Re: What would you deal Garza for?

[Little Slide Rooter]

I'd love to go with Hamels. I really don't see reason to believe that they won't spend big money anytime soon, however if they don't then in addition to Garza I'd go with Marcum, Sanchez, or McCarthy. As for the bat, that's another story. People don't want to spend in Ethier or Upton. Delmon Young would be cheaper but he's not as good and he's a sociopat who might not handle a big market and it's fans too well. Swisher's the type of bat that I you have a good 3-4 or 3-5 he'd be a great addition but not a guy who will make a BA offense good. Most peope don't seem willing to entertain the idea of LaHair in left either. Not sure what other options are out there.

[KingCubsFan]

Unless we feel comfortable that adding an Upton and a Hamels can put us squarely in contention, I think you try and bargain hunt on the bat. Sign the big-time pitcher, although I doubt we will. But we could conceivably contend by adding Swisher or Youkilis, along with an arm down to the likes of a Marcum. Leaving plenty of cash available to go and add a bigger name and contract whenever one presents itself.

The one difference between Hamels and the other pitchers is that Hamels is lefthanded and gets a good amount of groundballs, both qualities that the new regime seems to have targeted. So if they were going to throw big money at a pitcher, Hamels is a likely candidate.

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

he MIGHT top 200 innings once?

even AT HIS HEALTHIEST didn't top 200 innings.

Never thrown 200 innings

Hard to buy ... that he's a 200 inning guy right now.

jesus, he's topped 195 innings the past two seasons, quit fixating on this stupid arbitrary threshold already and formulate a new argument that makes sense

 

Yeah that's been the crux of my whole argument...No big deal that he's got a surgically rebuilt shoulder that's never topped what's suddenly an arbitrary number for a SP...I mean what kind of IDIOT expects 200 innings from a guy getting called "almost elite" in this thread who apparently we should just hand some money to this offseason....THAT makes sense.

 

How in the [expletive] did you wade through all that to handpick quotes and come away with that's my only point? Fuckin yuuuch.

Edited May 7, 2012 by PriortoTheoIhadWood

[davell]

We have tons of unknowns going into next year obviously. But, if we keep Garza and Shark is a legit 3ish type, I think we'll make moves towards us truly contending, instead of placeholder type moves, as we got this year. LaHair is a HUGE question mark, as to whether he's for real and as to whether he's still on our team. Rizzo and Brett are questions, but we'll almost definitely see them later on and hopefully we'll get an idea as to what they may be for us in the future.

 

I could see us adding either a C, very doubtful, 2B or 3B, fairly likely, or a corner OFer, which I see is very likely.

 

At Catcher, you've got 3 options. Mike Napoli, Miguel Montero, and Russell Martin. First 2 are going to be extremely high priced and doubtful to be considered by us. If we trade Soto and don't feel Castillo is the answer, Martin would be a solid upgrade, while not breaking the bank.

 

At 2B and 3B, you have Kelly Johnson and probably Kevin Youkilis, be it by FA or possibly trade, if Boston picks up his option, which could be risky. Johnson wouldn't cost a ton and certainly would provide some power at a spot where we have none. Youkilis could be a bigtime bat for us and possibly even give us an option to move Stewart to 2B, if we thought he could handle it and his bat proves worth trying to keep.

 

In the OF, you have Upton, who makes sense, especially from an age standpoint. He'll be very highly coveted though and I'm not sure I'd feel safe in giving him 100 mill+ type deal, which may be likely once all is said and done. I've seen 6/120 thrown out on Josh Hamilton, so I'll just flat out pass on anything close to that. Carlos Lee on a one year deal? I doubt he'd be very fun to watch roam LF at this point and probably won't be much better than Soriano, even with the bat, once all's said and done. So he's out. Michael Bourn? I doubt we'll spend money on a "leadoff hitter" with the new regime. Melky Cabrera? He's the right age, probably wouldn't break the bank, and could be a guy we target. Victorino? Doesn't seem to fit and is too risky anyway. Berkman? Doubt he leaves STL. Ichiro? Ain't leaving the Mariners. Quentin? Waaay too injury prone, but I guess could be a guy we'd take a flyer on, if he was cheap enough. Ethier? I've seen reports that LA really wants to keep him and 6/90 looks like where they could wind up. Too expensive anyway, for what you get. Nick Swisher will be very interesting, but I figure the Yanks will try their best to hold onto him. Really solid player, but if he's available, he'd be a great fit with us.

 

Likelihood, in my opinion, who the new regime targets would be as follows.....

 

1. Youkilis

2. Cabrera

3. Swisher

4. Martin

5. Upton

 

As for pitching, I figure Hamels is going to wind up too pricey. Dodgers, Yankees, and red Sox will all be involved with him and my guess is he'll get over 150 mill. Greinke is too risky, with the social anxiety stuff, for Theo to make him his first big FA acquisition. Sanchez is definitely a possibility, all depends on hiw hard the losers on Hamels go after him. Liriano could be a buy low guy who pays major dividends. He's a guy I definitely think we'd be interested in. McCarthy will get a nice deal from somewhere, but my guess is he's dealt at the deadline and may not make it to the market as it is. Leaves Marcum and Peavy as the last of the fairly solid options. If they came cheap enough, I could see us keeping Dempster and adding one of them as well. Edwin Jackson deserves a mention here, but since we didn't seem to be involved this past offseason, I doubt we'd change our minds on him.

 

My stab at our preference list here would go like this....

 

1. Hamels, but only up to a certain point monetarily.

2. Sanchez- same as Hamels

3. Marcum- Probably allows us to keep Dempster on a short term deal

4. Peavy- same as Marcum

5- Greinke- If he somehow saw his price drop.

6- Liriano- If he could be fixed, it's a great move. He'd be cheap at least.

7- McCarthy- I could see the Oakland stigma keeping us away from him, since he'll probably get a very solid deal.

[sneakypower]

he MIGHT top 200 innings once?

even AT HIS HEALTHIEST didn't top 200 innings.

Never thrown 200 innings

Hard to buy ... that he's a 200 inning guy right now.

jesus, he's topped 195 innings the past two seasons, quit fixating on this stupid arbitrary threshold already and formulate a new argument that makes sense

 

Yeah that's been the crux of my whole argument...No big deal that he's got a surgically rebuilt shoulder that's never topped what's suddenly an arbitrary number for a SP...I mean what kind of IDIOT expects 200 innings from a guy getting called "almost elite" in this thread who apparently we should just hand some money to this offseason....THAT makes sense.

 

How in the [expletive] did you wade through all that to handpick quotes and come away with that's my only point? [expletive] yuuuch.

TWO HUNDRED INNINGS, THERE MUST BE TWO HUNDRED

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

Upton, the youngest of that group gets 5th? FIFTH? Three below MELKY Cabrera? On age talent and price tag alone he should be at worst two (since they probably like Youk) and probably #1.

[dew1679666265]

So you ARE managing their money for them here based on one offseason where they we're clearly purging the roster as best they could...Good to see you can finally admit that, as indirect/passive as that was.

 

I was responding to a point you made about how unbelievable it would be that the Cubs would stop their pursuit of Upton because they had Hamels. I responded that I wouldn't have expected them to stop their pursuit of Cespedes simply because they couldn't get him on the perfect contract, but they did. Which means, I'm not sure what their finances are like and what their ultimate plan is for building this team, so I can't speak to whether signing Hamels would stop them from pursuing Upton. I don't think any of us know that.

 

That has nothing to do with me managing their finances, though.

 

Significantly better pitcher...Your lesser price was 100 million. 100 million. To a guy with multiple arm surgeries who isn't even all that much younger than this super risk that is Hamels to you. Your argument for Sanchez just doesn't make sense.

 

You still seem confused about what I actually said so let me repost it so you can re-read it, and this time I'll try bolding some to help out your understanding.

 

It wouldn't surprise me if Anibal's high-end price would be something like 5/100 while Hamels' low-end price would be something like 6/120.

 

Please point out there where I stated that I felt the Cubs should pay Anibal $100 million. What I said was that the absolute highest dollar amount I could see Anibal signing on the free agent market (regardless of who signs him) was a 5/100 million deal. That's if some crazy bidding war takes place between teams that are desperate for not getting Hamels/Greinke. I also said the absolute lowest I could see Hamels getting was 6/120 and that's if the market is far drier than I expect now. Neither is a prediction, nor a suggestion of what the Cubs should pay either player.

 

Basically, my point in making that statement was to say the smallest amount of money I could possibly see being the difference in total value between Anibal and Hamels' contracts was about $20 million. Meaning I fully expect the difference to be much, much higher than that.

 

As far as the points:

 

1) You really are just glossing over the injury history of a guy who's had MULTIPLE shoulder issues. That's 4-5 years of owning a MAJOR injury risk.

 

2) Perigree. Hamels destroys him there, and he's a MAJOR reason why the Phillies were better. Sanchez = role player. Hamels = star, is the point.

 

3) Good for him. Not the first guy to have a nice couple of years. Doesn't mean you hand him 100 million, which you actually suggested.

 

4) More spin? It's a guy with multiple shoulder and arm injuries in his past who even AT HIS HEALTHIEST didn't top 200 innings. What about this guy doesn't SCREAM risk/bad signing coming?

 

5) On top of it Hamels is the better strikeout pitcher throughout their respective histories....Which bodes very well for his future. You realize how big a deal it is that a lefty is putting up his kind of K rates?

 

Sanchez is a nice pitcher who should get a ton of respect for what he's done for himself. That said, someone else can pay him he FA price. I want to be elite, and that requires signing better than second tier pitching with significant injury history.

 

Can you name the elite bat available I should set my eyes on in place of the elite pitcher? I still insist that the only shoulder problem guy to pursue is Upton, no contest.

 

1. I'm not glossing over anything. Sanchez has more risk than Hamels at getting hurt, but both are far greater risks than any hitter for injury/decline simply because they are pitchers. If I'm going to sign a massive risk, I'd rather sign the lesser commitment and that player is Sanchez. If we had a greater need, I might be willing to take on the greater commitment to Hamels, but we don't.

 

2. Both pitchers are 7-year major league veterans. We know what they're each capable of doing. Pedigree means nothing at this point. Your statistical history is your statistical history. Hamels isn't a better pitcher because he might or might not be a "winner." He certainly isn't a better pitcher because his teams have been better.

 

3. Once again, no I did not suggest we pay Sanchez $100 million. I said someone might as an example of the absolute highest contract he might receive. I would not be in favor of the Cubs going that high. His very good numbers the past couple of seasons are very relevant to the discussion however, since his fWAR numbers have been very similar to Hamels' the past couple of years. Maybe he's not a far inferior pitcher. Maybe he's just a little worse.

 

4. sneaky covered this pretty well. His price is far lower than Hamels because he has had injury problems throughout his career. Statistically, he's not that much inferior of a pitcher. Both are a gamble, Anibal moreso, but there's less commitment with Anibal and when signing pitchers, I tend to lean toward lesser commitment.

 

5. It is very nice that Hamels is a lefty posting very good K rates. However, over the past couple of seasons, Anibal has been right there with Hamels on K rate, only half a K behind him. Anibal isn't some mid-rotation scrub that might get severely overpaid. This is an elite talent who has struggled with injuries. The upside is very much there with Anibal nearly as much as it is with Hamels. I realize the risk is greater with Anibal, but the risk is great with both, and the commitment to Anibal is less.

 

My primary interest in Sanchez is that I have very little interest in giving a pitcher 6-7 years when he'll be 34-35 by the end of the deal, regardless of who that is. Hamels will demand that, Sanchez will not. We would be paying Sanchez until he's 32-33, we would be paying Hamels until he's 34-35 and paying him much, much more money. If Sanchez were a significantly inferior pitcher, I wouldn't make this argument. But he's not. He's worse, but has proven the past couple of years that he's not much worse.

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

he MIGHT top 200 innings once?

even AT HIS HEALTHIEST didn't top 200 innings.

Never thrown 200 innings

Hard to buy ... that he's a 200 inning guy right now.

jesus, he's topped 195 innings the past two seasons, quit fixating on this stupid arbitrary threshold already and formulate a new argument that makes sense

 

Yeah that's been the crux of my whole argument...No big deal that he's got a surgically rebuilt shoulder that's never topped what's suddenly an arbitrary number for a SP...I mean what kind of IDIOT expects 200 innings from a guy getting called "almost elite" in this thread who apparently we should just hand some money to this offseason....THAT makes sense.

 

How in the [expletive] did you wade through all that to handpick quotes and come away with that's my only point? [expletive] yuuuch.

TWO HUNDRED INNINGS, THERE MUST BE TWO HUNDRED

 

Fck that give him ALLTHEMONEYZ that way he can afford the surgeries!

 

The Chicago Charity Cubs with hearts of gold and the lowest range of motion rotation in the league! Arms of steel baby!

[davell]

Upton, the youngest of that group gets 5th? FIFTH? Three below MELKY Cabrera? On age talent and price tag alone he should be at worst two (since they probably like Youk) and probably #1.

 

I'm not basing this on what I think, I based it what I figure they're thinking. If Upton is going to command 20 mill a year for 6-7 seasons, which I could see happening, because of the lack of bats, is it worth spending THAT much on him? To me, he could fall into the same category as Greinke even. Maybe Theo wouldn't want to take that big of a risk with his first big FA signing. I like Upton a bunch personally, but I'm not even sure I'd feel comfortable giving him over 100 mill.

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

Upton, the youngest of that group gets 5th? FIFTH? Three below MELKY Cabrera? On age talent and price tag alone he should be at worst two (since they probably like Youk) and probably #1.

 

I'm not basing this on what I think, I based it what I figure they're thinking.

 

This is another way of saying that you're basing this on what you think. He's the best of those guys easily when you're looking at age and projection.

 

They're almost CERTIANLY not targeting Melky Cabrera over him. That's borderline ridicuolous...Recent career year or not...Upton is significantly better over the course of their careers and is way more physically gifted.

[XZero771679666304]

Yeah, we can't have guys throwing 195 innings. We need 200 IP guys.

[KingCubsFan]

Upton, the youngest of that group gets 5th? FIFTH? Three below MELKY Cabrera? On age talent and price tag alone he should be at worst two (since they probably like Youk) and probably #1.

 

I'm not basing this on what I think, I based it what I figure they're thinking. If Upton is going to command 20 mill a year for 6-7 seasons, which I could see happening, because of the lack of bats, is it worth spending THAT much on him? To me, he could fall into the same category as Greinke even. Maybe Theo wouldn't want to take that big of a risk with his first big FA signing. I like Upton a bunch personally, but I'm not even sure I'd feel comfortable giving him over 100 mill.

Nobody is giving Upton that much, unless he keeps up his .917 OPS.

[davell]

Upton, the youngest of that group gets 5th? FIFTH? Three below MELKY Cabrera? On age talent and price tag alone he should be at worst two (since they probably like Youk) and probably #1.

 

I'm not basing this on what I think, I based it what I figure they're thinking.

 

This is another way of saying that you're basing this on what you think. He's the best of those guys easily when you're looking at age and projection.

 

They're almost CERTIANLY not targeting Melky Cabrera over him. That's borderline ridicuolous...Recent career year or not...Upton is significantly better over the course of their careers and is way more physically gifted.

 

Wrong. If I can have Upton at 6/100, I'd take him over Cabrera at 3/30. I based that post on the thinking of what could run through Theo's head, with this being his first big FA signing. Yes, BJ is a 4 WAR guy consistently and yes, he's heading into his prime. But, if Cabrera has another solid season(he was a 4 WAR guy last year too) and the price tag is TONS different, I do see Theo erring on the side of caution.

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

Yeah, we can't have guys throwing 195 innings. We need 200 IP guys.

 

Word is you get a discount if you buy the 195 guy and he's had at least two arm operations. Sounds like a deal the Kansas City Cubs should be in on!

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

Upton, the youngest of that group gets 5th? FIFTH? Three below MELKY Cabrera? On age talent and price tag alone he should be at worst two (since they probably like Youk) and probably #1.

 

I'm not basing this on what I think, I based it what I figure they're thinking.

 

This is another way of saying that you're basing this on what you think. He's the best of those guys easily when you're looking at age and projection.

 

They're almost CERTIANLY not targeting Melky Cabrera over him. That's borderline ridicuolous...Recent career year or not...Upton is significantly better over the course of their careers and is way more physically gifted.

 

Wrong. If I can have Upton at 6/100, I'd take him over Cabrera at 3/30. I based that post on the thinking of what could run through Theo's head, with this being his first big FA signing. Yes, BJ is a 4 WAR guy consistently and yes, he's heading into his prime. But, if Cabrera has another solid season(he was a 4 WAR guy last year too) and the price tag is TONS different, I do see Theo erring on the side of caution.

 

1) Cabrera's reward for his 4 season season at..25(?)...was to be traded. What does that imply to you? Upside?

 

2) If he repeats last year (off to a great start) then WHY would he only get 3/30? Hell, why would Sabean Let him hit FA to get 3/30 when his team can't hit?

 

3) Again, this is what you think Theo/Hoyer will do, which is another way of saying this is what you think.

 

4) Would still trust Upton more than him anyway, and he probably won't get 100 million.

[davell]

Upton, the youngest of that group gets 5th? FIFTH? Three below MELKY Cabrera? On age talent and price tag alone he should be at worst two (since they probably like Youk) and probably #1.

 

I'm not basing this on what I think, I based it what I figure they're thinking.

 

This is another way of saying that you're basing this on what you think. He's the best of those guys easily when you're looking at age and projection.

 

They're almost CERTIANLY not targeting Melky Cabrera over him. That's borderline ridicuolous...Recent career year or not...Upton is significantly better over the course of their careers and is way more physically gifted.

 

Wrong. If I can have Upton at 6/100, I'd take him over Cabrera at 3/30. I based that post on the thinking of what could run through Theo's head, with this being his first big FA signing. Yes, BJ is a 4 WAR guy consistently and yes, he's heading into his prime. But, if Cabrera has another solid season(he was a 4 WAR guy last year too) and the price tag is TONS different, I do see Theo erring on the side of caution.

 

1) Cabrera's reward for his 4 season season at..25(?)...was to be traded. What does that imply to you? Upside?

 

2) If he repeats last year (off to a great start) then WHY would he only get 3/30? Hell, why would Sabean Let him hit FA to get 3/30 when his team can't hit?

 

3) Again, this is what you think Theo/Hoyer will do, which is another way of saying this is what you think.

 

4) Would still trust Upton more than him anyway, and he probably won't get 100 million.

 

 

1. It implies KC thought they needed pitching moreso than hitting, in order to possibly contend in 2012. They shouldn't have made the trade.

2. Did I say that's what I thought he'd get? No, I said I'd rather have Upton at 6/100 more than Cabrera at 3/30. Should show you I'd really, really like Upton more than him. But would I definitely feel comfortable giving Upton 100 mill? Hell no. But I don't want Melky on the Cubs unless he comes very cheap and I don't see that happening either.

3. Again, if I like Upton much more than any of the other FA bats, which I do, then you putting words in my mouth just isn't very intelligent on your part. Everyone has a cut off point to what they value a player at. My guess(and that's obviously all it is) is that Theo and Jed won't want to get close to 100 mill for Upton and that Cabrera, even if it's at 4/48 or whatever, becomes a much more attractive target to THEM. NOT to me.

4. No clue on what Upton winds up getting, this year is obviously a huge one for him to help dictate what he gets.

[Backtobanks]

We have tons of unknowns going into next year obviously. But, if we keep Garza and Shark is a legit 3ish type, I think we'll make moves towards us truly contending, instead of placeholder type moves, as we got this year. LaHair is a HUGE question mark, as to whether he's for real and as to whether he's still on our team. Rizzo and Brett are questions, but we'll almost definitely see them later on and hopefully we'll get an idea as to what they may be for us in the future.

 

I could see us adding either a C, very doubtful, 2B or 3B, fairly likely, or a corner OFer, which I see is very likely.

 

At Catcher, you've got 3 options. Mike Napoli, Miguel Montero, and Russell Martin. First 2 are going to be extremely high priced and doubtful to be considered by us. If we trade Soto and don't feel Castillo is the answer, Martin would be a solid upgrade, while not breaking the bank.

 

At 2B and 3B, you have Kelly Johnson and probably Kevin Youkilis, be it by FA or possibly trade, if Boston picks up his option, which could be risky. Johnson wouldn't cost a ton and certainly would provide some power at a spot where we have none. Youkilis could be a bigtime bat for us and possibly even give us an option to move Stewart to 2B, if we thought he could handle it and his bat proves worth trying to keep.

 

In the OF, you have Upton, who makes sense, especially from an age standpoint. He'll be very highly coveted though and I'm not sure I'd feel safe in giving him 100 mill+ type deal, which may be likely once all is said and done. I've seen 6/120 thrown out on Josh Hamilton, so I'll just flat out pass on anything close to that. Carlos Lee on a one year deal? I doubt he'd be very fun to watch roam LF at this point and probably won't be much better than Soriano, even with the bat, once all's said and done. So he's out. Michael Bourn? I doubt we'll spend money on a "leadoff hitter" with the new regime. Melky Cabrera? He's the right age, probably wouldn't break the bank, and could be a guy we target. Victorino? Doesn't seem to fit and is too risky anyway. Berkman? Doubt he leaves STL. Ichiro? Ain't leaving the Mariners. Quentin? Waaay too injury prone, but I guess could be a guy we'd take a flyer on, if he was cheap enough. Ethier? I've seen reports that LA really wants to keep him and 6/90 looks like where they could wind up. Too expensive anyway, for what you get. Nick Swisher will be very interesting, but I figure the Yanks will try their best to hold onto him. Really solid player, but if he's available, he'd be a great fit with us.

 

Likelihood, in my opinion, who the new regime targets would be as follows.....

 

1. Youkilis

2. Cabrera

3. Swisher

4. Martin

5. Upton

 

As for pitching, I figure Hamels is going to wind up too pricey. Dodgers, Yankees, and red Sox will all be involved with him and my guess is he'll get over 150 mill. Greinke is too risky, with the social anxiety stuff, for Theo to make him his first big FA acquisition. Sanchez is definitely a possibility, all depends on hiw hard the losers on Hamels go after him. Liriano could be a buy low guy who pays major dividends. He's a guy I definitely think we'd be interested in. McCarthy will get a nice deal from somewhere, but my guess is he's dealt at the deadline and may not make it to the market as it is. Leaves Marcum and Peavy as the last of the fairly solid options. If they came cheap enough, I could see us keeping Dempster and adding one of them as well. Edwin Jackson deserves a mention here, but since we didn't seem to be involved this past offseason, I doubt we'd change our minds on him.

 

My stab at our preference list here would go like this....

 

1. Hamels, but only up to a certain point monetarily.

2. Sanchez- same as Hamels

3. Marcum- Probably allows us to keep Dempster on a short term deal

4. Peavy- same as Marcum

5- Greinke- If he somehow saw his price drop.

6- Liriano- If he could be fixed, it's a great move. He'd be cheap at least.

7- McCarthy- I could see the Oakland stigma keeping us away from him, since he'll probably get a very solid deal.

 

Nice analysis. The problem is that outside of Hamels and Upton, I don't see anyone standing out as an impact player. Some would make a nice addition to the team, but not really making them into an instant contender.

[Exile on Waveland]

2. Both pitchers are 7-year major league veterans. We know what they're each capable of doing. Pedigree means nothing at this point. Your statistical history is your statistical history. Hamels isn't a better pitcher because he might or might not be a "winner." He certainly isn't a better pitcher because his teams have been better.

 

I think it's pretty clear the implication here is not that Hamels is a better pitcher because he's pitched on better teams. It's that he may be more prepared to handle the pressure of signing a huge contract and moving teams (in his case, another high-pressure city/franchise). This would basically be a lateral move for Hamels; not so for Sanchez. I have no idea how either would react, or if it would even necessarily matter; but even Albert Pujols is seemingly struggling with this and "pressing" (unless you think he is hurt, or completely fell off a cliff at somepoint between the World Series and Opening Day). Moreover, you've mentioned that you're reluctant to sign Grienke because of his anxiety, which is basically a different way of saying that mental matters as well as physical.

 

Now, most all of this unlicensed psychoanalzying will be factored in their respective contracts -- obviously, "baseball people" love the "winner" label -- so it's probably a moot point. And, personally, I'm guessing Sanchez will sign a much more reasonable (repeat: reasonable, not just cheaper) contract than Hamels, and I'd rather leave room for Upton in any case. But I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Hamels' success in a figurative fish bowl.

[Exile on Waveland]

if teams really do go crazy for Anibal though, i'd be more than happy picking up Edwin Jackson; he'll probably be bargain basement again, and you can conceivably fit he, Upton, S. Drew all in for the price of just Hamels

 

fWAR since 2009:

 

C. Hamels: 13.6

M. Cain: 13.2

E. Jackson: 12.0 (19th-best)

J. Shields: 11.1

M. Garza: 10.8

 

All this was true last season, and yet no one on here seemingly wanted Jackson (I'm, yes, obviously patting myself on the back because I did). And, frankly, while I'm willing to be convinced to the contrary, I'm a little annoyed the front office did not step in and offer Jackson more than the one-year deal he received (of course, I suppose it's possible they did and we don't know, or maybe he flat-out was going to refuse to sign a one-year deal). A now-28 year old with good talent that's produced WARs of 2.2, 4.0, 1.7, and 2.9 (while throwing at least 183 innings); what wasn't to like?

[SouthSideRyan]

I wanted Jackson, but Maholm made him rather redundant.

[Splendid Splinter]

Nice analysis. The problem is that outside of Hamels and Upton, I don't see anyone standing out as an impact player. Some would make a nice addition to the team, but not really making them into an instant contender.

 

Agreed. It's also why for some reason... I have a gut feeling that Theo/Hoyer will shock everyone and trade for an impact player (could be like Justin Upton or King Felix for example) since there's only 2 that could be a FA this offseason. Although I'm not sure how they will get a guy like through a trade, but it's just a funny feeling I got.

[dew1679666265]

I think it's pretty clear the implication here is not that Hamels is a better pitcher because he's pitched on better teams. It's that he may be more prepared to handle the pressure of signing a huge contract and moving teams (in his case, another high-pressure city/franchise). This would basically be a lateral move for Hamels; not so for Sanchez. I have no idea how either would react, or if it would even necessarily matter; but even Albert Pujols is seemingly struggling with this and "pressing" (unless you think he is hurt, or completely fell off a cliff at somepoint between the World Series and Opening Day). Moreover, you've mentioned that you're reluctant to sign Grienke because of his anxiety, which is basically a different way of saying that mental matters as well as physical.

 

Now, most all of this unlicensed psychoanalzying will be factored in their respective contracts -- obviously, "baseball people" love the "winner" label -- so it's probably a moot point. And, personally, I'm guessing Sanchez will sign a much more reasonable (repeat: reasonable, not just cheaper) contract than Hamels, and I'd rather leave room for Upton in any case. But I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Hamels' success in a figurative fish bowl.

 

I actually hadn't even thought of it that way. That argument (or phrasing, maybe) makes a lot more sense, but I'm not sure it's a significant factor. It might help Hamels be a little better a little quicker, but over the course of the contract it shouldn't make much of a difference.

 

On Greinke, that's an actual diagnosed disorder, not just amateur psychoanalyzing leading to concern. It's a far more significant issue for Greinke than it would be for Hamels/Anibal/nearly any other ML SP.

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

2. Both pitchers are 7-year major league veterans. We know what they're each capable of doing. Pedigree means nothing at this point. Your statistical history is your statistical history. Hamels isn't a better pitcher because he might or might not be a "winner." He certainly isn't a better pitcher because his teams have been better.

 

I think it's pretty clear the implication here is not that Hamels is a better pitcher because he's pitched on better teams. It's that he may be more prepared to handle the pressure of signing a huge contract and moving teams (in his case, another high-pressure city/franchise). This would basically be a lateral move for Hamels; not so for Sanchez. I have no idea how either would react, or if it would even necessarily matter; but even Albert Pujols is seemingly struggling with this and "pressing" (unless you think he is hurt, or completely fell off a cliff at somepoint between the World Series and Opening Day). Moreover, you've mentioned that you're reluctant to sign Grienke because of his anxiety, which is basically a different way of saying that mental matters as well as physical.

 

Now, most all of this unlicensed psychoanalzying will be factored in their respective contracts -- obviously, "baseball people" love the "winner" label -- so it's probably a moot point. And, personally, I'm guessing Sanchez will sign a much more reasonable (repeat: reasonable, not just cheaper) contract than Hamels, and I'd rather leave room for Upton in any case. But I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Hamels' success in a figurative fish bowl.

 

This is exactly it on that point, and that's exactly what pedigree is in the first place. Don't think this won't matter to teams that Hamels was the ace on a WS winner while Sanchez has been a non-ace on a bottom dweller. It's like any other field...The more you've seen and done matters, ESPECIALLY since they're essentially the same age.

 

I'll have to get to the rest of that post later. Too many words for a phone. Will point out that Samchez has been healthy all of two years in the big league, hence the gloss over injuries point. Pinning injuries on a guy at 34-35 makes little sense when you're pushing giving 5 to a talent that has been far more damaged for years. Btw giving 5 to Sanchez makes him 33-34...Thisnisnt even a fn contest objectively. Sanchez would make a nice Dempster replacement...Hamels gives the Cubs a guy who's a legit #1 start on pretty much every rotation in the league.

Edited May 7, 2012 by PriortoTheoIhadWood

[davell]

Nice analysis. The problem is that outside of Hamels and Upton, I don't see anyone standing out as an impact player. Some would make a nice addition to the team, but not really making them into an instant contender.

 

Agreed. It's also why for some reason... I have a gut feeling that Theo/Hoyer will shock everyone and trade for an impact player (could be like Justin Upton or King Felix for example) since there's only 2 that could be a FA this offseason. Although I'm not sure how they will get a guy like through a trade, but it's just a funny feeling I got.

 

I don't see the pieces we currently have being nearly enough to get something like that done yet honestly. Especially since I really think we're counting on Brett moving forward and certainly Rizzo. I'm not sure they even know for sure which direction they're taking yet with Garza. If he's dealt, then the people saying we're 2014 or later before we're contending are right, in all likelihood.

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

The Upton trade isn't until 2014 folks.