Dale Sveum said yesterday that Scott Feldman will be the 4th starter for the Cubs. He also confirmed what we already knew in that Scott Baker won't be ready to start the season.
Cubs manager Dale Sveum said Scott Baker, coming back from Tommy John surgery last year, most likely will not be ready by Opening Day, and that Scott Feldman will start and won't need to multi-task as he did with the Rangers.
With Feldman securing a spot and Baker not being ready by April 1, that leaves one vacancy in the rotation. Jeff Samardzija and Edwin Jackson are set, and Matt Garza also appears healthy after missing more than two months last year because of an elbow problem.
"There's an above average chance Baker is going to probably start a little bit late, just because you don't want to rush him," Sveum said Thursday. "There's no need for that. You have Garza, Samardzija, Jackson, Feldman and the other spot, and you never know — there's no guarantees of any spots besides the top three. We'll let it all pan out and see what happens."
But asked about whether Feldman, who has pitched in relief and started for the Rangers, would be considered for the 'pen, Sveum said, "Feldman's a starter. He's going to be one of the starters."
That leaves the 5th spot open for Travis Wood or Carlos Villanueva, but it appears Sveum already knows who that spot will be going to.
Villanueva will likely be used in relief, Sveum said. That would give lefty Travis Wood an edge for the last rotation spot.
I don't think much of Villanueva, but I'd rather he be starting than Feldman. What will be most interesting regarding the rotation is what happens when Scott Baker returns. That decision will more than likely come down to how Travis Wood and Scott Feldman have fared in the early going. My bet is on Wood keeping a job in the rotation.
The front of the rotation will be some combination of Matt Garza, Edwin Jackson and Jeff Samardzija.
Comments
Why are you so bullish on Feldman? I thought he had ok numbers for being in a hitter’s park in a good division in the AL. And I thought Fangraphs liked him too.
JonKneeVQuote Reply
@ JonKneeV:
He’s had 2 decent seasons in his career (2009 and 2012). The rest have sucked. He’s been worth 3 rWAR in his career and 3.5 of that was in 2009: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/f/feldmsc01.shtml#pitching_value::none
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=6283&position=P
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=45622
I think he’s the 7th best starter on this team (Garza, Jackson, Samardzija, Baker, Wood, Villanueva).
dmick89Quote Reply
Should Jadeveon Clowney be allowed to enter the 2013 NFL Draft? Why? 500 words, go!
RynoQuote Reply
Enrico, I grabbed an mp3 file of that song if you’re interested. I found some software for the Mac to convert youtube to mp3 and the sound is pretty good (same as the youtube I posted here yesterday).
dmick89Quote Reply
Suburban kid wrote:
My limited understanding of bookies is they don’t give you the odds, they give you what they expect the population to bet and want it so both sides of the bet are 50/50. That way they break even and collect on the juice. Since there are so many optimistic Cubs fans out there, they have reduced odds.
WaLiQuote Reply
@ WaLi:
Yeah, the Cubs odds always appear better than they really are because there are so many people betting on the Cubs.
The other question regarding the playoff odds, is it similar to what Nate Silver explained about 538 during the election? They had Obama winning something like 75% of the trials, but in reality, he had closer to a 95% or higher chance of winning re-election. I seem to recall one mathematician even putting those odds at something like 98-99% based on Nate’s projected electoral count.
I don’t think this would be true in baseball, but I don’t know. My math sucks.
dmick89Quote Reply
@ WaLi:
The odds aren’t really 50/50, but yes they adjust the odds so 50% of the bets are on each side.
For example, let’s say the spread on tomorrow’s IU-Purdue game is 15.5. You’d want the money of those bets to be split evenly on each side of the two potential outcomes. But the payout for both sides isn’t -100 (bet $100 to win $100). Most likely the payout is -110 (bet $110 to win $100). So the bookies are getting that extra cushion.
This is why lines can change if betting is heavy on one team (like the Niners in the Superbowl).
It’s like casino’s with Texas Hold ‘Em. The house rakes some of the bets.
JonKneeVQuote Reply
@ Ryno:
Yes.
GBTSQuote Reply
@ Ryno:
no
Bubbles, UndoubtedlyQuote Reply
@ GBTS:
@ Bubbles, Undoubtedly:
You’ve convinced me.
RynoQuote Reply
(dying laughing) ???
dmick89Quote Reply
@ Ryno:
Maybe.
dmick89Quote Reply
@ dmick89:
He plays for South Carilina, so I’m going to go ahead and assume Bubbles wants his team to have the best player in the country for another year.
GBTSQuote Reply
@ dmick89:
Well, shit. Now I’m torn again.
RynoQuote Reply
@ Ryno:
My favorite rationale for the two year wait is that the players “aren’t ready,” and too many will flame out if drafted too early. You know.who’s problem that is? The team who drafts him, not the player.
I’m sorry, I thought this was America, where people take business risks all the time that can either end profitably or horribly. Awful fucking convenient for the NCAA that only in the monopoly of proessional sports we feel the need to insulate players and teams for an arbitrary two years from the risk of drafting/being drafted too early because the player “might not be ready.” Eat a dick, NCAA. Ask that Noel kid from Kentucky basketball if he thinks he needed to shred his knee pretending to be a student for 6 months so he could be ready for the NBA.
GBTSQuote Reply
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1206924/index.htm
That’s sweet and all, but can we stop perpetuating the idea that the pistol is an offense? It’s just a formation. Teams don’t run the shotgun or the Power I.
Teams can run pretty much any play out of the pistol. The formation itself is innovative, as is the zone read or read option play.
/petpeeve
RynoQuote Reply
@ GBTS:
More words.
GBTS wrote:
It’s OK, just pay more attention next time.
GBTS wrote:
Well I think it’s the player’s problem a little…
RynoQuote Reply
I agree with you, GBTS. The Draft Advisory Committee does a good job of letting players know if they need another year in college.
My opinion is that this really only applies to MAYBE and handful of players each year. Clowney, Marqise Lee and Austin Sefarian-Jenkins are guys who are a year away from being eligible, but would probably get first-round grades in this year’s draft.
Cyrus Kouandjio is a guy who has a good chance to be a high first rounder in 2014, but he’d probably get a second-round grade right now. The DAC would make him aware of that so he can make an informed decision.
I really just wondered if anyone thought it was a good rule, but I should have known that no one here would agree with it.
RynoQuote Reply
new shit: http://obstructedview.net/news-and-rumors/last-year-joe-mather-this-year-brent-lillibridge.html
dmick89Quote Reply
@ Ryno:
I’m amazed that the NCAA allows the DAC to exist, considering they blackball players for merely walking on the opposite side of the street as an agent.
BerseliusQuote Reply
@ Ryno:
The problem with letting guys get drafted “too early” in the NFL is there is no chance for them to develop unless you play them. And if he isn’t ready, then you’re sacrificing wins for his development most likely. That being said, is Clowney ready?
MuckerQuote Reply
Ryno wrote:
They’re not being drafted involuntarily. If a 19 year old thinks he’s good enough to play in the NFL, good for him. He’s probably wrong, but that’s his choice to make. I just don’t get why in professional sports we coddle people from making potentially terrible business decisions. Again, I thought this was America.
gbts22Quote Reply
@ Ryno:
I didn’t even know there was a DAC. I think that’s a really good thing and makes the two year waiting period even more inexcusable.
gbts22Quote Reply
Mucker wrote:
Exactly. So guys who need more time should continue on in college. Teams that draft such players have no one to blame but themselves if they don’t develop.
gbts22Quote Reply
And here I am by myself, talking to myself.
gbts22Quote Reply