*sigh* No I didn't. I said trading one of your better pitchers doesn't make sense. You and the rest of these guys are acting as if Michael Young is some kind of sovereign, which he isn't. Carlos was one of the stronger pitchers the north side had last season no? How much sense does it make to trade him away on the very off chance that the pitchers you have now will be just as good or better? What kind of a wake up call do you need? You act as if the rotation is stellar, which is flat out ridiculous. Keep what you have and if its shitty then you trade. You don't do spur of the moment moves or you end up with...Alfonso Soriano...Milton Bradley...Fukudome...the list goes on and on. You'd think for somebody to be a Cub fan you'd know better since you'd know better about the organization than I do. But I've got to say the moves you guys make and the moves you guys want to are some of the stupidest I've seen. Think about it, it isn't that hard of a concept to grasp. I'm not "making shit up" I'm stating facts.
The ERA is a direct reflection of how the pitcher does. How can a so called baseball fan not know this? It doesn't matter how the job gets done as long as it gets done. You don't have to be a sexy strike out pitcher to be one of the best, ask Mark Buehrle.
ERA absolutely is not a direct reflection of how the pitcher does. ERA is a direct reflection of what actually happened on the baseball field, with the caveat that official scorers can make some difference. A pitcher is not in control of his ERA. He is, however, in control of his FIP. ERA reflects the results of those pitches. Which relies largely on the defense.
Who said you had to be a sexy strike out pitcher? While you are somewhat right about getting the job done, it's not entirely true. Pitcher X could have an ERA above 4, while playing with the worst defense in the league, while pitcher Y has an ERA below 4, while pitching with the best defense in the league. If Pitcher X had that great defense, he would be better. FIP doesn't involved fielders, so it shows us how the pitcher actually performed.
ERA has nothing to do with the things you listed lol. ERA means earned run average so if you bring "team defense" into the equation that's unearned runs. Who's trying to compare leagues? I'm talking about the Cubs, point blank period. Pointless angle. Difficult to compare across years? Are you re-reading what you type to hear yourself? ERA is the best stat to look at how well a pitcher's doing, it's pointless to even try to argue otherwise. I'd take a 2-5 pitcher with a 2.33 ERA (which is one hell of an odd combination but it's only for hypothetical purposes) over a 5-2 pitcher with a 4.35 ERA any day.
NO! Team Defense absolutely has to do with ERA. Have you never heard of range? If player A can get to 10/10 balls and makes 1 error, but player B can only get to 7/10 balls, but makes no errors, that doesn't makes Player B the better defender at all. Plus, a lot of it is at the discretion of the score keeper.
NO! ERA is not the best stat to look how a pitcher is doing. I would love to know where you get your information at. I agree, that would much rather have the 2-5 pitcher, but would you rather have:
Pitcher Q who has a 4.00 ERA, with a 3.15 FIP, or Pitcher W who has a 3.5 ERA with a 4 FIP? The answer is Pitcher W, because he performed better than Pitcher Q. FIP does not involve fielders, therefore shows us just how the pitcher pitched.
Hmm..maybe because (oh & you'll hate this one) he had a lower ERA than Ryan Dempster did. He was the pitcher who almost threw a no-no against my blazing Sox to cool them off of their 9 game win streak. He was the most consistent (at least from what I saw) of the Cub pitchers and the main reason he had those 8 losses was because of the pen fucking him over and the offense not scoring enough to get him a W (again, from what I saw). Good enough? I think so.
Great, he had a better ERA than Dempster, while Dempster had a better FIP, xFIP(expected FIP, which is better for smaller sample sizes), K/9, HR/9, and tERA. Lilly got a lot of help from his defense. He certainly didn't pitch better than Dempster.
Great, in one game, he almost threw a no-no, I don't see how that makes him the best pitcher on a team, over the course of a year, or in his case about 4 months of the season.
Using W-L to gauge a pitchers ability? Really? That's dumb. From what you saw he was the best? Did you watch every game of every pitcher? No. Then don't speak like you did, that's why we have stats, to tell us how they did.
Pointless at this point, I said there isn't much you could say to change my mind. This didn't do the trick either. Nice try though.
Okay, then why is it a bad trade? What are you basing that off of?
Re-read what I said and reply again. You missed the point.
How do you know Pena wasn't the plan all along? You don't. We aren't within the organization, so we just don't know.
Glad you're man enough to admit your position, but no we aren't all e-losers on here. I for one don't see the need to take personal shots at someone to get my point across. And I'm not 34 living in my mom's basement. I'm 19, sitting in my dorm room right now.
& I'm 15, sitting in my living room right now.
Your perception of the Cubs is off.
DeRosa has been terrible since we traded him and we got Archer for him, who could have been a really good pitcher here, but we traded him. So it was basically DeRosa for Garza, that isn't bad.
Silva started off great, and then he was terrible. He wasn't better than Z, Dempster, Gorzelanny (traded), Lilly (traded), etc. if you put the whole season into respect.
We don't need Silva, and he's been getting hammered all spring. We have Dempster, Zambrano, Garza, Wells, and Cashner, which isn't bad at all. If Silva stays, he'll probably be in the pen. But ya, our ace.
You didn't watch the Cubs enough to know the whole storyline, just strust me on this one.
Gorz was traded in the off season.
