Re: What do you predict the 2011 Cubs will look like?

[UMFan83]

He's given middle relievers $5m/year contracts

 

Who? Howry got about $4 mil a year, Grabow got an average of 3.5 a year and Eyre got 3 a year. I can't think of any $5+ mil a year relievers under Hendry. And Howry and Eyre were good signings.

 

I should have said $4m/year contracts, but Grabow is gonna make $4.8mil next season, who was the player in my head when I wrote that. But yes, also $4m/year to both Eyre and Howry.

 

he's given just about every decent signing/resigning no trade clauses

 

We only have five guys with NTCs: Lee, Aramis, Soriano, Z, Fukudome. Soriano and Z are the only NTCs that look really bad at this point. The Cubs want to trade Fukudome but really shouldn't and Lee and Aramis have 10/5 rights at this point (and we didn't want to trade either prior to last year when I think both got their rights).

 

Also include Lilly, who was just traded, and Samardzija who isn't even in the bigs right now. The point is, those 5 guys you listed make a combined $82 million. Combined with Lilly's $13 mil and Shark's $2 mil, the Cubs entered the season with $97 million tied up to 7 players with some form of no trade protection. That's more than 20 teams payrolls tied up in no trade clauses. It's the big reason why we just have to kind of wait this whole thing out and let contracts expire, instead of blowing up the core last offseason or this offseason.

[dew1679666265]

I should have said $4m/year contracts, but Grabow is gonna make $4.8mil next season, who was the player in my head when I wrote that. But yes, also $4m/year to both Eyre and Howry.

 

That makes your point factual, but it's not really a bad thing. Grabow was a bad signing, but Howry and Eyre were both, overall, good for the Cubs (more Howry than Eyre).

 

Also include Lilly, who was just traded, and Samardzija who isn't even in the bigs right now. The point is, those 5 guys you listed make a combined $82 million. Combined with Lilly's $13 mil and Shark's $2 mil, the Cubs entered the season with $97 million tied up to 7 players with some form of no trade protection. That's more than 20 teams payrolls tied up in no trade clauses. It's the big reason why we just have to kind of wait this whole thing out and let contracts expire, instead of blowing up the core last offseason or this offseason.

 

Z, Kosuke and Soriano are largely untradeable at this point because of poor performance/benching. Kosuke may become moreso next year when less of his contract is left, however. Lilly was just traded for a good return and Lee and Aramis have 10/5 rights and we had no real desire (or reason) to trade them before last season. I did forget about Shark, but he's making $2 mil a year.

 

I don't see how the NTCs are keeping us from rebuilding the team if the desire is there. Regardless of NTCs, blowing the team up would not be a particularly good idea anyway. I really don't see the issue.

 

If no player had any type of no trade protection, who would we have traded to this point that we have not and would trading that player have been a good idea?

[SouthSideRyan]

Picking nits, but Soriano's performance is only poor relative to his contract. He's had one below average year, and that was when he played the season on one leg.

[dew1679666265]

Picking nits, but Soriano's performance is only poor relative to his contract. He's had one below average year, and that was when he played the season on one leg.

 

Good point. I should have included monster contracts in that as well. Soriano has been good to very good as a Cub (save last year) and has really been about all we could have hoped for (realistically). Nobody's trading for that contract right now unless they're incredibly desperate to win at the trade deadline, though.

[UMFan83]

That makes your point factual, but it's not really a bad thing. Grabow was a bad signing, but Howry and Eyre were both, overall, good for the Cubs (more Howry than Eyre).

 

Scott Eyre gave the Cubs a 4.03 ERA in 148 appearances for the Cubs and Howry gave the Cubs a 3.90 ERA in 234 appearances for the Cubs. Considering the variability of relievers, averaging around a 4 ERA for 2 guys over 3 seasons is decent, but I don't see how they should be paid $8 million combined for that performance. Now those contracts didn't stop the Cubs from adding payroll while they were signed, but the original point (which we both agree on lol) is that Hendry should not be given another opportunity to spend a sizable chunk of money on building a team because of examples like this. If he is willing to give Grabow almost $5 million next year to be a setup man with his track record during a time where there is little to no payroll flexibility, I can't imagine him resisting more overpaid relievers in the future.

 

Also include Lilly, who was just traded, and Samardzija who isn't even in the bigs right now. The point is, those 5 guys you listed make a combined $82 million. Combined with Lilly's $13 mil and Shark's $2 mil, the Cubs entered the season with $97 million tied up to 7 players with some form of no trade protection. That's more than 20 teams payrolls tied up in no trade clauses. It's the big reason why we just have to kind of wait this whole thing out and let contracts expire, instead of blowing up the core last offseason or this offseason.

 

Z, Kosuke and Soriano are largely untradeable at this point because of poor performance/benching. Kosuke may become moreso next year when less of his contract is left, however. Lilly was just traded for a good return and Lee and Aramis have 10/5 rights and we had no real desire (or reason) to trade them before last season. I did forget about Shark, but he's making $2 mil a year.

 

I don't see how the NTCs are keeping us from rebuilding the team if the desire is there. Regardless of NTCs, blowing the team up would not be a particularly good idea anyway. I really don't see the issue.

 

If no player had any type of no trade protection, who would we have traded to this point that we have not and would trading that player have been a good idea?

 

Well we don't really know who would or would not lift their no trade clause if traded because none of them (besides Lee) have gotten to that point. But who knows why? Just because it hasn't hurt them yet doesn't mean it is a smart idea to give everyone NTC. Do we know for a fact that Soriano would OK a trade elsewhere if the Cubs actually found a team to take on some of his deal? Zambrano, as much as he's had with the team this year, I can't say for certain he'd accept a trade somewhere. We know Lee won't, Ramirez might. Even Fukudome I am not sure would accept a trade somewhere. Maybe if it were a big market or maybe Seattle. But he's not oking a trade to lets say Denver most likely.

 

Maybe I'm putting a little too much emphasis on the NTC and not enough on the enormous salary these guys all make. I don't deny that's a huge reason too...probably bigger reason. It's not worth Hendry's times to look for trades where we get 20 cents on the dollar for a player like Fukudome, and pay half his salary, and have to worry about getting all the way down to an agreement and Fukudome nixing the trade.

[dew1679666265]

Scott Eyre gave the Cubs a 4.03 ERA in 148 appearances for the Cubs and Howry gave the Cubs a 3.90 ERA in 234 appearances for the Cubs. Considering the variability of relievers, averaging around a 4 ERA for 2 guys over 3 seasons is decent, but I don't see how they should be paid $8 million combined for that performance. Now those contracts didn't stop the Cubs from adding payroll while they were signed, but the original point (which we both agree on lol) is that Hendry should not be given another opportunity to spend a sizable chunk of money on building a team because of examples like this. If he is willing to give Grabow almost $5 million next year to be a setup man with his track record during a time where there is little to no payroll flexibility, I can't imagine him resisting more overpaid relievers in the future.

 

With both Howry and Eyre, Hendry gave them one year too long on their deals. Eyre posted a 3.38 and 4.13 ERA his first two years with a 2.43 and 1.29 K/BB. Howry posted a 3.17 and 3.32 ERA in his first two seasons with a 4.18 and 3.79 K/BB. Eyre was a little worse overall than I thought, but generally you're not getting close to the level of production from some random rookie that you got from Howry.

 

The bigger frustration I have with Hendry is giving multiple millions for replaceable bench bats (Neifi, Miles, etc) than giving contracts to relievers. Grabow was a bad contract all the way around, but I really can't think of any other big money relievers who were a terrible (or even really needless) contract.

 

Well we don't really know who would or would not lift their no trade clause if traded because none of them (besides Lee) have gotten to that point. But who knows why? Just because it hasn't hurt them yet doesn't mean it is a smart idea to give everyone NTC. Do we know for a fact that Soriano would OK a trade elsewhere if the Cubs actually found a team to take on some of his deal? Zambrano, as much as he's had with the team this year, I can't say for certain he'd accept a trade somewhere. We know Lee won't, Ramirez might. Even Fukudome I am not sure would accept a trade somewhere. Maybe if it were a big market or maybe Seattle. But he's not oking a trade to lets say Denver most likely.

 

I'm not talking about who might lift their clause. I'm saying if no player had NTC, who is it realistic that we may have traded to this point? Lee has invoked his 10/5 rights, the NTC is irrelevant at this point.

 

You're also talking about NTCs as if they have no value to the club handing out the NTC. I can't give you an exact dollar figure, but the reason NTCs are given out is because you can offer the NTC and then lower the dollar figure or length of the deal. The NTC is as good as money for many players because they dictate their future at that point. Some guys won't sign without it and some guys will take less money or years to include an NTC.

 

Hendry has done a pretty good job of either giving the NTCs to players who we likely wouldn't want to trade (Lee, Aramis) or guys whose contract would be prohibitive enough to make the NTC irrelevant (Soriano, Z – though Z could have been in that first category when we signed him). The no trade protection that Lilly had generally just blocked trades to teams that weren't likely to want him anyway.

 

Maybe I'm putting a little too much emphasis on the NTC and not enough on the enormous salary these guys all make. I don't deny that's a huge reason too...probably bigger reason. It's not worth Hendry's times to look for trades where we get 20 cents on the dollar for a player like Fukudome, and pay half his salary, and have to worry about getting all the way down to an agreement and Fukudome nixing the trade.

 

Most of the contracts aren't that enormous, especially at the time they were signed, it's just that the economy has collapsed and, because of that, teams don't want to take on very large contracts. Soriano was a generally humongous and crazy contract, but his was the only outlandish one. We were actually outbid by multiple teams for Kosuke and Z gave us a hometown discount. Aramis did the same as Z (and his position is too valuable to let go right now) and Lee's contract isn't keeping him here. The budgetary issues are more a result of an unforeseen economic collapse moreso than Hendry handing out ridiculous contracts. All these players have been more productive than not over the length of their contracts.

[Exile on Waveland]

Hendry has done a pretty good job of . . . giving the NTCs to players who we likely wouldn't want to trade . . .

 

I find this reasoning very circular.

[dew1679666265]

Hendry has done a pretty good job of . . . giving the NTCs to players who we likely wouldn't want to trade . . .

 

I find this reasoning very circular.

 

Why? I specifically meant Lee and Aramis and we had no desire to trade either until their 10/5 rights kicked in. The player is the one who negotiates in the NTC and the GM then tweaks the money/years offered accordingly. The player wants the assurance of not being traded until his 10/5 rights kick in (or being able to accept a trade and then reject any future deals) and the GM is more than happy to oblige if he sees that player as a young enough cornerstone that he won't want to trade the player during the contract.

 

Whether that was the thought process or not for Hendry, he still has given NTCs either to guys who are good and young enough for us to not want to trade him or to guys whose contracts would likely prohibit trading them in the first place (Soriano, Z).

[UMFan83]

Can't argue Kosuke because we all wanted him. But that contract looks like an eyesore now. Soriano's contract is historically bad in both years and amount, regardless of the economy. I can't imagine how much worse it would be without the value adding NTC that you speak of.

 

Z may have given us a hometown discount, but you can easily question whether it was smart to resign Z to a long term contract at that point. I probably supported the move at the time but many people questioned it on the day it was signed due to the work that has been put on his arm, his attitude and his decreasing numbers (ERAs the last 4 seasons until his extension: 2.75, 3.26, 3.41, 3.95). I think Hendry would definitely consider an alternative route had he been able to do it over again. Also you don't point out how Milton Bradley got a 3 year 30 million dollar deal, despite having the worst numbers against RHP (the targeted area of need for this signing) than Ibanez and Dunn. Dunn absoutely embarrasses RHP over his career, and he signed for less money and years with a shittier team after publically pining for the Cubs. But Hendry went with Bradley despite the off the field and injury issues and despite the fact he hits much better vs. lefties than righties, because Bradley was more versatile, something Hendry was hot for (and probably still is). And I'm not even mentioning how Hendry was rumored to have outbid himself for Bradley (similar to the rumors he did the same for Maddux and Soriano in the past).

 

I'm not sure what we are really arguing about anymore, because its slowly turning into pro-Hendry vs. anti-Hendry and you're next post will somehow be about the good signings Hendry has made in his defense. I don't hate Hendry as much as some, although I do greatly dislike him and do not think he should be in charge of the next rebuild because I don't trust him to spend our money properly.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

This thread is depressing. None of the 2011 rosters look very good and I suspect the Cubs are looking to slash more payroll.

[dew1679666265]

Can't argue Kosuke because we all wanted him. But that contract looks like an eyesore now. Soriano's contract is historically bad in both years and amount, regardless of the economy. I can't imagine how much worse it would be without the value adding NTC that you speak of.

 

Z may have given us a hometown discount, but you can easily question whether it was smart to resign Z to a long term contract at that point. I probably supported the move at the time but many people questioned it on the day it was signed due to the work that has been put on his arm, his attitude and his decreasing numbers (ERAs the last 4 seasons until his extension: 2.75, 3.26, 3.41, 3.95). I think Hendry would definitely consider an alternative route had he been able to do it over again.

 

Kosuke's contract is only bad because Lou/Hendry benched him for Colvin. Nobody could have predicted this type of breakout from Colvin and Kosuke would likely be starting and producing if not for the fluke. It's another topic to discuss whether Colvin should be starting over Kosuke, though.

 

And I already said Soriano's contract was humongous and awful. There's no disagreement on that point. The NTC likely helped, but he really shouldn't have been signed to that monster of a deal (even though he's been really good to this point overall).

 

On Z, I can buy that argument. However, Hendry did still get a hometown discount and Zs struggles have been overblown quite a bit. He's overpaid no doubt, but is still a quality starting pitcher. His 2009 and 2010 xFIPs have actually been better than they were in 2007 and 2008 – 4.62 and 4.45 in 2007 and 2008, 4.27 and 4.34 in 2009 and 2010. He's not been ace material, but he's not been anywhere close to as bad as many people make him out to be.

 

Also you don't point out how Milton Bradley got a 3 year 30 million dollar deal, despite having the worst numbers against RHP (the targeted area of need for this signing) than Ibanez and Dunn. Dunn absoutely embarrasses RHP over his career, and he signed for less money and years with a [expletive] team after publically pining for the Cubs. But Hendry went with Bradley despite the off the field and injury issues and despite the fact he hits much better vs. lefties than righties, because Bradley was more versatile, something Hendry was hot for (and probably still is). And I'm not even mentioning how Hendry was rumored to have outbid himself for Bradley (similar to the rumors he did the same for Maddux and Soriano in the past).

 

I didn't mention Bradley because I don't disagree with you there. I didn't like the Bradley contract at the time (primarily because of injury concerns and my preference for Dunn) and I still don't like the contract.

 

I'm not sure what we are really arguing about anymore, because its slowly turning into pro-Hendry vs. anti-Hendry and you're next post will somehow be about the good signings Hendry has made in his defense. I don't hate Hendry as much as some, although I do greatly dislike him and do not think he should be in charge of the next rebuild because I don't trust him to spend our money properly.

 

My point of debate has been the NTCs and whether Hendry overpays every reliever he signs. I'm not trying to make a pro-Hendry argument here, moreso trying to direct the criticisms of him to where he's actually been bad, not so much to areas that he hasn't been bad (relievers) or that are irrelevant (NTCs).

[dew1679666265]

This thread is depressing. None of the 2011 rosters look very good and I suspect the Cubs are looking to slash more payroll.

 

It'd be really tough to field a quality, competitive team in 2011 no matter what we do, I think. My preference would be to focus 2011 on shedding some money that won't help us in the future and bringing in some good, cheap productivity.

 

If we were to try to compete in 2011, however, it'd almost have to start with signing Adam Dunn and hoping Aramis can stay healthy.

[Soul]

Yeah, just shed cash. As much as we can. 2011 will probably be all about looking at the progress of young players, for me.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

This thread is depressing. None of the 2011 rosters look very good and I suspect the Cubs are looking to slash more payroll.

 

It'd be really tough to field a quality, competitive team in 2011 no matter what we do, I think. My preference would be to focus 2011 on shedding some money that won't help us in the future and bringing in some good, cheap productivity.

 

If we were to try to compete in 2011, however, it'd almost have to start with signing Adam Dunn and hoping Aramis can stay healthy.

 

And Zambrano bounces back. And you win at bullpen roulette. Ick ick ick.

 

It's so frustrating, because this board *knew* this would happen. Collectively, we knew Soriano's deal was horrific, we knew they were counting on some of these guys' primes to last a few years longer than likely, and yet it all just unfolded.

[Exile on Waveland]

Hendry has done a pretty good job of . . . giving the NTCs to players who we likely wouldn't want to trade . . .

 

I find this reasoning very circular.

 

Why? I specifically meant Lee and Aramis and we had no desire to trade either until their 10/5 rights kicked in. The player is the one who negotiates in the NTC and the GM then tweaks the money/years offered accordingly. The player wants the assurance of not being traded until his 10/5 rights kick in (or being able to accept a trade and then reject any future deals) and the GM is more than happy to oblige if he sees that player as a young enough cornerstone that he won't want to trade the player during the contract.

 

Whether that was the thought process or not for Hendry, he still has given NTCs either to guys who are good and young enough for us to not want to trade him or to guys whose contracts would likely prohibit trading them in the first place (Soriano, Z).

 

In practicality, you are clearly correct. The Cubs had no desire to trade either player before their 10/5 rights accrued, rendering the no-trade clauses moot.

 

I just don't think that reasoning vindicates the no-trade clauses (especially vis-a-vis Lee). Almost exclusively, teams don't sign players they desire to trade. Teams certainly don't often sign players they desire to trade to multi-year, eight-digit contracts. So, of course, the Cubs didn't desire to trade Lee or Ramirez when they were signed. However, flexibility and contingency are not merely desirable in retrospect. Perhaps this is personal preference, but I would gladly pay a little premium for those in almost all scenarios. I would also look to trade players before 10/5 rights accrued, in many scenarios (Ramirez would have been an exception to that).

 

Finally, the latter argument which I didn't originally address is a fundamental two-wrongs-don't-make-a-right situation. I'm also not sure I agree with it, because I could definitely envision someone taking Soriano or Zambrano when fewer years remain on their respective contracts (depending on how either player performs in the meantime).

[A New Era]

What I see is. .

 

1B) Maybe go all out for Gonzolex or stopgap

2B) Dewitt (this was a decent move young and cheap and slight upgrade)

SS) Castro

3B) Ramirez

C) Soto

LF) Soriano

CF) Byrd

RF) Colvin (I think they will trade Fukudome this winter).

 

SP) Zambrano

SP) Wells

SP) Gorzelanny

SP) Silva

SP) One of our promising young guys

 

Overall I just think Hendry will not be allowed to make stupid moves. Overpaying for relievers and mediocre players to long term contracts is over. I don't think Ricketts will let him do that. However I wouldn't be surprised if he is allowed to make a big move for a BONIFIED great player like Gonzalez.

[KaiserCesar]

What I see is. .

 

1B) Maybe go all out for Gonzolex or stopgap

2B) Dewitt (this was a decent move young and cheap and slight upgrade)

SS) Castro

3B) Ramirez

C) Soto

LF) Soriano

CF) Byrd

RF) Colvin (I think they will trade Fukudome this winter).

 

SP) Zambrano

SP) Wells

SP) Gorzelanny

SP) Silva

SP) One of our promising young guys

 

Overall I just think Hendry will not be allowed to make stupid moves. Overpaying for relievers and mediocre players to long term contracts is over. I don't think Ricketts will let him do that. However I wouldn't be surprised if he is allowed to make a big move for a BONIFIED great player like Gonzalez.

 

I think you are leaving out Dempster from the rotation. Also, at least one of Zambrano/Silva will be traded this offseason in all likelihood, so then you'd end up with a choice of Cashner, Jackson, Diamond with a guy like Archer reasonably close.

 

Whoever ends up at 1B will determine whether the 2011 team has any chance of contending. Aside from Dewitt, the lineup is full of guys who can reasonably OPS at least around .800 next year.

[Guest]

Something like:

 

Castro

Colvin/Byrd

Dunn

Soriano

Soto

Ramirez

Byrd/Colvin

DeWitt (replace with Fontenot/Baker if you are so inclined)

 

or whatever order you want to put those 8 is a pretty solid lineup. Make a deal for someone like Gonzalez or Fielder and it's even better.

 

Dempster

Wells

Gorzelanny

Zambrano

Cashner/Diamond/Jackson/Silva/etc

 

I'm less enthusiastic about, but it's been a long time since the Cubs didn't have at least a decent rotation, and there's a lot of things to like about it. Throw Marshall/Marmol and maybe the return of Guzman at the back of the pen, and that's a pretty good team.

 

The problem is that without a big acquisition, that team isn't going to be great. I'm not sure there's a clear path to "great", but it probably doesn't align with maximizing the wins for 2011.

[ConstableRabbit]

I thought Guzman was done...

[Cubs Fan Dan]

Couple of things I look to happen. I am going on a hunch but I think Hendry uses Wells as bait this offseason. I also see Fontenot going. Would not mind a pick up of a RH bat if Colvin.

 

What I expect:

 

Castro

DeWitt

Ramirez

Soto

Pena

Soriano

Byrd

Colvin / (Willingham / Gomes / Nady)

 

Baker

Willingham / Gomes / Nady

Chirinos

Barney

Snyder/ LaHair

 

Zambrano

Dempster

Gorzelany

Cashner

Diamond / Jackson / Coleman maybe FA

 

What I hope for: Wells, Colvin and Vitters plus maybe 1 or 2 low a prospects for Gonzalez.

 

Crawford

Castro

Ramirez

Gonzalez

Soto

Soriano

Byrd

DeWitt

 

Chirinos

Baker

Gomes

Barney

Snyder /LaHair

 

Zambrano

Hudson / Vasquez

Dempster

Gorzelany

Cashner

[Fro]

The problem is that without a big acquisition, that team isn't going to be great. I'm not sure there's a clear path to "great", but it probably doesn't align with maximizing the wins for 2011.

 

The key is going to be not spending a ridiculous amount of money and overpaying for someone in 2011... save your money for 2012.

[NCCubFan]

I thought Guzman was done...

For this year, yes. For the future, that remains to be seen. I do recall reading that when the surgery was performed the damage wasn't as bad as first feared. I think the Cubs need to operate under the assumption that he's done and if he can return it's a nice bonus.

[fiver]

Dewitt definitely needs a platoon partner at second. I was going to ask who we could get that would be an upgrade over Baker, but after looking at splits, Baker has been really good against left handers again this year. He's just had too many ABs against right handers.

[fiver]

dp

[Keener98]

I wouldnt be so quick to say Dewitt needs a platoon partner. Yea hes been bad this year vs leftys but in 2008 he had 84 at bats and posted a 854 OPS with a excellent strikeout to walk ratio. So basically we really dont know enough yet about Dewitts ability to hit leftys, to say he needs platooned.