Cubs Pursuing Lilly

[frostwyrm]

It's a bubble. You can't have average #4 starting pitchers getting 4/40 deals indefinitely. The numbers just won't add up in the longterm.

 

How do you know? You've done a revenue analysis?

 

I haven't done a revenue analysis, but if average #4 starters keep getting 4/40 and Gary Matthew Jr. types keep getting 5/50 it looks to me like it will soon require a Yankees-size payroll to field an MLB contender.

 

1. Alex Rodriguez 25,680,727

2. Derek Jeter 20,600,000

3. Jason Giambi 20,428,571

4. Mike Mussina 19,000,000

5. Randy Johnson 15,661,427

6. Bobby Abreu 13,600,000

7. Johnny Damon 13,000,000

8. Hideki Matsui 13,000,000

9. Jorge Posada 12,000,000

10. Mariano Rivera 10,500,000

11. Carl Pavano 8,000,000

12. Kyle Farnsworth 5,416,667

13. Tanyon Sturtze 1,500,000

14. Mike Myers 1,150,000

15. Robinson Cano 381,100

16. Scott Proctor 353,675

17. Chien-Ming Wang 353,175

18. Andy Phillips 331,150

19. Wil Nieves 328,600

Total Team Salary: 198,662,180

 

 

When the Cubs have 10 guys on their roster making $10M per year, let me know and four guys making about $20M or more, let me know.

 

Give it time. If this market holds up for 2 more years you're going to see an explosion of $10M+ salaries all over baseball.

[TruffleShuffle]

I can't afford even one retooling year, because my sorry ass will be fired if I don't produce a winner overnight.

 

How do they retool though? Aside from Pie and Patterson, there aren't any position players worth a damn who are close to being ready to contribute at the major league level. Some of the pitchers show promise (Veal, Gallagher, Marmol, etc), but we've heard that song before. Bottom line, the farm system is pretty lousy right now, and the only way to restock it would be to deal off guys who would fetch good prospects in return - i.e., Zambrano, Lee, Ramirez, Barrett and Hill. If you trade those guys, you're taking two steps back in hopes of taking three steps foward later - not the greatest idea.

[C.C.]

A piece from Jason Stark's ESPN article today quoting Jim Hendry:

 

"But if you find yourself in a spot where you're a contending club and your young pitching isn't ready, what are you going to do?" Cubs GM Jim Hendry asked. "You're in a spot where you do what you have to do, even if you aren't doing what you want to do." "Obviously, this is a spot we've never been in, and it's not a spot you like to be in," Hendry said. "It wasn't too long ago that we thought we were all set with real good young starting pitching. Heck, in 2003, Carlos Zambrano was our fourth starter [behind Mark Prior, Kerry Wood and Matt Clement]. We thought we were in great shape. They were all in their 20s. And they were all zero to three [years of experience]. But it didn't work out how we thought it would work out or how we expected it to work out."

 

Sorry if it was already posted but I thought it was interesting.

 

In other words:

 

I painted myself into a corner and now I'm screwed.

 

In other words:

 

I can't afford even one retooling year, because my sorry ass will be fired if I don't produce a winner overnight.

 

We have been retooling, it seems, every year. It good to see us going for it this year.

[goonys evil twin]

If these prices persist for 2 more years I think we'll see greatly increased revenue sharing or a salary cap. It won't be acceptable to a have situation where it requires $175-200M just to field a respectable team, not unless small market teams get a whole lot of help.

 

Two things, I don't see why it would necessarily cost $175-200m just to field a respectable team. And, 8 years ago people would have said the same thing, only using $75-90m as the number.

 

There have been a heck of a lot of mediocre starting pitchers who have signed for between 8 and 10 million in recent years. This is not completely out of the blue. Plus, baseball balances this out with how cheap young talent is. In football, draftees get 8 figure signings bonuses and count huge against the cap right away. In baseball, you have guys like John Lackey, who has been a good pitcher for 4+ years and has barely made $4 million. Not every team has to sign free agent $10m 4th starters. Some teams, like Oakland, will always be more efficient with their money. You are acting as if everybody is going to look like the Cubs. The Cubs are going to spend more than the vast majority of teams.

[TruffleShuffle]

Give it time. If this market holds up for 2 more years you're going to see an explosion of $10M+ salaries all over baseball.

 

Maybe. But in that case, who's screwed? The small market teams. They'll have to win by building strong minor-league systems and by producing guys who can contribute toward winning a championship in their first five years (before they reach UFA status). Well, how's that any different than the way things have been for the past 15 years?

[shnsajax]

It's a bubble. You can't have average #4 starting pitchers getting 4/40 deals indefinitely. The numbers just won't add up in the longterm.

 

How do you know? You've done a revenue analysis?

 

I haven't done a revenue analysis, but if average #4 starters keep getting 4/40 and Gary Matthew Jr. types keep getting 5/50 it looks to me like it will soon require a Yankees-size payroll to field an MLB contender.

 

1. Alex Rodriguez 25,680,727

2. Derek Jeter 20,600,000

3. Jason Giambi 20,428,571

4. Mike Mussina 19,000,000

5. Randy Johnson 15,661,427

6. Bobby Abreu 13,600,000

7. Johnny Damon 13,000,000

8. Hideki Matsui 13,000,000

9. Jorge Posada 12,000,000

10. Mariano Rivera 10,500,000

11. Carl Pavano 8,000,000

12. Kyle Farnsworth 5,416,667

13. Tanyon Sturtze 1,500,000

14. Mike Myers 1,150,000

15. Robinson Cano 381,100

16. Scott Proctor 353,675

17. Chien-Ming Wang 353,175

18. Andy Phillips 331,150

19. Wil Nieves 328,600

Total Team Salary: 198,662,180

 

 

When the Cubs have 10 guys on their roster making $10M per year, let me know and four guys making about $20M or more, let me know.

 

Give it time. If this market holds up for 2 more years you're going to see an explosion of $10M+ salaries all over baseball.

 

Unless we have a FA market like we did in 2000, I doubt it will. Bad contracts will force GM's to recind back to where the market was. I don't see this keeping up, unless MLB is post a much bigger profit than we know about.

[Vinestal]

If these prices persist for 2 more years I think we'll see greatly increased revenue sharing or a salary cap. It won't be acceptable to a have situation where it requires $175-200M just to field a respectable team, not unless small market teams get a whole lot of help.

 

Two things, I don't see why it would necessarily cost $175-200m just to field a respectable team. And, 8 years ago people would have said the same thing, only using $75-90m as the number.

 

There have been a heck of a lot of mediocre starting pitchers who have signed for between 8 and 10 million in recent years. This is not completely out of the blue. Plus, baseball balances this out with how cheap young talent is. In football, draftees get 8 figure signings bonuses and count huge against the cap right away. In baseball, you have guys like John Lackey, who has been a good pitcher for 4+ years and has barely made $4 million. Not every team has to sign free agent $10m 4th starters. Some teams, like Oakland, will always be more efficient with their money. You are acting as if everybody is going to look like the Cubs. The Cubs are going to spend more than the vast majority of teams.

 

Because they have to make up for having a crappy farm system and an unwise GM. *sigh*

[C.C.]

If these prices persist for 2 more years I think we'll see greatly increased revenue sharing or a salary cap. It won't be acceptable to a have situation where it requires $175-200M just to field a respectable team, not unless small market teams get a whole lot of help.

 

Two things, I don't see why it would necessarily cost $175-200m just to field a respectable team. And, 8 years ago people would have said the same thing, only using $75-90m as the number.

 

There have been a heck of a lot of mediocre starting pitchers who have signed for between 8 and 10 million in recent years. This is not completely out of the blue. Plus, baseball balances this out with how cheap young talent is. In football, draftees get 8 figure signings bonuses and count huge against the cap right away. In baseball, you have guys like John Lackey, who has been a good pitcher for 4+ years and has barely made $4 million. Not every team has to sign free agent $10m 4th starters. Some teams, like Oakland, will always be more efficient with their money. You are acting as if everybody is going to look like the Cubs. The Cubs are going to spend more than the vast majority of teams.

 

Because they have to make up for having a crappy farm system and an unwise GM. *sigh*

 

Well that and they are one of the more popular teams in all of sports...

[TruffleShuffle]

If these prices persist for 2 more years I think we'll see greatly increased revenue sharing or a salary cap. It won't be acceptable to a have situation where it requires $175-200M just to field a respectable team, not unless small market teams get a whole lot of help.

 

Two things, I don't see why it would necessarily cost $175-200m just to field a respectable team. And, 8 years ago people would have said the same thing, only using $75-90m as the number.

 

There have been a heck of a lot of mediocre starting pitchers who have signed for between 8 and 10 million in recent years. This is not completely out of the blue. Plus, baseball balances this out with how cheap young talent is. In football, draftees get 8 figure signings bonuses and count huge against the cap right away. In baseball, you have guys like John Lackey, who has been a good pitcher for 4+ years and has barely made $4 million. Not every team has to sign free agent $10m 4th starters. Some teams, like Oakland, will always be more efficient with their money. You are acting as if everybody is going to look like the Cubs. The Cubs are going to spend more than the vast majority of teams.

 

Because they have to make up for having a crappy farm system and an unwise GM. *sigh*

 

no, because they can

[frostwyrm]

If these prices persist for 2 more years I think we'll see greatly increased revenue sharing or a salary cap. It won't be acceptable to a have situation where it requires $175-200M just to field a respectable team, not unless small market teams get a whole lot of help.

 

Two things, I don't see why it would necessarily cost $175-200m just to field a respectable team. And, 8 years ago people would have said the same thing, only using $75-90m as the number.

 

There have been a heck of a lot of mediocre starting pitchers who have signed for between 8 and 10 million in recent years. This is not completely out of the blue. Plus, baseball balances this out with how cheap young talent is. In football, draftees get 8 figure signings bonuses and count huge against the cap right away. In baseball, you have guys like John Lackey, who has been a good pitcher for 4+ years and has barely made $4 million. Not every team has to sign free agent $10m 4th starters. Some teams, like Oakland, will always be more efficient with their money. You are acting as if everybody is going to look like the Cubs. The Cubs are going to spend more than the vast majority of teams.

 

We've seen mediocre pitchers get overpaid based on overly optimistic hunches about their upside, but Lilly is different. He's getting 4/40, and nobody expects him to be more than a serviceable #4 even in the 1st year of the deal. In this market, all you have to do get $10M per year is not suck.

[goonys evil twin]

We've seen mediocre pitchers get overpaid based on overly optimistic hunches about their upside, but Lilly is different. He's getting 4/40, and nobody expects him to be more than a serviceable #4 even in the 1st year of the deal. In this market, all you have to do get $10M per year is not suck.

 

Part of that is because of this year's playoffs. Mediocre pitching ruled. Next year it will be something else that gets a bounce.

 

But Lilly can be more than a servicable 4 at his best. In his best seasons, he's been more than a servicable 4.

 

In this market, if you make all your starts and are have at least average results, you will get paid. But that's partially because there are so few guys out there who make all their starts with average effectiveness and are free agents. Teams need 5 startings pitchers, and if guys get hurt, they need more. Hendry, coming off a year where they were starting guys who had no business on a 40 man roster, was desperate for people who could go close to 200 innings and be okay. But that's how Maddux was compensated the past two years. He was just a 200 IP guy who didn't suck, and he got $9m the last two years.

 

MLB teams are willing to pay a premium to pitchers who make all their starts. In years past they've given huge deals to very talented guys who couldn't make all their starts. It's a constantly shifting market.

[frostwyrm]

We've seen mediocre pitchers get overpaid based on overly optimistic hunches about their upside, but Lilly is different. He's getting 4/40, and nobody expects him to be more than a serviceable #4 even in the 1st year of the deal. In this market, all you have to do get $10M per year is not suck.

 

Part of that is because of this year's playoffs. Mediocre pitching ruled. Next year it will be something else that gets a bounce.

 

But Lilly can be more than a servicable 4 at his best. In his best seasons, he's been more than a servicable 4.

 

In this market, if you make all your starts and are have at least average results, you will get paid. But that's partially because there are so few guys out there who make all their starts with average effectiveness and are free agents. Teams need 5 startings pitchers, and if guys get hurt, they need more. Hendry, coming off a year where they were starting guys who had no business on a 40 man roster, was desperate for people who could go close to 200 innings and be okay. But that's how Maddux was compensated the past two years. He was just a 200 IP guy who didn't suck, and he got $9m the last two years.

 

MLB teams are willing to pay a premium to pitchers who make all their starts. In years past they've given huge deals to very talented guys who couldn't make all their starts. It's a constantly shifting market.

 

I totally agree that durability was undervalued in starting pitchers for a long time and it was due for a price correction, but we're seeing way too big of a correction.

[baseball7897]

Rotoworld:

 

The Cubs have reportedly tweaked their previous offer to Ted Lilly, who could settle on a new team before the close of the winter meetings

 

Yahoo! Sports' Tim Brown said this afternoon that a deal between the Cubs and Lilly remains likely

[Andy]

I seriously wonder what post-2004 Rusch would've gotten in this market.

[Soul]

We've seen mediocre pitchers get overpaid based on overly optimistic hunches about their upside, but Lilly is different. He's getting 4/40, and nobody expects him to be more than a serviceable #4 even in the 1st year of the deal. In this market, all you have to do get $10M per year is not suck.

 

Part of that is because of this year's playoffs. Mediocre pitching ruled. Next year it will be something else that gets a bounce.

 

But Lilly can be more than a servicable 4 at his best. In his best seasons, he's been more than a servicable 4.

 

In this market, if you make all your starts and are have at least average results, you will get paid. But that's partially because there are so few guys out there who make all their starts with average effectiveness and are free agents. Teams need 5 startings pitchers, and if guys get hurt, they need more. Hendry, coming off a year where they were starting guys who had no business on a 40 man roster, was desperate for people who could go close to 200 innings and be okay. But that's how Maddux was compensated the past two years. He was just a 200 IP guy who didn't suck, and he got $9m the last two years.

 

MLB teams are willing to pay a premium to pitchers who make all their starts. In years past they've given huge deals to very talented guys who couldn't make all their starts. It's a constantly shifting market.

 

I totally agree that durability was undervalued in starting pitchers for a long time and it was due for a price correction, but we're seeing way too big of a correction.

 

I'm on board with that. Overreaction is the American Way.

[inari]

I don't think this has been posted yet...

 

The Cubs have reportedly tweaked their previous offer to Ted Lilly, who could settle on a new team before the close of the winter meetings.

Yahoo! Sports' Tim Brown said this afternoon that a deal between the Cubs and Lilly remains likely. The Jays have joined the Cubs in offering Lilly a four-year deal, and the Mariners, Giants and Yankees are also supposed to be in the mix. Still, it's looked like Lilly to the Cubs for about two days now.

 

I know many of you are against Lilly, but I really want him. That said, I want him provided it would not interfere with signing Schmidt.

[tkenm356]

I don't think this has been posted yet...

 

The Cubs have reportedly tweaked their previous offer to Ted Lilly, who could settle on a new team before the close of the winter meetings.

Yahoo! Sports' Tim Brown said this afternoon that a deal between the Cubs and Lilly remains likely. The Jays have joined the Cubs in offering Lilly a four-year deal, and the Mariners, Giants and Yankees are also supposed to be in the mix. Still, it's looked like Lilly to the Cubs for about two days now.

 

I know many of you are against Lilly, but I really want him. That said, I want him provided it would not interfere with signing Schmidt.

 

About 2 or 3 posts above yours, homie

[Butterscup1679666578]

I don't think this has been posted yet...

 

The Cubs have reportedly tweaked their previous offer to Ted Lilly, who could settle on a new team before the close of the winter meetings.

Yahoo! Sports' Tim Brown said this afternoon that a deal between the Cubs and Lilly remains likely. The Jays have joined the Cubs in offering Lilly a four-year deal, and the Mariners, Giants and Yankees are also supposed to be in the mix. Still, it's looked like Lilly to the Cubs for about two days now.

 

I know many of you are against Lilly, but I really want him. That said, I want him provided it would not interfere with signing Schmidt.

 

Up about three posts.

[Andy]

I don't think this has been posted yet...

 

The Cubs have reportedly tweaked their previous offer to Ted Lilly, who could settle on a new team before the close of the winter meetings.

Yahoo! Sports' Tim Brown said this afternoon that a deal between the Cubs and Lilly remains likely. The Jays have joined the Cubs in offering Lilly a four-year deal, and the Mariners, Giants and Yankees are also supposed to be in the mix. Still, it's looked like Lilly to the Cubs for about two days now.

 

I know many of you are against Lilly, but I really want him. That said, I want him provided it would not interfere with signing Schmidt.

Up about four posts.

 

(Yes, I did that on purpose)

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

If the Cubs sign both Lilly and Schmidt, it could be an indication that Hendry doubts whether he can extend Zambrano.

[inari]

If the Cubs sign both Lilly and Schmidt, it could be an indication that Hendry doubts whether he can extend Zambrano.

 

I don't really see that as the case. If he thought he needed that money for Z, he wouldn't spend it on Schmidt and Lilly.

[Soul]

If the Cubs sign both Lilly and Schmidt, it could be an indication that Hendry doubts whether he can extend Zambrano.

 

OH, don't you bring your negative vibes in here, mandinga!! :wink:

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

The Jays are almost to the point of pulling their offer to Lilly.

 

Link.

 

"We're all getting a little tired of the talking, at some point it's yes or no," said Blue Jays GM J.P. Ricciardi. "We're getting close to that point."

[Jazz]

The Jays are almost to the point of pulling their offer to Lilly.

 

Link.

 

"We're all getting a little tired of the talking, at some point it's yes or no," said Blue Jays GM J.P. Ricciardi. "We're getting close to that point."

 

To me this means if Lilly doesn't sign with anyone by the end of tommorow, he's almost guaranteed to be a Cub.

[killthegoat06]

The Jays are almost to the point of pulling their offer to Lilly.

 

Link.

 

"We're all getting a little tired of the talking, at some point it's yes or no," said Blue Jays GM J.P. Ricciardi. "We're getting close to that point."

 

Pull yours Hendry!