PDA

View Full Version : Obsessing over Cubs rotation


WhiteSoxFan84
01-11-2005, 02:00 PM
LA Dodgers;
1) Jeff Weaver
2) Odaliz Perez
3) Derek Lowe
4) Brad Penny
5) Kaz Ishii

Cubs;
1) Mark Prior
2) Kerry Wood
3) Carlos Zambrano
4) Greg Maddux
5) Glendon Rusch

Keep a few things in mind, I doubt these are the official orders, I just put them together, and the order shouldnt matter, I'm just asking you who has the best overall rotation. I just love that Dodgers rotation and wonder if they have the best rotation in the NL.

Comments please.

MUsoxfan
01-11-2005, 02:02 PM
To me, there's more question marks on that Dodger staff than on the Chubbie staff.

RKMeibalane
01-11-2005, 02:25 PM
The Cubs have the better staff. The Dodgers have too many players who, even at this point, still haven't proven that they can handle starting over the course of a full season.

fquaye149
01-11-2005, 02:42 PM
The Cubs have the better staff. The Dodgers have too many players who, even at this point, still haven't proven that they can handle starting over the course of a full season.
as opposed to wood prior and zambrano (and an ancient maddux with walker/nomar up the middle)?

yet, i'll still take the cubs rotation, i think.

Flight #24
01-11-2005, 02:46 PM
#1: Prior v. Weaver - Prior, no contest.

#2: Zambrano v. Perez - see #1. Perez has a longer track record, but nowhere near the dominance of Zambrano.

#3: Wood v. Lowe - Even or to Wood. Despite his being way overhyped, Wood's still better than Lowe, who's put up some pretty poor years. He's also a guy who won't benefit as much from the move to Dodger Stadium since he's a ground ball pitcher anyway.

#4: Madduz v. Penny - At this stage, probably Penny. Especialyl since I expect Maddux to decline from last year a bit given his age, trends, & workload.

#5: Rusch v. Ishii - Ishii, but neither's very good. Rusch will have a hard time duplicating last year's performance, at least if his career provides any guidance.
Overall, the Cubs have pretty solid advantages at #1 & 2, more than offsetting any weaknesses at 4 & 5.

Now talk about bullpens? No contest - LA.

Clement's beard
01-11-2005, 03:05 PM
Interesting topic. The cubs rotation is probably better then any team in the NL, probably. Their infield is probably the best hitting infield in the NL, probably. Their outfield is suspect outside of Patterson but I think Hendry will hose someone into taking Sosa's contract and he will sign a LF, possibly Ordonez.

Their pen is suspect and if Dempster can't close and Borowski is not healthy, they could have big problems.

Jerome
01-11-2005, 03:09 PM
A healty Cubs rotation is probably the best in baseball or at least top five. Let's hope for some more achillies problems in 2005!

The Dodgers though will be helped by the pitcher-friendly park.

Jjav829
01-11-2005, 03:19 PM
It's the Cubs easily. Here's the thing about the Cubs. They are still the same great looking fantasy/PS2 team. They still look great on paper. At the end of last season I compared them to the Sox. I said I thought they were just like the Sox, though with a better rotation. And Hendry has done nothing to change that. They are still a very slow team. They still have too many high strikeout, power hitter types. They are still a station-to-station team that won't do the little things. Their defense is still questionable. They still no have closer and a weak bullpen. On paper, their team looks great. But as I said when they re-signed Nomar and Walker, they probably should have looked elsewhere at one or both of those positions. They should have looked at a guy like Polanco who can do some different things than Walker. While Renteria was overpaid, he probably would have fit the Cubs better than Nomar. I think they probably would have been better off taking a chance on Tony Womack rather than keeping Walker.

That's why I like what Kenny has done this offseason. He changed the makeup of this team and addressed the problems. He added a leadoff hitter with speed, a lefty catcher who can hit, another solid starter and a couple solid bullpen arms. All of those areas were needs for the Sox. Meanwhile all of the problems the Cubs had in winning last season are still areas of concerns. They still have no leadoff hitter. Their defense still has some questions. They still have no closer and a questionable bullpen. They lost a starter and replaced him with a guy who hasn't been very reliable (or good) in his career. And now they are looking at Jeromy Burnitz to fill their hole in left. What does he add? Okay, he gives them a lefty to break up some of their righties. But he's another high strikeout, slow, power hitter. Frankly, I hope they do get him. :cool:

Edit: This just in, Cubs sign Cody Ransom. That changes everything I just said.

samram
01-11-2005, 06:13 PM
It's the Cubs and this coming from a Dodgers fan. Weaver is not a #1, Penny is coming off an injury, and Ishii was certainly nothing special last year.

Of course, they do have Gagne at the back of their bullpen, so that's something.

doublem23
01-11-2005, 07:05 PM
The Dodgers aren't even one of the top 5 rotations in baseball.

Best starting pitching in the National League? Atlanta. Then the Cubs.

DSpivack
01-14-2005, 05:21 AM
Call me crazy, but I don't see the Cubs having nearly as good of a rotation this year as they did in 2004. Prior and Zambrano are studs when healthy, but Wood still has to stay healthy and break out if the rotation is to be good, Maddux has to have another stellar year at his age, and Glendon Rusch has to prove he is a full time starter, which I doubt (talk about a run on sentence).

I just see too many holes there to think that is a top-notch rotation. I think the Sox rotation is similar, not as good, but similar: Garcia and Buehrle are studs (more durable, less talented than Prior, Zambrano), but there are durability and age question marks in former Yanks Contreras and El Duque, as there are age questions with Maddux and talent/durability questions with Rusch. Garland is a like Wood lite, full of talent and waiting to win a bunch of games.

Call me crazy again, but I like the Cards rotation as the best in the NL Central right now:
1. Mark Mulder
2. Chris Carpenter
3. Matt Morris
4. Jeff Suppan
5. Adam Wainwright/Jason Marquis

It's not as flash as the Cubs, but I think there are fewer question marks there, and a deeper staff.

veeter
01-15-2005, 09:58 AM
Does being injury prone and inconsistent ever go into these comparisons? I go on record as believing the Cubs pitching staff, especially Kerry Wood, is over rated. Case in point: When all the Cubs rotation finally came back healthy last year for the stretch run, they proceeded to tank. Wood and Prior rarely go late into games. Then when the game is lost they blame the bullpen. If these guys are going to be spoken of like the next Tom Seaver and Nolan Ryan they need to finish a game once in a while. Wood still gets mileage out of his 20 strikeout game from 1998!!!! When it's all said and done Zambrano may turn out to be the best one.

The Critic
01-15-2005, 06:27 PM
The Cubs and Cards rotations both have significant question marks, but if both staffs perform to peak potential, the Cubs' staff is better IMO.
The Cubs appear to want Angel Guzman to slot at #5, with Rusch doing middle relief and spot starting. The kid has a world of potential, but like most of the other Cub starters, he's coming off injury.
IMO, Carpenter, Morris and Suppan all have something to prove this year for St. Louis.

Whitesox029
01-15-2005, 06:45 PM
I'm predicting Maddux falters badly this year. He's been getting worse every year since about 02. Rusch was impressive last year, but he's never really been that great before so I see a Loaiza-like fall from grace on a lesser scale for him.
Keep in mind I'm trying to be optimistic.

JKryl
01-15-2005, 11:15 PM
Who cares? This is a White Sox site, not a Cub/Dodgers site.

The Critic
01-16-2005, 06:54 AM
Who cares? This is a White Sox site, not a Cub/Dodgers site.
This IS a White Sox site, but this is the "Talking Baseball" forum, which if I'm not mistaken, is intended for non-White Sox baseball conversation....and a comparison of other teams' pitching staffs would fall under non-White Sox baseball conversation.