per AM1000 - Cubs Sign C Dioner Navarro, NOT Jaime

[A New Era]

Maybe Theo or one of our Scouts is familiar with him and thinks he would make a great coach. And this is a way to get in in the orginization. Other than that, who knows. And who cares at this cost.

[jersey cubs fan]

Maybe Theo or one of our Scouts is familiar with him and thinks he would make a great coach. And this is a way to get in in the orginization. Other than that, who knows. And who cares at this cost.

 

That would strike me as a terribly inefficient way to get a potential future coach into the system. I will gladly pay you 1.6 million today for an opportunity to pay you $250,000 to coach when you retire.

[Bull]

Maybe Theo or one of our Scouts is familiar with him and thinks he would make a great coach. And this is a way to get in in the orginization. Other than that, who knows. And who cares at this cost.

 

That would strike me as a terribly inefficient way to get a potential future coach into the system. I will gladly pay you 1.6 million today for an opportunity to pay you $250,000 to coach when you retire.

 

 

More like, I can only pay you 250K later, but I've got the money to pay you handsomely now if you'll hang with us.

Sounds good to me.

 

I had thought about this myself, and then dismissed it. Not because it doesn't make sense, just because its a huge leap.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

OR IT COULD JUST BE THAT THEY WANTED TO UPGRADE THE CATCHER POSITION

[jersey cubs fan]

Maybe Theo or one of our Scouts is familiar with him and thinks he would make a great coach. And this is a way to get in in the orginization. Other than that, who knows. And who cares at this cost.

 

That would strike me as a terribly inefficient way to get a potential future coach into the system. I will gladly pay you 1.6 million today for an opportunity to pay you $250,000 to coach when you retire.

 

 

More like, I can only pay you 250K later, but I've got the money to pay you handsomely now if you'll hang with us.

Sounds good to me.

 

I had thought about this myself, and then dismissed it. Not because it doesn't make sense, just because its a huge leap.

 

And makes no sense.

[Bull]

OR IT COULD JUST BE THAT THEY WANTED TO UPGRADE THE CATCHER POSITION

 

Which is why I dismissed the idea. While its much more helpful to accept it at face value, I'm just pointing out that I don't think its irrational that the OP considered it. No need to yell.

[rocket]

this signing basically comes down to "clevenger really sucks, navarro sucks less and has a rapport with garza, might as well get him"

[KingCubsFan]

I think you have to be looking for things to complain about when you get upset over a team with no budget concerns signs a back up catcher that won't be blocking any players of concerns from getting MLB at bats for 1.75 million dollars.

 

And I think you have to be looking for reasons not to complain to say there's nothing wrong with paying that much for a completely, utterly fungible, replacement-level player.

 

The extra $1 million will not hold them back from doing anything they want to do in the future. It won't keep them from signing any major league player or an amateur guy. Complaining about this price tag is looking for something to complain about.

 

If you want to complain about the player, fine, but his cost will affect zero moves in the future. It is not your worry.

 

But its a bad move and thats the point. You cant spout off about acquiring assets, utilizing funds better, and making moves for the future when you waste money on a player you dont need. Yeah its only 1.75mil but its moves like this one, resigning reed johnson, baker, etc. They add up to the amount that we could have paid a decent player at a position of need such as third base, pitcher, reliever, etc.

If you don't consider Baker a "decent" player, these contracts would have to add up to about $12-15 million to get anything "decent" in free agency these days. There's absolutely no reason to get upset about this move, unless you're Dale Sveum and you're pissed you'll no longer have Clevenger's slump-proof bat.

[SouthSideRyan]

I think you have to be looking for things to complain about when you get upset over a team with no budget concerns signs a back up catcher that won't be blocking any players of concerns from getting MLB at bats for 1.75 million dollars.

 

And I think you have to be looking for reasons not to complain to say there's nothing wrong with paying that much for a completely, utterly fungible, replacement-level player.

 

The extra $1 million will not hold them back from doing anything they want to do in the future. It won't keep them from signing any major league player or an amateur guy. Complaining about this price tag is looking for something to complain about.

 

If you want to complain about the player, fine, but his cost will affect zero moves in the future. It is not your worry.

 

It's not the point of, "oh no we're out of money, blew it on Navarro." It's "Nah, that guy's not worth that much, they're spending like drunken sailors I tells ya!!, OOOOH backup catcher, now he's worth 1.75M

[nick23]

Gerald Laird got 2 years from the Braves today, money unknown yet. The other options were Shoppach, Torrealba, Barajas, Olivo, Blanco, and Snyder. Shoppach likely gets multiple years and Navarro is younger and better than the rest. They paid up for the possible upside, if Castillo doesn't work out. I see nothing wrong with it at all, the more I look at it.

 

Those were the "other options" only if you insisted on wasting a roster spot on a proven veteran backup catcher.

How is it wasting a spot if the internal options are terrible?

[Rob]

Gerald Laird got 2 years from the Braves today, money unknown yet. The other options were Shoppach, Torrealba, Barajas, Olivo, Blanco, and Snyder. Shoppach likely gets multiple years and Navarro is younger and better than the rest. They paid up for the possible upside, if Castillo doesn't work out. I see nothing wrong with it at all, the more I look at it.

 

Those were the "other options" only if you insisted on wasting a roster spot on a proven veteran backup catcher.

How is it wasting a spot if the internal options are terrible?

 

Precisely.

 

If Navarro and Clevenger somehow find themselves at the major league level with Castillo forced down to AAA, this is an awful move.

 

If it's only blocking Clevenger though, there's probably a couple million in excess value that Navarro provides over Clevenger. Better hitting, possibly better defense, the rapport with Garza, etc...

 

I'm going to throw out one other option. Every time I've heard Castillo talk, he had some degree of difficulty with his English (full disclosure, it's been a few years). Navarro may have been chosen as the veteran mentor in part because he'd have an easier time communicating with Castillo in his native Spanish. Just a thought.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The evidence that Navarro sucks less than Clevenger seems pretty scant to me.

[Rob]

The evidence that Navarro sucks less than Clevenger seems pretty scant to me.

 

The difference is about 1.5 mil if Navarro gets his incentives.

 

I'm not the biggest believer in paying for intangible stuff. But if there's one spot where it can make a real difference, it'd be backup catcher. They have so many opportunities to work with the pitching staff, and Navarro will get to help shape Castillo's defense going forward (an area where he certainly needs refinement).

 

That kind of work can easily be worth 1.5 mil. I'll defer to the front office's judgment on this, since they get to see a lot more of that intangible stuff than we do.

 

TB did keep him around for a while though. There seems to be some degree of forward-thinking smoke around him for whatever reason.

[Rob]

And yes, I realize that I have entirely lost my teeth since Theo and Jed came to town. During the Hendry years I'd have raised holy hell about this kind of stuff.

 

I guess there are more gray areas than I was willing to concede at that time.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm not the biggest believer in paying for intangible stuff. But if there's one spot where it can make a real difference, it'd be backup catcher.

 

Wouldn't it make more sense that the one area it could make a difference is at starting catcher?

[Guest]

The evidence that Navarro sucks less than Clevenger seems pretty scant to me.

 

You're a lot more confident in Clevenger's minor league translations than I am. He slapped doubles the other way for a month, then got hurt and was well below replacement level when he returned. His main offensive weapon is his hit tool and he hit .164 after his hot April. Could he be a passable backup catcher? Sure, he has that hit tool and maybe he wasn't completely healthy all last year. But that's far from certain given his awful 2012 and the fact that he wasn't much of a prospect until he switched to catching and started repeating AA. Compare to Navarro, who has a .660 MLB OPS in over 2200 PAs(.690 in the NL if you care about that sort of thing), and to me there's little doubt that you're locking in better production by bringing in Navarro.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If you think Navarro's career numbers are the way to project him, then yeah, I don't think Clevenger can match .660.

 

But those include some awfully old numbers. He's at a combined .594 the last four years, and I think Clevenger can probably match that.

[jersey cubs fan]

Aside from numbers, didn't Clevenger do a lot of stupid Theriot-like things last season? I didn't watch a hell of a lot of games but I feel like he was picked off, bunted on his own, fooled by defenders and a couple other things that stood out as stupid mistakes. Maybe it's just a matter of showing they mean business with the whole fundamental thing without pulling Quade and blaming it all on Castro and other guys who matter.

[Guest]

Well yes, when you include his 2 worst seasons as half of your sample, that will drag down the average.

 

Last year: .755

Last 2 years: .641

Last 3 years: .603

Last 4 years: .593

Last 5 years: .652

 

An OPS in the neighborhood of .650 hardly seems out of place as an expectation for Navarro at 29.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Well yes, when you include his 2 worst seasons as half of your sample, that will drag down the average.

 

Last year: .755

Last 2 years: .641

Last 3 years: .603

Last 4 years: .593

Last 5 years: .652

 

An OPS in the neighborhood of .650 hardly seems out of place as an expectation for Navarro at 29.

 

If you're looking for a sample that is recent enough to be relevant and large enough to be useful, years 3 and 4 look like the sweet spot to me.

[treebird]

this signing basically comes down to "clevenger really sucks, navarro sucks less and has a rapport with garza, might as well get him"

 

"has a rapport with garza" is an interesting way to phrase "has a history of getting into fights with garza"

[rocket]

this signing basically comes down to "clevenger really sucks, navarro sucks less and has a rapport with garza, might as well get him"

 

"has a rapport with garza" is an interesting way to phrase "has a history of getting into fights with garza"

 

SWEET! at least when the cubs sucked in the hendry years we had the zambrano/barrett and zambrano/lee fiascos to keep us entertained.

 

good move theo

 

also, for what it's worth, the reds fans i know liked navarro and are bummed to see him leave.

[waffle]

in the sun times (I think) they said they became close buds after their initial issues.

[Guest]

i don't understand why anyone would care enough to be mad about this. it's like everyone is completely ignoring the obvious truth. they are going to have crazy money "left over" this offseason just like last year.

 

if they do stuff like this in a few years when the cubs are competing and the team has needs elsewhere, then i'll be annoyed.