Why Zambrano's Move to the Pen Could be a Good Thing

Picture this scenario: it's the bottom of the 7th inning. The bases are loaded and the Cubs are tied with the Cardinals with just one out. Pujols is at the plate and Dempster, who has pitched masterfully (again) has already thrown 117 pitches.

He's gassed and this is the most crucial moment in the game. The Cubs are two games back of the Cardinals and they need to take this game.

Lou Piniella waddles out to the mound and touches his right arm: he wants the righty. And in from the bullpen area comes none other than Carlos Zambrano—the best pitcher in the pen whose name isn't Carlos Marmol.

If anything positive is going to come from moving Zambrano to the pen, this is it. The Cubs will be one of the very few teams who get to experiment with the theory of using your best reliever in the toughest spot—not just in the ninth inning to get the save. It's the reason why your best reliever shouldn't be your closer.

Teams have experimented with this in the past—the Red Sox a few years ago, the Twins were gonna try it until they decided on Rauch replacing Nathan rather than having a closer by committee. MLB teams just don't have the balls to try it.

The Cubs won't really be "trying it" but it's as close as we'll get. We'll see how long it takes before Z goes back into the rotation though...but I'd love to see him come out when the toughest situations come up before the ninth inning.

What Makes a Trade Good or Bad?

My friend Joel and I have been going back and forth a lot on whether or not the Silva for Bradley trade was any good. Basically, this is how the debate has gone down:

J: Bradley was a dick and he needed to get traded away.

SG: Yeah but the Cubs traded from a position of weakness because they HAD to trade him and everyone knew it, so all they could get in return was a chubby guy who can't break 90mph.

J: Easy there man, isn't it time you got back to managing jimhendryapologist.org?

SG: You're stupid.

You get the idea. But the more back and forth we had, the more I realized that I was indeed defending a lot of Jim Hendry's moves. Maybe it's because I followed the progress of the Cubs minor league system from when Hendry took over and slowly made the Cubs system the envy of baseball (this was a while ago).

So it's possible I have a soft spot in my heart for Jim Hendry.

But it's also possible I'm right. You see, if there's one thing I detest is Monday morning quarterbacking. Just because a trade doesn't work out after the fact, it doesn't mean it was a bad trade at the time. And the inverse also holds true.

Let's take the Silva trade because we can't really "look back" on it yet. It's too soon. But this is when Hendry had to make the trade—he can't look back to see if it's a good idea or not. And right now, this is a bad trade. Look at Silva's numbers and look at Bradley's numbers. Sure, Bradley is a jackass and Silva isn't, but Silva's career looks like it should never have gotten started and Bradley at least looks like he has some gas left in the tank. And then there's the whole thing about dealing from a position of weakness.

There is one phrase you'll hear over and over when it comes to trade talk:

You can't really judge this trade for a few years until all the parts of it can be evaluated

Bullshit. You can evaluate a trade right then and there but you have to stick your neck out and face the possibility that you are wrong. That's what Hendry and every other GM has to do, so why don't we hold ourselves to the same standard?

I know we don't have to, but we should.

Anyway, this was a bad trade. Silva's performance might make it a bad trade that turned out well for the Cubs, but right now I give this trade an F.

Zambrano to the Bullpen: 5 Reasons why it's a Sucky Move

So the Cubs have made their first desperation move of 2010 (I'm not counting the Milton Bradley trade since the season hadn't started yet). Carlos Zambrano was taken out of the starting rotation and sent to the pen.

Here are five reasons why this is a ridiculous move:

1. Zambrano is/was an Elite Starter

He's supposedly your #1 starter and now you're sending him to the pen? I know he hasn't been awesome lately (not many wins but his WHIP and OBA are top notch) but come on—since when do we judge a starter with his track record after four starts? He still has #1 stuff and now he's in the pen.

That sucks.

2. Are Gorzelany and Silva Better than Zambrano?

Nope. But essentially that's what just happened—they both bumped Big Z from the rotation. "But look at the numbers Senor, they have been awesome!" Sure they have, but like I said before, this is after only four starts. And yeah Silva looks like a new man, but these two guys will not pitch this well for the rest of the season. You can bank on that. So what happens when they come back down to earth? Pull Z back into the rotation?

Good luck with that.

3. $$$

Zambrano is now an $18 million setup man that will pitch three or four innings a week in a role he hasn't been in for a LONG time.

I can't wait to see the bloggers (not me) start to come up with the "Z makes $X million per win" stats that are so prevalent.

Sucky sucky.

4. What if if Works too Well?

This is where I hedge my bets. What if it goes according to plan? What if Z rocks it as a setup man, starts behaving himself, and donates half his salary back to the team so they can go sign Pedro Martinez? Then your hand is forced and he has to stay in the pen. And when Gorz/Silva start to suck or someone else gets hurt—then what do you do?

Nothing—you're screwed. Mucho sucko.

5. You're Taking Z's Bat out of the Lineup

The team still isn't hitting. It's sucking. So now Big Z will probably no longer hit. Which is too bad because he might put up a higher OPS than Theriot if he had a shot at it.

Tyler Colvin Mania Has Brainwashed the World

Who knew all you needed to become a big shot in the major leagues was to be young and have an awesome spring? Unless your name is Stephen Strasburg. Or Aroldis Chapman. Or Starlin Castro.

Somehow Tyler Colvin beat the odds and has won the hearts and minds of lazy analysts and over-eager fans by putting up really good numbers in Spring Training.

.468, 2HR, 18 RBIs

That's the line that created all the Tyler Colvin hype that's out there. That's a sample size of 77 ABs. That, along with Colvin gaining 20 pounds of muscle over the winter, has him in some conversations as a rookie to watch for in 2010.

Which is ridiculous.

I'm even hearing people talking about how he and Starlin Castro are proof that the Cubs have finally learned to produce position players.

That's preposterous—the Cubs have HUGE problems developing position players and one great Spring Training (it was great, you have to admit) by Tyler Colvin can't change that.

One good thing about all this undeserved hype is that Starlin Castro has the spotlight off of him for a little while. Jim Hendry made the right call by sending Castro to AAA instead of AA—at least we agree on that. Having fans drool over Colvin's spring-training stats is keeping the pressure off Castro.

Props to Tyler Colvin

First of all, my hat is off to the young man. He came into Spring Training without a chance in hell to make the roster and he somehow pulled it off. How Piniella will get him any decent amount of ABs with Byrd, Kosuke, and Soriano in the lineup is beyond me (oh and don't forget Xavier Nady, whom we're paying $3 million)—but that's a separate issue.

This post isn't about how Colvin is or isn't going to be a productive ML player. I personally don't think it's going to happen this year, but I could be wrong. I've stated my opinions on the Cubs picking Colvin before and I think it was a bad choice.

I'm sure he's excited about being in the Bigs but the Cubs aren't helping his development. He didn't draw a single walk (which isn't that big a deal—it's spring training), but in his career he hasn't learned to draw walks consistently. Which isn't a big deal, except he strikes out wayyy too much. He is NOT going to learn now that in the bigs—especially not with sporadic at bats. He is going to try to produce, which is what he should be doing.

The problem here isn't that Tyler Colvin isn't ready for the big leagues. The problem is that Hendry/Piniella decided to keep him on the roster despite knowing that it isn't good for his development. Just look at his stats—he needs at least a full season at AAA before he's ready.

The problem is also lazy analysts like Eduardo Perez. He was on ESPN and he picked Colvin as his "Rookie to Watch" for 2010. How ignorant is that? Here is what Perez did: he rummaged through the league's spring-training stats and found the best numbers available. He picked out the rookie with the best stats and that's how he made his decision. How else do you explain this terrible pick?

I should've been on ESPN explaining how crazy Perez is and how crazy it is to expect him to take over for Soriano after a slow start.

Wake up people!