Tigers sign Prince - 9/214 - Heyman

[MSG T]

Soriano and Bradley really shouldnt be lumped together either. Soriano was the top guy on the market, and I believe that it was the Phillies and Angels who had similar 5 year offers in the table for him before Jim Hendry jumped in attempting to outbid both them, himself, and the richest emporers in the history of China. Sorianos 1st 2 years were great, '09 was pretty bad and the last 2 have been productive. Had we given him. 5 year deal or even a 6 it would be over or at the last year an it wouldn't be considered the epic failure that it is. Bradley, on the other hand while many of the stat heads were in love with him it was considers questionable from he beginning especially on a 3 year deal with his history of physical injury and mental problems which humorously came together when he hurt himself while being held back from attacking an umpire.

 

Soriano was a case of overpaying for the best bat available, warts and all. Fielder is also the best bat available. He also has warts. In the end, just like with Soriano, a reasonable 5-year deal would make sense. As the dollars and years climb, it becomes more and more difficult to justify.

 

 

I don't necessarily disagree with this, but, there's a difference in projections for an 8 year contract to a 31 year old that averaged a tad over 3.0 WAR through his prime and the projections for a 6 year contract, going by rumors/innuendo, to a 27 year old who averaged 4.0 WAR in the years leading into his prime.

 

I don't disagree that there are risks involved with Fielder, and there's little doubt in my mind that he will have a significant fall in production at a younger age than a lot of players. But, even if he has that fall in his early 30's, say 32 or 33, that still leaves him with 4-5 years of good to great production ahead of him. That's worth a 6 year contract to me. I'll be honest, unlike some on here, I wouldn't go past that, and I'd prefer a year or two shorter, but I'd go 6 years with little heartburn over it. Looking at it another way, a 32 year old Prince Fielder with one year left at, say, $25 mil is a much more tradeable asset than a 35 year old Soriano with 3 years at $18 per. Particularly when considering an AL team may be willing to take a chance as a DH and the Cubs eating little money if they receive little in return.

[KingCubsFan]

13th in 1B WAR in 2010, 17th in 2008

 

 

EDIT: For reference, Pena was 16th this year.

I think he was in 10th in 2010. But this is when stats go wrong. In the real world, there's no way this team is better off with Daric Barton at first base.

[Guest]

Soriano was a case of overpaying for the best bat available, warts and all. Fielder is also the best bat available. He also has warts. In the end, just like with Soriano, a reasonable 5-year deal would make sense. As the dollars and years climb, it becomes more and more difficult to justify.

 

Hey, you go play with your reasonable contracts in the corner and the rest of MLB will get going with reality.

 

We may have different definitions of reasonable as mine might be slightly less conservative, but overall, I'm with davearm here.

[jersey cubs fan]

Soriano was a case of overpaying for the best bat available, warts and all. Fielder is also the best bat available. He also has warts. In the end, just like with Soriano, a reasonable 5-year deal would make sense. As the dollars and years climb, it becomes more and more difficult to justify.

 

Hey, you go play with your reasonable contracts in the corner and the rest of MLB will get going with reality.

 

We may have different definitions of reasonable as mine might be slightly less conservative, but overall, I'm with davearm here.

 

If you signed Soriano to his deal when he was 27, warts and all, you wouldn't have been upset during the timeframe of that contract. And while Fielder's warts may be the type you find on your hands, Soriano's were genital.

Edited December 14, 2011 by jersey cubs fan

[Sammy Sofa]

Soriano was a case of overpaying for the best bat available, warts and all. Fielder is also the best bat available. He also has warts. In the end, just like with Soriano, a reasonable 5-year deal would make sense. As the dollars and years climb, it becomes more and more difficult to justify.

 

Hey, you go play with your reasonable contracts in the corner and the rest of MLB will get going with reality.

 

We may have different definitions of reasonable as mine might be slightly less conservative, but overall, I'm with davearm here.

 

The corner awaits.

[jersey cubs fan]

go cheer on the A's.

[davell]

The mythical, perfect FA that we hope winds up on the horizon, just won't be showing up. Teams are locking their guys into deals much, much, much earlier now. What we're going to be seeing is a bunch of 30ish year olds or so as the big names from here on out. And if that perfect guy DID show up? He'd probably cost in excess of 300 mill anyway, so half the board would STILL be grumbling about overpaying anyway.

 

So, we sign a guy with a wart or two? So what? Until the system is literally producing bigtime talent guys on a yearly basis(never) this is what ALL big market teams HAVE to do, in order to compete on a year in, year out basis.

[ConstableRabbit]

Sign minor wart players; develop wartless ones. That's the Cubs Way.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The mythical, perfect FA that we hope winds up on the horizon, just won't be showing up.

 

But there will be better times to sign FAs.

[jersey cubs fan]

The mythical, perfect FA that we hope winds up on the horizon, just won't be showing up. Teams are locking their guys into deals much, much, much earlier now. What we're going to be seeing is a bunch of 30ish year olds or so as the big names from here on out. And if that perfect guy DID show up? He'd probably cost in excess of 300 mill anyway, so half the board would STILL be grumbling about overpaying anyway.

 

So, we sign a guy with a wart or two? So what? Until the system is literally producing bigtime talent guys on a yearly basis(never) this is what ALL big market teams HAVE to do, in order to compete on a year in, year out basis.

 

You can only get big bats in three ways, draft/develop, trade your farm for an established one, sign free agents. The Cubs haven't drafted/developed big corner bats in over a decade and have none on the immediate horizon. They don't have the supply in the farm system to go out and trade for them. They need to sign one now, and then allow the new regime to draft/develop the replacements who will be significantly underpaid for the duration of Fielder's contract to offset costs.

[jersey cubs fan]

The mythical, perfect FA that we hope winds up on the horizon, just won't be showing up.

 

But there will be better times to sign FAs.

 

Like when you're competing with Boston and the Yankees for those free agents. That's always fun.

[Little Slide Rooter]

And what if Joey Votto becomes available for next year and wants a 6-7 year deal? Do we worry about his anxiety disorder? What about Hamels or Cain? They'll easily command 6 years if Buehrle got 4 and Wilson 5. Pitchers are even more risky than hitters on long term contracts. Should we just pass on every bid FA and keep racking up guys like Ian Stewart, Daric Barton, and Joe Saunders and safer free agents like David DeJesus and hope that our 18-19 year olds all hit ter ceiling in 4-5 years because that sound like a perfect recipe for a perennial sub .500 team until we can finally produce some real talent from the farm and even then, you still need to either spend or trade. Even the Brewers who produced Prince Fielder, Ryan Braun, Rickey Weeks, Yovanni Gallardo, and Corey Hart in like a 3 year span needed to deplete what was left of their farm system before they were able to really compete, and while we have more money than they do, what are the chances that we produce 5 impact players like that in a short span. He'll, we havnt produced 5 players like that in my lifetime.

[davell]

The mythical, perfect FA that we hope winds up on the horizon, just won't be showing up.

 

But there will be better times to sign FAs.

 

Like when you're competing with Boston and the Yankees for those free agents. That's always fun.

 

Bingo. From that argument, Fielder is damn near the PERFECT guy for us, for that reason alone.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

So we're big-market enough to not be worried about the downside of expensive free agents, but not big market enough to hang with the Yankees and Red Sox?

[jersey cubs fan]

So we're big-market enough to not be worried about the downside of expensive free agents, but not big market enough to hang with the Yankees and Red Sox?

 

Um, yes. They are operating at a $30-60 million advantage to the Cubs. What kind of a question is that?

[abuck1220]

So we're big-market enough to not be worried about the downside of expensive free agents, but not big market enough to hang with the Yankees and Red Sox?

 

pretty much.

[Guest]

The mythical, perfect FA that we hope winds up on the horizon, just won't be showing up.

 

But there will be better times to sign FAs.

 

Like when you're competing with Boston and the Yankees for those free agents. That's always fun.

 

Bingo. From that argument, Fielder is damn near the PERFECT guy for us, for that reason alone.

 

He's not that great of a player at a position where it's fairly easy to find decent offense (and his good to great offense is his only strength) and he's going to get paid like the 3rd highest salary in the league.

Edited December 14, 2011 by David

[MSG T]

So we're big-market enough to not be worried about the downside of expensive free agents, but not big market enough to hang with the Yankees and Red Sox?

 

 

My thoughts...Red Sox - yes we can hang

 

Yankees - occasionally, yes, most of the time, no

[Guest]

So we're big-market enough to not be worried about the downside of expensive free agents, but not big market enough to hang with the Yankees and Red Sox?

 

 

My thoughts...Red Sox - yes we can hang

 

Yankees - occasionally, yes, most of the time, no

 

The Yankees are going out of their way to get below the tax threshold by 2014 (which, admittedly is still $189M or whatever).

[jersey cubs fan]

He's not that great of a player at a position where it's fairly easy to find decent offense and he's going to get paid like the 3rd highest salary in the league.

 

The fact that there are numerous productive 1B, or 1B types, does not mean it is all that easy to find them. The Cubs don't have one. You actually do need to acquire them and there are non on the horizon in the system, nor through other likely acquisition possibilities. The Cubs went through the Matt Stairs and Fred McGriff are good enough stage already. You can hide a lower tier 1B out there and not get killed, if you have some studs elsewhere, but the Cubs have no other impact bats. You can't fill your roster with all 6 hitters.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It's okay to overpay for Fielder because we want to get our FAs now before the Yankees and Red Sox come along and force us to overpay.

[MSG T]

So we're big-market enough to not be worried about the downside of expensive free agents, but not big market enough to hang with the Yankees and Red Sox?

 

 

My thoughts...Red Sox - yes we can hang

 

Yankees - occasionally, yes, most of the time, no

 

The Yankees are going out of their way to get below the tax threshold by 2014 (which, admittedly is still $189M or whatever).

 

 

I just think when all is said and done over the next couple of years, the Cubs will settle in around $140-150 mil. That would put them within about 10% of the Red Sox, that's close enough to win around half the battles over FA with them. The Yankees will still have an advantage most years for most FAs.

 

My bigger concern is that they dominate the Central, if that means dominating them in payroll too, so be it. Obviously on the field is far more important, but having a payroll that dominates them assists in that, if managed properly.

[jersey cubs fan]

It's okay to overpay for Fielder because we want to get our FAs now before the Yankees and Red Sox come along and force us to overpay.

 

Quit being such a dolt. It is to the Cubs immense advantage that they are in need of a position with a player readily available while the Yankees, Red Sox, Mets, Phillies, Angels and Dodgers are not in the bidding. Why are you pretending that is not an accurate and fair statement?

[davell]

I hate even asking this, but why is NOW not the right time to spend on a bigtime FA to begin with? Money off the books, more money coming off next year. Seems kind of perfect timing to me.

[jersey cubs fan]

I just think when all is said and done over the next couple of years, the Cubs will settle in around $140-150 mil. That would put them within about 10% of the Red Sox, that's close enough to win around half the battles over FA with them. The Yankees will still have an advantage most years for most FAs.

 

How is being at a disadvantage evidence of being able to split evenly with them?

 

Boston is going to have an advantage given their place as the only game in town, not to mention the region. They dominate one of the wealthiest parts of the country with absolutely no competition for eyeballs, plus they have the advantage of a DH spot.