Per Robothal, the Cubs are pursuing both Albert Pujols and Prince Fielder. Not surprisingly, his sources say that the Cubs would rather go long-term with Pujols than Fielder. That’s a no-brainer given the current peak that Pujols would be coming down from without even considering Fielder’s probable age curve. Still, I don’t think the Cubs will be interested in beating the Cardinals roughly 9/200-210 offer on years. This is going to be the last contract Pujols signs so it might be tough to push for a higher AAV deal unless there’s more overall money involved. Would the Cubs or any team be willing to go over a $30m/yr AAV? Pujols would probably still stick with 9/210 over, say, 7/210, and I’d be shocked if he signs for less than 7 years or so with a 9 year offer on the table. I also think that if the offers are close he’d rather stick in St. Louis.
Another thing Rosenthal mentions is that the Cubs pursuit could be tied to the new CBA deal’s restrictions on amateur spending making it harder to build from your farm system. I don’t necessarily buy that conneection. The Cubs are a large market team that have the luxury to be able to go after elite free agents like this, and as Rosenthal points out a lot of teams have been locking up their own guys lately. Hamilton (no thanks) and Votto are the only elite hitters that are likely to come on the market before the rest of the Cubs rebuilding process is likely to catch up. I might rather have Votto than Fielder or Pujols, but that’s not something you can count on down the road.
(h/t Nate)
I wonder if the Cubs are simply trying to drive up the price on Pujols. I read yesterday that no one has matched or exceeded the Cardinals’ offer. Seems like if the Cubs aren’t going to get Pujols, it would behoove them to at least shift the market on him enough that the Cards either lose him or pay a little more dearly for him.
I wonder how much the Cardinals make in Pujols merch.
I wonder what it’s like in Capestrano in the spring.
The Cubs could sign Fielder and Pujols, play Pujols at 3rd and bank on the DH arriving in the NL within the next two years.
[quote name=Suburban kid 22]I wonder how much the Cardinals make in Pujols merch.[/quote]
I had the same thought today on the train on the way to work as i thought about buying a Pujols Cubs jersey.. Between Authentic Jerseys (219) Replica (100) T shirt Jerseys (20) so pretty much you can make a lot of Money back.
[quote name=AndCounting]The Cubs could sign Fielder and Pujols, play Pujols at 3rd and bank on the DH arriving in the NL within the next two years.[/quote]
I like this idea. You could also put him in LF…
Also dont know if anyone care or what not but http://www.mitchellandness.com
is running an insnae special on cubs throwback jerseys. I jsut got a Ron Santo jersey for a hundred bones
[quote name=AndCounting]I wonder if the Cubs are simply trying to drive up the price on Pujols. I read yesterday that no one has matched or exceeded the Cardinals’ offer. Seems like if the Cubs aren’t going to get Pujols, it would behoove them to at least shift the market on him enough that the Cards either lose him or pay a little more dearly for him.[/quote]
I was thinking the same thing, but that’s a pretty expensive game of chicken to play. At least Theo has experience with it in his dealings with the Yankees, though from what I remember most of those bidding wars were instigated from the other side.
[quote name=Berselius]I was thinking the same thing, but that’s a pretty expensive game of chicken to play. At least Theo has experience with it in his dealings with the Yankees, though from what I remember most of those bidding wars were instigated from the other side.[/quote]Kinda what I was thinking, too. Can’t remember how many free agents the Yankees and Sox both went after, but the accusations of auction tampering seem to have been generally directed at the Yanks.
It’s a good point about the merch. The Cubs would definitely sell a plethora of Pujols jerseys. The poo-holes t-shirt industry would take a hit, though.
I mean it would be silly not to want either of them..
Also i might no be thinking about this rationally but I want an exciting cubs player on the team next year. Pujols AND or Fielder qualify.
Also sign me up for wanting no part of Chase Headley
[quote name=AndCounting]
It’s a good point about the merch. The Cubs would definitely sell a plethora of Pujols jerseys. The poo-holes t-shirt industry would take a hit, though.[/quote]When Pujols starts sucking it’ll bounce back. They still sold Zambrano mows my lawn shirts as recently as this past September.
[quote name=bubblesdachimp]I mean it would be silly not to want either of them..
Also i might no be thinking about this rationally but I want an exciting cubs player on the team next year. Pujols AND or Fielder qualify.
Also sign me up for wanting no part of Chase Headley[/quote]
I’d be okay with Headley. He can take a walk, and I’d be interested to see how his SLG would improve when he’s not playing most of his games in Petco and the rest of the cavernous parks of the NL West.
I think I saw from a Rockies source that the Cubs expressed interest in Ian Stewart as well.
Well, maybe as so much after looking at the numbers a bit
Headley’s career home/away splits
AVG/OBP/SLG/wOBA
.229/.319/.336/.298
.303/.364/.441/.354
Those away numbers look great until you notice that his road BABIP is an absurd .374
He’ll be better away from Petco, but not that much better. I’m not sure what to make of his defense either. It looks like he’s probably a bit above average.
Another thing is I really think if the Cubs sign Pujols or Fielder they sell out every game for the next 3-5 years immediately
Why would Pujols go with 9/210 over 7/210?
[quote name=AndCounting]I wonder if the Cubs are simply trying to drive up the price on Pujols. I read yesterday that no one has matched or exceeded the Cardinals’ offer. Seems like if the Cubs aren’t going to get Pujols, it would behoove them to at least shift the market on him enough that the Cards either lose him or pay a little more dearly for him.[/quote]This is what I think it is. The Red Sox and Yankees have played this game over the last decade. I expected when Theo came here he’d drive up prices for the Cardinals as he did for the Yankees.
If the Cubs do have interest in one of these guys, I’d bet it’s Fielder. Theo pointed out that a free agent would have to be in the right age range and he talked about a player peaking between 26 and 31. Pujols is outside that range and I don’t think the Cubs have serious interest in him.
[quote name=bubblesdachimp]Another thing is I really think if the Cubs sign Pujols or Fielder they sell out every game for the next 3-5 years immediately[/quote]They’d only sell out if the team was good. The Cubs didn’t sell out when they had Sosa. Pujols is better than that, but Fielder probably isn’t. Attendance is tied to success.
[quote name=mb21]They’d only sell out if the team was good. The Cubs didn’t sell out when they had Sosa. Pujols is better than that, but Fielder probably isn’t. Attendance is tied to success.[/quote]
They sold out after 98 thought right?
I know they’d sell a shitton of jerseys, but I wonder what percentage of shitton the team gets to keep, compared to the manufacturer, MLB, the retail outlet, and the athlete himself.
[quote name=mb21]Why would Pujols go with 9/210 over 7/210?[/quote]
I don’t think he’s going to sign another significant deal when he’s 38, and if the total money is about the same then I think he stays in STL. Past a certain point the total $$ is going to matter more than years.
[quote name=AndCounting]I wonder what it’s like in Capestrano in the spring.[/quote]Is that when the swallow come back from whence they came?
[quote name=bubblesdachimp]They sold out after 98 thought right?[/quote]No. They actually got no bounce whatsoever relative to the rest of the league. In 1998 the Cubs ranked 6th (out of 16 NL teams) in attendance. They ranked 6th in 1999 and 9th in 2000. They were 8th in Sosa’s best season 2001 and 7th in 2002. They jumped to 3rd in 2003.
The Cubs would probably sell a few more seats early on in the season next year, but it wouldn’t last long if the Cubs weren’t winning. I’m also willing to bet that the the Cubs sold more merchandise after 2003 and even 2004 than they did immediately after Soriano was signed. That merch jumped up again after 2007. People don’t spend money on bad teams.
If the Cubs had Roy Halladay, Tim Lincecum, Cliff Lee, Felix Hernandez and Justin Verlander and somehow managed to win 60 games attendance will suck.
Swallows, even.
[quote name=Suburban kid 22]I know they’d sell a shitton of jerseys, but I wonder what percentage of shitton the team gets to keep, compared to the manufacturer, MLB, the retail outlet, and the athlete himself.[/quote]I don’t believe the athlete gets any. It’s MLB merchandise licensed with the Cubs logo so they’d get their share, but the player doesn’t get any.
[quote name=Berselius]I don’t think he’s going to sign another significant deal when he’s 38, and if the total money is about the same then I think he stays in STL[/quote]I get it now. I was thinking you were saying random play X would rather sign for 9/210 than 7/210 because it’s longer. That’s obviously not what you were saying. If you’re willing to go 7/210, the Cubs could easily beat the Cardinals offer over 9 years.
I’m glad they’re showing interest because I want the Cubs to make the Cardinals pay as much as possible and make it hurt as much as it can in the later years.
[quote name=Suburban kid 22]Is that when the swallow come back from whence they came?[/quote]You mean an African, or a European swallow?
They would also increase leverage with Fielder by expressing interest in Pujols. I really hope their just driving up the price for the Cards though.
[quote name=mb21]I get it now. I was thinking you were saying random play X would rather sign for 9/210 than 7/210 because it’s longer. That’s obviously not what you were saying. If you’re willing to go 7/210, the Cubs could easily beat the Cardinals offer over 9 years.
I’m glad they’re showing interest because I want the Cubs to make the Cardinals pay as much as possible and make it hurt as much as it can in the later years.[/quote]
I think the Cubs can beat the Cardinals offer, but I don’t think they should. I’d rather have less years and higher AAV, but I don’t think Pujols is going to go down past 7 years and I don’t think any team is going to offer more than $30m AAV
[quote name=mb21]If the Cubs had Roy Halladay, Tim Lincecum, Cliff Lee, Felix Hernandez and Justin Verlander and somehow managed to win 60 games attendance will suck.[/quote]Yeah, but what if they had David DeJesus, Mitch Moreland, Shawon Dunston Jr, and Trevor Gretzky?
[quote name=fang2415]You mean an African, or a European swallow?[/quote]The ones that inhabit Serrano, Italy.
[quote name=Berselius]I think the Cubs can beat the Cardinals offer, but I don’t think they should. I’d rather have less years and higher AAV, but I don’t think Pujols is going to go down past 7 years and I don’t think any team is going to offer more than $30m AAV[/quote]
The Cubs could do something like 7/210 and tack on a couple of vesting options that could bring it to something like 9/300 if he meets certain criteria.
That gives Pujols the potential to make at least what the Cardinals are offering through 7 years and then some on the back end that the Cardinals are not offering. But it gives the Cubs some protection if he completely falls off the table sometime in the next 7 years.
[quote name=Aisle424]The Cubs could do something like 7/210 and tack on a couple of vesting options that could bring it to something like 9/300 if he meets certain criteria.
[/quote]World Series MVP —> Ownership stake in the team, which is renamed the Chicago Pujols is Fucking Aweseomes
I can’t get excited about Pujols or Fielder at this point, to be honest. I guess I’m just wary of getting saddled with dead weight right around the time they may actually be able to compete.
Those two options years would be worth $45 million per year? That seems a bit much, but I think you’re on the right track. 7/210 plus an 8th year vesting option for $30 million and a 9th year vesting or mutual option for $30 million more.
[quote name=josh]I can’t get excited about Pujols or Fielder at this point, to be honest. I guess I’m just wary of getting saddled with dead weight right around the time they may actually be able to compete.[/quote]I think Fielder is the better option, but it sounds like he’s going to want insane money too.
If the Cubs could get Pujols for 7/210 plus a couple vesting options then I’m all for it. I still think all they’re doing is driving up the price though.
B, do you have anything coming up on the Oliver projections? I’m getting the batters ready to post if you don’t have anything.
[quote name=GBTS]World Series MVP —> Ownership stake in the team, which is renamed the Chicago Pujols is Fucking Aweseomes[/quote]They’ll rename the St. Louis team that? I’m in.
[quote name=mb21]B, do you have anything coming up on the Oliver projections? I’m getting the batters ready to post if you don’t have anything.[/quote]
No, go ahead
[quote name=Berselius]No, go ahead[/quote]Don’t tell him what to do,.
[quote name=mb21]If the Cubs could get Pujols for 7/210 plus a couple vesting options then I’m all for it. I still think all they’re doing is driving up the price though.[/quote]
Yeah, this is exactly how I feel too.
[quote name=GBTS]Don’t tell him what to do,.[/quote]
Do not presume to tell me what to do about telling him what to do.
[quote name=Berselius]Do not presume to tell me what to do about telling him what to do.[/quote]Oh shit. Here come the bannings.
[quote name=AndCounting]Oh shit. Here come the bannings.[/quote]It’s no big deal. I’ve gotten around my banning all these months.
[quote name=Berselius]No, go ahead[/quote]Cool. It’s ready so I’ll publish it later today.
[quote name=AndCounting]Oh shit. Here come the bannings.[/quote]
[quote name=Suburban kid 22]
[/quote]Correct.
I’d take a shot at Pujols. I think the Cubs can contend in 2 or 3 years and I think he would still be the best player on the team at that point. If they contend from 2013-2016, he will still be a powerful force for those seasons.
Cubs win it all —————–> who cares about the bill.
From THT the other day:
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/2012-offseason-the-chicago-cubs1/
[quote name=Suburban kid 22]I’d take a shot at Pujols. I think the Cubs can contend in 2 or 3 years and I think he would still be the best player on the team at that point. If they contend from 2013-2016, he will still be a powerful force for those seasons.
Cubs win it all —————–> who cares about the bill.[/quote]That’s the kind of thinking that netted us Soriano.
Spend everything to win now regardless of the consequences is the exact mindset I thought we were happy to see pass.
[quote name=josh]That’s the kind of thinking that netted us Soriano.[/quote]And the best team in baseball in 2008.
If that’s what Cashman is actually willing to give up for Garza this deal should be done now. Immediately. Like yesterday.
[quote name=josh]Spend everything to win now regardless of the consequences is the exact mindset I thought we were happy to see pass.[/quote]If you want to be good there are two ways to do it: wait for a shitload of prospects to get lucky so you can succeed for little money and fill in the holes with reasonable free agents. This is what the Rays have done and it’s what other small market teams are trying to do. The other way is to build a farm system and sign expensive free agents. This is what teams like the Cubs do. If we thought the days of the Cubs giving away large contracts was over, I’d encourage you to look at Boston and see the large contracts they’ve given out.
The reason the Cubs fell apart was for two reasons: they stopped investing at the MLB level and didn’t have a farm system that could replace the players they lost.
[quote name=josh]That’s the kind of thinking that netted us Soriano.[/quote]Well, best player on the market =/= best player of the century.
Also, Bryan LaHair.
from RLYW commenter:
(dying laughing) that’s what I was thinking when I read Montero’s name. The sentence after it stated the Cubs probably wouldn’t have interest in Montero since they have Soto. Another (dying laughing)
[quote name=GBTS]And the best team in baseball in 2008.[/quote]Yeah, and then 2009, 2010, and 2011 happened. I loved 2008, but it seems like ages ago.[quote name=mb21]If we thought the days of the Cubs giving away large contracts was over, I’d encourage you to look at Boston and see the large contracts they’ve given out.[/quote]I’m not personally against big contracts, per se. I’m just not excited about either of those two players. No, I don’t think Pujols will sour as badly as Soriano did.
[quote name=josh]That’s the kind of thinking that netted us Soriano.[/quote]Soriano’s free agent class
Wow. Must have slipped html into that comment or something. Heh.
Soriano was about Pujols’ age when the Cubs signed him but with a little less than Fielder’s history of production. I wouldn’t call it the same type of thinking because they’re not the same type of players.
jags being sold
[quote name=AndCounting]Wow. Must have slipped html into that comment or something. Heh.
Soriano was about Pujols’ age when the Cubs signed him but with a little less than Fielder’s history of production. I wouldn’t call it the same type of thinking because they’re not the same type of players.[/quote]
You could argue based on WAR that Pujols is almost four times the player Soriano is.
[quote name=dylanj]jags being sold[/quote]How much you wanna bet that they’re the ones moving to LA?
[quote name=mb21]If that’s what Cashman is actually willing to give up for Garza this deal should be done now. Immediately. Like yesterday.[/quote]Montero isn’t much of a defender anywhere. BUT I think Theo/Jed make that deal considering costs if they can’t find a better deal elsewhere.
Based on what they are saying I think they are looking to trade anyone on the roster but only for ML-ready prospects or players with plenty of service time remaining.
[quote name=dylanj]jags being sold[/quote]Would anyone in Jacksonville notice?
[quote name=Rice Cube]You could argue based on WAR that Pujols is almost four times the player Soriano is.[/quote]What’s his projection, though? What is reasonable to assume he’ll do in the future?
[quote name=josh]What’s his projection, though? What is reasonable to assume he’ll do in the future?[/quote]I guess that depends on how old you think he is. He could fall off the cliff or he could be Bondsian.
It could go either way.
[quote name=Rice Cube]
It could go either way.[/quote]Maybe, maybe not.
The other argument for going after Pujols or Fielder is that is weakens one of our two main rivals in the division.
I know that I have traded for Boardwalk or Park Place when playing Monopoly simply to keep it out of the hands of the person who wants it to complete a set. Maybe it doesn’t help me improve my own standing at the moment, but it certainly harms my opponents’ ability to improve his own situation to overtake me.
Pujols rWAR has dropped for 3 straight years and is starting to get into the human territory, but even if he is only a 4.0 WAR player for the Cubs that is 4 more wins than they have now, and 4 wins less that the Cardinals have.
The Brewers are going to lose Fielder anyway, so as long as he doesn’t go to the Cardinals to replace Pujols (which they claim is not an option), then two division rivals lose value and the Cubs gain.
Throw in the merchandising bump they get and they get a year or so of Pujols for “free” since that is money that won’t be spent otherwise by the Cubs’ fan base.
[quote name=Aisle424]
I know that I have traded for Boardwalk or Park Place when playing Monopoly simply to keep it out of the hands of the person who wants it to complete a set. Maybe it doesn’t help me improve my own standing at the moment, but it certainly harms my opponents’ ability to improve his own situation to overtake me.[/quote]I like this analogy, although in my experience very few people actually land on Boardwalk or Park Place so I shift my strategy towards getting the green or yellow properties instead.
[quote name=Berselius]From THT the other day:
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/2012-offseason-the-chicago-cubs1//quote
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
[quote name=Rice Cube]I like this analogy, although in my experience very few people actually land on Boardwalk or Park Place so I shift my strategy towards getting the green or yellow properties instead.[/quote]
I used Board Walk & Park Place because they are the two most expensive (and usually sought after) properties on the board. But I’ve blocked people from getting monopolies in just about every area when I’ve had the means when a player with the missing piece is weak and I can take advantage of their desperation to unload a piece doing them little good.
I’d guess that Pujols could reasonably be expected to produce 6 WAR next year and maybe more.
[quote name=Rice Cube](dying laughing)[/quote]
“C.C. Sabathia, Prince Fielder Keep Imagining Each Other As Giant Talking Hot Dog, Hamburger”
http://www.onionsportsnetwork.com/articles/cc-sabathia-prince-fielder-keep-imagining-each-oth,2493/
[quote name=mb21]I’d guess that Pujols could reasonably be expected to produce 6 WAR next year and maybe more.[/quote]So you feel this last season really was just an off year and not a sign of flagging ability or something?
[quote name=Aisle424]I used Board Walk & Park Place because they are the two most expensive (and usually sought after) properties on the board. But I’ve blocked people from getting monopolies in just about every area when I’ve had the means when a player with the missing piece is weak and I can take advantage of their desperation to unload a piece doing them little good.[/quote]My wife, sister-in-law, their teenage cousin and I played Monopoly one time and the cousin traded a couple properties to the SIL to help her complete two sets. I pretty much quit after that.
Aisley = Theo Epstein
Cousin = Ed Wade
/cool story bro’d
[quote name=Rice Cube]My wife, sister-in-law, their teenage cousin and I played Monopoly one time and the cousin traded a couple properties to the SIL to help her complete two sets. I pretty much quit after that.
Aisley = Theo Epstein
Cousin = Ed Wade
/cool story bro’d[/quote]I’ve never once played Monopoly and thought “I’m having a lot of fun right now.”
[quote name=josh]I’ve never once played Monopoly and thought “I’m having a lot of fun right now.”[/quote]Don’t you like anything?
http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/11/29/curtis-granderson-is-happy-with-the-new-hgh-test/
Getting rid of a conversation…that’s a good point.
[quote name=Rice Cube]Don’t you like anything?[/quote]whiskey.
[quote name=Aisle424]
Pujols rWAR has dropped for 3 straight years and is starting to get into the human territory
[/quote]I wouldn’t put much stock in that “trend.” 2009 was a huge year for Pujols, maybe his best, so of course 2010 (a typical Pujols year) looked worse–there’s no decline there. 2011 was certainly a down year, brought about by a slow start and a broken arm, but he’s likely to bounce back somewhat in 2012.
[quote name=josh]So you feel this last season really was just an off year and not a sign of flagging ability or something?[/quote]
Well, there was that whole freak broken bone thing he endured and came back way early from so hard to say. I would say it’s almost certain his days as a 9 WAR 1B are over, but an average of 5-7 over the next 5 seasons is very doable. Even a Pujols in slow decline is more than likely going to be a top 5 1B going forward. Keep the contract higher on dollars and slightly lower on years and this could work out very very well.
[quote name=Rice Cube]I like this analogy, although in my experience very few people actually land on Boardwalk or Park Place so I shift my strategy towards getting the green or yellow properties instead.[/quote]Orange FTW
Pujols’ ability is almost certainly declining (unless he pulls a Barry Bonds on us), but I really doubt his 2011 numbers represent his new talent level. He’ll probably be closer to his 2010 numbers for the near future.
[quote name=josh]Would anyone in Jacksonville notice?[/quote]
I think my in-laws are the only Jags fans in Florida. The tens of St. Louis Rams fans must be excited, since when the Jags inevitably move to LA they’ll get to move out of the NFC West.
This has to be a balk, right?
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/top-15-prospects-chicago-cubs/
^^ Justread that…Baez over BJax??
[quote name=ACT]Pujols’ ability is almost certainly declining (unless he pulls a Barry Bonds on us), but I really doubt his 2011 numbers represent his new talent level. He’ll probably be closer to his 2010 numbers for the near future.[/quote]
I agree, but I’m talking about almost a worst case scenario that doesn’t involve a significant injury. I think we’d all be shocked if Pujols put up a 4 WAR season this year, but if he did, it still damages the Cardinals and helps the Cubs.
If we split the difference between 2010 and 2011 and call him a 6.2 WAR player in 2012, that could project out to:
2012 = 6.2
2013 = 5.7
2014 = 5.2
2015 = 4.7
2016 = 4.2
2017 = 3.7
2018 = 3.2
I may be off on how much you decline after age 35 or 36, but that still gets us through 4 years with a pretty damn good player that will be hard to replace in St. Louis. Maybe Berkman can step up for a year or 2 to cushion the blow, but it will take some doing to replace that productivity for that long, plus Berkman was already a part of the team, so then they would have to “replace” Berkman’s numbers since he is now “replacing” Pujols’.
I’m not saying I would do it, but given how it impact two sides of the competitive equation, it starts to make a bit more sense financially for the Cubs, even if they aren’t in the position to win right now.
Phil Rogers is calling bullshit on Rosenthal:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-rogers-pujols-fielder-dont-fit-in-cubs-plans-20111129,0,7986662.story
Of course, this makes me believe that it could actually happen even more.
We need the guy in the purple sweatshirt to get the scoop on this.
[quote name=Aisle424]Phil Rogers is calling bullshit on Rosenthal:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-rogers-pujols-fielder-dont-fit-in-cubs-plans-20111129,0,7986662.story
Of course, this makes me believe that it could actually happen even more.
We need the guy in the purple sweatshirt to get the scoop on this.[/quote]
I love how “rebuilding through the farm system” seems to implicitly mean cutting payroll to $70m to these morans.
Let me try that again.
[quote name=Aisle424]I agree, but I’m talking about almost a worst case scenario that doesn’t involve a significant injury. I think we’d all be shocked if Pujols put up a 4 WAR season this year, but if he did, it still damages the Cardinals and helps the Cubs.
If we split the difference between 2010 and 2011 and call him a 6.2 WAR player in 2012, that could project out to:
2012 = 6.2
2013 = 5.7
2014 = 5.2
2015 = 4.7
2016 = 4.2
2017 = 3.7
2018 = 3.2
I may be off on how much you decline after age 35 or 36, but that still gets us through 4 years with a pretty damn good player that will be hard to replace in St. Louis. Maybe Berkman can step up for a year or 2 to cushion the blow, but it will take some doing to replace that productivity for that long, plus Berkman was already a part of the team, so then they would have to “replace” Berkman’s numbers since he is now “replacing” Pujols’.
I’m not saying I would do it, but given how it impact two sides of the competitive equation, it starts to make a bit more sense financially for the Cubs, even if they aren’t in the position to win right now.[/quote]Good points all. All right. I’m giving Theo the okay on this one.
[quote name=Aisle424]Phil Rogers is calling bullshit on Rosenthal:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-rogers-pujols-fielder-dont-fit-in-cubs-plans-20111129,0,7986662.story
Of course, this makes me believe that it could actually happen even more.
We need the guy in the purple sweatshirt to get the scoop on this.[/quote]He also says Cespedes is 25 but could be older. I thought he has been listed as being 26?
So has anything happened with that whole compensation thing yet? Did the Red Sox drop it?
[quote name=WaLi]So has anything happened with that whole compensation thing yet? Did the Red Sox drop it?[/quote]What do you want to be absolutely nothing comes of it?
[quote name=JMan]He also says Cespedes is 25 but could be older. I thought he has been listed as being 26?[/quote]
See? He IS older than 25! Phil Rogers is throwing down the knowledge today.
[quote name=josh]So you feel this last season really was just an off year and not a sign of flagging ability or something?[/quote]I feel that you have to consider much more than last year’s performance. Last year certainly deserves more weight than previous seasons, but you can’t ignore the previous seasons and focus only on last year.
It’s hard to figure out what the Cubs may do with prospects like this moving forward, but I’d be very surprised to see Baez begin the year in a full season league (Low A). Maybe Theo and Co. want to push them a bit, but I’d bet money on Baez staying behind in extended spring training and then reporting to Boise when their season begins midseason. I could see him pushed up to Peoria within a month, but starting there would be quite surprising.
[quote name=Aisle424]I agree, but I’m talking about almost a worst case scenario that doesn’t involve a significant injury. I think we’d all be shocked if Pujols put up a 4 WAR season this year, but if he did, it still damages the Cardinals and helps the Cubs.
If we split the difference between 2010 and 2011 and call him a 6.2 WAR player in 2012, that could project out to:
2012 = 6.2
2013 = 5.7
2014 = 5.2
2015 = 4.7
2016 = 4.2
2017 = 3.7
2018 = 3.2
I may be off on how much you decline after age 35 or 36, but that still gets us through 4 years with a pretty damn good player that will be hard to replace in St. Louis. Maybe Berkman can step up for a year or 2 to cushion the blow, but it will take some doing to replace that productivity for that long, plus Berkman was already a part of the team, so then they would have to “replace” Berkman’s numbers since he is now “replacing” Pujols’.
I’m not saying I would do it, but given how it impact two sides of the competitive equation, it starts to make a bit more sense financially for the Cubs, even if they aren’t in the position to win right now.[/quote]That’s probably a pretty decent projection moving forward. To keep things simple, I’ll start at 6 WAR and drop by .5 WAR each year to get a value.
Year WAR per win $WAR
2012 6 $4.80 $28.80
2013 5.5 $5.04 $27.72
2014 5 $5.29 $26.46
2015 4.5 $5.56 $25.00
2016 4 $5.83 $23.34
2017 3.5 $6.13 $21.44
2018 3 $6.43 $19.30
2019 2.5 $6.75 $16.89
Total 34 $5.73 $194.80
If the Cardinals are offering 7/210, I hope the Cubs make them bid higher, but that’s probably too much money unless we’re expecting higher inflation in baseball.
I looked back several years at the Red Sox top draft picks out of high school and I found only one 1st rounder that began his first full professional season at a full season league. Baez is going to have to be awfully damn impressive to begin the year at Peoria.
[quote name=mb21]If the Cardinals are offering 7/210, I hope the Cubs make them bid higher, but that’s probably too much money unless we’re expecting higher inflation in baseball.[/quote]
I believe it is 9/210.
teams are “kicking the tires” on Soriano and the Cubs are willing to eat a lot of money: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/11/rosenthal-on-votto-alonso-rangers-soriano.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MlbTradeRumors+%28MLB+Trade+Rumors%29
[quote name=Smokestack Lightning]I believe it is 9/210.[/quote]That’s probably a fair deal. I was thinking it was 7 years for some reason.
[quote name=mb21]That’s probably a fair deal. I was thinking it was 7 years for some reason.[/quote]I blame berselius.
http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/at_what_point_will_baseball_prospects_leave_baseball/
[quote name=Rice Cube]I blame berselius.[/quote]It’s always a wise decision to blame berselius. He’s a fuck up. (dying laughing)
[quote name=WaLi]So has anything happened with that whole compensation thing yet? Did the Red Sox drop it?[/quote]http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=theo+cubs+red+sox+compensation
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/more-than-they-collectively-bargained-for/
[quote name=mb21]http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/at_what_point_will_baseball_prospects_leave_baseball/[/quote]That’s a fun problem, but I’d counter by saying that most Canadian kids grew up playing ice hockey and focusing on ice hockey because that sport is like a religion up there. I think that level of focus and obsession precludes them from having many other options. So I am not sure you can compare the situation in MLB with the NHL.
I know that wasn’t the point of the exercise, but I just saw that as a flaw in reasoning. I’m probably not 100% right about that though.
Some tids from Levine’s chat earlier:
-Doesn’t believe Cubs are serious about Pujols, think they’re just trying to drive the price up for the Cards.
-No clue on Garza really despite taking 20 questions about him. Maybe he goes maybe he stays. Thanks Bruce.
-Hopes for a Cespedes-Darvish update within the next couple of days.
-the new CBA definitely screwed up Theo’s Nefarious Plan.
And…Cubs have reached out to Pujols’s agent:
http://espn.go.com/chicago/mlb/story/_/id/7294424/source-chicago-cubs-call-albert-pujols-reps-express-interest
[quote name=Smokestack Lightning]Some tids from Levine’s chat earlier:
-Doesn’t believe Cubs are serious about Pujols, think they’re just trying to drive the price up for the Cards.
-No clue on Garza really despite taking 20 questions about him. Maybe he goes maybe he stays. Thanks Bruce.
-Hopes for a Cespedes-Darvish update within the next couple of days.
-the new CBA definitely screwed up Theo’s Nefarious Plan.
And…Cubs have reached out to Pujols’s agent:
http://espn.go.com/chicago/mlb/story/_/id/7294424/source-chicago-cubs-call-albert-pujols-reps-express-interest/quoteI refuse to believe that a front office stacked with so many brains didn’t have a Plan B through Plan Z. Evil Plan Z is also lemon-scented.
[quote name=Rice Cube]That’s a fun problem, but I’d counter by saying that most Canadian kids grew up playing ice hockey and focusing on ice hockey because that sport is like a religion up there. I think that level of focus and obsession precludes them from having many other options. So I am not sure you can compare the situation in MLB with the NHL.
I know that wasn’t the point of the exercise, but I just saw that as a flaw in reasoning. I’m probably not 100% right about that though.[/quote]There are some differences, but it’s more of a thought exercise. Even if you took away all signing bonuses, there is simply no way that a large number of highly talented baseball prospects leave the sport for something else. That listed I posted the other day I thought was quite revealing. In the history of baseball, the list of two sport starts that played baseball was very short. And that list included only a handful of players that you’d hate to lose.
[quote name=Rice Cube]I refuse to believe that a front office stacked with so many brains didn’t have a Plan B through Plan Z. Evil Plan Z is also lemon-scented.[/quote]Agreed. I’m sure it irritated them, but I’m also sure they knew it was coming. I think it’s clear Hendry did so if Theo and Hoyer didn’t see it coming then I’m confident saying right here and now that the Cubs are just plain fucked. If they didn’t see it coming then the Cubs will more than likely cease to exist in 5 years. It’s that bad.
They knew it.
[quote name=Rice Cube]I refuse to believe that a front office stacked with so many brains didn’t have a Plan B through Plan Z. Evil Plan Z is also lemon-scented.[/quote]
I agree. And what we’re seeing may just be it. Buy a contending team as quickly as possible as the youth movement is going to take longer than previously expected.
Or it could be Theo doesn’t like the Cardinals paying 200MM for 9 years of Pujols and wants to see if he can get them to pay 30-40MM more.
Jamie Quirk —–> new bench coach
I guess she’s cute and all, but her previous experience is as an editor?
http://www.jacketflap.com/profile.asp?member=JamieQuirk
[quote name=mb21]There are some differences, but it’s more of a thought exercise. Even if you took away all signing bonuses, there is simply no way that a large number of highly talented baseball prospects leave the sport for something else. That listed I posted the other day I thought was quite revealing. In the history of baseball, the list of two sport starts that played baseball was very short. And that list included only a handful of players that you’d hate to lose.[/quote]I think you guys probably touched on this before in previous discussions/threads, but if I were an 18-year-old kid just graduating high school, and had the chance to get paid whatever the minimum is for a minor leaguer to start (I assume the first rounders would still get million dollar deals right?), I’d do it because I’d be getting paid a lot more than whatever shitty high school or college job I could get doing something I loved. I think a lot of kids think the same way. So if you want kids to give up college, you wave $500K in front of them (or more) and I’m guessing way more than half of them would bite.
From my point of view, I’d get that $500K up front and invest it, then live frugally off my minor league salary while working hard to get to the majors and to the big payday after those six years of control. But I don’t like wasting money so I’m more of a mutant than the norm (dying laughing)
I also like the part where I wouldn’t have to pay back any college loans because I didn’t go to college and am assuming that the college wouldn’t have given a good baseball scholarship anyway.
I’m sure there are other angles but that’s what popped into my mind for now.
I think it will be very interesting to see what happens with Fielder this offseason. I don’t think any team is going to pay him what he’s looking for. He might be a very late sign.
Patrice O’Neil ———> not alive
Broxton ———> KC
My sister and brother-in-law have started a new blog about cooking and trying new recipes.
http://savoryscientists.wordpress.com/
It’s pretty entertaining even for someone like me who has no culinary skills at all.
Side topic…do you think Kenny Lofton deserves to be in the Hall of Fame?
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/l/loftoke01.shtml
[quote name=Rice Cube]Side topic…do you think Kenny Lofton deserves to be in the Hall of Fame?
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/l/loftoke01.shtml/quotePersonally? No chance.
[quote name=josh]Personally? No chance.[/quote]But a very good player.
[quote name=josh]Personally? No chance.[/quote]Yeah, I like Kenny but I don’t think he really stood out. He will probably not get in but I think he’s on the WAR-cusp.
[quote name=Rice Cube]Yeah, I like Kenny but I don’t think he really stood out. He will probably not get in but I think he’s on the WAR-cusp.[/quote]I’m trying to remember those questions from that earlier post. One was whether he was considered the best at his position. I can’t really remember for sure if anyone threw that around at the time. He definitely sticks out as being a big name from that period. He never won an MVP, if that matters. He came in second to Pat Listach for ROY.
An OVblog subscriber.
[quote name=Rice Cube]Side topic…do you think Kenny Lofton deserves to be in the Hall of Fame?
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/l/loftoke01.shtml/quoteI like it, though I think he’s a bit of a long shot.
[quote name=Rice Cube]
An OVblog subscriber.[/quote]
False. Cara still needs to send her subscription fee to us.
The big question with Lofton is how good his defense is; if it’s not nearly as good as Total Zone thinks, he probably falls a little short.
FRAA isn’t high on Lofton defense. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=LOFTON19670531A
[quote name=Berselius]False. Cara still needs to send her subscription fee to us.[/quote]The sender was not Cara.
No dinner for you.
[quote name=ACT]The big question with Lofton is how good his defense is; if it’s not nearly as good as Total Zone thinks, he probably falls a little short.[/quote]Lots of really good years with the Indians, then he just sank into a lot of years around the 1 WAR mark. I don’t specifically remember, but is he a case of a guy whose speed left him later on? As far as his defense goes, I think that writers will tend toward defensive awards and reputation. Lofton had a solid reputation as a defender in his early years, no doubt about that.
Still haven’t watched it, but I may start with this:
“Breaking Bad encores return to the AMC schedule with the series’ Season 1 premiere, “Pilot,” airing this Sun., Dec. 4 at 12AM | 11C.”
[quote name=Aisle424]Patrice O’Neil ———> not alive[/quote]Michael decided to do a little detective work.
“You burn down the storage unit?”
“Oh most definitely.”
[quote name=WenningtonsGorillaCock]Still haven’t watched it, but I may start with this:
“Breaking Bad encores return to the AMC schedule with the series’ Season 1 premiere, “Pilot,” airing this Sun., Dec. 4 at 12AM | 11C.”[/quote]Starting with the first episode would be a good choice.
[quote name=mb21]Starting with the first episode would be a good choice.[/quote]It could be fun to start with the most recent and work your way back. You’d be like the guy in Memento.
http://www.geekosystem.com/facebook-face-change-prank/
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
[quote name=josh]It could be fun to start with the most recent and work your way back. You’d be like the guy in Memento.[/quote]Someone should try that.
[quote name=GBTS]http://www.geekosystem.com/facebook-face-change-prank/
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)[/quote]James has no sense of humor.
[quote name=mb21]Someone should try that.[/quote]Walter White is a bald asshole who becomes closer to his family when his hair grows back and wife loses weight.
[quote name=Aisle424]My sister and brother-in-law have started a new blog about cooking and trying new recipes.
http://savoryscientists.wordpress.com/
It’s pretty entertaining even for someone like me who has no culinary skills at all.[/quote]That was a fun read. I’ll check it out again.
[quote name=GBTS]Walter White is a bald asshole who becomes closer to his family when his hair grows back and wife loses weight.[/quote]He also becomes a better father when he gives up his meth job.
Jesse’s life improves despite losing millions of dollars.
Greg Maddux ——————> No longer a Cub. Again.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-maddux-leaving-cubs-20111129,0,3429830.story
Nooooooo! Reverse spoilers!
I was totally going to get to this after I plowed through all the episodes of MacGyver too. Netflix instant play FTW (DVD service sucks now though, Redbox FTW)
[quote name=Smokestack Lightning]Greg Maddux ——————> No longer a Cub. Again.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-maddux-leaving-cubs-20111129,0,3429830.story/quoteGood luck to Greg.
[quote name=mb21]
Jesse’s life improves despite losing millions of dollars.[/quote](dying laughing)
[quote name=Rice Cube]I think you guys probably touched on this before in previous discussions/threads, but if I were an 18-year-old kid just graduating high school, and had the chance to get paid whatever the minimum is for a minor leaguer to start (I assume the first rounders would still get million dollar deals right?), I’d do it because I’d be getting paid a lot more than whatever shitty high school or college job I could get doing something I loved. I think a lot of kids think the same way. So if you want kids to give up college, you wave $500K in front of them (or more) and I’m guessing way more than half of them would bite. [/quote]I’m with you, RC. I think the predictions that this will hurt teams’ ability to build through the draft are mistaken or at least grossly exaggerated. Boras asked the question of why would a multi-sport athlete choose baseball? Because baseball, unlike football, doesn’t turn your brain to apple sauce. And unlike basketball there are actual jobs available in baseball. Sure, baseball will be the second most lucrative option for some athletes, but it comes with a much lower risk to the athlete. I think this actually lowers the bargaining power of draftees and makes it more likely that teams will be able to sign them. Lose some to college? So what. They’ll be back.
[quote name=AndCounting]I’m with you, RC. I think the predictions that this will hurt teams’ ability to build through the draft are mistaken or at least grossly exaggerated. Boras asked the question of why would a multi-sport athlete choose baseball? Because baseball, unlike football, doesn’t turn your brain to apple sauce. And unlike basketball there are actual jobs available in baseball. Sure, baseball will be the second most lucrative option for some athletes, but it comes with a much lower risk to the athlete. I think this actually lowers the bargaining power of draftees and makes it more likely that teams will be able to sign them. Lose some to college? So what. They’ll be back.[/quote]I agree 100%. Boras is making that threat because he’s going to be trying to swing athletes toward football to get himself more money, but when you get down to it, baseball players have longer careers. He might convince a few players here and there, but overall I doubt we see much change.
[quote name=josh]I agree 100%. Boras is making that threat because he’s going to be trying to swing athletes toward football to get himself more money, but when you get down to it, baseball players have longer careers. He might convince a few players here and there, but overall I doubt we see much change.[/quote]
this would have been a bigger deal when the kids could have jumped straight to the NBA from high school or to the NFL after 1 year in college, but because they have to wait longer to become employed in a sport that has fewer openings, they will probably still take the money on the table in front of them.
[quote name=Smokestack Lightning]Greg Maddux ——————> No longer a Cub. Again.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-maddux-leaving-cubs-20111129,0,3429830.story/quote
is theo going to ask for ian kinsler as compensation?
[quote name=AndCounting]I’m with you, RC. I think the predictions that this will hurt teams’ ability to build through the draft are mistaken or at least grossly exaggerated. Boras asked the question of why would a multi-sport athlete choose baseball? Because baseball, unlike football, doesn’t turn your brain to apple sauce. And unlike basketball there are actual jobs available in baseball. Sure, baseball will be the second most lucrative option for some athletes, but it comes with a much lower risk to the athlete. I think this actually lowers the bargaining power of draftees and makes it more likely that teams will be able to sign them. Lose some to college? So what. They’ll be back.[/quote]
the issue is that teams no longer have the option of diverting resources towards the draft.
[quote name=GW]is theo going to ask for ian kinsler as compensation?[/quote]I’m sure that Theo will make this joke with Jon Daniels as a joke at the Winter Meetings (dying laughing)
After which they both point to Ben Cherington and laugh.
[quote name=AndCounting]I’m with you, RC. I think the predictions that this will hurt teams’ ability to build through the draft are mistaken or at least grossly exaggerated. Boras asked the question of why would a multi-sport athlete choose baseball? Because baseball, unlike football, doesn’t turn your brain to apple sauce. And unlike basketball there are actual jobs available in baseball. Sure, baseball will be the second most lucrative option for some athletes, but it comes with a much lower risk to the athlete. I think this actually lowers the bargaining power of draftees and makes it more likely that teams will be able to sign them. Lose some to college? So what. They’ll be back.[/quote]THIS
[quote name=GW]the issue is that teams no longer have the option of diverting resources towards the draft.[/quote]I think if we’re going with Tango’s exercise and ignoring everything we already knew about the draft, even without a signing bonus, most kids are going to take the money and run. That’s what I think we are arguing anyway.
The new CBA restricts how much money can be spent on the draft but the new caps at each slot don’t seem to be too different. Sounds like you can still throw $10MM at a #1 pick if you wanted to. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.
[quote name=GW]
[/quote]wtf? Why would you….
What could she have meant?
[quote name=GW]the issue is that teams no longer have the option of diverting resources towards the draft.[/quote]Yes, it will be harder for the Cubs to catch up to the other teams by simply maxing out the ability to land every tough sign there is out there, but as someone mentioned, there might be a shitty year coming up where we don’t care that we lose draft picks, so we go hog wild and get the shit penalized out of us for a year where the talent is crap.
Smart guys will find a way to turn this to a competitive advantage.
[quote name=Rice Cube]I think if we’re going with Tango’s exercise and ignoring everything we already knew about the draft, even without a signing bonus, most kids are going to take the money and run. That’s what I think we are arguing anyway.
The new CBA restricts how much money can be spent on the draft but the new caps at each slot don’t seem to be too different. Sounds like you can still throw $10MM at a #1 pick if you wanted to. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.[/quote]
still missing the point. i agree that talent that will still opt for baseball. they just put a salary cap on the draft/ifa, so no one can act like the yankees when it comes to snatching up amateur talent.
[quote name=GW]still missing the point. i agree that talent that will still opt for baseball. they just put a salary cap on the draft/ifa, so no one can act like the yankees when it comes to snatching up amateur talent.[/quote]
(dying laughing) just kidding, but it did sound like the CBA allowed for some flexibility with moving baseball funds between pools but there’s a hard cap on non-payroll expenditures. That part of the CBA I didn’t understand as much.
[quote name=josh]wtf? Why would you….
What could she have meant?[/quote]
she’s the head of the “call before you dig” program in texas, apparently, and they released license plates to raise awareness. it’s “damage prevention.” why, what did you think it meant?
[quote name=GW]she’s the head of the “call before you dig” program in texas, apparently, and they released license plates to raise awareness. it’s “damage prevention.” why, what did you think it meant?[/quote] Dogg Pound
[quote name=GW]she’s the head of the “call before you dig” program in texas, apparently, and they released license plates to raise awareness. it’s “damage prevention.” why, what did you think it meant?[/quote]double penetration.
[quote name=Aisle424]Yes, it will be harder for the Cubs to catch up to the other teams by simply maxing out the ability to land every tough sign there is out there, but as someone mentioned, there might be a shitty year coming up where we don’t care that we lose draft picks, so we go hog wild and get the shit penalized out of us for a year where the talent is crap.
Smart guys will find a way to turn this to a competitive advantage.[/quote]
i don’t see any reason to believe that the competitive advantage gained from exploiting the new rules will approach the magnitude of the competitive advantage from exploiting the old ones.
[quote name=GW]i don’t see any reason to believe that the competitive advantage gained from exploiting the new rules will approach the magnitude of the competitive advantage from exploiting the old ones.[/quote]The fact is that athletes don’t gain much by turning down a max offer. If you offer the max and they say no, then they wait a year, and get offered the max again. Unless they think they can impress someone enough to warrant the taxes, I think we’ll just see players agreeing to the max. Maybe that’s wrong, but a player is going to have to be twice as special now to get a team to agree to basically choose them as their draft pick for this draft AND the next.
new thread up: http://www.obstructedview.net/chicago-cubs/articles/2012-cubs-oliver-projections-part-1.html
[quote name=josh]double penetration.[/quote]Worst thing to every happen on this blog.
[quote name=Rice Cube]Worst thing to every happen on this blog.[/quote]Aw sweet! Finally, some recognition.
[quote name=GW]i don’t see any reason to believe that the competitive advantage gained from exploiting the new rules will approach the magnitude of the competitive advantage from exploiting the old ones.[/quote]
Probably not, but it will eventually when the the small market teams still can’t afford to keep their players they developed. The Cubs can sign them up like Pittsburgh is like their AAA team again. or trade for them a little easier because the Pirates won’t be getting compensation when they sign with someone else in free agency.
The talent will continue to flow to the major markets, which the Cubs are. I’m not concerned. It just won’t be as sneaky and as cheap as we thought when Theo first took over.
[quote name=mb21]Someone should try that.[/quote]I don’t think I’d understand the dialog running in reverse
From Kaplan on twitter:
The Cubs are working on an extension for Kenney. Wtf