Andrew Cashner Should Be Starting
Yeah, he had a 4.80 ERA in relief last season, I know. He was walking nearly 5 guys per 9 innings. Command was obviously a problem. And it probably wasn't his only problem, either. But even so, I think that Andrew Cashner should be the Cubs' fifth starter going into next season. And if they aren't willing to go that far, at the very least he should be in Triple-A preparing himself for the day when he fills that role.
Carlos Silva has proven that he's not an awful pitcher. You don't post four seasons with 2+ WAR and three seasons with 3+ WAR if you're an awful pitcher. You might get lucky and pitch one, but you're doing something right if you make it through four. Yet the key here isn't that Silva isn't an awful pitcher; it's that he's not a particularly good one, and there's no chance that he'll ever be great. He's got exceptional command, and he can eat some innings when he's not taking after the wrong Carlos and picking fights in the dugout. But he's never missed bats like he did last season, and at nearly 32 it's not likely that he's somehow found a new way to get hitters out after seven seasons in the majors.
That's why I want to see what Cashner can do. He's got the big-time raw stuff, with a powerful fastball and a legit out-pitch in his slider. He was making big strides in terms of his development as a starter before the Cubs brought him up the big league bullpen for most of last season. There's no reason to believe that he can't continue to make those strides if he's placed back into the same program. And unlike Silva, there's the potential for greatness there. And when you're a fourth-place club that's looking towards the future, the long-term potential of someone like Cashner outweighs the short-term benefits of someone like Silva.
Cashner probably won't be the difference between making or missing the playoffs in 2011, regardless of the role he's in. But if the Cubs want to make their future feel a bit more exciting, they should probably focus on putting together that Garza-Cashner-Trey McNutt top of the rotation for 2012-2013. Because they're not going to be winning any divisions with Randy Wells as their No. 2 starter.
7 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
If Wells isn't good enough to be a #2, then why is Garza your projected #1?
Bullpen Banter
Twitter Account: @Ioffridus
If guys like Cashner and McNutt don't come through
They’re the projected No. 1 and No. 2 starters for the club in 2013, assuming that Zambrano and Dempster aren’t brought back. And most of their best prospects, guys like Jay Jackson and Chris Carpenter, might be better suited for relief than starting.
Just trying to say that front-line pitching could be an issue for them, and they should try to maximize their odds of developing some of that kind of pitching by moving Cashner back to the rotation.
Also, I’m somewhat optimistic about Garza making some strides with a move to the NL, and I think it’s more plausible that Garza is an acceptable No. 1 in 2013 than Wells is an acceptable No. 2 in 2013.
Baseball is my preferred sport. It should be yours, too.
I'm a columnist for Beyond the Box Score, an SB Nation blog.
Oh, I'm on Twitter, too.
by Satchel Price on Mar 10, 2011 2:00 PM EST up reply actions
I agree with your premise
The Cubs need guys TOR arms and Cashner/McNutt have a chance to be just that. I’m just having a hard time seeing the difference between Wells/Garza, both look like solid #3s to me with Wells having the better career numbers so far.
Bullpen Banter
Twitter Account: @Ioffridus
I think there are some clear differences
Garza has been putting up his numbers in the AL East. He’s proven to be more durable. He’s younger. He averages 93.3 MPH on his fastball, compared to 89.6 for Wells. In 2013, he’ll be 29. Wells turns 31 during the season. I think that Garza has way, way more potential to improve from here, compared to Wells.
Speaking in terms of what they’ve done so far though, yeah, they’re pretty equal. But you can’t ignore that Garza is younger, throws much harder, has better raw stuff, and has a far stronger pedigree.
Baseball is my preferred sport. It should be yours, too.
I'm a columnist for Beyond the Box Score, an SB Nation blog.
Oh, I'm on Twitter, too.
by Satchel Price on Mar 10, 2011 2:22 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, Wells is about 15 months older than Garza
But as a converted catcher, he’s had less experience pitching. Garza will almost certainly put up better numbers in the NL Central than he did in the AL East, but it’s not like Wrigley Field is a HR suppressing environment. His fastball has less pure velocity than Garza’s, but Wells’s swinging strike percentage is a full percentage higher and trending upwards.
It’s possible that Garza emerges in Chicago, but I would actually give McNutt or Cashner a better chance at emerging as a future ace.
Bullpen Banter
Twitter Account: @Ioffridus
That's fair.
I’m just guessing that given what they gave up for him, as well as his expected salaries and past track record, that Chicago expects him to head the rotation in a year or two.
Baseball is my preferred sport. It should be yours, too.
I'm a columnist for Beyond the Box Score, an SB Nation blog.
Oh, I'm on Twitter, too.
by Satchel Price on Mar 10, 2011 3:20 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Agreed, been on this pt since he was moved to relief last year
I know pitchers might have a different age curve than hitters, but how do you think this affects his progression? Being drafted out of college as a closer, I was hoping he’d stay in the minors all last year to build up to 140-150 IP on his arm – I think his official count last year (from all levels) was around 111. As he’s now entering his mid-late 20s, he’s still a season or two away from being an 180+ IP guy, and he’ll be building that arm strength during his physical peak years
Rays/Cubs - AnotherCubsBlog.net - @Manu_P_Mishra on Twitter

by 




























