Apparently the Cubs have or are close to signing Jorge Soler to a 4-year deal for $27.5 million. There's no inclusion in the contract that he become a free agent after 4 years. Instead, he'll have to accrue 6 years of MLB service time before that happens. The Cubs will have 4 options.
More on this tomorrow.
Obstructed View Forum
Obstructed View is a blog created solely for entertainment and informational purposes. It is not affiliated with the Chicago Cubs or Major League Baseball in any way. The opinions on Obstructed View are not endorsed by the Chicago Cubs or Major League Baseball and do not represent their views.
Copyright © 2012 Obstructed View
stercus ad temere intempestivo temporibus
I’m going to be disappointed if this guy starts out in anything other than High A. If they invested that kind of money in a guy they don’t even think can play in the FSL then that’s just fucked up.
Rice Cube wrote:
weird article. says he’s expected to sign, but doesn’t even cite any unnamed sources. the only thing he cites is the 27.5 rumor from elsewhere
I only went with it because there are others talking about it on twitter. I kind of hope it’s bullshit.
@ GW:
I think I’d believe KG’s tweets more so than Van Dyck, but most of what he says in the article was corroborated.
eh I’m all for it. The more impact young talent the better. We talked about how we had a lack of impact minor leaguersand now Theo has added two in one off season. Not bad
@ dylanj:
Agreed. This kid looks special. Excited to see him play.
If he is what he is supposed to be and Jackson Rizzo and Baez develop suddenly you have a future hitting core of
Jackson
Castro
Rizzo
Soler
Baez
that is pretty solid. Espescially with four of the 5 being great athletes.
plan on Castro and probably one of those guys bubbles. Odds are the rest fail
@ dylanj:
sorry forgot to Cub it.
I like having dome interesting bats in the system to track and follow.
jon fisch @jonf1220 Reply Delete Favorite · Open
@keithlaw Do you think Soler has agreed with the Cubs?
keithlaw keithlaw
No clue. Would be #2 on their top 10 for me. “@jonf1220: @keithlaw Do you think Soler has agreed with the Cubs?”
jon fisch @jonf1220 Reply Delete Favorite · Open
@keithlaw Where would you have put him on your 2011 Rule 4 big board? Top ten?
keithlaw @keithlaw Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Not top ten last year, but top ten this year. “@jonf1220: @keithlaw Where would you have put him on your 2011 Rule 4 big board? Top ten?”
no, our farm is going to be a lot of fun to watch for sure.
What I really like is this- what our FO talks about wanting to do,we do. At the start they said the Cubs needed to get younger, add impact prospects and we have. On the business side the new park seems to be making progress and the academy is being built. Honestly, we have a top 5 owner in baseball right now and if he gets Wrigley fixed up he’s up there with the Yankees and Sox ownership IMHO
The score confirming the deal for what thats worth
@ bubblesdachimp:
That would be awesome but the chances of that happening (all of them panning out) are incredibly slim.
@ shawndgoldman:
I know. I can dream right? I think Rizzo and Jackson are pretty safe. And i just believe that Baez’s bat is that special.
@ mb21:
Why? The money? What else are they going to spend it on?
@ dylanj:
I like your posts both here and on twitter.
I am very impressed with Ricketts and Thoyer. They seem to know what is up. And how to build this shit.
Shawn, you’re supposed to be getting blueprints for the MOON COLONY ready.
@ dylanj:
IT’S GONNA HAPPEN
@ dylanj:
Maybe you can build a moon academy for the Cubs to take advantage of the Moon People market inefficiency.
shawndgoldman wrote:
Hookers?
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
Two people who probably never reach the big leagues will have plenty of time to count $35 million.
i trust thoyer and mcleod.
i really do. Mccloyer turned a mediocre san diego farm system into the best one in baseball.
Theo has 2 rings. I think we are doing this the right way.
Just saw a headline on cubs.com: Cubs taking win now philosophy into spring.
That’s probably a good philosophy because once spring is over so is the winning.
If the Cubs are foolishly throwing their money away, I’m glad it is in the $30 million range instead of $100 million range. There is at least a chance that the Cubs get value for this money they’ve spent, whereas there was no way on God’s green earth with everything going their way that they would have gotten value out of Soriano’s contract.
mb21 wrote:
I wanted to do a post on that, but I ran out of time today. That article was fucking ridiculous.
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
After your first two gifs that was the one I thought of next. I love those old Looney Tunes cartoons (dying laughing)
The money is a lot becasue he is a free agent. I dont think the cubs are offering him a dollar more than they need to. If Bubba starling was a free agent he would probably get around this much too. I have no problem with it
@ Aisle424:
I haven’t read the article. I just saw the headline and laughed.
bubblesdachimp wrote:
Well, no, it’s not like Theo sat down with him and asked him how much he wanted and then added $18 million to it. It’s not a question of whether they paid him more than they needed to. It’s a question of whether he was even worth it. The answer to that is almost certainly no. At least when you waste money on draft picks or other international free agents you’re only wasting a million bucks. This time they’re wasting $27 million.
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
I liked this because I love In Living Color.
@ mb21:
But if he does pan out…
I am almost 99% certain that MB does not like this signing (if confirmed), and am about 90% certain that MO doesn’t either (dying laughing)
@ bubblesdachimp:
There’s always that slim chance.
@ mb21:
(dying laughing) (dying laughing) (dying laughing)
@ mb21:
@ Rice Cube:
I like the player, but that’s based ONLY on what I’ve read. He sounds like he has a lot of potential. I just hate the money.
27.5 over four years? WTF.
Maybe I do that for Strasburg and Bryce Harper. But for Soler?
Again, he could be really good one day, but that’s a lot of money for a gamble.
Holy shit that is a ton of money. Not my money, but damn. Let’s see if that’s the final number, though.
@ mb21:
I’m sort of in agreement with you, but I try to rationalize it by thinking of the impending CBA restrictions, or the Cubs needing a business tax break… (dying laughing)
I think I’m happy that they signed Soler and not Cespedes. I guess that will have to do.
@ Rice Cube:
I would prefer the 19 year old to the 26 year old player
@ mb21: If grasshoppers had door gunners, birds wouldn’t fuck with them.
mb21 wrote:
Yeah, that’s where I’m at. Nice player. Shit money.
@ bubblesdachimp:
I prefer Barbara Streisand to Barbara Bush.
We have bitched and moaned that the Cubs haven't acted like a big market team in a division of small to mid-market teams and they finally have. They threw their cash around in a way in which the Yankees would have if they were in the same situation. It is probably stupid money, but it is money the Cubs can afford and it is money that is being spent on their future and it isn't such a prohibitive amount that it will handicap their future moves. I'm thrilled.
Skip to 1:21
The video cannot be shown at the moment. Please try again later.
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
Soler is the one who didn’t even play professionally, right? So all we have information on is practice? We’re talkin ’bout practice. Not a game.
@ Aisle424:
That’s a fair point. The Cubs can afford a $30 mil mistake. But that doesn’t mean I don’t get to bitch about it. (dying laughing)
@ Aisle424
Yeah, I think they figured they had the money and the opportunity, so what the hell, give it a shot.
Mercurial Outfielder wrote:
Don’t you like anything?
@ Aisle424:
Salma Hayek
Craft beer
Scotch
Pork
David Hume
That’s the list.
@ Aisle424:
I don’t disagree with you, but I used that same argument when the Cubs signed Soriano. I want them to act like a big market team while also spending their money wisely. If they don’t, they’re going to need to have a payroll of $200 million and they don’t have the revenue that the Yankees have.
I’m glad they got Soler. I just hate the amount of money they spent in doing so. I
@ mb21:
Mb21 —> Allen Iverson
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
it’s your duty as a Cubs fan to bitch about stuff.
I can’t wait to see the aioli metaphor MB uses to explain this signing.
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
It’s like we said when they signed Bradley. It was worth the risk. At least with Bradley you were getting an MLB player who was coming off an MVP caliber season. He had a shitload of personal issues, but it was only $30 million. It was worth the risk. It’s still only $30 million, but it’s not something I think is worth the risk.
I personally think Soler has a much better chance to work out than Bradley. Hated that deal and hated Soriano’s when they both happened.
@ mb21:
Yeah, $30 mil on an unproven 19YO is a lot more of a risk than $30 mil on Milton Bradley. Who knows? Maybe the kid is the next Vlad Guerrero. Maybe he’s just the next Alexei Ramirez. Or maybe he’s the next Yuniesky Betancourt.
@ Aisle424:
Toolsy 19 YO with no MLB experience, hell, no professional experience, has a better chance to work out than a guy coming off a .999 OPS season in the AL and a guy fresh off a 40-40 season?!?!?!?!
WTF?
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
If he ended up being the next Yuni you’d have to consider that a success in my opinion. You certainly hope for more, but if you end up with someone who sticks around in the big leagues for several years I’d say you did alright. Much more likely is he ends up being the next Marwin Gonzalez.
If the Yankees thought Soler was worth splashing for, the Cubs wouldn’t be getting him.
@ mb21:
I can’t fault Thoyericketts too much here. It’s the last year they have to spend big in the Latin American market. Fine. But after Cespedes went for $36 mil, you had to figure Soler would go for far less. Maybe that’s what is really bothering me. It feels like the Soriano deal, when the Cubs were essentially bidding against themselves and still got gouged.
@ Aisle424:
I don’t know about that. Josh Vitters was arguably the best high school player in the country in 2006. Many thought he was the most talented bat available in the draft. He sucks. There are many more stories like Vitters. The top overall pick in the draft (best player in the entire country) has averaged about 15 WAR over a 10 year career. These guys fail almost all of the time. I think there are very few big league players who are less likely to be worth $27.5 million than someone with the experience of a draft pick or Soler.
I like Soler. From what I’ve read it sounds like he could be pretty damn good. He’s a top 10 pick. Like most top 10 picks, they end up sucking. That’s the chance you take.
I just hope he starts out in Daytona. If they think he’s ready for High A then I might be able to more easily understand the money.
@ mb21:
Yeah, you’d like to see him at least be able to have success in the MiLB equivalent of the Cuban league. I hope to Mickey Morandini’s mustache that he is good. The Cubs need cost-controlled talent in the team for the next 2-3 seasons.
Mercurial Outfielder wrote:
the cubs paid for what Soriano had already done vs what they think Soler is going to do.
@ dylanj:
Ok…
Someone needs to get Nick Cafardo to confirm this story.
@ mb21:
I dropped the thread a while back, but I still think that the conventional wisdom about these signings being a splash in the last year before the new CBA is spot on. I agree that the overall impact of the new CBA on the amateur draft will be to lower the amount of money spent there in the aggregate, but I don’t think that will make minor league talent cheaper. If anything, it creates a floor of sorts in the market, with cheap teams no longer able to lean on the ‘signability’ excuse to pass on top-shelf talent in early rounds. It also will constrain teams who are so inclined from spending more to bring in more than their share of talent via the draft.
At the same time, the ability for teams to flip established players for young talent is diminished significantly by the changes in free agent compensation. I think you’ll see a lot of teams choose to be a lot less active at the deadline, with the few deals that are made really focusing on short-term ‘rentals’ — why pay full value for subsequent seasons when you can grab players without penalty during the offseason?
The club is paying for the privelage of acquiring young talent without using draft picks in an environment where the acquisition of young talent will be further constrained by the new CBA. Given that the team likely won’t contend during the bulk of these two contracts, I can’t get too bent out of shape about any of this. It’s mostly upside, with few alternatives available for the use of this cash.
Mercurial Outfielder wrote:
You only get to pick 2 of the 5. Please have a revised list in by 9:00 am tomorrow.
Don’t you assholes sleep?
I like it. The Cubs have a shit-ton of money and no way to use it to get good quickly, so they’re not bothered about spending it however they can to get good four years down the road. This $27M basically bought them an additional top-ten 2011 draft pick, which is the last such pick that can be bought for the next five years, in addition to the signing bonus that such a player would need. That might be a little overpay but who cares. MB suggested hookers as an alternative way for them to use this $27M and I seriously think that that would be their second best way they could improve the team with it. (dying laughing)
BTW I am making the assumption that when Nick Cafardo eventually reports the details that it will be a normal prospect deal without a roster spot or anything. If they immediately have to put him on the 40-man, or keep him on the coaching staff, or never allow him out of Illinois, or make him the PA announcer, or any other weird shit like that, then I’ll like the deal a lot less.
I know it’s bad to waste money, but I’m just finding a hard time hating this deal. Of the three top free prospects available, the Cubs got two of them. The two youngest ones. They made the commitment to build from the ground up and they’re spending free agent amounts of money to acquire the best talent available. No, its not going to all work out, but if they stay the course, the numbers will be in their favor. No one will remember that Soler didn’t work out when the Cubs are using homegrown youth to be a perennial competitor. Nothing the media does will sink Thoyer, I don’t think, because I think they knew going into this deal that they were in for a rough ride.
I say the ends justify the means here. I think they’ll go back to acquiring impact MLB talent when the time is right. Obviously that “Win-now” article was just trying to give people a reason to get excited about the Cubs this season. Everything they’ve said so far has been to soften the blow of a few years of shitty Cubsdom, but I really think these moves, in sum total, will pay off long-run.
@ Mish:
I actually suffer from chronic insomnia, cunt.
@ Suburban kid:
Mmm…chronic.
@ Mish:
No, your [mom/sister/girlfriend] kept tossing and turning.
(Pick whichever least offends you.)
GBTS wrote:
.
@ GBTS:
What if they’re all the same woman?
@ Mish:
Then you’re from Missouri.
South Carolina might be more apt.
testes
mb, the site seems to be banning me from posting pictures. Deliberate?
Mercurial Outfielder wrote:
I wanted no part of Milton Bradley. I agreed he was the best player available, but there was no way in hell that marriage was going to go well. None. Then we saw it start in Spring Training the moment Milton arrived with Sullivan and his merry band poking Bradley with a stick every chance they got. It’s not like that behavior was out of character for the press, nor was Bradley’s reaction to it. Combined with the fact that nobody else was even considering a 3rd year that the Cubs tossed in seemingly for shits and giggles, I hated, hated, hated that deal and gave it 0% chance of working out. And then even I was surprised by how quickly it went to shit.
So even if Soler’s chances of earning his money are .00000000000001%, I still think it is smarter money spent.
And she looks like this
Something’s fucked with this thread – it may have to do with all the gifs. Or maybe I have been banned from doing anything other than plain text with no reply/quote/link/image? If I include anything like that, the post disappears.
@ Suburban kid:
Is it just the one image you tried to post. The ones with that Sully image were marked as spam.
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
This is just screaming to have Theo and Hoyer photoshopped in.
Maybe Theo and Ricketts is more appropriate.
Aisle424 wrote:
It was my understanding that the White Sox and one other team had offered more money for Bradley than the Cubs, but he took the lesser deal. That’s what I remember being reported at the time anyway.
For some reason I think it was the Nationals who also offered more than the Cubs for Bradley.
I seem to remember that all the other deals were for 2 years (maybe for more average per year), but the Cubs tacked on a 3rd year for more money overall, but that doesn’t even matter. I gave Bradley a 0% chance of succeeding in Chicago with this fanbase and with this media hounding him constantly.
I think there was more money from at least one team, but even if it was fewer years and we take $30 million over 3 years it’s the same as $22 million over 2 years.
As I’ve said though, I like Soler. He has a ton of potential. He’s Jeff Samardzija. It just so happens they gave him 3 times as much as Samardzija got. I think the Cubs went into this offseason wanting to acquire both of these Cubans and were going to do so regardless of the cost. I think that’s obvious and I also think it’s a terrible way to run a business. Fortunately it’s only $35 million.
@ mb21:
I’m glad that the Cubs areimproving the team, but I guess looking at it, it is a lot of money.
I didn’t realize it until I look at players who are getting paid more than what these kids will be making. I just hope one of these two pan out.
$35 mil / 4 years (?) (for 2 players) is $4.375 each per year.
Players making about this much or more than this per roster payroll page last updated 1/18:
Matt Garza ($8.7, although I think this is more now right?)
Paul Malholm ($4.75)
Carlos Marmol ($7)
Marlon Byrd ($6.5)
David DeJesus ($4.25)
Geovaney Soto ($4.3)
Aldolfo Soriano ($18!!)
Carlos Pena ($5 mil, off team)
Jon Heyman wrote:
Does anybody know what this guy looks like? I keep picturing a big bald black guy with a goatee and prays to a voodoo doll.
mb21 wrote:
Figures.
@ Berselius:
MLBTR hasn’t even run with this yet so I think it says something about the rumor.
@ Suburban kid:
(dying laughing) can you post other images? I know I’ve seen you post some recently so I don’t know why that one was flagged.
mb21 wrote:
The spam filter is set so that you have to post a certain percentage of pizza hut MILF or alien porn references to be viewed as a credible OV commenter.
Berselius wrote:
@ WaLi:
Yeah, that’s the only thing that really bugs me here. I get the rationale, with the new CBA and all, but this is $35 mil spent on a pitcher with mediocre, at best, numbers in a league equivalent to A-ball, and a completely untested 19 YO. The Cubs can afford to make a mistake. I just hope they haven’t made one.
Mercurial Outfielder wrote:
Mediocre is putting it nicely. I think Concepcion’s numbers flat out suck.
.
@ FonteYES:
I choose both.
assuming we land Soler here is the Dylan Jones Top 11 most interesting prospects for 2012
1. Brett Jackson
2. Anthony Rizzo
3. Jorge Soler
4. Dan Vogelbach
5. Marcos Hernandez
6. Zeke DeVoss
7. Javier Baez
8. Dillon Maples
9. Yao Ling Wang
10. Ben Wells
11. Josh Vitters
another thing is we are treating the translation from Cuban ball to A ball as gospel and its not. And we seem to be equating prices paid in the draft vs prices paid for int’l free agents which have never matched up. And we have talked for years about how we needed to open up this market and we have.
In short we dont like anything.
Where is Trey McNutt on your list? He’s the best pitching prospect we have who has played any professional baseball.
http://throughthefencebaseball.com/chicago-cubs-prospect-watch-daniel-vogelbach/16010/
good read on Vogelbach.
dylanj wrote:
I agree. International free agents are typically paid less than draft picks. That’s why I don’t agree with this or what berselius has said. The top international free agent not from Japan will get about $3 million. There are several players in the draft who get more than that. The top draft pick will often get around $10 million. The Cubs paid their 14th round pick more than $2 million, which was probably more than any international free agent signed for except for maybe a handful.
McNutt isn’t that interesting to me. I watched him pitch a few times last year and he has a nice fastball. There is nothing else to say about him.
Jeff Beliveau would be the next guy up. Left handed Marmol.
I don’t get the DeVoss love, DJ. He has no power, and can’t play CF or SS. He’s also a bit old for his level (21YO at Rk & A-ball). High OBP, takes his walks. Sounds like a 4th OF, reserve MIF to me. Poor man’s Chone Figgins.
@ mb21:
but the high profile Cubans always sign for more than the teen DR prospects. Always have.
I like guys who excel in one area. This is by no means a list of how they will pan out just guys who I am interested in watching. But I hope DeVoss could stick at 2B or CF.
Logan Watkins is a local KS guy who continues to do decent as he climbs the ladder.
@ dylanj:
He’s been played almost exclusively at 2B for the Cubs, and he was a corner OF/2B at Miami. He’s not going to be a MLB CF, and his bat won’t play at 2B in the NL. He’s just another slap-hitting fast guy, IMO.
dylanj wrote:
let’s see if that works
That’s not unusual, SK.
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
That’s exactly what I was thinking. I love the OBP and if he can stick at 2nd or something maybe he could be a valuable leadoff hitter. My guess is he’s moved to LF along the way. He has a long way to go and he’s already a borderline 2B from what I’ve read. I like the draft pick though. He has a skill this organization needs.
mb21 wrote:
Only Sully images sully the filter.
a slap hitting fast guy who can take walks. Lots of them. He was old for Boise at 20 so how he handles Peoria or Daytona will let us know what he is worth.
That Torreyes kid we got for Marshall is also somebody to keep an eye on.
@ mb21:
Yeah, it’s good to see them target guys with on-base skills, but I’d like them to be just a bit less one dimensional. There’s nothing exciting about a guy whose ceiling is Lance Johnson.
@ dylanj:
Most of the high profile Cubans have established themselves as stars in the Cuban league.
Jeimer Candelario dominated the DSL last year. Hopefully he gets sent to ARZ then Boise.
Alexei Ramirez signed for what, $6 million? That’s worked out better than anyone could have imagined, but the guy was expected to contribute immediately. He was a super star in Cuba. Six million dollars!
@ dylanj:
I wonder if Watkins ends up like Marquez Smith and Ryan Flaherty. The numbers look good, but there’s something the scouts don’t like.
Watkins is interesting because he is age appropriate for his level every year, does a decent job every year and moves up a level every year. He didnt dominate then trail off but he hasnt broke out either.
I think the Chapman deal for $30 million as precedent plus the fact that this was the last time teams could bid so freely on the international talent is what pushed the prices up. Then toss on that the Cubs were hellbent and determined to throw their weight around like a big boy to get these done and there you have it.
Like I said, I’d rather they spend a few million extra on prospects than a few extra tens of millions on FAs that are past their prime and getting paid for what they did for another team.
if the Cubs whiff on these guys, there is nothing stopping them from making an almost exact type of deal in the future (if the CBA allowed it), but if they whiff on a $100+ million deal, you can’t just turn around and do another one to fix it. That’s where the Yankees get themselves into trouble. I don’t think any major market team spent their way into the poorhouse while spending on prospects.
@ Aisle424:
You and I, don’t often, agree, but on this, we do
When was the last time a major market time spent $35 mil on two prospects?
Fukudome —-> White Sox
@ Mish:
That’s actually a really smart move for them. Their OF defense is atrocious and there’s not a single guy in that lineup projected to have an OBP north of .330.
Mercurial Outfielder wrote:
Fair point. But seeing as they won’t ever be able to do it again, we don’t have to worry that it will be a repeated “mistake.” They are spending on the future because they can afford to and that is where their priority is. These guys may turn to shit, but I applaud the attitude that they will throw their weight around when necessary.
If this was the only way they improved the team over the course of this off-season, I might be more inclined to worry. But this combined with some smart trades and some value acquisitions shows they are taking any and every angle to improve the team where possible. That may include some over-market spending, but that is their competitive edge as a major market in the NL Central.
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
I have a very difficult time even considering Concepcion a prospect. I guess since he’s young he qualifies, but he’s a work in progress. He’s basically a reclamation project that cost $7 million and an MLB roster spot.
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
Konerko? Or maybe Dunn?
KG said Concepcion was basically a 1st rnd or sandwich pick . So yeah he qualifies as a prospect.
I think the difference between Chapman and these two guys is that Chapman was expected to spend little time in the minors and be up with the Reds by the summer. They weren’t paying for expected production 5 years down the road like the Cubs are.
It’s also important to consider that the Reds paid him, $30 million whereas if if Soler is even league average they’ll be paying him closer to $80 million. Let’s say he needs 3 full years in the minors, which I think is probably fewer than he’ll require.
2012: $7
2013: $7
2014: $7
2015 (25-man roster): $7
2016: $7 (can’t make less than the previous year so even though is contract is up, he gets that much)
2017: $7
2018: (arb eligible): $10
2019: $12
2020: $15
$79 million total. That’s if it works out and they get an average ballplayer. He’ll have made about $80 million when he was worth about $15-20 million. The only way this ends up being a good contract is if he Soler becomes a super star within a year or two. Otherwise it’s just a matter of how bad the contract is.
Stating this as 4-years and $28 million is misleading. They’re guaranteed to pay Soler $28 million, but if he’s even a useful MLB player they’ll be paying considerably more. Even if he was a bench player the Cubs probably end up paying $60 million to Soler. For a bench player. If he’s a good ballplayer they’ll pay him closer to $100 million. There’s no savings here.
@ dylanj:
He’d be the first sub 5 K/9 prospect in the last 40 years then.
@ mb21:
Is that really how it works? I thought the contract was basically his salary and he wouldn’t get even the MLB minimum on top of that. Not that I don’t believe you, but it’d be shocking to me if that’s really what it pans out to and the Cubs did it anyway.
@ mb21:
Do we know how the payments break out? COuld they have given him a $12 million bonus and then $16 million in salary?
Then it works out to something like:
2012: $16
2013: $4
2014: $4
2015 (25-man roster): $4
2016: $4 (can’t make less than the previous year so even though is contract is up, he gets that much)
2017: $4
2018: (arb eligible): $6
2019: $8
2020: $10
That’s only $60M. Plus, if he is a bench player, they let him go. They aren’t obligated to keep paying him up and above the $28M. I get that it is a lot of money and it is probably more than he is worth, but the Cubs’ edge is their money and the amount risked here is more palatable than the amount spent on Fielder and Pujols this offseason.
Mercurial Outfielder wrote:
mb21 wrote:
This is why scouts exist. If you want to frame your argument relative to money spent on equivalently ranked players in the draft (though I disagree), that’s fine, but it’s fucking ridiculous to talk about a 19 year old’s numbers. There is a reason why scouts exist.
Aisle424 wrote:
That’s the key for me. Money is what the Cubs have more of than other teams, and the new CBA means that they may have a limited window to maximize its impact. Again, what else can they drop $28M on that would have as good a chance of making them good as Soler does in a similar time frame? I’m not sure there is such a thing, unless someone finds a new Market Inefficiency (TM).
Also, is this officially official yet? Why tf is the usually-premature mlbtr not even reporting it?
Mish wrote:
Peanuts ———-> Fukudome
The White Sox are only paying him $500k this year, and it’s a $500k buyout on a $3.5m option for next year. That’s probably a steal. Especially when you consider that Fukudome already knows where to eat lunch in Chicago.
@ Rice Cube:
Assuming the $27.5 million isn’t a signing bonus, yes, that’s how it would work. If the money is a signing bonus like other draft picks then it obviously wouldn’t. Strasburg was given a $15 million signing bonus, but his paycheck were the same as all other players at the level he’s played at.
@ Berselius:
Isn’t Concepticon only 18 (or just turned 19 after his last season)? How do most teenagers’ number’s look in high-A ball or whatever Cuba is equivalent to? My guess is if you put most 18-year-olds in that level of the minors their numbers would suck too.
Still not saying he’s good or worth the (MLB) contract, but I agree that we probably can’t evaluate him accurately with the info we’ve got.
http://www.csnchicago.com/09/26/11/Sox-Drawer-Hawk–Stone-rip-Beane-Moneyba/landing_soxdrawer_v3.html?blockID=567770&feedID=665&qv=1
wow I missed that from last year. STEVE STONE
Berselius wrote:
And where not to eat dinner
@ fang2415:
$28 million on any number of free agents from this offseason would have been more worth it.
Miles and Kaplan say no deal. Lots of teams still on. We have wasted a lot of time
Kaplan say the deal is not done, but it seems to me like the actual signing is a formality.
mb21 wrote:
I would have enjoyed watching a 75-76 win team much more than a 70 win team.
If the Cubs believe Soler will be a better MLBer than Cespedes, does that factor into the money at all? Maybe the Cubs and the scouts think Soler is a future MVP type and somebody you build a team around so they gave him big money to come to them. I don’t know, but the Cubs seem to really like this guy so I’ll take a wait and see approach.
@ Berselius:
Then why do we even talk about any prospect’s numbers? What you’re saying is we should just ignore all stats for 19 and under kids. At what age can we start looking at the stats? Is Hayden Simpson old enough yet? Why were we excited about Starlin Castro? I know I wasn’t excited because of what the scouts said for the same reason I’ve never been excited about Josh Vitters.
@ Mucker:
I hope they really like him. It would be ridiculous if they weren’t even that impressed and they gave him that much money.
@ mb21:
I’m not trying to say that at all. I’m just saying that if his stats suck so much then why are so many talent evaluators rating him so highly? Evaluating minor leaguers based on stats is such a mess due to small sample sizes and various league factors (which are even odder in closed leagues like Cuba’s). If all I saw were those stats then I obviously wouldn’t sign him. But I’m okay with trusting the scouts here.
@ Berselius:
I don’t care about the win total when it comes to spending money. Teams don’t spend more per win if they’re at 88 wins. Teams spend the same per win regardless of how many wins they have.
mb, your seething for each and every single move is getting ridiculous. Has there been a Free Agent signing for an impact (or potential impact) player that you’ve liked? Maybe your concept of what players are worth is flawed. We are signing young talent. Why are we bitching about it? Where else did you want these funds to go? In Ricketts pocket?
Mish wrote:
They only had to pay $1 million. That’s quite a bargain.
@ Berselius:
What they say is important, but I don’t trust them. I didn’t trust them when they talked about Vitters, Hayden Simpson, and Tyler Colvin either. Why did the scouts like him so much? I have no idea. Of the Cuban pitchers I’ve looked at that came to the US, they struckout about .1 batter more per 9 and walked about a batter more per 9. So the numbers matters. Obviously with one season it’s a sample size issue, but not much of one. You don’t need many batters faced to have a reliable amount of information about his ability to strike batters out. He young for what would be the equivalent level here and that matters too.
mb21 wrote:
Hmm now that’s food for thought. How many top-ten draft picks end up as league average over their cost-controlled years? And how many end up all-stars (or shoulda-been-all-stars, like Garza I guess)? Using those to handicap those outcomes, I guess one could roughly figure out whether you come out ahead of where you’d get by just plunking down $28 for 7 wins…?
jtsunami wrote:
Two moves. Let’s be clear here. There have been 2 moves this entire offseason that I have not liked. TWO. I don’t know if you expected me to like everything this front office does, but that’s obviously not going to happen.
I was a huge fan of the Sean Marshall trade. Same goes for Cashner. The Ian Stewart trade was meh, but it wasn’t bad. It wasn’t good. It was a typical trade (both teams got something out of it). I liked the DeJesus signing. I liked bringing Reed Johnson back. I liked DFAing Koyie HIll. I was meh on Kerry Wood. I even like Soler. I just hate the money.
is that enough or do I have to like everything?
mb21 wrote:
Er… yeah, that sounds pretty much right to me. High School stats are almost meaningless because of the crazy variability of the league they play in, so at the very least we don’t have much to compare it to. AFAIU, kids that young are where you value your scouts’ opinion waaay above any numbers he shows you.
Do we have any comps for numbers of under-19s who have played professionally?
@ fang2415:
I mentioned it earlier, but the average 1st pick in the draft provides 15 WAR over a 10 year career. You’re not giving these guys big bonuses for what the group of 1st picks do, but for what they can do. The same is true for whatever contract Soler gets, but I don’t care what type of free agent he is. There’s no way I’m paying him more than I’d have paid a top pick in the draft. If I lose the best player in baseball history, so be it.
mb21 wrote:
Don’t you like everything?
You know, I’ve sat here for half a day waiting for you guys to start talking about something awesome like campus architecture. WTF is this baseball nonsense?
Mish, we’re just waiting around for you to give us some UGC for another daily facepalm.
@ fang2415:
Stats at high schools aren’t meaningless. If I understand more about high school baseball and could access their stats as easily as you can for college then I’d be more inclined to look at their stats. I’m talking about guys who have played professionally like Concepcion has. There’s a lot we don’t know because he played in Cuba, but strikeout rates are nearly the same in all professional leagues I checked out recently. Whether it’s a specific minor leagues, MLB, Japan or Cuba, K rates seemed to be fairly similar.
Midday facepalm coming your way. It will be like nothing you’ve ever seen before, especially if you’ve never read the daily facepalm before.
mb21 wrote:
Well but again, if you’re comparing it to a draft cost, then the $27M is not just paying what you’d pay the guy you drafted, but also what you’d pay for the ability to make the extra pick itself. The Cubs basically just paid to instantaneously lose 93 games, and then on top of that ponied up the bonus that they’d need to give the player they got with the draft pick that losing those games got them. (dying laughing)
jtsunami wrote:
.
Kevin Goldstein said:
Berselius wrote:
UCG? United Church of God?
Kaplan:
(dying laughing)
So, whatever.
Man I suck. UGC, not UCG. (dying laughing)
Mish wrote:
UGC. United God of Church.
Here’s a bread turtle:
@ Mish:
WHAT HAS SCIENCE DONE
@ Mish:
I like turtles.
@ fang2415:
They’ve effectively mated bread and a turtle.
Mish wrote:
If you were to cook a turtle in a cast iron pan, what kind of oil would you use?
I don’t know what kind of oil, but I’d probably but it from Shell.
@ Mish:
Are these the food-animal hybrids that we’ve all been warned about? Stem cells are magic.
@ Mish:
this is why gays can’t be allowed to marry
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/02/many-teams-in-on-jorge-soler.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Hey Mish, I’m glad you found time to make a valentine for yourself.
http://i.imgur.com/ZS39T.gif
Face—-> palm
http://www.obstructedview.net/chicago-cubs/daily-facepalm-2-14-2012.html