A couple days ago the Cubs traded Sean Marshall to the Reds for Travis Wood and two unknown minor leaguers. They also re-signed Reed Johnson for what is thought to be just a bit over $1 million. Last night they signed former Rockies closer Manuel Corpas to a 1-year deal. The dollar amount is still unknown, but I’d guess it’s $1 million. Corpas missed all of the 2011 season after undergoing Tommy John Surgery at the end of the 2010 season.
Marshall was set to earn $3.1 million next year while Wood makes the league minimum. The combined salary between Johnson and Corpas is probably about $2.2 million. The combined total the Cubs added this week was $2.7 million so they saved a little money.
They traded away a guy who is projected to be worth 2 WAR in Marshall, acquired a pitcher projected to be worth about 2 to 2.5 WAR in Travis Wood (Oliver, Fans). CAIRO projects .6 in just over 100 innings. Increase the innings and you end up at roughly 1 WAR. Reed Johnson, as a back-up, can probably be counted on for about .5 WAR. CAIRO projects exactly that. CAIRO also projects Corpas will be worth .5 WAR.
The Cubs added somewhere between 2 and 3.5 WAR. They did so while spending less and gaining multiple years of club control. The Cubs aren’t any worse after this week like many have suspected. They’re at least as good (or bad) and probably a little better. They’re certainly better in the future.
Theo talked specifically about this and we’ll get to that in a little bit. First, the Marshall trade to the Reds has become officially official. The Cubs acquired for Marshall, along with Travis Wood, Dave Sappelt and Ronaldo Torreyes. We discussed this in the last thread and I’ll post some of those comments here. If you followed the comments in the last thread you can just click here to bypass it.
DJ: Sappelt doesnt seem like much and Torreyes is years away. About what you would expect
mb21: Torreyes absolute raked in the MWL at the age of 18: baseball-reference.com/…/…
He hit .356/.398/.457. He doesn’t have much power, but as a middle infielder at his age and at that level that’s damn good.
Sappelt has hit pretty well in the minors through age 24: .309/.362/.459. He can play all 3 outfield spots. He got a little over 100 PA with the Reds last season.
From the Baseball America chat on the 2012 top Reds prospects:
Harry (NJ): Does the “little red machine”, aka Ron Torreyes, get consideration in your top 30?
J.J. Cooper: You can’t help but love Torreyes. His size will always be a question, but man he can hit, and he’s solid defensively. If everything breaks right, he’s an everyday second baseman. If it doesn’t there are plenty of scouts who think he could handle SS and 3B well enough to be a useful utilityman.
mb21: Sappelt’s wRC+ at each level
wRC+: 114, 102, 114, 49, 91, 157, 132, 127
PA: 279, 331, 271, 76, 77, 372, 115, 336
118 PA MLB level, 63 wRC+, +4.7 UZR, .3 WAR
The only time in the minors he’s been below average is when he had less than 80 PA. I wouldn’t be surprised if he takes Campana’s spot on the roster.
JMan (on Travis Wood): I think Law said if he changes his pitching approach there is potential to be a #3. I think he mentioned ditching his 4-seamer…basically going to back to throwing the pitches he did in 2010.
DJ: here’s food for thought
When Castro was 18 he was in RK ball and posted a .823 OPS
Torreyes was 18 in A ball posting a .855.
Now, Castro had/has a much more projectable frame to develop and got promoted straight to high A where he really took off but its promising.
Smokestack Lightning: Given the extreme volatility inherent to reliever production, I’m still having a hard time believing the Cubs got what they did for a pitcher at the doorstep of 30 who may or may not give the Reds 70 good innings and then require many millions thereafter.
Even if at best Wood, Sappelt, and Torreyes become merely serviceable big league players, this is a rather large win.
bubbles: Keith law likes the deal quite a bit
8volumesthick: I like these minor leaguers. They probably won’t be stars but really useful. Torreyes struck out in only 7% of his PA’s as an 18 year old in A ball. That’s alot of contact.
RC: The new Cubs plan:
Theo had some interesting things to say. He explains the Marshall trade and then talks a bit about Matt Garza.
“Matt Garza is the type of pitcher you want to build around,” Epstein said Friday. “He’s a proven top-of-the-rotation guy, a proven performer in the playoffs. I think last year he had his best season, all things being equal.
“It’s hard to find top-of-the-rotation guys, so if you have them, and if there’s way to keep them around, that’s always compelling for the club. With that said, we’ve been honest. We are in a mode where we have to listen on everybody. And if there’s a way to improve the long-term outlook for this club in a significant manner, we can’t look past opportunities.”
Gordo mentioned online how the Cubs are weighing their options with Garza. Should they trade him or give him a contract extension? This is perhaps the one decision that will tell us how quickly the new front office believes they can turn things around. Garza just turned 28 years old and has two years of club control remaining. He’ll enter free agency as it is right now at the age of 30, which is still relatively young. It’s past his prime, but if he stays healthy he’ll earn a big payday.
The fact the Cubs are even discussing which alternative is better tells us that competing this year or next is out of the question. I think we already knew that. A year ago I looked at how much it would cost the Cubs to buyout Garza’s arbitration eligible years. At the time we had him projected to be worth 8.7 WAR over those years. Factoring in the discount for arbitration eligible years that was a 3-year contract for $25-29 million. He had his best season last year so we can increase that.
Oliver provides a 6-year forecast, which begins with 3.9 WAR in 2012. Oliver unfortunately does not include much of any decline in playing time, which is a significant reason why players get worse as they age. Oliver projects 202 IP in 2012 and 198 IP in 2017. That’s unreasonable. I could understand how a projection might have similar playing time from age 28 to 30, but after that it’s going down. Oliver has 3.9 in 2012, 3.7 in 2013 and 3.6 in 2014. I’m going to begin to reduce by .5 after that. Here’s what we get for 5 years.
2012: 3.9 WAR
2013: 3.7
2014: 3.6
2015: 3.1
2016: 2.6
2012 and 2013 are arbitration eligible years so there is a discount. It’s factored in below.
| Year | WAR | per win | $WAR | Discount |
| 2012 | 3.9 | $5.00 | $19.50 | $11.70 |
| 2013 | 3.7 | $5.25 | $19.43 | $15.54 |
| 2014 | 3.6 | $5.51 | $19.85 | $19.85 |
| 2015 | 3.1 | $5.79 | $17.94 | $17.94 |
| 2016 | 2.6 | $6.08 | $15.80 | $15.80 |
| Total | 16.9 | $5.53 | $92.51 | $80.83 |
Considering the risk of a 5-year deal you can subtract another 10% and you get a 5-year deal for $72 million. I don’t think anybody here would be too upset with that kind of a deal for Garza. He’s worth it. The question is whether or not the Cubs think Garza can be a significant contributor to a contending team or if they think what he brings in return will offer more production in those later years.
“We aren’t in a situation where we have to do anything with Garza,” Epstein said. “But generally we are in the business right now of taking our short-term assets and turning them into long-term assets. In the case of Sean Marshall, that ended up happening in a trade. We turned a short-term asset in Marshall into what we hope will be three long-term assets (in Travis Wood, Dave Sappelt and Ronald Torreyes).”
…
“In the case of Matt Garza, perhaps nothing happens, or perhaps we can turn him into a long-term asset by extending him on a deal that makes sense for everybody,” he said. “We’ll listen, because there’s always an active trade market for top-of-the-rotation guys with multiple years of control.”
I love the way this front office thinks.
Favorite tweet of the day comes from Baseball America’s Ben Badler: “Any trade involving Ronald Torreyes is Ben Badler approved. Guy is 5-foot-nothing and all he does is hit.”
Comments
I love that this solid thinking is perilously close to a “patented Phil Rogers’ +2.”
shawndgoldmanQuote Reply
I like how the nuclear bomb gif made it into the featured comments. I’m so proud (dying laughing)
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=shawndgoldman]I love that this solid thinking is perilously close to a “patented Phil Rogers’ +2.”[/quote]Except rogers would have the cubs at 0 on this deal because only mlb players count.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/7521/trade-shows-cubs-serious-about-rebuilding?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Any of you guys familiar with the prospects Levine lists in this article?
Rice CubeQuote Reply
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=nicoli001jus
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=marisn001jac
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Marisnick is the number 3 Blue Jays prospect and Nicolino is number 5.
Marisnick:
Nicolini:
Now you know as much as I know about the two.
mb21Quote Reply
Now I guess it’s just a matter of how badly Toronto wants Garza, if at all.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
These quotes give me goosebumps. I think the Cubs actually have a president and gm that get it.
wpbcQuote Reply
Well MB, I actually read what Matt Damon had to say and also remember seeing him talk politics for a while on CNN (the interview show with the Brit, can’t remember what it is) several months back. Turns out Damon is significantly more capable of speaking about policy than most of the politicians who run for President in any given election.
I also happen to agree with every single thing he said, but what can I do, I’m just one of the “sheeple” unable to think for myself like pinetar pointed out.
Like MB, I usually don’t give a shit what ‘celebrities’ have to say about anything but if one of them turns out to have some thoughts of actual worth on any given issue I’m not going to dismiss them out of hand. Guess that means I’m “silly” as well. I may not have been a ‘fan’ before but after hearing/reading what Damon said, I think I might be now. Like with Clooney, who I actually kind of disliked before I saw several clips where he’s talking politics.
Sure its usually true that people are interested in the thoughts of celebrities for no reason but that doesn’t mean all actors are worthless human beings who should have nothing to say about anything but their craft.
Anyway, you can go back to discussing the trade value of relievers and potential upside of minor leaguers who will probably never make it to the majors, I’ll go back to lurking again. See you guys when the NBA season is over.
P.S.- (dying laughing) (can’t leave without doing that)
Weapon XQuote Reply
Where did I say he was a worthless human? Here’s what I said.
[quote name=Barack Obama] “I’ve even let down my key core constituency: movie stars. Just the other day, Matt Damon — I love Matt Damon, love the guy — Matt Damon said he was disappointed in my performance. Well, Matt, I just saw ‘The Adjustment Bureau,’ so — right back atcha, buddy.”[/quote]
I replied with this:
I’d have said that regardless of who the President said that about. It’s awesome that he said it.
And finally I said this:
So I ask again, where did I say anything negative about Matt Damon? That you read me attacking Damon is not my problem. I was fairly clear in what I said, but since you accused me of something I didn’t do I thought I’d quote myself here to point it out.
mb21Quote Reply
Internet fight begin
RodrigoQuote Reply
[quote name=Rodrigo]Internet fight begin[/quote]There’s nothing to fight about. Like I said, someone said I said something I didn’t and if others were to read this thread I want them to read my words and not what he thinks I said. I stand by everything I said because I was clearly speaking about Hollywood and not just Matt Damon. Why he took offense to that is strange, but I also don’t care.
mb21Quote Reply
Dave Sappelt is on Z’s Venezuela team:
http://mlb.mlb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?pos=LF&sid=l135&t=p_pbp&pid=543743
Interestingly, Z hasn’t pitched since the 14th and no news of if he’s ever going to pitch again before their season is up.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
The political talk will stop now.
BottleasmokeQuote Reply
I’ve also never said actors should shut their mouths about anything other than acting. I’ve argued many times that athletes can say whatever they want about whatever subject they want so why would I think differently about Hollywood? We may not like the athletes for what they say about some things, but it’s their right. They didn’t sign a contract to shut their mouths. Yet when it comes to athletes almost every fan gets mad at athletes for expressing their opinions if they’re opinions that the fan disagrees with.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]Dave Sappelt is on Z’s Venezuela team:
http://mlb.mlb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?pos=LF&sid=l135&t=p_pbp&pid=543743
Interestingly, Z hasn’t pitched since the 14th and no news of if he’s ever going to pitch again before their season is up.[/quote]He only started that one time after he was hit in the face, right?
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]He only started that one time after he was hit in the face, right?[/quote]Yessir. Four solid innings although he only had one strikeout. After that, no Z news. Not sure what’s going on.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Actually, not to add fuel to the fire, but I hate when actors use their stage to bitch about politics. So I tend to agree with you, MB.
RodrigoQuote Reply
[quote name=Rodrigo]Actually, not to add fuel to the fire, but I hate when actors use their stage to bitch about politics. So I tend to agree with you, MB.[/quote]I hate that they are given the stage, but that’s not the actor’s fault. That’s our fault. Demand I take the stage on something, provide me that stage and I will eventually take it.
Based on the garbage I see in the checkout lines at the grocery store there is an alarmingly ridiculous amount of interest in these people’s lives. I don’t get that. I don’t get why anyone cares what Matt Damon, Curt Schilling or Clint Eastwood thinks about politics. They may or may not be smart and have good points. I don’t know and I don’t care. I just don’t know why anyone cares. I don’t know why they were ever given that stage in the first place.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]Yessir. Four solid innings although he only had one strikeout. After that, no Z news. Not sure what’s going on.[/quote]Yeah, the lack of strikeouts was disappointing, as was the case for much of last year. Also, although his fastball scraped the low 90’s in the early going, it sat in the high 80’s.
ACTQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I hate that they are given the stage, but that’s not the actor’s fault. That’s our fault. Demand I take the stage on something, provide me that stage and I will eventually take it.
Based on the garbage I see in the checkout lines at the grocery store there is an alarmingly ridiculous amount of interest in these people’s lives. I don’t get that. I don’t get why anyone cares what Matt Damon, Curt Schilling or Clint Eastwood thinks about politics. They may or may not be smart and have good points. I don’t know and I don’t care. I just don’t know why anyone cares. I don’t know why they were ever given that stage in the first place.[/quote]
People’s interest in the life of celebrities is something I never understood. Who gives a rat’s ass what these people do beyond the films they create.
RodrigoQuote Reply
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/transactions/
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Rodrigo]People’s interest in the life of celebrities is something I never understood. Who gives a rat’s ass what these people do beyond the films they create.[/quote]I don’t get it either.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Rodrigo]People’s interest in the life of celebrities is something I never understood. Who gives a rat’s ass what these people do beyond the films they create.[/quote]I think people who are interested in this stuff are usually of the middle class (or lesser) and thus live vicariously through celebrities who can afford to do all kinds of fun and crazy stuff, drive fancy cars, and fuck hot women. Fantasy is understandable, but obsessing over what Celebrity X is doing is overboard.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]I think people who are interested in this stuff are usually of the middle class (or lesser) and thus live vicariously through celebrities who can afford to do all kinds of fun and crazy stuff, drive fancy cars, and fuck hot women. Fantasy is understandable, but obsessing over what Celebrity X is doing is overboard.[/quote]I do think it is about living vicariously through them. After they’ve done that a few days they’ll trash them for being wealthy and doing the things that they enjoy reading about.
mb21Quote Reply
short guys are the new market inefficiency (dying laughing)
dylanjQuote Reply
I didn’t hear what Matt Damon said, but if he said something smart, or something I agreed with, then I would count him among those whose opinions I listen to.
I do not care about his fancy cars and hot women fucking. Don’t think WX said he did either. Celebrity gossip and celebrity political grandstanding are two different things. Not interested in one and don’t care much for the other, but again, if the celebrity said something good, I’d make a note of it.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
i dont mind Damon speaking up because he takes the time to inform himself before saying something.
That said I have never been less interested in a topic at this blog than this one. We need to get back to Pizza Hut MILFS
dylanjQuote Reply
[quote name=dylanj]i dont mind Damon speaking up because he takes the time to inform himself before saying something.
That said I have never been less interested in a topic at this blog than this one. We need to get back to Pizza Hut MILFS[/quote]
Wrong!
We should be talking about cats.
BottleasmokeQuote Reply
[quote name=Suburban kid]I didn’t hear what Matt Damon said, but if he said something smart, or something I agreed with, then I would count him among those whose opinions I listen to..[/quote]I don’t know what Damon said other than what I can glean from Obama’s response. I don’t want to know, but I’m talking more about Hollywood in general. I don’t understand the fascination, but I also don’t understand the fascination people have with athletes.
mb21Quote Reply
MB, I didn’t pretend that that’s exactly what you said, or I would have shown it as a quote. I was trying to show what you seemed to be implying with your comments. Yes, I exaggerated a bit in equating it to calling him a “worthless human being.” It was done, as it often is on the internets, for effect. I thought it was pretty obvious that that’s not exactly what you said.
Nor was I picking on your entire thread of comments which you needlessly posted again in your reply, most of which I pretty much agree with. I was only referring to your first comment:
Again, as I already said before, I largely agree with you about the interest in celebrities but in the comment above you seem to be pretty clearly denigrating not only the idea that Matt Damon could have anything worthwhile to say but also anyone who might think that he did say something worthwhile.
Not championing everything every celebrity says or the interest by the public in those banalities, just sayin that in this instance, what this celebrity did say wasn’t exactly deserving of such scorn. I think the reason he was asked about politics in this instance is because he was active before, has spoken about issues several times in the past and actually seemed to know what he was talking about.
And I’m not “offended” because you were speaking about Matt Damon but more at the dismissal of anyone who thought what he said had value. You were generalizing and picked a bad example to generalize with, imo.
I don’t particularly care about this issue but, since I also saw the same links you did and actually clicked over and found out what he said, I thought I’d chime in. I forgot how vehemently you defend against any suggestion that you might ever be mistaken. My bad.
To sum up:
They’re not worthless, it’s just that regardless of whether they’re smart and/or make good points, you just don’t care. Okay, I get that. Personally, I am interested in hearing a good point no matter who makes it. Double interested if they are also smart. But to each his own. You also don’t get why anyone else cares. Understood.
But why do you care whether or not anyone else cares or why those celebs were given that stage? You know what, forget it. I don’t care.
So… baseball…
Based on the clear rebuilding process the Cubs are finally engaged in, what do you think about still-a-free-agent Prince Fielder? Superfriends should have no interest, right? I mean what’s the benefit of signing him to a team that will not contend for years? Aren’t the Cubs better off finding a star 1B via free agency or trade once they’re closer to contention?
Weapon XQuote Reply
[quote name=dylanj] We need to get back to Pizza Hut MILFS[/quote]
Now I’m both hungry and horny. (don’t criticize my taste in pizza, the hut is a guilty pleasure every 3-6 months)
Weapon XQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I don’t know what Damon said other than what I can glean from Obama’s response. I don’t want to know, but I’m talking more about Hollywood in general. I don’t understand the fascination, but I also don’t understand the fascination people have with athletes.[/quote]
The music industry is just as bad. It’s sad that people listen to what these people say and then take a stance because what was said and they take it as gospel. When all they need to do is research and make their own decisions.
pinetarQuote Reply
[quote name=Weapon X]
Based on the clear rebuilding process the Cubs are finally engaged in, what do you think about still-a-free-agent Prince Fielder? Superfriends should have no interest, right? I mean what’s the benefit of signing him to a team that will not contend for years? Aren’t the Cubs better off finding a star 1B via free agency or trade once they’re closer to contention?[/quote]
I figure they’d probably just wait for White Prince Fielder to show he can do the job instead.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Is this a mythical figure created for Cubdom or is there an actual player dubbed White Prince Fielder by OV (I haven’t lurked in the comments for a while so for all I know…)?
Weapon XQuote Reply
[quote name=Weapon X]Is this a mythical figure created for Cubdom or is there an actual player dubbed White Prince Fielder by OV (I haven’t lurked in the comments for a while so for all I know…)?[/quote]Sorry about that. Dan Vogelbach.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Holy fuck, there really is a White Prince Fielder. That’s why they bought the McDonald’s.
Weapon XQuote Reply
Over at redreporter they are kinda sad. Makes bubbs happy
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
Couldn’t find a definitive post on whether they signed him or not but I’m guessing they did. Either way, I don’t see why the Cubs even made an offer to Fielder (the real one). What possible good could it do to commit serious money long-term when you’re trying to rebuild from the bottom up?
I guess you never know and plenty of seemingly shitty teams make the playoffs and even make it to the WS but it just seems like a needless waste of resources to count on that luck and sign a star now. Though I guess Prince is younger than Pujols so there’s that.
Weapon XQuote Reply
[quote name=Weapon X]Couldn’t find a definitive post on whether they signed him or not but I’m guessing they did. Either way, I don’t see why the Cubs even made an offer to Fielder (the real one). What possible good could it do to commit serious money long-term when you’re trying to rebuild from the bottom up?
I guess you never know and plenty of seemingly shitty teams make the playoffs and even make it to the WS but it just seems like a needless waste of resources to count on that luck and sign a star now. Though I guess Prince is younger than Pujols so there’s that.[/quote]
?
I don’t think anyone’s signed Prince Fielder yet…? I think they probably talked with Boras about the parameters of a potential offer but didn’t actually make any serious talks.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Sorry, I meant whether the Cubs signed Vogelbach.
Weapon XQuote Reply
I think they did. He’s played in the AZL at least.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=vogelb000dan
Rice CubeQuote Reply
I found mentions of the Cubs making a good offer but then nothing saying that it was signed. Thanks for the link, small sample, I know, but pretty good numbers… hope we finally have a corner infielder pan out and make it as an everyday big leaguer. Here.
I’m sad to see Sean Marshall go but damn that seems like a good trade. Now that both Lou and Marshall are gone we need to somehow memorialize that one-third of an inning that Marshall played in left field so it’s not forgotten. Best part of the 2009 season.
Weapon XQuote Reply
http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=5568757&c_id=mlb
If someone wants to download that and do the immortalizing before MLB.com takes it down, that’d be sweet.
/no software
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Wow
http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/23/yorvit-torrealba-hits-umpire-during-venezuelan-winter-league-game/
RodrigoQuote Reply
[quote name=Weapon X]
Based on the clear rebuilding process the Cubs are finally engaged in, what do you think about still-a-free-agent Prince Fielder? Superfriends should have no interest, right? I mean what’s the benefit of signing him to a team that will not contend for years? Aren’t the Cubs better off finding a star 1B via free agency or trade once they’re closer to contention?[/quote]I’d be excited if they signed Fielder, but if they sign him to the kind of contract Boras is looking for, it could be a disaster long-term (though it would make the Cubs more fun to watch short-term).
ACTQuote Reply
How I Learned to Mind My Own Business:
I was walking past the mental hospital the other day, and
all of the patients were shouting, “13…13…13.”
The fence was too high to see over, but I saw a little gap
in the planks, so I looked through to see what was going on.
Some idiot poked me in the eye with a stick , then they all
started shouting “14…14…14.”
pinetarQuote Reply
I wonder if the strategy is to trade for a player on or near the major league roster and then request lower level players with high ceilings. Serves the purpose of potentially contending soon with a continued influx of young guys. Or maybe that should have been the obvious strategy.
I could see the cubs wanting deck McGuire/drabek plus marianick and a kind of reclamation project like Snider. That might also be a bit much.
JManQuote Reply
[quote name=JMan]I wonder if the strategy is to trade for a player on or near the major league roster and then request lower level players with high ceilings. Serves the purpose of potentially contending soon with a continued influx of young guys. Or maybe that should have been the obvious strategy.
I could see the cubs wanting deck McGuire/drabek plus marianick and a kind of reclamation project like Snider. That might also be a bit much.[/quote]
Seems like a fair asking price considering the return for Gio Gonzalez
RodrigoQuote Reply
What I really care about is what other random baseball blog commenters have to say about what hollywood celebrities have to say about what politicians have to say about what economists have to say about how to ensure I have enough free time to care about baseball bloggers.
shawndgoldmanQuote Reply
[quote name=shawndgoldman]What I really care about is what other random baseball blog commenters have to say about what hollywood celebrities have to say about what politicians have to say about what economists have to say about how to ensure I have enough free time to care about baseball bloggers.[/quote]
crackpot leftist scientist
GWQuote Reply
I go one day without being online here and all hell breaks loose. The celebrity politics talk will stop NOW or I will go on the most uninformed rant you’ve ever seen.
Aisle424Quote Reply
Holy shit I have to go and get some fucking wrapping paper. Dumbass.
Suburban kid 2 or 288Quote Reply
[quote name=Aisle424] The celebrity politics talk will stop NOW [quote]
what the hell is happening here? next thing you know somebody’s going to be quoting jerry lewis on something, and that will not be any damn good.
wpbcQuote Reply
[quote name=Suburban kid 2 or 288]Holy shit I have to go and get some fucking wrapping paper. Dumbass.[/quote](dying laughing) have you done any Christmas shopping or is that a last minute thing too?
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Weapon X]Based on the clear rebuilding process the Cubs are finally engaged in, what do you think about still-a-free-agent Prince Fielder? Superfriends should have no interest, right? I mean what’s the benefit of signing him to a team that will not contend for years? Aren’t the Cubs better off finding a star 1B via free agency or trade once they’re closer to contention?[/quote]It still makes sense to sign Fielder in my opinion as long as it’s a reasonable contract like ACT pointed out. Signing Fielder would only hurry along the rebuilding process. The most I’d go is about 6 years and $130 million. If the Cubs could sign him and he stays healthy the Cubs could easily be in contention in 3 or 4 years.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21](dying laughing) have you done any Christmas shopping or is that a last minute thing too?[/quote]I’ve been congratulating myself all week for being done well in advance for the first time ever. Then I realized this morning they don’t wrap themselves. (dying laughing)
Suburban kid 2 or 288Quote Reply
[quote name=Suburban kid 2 or 288]I’ve been congratulating myself all week for being done well in advance for the first time ever. Then I realized this morning they don’t wrap themselves. (dying laughing)[/quote]Next year Obstructed View will post a to do list for Christmas shoppers to help you out. (dying laughing)
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]Next year Obstructed View will post a to do list for Christmas shoppers to help you out. (dying laughing)[/quote]Don’t forget to include the Cubs holiday packs! (dying laughing)
I’d be okay with signing Prince Fielder but I don’t know how likely Scott Boras is to come down from his cloud of delusion. There’s also the random fear that Fielder will somehow end up back in Milwaukee although I don’t see how the Brewers can scrounge up the money.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]Don’t forget to include the Cubs holiday packs! (dying laughing)
I’d be okay with signing Prince Fielder but I don’t know how likely Scott Boras is to come down from his cloud of delusion. There’s also the random fear that Fielder will somehow end up back in Milwaukee although I don’t see how the Brewers can scrounge up the money.[/quote]I was going to say that Boras is full of shit because guys who have signed monster contracts have signed by now, but I went to A-Rod’s page and he didn’t sign his deal with Texas until late January.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I was going to say that Boras is full of shit because guys who have signed monster contracts have signed by now, but I went to A-Rod’s page and he didn’t sign his deal with Texas until late January.[/quote]I tried to handicap the sweepstakes about a week ago. I figure the Cardinals are out of it now as they got Beltran and Berkman, and when Craig comes back they’ll have a logjam at 1B/OF so they don’t need Fielder.
I still hear the Mariners and Orioles are in and while that really doesn’t make sense to me, if they offer the money, Fielder and Boras will probably take it.
The ones that sort of make the most sense to me are the Blue Jays, Rangers and Cubs, none of whom are desperate. I assume the Jays still have Adam Lind who they can stick at 1B. If not they can always throw Bautista there every now and then. The Rangers probably haven’t lost a step even with the Angels getting Pujols. The Cubs are allegedly in rebuild mode.
I can see a situation where the Cubs keep an eye on the market and if Fielder is stuck with Seattle and Baltimore at a low-end deal, then Chicago can throw a bigger offer in the hat and still get Fielder on their terms. That’d be kind of sweet.
I’m not opposed to Fielder just getting out of the NL though, and while it will suck, I’m okay with the prospect of a full-scale rebuild.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
^ I’m almost certain the Brewers don’t have the funds to sign Fielder especially when they have to deal with K-Rod’s arbitration and Ramirez’s backloaded contract.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Suburban kid 2 or 288]Holy shit I have to go and get some fucking wrapping paper. Dumbass.[/quote]
I hope you buy some regular wrapping paper for the gifts for kids.
BerseliusQuote Reply
[quote name=GW]crackpot leftist scientist[/quote]
I see you’re familiar with my work.
shawndgoldmanQuote Reply
I like the Cubs’ chances of getting Fielder. I think they need *something* to appease the masses while they rebuild. If they’re going to do that, it means getting a guy that will be good enough long enough for it to matter once the rebuild is reaping net positives. Fielder fits the mold. Combine that with the salary freedom the Cubs have I can see them making a strong push.
shawndgoldmanQuote Reply
Looking at the Cubs’ current salary commitments, the anticipated budget, the low chances they’ll be able to compete this year no matter who they sign, and the need to stay flexible during the years they might contend…… I see strong incentives for the Cubs to sweeten the pot by front-loading the deal, when the salary will have more value to Fielder but less value to the Cubs.
shawndgoldmanQuote Reply
If the Cubs hit Boras’s target yearly salary of $25M/year, but limit the deal to 6 years they could offer something like this:
Year 1: $20M + $15M bonus
Year 2: $20M + $10M bonus
Year 3: $20M + $5M bonus
Year 4: $20M
Year 5: $20M
Year 6: $20M
That’s a bad deal in the first couple years, but who cares? You’re getting good value on the back end, particularly if Theo’s habit of protecting guys’ health with depth prolongs Fielder’s peak years.
Also keep in mind this is assuming the Cubs will have to meet Boras’s yearly salary demands, which is something I’m not sure they’ll have to do given the current suite of suitors.
shawndgoldmanQuote Reply
My peasant mind thinks that if you’re getting paid $20MM already that should be a bonus in itself (dying laughing)
Six years and $150MM seems a bit hefty to me but I see what you did there. I thought teams generally tried to avoid the front-loading though, especially when it is such a huge contract.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]My peasant mind thinks that if you’re getting paid $20MM already that should be a bonus in itself (dying laughing)
Six years and $150MM seems a bit hefty to me but I see what you did there. I thought teams generally tried to avoid the front-loading though, especially when it is such a huge contract.[/quote]
Generally that’s the case. But usually it’s because you want to squeeze something into your budget when you’re trying to WIN NOW. But the Cubs aren’t trying to do that, so they might as well take the hit when they can afford it.
To put it another way, would you take a 1-2 win hit now if it meant gaining a win or two a few years down the road? Of course you would. So why not trade $10-$15M in salary now for savings in a few years? It’s the same question and it should be the same answer.
Also, I agree $150M/6 is a lot. I mostly did that as an exercise to show that even if the Cubs meet Boras’s demands they could make a contract palatable. You could also do the same thing with a smaller contract and achieve an even better result.
shawndgoldmanQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]My peasant mind thinks that if you’re getting paid $20MM already that should be a bonus in itself (dying laughing)[/quote]
Yes, but you’re not a man of Fielder’s size trying to support yourself on nothing but gourmet-prepared meals with nothing but the finest Whole Foods ingredients. (dying laughing)
shawndgoldmanQuote Reply
[quote name=shawndgoldman]Yes, but you’re not a man of Fielder’s size trying to support yourself on nothing but gourmet-prepared meals with nothing but the finest Whole Foods ingredients. (dying laughing)[/quote]The Ricketts did just buy up that lot with the McDonald’s…that might allay some of Fielder’s food costs, although it won’t be quite as healthy.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
In your hypothetical model, do you think the Cubs could have it both ways? My idea is that you could slightly backload the contract on the base salary but still give him a signing bonus as outlined above, but throw in an opt-out during year four such that if the Cubs choose to go another direction, they can save the remaining $50MM, but if Fielder holds up well, they can extend him to the original 10-year desired contract (though I don’t think that’s going to happen). The opt-out allowing him to cash in on a potentially larger pay day has to be enticing.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
I had a dream last night where Oakland signed Prince Fielder.
GBTSQuote Reply
I have boring dreams, btw.
GBTSQuote Reply
In that regard it does make sense. I was viewing it as committing money (aka risking money) to a need that won’t exist for 3-4 years. By the time the team is in position to contend we could regret the Cubs decision because Fielder got too fat to be able to swing the bat or got injured or lost ability or whatever. Plus, in 3-4 years who knows who/what is available through free agency and the draft.
I’ve just been a little frustrated that some moves Theo & co. have made or are rumored to be making seem to be largely about placating fans and not sucking too much. We’ve endured a lot of suck over the years, I think we’re ready for one heavily concentrated dose.
But taking into consideration that the teams who are still in don’t seem to be too desperate- plus Shawn pointing out that the Cubs could front-load the contract and have a really good deal for when it actually matters- has pretty much convinced me that it could be a good thing. And I suppose it wouldn’t hurt to keep the public placated enough to not make too much noise and keep buying a reasonable amount of tickets.
Weapon XQuote Reply
Fixed. Fucking HTML fail.
Aaaaand I just realized we can edit comments. This is what happens when you only drop in every 3-4 months.
Weapon XQuote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]I have boring dreams, btw.[/quote]
You have no idea. My dream was just me being interviewed by a blogger about what I thought of Matt Damon’s acting career. And then the President gave a press conference asking why anyone gave a shit what I thought about Matt Damon’s acting and why I was even given that platform.
I cried. And then Mark Wahlberg walked into my apartment wearing some sort of hospital clothing and shot me in the head.
Weapon XQuote Reply
… I guess my dreams aren’t that boring after all…
Carry on.
Weapon XQuote Reply
Speaking of Oakland…
http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/24/report-the-athletics-could-be-granted-permission-to-move-to-san-jose-by-february/
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]I had a dream last night where Oakland signed Prince Fielder.[/quote]Were there any cheeseburgers in the dream?
mb21Quote Reply
New festive crap.
http://obstructedview.net/chicago-cubs/articles/the-twelve-days-of-cubsmas.html
AndCountingQuote Reply