ESPN 1000 - Cubs are going after Schmidt next

[David]

Levine was just on with Salisbury and Rosenbloom.

 

Rosenbloom was trying to rip the Cubs for only improving what he implied was an already strong offense (moron), and he went on to ask why the Cubs weren't interested in Zito or Schmidt.

 

Levine said the Cubs felt Zito would be overpaid (probably by the Mets), but that they certainly are interested in Schmidt and suggested that they're going to try to get something done with Schmidt now that Soriano is done. Said there's a "good possibility" that we'll wind up with him.

 

Just thought I'd pass on what I heard on the way in to work.

 

EDIT - Forgot to mention that he said they'd like to work out something in the 3 year range with Schmidt.

[Derwood]

Levine was just on with Salisbury and Rosenbloom.

 

Rosenbloom was trying to rip the Cubs for only improving what he implied was an already strong offense (moron), and he went on to ask why the Cubs weren't interested in Zito or Schmidt.

 

Levine said the Cubs felt Zito would be overpaid (probably by the Mets), but that they certainly are interested in Schmidt and suggested that they're going to try to get something done with Schmidt now that Soriano is done. Said there's a "good possibility" that we'll wind up with him.

 

Just thought I'd pass on what I heard on the way in to work.

 

EDIT - Forgot to mention that he said they'd like to work out something in the 3 year range with Schmidt.

 

I thought Schmidt was keen on playing on the west coast?

[David]

I thought Schmidt was keen on playing on the west coast?

 

That's what we've heard. On the other hand...money talks and everything else walks, right?

[Andy]

Good lord. Hendry's out for blood.

[radarluv1]

how many more (non-C) FA's can we sign? 1 or 2, i believe. if this is the case, then they better count. yes to schmidt, no to Padilla, Meche, Wolf, etc.

[UMFan83]

Lets do this yesterday. If this happens, I will be forced to be optimistic about the 2007 Chicago Cubs.....we might even hit that magic 83 win mark

[badgercub]

how many more (non-C) FA's can we sign? 1 or 2, i believe. if this is the case, then they better count. yes to schmidt, no to Padilla, Meche, Wolf, etc.

 

With the new labor agreement I believe the number of A/B free agents that a team can sign has increased. Plus you have to remember that losing Pierre also credits the Cubs with one back.

[cubweiser03]

IMO anybody that has the courage to offer length to Schmidt has the inside track. I say he'll take less per year at the benefit of more years because of his shoulder history. 4 years might get it done. 5 is probably a certainty. Schmidt and Zito will probably wait and see what Boston does with Mats before signing.

[Wilmo]

I know this is off the Schmidt topic, but in the last few days I have read where people are talking about a, b, and c free agents and I can not EVER remember this being mentioned in the past.

 

Is this something new in the labor deal? Or have I had my head planted deep into the sand on this topic?

 

Also, if you could point me in the direction of where I could read about these categorized free agents and the signing rules that would be great.

[Elrhino]

Sign Schmidt and trade for Jennings or Westbrook, but just say NO to giving Lilly/Meche/Padilla $8-$10 per.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Schmidt would be FANTASTIC.

[St.Paul Cub]

I'll be amazed if they sign Schmidt, just because of the aggressiveness of the offseason. I figured signing Lilly and Marquis, plus a trade for Jennings would pretty much be all we'd see. I agree that length of the contract is what would get it done.

[David]

I know this is off the Schmidt topic, but in the last few days I have read where people are talking about a, b, and c free agents and I can not EVER remember this being mentioned in the past.

 

Is this something new in the labor deal? Or have I had my head planted deep into the sand on this topic?

 

Also, if you could point me in the direction of where I could read about these categorized free agents and the signing rules that would be great.

 

Definitely not something new.

 

Don't have a link on it for ya, though.

[Wheelimus]

Our allotment of A&B's is six I believe, five plus the number of A&B's we'll lose, which is one (Pierre).

 

Aram doesn't count.

 

So, as of now, we have four we can still use.

 

Sorry, no links to back that up, gleened from the recent Soriano thread and Aram threads. Pretty sure it's accurate though. Someone correct me if I'm wrong!

 

Anyway, on topic, Schmidt, wow. Uncle Lou was right when he said that Hendry was going crazy gobbling up players. How in the hell did he go from "Slumping Neifi" to "Jordan in the 4th quarter" so quickly? MacPhail?

[B]

I know this is off the Schmidt topic, but in the last few days I have read where people are talking about a, b, and c free agents and I can not EVER remember this being mentioned in the past.

 

Is this something new in the labor deal? Or have I had my head planted deep into the sand on this topic?

Also, if you could point me in the direction of where I could read about these categorized free agents and the signing rules that would be great.

 

No, this is not something new.

[stuy119]

I know this is off the Schmidt topic, but in the last few days I have read where people are talking about a, b, and c free agents and I can not EVER remember this being mentioned in the past.

 

Is this something new in the labor deal? Or have I had my head planted deep into the sand on this topic?

 

Not something new, but something that's new to Cubbie fans. We're not used to keeping track of how many top-tier FA's we sign. :D

[biittner77]

I know this is off the Schmidt topic, but in the last few days I have read where people are talking about a, b, and c free agents and I can not EVER remember this being mentioned in the past.

 

Is this something new in the labor deal? Or have I had my head planted deep into the sand on this topic?

 

Also, if you could point me in the direction of where I could read about these categorized free agents and the signing rules that would be great.

 

Definitely not something new.

 

Don't have a link on it for ya, though.

 

Probably you've not heard of it because teams hardly ever reach their limit- especially the Cubs. I'd also bet that money has more to do with not signing 5 type A FAs than any league imposed limit.

[Derwood]

I know this is off the Schmidt topic, but in the last few days I have read where people are talking about a, b, and c free agents and I can not EVER remember this being mentioned in the past.

 

Is this something new in the labor deal? Or have I had my head planted deep into the sand on this topic?

 

Not something new, but something that's new to Cubbie fans. We're not used to keeping track of how many top-tier FA's we sign. :D

 

the reason he hasn't heard of the A/B thing in the past is that the Cubs usually sign F and G tier free agents

[goonys evil twin]

I know this is off the Schmidt topic, but in the last few days I have read where people are talking about a, b, and c free agents and I can not EVER remember this being mentioned in the past.

 

Is this something new in the labor deal? Or have I had my head planted deep into the sand on this topic?

 

Also, if you could point me in the direction of where I could read about these categorized free agents and the signing rules that would be great.

 

Definitely not something new.

 

Don't have a link on it for ya, though.

 

Probably you've not heard of it because teams hardly ever reach their limit- especially the Cubs. I'd also bet that money has more to do with not signing 5 type A FAs than any league imposed limit.

 

I think the Yankees hit the limit a couple years ago.

 

One thing that throws it off is lots of guys qualify for A/B status without being that big of an acquisition. Middle relievers, and utility guys can get such status. You can sign 2 relievers, one utility guy, a mediocre starting pitcher, and a bottom of the order hitter and hit your limit without any one huge signing.

[David]

Let's imagine a best case scenario for a second on our rotation.

 

Let's say we sign Schmidt and that Prior pitches like even 85% of his former self.

 

 

Z, Schmidt, Hill, Prior, Miller/Marshall/Guzman/Random FA

 

 

That rotation would be up there with the good ol' days of 2003. Would probably be better, considering you don't have the black hole of Estes anywhere in there.

[Twiggy]

I'd be very suprised if we do end up with Schmidt. I expect Lilly or Meche a pitcher of that calibur to sign.

[Wheelimus]

If this were pre-Soriano, I'd agree with you. But at this point, I don't see Hendry being outbid for someone he really wants.

 

Nothing will surprise me going forward. Roger Clemens would not surprise me.

[RynoRules]

Please make this happen Jim! You have given us reason to believe it can!

[illiniguy]

First we keep Aram, now Soriano, more to come? Is this bizarre world or what. We are still the Cubs.. Right?

[Mark Priors Calves]

I like it. Make it happen, Jimbo.