Cubs Sign Grabow (2 years, $7.5 Million)

[SouthSideRyan]

Why is everyone pretending like Grabow will sign for multiple years at a lower salary than he makes now?

[CUBZ99]

We have Marshall, Gorzelanny, and Gaub, plus Fossum, Lambert, Russell, and Papelbon are all degrees of non-terrible. There's no need for Grabow to be making millions of dollars, especially when there's a pretty good chance he'd be at best the 3rd best LH in the organization.

 

Marshall has serious durability issues and has been terrible the second half of this season. Any sane GM would not go into a season relying on him to be healthy. Further, Right handed batters are OPSing .815 off of him, so he's not a great option unless he is only facing LHers.

 

Gaub is a head scratcher because if the Cubs had faith in him you would think they would have called him up already. Maybe the are trying to keep his trade value high going into the off season.

 

Gorzellanny would be a nice swing person in the bullpen next year, and I'm sure that's what they have planned for him.

 

As far as Fossum, Russell and Papelbon go, I highly doubt (and hope) the Cubs don't have to rely on those guys going into next season.

[pitchcs]

 

Marmol/Gooz/Marshall/Gorz/Pick 2/3 is my pen.

 

I wouldn't be opposed to Grabow if only to satisfy the "must have a veteran presence in the pen" doctrine and guarantee you have at least one lefty therefore reducing the likelihood of them freaking out in March and demanding to get a lefty.

 

I see that, I just hate that we're back to Dusty-proofing thhe team.

 

 

To be fair, there are a whole bunch of GMs that like veterans in their bullpen not just JH. I certainly wouldn't want too much inexperience in my pen if I were the GM (especially for this club).

[Outshined_One]

Unless Harden comes back, I'm guessing one of Gorzelanny and Marshall will be the #5 starter. Without Grabow, that would leave Lou with just one LHP in the bullpen (unless one of the AAA/AA arms comes through). I'm guessing this is being done with that possibility in mind. Plus, if Harden does re-sign in the offseason, the Cubs will be free to include one of those two lefties in a trade package without worrying about the LHP situation.

 

I'm not saying the Cubs need more than one LHP in the pen, but I can see why they'd be discussing an extension with Grabow.

[KingCubsFan]

If Grabow is the only guy in the pen making big money next year I'd be fine with it. I still don't know why Gaub and Parker haven't been given a shot in September

[17 Seconds]

I don't understand why so many people don't realize that Grabow sucks. I don't care how much the contract is worth, grabow doesn't deserve a multi-year deal. He blows.

[Post Count Padder]

I wouldn't mind him at $2 mil a year. Maybe $3 mil, but no more than that. and no more than two years. This team needs to stop overpaying for relievers.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Marshall has serious durability issues and has been terrible the second half of this season. Any sane GM would not go into a season relying on him to be healthy. Further, Right handed batters are OPSing .815 off of him, so he's not a great option unless he is only facing LHers.

 

Gaub is a head scratcher because if the Cubs had faith in him you would think they would have called him up already. Maybe the are trying to keep his trade value high going into the off season.

 

Gorzellanny would be a nice swing person in the bullpen next year, and I'm sure that's what they have planned for him.

 

As far as Fossum, Russell and Papelbon go, I highly doubt (and hope) the Cubs don't have to rely on those guys going into next season.

 

Marshall is a good pitcher, and if he's a reliever, his durability is pretty much a non-issue. He's better than Grabow. Gorzelanny is much the same way.

 

Gaub isn't on the big league club because he's not on the 40 man roster. There's no need to add him now and start all the option clock stuff so he could throw 5 innings this month.

 

I mention Fossum, Russell, and Papelbon to point out that there are mediocre options available in the minor leagues, so having Gaub on the MLB roster doesn't hurt our ability to taxi relievers to and from Iowa, or to compensate for a minor injury.

[17 Seconds]

Grabow's career WHIP numbers, starting with this season

 

1.42

1.28

1.45

1.41

1.37

1.77

 

And his career splits vs lefties aren't drastically different like you'd expect from a loogy. He has a 1.33 career WHIP vs lefties.

 

Why do we want to give this guy a multi-year deal again? It's one thing paying for relievers. It's another thing to pay for crappy relievers.

[Wrigley Rat]

IMHO, Grabow will be back one way or another next year. If the Cubs can't sign him to a two year contract, they will offer him arbitration. He will most likely accept since he is a Type A free agent and the club signing him would need to pony up a 1st rounder for him. That would seriously lower his value on the open market. I say he gets a two year $6.5 million contract or they settle for $3,250,000 one year contract after comparing arbitration numbers.

 

I agree with the arguments against paying high dollar values for relief pitchers (ala Howry, Eyre, Remlinger), but I think a proven lefty is the exception (the assumption is that Grabow qulaifies as a proven lefty).

 

The Cubs will most likely non-tender Heilman this December prior to the Rule 5 Draft. Our bullpen would look like this going into spring training (except for any FA signings): Marmol, Guzman, Grabow, Marshall, Gorzelanny, Samardzija, Caridad, Stevens, Gaub, Parker, Berg, Patton. I expect Marshall and/or Gorzelanny to be used in a trade this offseason. After Marmol, Guzman, and Grabow there are not many proven guys. It would be nice to keep a couple of them at AAA to be used as fill-ins when someone gets hurt.

[Rob]

If I had to guess, I'd say it'll be about 7.25 mil over two years, plus incentives for games finished... just in case we need to use him as closer.

[Halman]

I wouldn't mind resigning grabow if Marshall is used as trade bait. I wouldn't be overly pleased but I wouldn't be mad or anything.

[CUBZ99]

Marshall has serious durability issues and has been terrible the second half of this season. Any sane GM would not go into a season relying on him to be healthy. Further, Right handed batters are OPSing .815 off of him, so he's not a great option unless he is only facing LHers.

 

Gaub is a head scratcher because if the Cubs had faith in him you would think they would have called him up already. Maybe the are trying to keep his trade value high going into the off season.

 

Gorzellanny would be a nice swing person in the bullpen next year, and I'm sure that's what they have planned for him.

 

As far as Fossum, Russell and Papelbon go, I highly doubt (and hope) the Cubs don't have to rely on those guys going into next season.

 

Marshall is a good pitcher, and if he's a reliever, his durability is pretty much a non-issue. He's better than Grabow. Gorzelanny is much the same way.

 

Gaub isn't on the big league club because he's not on the 40 man roster. There's no need to add him now and start all the option clock stuff so he could throw 5 innings this month.

 

I mention Fossum, Russell, and Papelbon to point out that there are mediocre options available in the minor leagues, so having Gaub on the MLB roster doesn't hurt our ability to taxi relievers to and from Iowa, or to compensate for a minor injury.

 

Not true, his durability is still an issue as proven this year. Look at his 2nd half stats. There is a reason he isn't pitching recently.

[CUBZ99]

Grabow's career WHIP numbers, starting with this season

 

1.42

1.28

1.45

1.41

1.37

1.77

 

And his career splits vs lefties aren't drastically different like you'd expect from a loogy. He has a 1.33 career WHIP vs lefties.

 

Why do we want to give this guy a multi-year deal again? It's one thing paying for relievers. It's another thing to pay for crappy relievers.

 

His OPS vs. lefties this year is .601 and vs. RH is .690ish. That is not bad at all.

[RedFlash]

Trevor Miller of the Cards got a one year deal worth $2 mill. Again I would the same deal as Miller got with the Cardinals with an mutual option.

[SouthSideRyan]

Trever Miller is 36 and has never been good before.

 

I think instead of signing Grabow, the Cubs should sign John Lackey to the same 3Y/3M deal Grabow will certainly sign.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Not true, his durability is still an issue as proven this year. Look at his 2nd half stats. There is a reason he isn't pitching recently.

 

And yet he still has a better WHIP and K/BB than Grabow.

 

Sean Marshall having a crummy August doesn't change the fact that he's better than John Grabow.

[Halman]

Trever Miller is 36 and has never been good before.

 

I think instead of signing Grabow, the Cubs should sign John Lackey to the same 3Y/3M deal Grabow will certainly sign.

 

Lawl

[Eric Clipperton]

Trever Miller is 36 and has never been good before.

 

I think instead of signing Grabow, the Cubs should sign John Lackey to the same 3Y/3M deal Grabow will certainly sign.

 

I don't know...Grabow does walk a ton of guys, but Lackey pitching left handed would probably walk a ton of guys too, might not fill that all-important LOOGY spot, which surely is an actual position on Lou's lineup card.

[17 Seconds]

We have Marshall, Gorzelanny, and Gaub, plus Fossum, Lambert, Russell, and Papelbon are all degrees of non-terrible. There's no need for Grabow to be making millions of dollars, especially when there's a pretty good chance he'd be at best the 3rd best LH in the organization.

 

Marshall has serious durability issues and has been terrible the second half of this season. Any sane GM would not go into a season relying on him to be healthy.

 

Why are you assuming that his second half struggles have to do with durability and usage? Last year he was a little better in the second half than in the first..... why didn't he fade down the stretch last year?

 

There might be something to the "Marshall has trouble pitching a full season" stuff, but now it's like everything is automatically being attributed to that, and people are just assuming it's a fact, when really it's just speculation.

 

Marshall getting shelled tonight? "Oh, must be because he's tired."

 

Marshall had a bad August? "Yup... typical Marshall"

[JeffH]

If I had to guess, I'd say it'll be about 7.25 mil over two years, plus incentives for games finished... just in case we need to use him as closer.

 

You forgot the player option for the third year.

 

Unfortunately, Hendry won't forget.

[Guest]

Extending Grabow wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, but it is completely unnecessary. Just offer arbitration and benefit from one of the outcomes:

 

1) He accepts - you get him on a one year deal for $3-3.5M. Not ideal, but much better than a multi-year deal

 

2) He declines and signs elsewhere - you have to fill the loogy spot with an option that's about equal (Marshall, Gorz, Gaub) AND you get to pocket two draft picks

 

3) He declines and gets hosed out of signing - Oh well, nothing lost.

[SouthSideRyan]

If I had to guess, I'd say it'll be about 7.25 mil over two years, plus incentives for games finished... just in case we need to use him as closer.

 

You forgot the player option for the third year.

 

Unfortunately, Hendry won't forget.

 

NO TRADE CLAUSE

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Extending Grabow wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, but it is completely unnecessary. Just offer arbitration and benefit from one of the outcomes:

 

1) He accepts - you get him on a one year deal for $3-3.5M. Not ideal, but much better than a multi-year deal

 

2) He declines and signs elsewhere - you have to fill the loogy spot with an option that's about equal (Marshall, Gorz, Gaub) AND you get to pocket two draft picks

 

3) He declines and gets hosed out of signing - Oh well, nothing lost.

 

Yep. This is the way it should go.

 

I'd prefer he declines arbitration, but if he accepts you're paying him a little too much, but there's no long-term commitment.

[jersey cubs fan]

Extending Grabow wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, but it is completely unnecessary. Just offer arbitration and benefit from one of the outcomes:

 

1) He accepts - you get him on a one year deal for $3-3.5M. Not ideal, but much better than a multi-year deal

 

2) He declines and signs elsewhere - you have to fill the loogy spot with an option that's about equal (Marshall, Gorz, Gaub) AND you get to pocket two draft picks

 

3) He declines and gets hosed out of signing - Oh well, nothing lost.

 

Yep. This is the way it should go.

 

I'd prefer he declines arbitration, but if he accepts you're paying him a little too much, but there's no long-term commitment.

 

Yeah, there shouldn't be any serious drive to sign an extension, unless the guy wants to pitch for $2m per year or something.