Cubs on WGN Right Now...

[PeterGriffin]

Potential 10-12 good years from Pie or potential 3-4 good years with Roberts.......hm.........

IF I am the Cubs I pass, but thanks for asking.

As a Cubs fan I want to keep Pie. If the front office won't take anything less than Pie then I would pass. I just want the whole Roberts ordeal to come to an end.

[The Rick]

If the gun was accurate real reason for concern, spring training or not. That'd an 8 mph difference over what he is supposed to throw. Whether accurate or not, it's a valid discussion.

Except for maybe you, I'm guessing you were probably Jeff ballard, John O'Donoghue and Jamie Moyer's biggest fans.

IF the gun was accurate... that's the operative word here. IF. A lot of people seem to be assuming it is. That is ridiculous, IMO. The scouting reports, his MiLB #'s and stuff should show you how talented he is. Not a radar gun during a spring training gun. I don't see how you don't understand what i'm saying.

[Fairfax Bird]

Tuned in just in time to see Murton hit into an inning ending double play. hah

As for the WGN radar gun, seems to be working now. Had Dempster in the 91-92 range.

It wasn't right yesterday. It had Micah Owings at 86 MPH and Lieber at 83 MPH. That just isn't right.

[PeterGriffin]

The radar gun is kinda overrated in some aspects. Some pitchers it doesn't matter how hard they throw because of the movement the get on their pitches, others without their velocity they get pounded. I guess I only look at the radar gun when talking about certain players.

[hatepaste]

IF the gun was accurate... that's the operative word here. IF. A lot of people seem to be assuming it is. That is ridiculous, IMO. The scouting reports, his MiLB #'s and stuff should show you how talented he is. Not a radar gun during a spring training gun. I don't see how you don't understand what i'm saying.

I never said I didn't understand. I was just bring up what I observed, I don't understand how YOU dont see what I'm saying. I saw a WGN broadcast and a gun report of 86-88 mph. And since I have never seen Gallagher pitch before, it is worth discussing...Hey is this normal? Is the gun off ro whatever? The topic is worth having a discussion about. There have been plenty of pitchers touted that can't throw worth a lick, and some have been good.

[The Rick]

I never said I didn't understand. I was just bring up what I observed, I don't understand how YOU dont see what I'm saying. I saw a WGN broadcast and a gun report of 86-88 mph. And since I have never seen Gallagher pitch before, it is worth discussing...Hey is this normal? Is the gun off ro whatever? The topic is worth having a discussion about. There have been plenty of pitchers touted that can't throw worth a lick, and some have been good.

I agree that it was worth discussing to a degree, but when presented with FACTS about his velocity/stuff, etc. people should have given him more credit. I was observing people assuming the radar gun was correct and that he wasn't all he was hyped up to be due to that assumption. That was my only beef. With that being said, it's all good. I'm going to drop it, I think we are at an understanding now.

[hatepaste]

I agree that it was worth discussing to a degree, but when presented with FACTS about his velocity/stuff, etc. people should have given him more credit. I was observing people assuming the radar gun was correct and that he wasn't all he was hyped up to be due to that assumption. That was my only beef. With that being said, it's all good. I'm going to drop it, I think we are at an understanding now.

Yah some misunderstanding all around. And now I know lots of people are going different ways with it. But I would say 99% of the time when someone is a highly touted pitching prospect, they're throwing 90+ mph. That's just the way it is. So when I basically knew nothing about gallagher, and saw the radar gun i was a little alarmed/surprised..But enough on that.

Slightly different topic. Everyone always says Gallagher is a 3-5 man in the rotation. Now looking at his minor league stats, which are fairly dominating. Plus people saying he has 4 pitches, and throws fairly hard. How is this guy not viewed as more of a potential 1 or 2? What more are scouts looking for?

[Number5]

Everyone always says Gallagher is a 3-5 man in the rotation. Now looking at his minor league stats, which are fairly dominating. Plus people saying he has 4 pitches, and throws fairly hard. How is this guy not viewed as more of a potential 1 or 2? What more are scouts looking for?

Consider that there are around 30 "#1" SP's in the world at any given time and another 30 "#2s." I think to reach those levels, each of their pitches need to grade at or near top-end. I'm not sure that terms like "throws fairly hard" or "has a decent curve ball" or "he has an idea of what he wants to do out there" qualify someone for those elite rankings, unless they are combined with some top ratings in nearly all other areas. Kind of like the difference between 800-800 on the SAT's and 710-677. The second guy is pretty darn smart, but maybe not Ivy League. I'm no scout, so that's just my 2 cents. Hey, saying a guy that projects to have a possible ceiling of a #3 MLB SP is pretty darn good, IMO.

[Ballgame64]

Consider that there are around 30 "#1" SP's in the world at any given time and another 30 "#2s." I think to reach those levels, each of their pitches need to grade at or near top-end. I'm not sure that terms like "throws fairly hard" or "has a decent curve ball" or "he has an idea of what he wants to do out there" qualify someone for those elite rankings, unless they are combined with some top ratings in nearly all other areas. Kind of like the difference between 800-800 on the SAT's and 710-677. The second guy is pretty darn smart, but maybe not Ivy League. I'm no scout, so that's just my 2 cents. Hey, saying a guy that projects to have a possible ceiling of a #3 MLB SP is pretty darn good, IMO.

I agree. Plus, there is a lot more to pitching than having "great stuff". Greg Maddux has earned a few Cy Youngs, over 3000 Ks, over 300 wins and a trip to Cooperstown while never having incredible stuff. Its about changing speeds, location and movement.

[hatepaste]

Consider that there are around 30 "#1" SP's in the world at any given time and another 30 "#2s." I think to reach those levels, each of their pitches need to grade at or near top-end. I'm not sure that terms like "throws fairly hard" or "has a decent curve ball" or "he has an idea of what he wants to do out there" qualify someone for those elite rankings, unless they are combined with some top ratings in nearly all other areas. Kind of like the difference between 800-800 on the SAT's and 710-677. The second guy is pretty darn smart, but maybe not Ivy League. I'm no scout, so that's just my 2 cents. Hey, saying a guy that projects to have a possible ceiling of a #3 MLB SP is pretty darn good, IMO.

I think you take it a step further. There really isn't 30 number 1's. But scouts tend to be liberal with projections as far as prospects go. That's why I was interested why they didn't think he could be better (i.e. be a number 1 or 2).

I mean Ponson was considered a potential number one, along with Jaret Wright and a slew of other prospects. That projection tends to get thrown around all the time.

[hatepaste]

I agree. Plus, there is a lot more to pitching than having "great stuff". Greg Maddux has earned a few Cy Youngs, over 3000 Ks, over 300 wins and a trip to Cooperstown while never having incredible stuff. Its about changing speeds, location and movement.

Have you seen Maddux's changeup?

[FO2020]

Have you seen Maddux's changeup?

You beat me to that, nice. Maddux especially when younger had pretty darn good stuff. You mention the change up, have you ever seen his 2 seam fastball? To this day it's still sick. Maddux just took good stuff, combined it with a knowledge of how to pitch and became one of the greatest of all time.

[hatepaste]

You beat me to that, nice. Maddux especially when younger had pretty darn good stuff. You mention the change up, have you ever seen his 2 seam fastball? To this day it's still sick. Maddux just took good stuff, combined it with a knowledge of how to pitch and became one of the greatest of all time.

The thing with Maddux is he didn't throw unbelievably hard, like a Roger Clemens, Curt Schilling or Randy Johnson. He still throws in the low 90's though, he just didn't get the love, because he wasn't perceived as a big strikeout pitcher, which he really wasn't. His numbers from the 1990's are amazing. Four straight Cy Youngs. Amazing part ther eis the 3rd and 4th one, he only had 25 and 28 starts.

I love watching Maddux pitch though, cerebral.

[Ballgame64]

The thing with Maddux is he didn't throw unbelievably hard, like a Roger Clemens, Curt Schilling or Randy Johnson. He still throws in the low 90's though, he just didn't get the love, because he wasn't perceived as a big strikeout pitcher, which he really wasn't. His numbers from the 1990's are amazing. Four straight Cy Youngs. Amazing part ther eis the 3rd and 4th one, he only had 25 and 28 starts.

I love watching Maddux pitch though, cerebral.

Maddux doesn't throw in the 90s anymore. I watched a lot of his starts in 2004, 2005 and 2006 with the Cubs. He tops out around 88, but usually he was in the 84-86 range. I understand all about his repetoire of pitches, but he has never been a pitcher who was considered to have "nasty" stuff - mid 90s fast ball to go with a sharp breaking slider. He has made a living with pinpoint control, changing speeds and getting unbelievable movement on his pitches. He is a different kind of "nasty" - the frustrating kind that makes a hitter think, "how did I miss that pitch."

I too love watching him pitch.

[hatepaste]

Maddux doesn't throw in the 90s anymore. I watched a lot of his starts in 2004, 2005 and 2006 with the Cubs. He tops out around 88, but usually he was in the 84-86 range. I understand all about his repetoire of pitches, but he has never been a pitcher who was considered to have "nasty" stuff - mid 90s fast ball to go with a sharp breaking slider. He has made a living with pinpoint control, changing speeds and getting unbelievable movement on his pitches. He is a different kind of "nasty" - the frustrating kind that makes a hitter think, "how did I miss that pitch."

I too love watching him pitch.

You're right, he doesn't throw in the 90s any more, but he's also 42 years old.

But we're in agreement. Most of the time "nasty" means a 98 mph fastball, a sharp breaking curve, or maybe a biting slider. Maddux didn't have any of those things he had a "nasty" changeup. That's not too exciting.

Almost say the same thing about Santana? Isn't his big pitch a changeup?