Dempster - if you were a GM, would you deal for him?

[frostwyrm]

I keep seeing posts about moving Dempster, which apparently a lot of people think is going to be WAY easier than it's likely to be. My question is, if you were an opposing GM, what would you need from the Cubs to make you agree to take Dempster? The guy is owed another $10.5M. Personally I wouldn't touch him unless the Cubs ate $7M. There is no way in hell any sane GM would want to go to his owner and explain a multimillion annual salary for Dempster, even for one year. Forget about two.

[CubFanPhilly]

I agree. I think Dempster's value is that of a 4th/5th starter (at best). More likely it's as a mediocre setup man in the bullpen. Eyre got $3.75 mil. per for two years with an option for a third. I doubt any GM would offer to pick up more than $2.5 mil. per over the two years left on his contract. Either that, or the Cubs take bad an equally bad contract in return.

 

But Dempster's contract is a sunk cost. Getting out of $4-$5 mil. of the contract might be the best deal the Cubs can get. Would that $2-$2.5 mil./year be better spent on someone else? Or would the player with the bad contract they take back be more useful? (e.g., a good platoon partner for J. Jones).

[LuckyPup]

i think a team looking to rid themselves of a longer term deal would take him- look at the dodgers- they would love to rid themselves of the 3 yrs 33M left on Drew's deal-2 years at 10.5 saves them 23M and gives them a servicable reliever/4-5 starter-

 

Jones+Dempster for Drew saves them roughly 12M and cuts a year off- that type of scenario would be the only way you could move Demp i IMO.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

If I could, I definitely would. I didn't like the contract when he signed it, I still don't like it. Howry or Wuertz will be ok at closer (so will Marmol after a while). And I'm guessing the Cubs will re-sign Kerry Wood to the pen.

 

You know, Wood, Dempster, Howry and Eyre is a ridiculously expensive pen.

[frostwyrm]

You know, Wood, Dempster, Howry and Eyre is a ridiculously expensive pen.

Plus $3.25M for Glendon.

[Dirt Dog Sparly]

You know, Wood, Dempster, Howry and Eyre is a ridiculously expensive pen.

Plus $3.25M for Glendon.

 

But if he retires like the rumors are then that comes off the books. Retirement means that his contract is no longer guaranteed.

[Wheelimus]

Well, if the Dodgers would trade Drew for Dempster, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

[goonys evil twin]

There's a lot of things that GMs do, and would do, that I would never do. It would not surprise me at all if somebody traded for Dempster.

[Sammy Sofa]

You can still unload a lot of bullpen cash by trading Eyre. He's gonna be a lot easier to move than Dempster at this point.

[biittner77]

There's a lot of things that GMs do, and would do, that I would never do. It would not surprise me at all if somebody traded for Dempster.

 

Like giving a decent prospect for Neifi Perez or Phil Nevin. Or giving Christian Guzman a big contract. The list is a long one.

 

Dempster is a proven closer, GMs like that tag. Unfortunately, Hendry is one of them.

[HoopsCubs]

I keep seeing posts about moving Dempster, which apparently a lot of people think is going to be WAY easier than it's likely to be. My question is, if you were an opposing GM, what would you need from the Cubs to make you agree to take Dempster? The guy is owed another $10.5M. Personally I wouldn't touch him unless the Cubs ate $7M. There is no way in hell any sane GM would want to go to his owner and explain a multimillion annual salary for Dempster, even for one year. Forget about two.

 

Did anyone say it would be easy? I don't think anyone here did. But as others have said, if you are willing to take on a big contract or eat some cash, almost any player is trade-able. If Jim Hendry could trade Todd Hundley, who had 2 years and $12M left on his contract, he can deal Ryan Dempster too if he wants too - it just takes some creativity. There are some teams, who had absolutely terrible bullpens last year - KC, TB, to name a few. I would ask around, especially if you're re-signing Wood.

[wade]

Well, if the Dodgers would trade Drew for Dempster, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

 

People have to stop talking about Drew. The thought of him in center or right makes me very happy and I'm not prepared for the inevitable disappointment.

 

In my opinion, aside from some injury history, he's the perfect player for what the Cub offense lacks.

[goonys evil twin]

In my opinion, aside from some injury history, he's the perfect player for what the Cub offense lacks.

 

No, that's Cabrera, or Abreu, or ARod.

[Rob]

I think the right situation usually presents itself.

 

For instance, the Yankees have a very lack-luster pen and tons of cash. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Brian Cashman would be willing to take a chance on Dempster if all he had to give would be salary relief.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

If the Cubs took Pavano in a deal for Arod, I doubt the Cubs would have trouble getting the Yankees to take back Dempster as part of the deal.

[Rob]

If the Cubs took Pavano in a deal for Arod, I doubt the Cubs would have trouble getting the Yankees to take back Dempster as part of the deal.

 

I'd been toying around with that exact idea, actually. I'm just trying to figure the numbers.

[wade]

In my opinion, aside from some injury history, he's the perfect player for what the Cub offense lacks.

 

No, that's Cabrera, or Abreu, or ARod.

 

I wouldn't be upset with any of those, either. Or a combination thereof.

[frostwyrm]

I keep seeing posts about moving Dempster, which apparently a lot of people think is going to be WAY easier than it's likely to be. My question is, if you were an opposing GM, what would you need from the Cubs to make you agree to take Dempster? The guy is owed another $10.5M. Personally I wouldn't touch him unless the Cubs ate $7M. There is no way in hell any sane GM would want to go to his owner and explain a multimillion annual salary for Dempster, even for one year. Forget about two.

 

Did anyone say it would be easy? I don't think anyone here did.

I keep seeing projections with Dempster leaving and we only eat 2-4 mil. That sounds pretty damn easy to me. Can you imagine the heat a GM would take for that deal when Dempster flops again? A guy could get fired for that.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I keep seeing posts about moving Dempster, which apparently a lot of people think is going to be WAY easier than it's likely to be. My question is, if you were an opposing GM, what would you need from the Cubs to make you agree to take Dempster? The guy is owed another $10.5M. Personally I wouldn't touch him unless the Cubs ate $7M. There is no way in hell any sane GM would want to go to his owner and explain a multimillion annual salary for Dempster, even for one year. Forget about two.

 

Did anyone say it would be easy? I don't think anyone here did.

I keep seeing projections with Dempster leaving and we only eat 2-4 mil. That sounds pretty damn easy to me. Can you imagine the heat a GM would take for that deal when Dempster flops again? A guy could get fired for that.

 

Dempster at 3 mil per year for 2 years is hardly an albatross. His K's and walks were almost identical from '05 to '06, and he even gave up fewer line drives this year. There's plenty of reason to believe Dempster won't be terrible again next year. This type of fluctuation is why it was stupid to give him the contract in the first place, but you're really, really overstating how hard it would be to move him, especially when you consider the extra weight GM's give to relievers who "have the ability to close".

[frostwyrm]

I keep seeing posts about moving Dempster, which apparently a lot of people think is going to be WAY easier than it's likely to be. My question is, if you were an opposing GM, what would you need from the Cubs to make you agree to take Dempster? The guy is owed another $10.5M. Personally I wouldn't touch him unless the Cubs ate $7M. There is no way in hell any sane GM would want to go to his owner and explain a multimillion annual salary for Dempster, even for one year. Forget about two.

 

Did anyone say it would be easy? I don't think anyone here did.

I keep seeing projections with Dempster leaving and we only eat 2-4 mil. That sounds pretty damn easy to me. Can you imagine the heat a GM would take for that deal when Dempster flops again? A guy could get fired for that.

 

Dempster at 3 mil per year for 2 years is hardly an albatross. His K's and walks were almost identical from '05 to '06, and he even gave up fewer line drives this year. There's plenty of reason to believe Dempster won't be terrible again next year. This type of fluctuation is why it was stupid to give him the contract in the first place, but you're really, really overstating how hard it would be to move him, especially when you consider the extra weight GM's give to relievers who "have the ability to close".

What contender would want to start a season counting on Ryan Dempster to close? Why would a rebuilding team want him? And if he's not closing then he's just an enormously expensive middle reliever coming off a terrible year. Eyre and Howry only got a little more that $3M per year, and they were coming off great years.

[goonys evil twin]

What contender would want to start a season counting on Ryan Dempster to close?

 

Maybe a contender that doesn't have Mariano Rivera closing? Todd freaking Jones is a playoff closer. If he can do it, Dempster can.

[frostwyrm]

I keep seeing posts about moving Dempster, which apparently a lot of people think is going to be WAY easier than it's likely to be. My question is, if you were an opposing GM, what would you need from the Cubs to make you agree to take Dempster? The guy is owed another $10.5M. Personally I wouldn't touch him unless the Cubs ate $7M. There is no way in hell any sane GM would want to go to his owner and explain a multimillion annual salary for Dempster, even for one year. Forget about two.

 

Did anyone say it would be easy? I don't think anyone here did.

I keep seeing projections with Dempster leaving and we only eat 2-4 mil. That sounds pretty damn easy to me. Can you imagine the heat a GM would take for that deal when Dempster flops again? A guy could get fired for that.

 

Dempster at 3 mil per year for 2 years is hardly an albatross. His K's and walks were almost identical from '05 to '06, and he even gave up fewer line drives this year. There's plenty of reason to believe Dempster won't be terrible again next year. This type of fluctuation is why it was stupid to give him the contract in the first place, but you're really, really overstating how hard it would be to move him, especially when you consider the extra weight GM's give to relievers who "have the ability to close".

I have never met anyone who values numbers like LD% and also values saves. In my experience these types of people are mutually exclusive. People who value saves ain't exactly deep thinkers, and people who covet a "proven closer" tend to look no deeper than save percentage and possibly ERA, and those numbers make Dempster look very bad.

[goonys evil twin]

I have never met anyone who values numbers like LD% and also values saves. In my experience these types of people are mutually exclusive. People who value saves ain't exactly deep thinkers, and people who covet a "proven closer" tend to look no deeper than save percentage and possibly ERA, and those numbers make Dempster look very bad.

 

Hendry was enamored with simply save totals when he went after Alf. Dempster has 57 saves the past two years with a terrible team that didn't give him many opportunities. His ERA is in the 3's, his OPS against is sub 700, his k/9 is about 8.5. He's not a worthless reliever.

[Sammy Sofa]

Exactly. I don't think he's the end-all, be-all of closers, but he's clearly not the "Dumpster" people rant about if you just look at his overall numbers out of the bullpen. Any GM with half a brain will probably see that Dempster's erratic use pattern under Baker played havoc with his outings. When's he used consistently he's very effective. When's he not, he's all over the place and goes off track. He's not a lost cause.

[frostwyrm]

I have never met anyone who values numbers like LD% and also values saves. In my experience these types of people are mutually exclusive. People who value saves ain't exactly deep thinkers, and people who covet a "proven closer" tend to look no deeper than save percentage and possibly ERA, and those numbers make Dempster look very bad.

 

Hendry was enamored with simply save totals when he went after Alf. Dempster has 57 saves the past two years with a terrible team that didn't give him many opportunities. His ERA is in the 3's, his OPS against is sub 700, his k/9 is about 8.5. He's not a worthless reliever.

You can dig up peripherals and make a case that he has value as a middle reliever, but unfortunately he makes closer money, and I very much doubt he could be sold as an elite middle reliever. Non-elite middle relievers aren't worth much. As a closer he's a very hard sell because people who want a proven closer don't want to hear about peripherals. They want save percentage.