 starts spread out over 2 years? But when you say second half, you really mean his last 2 starts. Ok. And the rest of your first paragraph, you're honestly trying to say that you're not a Cubs fan? Because you're pretty biased.

From watching him pitch the final three starts of the season he seemed more relaxed on the mound. So I think Zambrano has a chance to rebound to the guy he was or better if he can keep himself undercontrol on the mound next year.

 

You couldn't make this stuff up. So the guy, who, according to you has struggled because he's been "the guy" and he gets too hyped up, now has a chance to bounce back because of his last 2 or 3 starts.

[baseballguy25]

Bottom line, Parra's stuff blows Gallagher's out of the water, and Marshall's as well for that matter. Heck, it's quite possibly better than Gallardo's. The ONLY issue with him is his injury concerns.

I read up on Parra(like you asked me to), and nobody is saying he's a high quality prospect as of right now. They still say he has potential to be a good 2-3, but I haven't seen anything about "ace" anymore. His stock is down prospect wise because of the injury problems and since he will be 26 at the end of next season. But I will admit I undervalued Parra stuff a little bit, and never knew it was that good. But not many seem super high on Villanueva(at least not as high as you are), his value seems just as high as Sean Marshalls does. So I'll give you Parra(if healthy) over Gallagher, but I'm sticking to my guns about Villanueva not being much better then Marshall.


I also have a correction on Rich Hill, I was bonehead and mixed up change up with Breaking ball for some reason. This is a scouting report on Hill I found

Has some nasty stuff, including low-90s heat that he combines with a jaw-dropping curve and good change-up.

The change up pitch was the work in progress pitch that Steve Stone was talking about the other day. If he masters that the sky is the limit.


Second, I suppose that Derek Lee's got a really bad injury history, huh? I mean, he's had similar wrist problems as Weeks, and since that's ALL Weeks has had, I'm assuming that you consider him to be very injury prone?


Derrek Lee has the track record of being a good major league player, and not having health problems beyond that. Weeks hasn't done anything yet in the big leauges, and has been slowed by injuries, so who knows what he will be. Not to mention Lee still had a Allstar season, despite his HR power being down in the first half. Brewer fans can talk up Weeks all they want, but nobody can be happy with him never playing 120 games in a season, and being a 230s hitter two of his three years in the big leagues. I dunno maybe, I'm to hard on Weeks because he disappointed my fantsay team last year. I was expecting Brandon Phillips(HR/SB/AVG) from Weeks. So I soured on him a bit, but lets see how he does next year.

So you can't see how Cappy, who had ERA's of 3.99 and 4.03 the two seasons prior to last year can possibly come back to 4.37, how Suppan who's ERA has been 4.12/3.56/4.16 the three prior years can possibly get back to 4.55 and Bush can get back to his career norms. Yea, how can anyone look at you as being biased? C'mon.

Capuano possibly, but not Suppan and Bush IMO. My reason for that was those guys weren't really that bad last year. The reason they struggled as much as they did is because of the poor defense, and unless they fix that they won't improve. It has nothing to do with being biased against the Brewers, poor defense makes the Brewers pitching worse then it is(any baseball fan will tell you that), and it will keep doing that until they improve it. For you to expect these guys to be all much better without a huge defensive improvement is unrealistic IMO.


Wait, aren't you the one who's arguing that 12 starts isn't a big enough sample size to judge Villanueva on? 12 starts spread out over 2 years? But when you say second half, you really mean his last 2 starts. Ok. And the rest of your first paragraph, you're honestly trying to say that you're not a Cubs fan? Because you're pretty biased.

Are you serious? were talking about a one of the best(from 03-06) NL pitchers in Zambrano. I think he's to good to(from what he has shown over his career), to pitch that poor again. I think most of it had to do with him being a headcase more then ususal last year. Again no I'm not a Cubs fan I'm just unbias unlike you and I know Zambrano is a very good pitcher. Villanueva has no track record at all, so please don't say stupid stuff like this.

You couldn't make this stuff up. So the guy, who, according to you has struggled because he's been "the guy" and he gets too hyped up, now has a chance to bounce back because of his last 2 or 3 starts.

I'm just going by what I seen on local sports shows about the Cubs and Zambrano last year. There were stories on why Zambrano had a down season last year, and many Cubs fans were impressed he pitched so well late in the season with so much pressure. Zambrano said he was being more calm before and during the game for the reason why he pitched better. Was it the real reason? or will it continue next year? Who knows but I'm just going on stuff I read and heard.

[ELCABALLO45]

Well.... I came back to add a few comments after reading some of this. And Go Gopher!

 

About Carlos V. -

 

What has he done to prove that but a handful of starts at the end of the season the last two years?

Yes it was at the end of the season, however these were in a middle of a race. He pitched really well. Before getting over used he was a DOMINATING middle guy and thats why he excites me.

 

About Rich Hill

First of all Hill has more then one pitch he has a Very good Curve ball(Almost Barry Zito in his prime good), a decent fastball, and a breaking ball. The breaking ball pitch isn't always there for him yet,

1. Curve Ball - Ok its not "Barry Zito in his prime good" its a VERY good pitch but don't be silly

 

2. Decent Fastball - 90mph fastball is ok

 

3. Breaking Ball - Its not always there for him yet? Wait a second... A fastball does not count because everyone can throw that so let me start over...

 

1. Curve Ball

 

2. A pitch that is not always there for him.

 

Ok one more time.

 

1. Curve Ball

 

That equals one pitch to me... Am I counting right?

 

About Ben Sheets -

You talk Sheets up like he's Johan Santana and the guy has had only 1 very good season in his career

That "1 good season" would of been a Cy Young award if he had run support that year. And Im sure he has been a 3 time all star so he has to be doing SOMETHING right.

 

About Bill Hall

 

 

Thats like the Pie/Hall stuff, would the Cubs trade Pie to get Hall? No.

Ok.. I thought about this and before last year.. The answer to that is Yes. Some ESPN guys picked Bill Hall to win the NL MVP this year (Yeah it shocked me to).

 

About the Weeks/DeRosa thing -

 

 

Who was the better player last year? I don't recall DeRosa getting sent down to the minors last season.

Who had the better year in 05? Prince or Derrek Lee? Who would you rather have? Weeks has been hurt so he cannot live up to his hype, but Im hoping he will this year. Ok that might be a BAD example but im just trying to say that you are trying to say."Well he had a better year last year" you sound like your trying to convince YOURSELF that. And Weeks had the better year....

 

About Carlos V. again.

 

 

If he was on the Cubs I would be excited to see what he could do

Would you be excited? Why would a White Sox fan be excited to see what a Cub player can do? Ok just joking on this one.BUT to try and say your NOT a sCrUBS fan is almost laughable at this point.

 

Well thats all for me... And I guess who ever said that arguing with a Cub fan is pointless is right....

[Gopher74]

I read up on Parra(like you asked me to), and nobody is saying he's a high quality prospect as of right now. They still say he has potential to be a good 2-3, but I haven't seen anything about "ace" anymore. His stock is down prospect wise because of the injury problems and since he will be 26 at the end of next season. But I will admit I undervalued Parra stuff a little bit, and never knew it was that good. But not many seem super high on Villanueva(at least not as high as you are), his value seems just as high as Sean Marshalls does. So I'll give you Parra(if healthy) over Gallagher, but I'm sticking to my guns about Villanueva not being much better then Marshall.

 

First of all, what do you think a 2-3 is? Marshall and Gallagher are considered 4-5 type guys, so that he's considered a number 2 in and of itself should tell you something.

Second, THAT IS A "HIGH QUALITY PROSPECT". I mean, I don't believe you went and read anything to be honest, but if you are going to, go to BA. He's the Brewers 2nd rated prospect behind Matt LaPorta. He'd likely be the Cubs 2nd best prospect only because of Vitters. He is a stud. That you don't believe me, I honestly don't care, but when you say he's a 2-3, and then he's not a high quality prospect, it's not really consistent. But beyond that, if you didn't know anything about the guy, why on Earth would you argue about him? I just don't understand that. Anyway, I don't know what you read, or what you've "claim" to have read, but he's got the stuff to be a potential ace. And by the way, he's 25. He's 25, and he's dominated in both AA and AAA, and he pitched very well in his callup. And he doesn't turn 26 until next Oct...in other words, he just turned 25 a couple months ago, so lets not go rounding his age up just yet.

 

And what have you read on Villanueva? Not to mention, I haven't said what I think he is, I just know he's better than Marshall. Again, I doubt you'll even find many Cubs fans arguing this point.

 

You know, it's easy to say, "You're being a homer", but if I were to say that Dave Bush is better than Carlos Zambrano because I don't know anything about Z, I'm sure you'd argue it as well.

 

The change up pitch was the work in progress pitch that Steve Stone was talking about the other day. If he masters that the sky is the limit.

 

The "sky" in this case is only so high for a guy like Hill. He's going to be solid, but he has a big loopy curve that's hittable if you know it's coming, and his velocity is very average. He's the quintessential "crafy left hander". He throws about 88-90 with a big curve ball. Yea, you could say, "If" he gets this pitch. Well that works for every pitcher. "IF" they develop another pitch, they'd all be a lot better. And if Hill was such a legit stud, an ace type as you seem to think, then they wouldn't toss his name around so freely in all these trade talks. Rich Hill has been at the center of just about every potential Cubs trade this summer. He's a nice pitcher. Some like him better than others on here. Some think he's better than Zambrano. I'm actually with you, I think Zambrano's great when he's on, and he's still the best on that team, HOWEVER, he is getting abused. He's throwing 215+ innings just about every year and he throws a lot of pitchers.

 

Capuano possibly, but not Suppan and Bush IMO. My reason for that was those guys weren't really that bad last year. The reason they struggled as much as they did is because of the poor defense, and unless they fix that they won't improve. It has nothing to do with being biased poor defense makes the Brewers pitching worse then it is(any baseball fan will tell you that), and it will keep doing that until they improve it.

 

All three of them were significantly worse than they have been for their careers. But either way, our defense will be better. Worlds better if they move Braun like they've talked about, and seemingly want to. If you replace Braun with an average 3rd basemen, all the sudden our defense is in the middle to upper part of the NL. If you replace him with a Rolen, Beltre, Feliz type, then were actually a very good defensive team. But even if you don't, you seem to forget, our IF is all made up of young guys. 23-25-24-23 from Braun, Hardy, Weeks, Prince. They'll just naturally progress. But Bush had a BABIP of about .340 last year. He had AWFUL luck. To think he's not going to improve....if he just is at .300 his ERA is going to plummet. That wasn't all because of the defense. And he shouldn't be starting anyway. He's literally the 7th in line right now.

Are you serious? were talking about a one of the best(from 03-06) NL pitchers in Zambrano. I think he's to good to(from what he has shown over his career), to pitch that poor again. I think most of it had to do with him being a headcase more then ususal last year. Again no I'm not a Cubs fan I'm just unbias unlike you and I know Zambrano is a very good pitcher. Villanueva has no track record at all, so please don't say stupid stuff like this.

 

Why is this so hard for you to understand? The argument was made that Zambrano's been progressively getting worse the last three years. You made the argument that it's becausse he puts too much pressure on himself, ect...ect.. and so on. You THEN made the argument that the last 2-3 starts of the season, he stopped doing that, and as such, he's going to bounce back next year. The argument was NEVER how good is he. Please, TRY and follow along here. The point is that you're using 3 games to say that this three YEAR trend is going to reverse itself. Again, not arguing he's not a good pitcher. We're beyond that. Maybe the fault lies with me here thinking you can handle a more sophisticated conversation. I don't know.

I'm just going by what I seen on local sports shows about the Cubs and Zambrano last year. There were stories on why Zambrano had a down season last year, and many Cubs fans were impressed he pitched so well late in the season with so much pressure. Zambrano said he was being more calm before and during the game for the reason why he pitched better. Was it the real reason? or will it continue next year? Who knows but I'm just going on stuff I read and heard.

 

Oh...ok, so these opinions aren't even yours, they're the result of a fluff piece you watched on Carlos Zambrano at the end of last year. Well, thanks for clearing that up.

 

I don't even know why you insist on arguing about Zambrano. I agree, he's a very good pitcher. I've never stated otherwise. It's just funny how you say, "well, I saw two games last year that suggest that 3 year trend is going to turn around, so...it's a no-brainer", and then say, "You can't use a year and a half of Villy in the majors! That doesn't work!

 

I don't know if you're a Cubs fan, but you've most definitely got some Chicago slant going on, and you're not very well informed about the Brewers. One would think that would make you hesitant to argue about them, or give us your opinion about them. Sadly that's not the case.

[Gopher74]

Derrek Lee has the track record of being a good major league player, and not having health problems beyond that. Weeks hasn't done anything yet in the big leauges, and has been slowed by injuries, so who knows what he will be. Not to mention Lee still had a Allstar season, despite his HR power being down in the first half. Brewer fans can talk up Weeks all they want, but nobody can be happy with him never playing 120 games in a season, and being a 230s hitter two of his three years in the big leagues. I dunno maybe, I'm to hard on Weeks because he disappointed my fantsay team last year. I was expecting Brandon Phillips(HR/SB/AVG) from Weeks. So I soured on him a bit, but lets see how he does next year.

 

Wait, I simply asked if Derek Lee, a guy who's have more injuries in the recent past than Weeks was injury prone.

 

What I do know is this. Saying he's never done anything in the Big Leagues is absolutely ridiculous. It's clear that you're a "Wins" and "Batting Average" type of guy, and that's fine, but it also leaves a lot to be desired. The kid's 24 years old. He came up about 6 weeks into the season three years ago(so he DID play a full year that year), hurt his wrist the following year, and it lingered last year until it healed.

 

 

And by the way, for you to say he's "never done anything", once again, I don't know what to say to some of this stuff.

 

I'm stealing this, but I'm sure erbacaine won't mind.

Now these are based on batting in the Leadoff spot(some people batted else where in the order)

Also its set at 400 or more plate apprences

OBP STATS FOR LEADOFF HITTERS

1. Hanely Rameriz OBP-.405

2. Ichiro Suzuki OBP-.396

3. Grady Sizemore OBP- .389

4. Rickie Weeks OBP-.385

5. Brian Roberts OBP-.376

 

OPS STATS FOR LEADOFF HITTERS

1. Hanely Rameriz OPS-1.001

2. Curtis Granderson OPS-.926

3. Alphonzo Soriano OPS-.924

4. Jimmy Rollins OPS-.903

5. Rickie Weeks OPS-.862

 

SLG STATS FOR LEADOFF HITTERS

1. Hanely Rameriz SLG-.596

2. Alphonzo Soriano SLG-.579

3. Curtis Granderson SLG-.565

4. Jimmy Rollins SLG-.553

5. Rickie Weeks SLG-.477

See guys TOP 5 in the League in MOST stats

But you're so big on what guys did in the second half, go look at what Weeks did. Again, I don't want to explain this again, so read up this time. He injured his wrist. They said it'd be about a full year before it was 100 pct. He struggled with it badly last year. His swing was off, he had to start it early, and he couldn't check it, so the hard stuff down and away KILLED him. But go check out what he did in the second half. Put it this way. He was without question, a better leadoff hitter than Soriano last year in the second half. Hell, he probably was overall, but I don't want you to have a heart attack. The bottom line, for a leadoff hitter is GETTING-ON-BASE. Weeks does a very good job of that, plus he's got 40/40 type potential.

 

 

 

[baseballguy25]

. Curve Ball - Ok its not "Barry Zito in his prime good" its a VERY good pitch but don't be silly

 

2. Decent Fastball - 90mph fastball is ok

 

3. Breaking Ball - Its not always there for him yet? Wait a second... A fastball does not count because everyone can throw that so let me start over...

 

1. Curve Ball

 

2. A pitch that is not always there for him.

 

Ok one more time.

 

1. Curve Ball

 

That equals one pitch to me... Am I counting right?

 

 

That was a mess up, the pitch I meant to say was change up

 

 

Would you be excited? Why would a White Sox fan be excited to see what a Cub player can do?

Yes because living in Chicago I would get to see him play alot. For me it's always exciting to see what young players with potential could do. Doesn't mean I would want the Cubs to win that game. But honestly I'll admit that I got confused with that and meant to say White Sox. All this defending the Cubs(can't believe I'm doing this) is getting mixed up. I guess I said Cubs because he asked he asked if he was on the Cubs would I be excited or whatever.

 

 

BUT to try and say your NOT a sCrUBS fan is almost laughable at this point.

 

Well thats all for me... And I guess who ever said that arguing with a Cub fan is pointless is right....

 

Why is that? If I was a Cubs fan don't you think I would be talking about more things then the stuff you guys brought up?(offense,pen and other stuff). If I was a Cubs fan wouldn't I be mentioning other parts of the team? What have I really defended the Cubs on? the rotation? Sorry I feel it's the Cubs have better pitching, trust me I'm not going to be the only one. Other then that I said it's unfair to say what guys were saying about Soto/Kendall and said the Cubs could debate other things. I really don't see how that makes me a Cubs fan? Honestly I hope you guys win the division next year, and I hope we find a way to be good next year(which seems super tough in the AL Central). White Sox division talk is boring right now(until we make some more moves), so I decided to stop be yours and Cubs boards. I never expected these long debates, I was just surprised some of you are as biased as you are. Some of you act like the Brewers won the division by 10-15 games last year, and the Cubs are trying to improve to catch them. I feel the Cubs are a good team and just wanted to inform you guys on the them and not to take them lighty. But hey if you guys don't want me to post on here anymore thats fine, it's your board and your right.

[ELCABALLO45]

That was a mess up, the pitch I meant to say was change up

 

Ok but still, Ben Sheets can SAY he has a change up. Does that mean he does? No.

 

Yes because living in Chicago I would get to see him play alot. For me it's always exciting to see what young players with potential could do. Doesn't mean I would want the Cubs to win that game. But honestly I'll admit that I got confused with that and meant to say White Sox. All this defending the Cubs(can't believe I'm doing this) is getting mixed up. I guess I said Cubs because he asked he asked if he was on the Cubs would I be excited or whatever.

 

That part was a joke... Sorry you took it the wrong way.

 

I think I speak almost everyone when it feels like you just came on here bashed the Brewers, stood up for the Cubs. Defended the Cubs like your own and talked down our prospects and team. As a huge Brewer fan you could of walked up to me and poke me in the eye and I probably would of got less worked up over it.

 

But hey if you guys don't want me to post on here anymore thats fine, it's your board and your right.

 

I never said I didnt want you to post here.

[Gopher74]

I feel the Cubs are a good team and just wanted to inform you guys on the them and not to take them lighty. But hey if you guys don't want me to post on here anymore thats fine, it's your board and your right.

 

Great. And if you just were talking about the Cubs, that'd be one thing, but you weren't, you were making totally ridiculous, totally unfounded comments about the Brewers. That's first. Second, what exactly makes you think we NEED to be educated on the Cubs? You think maybe we saw them enough last year? I'd venture to guess that I saw them play a LOT more than you did.

 

And I love the little shots in there, like if we don't agree with your POV's, then we're homers. That's the point I was trying to make. When your arguments are so ridiculous, and you're forced to argue each point, you're going to come off as a homer, but I'm sure if I argued that Tony Gwynn Jr was better than Nick Swisher, Luis Pena was better than Bobby Jenks, Brad Nelson was better than Paul Konerko, you'd respond in kind.