Cubs Sign Pena to 1 year, $10 million Deal (p. 3)

[EhDubya]

Pena hasn't spent any significant time hurt. He spent half of '05 in the minors cause the Tigers demoted him, then signed a couply minor league contracts with the Yankees and Boston in '06.

 

I thought he was banged up one of those years.

 

604 PAs one year, 543 the next. None of the minor league time on rehab stints.

 

Well then my memory is worse than I thought. He's just an inconsistent SOB. Hopefully he's got a decent year left in him.

 

I'm torn. I want the signing to work out, but I don't want Hendry to then reward him with a 4 year deal.

[Southpaw191679666239]

Gordon Wittenmyer is reporting that some of the money might be deferred on Pena. He's working on how much.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

This move could be really good if Pena is healed up.

weak

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

Always been a fan of Pena...athletic left handed bat who hits with power...could do worse for a year...take him over Laroche anytime.

[Southpaw191679666239]

Muskat also reporting deferred money.

[Clem Fandango]

He's a NTC away from giving him the Jim Hendry Special

[David]

Deferring money isn't a bad thing.

[Clem Fandango]

Deferring money isn't a bad thing.

 

In this situation, no. It's probably not much at all, but enough to give the team some wiggle room this season. Which is nice, but deferred money on other contracts he's set up is probably part of the reason why Hendry had to defer money on this one. It's a vicious cycle, luckily this is only a one year contract so deferring money probably won't handcuff the team's salary in the future

[SouthSideRyan]

There's nothing vicious about the cycle.

[jersey cubs fan]

There's nothing vicious about the cycle.

 

Not if payroll keeps going up.

[Clem Fandango]

If you do it enough eventually you're going to be paying more money for players who aren't worth it during the last years of their contracts. When this happens and you need to go out and sign better players, you can't afford to give them the big money during those years, so you backload the contract to their later years and you're stuck having to do the same for the next crop of FA signings. Rinse and repeat.

[SouthSideRyan]

There's nothing vicious about the cycle.

 

Not if payroll keeps going up.

 

Payroll only goes up because we keep spending more on an annual basis on players, not because of backloading contracts. The only issue comes up if a player doesn't want balloon payments.

[Clem Fandango]

There's nothing vicious about the cycle.

 

Not if payroll keeps going up.

 

Payroll only goes up because we keep spending more on an annual basis on players, not because of backloading contracts. The only issue comes up if a player doesn't want balloon payments.

 

Touché. So the obvious answer is stop giving out bad contracts. We'll probably need a new GM before that happens

[jersey cubs fan]

There's nothing vicious about the cycle.

 

Not if payroll keeps going up.

 

Payroll only goes up because we keep spending more on an annual basis on players, not because of backloading contracts. The only issue comes up if a player doesn't want balloon payments.

 

Payroll goes up when a team is willing to spend more on players. That should act as a benefit to a team when opposition isn't able to increase at the same rate, but when the increased payroll is offset by the fact that you are just paying for what a guy gave you a year or more earlier, it is negated. When payroll declines you are screwed.

[javy knows my name]

If you do it enough eventually you're going to be paying more money for players who aren't worth it during the last years of their contracts. When this happens and you need to go out and sign better players, you can't afford to give them the big money during those years, so you backload the contract to their later years and you're stuck having to do the same for the next crop of FA signings. Rinse and repeat.

No. The only pitfall to backloading contracts is that it makes them harder to trade in the later years, when the player isn't worth what he's getting paid at the end. But since you don't sign a player with the intent on trading him before his contract is up, it makes sense to backload from a business standpoint.

 

I have to pay this player x amount of dollars over the course of 5 years; if I am afforded the opportunity, I'm going to pay him as little as I can right now in order to free up payroll in the immediate future, and then be able to adjust for the hit to the payroll at the back end.

[Hawk4Hall]

10 million for a guy that hasn't hit over .247 since 2007 worries me. He's got power but his average has been terrible for the majority of his career.

 

2007 was his best season by far. I know it was going to be hard to replace Lee, but the Cubs paid too much for Pena.

[jersey cubs fan]

10 million for a guy that hasn't hit over .247 since 2007 worries me. He's got power but his average has been terrible for the majority of his career.

 

I might just switch to full onboard 100% happy with this deal just because of statements like this.

[javy knows my name]

10 million for a guy that hasn't hit over .247 since 2007 worries me. He's got power but his average has been terrible for the majority of his career.

 

I might just switch to full onboard 100% happy with this deal just because of statements like this.

Yeah, it kinda feels like the Bradley deal, only with a much better chance of success

[Clem Fandango]

10 million for a guy that hasn't hit over .247 since 2007 worries me. He's got power but his average has been terrible for the majority of his career.

 

2007 was his best season by far. I know it was going to be hard to replace Lee, but the Cubs paid too much for Pena.

 

Pena's AVG last year was a fluke due to a BABIP that was 57 points lower than his career total. He probably won't hit above .270, but if his BABIP returns to normal he most assuredly won't hit below .200... or even .240 for that matter. Meanwhile he'll likely draw 80+ walks, hit 30+ homers, drive in 100+ runs, and provide great defense at 1B.

 

Batting average isn't everything. In 2009 when he hit .227 he still had a 133 OPS+ which was better than the 129 OPS+ he had the year before when he hit .247. No matter which year he returns to, whether it's 09 or 08, he will be an upgrade over Lee this past season and will provide great value at $10 million dollars... but since his contract is deferred he will probably be playing for around $8 million I would imagine, which is even better.

[Hawk4Hall]

10 million for a guy that hasn't hit over .247 since 2007 worries me. He's got power but his average has been terrible for the majority of his career.

 

2007 was his best season by far. I know it was going to be hard to replace Lee, but the Cubs paid too much for Pena.

 

Pena's AVG last year was a fluke due to a BABIP that was 57 points lower than his career total. He probably won't hit above .270, but if his BABIP returns to normal he most assuredly won't hit below .200... or even .240 for that matter. Meanwhile he'll likely draw 80+ walks, hit 30+ homers, drive in 100+ runs, and provide great defense at 1B.

 

Batting average isn't everything. In 2009 when he hit .227 he still had a 133 OPS+ which was better than the 129 OPS+ he had the year before when he hit .247. No matter which year he returns to, whether it's 09 or 08, he will be an upgrade over Lee this past season and will provide great value at $10 million dollars... but since his contract is deferred he will probably be playing for around $8 million I would imagine, which is even better.

I know average isn't everything but he strikes out a ton. Not out of the ordinary for a power guy, but the Cubs already have Soriano for the swing and misses.

 

I don't dislike Pena as a player, just think 10 million is a lot for him.

[jersey cubs fan]

Average is a lot less than just not everything.

[Clem Fandango]

I know average isn't everything but he strikes out a ton. Not out of the ordinary for a power guy, but the Cubs already have Soriano for the swing and misses.

 

I don't dislike Pena as a player, just think 10 million is a lot for him.

 

Soriano can't draw walks. Pena can. The reason Pena strikes out a lot is because he's selective and knows how to take a pitch and that generally runs the count up to 2 strikes, making him more prone to striking out. Soriano strikes out a lot because he's a free swinger who swings at [expletive] pitches

[David]

I thought we were talking about deferred money, not backloading higher salaries onto the later years of a multi-year deal... not exactly the same thing.

[dew1679666265]

10 million for a guy that hasn't hit over .247 since 2007 worries me. He's got power but his average has been terrible for the majority of his career.

 

2007 was his best season by far. I know it was going to be hard to replace Lee, but the Cubs paid too much for Pena.

 

I'd much rather get good on-base numbers and power numbers than average. Batting average really doesn't mean much, a .351/.490 career OBP/SLG line means a lot more.

[dew1679666265]

I don't dislike Pena as a player, just think 10 million is a lot for him.

 

It's just a one year deal and part of the money is deferred. If he returns to one of his best years (2007-2008), we got a great deal. Even if he returns to his 2009 form, he won't be overpaid at probably $7-8 mil this year.