Deadlines, spring training and more
As most of you know, tomorrow is the deadline for major-league teams to offer salary arbitration to their own free agents. As I've been saying since the end of the season, I don't expect the Cubs to offer arbitration to Rich Harden, Kevin Gregg or Reed Johnson. That doesn't mean the Cubs can't re-sign any of them (they're not interested in having Gregg back), but they just won't get draft-pick compensation if these free agents sign with another club.
We've been back and forth on the Harden situation all off-season. As I've said, the numbers say you offer Harden arbitration, but we're not operating in a vacuum. The Cubs have raved about how pitching coach Larry Rothschild and trainer Mark O'Neal got Harden ready to start 26 times. In other words, Harden's troublesome right shoulder was a project. None of us has seen the MRIs, X-rays and doctors reports, but if there weren't issues that troubled the Cubs, offering arbitration would be a no-brainer. But it appears the Cubs feel there is enough concern about Harden's shoulder that they don't want to risk paying him $8 million to $10 million and risk having the darn thing blow out on them. My guess is that Harden will get no more than a one-year, and possibly a two-year, offer from some club out there. If there is no market, it's even possible he could come back to the Cubs on a one-year incentive-laden deal.
I expect the Cubs to tender contracts to the arbitration-eligible players by the Dec. 12 deadline to do so. That includes "Super-2" second baseman Mike Fontenot. Progress appears slow on the Cubs' efforts to trade Milton Bradley. They had hoped to have that done by the time the winter meetings start next Sunday-Monday in Indy. I don't think that's going to happen. I'll head to Indy Sunday and will have multiple blogs every day from there through Thursday, the day of the always-exciting Rule 5 draft. (Actually, a lot of people get worked up about the Rule 5 draft. I still remember all the hand-wringing over the Cubs losing Andy Sisco to the Royals a few years back.)
The Cubs brass will be in Naples, Fla., tomorrow to talk about that city's proposal to build a 15,000 seat stadium and other facilities in an effort to lure the Cubs out of Arizona for spring training:
http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2009/nov/23/chicago-cubs-spring-training-...
Mesa, Arizona, is pulling out all the stops to keep the Cubs. Personally, I'd like to see the Cubs stay in Mesa. The travel in Arizona is so much easier. The Cubs are kings of the Cactus League as far as attendance goes. The Red Sox, Yankees and Cardinals are in Florida. Who knows what newly minted Cubs president Crane Kenney is whispering into the ear of owner Tom Ricketts. Remember, Crane is an old Boston preppie.
When I got back from vacation the other day, awaiting me in the office was "The Hardball Times Baseball Annual." There's a lot of fun statistical and historical stuff in this book, including a look back on the beginnings of free agency in 1975-76. The book lists the top players in the NL Central, as far as WAR (wins above replacement) goes:
Albert Pujols, Cardinals (8.4 WAR)
Prince Fielder, Brewers (6.7)
Adam Wainwright, Cardinals (5.7)
Chris Carpenter, Cardinals (5.6)
Derrek Lee, Cubs (5.3)
Ted Lilly checks in 12th in the division at 3.7, followed immediately by Ryan Dempster and Carlos Zambrano at 3.6.
The authors provide these tidbits on the Cubs page:
--Koyie Hill hit zero infield popups (FWIW)
--Lilly's flyball percentage of 51 was the highest of big-league pitchers with at least 162 innings pitched.
--Zambrano, as a batter, had a higher isolated power (slugging percentage minus batting average) than any other hitter on the team except D-Lee. Z's ISO was .246.
Along with the Bill James Handbook, I heartily recommend this tome by the Hardball Times. It'll help the off-season go by a little more quickly, ecxpecially with the hot stove pretty cold right now.
Could the Cubs seriously be considering Florida for spring training? Isn't this more likely a ploy to get a better deal for a new complex from Mesa?
I can't see it, but you never know what might happen. I still believe Arizona will pull out every stop to keep the Cubs. The Cactus League needs them. Yes, there is an element of playing the two sides off against each other. I would hope that Crane Kenney doesn't feel a need to have the Cubs train in the same state as the Yankees and Red Sox. We'll see what the Ricketts family thinks.
Mesa to pay for Bradley's walking papers and some upgrades to Wrigley before they agree to remain there:)
Bruce - You are right, you have written extensively about offering arbitration to Harden. But we have not debated offering Kevin Gregg.
Should the Cubs offer him arbitration? If he rejects, Cubs get Type A compensation.
If he accepts, I think he would receive a one year salary between $4 and $5.5 million. I use $5.5 million as the ceiling with Jenks and Putz as comparables.
At a salary in the range of $4 -5.5 million, I think Gregg is tradeable. He would be a decent closer or right hand set up man for a team with a big ball park.
What are your thoughts? Probably academic by now as Cubs have made the decision.
The Cubs had no intention of bringing him back so the idea of offering him arbitration was never considered. Yes, I suppose he would be tradeable, but when? The Cubs are a team counting every dollar right now, and they can't afford to have his salary on the books.
That's a lot of money for a medicore relief pitcher. I know I wouldn't be looking to trade ANYTHING for a $5 million Kevin Gregg. That's another contract where they'd have to eat money.
One of Hendry's strengths has been trading undesirable mid level salary players. Examples F. Bynum for Kevin Hart, Michael Barrett for this year's minor league POY. So I would rather see him try to trade Gregg than get nothing.
But you are right. With money being tight, the Cubs could not take the risk that they might not have him traded by opening day.
Bruce…
I know that you fully appreciate the difficulty of the GM job, and especially that of the Cubs’ GM, Jim Hendry. But don’t you think much of what Jim has to consider is being overlooked or skimmed over?
Nearly everyone is focused on moving Bradley, and of course that needs to be done. It almost has to be done before anything else of significance can be done, not only for budgetary reasons, but to know what the Cubs will get back and what positions that will, as a consequence, leave open to fill.
Many others are focused on Harden or possible replacements and/or clamoring to acquire Granderson, or replacing Theriot, Fontenot or both. I’d like to pause here, long enough to say that the Harden and Granderson factors are certainly worthy of attention, but replacing either Theriot or Fontenot is NOT. The gripe about Theriot is nearly always his range, or lack thereof, at shortstop. While his range isn’t what the Cubs, or any team, would like from a SS, neither is the range of Derek Jeter, who will be elected to the HOF on his first ballot. Both of these guys are, to put it succinctly, winners. They play the game as it was intended to be played, and as it needs to be played, to produce a team that wins consistently. Ditto, Fontenot! That’s why Lou loves them so much, as do I. Even so, both are likely to be replaced in the near future.
Getting back to Hendry’s off season considerations….. One of the things that isn’t being given due consideration is the fact that this team is beginning to show “age” at key positions and health factors don’t just involve Harden. Another is the growing team salary totals and the fact that far too much of the salary is concentrated among too few players to project a consistently winning team, without stopping for a few years to rebuild the team at some point. Another key consideration is whether or not to trade top prospects for pieces, like Granderson, that just might put the team over the top in getting the Cubs to the World Series. Beyond that is NOT a factor of the GM’s office.
It’s OK to trade prospects for pieces, sometimes, and sometimes it isn’t. It depends on the prospects and the “pieces” of course, but it goes beyond that at times, too. This is one of those “times”! It is generally accepted that, in no particular order, the Cubs top prospects are Vitters, Castro, Carpenter, Cashner, Castillo and Colvin, among others. It is similarly accepted that players like Jake Fox, Sam Fuld, Justin Berg, Micah Hoffpauir, Jeff Samardzija and possibly a couple more are beyond the prospect stage and would be in the class of “emerging Major Leaguers”. Jim Hendry has to decide which should be held and which could be traded in which package for which piece or pieces.
With all of the above in mind, I feel safe in saying that while Granderson would be an important piece for the Cubs off-season success, that Jim can NOT consider including Vitters in that, or any, deal this winter. Even though Vitters probably will change positions in a few years, right now he is the “heir-apparent” at 3b for the Cubs. And with the uncertainty surrounding Ramirez’ health, and the fact that he can “opt-out” of his contract after the upcoming season, until those factors are known, Vitters must remain a Cub. Right now, in addition to Vitters, I would classify Castro, Castillo & Carpenter as untouchable, but that leaves a huge list of available prospects and emerging talent for the Cubs to use in the “right” deals.
Across the diamond, in 2010, Derek Lee will finish the last year of his contract at age 35. It has to be in Jim’s mind that this could be the last year for Derek with the Cubs. At 35 he would certainly be in the questionable, if not unworthy, class when it comes to being offered a long-term contract, and certainly so, when it comes to “no-trade” protections of any kind. If Jim were to consider re-signing Derek, what would he have to pay, and for how long, and if not with Derek, when and with whom, will youth be injected at the corners to keep the over all improvement of the team on a consistent climb? And then, looking down the road even a year or two, it would appear that the Cubs will be getting way too offensively Right Handed, and that Lee holds down a spot that needs to be filled by a LH bat, if the Cubs are to have much of a chance of having any balance at all in the lineup. Will Hoffpauir be the short-term replacement? Possibly, or even probably, as it appears now, but that certainly is no certainty! Thankfully, 1b is one of the easier positions to fill each year with temporary players, while the next Derek is discovered or obtained.
To complete this team, even if Granderson is obtained to play CF against RH pitching and Fukudome is moved back to RF, this team STILL needs a true leadoff hitter. A leadoff hitter is needed, if for no other reason, to keep Lou from entertaining the thought of taking Granderson or Soriano out of the middle of the order to make a L/R leadoff platoon! I think Jim knows this all too well, and for that reason I believe the 3-way deal that sends Bradley to the Rays for Burrell, and nets Castillo from the Mets will get done….perhaps with the Cubs paying more than they would like, but getting it done, nonetheless!
Hendry has a LOT to think about, and he deserves a LOT more credit from the fans than he is getting! Don’t you agree, Bruce?
there is not much in there I agree with at all.
You basically admit that Vitters will probably move off 3B, yet you say he has to stay in case Ramirez leaves?
Fontenot is a "winner"? Is that more important than being "good"?
You're worried about being too "right handed" 2 or 3 years down the road? I mean, really?
I see that "thinking ahead is too much for you.
Maybe you should join BearsCubs... and learn to read and think together
Yeah, worrying about right/left balance in 2011 and 2012 isn't something that needs to be worried about.
Spoken like a person with weeks of experience in the game! If I were you I contact the Cubs and see if they couldn't use you in some capacity. I understand that being left or right handed doesn't matter to the grounds crew or the ticket takers!
Why are you defending Hendry? He gave a 32 year old/defensively challenged/low OBP player like Soriano an 8 year deal to play in the NL; he gave a light slugging player like Fukudome $48M to play a power position in MLB; he gave a 3 year deal to a known malcontent, who has never stuck on a team longer than 2 seasons and then was scratching his head when the Angels gave Bobby Abreu a 1 year deal. Those 3 moves have killed the Cubs. And I'm just talking outfield here.
Are you really comparing Ryan Theriot to Derek Jeter now? Ludicrous beyond discussion. If for nothing else, check out their respective OBPs, especially in the second half of a season.
Let's not even get into his propensity to hand out no-trade clauses.
Hendry has done very little right in the 7+ years he has had this job. For every Hee Seop Choi for Derrek Lee trade he has made, he has made 3 or 4 dumb moves (e.g. not re-signing Moises, but signing Burnitz, the Juan Pierre trade, Kevin Gregg, Aaron Miles, the list is endless...). He has been lucky to mask his follies behind a large payroll that has produced 3 division titles, in a division where his club tends to spend 30-40% more than the rest.
For his so-called great expertise in scouting the Cubs have not produced an all star caliber position player born out of their minor league system during his long tenure (maybe Soto will be the first, but I doubt it). In fact, Hendry's best move may be the hiring of Tim Wilken, which says as much for Tim's abilities as it says for Hendry's own ineptitude.
Hendry has survived because winning on the field was not paramount to Tribune. It sounds like winning on the field is the only thing that matters to Tom Ricketts. And for that, he will need to find a savvy GM.
I will always root for the Cubs! Any time of day! Any situation! But I am also rooting that 2010 will be Hendry's last season in Chicago.
Hoops
Let's take your "points" (if they can at all be considered so) one at a time.
1) You act as if Hendry just pulled Soriano "out of a hat" so to speak, but it wasn't Hendry alone that pursued Soriano with big money offers. Besides, it was the TRIBSTERS that made the decision to "throw money" at the roster to try and compel the Cubs into a Series while they still owned the Cubs and could take both the credit and the increase in value that such a result would have produced. It was the TRIB that wanted to "make a statement" with those expenditures NOT Hendry. Now, did he go too far with the final offer? Probably, but he wanted to "end debate" and close the deal, as he had a LOT more to do that winter and couldn't afford to let his other targets go "off the table" while the TRIB "purse strings" were OPEN! Let's see...by not dragging it out, he signed Ted Lilly....that worked out pretty well. Why don't you gripe about that? Even Marquis, who was vastly under-appreciated after he arrived, worked out well. I suppose you want to criticise Hendry for that, too! Do I need to go on?
As for no-trade clauses...I don't like them...never have; but that doesn't make them NOT a part of the game today. The main problem is that once you give ONE, there are twice as many more players standing in line with their hands out! Having said that, unless my memory fails me, the only one that has really hurt the Cubs is Soriano's. Hendry has usually found a way to work around them, and in some cases is better off that he couldn't make some deals that were rumored at the time. But that's the nature of the game and the office.
FUKUDOME....It wasn't like the Cubs had no competition for this guy. The concensus among MAJOR LEAGUE GM's and scouts was that Fukudome would play in the Majors at a level somewhere between Ichiro and Matsui. Besides Hendry wanted a good defensive RF, not just a slugger, and to his CREDIT!!! I hardly fault Hendry for following the advice of his own EXCELLENT scouting department and the said MAJOR LEAGUE consensus as well, over the strictly HINDSIGHTED "arm-chair GMs" like you.
Bradley, who no one suggests has come close to reasonable expectations, let alone his other problems, was as much Piniella's hiring as Hendry's if not more so. It was Piniella, looking for an excuse for getting swept out of the playoffs, that INSISTED on a LH middle of the order bat, knowing full well that the only place the Cubs had to play such an acquisition was CF or RF. Since LH or SH centerfielders with power don't exactly "grow on trees", for all practical purposes, Hendry was limited to looking for a LH or SH outfielder that could actually play the toughest RF in the National League and perhaps all of MLB, and there were exactly (3) THREE to choose from...Bradley, Abreu & Dunn. Are you trying to suggest that either Dunn or Abreu could play RF at Wrigley????? Not even on a CLOUDY, Pefectly CALM day, let alone normal conditions! Now, Piniella says he doesn't care whether the guy bats R or L as long as he gets a middle of the order RBI guy, Well he is a YEAR late in giving Jim that leeway, and wrong to boot! The Cubs still need that middle of the order RBI guy, but he must be LH or SH to be as effective as the Cubs need for him to be......Granderson!!!!!
As for Theriot, I made no real comparison. NO ONE can, as Jeter's career is waning and Theriot's has hardly begun. I did make the point that replacing players based strictly upon range factors isn't a good idea. There is MUCH more to the game than that. I would love for Theriot to bat second for the Cubs for the next 10 years. But because of the hard charging Starlin Castro, he will probably be moved to 2nd in the next year or so, and because of the Cubs lack of LH hitting, he may lose out to a LH or S hitting second baseman as well. But he will be a winner where ever he plays, and there are few better #2 hitters in the game today. I would love to manage a team full of players that play the game like Ryan Theriot.
2) Hendry's mistakes.. Let me start out by asking you to name one, even just ONE, Major League GM that hasn't made a bad deal, or two, or three or four, or more. It goes with the game and the office! The only people who have lists of GM's mistakes that are "endless" are those who don't understand the game and who delight in cutting people down to make themselves look good!
On the other hand, Jim Hendry has rebuilt this club.... Not just once...but about one and a half times during his tenure. Once to suit MacPhail and then some of it over again to suit himself and finally we are seeing the results of that over the entire operation. The Cubs almost got there when they hired Dallas Greene, but meddling by Trib Execs cut that short. Then the Peter Principle's baseball prince of examples, Jim Frey, tore up the organization to the point that it has taken all of this time to recover, but still guys like you would have the Cubs firing and hiring GMs every other year because of one so called bad deal or another, constantly rebuilding Scouting and Player Development and NEVER getting there. That has been the story of the Cubs since 1945. Thank God for Jim Hendry, and Thank God for the Ricketts family, who will listen to Jim over people like you!
Go ahead and build Hendry a statue in your front yard......
Bradley: Like most other free agents, Hendry out bid himself when a sagging economy and a surplus of options were out there. He overpaid for a clubhouse cancer, tried to spin it, and now is constrained by Bradley's deal. Meanwhile the 2 other guys you listed, came on the cheap, and absolutely out did Bradley. Doesn't Dunn have about 100 career homers vs the Cubs, and familar with Wrigley? Doesn't he always have an OBP over .400? Doesn't Abreu offer you a 3 tool pool? It's a complete slap in the face that the Cubs rushed to sign Bradley, failed to trade for Peavy, and were left to watch other teams make fiscal RESPONSIBLE decisions.
Granderson: Have you checked to see that Curtis is a leadoff hitter? Or that he hits BELOW .200 vs lefties? So he's basically a platoon player.
Fukudome: Just because others pursued him, doesn't make it right. You now have a slap hitting, .260 avg, no power, corner outfielder making almost 14 million. When did Derrek May return?
If you don't think the overspending hasn't killed this team, look no further then this offseason. All those pathetic deals, are there to remind you every day. I hope Bradley doesn't get traded, which SHOULD lead to Hendry being fired on the first day of spring training.
He also overvalued Soto and Fontenot and figured he could plug those 2 in holes, only to watch both implode before his eyes. Thus, he HAD to add Jeff Baker because Fontenot sucked, and couldn't handle a daily job. Soto? Which one do you have? The guy who thrived in a deep llineup? Or the guy who couldn't hit his weight in an average lineup?
I'll give you that others were involved with Soriano. I'll also give you that other Gms make crap moves, but I don't see any other MAJOR market team cash strapped by long term, over paid deals, like the Cubs. When a guy like Roy Halladay is available, and you can't pursue him because you are constrained, that's all on the GM.
So go ahead and defend Jim Hendry, but dont' come crying in April when this team sucks, and you have to take your "it's gonna happen" sign and go home.......
Bradley.... Your comments are almost so ridiculous as to be unworthy of comment!
Don't get me wrong. I don't like him. Didn't want him then, much less now, BUT Piniella was making a big deal about getting a LH middle of the order guy to play RF after being swept out of the playoffs.
As for your comments....
In the first place there was NO "surplus of options" for a LH OR SH RF w/power. There were exactly 3 as I mentioned above and ONLY Bradley of the 3 had any chance at all of being able to play RF at Wrigley Field. And if you want to argue with that point, then you don't know enough about the game or Wrigley to be posting on this blog!
In the second place it's so marvelous that you in 20/20 HINDsight can see what the affect of the economy WAS going to be on Baseball in general and the Cubs in specific, back then, while Hendry had to deal with the economy AS IT WAS UNFOLDING, when NO ONE, not even the President of the United States and his staff knew what to expect! I don't know how you have the time to read and participate in this blog, as there must be a line of people a mile long at your door looking for your advice, since you are so all knowing!!!! I would have said Omniscient, but I have to take into account that some of you can't read, and some can't think ahead, and apparently some can't think at all!
In the 3rd place, other teams didn't have ownership ignoring what issues were known and pushing for a Series appearance LAST year, because they knew it was their last chance as owners to drive up the price of the team! (I'm surprised that such an Omniscient one as yourself couldn't see or remember that) And in ownership's mind, Lou needed a LH middle of the order bat that could play RF, so Hendry had to deliver one. On top of that Bradley was coming off of a career year of sorts, that if he had even approached, we wouldn't be having this exchange! Of course in your mind that too must have been Hendry's fault, not Bradley's.
Granderson...I know him, apparently a LOT better than you do. Just because he has been used as a leadoff guy about 85% of the time doesn't mean that's where the Cubs have to use him. He is no better at stealing bases, for instance, than Theriot as Ryan has stolen about 20 more than Granderson over the past 4 years, and his career OBP trails Theriot's by about a dozen or so points as well. On the other hand, when he has been given the opportunity, Granderson has hit VERY well in the 5th slot in the order where his LH power would look VERY good hitting between Ramirez and Soriano, and like Soriano largely wasted batting leadoff. He also plays good outfield D allowing Fukudome to return to RF where he plays best.
And if you don't see other Major Market teams constrained by Salaries, then you aren't looking. The Yankees, The Mets, The Red Sox, The Angels, The Dodgers....I think those all qualify as Major Market teams and everyone of them is constrained from doing what they would like to do to some degree, and have said so publicly at least once so far this off season!
I don't agree with every move that Jim makes, but when I am honest with myself and analyze the moves in more depth, he has usually been right, and when I look around at all of the GMs that have come and gone (mostly gone) during Jim's tenure with the Cubs, I'm very glad he has the job instead of the others that it might have been.
Did you just say that Curtis Granderson can hit 5th? Really? Did I misread that? Sweet god.
I post on here enough, and I have taken a step backwards because of sheep like you. You continually stand behind a team, stand behind a gm, that has given you nothing but taken your money and fed you with a buffet of BS. You probably pass around petitions not to rename Wrigley, or tear it down because it's a landmark. Where a new state of the art stadium would eliminate the morons from showing up, and give the Cubs the necessary revenue to compete year after year.
Bradley had played over 120 games a few times. He had a career year being a DH!!!!! He's also an AWFUL fielder, or didn't you notice that? Come on, man. Abreu was a far better option, and came on the cheap, because THE REST OF BASEBALL realized that the market was coming down. So no, it's not me. I also don't have a parade of people stopping by my house asking for advice. Apparently, you must, because you rip everyone on here that doesn't agree with your kool aid thinking process.
Dunn would have been a train wreck. He would have been no better then Bradley FIELDING, but his power stats, and OBP would have been a huge addition. He also had played in Wrigley enough with the Reds to know the field a helluva lot better then Bradley. Again, he signed after Bradley.
The problem with Hendry, which Bruce has noted, is that he gets fixated on one guy or position, and hurries to fill that void. He also has overpaid for a lot of crap players over the years, and given out NTCs like the were candy. Not to mention over valued players in house who turn out to be crap.
Anyone that thinks a young player under 30 coming into his power and hitting 25 to 30 HRs, hitting above 340 in the 5th slot, with an OBP over 400 I would say is a middle of the order candidate, and I think anyone that knows a thing about the game would agree....of course that lets you out!
And main reason it leaves you out, is because you post and post but never listen and learn!
It doesn't matter a lick how many games Bradley had played per year or even that he played most of them as a DH. Dunn would have screwed himself into the ground trying to catch windblown fly balls in RF at Wrigley and and Abreu wouldn't get within 10 feet of the bricks without a mattress and a chair! With the choices available and the mandate to make a deal, Hendry had to take Bradley while he was available and hope for the best. And it wasn't just hope. Hendry checked with everyone that would talk about Bradley and directly with him. He just couldn't handle the big city press after getting off to a slow start.
I have not seen Bruce criticize Hendry in the manner you suggest, but even if he has, it doesn't mean too much, because when you are seeking a commodity in short supply, like LH Pitching, a LH hitting catcher or middle infielder or a LH hitting RF w/power, you are usually in a situation where you are dealing at a disadvantage and can't wait too long and lose out. It's different if you just need an outfielder that can hit. But the Cubs can not accept that, because the only place on field that an "outfielder that can just hit" can play is already filled.
I have a suggestion...since you are so critical of the Cubs, Hendry, etc... go watch the Sox! In so doing you will elevate the average Baseball IQ of both team's fans!~
Usually been right?
BroLight = Jim Hendry
Hey Bruce,
Isn't there some rule that prevents Jim Hendry from participating on your blog?
Hoops
What is even more disconcering is that what if the Cubs CAN NOT trade Bradley? I don't think this is as far fetched as it seems. Hendry's goal was to trade him prior to the winter meetings, but that seems unlikely. Why would anyone take this guy without having the Cubs eat a LARGE portion of his deal, or take back a deadbeat contract in return? So what does that do? You are still at the same impasse in terms of payroll constraints.
Taking back a bum like Pat Burrell does nothing to help the Cubs current situation. For one, where would Burrell play? Your outfield defense stays the same as last year, or gets even weaker.
I stand behind the notion that given a blank checkbook, and not being held accountable for stupidity in spending money has led to this current situation. I dont' see how the Cubs improve going into next year, considering Ricketts will not add a LONG or EXPENSIVE deal to the current payroll. So you are looking at stop-gap options.
If/when Bradley is moved, and what Hendry has to take back, we can start coveting other players. Until then.....it's all a moot point.
On a side note, I am VERY concerned about Lilly. Going in and cleaning out a shoulder should not be brushed aside.
It's longer than Bruce's post. :-)
It's no wonder why Cub fans get a bad rap!
I think the word you dropped there is "drivel."
Does Lou still like Mike? I mean there's no getting around it - Mike was very bad at the plate last year. I would expect Hendry will try over the next 11-12 days to trade him like he traded Heilman. With Baker and Blanco around and Aaron Miles under contract (ugh!), Mike no longer has a role here (assuming, of course, the Cubs are trying to find a new starting 2B or SS). It doesn't make any sense to me for the Cubs to pay Fontenot $800K to $1M.
I'm really disappointed about Bradley. I hope this isn't a situation where Hendry got too greedy. Sounds like there was a deal to be made there with Tampa Bay. Would it be bad to have Pat the Bat on the bench for one season vs. paying every dollar to move Bradley?
Hoops
This is not good. Either Harden's arm is about to fall off, or the Cubs are about to make a huge mistake. Either way, it's not good... sad if it's the former and bad if it's the latter.
Even with all of Harden's injury problems, he's been worth 17.4 WAR over his career (6.5 seasons), for an average of ~2.7 WAR/year. That should be worth about $12-13M on this year's free agent market, and everything I've read has his arbitration salary being set a $8M-$10M for one season. At that price, the Cubs would have a bargain on their hands. And if they want to go in another direction in the rotation (I wouldn't blame them and think Gorzelanny looks like a nice option), then they could always deal Harden. Minnesota was interested in him at the waiver deadline, and I'm guessing other teams would be interested in his services. He'd be a great fit here in Seattle, with the spacious ballpark and outstanding OF defense. He'd fit well in Detroit, as well... particularly if they want to unload Bonderman as part of a Granderson deal. And if budgets are tight this offseason I'm guessing the Yankees would still be interested. Plus, by offering him arbitration you get a compensation pick in return, which is one way to build a roster when you're strapped for cash. For example, the Cubs could use that pick to draft a "nearly MLB ready" closer out of the college ranks to bolster their 2010 and 2011 bullpen at minimal cost.
The bottom line is that there's not much of a downside to offering Harden arbitration unless they expect his arm to blow up. And if that's the case, I'm not mad... I just feel bad for the guy.
I really you're wrong on this one, Bruce... but I doubt you are.
Hey Bruce,
Thanks for all the info, and especially for including the Hardball Times stuff. It's nice to hear the numbers perspective from a beat writer. Do you have any insight into why the Cubs didn't trade Harden to the Twins at the waiver trade deadline? And for that matter, why they couldn't just trade him if he were to accept arbitration? If they knew they weren't bringing him back, I don't understand not getting anything for him. Thanks.
Supposedly Minnesota didn't want to trade for Harden, possibly just blocking some other team to get him. Maybe Detroit?
Could've just let Minn. have him, but I'm guessing Hendry felt like the Cubs still had a chance to win the division and didn't want to waive the white flag.
Harden would probably cost $9 mil in arbitration. What's the upside? He puts it all together and has a Cy Young caliber season. Downside? He doesn't throw a pitch.
Just need to see where that $9M goes. $3.5 already went to a mediocre relief pitcher.