stop spending big $ on setup men, please

[TruffleShuffle]

Where did I say anything bout goin into a season with 7 guys who havent thrown a big league pitch? I said its dumb to spend big money and big years on ML relievers because they are so inconsistant. Giving out 3 year deals for relievers to me is not smart plain and simple. I know every bp isnt going to be built from your farm system but if your farm system is anything decent you should have enough quality arms down there that you can form most of your bp from that.

Which teams, aside from the small market teams that have no other choice, do that?

St. Louis & Anaheim, two teams that perpetually have top 5 bullpens in baseball.

 

Other than Izzy, I can't think of a single FA those guys have gone on the market for and signed to big money contracts. Now, Anaheim extended Shields with pretty big money, but they found him for minimum dollars initially.

 

Minnesota's bullpen last year was about as good as it gets. Nathan was the only guy making more than $1m, IIRC, and most were making around league minimum.

 

Rincon and Crain were both strong minor league prospects who have been successful at the big league level. Pat Neshek was also a product of their system who had great numbers in the minors. They got incredibly lucky with Dennys Reyes, who had an ERA over 4.5 and a WHIP over 1.5, and then managed to have an ERA and a WHIP of under one last season.

 

If the Cubs could produce three relievers like Rincon, Crain and Neshek, hell I'd be all for that. But Wuertz is probably pretty close to Crain in terms of ability, and then who's next? Will Ohman? He's easily worse than any of the Twins' three. Novoa sucked. Guzman has sucked in every attempt in the big leagues. Leicester, Wellemeyer, Bartosh, Mitre, none of those guys have been good enough. That's why the Cubs sign people like Howry and Eyre, because none of their minor league options are passable options. Your plan is great in theory abuck, but it doesn't work in real life because this organization has not produced enough quality pitchers.

[papabear58]

Where did I say anything bout goin into a season with 7 guys who havent thrown a big league pitch? I said its dumb to spend big money and big years on ML relievers because they are so inconsistant. Giving out 3 year deals for relievers to me is not smart plain and simple. I know every bp isnt going to be built from your farm system but if your farm system is anything decent you should have enough quality arms down there that you can form most of your bp from that.

Which teams, aside from the small market teams that have no other choice, do that?

St. Louis & Anaheim, two teams that perpetually have top 5 bullpens in baseball.

 

Other than Izzy, I can't think of a single FA those guys have gone on the market for and signed to big money contracts. Now, Anaheim extended Shields with pretty big money, but they found him for minimum dollars initially.

 

Minnesota's bullpen last year was about as good as it gets. Nathan was the only guy making more than $1m, IIRC, and most were making around league minimum.

 

Rincon and Crain were both strong minor league prospects who have been successful at the big league level. Pat Neshek was also a product of their system who had great numbers in the minors. They got incredibly lucky with Dennys Reyes, who had an ERA over 4.5 and a WHIP over 1.5, and then managed to have an ERA and a WHIP of under one last season.

 

If the Cubs could produce three relievers like Rincon, Crain and Neshek, hell I'd be all for that. But Wuertz is probably pretty close to Crain in terms of ability, and then who's next? Will Ohman? He's easily worse than any of the Twins' three. Novoa sucked. Guzman has sucked in every attempt in the big leagues. Leicester, Wellemeyer, Bartosh, Mitre, none of those guys have been good enough. That's why the Cubs sign people like Howry and Eyre, because none of their minor league options are passable options. Your plan is great in theory abuck, but it doesn't work in real life because this organization has not produced enough quality pitchers.

 

They seem to do ok with starters (Z and Hill and, until injury that you can't blame entirely on the organization, Wood/Prior). It's just the relievers that they seem to suck with. I wonder why that is :?

[Guest]

Other than Izzy, I can't think of a single FA those guys have gone on the market for and signed to big money contracts.

 

Ray King, Julian Tavarez, Dave Veres, Mike Timlin, Steve Kline. All signed for $2M or more. That was easy.

- I thought King came in a trade with Atlanta

- I'm nearly positive that Timlin came over as part of a trade

- Veres came over in the trade with Daryl Kile

- Kline came over in a trade for Tatis

 

Only one of those guys was signed as a free agent by stl - Tavarez and that was only to a two year deal worth a total of $4.2M. The other guys were all acquired as pieces of a trade.

 

So I think my statement stands.

Edited April 10, 2007 by Tim

[Guest]

Where did I say anything bout goin into a season with 7 guys who havent thrown a big league pitch? I said its dumb to spend big money and big years on ML relievers because they are so inconsistant. Giving out 3 year deals for relievers to me is not smart plain and simple. I know every bp isnt going to be built from your farm system but if your farm system is anything decent you should have enough quality arms down there that you can form most of your bp from that.

Which teams, aside from the small market teams that have no other choice, do that?

St. Louis & Anaheim, two teams that perpetually have top 5 bullpens in baseball.

 

Other than Izzy, I can't think of a single FA those guys have gone on the market for and signed to big money contracts. Now, Anaheim extended Shields with pretty big money, but they found him for minimum dollars initially.

 

Minnesota's bullpen last year was about as good as it gets. Nathan was the only guy making more than $1m, IIRC, and most were making around league minimum.

 

Rincon and Crain were both strong minor league prospects who have been successful at the big league level. Pat Neshek was also a product of their system who had great numbers in the minors. They got incredibly lucky with Dennys Reyes, who had an ERA over 4.5 and a WHIP over 1.5, and then managed to have an ERA and a WHIP of under one last season.

 

If the Cubs could produce three relievers like Rincon, Crain and Neshek, hell I'd be all for that. But Wuertz is probably pretty close to Crain in terms of ability, and then who's next? Will Ohman? He's easily worse than any of the Twins' three. Novoa sucked. Guzman has sucked in every attempt in the big leagues. Leicester, Wellemeyer, Bartosh, Mitre, none of those guys have been good enough. That's why the Cubs sign people like Howry and Eyre, because none of their minor league options are passable options. Your plan is great in theory abuck, but it doesn't work in real life because this organization has not produced enough quality pitchers.

 

They seem to do ok with starters (Z and Hill and, until injury that you can't blame entirely on the organization, Wood/Prior). It's just the relievers that they seem to suck with. I wonder why that is :?

Sorry for quoting the whole thing, but wanted to make a couple points...

 

I didn't list minnesota because the question specifically excluded small market teams. One could also list Oakland as a team that usually has a good pen without signing big money FA's. Dodgers, too.

 

Guzman has sucked at every attempt at the big leagues? What, all two of them? lol

 

Ohman may be worse than the Twins three, but he's a better pitcher than Eyre, who we signed for big money.

 

And your statement about producing pitchers is just flat out wrong. The cubs have produced more major league pitchers than ANY organization over the past ten years according to a recent study by BA. And it isn't even that close.

[CubColtPacer]

Other than Izzy, I can't think of a single FA those guys have gone on the market for and signed to big money contracts.

 

Ray King, Julian Tavarez, Dave Veres, Mike Timlin, Steve Kline. All signed for $2M or more. That was easy.

- I thought King came in a trade with Atlanta

- I'm nearly positive that Timlin came over as part of the Rolen trade

- Veres came over in the trade with Daryl Kile

- Kline came over in a trade for Tatis

 

Only one of those guys was signed as a free agent by stl - Tavarez and that was only to a two year deal worth a total of $4.2M. The other guys were all acquired as pieces of a trade.

 

So I think my statement stands.

 

Maybe the letter of the point, but weren't you trying to make the point that St. Louis realizes the low value of the bullpen and weren't willing to expend a large amount of resources to build a strong bullpen and instead go to their farm system to build it? St. Louis actually did more than the Cubs-they put such a strong emphasis on their bullpen that they actually went out like you said and traded for several different high priced bullpen pitchers. They spent that part of their payroll on the bullpen and gave up talent to get these pitchers, and their bullpen was made up at one time of almost nobody from their farm system.

[Guest]

Other than Izzy, I can't think of a single FA those guys have gone on the market for and signed to big money contracts.

 

Ray King, Julian Tavarez, Dave Veres, Mike Timlin, Steve Kline. All signed for $2M or more. That was easy.

- I thought King came in a trade with Atlanta

- I'm nearly positive that Timlin came over as part of the Rolen trade

- Veres came over in the trade with Daryl Kile

- Kline came over in a trade for Tatis

 

Only one of those guys was signed as a free agent by stl - Tavarez and that was only to a two year deal worth a total of $4.2M. The other guys were all acquired as pieces of a trade.

 

So I think my statement stands.

 

Maybe the letter of the point, but weren't you trying to make the point that St. Louis realizes the low value of the bullpen and weren't willing to expend a large amount of resources to build a strong bullpen and instead go to their farm system to build it? St. Louis actually did more than the Cubs-they put such a strong emphasis on their bullpen that they actually went out like you said and traded for several different high priced bullpen pitchers. They spent that part of their payroll on the bullpen and gave up talent to get these pitchers, and their bullpen was made up at one time of almost nobody from their farm system.

I think it's a mixed bag of cases, though. As an example, Veres wasn't the main target in the trade with Col - he came along with Kile. And he was just an arbitration eligible guy when he was acquired. As soon as he hit FA, they let him go (and the Cubs paid him $2M to sign him). Timlin came as a salary dump by the O's at the trade deadline in 2000 when the Alan Benes experiment didn't pan out. Steve Kline was also just a fairly cheap, arby-eligible guy when brought over and existed on year to year contracts. Ray King was an arby guy and only cost $900K when he was brought on board. Sensing a trend here? The Cards did not go out and allocate a bunch of payroll and they did not give up a lot to get these guys. When they hit FA and would require a multi-year commitment, they cut them loose.

 

It's a pretty simple concept, actually. Don't make long-term commitments to relievers. They're simply too fickle. Jocketty gets it.

[BigbadB]

While one guy could hold up his value in a long term contract, it's not a gamble worth taking. We've watched the Cubs give big money to Alfonseca, Fassero, Gordon, Remlinger, Hawkins, Eyre and Howry. None has really been worth their value.

 

In 2002, the most effective guys in the pen were Juan Cruz and Joe Borowski. The big money pen guys were Fassero and Alfonseca.

 

In 2003, Borowski, Farnsworth and Guthrie were the most effective guys in the pen, and the big money pen guys were Remlinger and Alfonseca.

 

In 2004, Hawkins and Mercker were the most effective pen guys, and the big money guys were Remlinger and Hawkins.

 

In 2005, Dempster and Ohman were the most effective guys in the pen, and Hawkins, Remlinger and Borowski were the big money guys.

 

In 2006, Wuertz, Howry and Eyre were the most effective bullpen guys, Dempster, Eyre and Howry were the big money pen guys.

 

Most of the more effective relievers have been the cheaper guys. It's a very fickle bunch.

[rawaction]

I was on record 2 years ago of wanting 1 FA reliever. I didn't want Eyre, who has been bad as a Cub. His WHIP and inherited runners scored rivals Dempster's from last year. Howry was a decent signing. But the Cubs have Howry, Eyre, Dempster, and Wood all making way more than the minimum. That's too much money invested in the pen. I don't mind the money going to a closer, if he is truly a stopper.....Dempster is not. I don't mind a good setup man getting paid money if he's a shut down type of reliever, Howry has shown he is at least pretty close to that level. But a situational LH should never be paid millions. A long-reliever should never be paid millions.

 

The Cubs have several arms ready for the big leagues who could be decent relievers for the league minimum: Cherry, Guzman, Rapada, Wells. That makes the money spent on the pen even more disappointing.

[rawaction]

What about Eyre was good last year? ERA? K/9? His peripherals sucked last year to a Dempsteresque level. He was extremely lucky in 2006.

[jersey cubs fan]

I was on record 2 years ago of wanting 1 FA reliever. I didn't want Eyre, who has been bad as a Cub. His WHIP and inherited runners scored rivals Dempster's from last year. Howry was a decent signing. But the Cubs have Howry, Eyre, Dempster, and Wood all making way more than the minimum. That's too much money invested in the pen. I don't mind the money going to a closer, if he is truly a stopper.....Dempster is not. I don't mind a good setup man getting paid money if he's a shut down type of reliever, Howry has shown he is at least pretty close to that level. But a situational LH should never be paid millions. A long-reliever should never be paid millions.

 

The Cubs have several arms ready for the big leagues who could be decent relievers for the league minimum: Cherry, Guzman, Rapada, Wells. That makes the money spent on the pen even more disappointing.

 

I don't think the dollars are nearly as big of a problem as the years. Hendry's tendency to go 3-years with non stud relievers is just maddening.

[rawaction]

I was on record 2 years ago of wanting 1 FA reliever. I didn't want Eyre, who has been bad as a Cub. His WHIP and inherited runners scored rivals Dempster's from last year. Howry was a decent signing. But the Cubs have Howry, Eyre, Dempster, and Wood all making way more than the minimum. That's too much money invested in the pen. I don't mind the money going to a closer, if he is truly a stopper.....Dempster is not. I don't mind a good setup man getting paid money if he's a shut down type of reliever, Howry has shown he is at least pretty close to that level. But a situational LH should never be paid millions. A long-reliever should never be paid millions.

 

The Cubs have several arms ready for the big leagues who could be decent relievers for the league minimum: Cherry, Guzman, Rapada, Wells. That makes the money spent on the pen even more disappointing.

 

I don't think the dollars are nearly as big of a problem as the years. Hendry's tendency to go 3-years with non stud relievers is just maddening.

 

Even the studs aren't sure bets. Hawkins is what I would consider a stud reliever, before he came to the Cubs. Remlinger probably could be considered a stud too, based on his 2 prior years, but he was turning 38.

 

There's not a reliever in the game today I can say I know will be still great in 3 years, except BJ Ryan and Papelbon, who would be wasted in that role.

[CubColtPacer]

What about Eyre was good last year? ERA? K/9? His peripherals sucked last year to a Dempsteresque level. He was extremely lucky in 2006.

 

His peripherals weren't bad at all until his injury in August-he never really recovered from that last season. He was good most of the year until then.

[frostwyrm]

I don't see how people can acknowledge that relievers are fickle but still say Howry was a good signing. He's only completed one year in a 3 year deal. He's still too expensive for his role and he could easily suck this year and the next. He was actually one of the players I would have liked to have seen traded last July while his value was high. He would have netted a good haul and we would have cleared a big contract from the books.

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't see how people can acknowledge that relievers are fickle but still say Howry was a good signing. He's only completed one year in a 3 year deal. He's still too expensive for his role and he could easily suck this year and the next. He was actually one of the players I would have liked to have seen traded last July while his value was high. He would have netted a good haul and we would have cleared a big contract from the books.

 

I think he was good last year, but not a particularly good signing. I would have traded any of the relievers this offseason.

[Soul]

I think the overall point is valid in that it would be nice to see more of our relievers come from within.

[Fro]

I think the overall point is valid in that it would be nice to see more of our relievers come from within.

 

Yes, but we're never going to get a pen of mostly homegrown kids as long as we keep drafting people with "teh awesome stuff" and hoping they develop control.

[KingCubsFan]

I think the overall point is valid in that it would be nice to see more of our relievers come from within.

 

Yes, but we're never going to get a pen of mostly homegrown kids as long as we keep drafting people with "teh awesome stuff" and hoping they develop control.

Why? You can teach mechanics, increased control, etc. You can't teach 98 mph fastballs and unhittable breaking balls

[jersey cubs fan]

I think the overall point is valid in that it would be nice to see more of our relievers come from within.

 

Yes, but we're never going to get a pen of mostly homegrown kids as long as we keep drafting people with "teh awesome stuff" and hoping they develop control.

Why? You can teach mechanics, increased control, etc. You can't teach 98 mph fastballs and unhittable breaking balls

 

The Cubs have been working on this theory for a long time, to no avail. They need more guys who throw 93 with control. Quit leading the league in walks allowed.

[papabear58]

I think the overall point is valid in that it would be nice to see more of our relievers come from within.

 

Yes, but we're never going to get a pen of mostly homegrown kids as long as we keep drafting people with "teh awesome stuff" and hoping they develop control.

Why? You can teach mechanics, increased control, etc. You can't teach 98 mph fastballs and unhittable breaking balls

 

The Cubs have been working on this theory for a long time, to no avail. They need more guys who throw 93 with control. Quit leading the league in walks allowed.

 

Jersey is right on this one. We've done a great job of drafting starting pitchers and developing them (see Zambrano, Hill, and before injury, Kerry Wood, and Mark Prior). What I've seen our team fall flat on it our ability to draft and develop relief pitching and I think it's because of our outlook on pitchers in general. Just because someone is a good starting pitcher doesn't mean that they can make a successful change to relief and excel out of the pen.

[TruffleShuffle]

Other than Izzy, I can't think of a single FA those guys have gone on the market for and signed to big money contracts.

 

Ray King, Julian Tavarez, Dave Veres, Mike Timlin, Steve Kline. All signed for $2M or more. That was easy.

- I thought King came in a trade with Atlanta

- I'm nearly positive that Timlin came over as part of a trade

- Veres came over in the trade with Daryl Kile

- Kline came over in a trade for Tatis

 

Only one of those guys was signed as a free agent by stl - Tavarez and that was only to a two year deal worth a total of $4.2M. The other guys were all acquired as pieces of a trade.

 

So I think my statement stands.

 

I thought you meant that they never went onto the market and received big money.

[TruffleShuffle]

I think the overall point is valid in that it would be nice to see more of our relievers come from within.

 

Yes, but we're never going to get a pen of mostly homegrown kids as long as we keep drafting people with "teh awesome stuff" and hoping they develop control.

Why? You can teach mechanics, increased control, etc. You can't teach 98 mph fastballs and unhittable breaking balls

 

maybe someone can teach mechanics and increased control, but that someone doesn't work for the cubs

[KingCubsFan]

I think the overall point is valid in that it would be nice to see more of our relievers come from within.

 

Yes, but we're never going to get a pen of mostly homegrown kids as long as we keep drafting people with "teh awesome stuff" and hoping they develop control.

Why? You can teach mechanics, increased control, etc. You can't teach 98 mph fastballs and unhittable breaking balls

 

maybe someone can teach mechanics and increased control, but that someone doesn't work for the cubs

I think the Braves stole them all

[Guest]

I think the overall point is valid in that it would be nice to see more of our relievers come from within.

 

Yes, but we're never going to get a pen of mostly homegrown kids as long as we keep drafting people with "teh awesome stuff" and hoping they develop control.

Why? You can teach mechanics, increased control, etc. You can't teach 98 mph fastballs and unhittable breaking balls

 

maybe someone can teach mechanics and increased control, but that someone doesn't work for the cubs

Ask Rich Hill who helped him.

[TruffleShuffle]

I think the overall point is valid in that it would be nice to see more of our relievers come from within.

 

Yes, but we're never going to get a pen of mostly homegrown kids as long as we keep drafting people with "teh awesome stuff" and hoping they develop control.

Why? You can teach mechanics, increased control, etc. You can't teach 98 mph fastballs and unhittable breaking balls

 

maybe someone can teach mechanics and increased control, but that someone doesn't work for the cubs

Ask Rich Hill who helped him.

 

good point. But seriously, it seems like Baseball America always loves the pitchers in the Cubs organization, but there's really not enough to show for how good they're supposed to be. BA tends to look at raw talent more than results, so in terms of physical ability, the Cubs are among the best at identifying it.

 

Because of injuries and inability to throw strikes, the physical skills too frequently don't translate to success at the major league level. I blame coaching throughout the organization for this - both in not teaching proper mechanics, and in not emphasizing the importance of throwing strikes.

[SouthSideRyan]

Howry's been doing it for 2.5 years running now. I have no problem with his signing. Not EVERY reliever is unpredictable, at some point a reliever proves himself.

 

Eyre was a bad signing.

 

I agree in theory that a good bullpen can be assembled on the cheap. The problem is that you wind up wasting time churning through replacement pitchers while looking for the guys that are going to click. It's the same argument that came up in the Lee/Choi thread. At some points you have to pay a premium for a certain level of certainty. With Choi in '04 he had the possibility of being everything Lee was at that moment, as soon as the next season. But the Cubs wanted the certainty from the position and got Lee from it. It's quite possible there are 7 guys in the Cubs's AA-AAA that can put up 3-4 ERAs in the majors out of the pen, but the certainty of having a guy who can do it is worth money.