Darvish is a Cub!

CubsFaninMN said:

I really don't think a guy who relies on control and change of speeds has to worry nearly as much about losing velo as a guy who only knows how to throw, not to pitch.

Yeah, when a guy like Chapman starts losing 3 to 5 mph off his fastball, it's time to hang them up. But all Hendricks needs to do is take another 2 to 3 mph off of his changeup, and he still has that same separation.

And as Beck pointed out, it wasn't the velo that was hurting him when he was battling through his hand issues last year, it was the control. Just like with Arrieta -- Jake lost his fine control, so he took 3 to 4 mph off his velo to try and get the control back. He was a really effective pitcher when he was able to find his control, even with 3 to 4 mph off his velo, but got knocked around when he lost it, and got into long counts, as well as running up his total pitch counts early and thus going only 4 or 5 innings. So, again, it wasn't the velo that bit him *or* Hendricks last year; it was the control.

As for Hendricks getting knocked around because his FB was topping out at 85 and not 87-89 -- are you really trying to tell me that major league hitters, who sit back and wait to just crush fastballs, can't crush 'em at 89 just as easily as at 85? Again, it was control, and being forced to come over the plate with less movement on 3-1 and 3-2 counts, than it was FB velocity, that was getting to Hendricks last year. His change-up was commensurately slower than his fastball right about then, too; it wasn't the speed separation that was hurting him.

To bring this back to Darvish, if velocity was all that was important, then why would a Hall of Famer like Jim Thome discuss Darvish's Eephus pitch, which floats in at about 55 mph, as a "jelly-knee" pitch? If you can spot up all of your pitches, you don't need to throw *any* of them past *anybody*.

Click to expand...

That is not correct on Jake. He lost velocity first.

He had to change to a crossfire to hide his pitches better.

Going crossfire you lose command. You have more command when you are more square to the plate.

So what he went through was a adaption to counter his loss. Not lowering velocity to add command

jooo83 said:

I would add St. Louis to the list of places I don't want Jake to sign.

Click to expand...

It will take more than one player to make either Stl or Mil get near the Cubs.

Mil lost their ace. Adding Jake makes them on par with last year. Which was a over achieve. Cubs are better than last year add to it they underperformed in the first half.

Both the Cubs and Indians under performed on the first then both pulled off the best records in the 2nd.

You could say that they were gassed from 2016 and didn’t recover until mid season. Then they went off in their runs.

It really is not about the divisions that they are in. It is about performing up to their talent.

Cubs should roll over the central. Wouldn’t shock me if 110 wins is in their view. It would take a stablization of the lead off And the D playing up to 2016’s level again. But wouldn’t shock me to see it happen.

CSF77 said:

Cubs should roll over the central. Wouldn’t shock me if 110 wins is in their view. It would take a stablization of the lead off And the D playing up to 2016’s level again. But wouldn’t shock me to see it happen.

Click to expand...

It's just so hard to win that many games. The 2016 Cubs and 2017 Dodgers were both completely bonkers teams, and neither even got to 105. Even the Cubs .662 in the second half last year wouldn't do it. You literally have to win more than 2/3rds of your games.

fatbeard said:

It's just so hard to win that many games. The 2016 Cubs and 2017 Dodgers were both completely bonkers teams, and neither even got to 105. Even the Cubs .662 in the second half last year wouldn't do it. You literally have to win more than 2/3rds of your games.

Click to expand...

I think the point is no one would be shocked even though it's hard to do. The division they play in helps.

Darvish contract is better then we thought...

https://twitter.com/GDubCub/status/963479216389001216

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

brett05 said:

I think the point is no one would be shocked even though it's hard to do. The division they play in helps.

Click to expand...

Pretty much. On paper 2016 should have not been that good. Jake got massive run support. Best in the NL. Lester had his best year here. Kyle a career year. Lackey was very solid. Hammel was a win machine in the first half. Cubs were blowing teams out 8-2 pretty regularly. D was top end. Lead off was stable.

If you look at it on paper. Yu > 2016 Jake. Jake really didn't step up until the WS. His win total was ballooned up by run support.

Q is better than Hammel by far.

So that leaves Chatwood and Lackey. That might end up a push. Lackey's core numbers were very good but had little to show in running up wins.

Hendricks IMO is a 3.00 ERA guy on avg. As long as the pen is stable his win/L should be close to his 16-8 record. This is why having a stable pen pays off.

Lester had a off year last year. 15.8 HR/FB was a career worst. 2.99 BB/9 worst sense 2012. I doubt he would ever admit to it but losing Ross affected him. 5.0 WAR then 4.4. First year with Contreras 2.7.

Honestly I'm kinda believing that we can put some of last year on Contreras' learning curve and how much the staff depended on Ross and Montero.

CSF77 said:

I think the issue with him is simple. He throws around 89 MPH. He gets by with weak contact and the difference in velocity from his 2 seem and his change up. His curve is league avg at best so it is not a pitch that he can base his arsonel around.

So if his 2 seem is at 85 and his change is at 82 is there a real difference in the 2? But 89 and 82 there is a difference.

I love the guy. He has made himself into a quality SP with college ball velocity. It reflects his work ethic and attacking each hitters weaknesses. IMO he has the tools to become a great pitching coach when his velocity drops for good.

Click to expand...

I honestly totally disagree with you here man. Velocity means far less than you think. It's movement that induces weak contact not velocity. That's the reason he's hard to square up. As for velocity returning after him being on the DL that really doesn't appear to be why he was struggling. As I mentioned before if you remove his first 3 starts of 2017 he had something like a 2.74 ERA the rest of the season. If we just look at the first half excluding those 3 games he gave up 19 runs in 55 innings for a 3.10 ERA. And frankly it's probably better than that because the 2 starts immediately prior to them putting him on the DL he gave up 9 runs in 9 innings. If you remove those 2 games you're talking about 10 runs in 46 innings or a 1.95 ERA. That's to go with his 2.19 ERA in the second half of last year.

Now I'm not sitting here trying to cherry pick data to make a point. But it's very easy to explain why his first 3 starts of the year may have been bad without concern for velocity. As i already mentioned they had a long season followed by a shorter than normal camp for their starters. And for what it's worth Hendricks wasn't the only starter who struggled in April. Lester's April ERA was 3.68. Arrieta's April ERA was 4.66 and Lackey's April ERA was 5.10. And in terms of the two starts before he went on the DL, we know that he was dealing with a hand issue and they let him try to pitch through it but ultimately decided after the second game to just put him on the DL and let him heal. So clearly those starts weren't at 100%.

Long story short here, the vast majority of 2017 he pitched very close to the player who was a cy young finalist in 2016. Those 5 starts cost him 20 runs over 25 innings(7.20 ERA). The rest of 2017 he posted 27 runs over 114.2 innings or a 2.12 ERA.

beckdawg said:

I honestly totally disagree with you here man. Velocity means far less than you think. It's movement that induces weak contact not velocity. That's the reason he's hard to square up. As for velocity returning after him being on the DL that really doesn't appear to be why he was struggling. As I mentioned before if you remove his first 3 starts of 2017 he had something like a 2.74 ERA the rest of the season. If we just look at the first half excluding those 3 games he gave up 19 runs in 55 innings for a 3.10 ERA. And frankly it's probably better than that because the 2 starts immediately prior to them putting him on the DL he gave up 9 runs in 9 innings. If you remove those 2 games you're talking about 10 runs in 46 innings or a 1.95 ERA. That's to go with his 2.19 ERA in the second half of last year.

Now I'm not sitting here trying to cherry pick data to make a point. But it's very easy to explain why his first 3 starts of the year may have been bad without concern for velocity. As i already mentioned they had a long season followed by a shorter than normal camp for their starters. And for what it's worth Hendricks wasn't the only starter who struggled in April. Lester's April ERA was 3.68. Arrieta's April ERA was 4.66 and Lackey's April ERA was 5.10. And in terms of the two starts before he went on the DL, we know that he was dealing with a hand issue and they let him try to pitch through it but ultimately decided after the second game to just put him on the DL and let him heal. So clearly those starts weren't at 100%.

Long story short here, the vast majority of 2017 he pitched very close to the player who was a cy young finalist in 2016. Those 5 starts cost him 20 runs over 25 innings(7.20 ERA). The rest of 2017 he posted 27 runs over 114.2 innings or a 2.12 ERA.

Click to expand...

Mar/Apr": 4.18 ERA
May: 3.34 ERA
June: 9.00 ERA (4 inning stint that led to the DL.

July: 1.93 ERA (9 IP)
Aug: 2.41 ERA
Sept/Oct: 2.01 ERA

Now on your argument of movement. I'm thinking SLG would be a fair indicator on that theory.

Apr: .392
May: .355
June: .533 (again 1 game)
July: .405 (9 IP)
Aug: .387
Sept: .322

So that part is relatively the same. So I agree with the movement theory. except in Sept/Oct he was looking like 2016.

You can argue it but I'm still seeing it as he got 100% and his velocity returned and he went back to what he was.

I think he has until 32-33 YO myself before his velocity falls off. I'm really doubting that the Cubs try to keep control of him when he hits F/A. They got damn lucky with that trade. Considering he was a toss in. I just see a drop off with age with him that you can't hide with forcing weak contact.

Just look at Greg. His highest ERA with the Braves was at 37 YO at a 3.96. Before that it broke 3.00 1 time at 35 YO at a 3.05. But he was a 91 MPH guy the whole time. When his velocity dropped into the 80's his ERA ballooned.

37: 3.96
38: 4.02
39: 4.24
40: 4.20
41: 4.14
42: 4.22

And his last years were at SD and LAD which are run suppressing stadiums. Basically he had help.

And this is a low 90's pitcher dropping a few MPH. Mot a high 80's pitcher dropping a few MPH.

Both have great command and movement. Ask Bryant and he was made into a fool this year by Greg.

But losing velocity does matter. That extra tick gives the hitter more time to decipher the pitch. That is why Jake went crossfire. To get that deception to offset.

edit: 1999 3.57 ERA 33 YO 2000 3.00 ERA 34 YO His 36 YO campaign was a resurgence at 2.62 ERA.
So IMO it just proves he played clean and regressed naturally.

Hmm... there is an interesting feature article on the Cubs' website in which Theo gives his side of the story as to how Darvish ended up signing with the Cubs. (I'd put in a link, but it usually will only link to the articles page, not to the individual article; suffice to say, it's on the main Cubs website.)

The interesting aspect is that, at least per Theo, the Cubs started out the off-season figuring they needed to add at least two starters, and were pretty well convinced that Darvish would cost as much as they could afford to pay for the two starters they needed, just by himself. And in fact, reading between the lines, the first solution that the FO was pursuing was adding Chatwood and Cobb. At which point, they would have been done in terms of adding MLB-ready starters for 2018.

But then Darvish's agent contacted the Cubs -- not the other way around -- asking for a meeting. To which Theo replied "Well, OK, it never hurts to talk, but to be honest, we don't think it's a very good fit." Again, because of Darvish's projected asking price.

What turned Theo around was a turn-around in Darvish's attitude, it seems. When he came to the U.S., the existing Japanese players in MLB were either mid-level players, or were nearing the ends of their careers. He felt strongly that he represented Japan within MLB, and was most concerned with representing his home country well, and with honor. He had never grown up "dreaming of a World Series" -- it just isn't something the Japanese culture places as much emphasis upon, for kids growing up there.

So, developing his talent, getting a ton of K's -- these were things he could do within himself, that didn't depend on playing for a world-beating team. He concentrated on being the best strikeout pitcher he could be, to thus bring honor to Japan. (It's a very Japanese mindset.)

But getting to the World Series with LA last year, and failing, changed his mindset. Darvish saw -- and felt -- the incredible run of emotions that comes with a World Series run.

And got addicted. (Who'd have thunk it?)

So, during the off-season, he apparently asked his agents to set up meetings only with teams that had a chance of getting back to the World Series during his contract period. And that the money was secondary to playing for a team that had a decent shot of getting him back to the Biggest Show in Baseball.

Which means that, whilst all of us were sitting here thinking that Darvish and his agent were trying to squeeze more money out of his team "finalists" and would sign with whomever made him the richest Yu on the block, apparently Darvish himself wanted to go to either the Cubs or back to the Dodgers, and was willing to take a little less money than, say, the Twins or the Brewers may have been willing to offer, to play for one of the teams that had the best chance of getting back to the WS in the next couple of years. In other words, all other things being equal, he would take less money from the Cubs than he would from the Brewers or the Twins. Which, as a Cubs fan, is sort of a good feeling.

I just found it fascinating that, had Cobb accepted the Cubs' offer, Theo would have told Darvish's people sorry, but no thanks, we have the guys we really want. And it was Darvish who kept pushing to try and sign with the Cubs, not the other way around.

I'd say all of this bodes well for how Yu will play for the Cubs, and how well he will be accepted by the team. And that shows by how important it is to him to play well for us -- you could tell by how nervous he was before his first ST start. You don't get nervous like that unless you're really concerned about what your new team, and teammates, think of you.

It really seems like he has the best possible attitude going into the season, for all the right reasons. Which makes it appear this is gonna be a REALLY good fit...