Hidalgo or Juan Gone as NRI's? Why not?

[goonys evil twin]

No they weren't. They left the 70's long ago. Last year was over 100, 2004 was in the mid 90's.

 

Peanuts, but last year, they were at 99.5 with Sammy's money. 2004 was 90.5, 2003 was 79.8. They were in the 60's as recent as 2001.

 

Link

 

Those numbers are a little misleading. They're based on the figures that MLB uses to figure the payrolls and don't always represent total payroll figures. Those numbers often do not include buy-outs, etc.

 

And they don't include midseason trades and a lot of other stuff.

[goonys evil twin]

Those numbers are a little misleading. They're based on the figures that MLB uses to figure the payrolls and don't always represent total payroll figures. Those numbers often do not include buy-outs, etc.

 

I'm comparing apples to apples. If those numbers are misleading for those reasons, your 105 is as well.

 

Why?

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Those numbers are a little misleading. They're based on the figures that MLB uses to figure the payrolls and don't always represent total payroll figures. Those numbers often do not include buy-outs, etc.

 

I'm comparing apples to apples. If those numbers are misleading for those reasons, your 105 is as well.

 

Why?

 

You just said it yourself:

 

And they don't include midseason trades and a lot of other stuff.

 

A prediction of a 105M payroll also does not include "midseason trades and a lot of other stuff". If the team went into past seasons with the payrolls I have indicated, what makes you think this year will be much different considering what we've already seen?

[erik316wttn]

I'd sign Juan Gone to a 500,000 guaranteed deal if he could pass a physical. I've never liked Hidalgo.

 

That 500 grand would buy us what? 3, 4 games maybe?

[UK1679666180]

They'll leave some payroll avail. for mid-season acquisitions, I think they can add one or two more players under about 5 mil and still have room for the deadline.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

That 500 grand would buy us what? 3, 4 games maybe?

 

If he provided his mid-to-late 90's production in those 3 or 4 games, it would be almost worth every penny.

[JeffH]

Twenty players currently under contract with defined salaries:

 

CF Juan Pierre - $5,750,000

RF Jacque Jones - $4,333,333

3B Aramis Ramirez - $10,500,000

2B Todd Walker - $2,500,000

1B Derrek Lee - $9,416,667

C Michael Barrett - $4,000,000 (estimate - breakdown of $12/3 deal never published)

IF Neifi Perez - $2,500,000

IF Jerry Hairston - $2,300,000

UT John Mabry - $1,075,000

C Henry Blanco - $1,500,000

SP Greg Maddux - $9,000,000

SP Mark Prior - $3,650,000

SP Glendon Rusch - $2,750,000

RP Will Ohman - $610,000

RP Scott Eyre - $3,700,000

RP Scott Williamson - $2,000,000

RP Bobby Howry - $4,000,000

RP Ryan Dempster - $5,000,000

DL Kerry Wood - $12,000,000

DL Wade Miller - $1,000,000

 

Subtotal - $87,585,000

 

Others to be added:

 

LF Matt Murton - $350,000

SS Ronny Cedeno - $350,000

OF Marquis Grissom - $1,000,000

SP Carlos Zambrano - $6,900,000

SP Jerome Williams - $350,000

RP Roberto Novoa - $350,000

RP Michael Wuertz - $350,000

 

Total - $97,235,000

[Neuby]

How come you have grissom listed to be making 1 million next season. He's a NRI I doubt he'll be getting a million dollar contract.

[JeffH]

How come you have grissom listed to be making 1 million next season. He's a NRI I doubt he'll be getting a million dollar contract.

 

It's just an estimate for planning purposes. The Cubs have a habit of overpaying role players. I expect he'll actually get something in the $0.6-$0.7 range.

[goonys evil twin]

Those numbers are a little misleading. They're based on the figures that MLB uses to figure the payrolls and don't always represent total payroll figures. Those numbers often do not include buy-outs, etc.

 

I'm comparing apples to apples. If those numbers are misleading for those reasons, your 105 is as well.

 

Why?

 

You just said it yourself:

 

And they don't include midseason trades and a lot of other stuff.

 

A prediction of a 105M payroll also does not include "midseason trades and a lot of other stuff". If the team went into past seasons with the payrolls I have indicated, what makes you think this year will be much different considering what we've already seen?

 

No, I didn't say so myself. Thinking they might go to 105m eventually means they might add payroll later on. They are in the 90's now, might go to 100 before the season, and maybe 105 before all is said and done. That is what is being talked about, and that would be right in line with the steady growth of recent years.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

No, I didn't say so myself. Thinking they might go to 105m eventually means they might add payroll later on. They are in the 90's now, might go to 100 before the season, and maybe 105 before all is said and done. That is what is being talked about, and that would be right in line with the steady growth of recent years.

 

That's not what was being talked about. Vance said "If the spending limit is around 100, the Cubs could still add a player for roughly 5 million. My guess is they could spend up to 105 million if Hendry wanted to." I wondered why he thought 105 was a realistic guess for the upcoming season based on past history with current ownership and management. No mention of midseason moves whatsoever.

[goonys evil twin]

No, I didn't say so myself. Thinking they might go to 105m eventually means they might add payroll later on. They are in the 90's now, might go to 100 before the season, and maybe 105 before all is said and done. That is what is being talked about, and that would be right in line with the steady growth of recent years.

 

That's not what was being talked about. Vance said "If the spending limit is around 100, the Cubs could still add a player for roughly 5 million. My guess is they could spend up to 105 million if Hendry wanted to." I wondered why he thought 105 was a realistic guess for the upcoming season based on past history with current ownership and management. No mention of midseason moves whatsoever.

 

At this point, I have no idea what you are talking about. The payroll has gone up steadily every year this decade. It was right around 100 last year. It was in the mid 90's before, and this year, if the trend holds, could be around 105. Midseason moves are a big part of that. It's realistic because that's what has happened consistently.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

At this point, I have no idea what you are talking about. The payroll has gone up steadily every year this decade. It was right around 100 last year. It was in the mid 90's before, and this year, if the trend holds, could be around 105. Midseason moves are a big part of that. It's realistic because that's what has happened consistently.

 

That makes two of us, I guess. This all started with me asking a simple question about the payroll, not peeing in anyone's Cheerios. Looking at the recent past with this ownership and management team in place, I do not believe we will start next season at 105. Last year, yes the payroll was right around 100, but 12.5 belonged to someone in Baltimore. The year before was not mid-90's as you keep saying but at 90.5.

 

Without the money owed Sammy in 2005, we haven't gone into a season with a top-5 payroll since before 1990 (if ever, I don't know), and I don't see that changing for next season.

[Knyption]

Chances are that Hildalgo and J Gone's ability diminished greatly since the steriod testing came to play.

 

That said, I wouldn't touch either because we know it will block Murton.

 

Dusty will play the Vets.

 

If we had a smart manager who platooned either with jones, then it may be a different story.

[goonys evil twin]

At this point, I have no idea what you are talking about. The payroll has gone up steadily every year this decade. It was right around 100 last year. It was in the mid 90's before, and this year, if the trend holds, could be around 105. Midseason moves are a big part of that. It's realistic because that's what has happened consistently.

 

That makes two of us, I guess. This all started with me asking a simple question about the payroll, not peeing in anyone's Cheerios. Looking at the recent past with this ownership and management team in place, I do not believe we will start next season at 105. Last year, yes the payroll was right around 100, but 12.5 belonged to someone in Baltimore. The year before was not mid-90's as you keep saying but at 90.5.

 

Without the money owed Sammy in 2005, we haven't gone into a season with a top-5 payroll since before 1990 (if ever, I don't know), and I don't see that changing for next season.

 

The perception that this ownership group is overly cheap is just wrong. It doesn't matter if money was spent on a player that didn't play here, it was spent. And this team has consistently spent a decent amount, increasing yearly. It makes perfect sense to assume it will be a little higher this year. Who cares what it is at the open of the season? The bottom line is the whole season. The Cubs have been top 5 for a while because they add during the season.

[Knyption]

i would not be surprised to see hendry pull off another blockbuster come deadline time with all the FA in '06 offseason

[Monco]

Can we ease up with shopping the clearance rack?A million here ,a million there,why can't we spend it on legitimate ballplayers.How many more question marks do we need on the roster?

[Drew Doughty]

There's nothing left, that's why we're looking at the "clearance" bin. There's no guarentee that any of these guys would be on the roster if they were NRIs anyways.

[RynoHawk]

I really think Hendry is done. This could be a long year.

[Drew Doughty]

I really think Hendry is done. This could be a long year.

 

So could any year. I'm sure there were a bunch of people that thought '03 could be a long year.

[USSoccer]

I really think Hendry is done. This could be a long year.

 

So could any year. I'm sure there were a bunch of people that thought '03 could be a long year.

 

I'll bet you more people thought 2003 would be a year that Choi, Hill and Zambrano would develop into cornerstones, and we'd be building toward competitiveness in 2004-6.

[CuseCubFan69]

I really think Hendry is done. This could be a long year.

 

So could any year. I'm sure there were a bunch of people that thought '03 could be a long year.

 

I'll bet you more people thought 2003 would be a year that Choi, Hill and Zambrano would develop into cornerstones, and we'd be building toward competitiveness in 2004-6.

 

Add Prior and Cruz to that. I thought the Cubs were a dynasty in the making.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I really think Hendry is done. This could be a long year.

 

So could any year. I'm sure there were a bunch of people that thought '03 could be a long year.

 

I'll bet you more people thought 2003 would be a year that Choi, Hill and Zambrano would develop into cornerstones, and we'd be building toward competitiveness in 2004-6.

 

Add Prior and Cruz to that. I thought the Cubs were a dynasty in the making.

 

After 2003, I envisioned '06 as our run to the three-peat.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

According to Newsday, the Reds, Orioles, and Red Sox have shown some interest in Hidalgo.

 

Link.

 

Richard Hidalgo, off a profoundly disappointing 2005 with the Texas Rangers (rumor is I might have picked him as the American League MVP), is still looking for work, with the Orioles, Red Sox and Reds most interested. The former Met might have to settle for a minor-league contract. Hidalgo did hit 16 homers in 308 at-bats last year. Maybe he can be this year's Comeback Player?

 

I still wish the Cubs were mentioned among those teams.

[Drew Doughty]

I really think Hendry is done. This could be a long year.

 

So could any year. I'm sure there were a bunch of people that thought '03 could be a long year.

 

I'll bet you more people thought 2003 would be a year that Choi, Hill and Zambrano would develop into cornerstones, and we'd be building toward competitiveness in 2004-6.

 

Maybe like Murton, Cedeno, Williams (though he's already fairly established), Guzman, and another Hill this year?