Jump to content
North Side Baseball
  • Replies 6.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
I guess I don't have much of a problem with it. Why would you buy out arb/pre-arb years if you're not getting extra year(s) team control at a discounted rate? What am I missing?
Posted
It would seem kind of dumb to not have such a policy, no?

 

I don't see why. It's not an unreasonable policy, but it's certainly not the only way to do things.

 

What would be the point of signing a pre-FA player to a multi-year contract that doesn't give the team some benefit on the back end? The only way around that would be one that significantly underpays the player, which I would guess they would allow to circumvent the policy.

Posted
So apparently, we have a team policy that any multi-year contracts for pre-FA players *must* include a bought-out free agent year and a club option year.

Where did you hear this? Is it in regards to a Samardzija extension?

Posted
So apparently, we have a team policy that any multi-year contracts for pre-FA players *must* include a bought-out free agent year and a club option year.

Where did you hear this? Is it in regards to a Samardzija extension?

 

http://www.bleachernation.com/2014/02/10/theo-epstein-speaks-extensions-big-money-free-agents-draftdevelopment-more/

Thanks. I think it mostly makes sense and don't really have a problem with it being a policy

Posted
It would seem kind of dumb to not have such a policy, no?

 

I don't see why. It's not an unreasonable policy, but it's certainly not the only way to do things.

 

What would be the point of signing a pre-FA player to a multi-year contract that doesn't give the team some benefit on the back end? The only way around that would be one that significantly underpays the player, which I would guess they would allow to circumvent the policy.

 

Well, you could sign them in to a cost-certainty deal through some of their arbitration years.

 

But more importantly, insisting on a club option certainly isn't standard. I'm not saying I have a problem with it, but it's not the only way to do business.

Posted

Well, you could sign them in to a cost-certainty deal through some of their arbitration years.

 

But more importantly, insisting on a club option certainly isn't standard. I'm not saying I have a problem with it, but it's not the only way to do business.

That type of cost certainty isn't all that valuable.

Posted

 

So I just stumbled onto this while looking at some other baseball highlights and I noticed that it has the Clemens/Wood game in its apparent entirety.

 

I was just looking for the Remlinger/Giambi strike out clip the other day and couldn't find it anywhere, but it's in this video at right around 5:22.

Posted
So apparently, we have a team policy that any multi-year contracts for pre-FA players *must* include a bought-out free agent year and a club option year.

 

Theo explaining that: "I think it makes sense if you are going to give that kind of security, the club should get a benefit in return."

 

If the player wants the security of a guaranteed multi-year deal while he's pre-FA, the team getting FA year(s) balances the benefits.

 

But the option(s) are a distinct benefit, of massive significance. For an agent to give a team a club-option, he needs to be getting something very valuable in return. Significantly enriched per-year guaranteed salary? Considerably enriched salary during that option year, with an enriched buy-out payment if the club declines? A club option is too valuable for an agent to concede that without getting something pretty player-favorable back to balance those values.

Posted
BP's "Effectively Wild" podcast previewing the Cubs was really good:

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=22789

 

Brought up an interesting downside comp for the current organization: The Brewers of 5+ years ago.

 

The Brewers have made the postseason twice in the past 6 years. If they had the money to extend CC and Prince plus add a couple free agents they could have had a great run. Assuming the Cubs resources come back soon (they better) I'd be happy producing the offense Milwaukee has from the farm the last 6 years or so.

 

I'm pretty confident the Cubs front office won't ever let the farm system get as bad as Milwaukee's is now, too.

Posted
BP's "Effectively Wild" podcast previewing the Cubs was really good:

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=22789

 

Brought up an interesting downside comp for the current organization: The Brewers of 5+ years ago.

 

I think a decent comparison would be pre-2006 DBacks.

 

#2 SS Justin Upton

#5 SS Stephen Drew

#17 OF Conor Jackson

#20 OF Carlos Quentin

#23 OF Chris Young

#32 OF Carlos Gonzalez

 

You've got a good mix of athletic OF types with upside (Soler/Quentin), more rounded OF types (Almora/Gonzalez), sheer freaks in potential (Baez/Upton) and quality college bats right just drafted (Drew/Bryant). Couple Jackson and Young (and the next year Montero came on strong) with Rizzo and Castro and you've got two systems loaded with potential offensive talent all over the place. The Dbacks didn't have a ton of farm pitching at the time, but began to acquire it a bit with some of the aforementioned prospects. Still, useful comparison especially if we flip one for an established pitcher. The DBacks did win the division twice in the next six years... But also finished last twice.

Posted

I have no problem with the Brewers comp and think it's a pretty good one.

 

Baez/Bryant-Braun/Fielder (two potential superstars)

Soler/Almora/Alcantara-Hart/Weeks/Hardy (3 potential very good regulars with the potential to have a few All-Star type seasons)

Posted
Beyond our financial advantages over the Brewers (once Tom Ricketts isn't poor anymore), the main difference is we already have Castro/Rizzo locked up through their prime years. They should both be good regulars even if they don't become superstars.
Posted
Whatever you do, don't look up Ken Hubbs's stats if you read that Fox Sports piece on him

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/fifty-years-later-ken-hubbs-memory-continues-to-glow-021314?cmpid=tsmtw:fscom:foxsports

 

I remember reading some Santo autobiography when I was around 13 or 14 and he had me absolutely convinced that if Hubbs hadn't died, the Cubs would have won World Series after World Series.

 

Also, this post led me to pull up the 1969 Cubs Fangraphs page and holy [expletive] their top three starters had WARs of 9.1, 7.5 & 5.9.

Posted
random pizza musings

 

The Papa John's in my area is not bad at all. Pizza Hut is [expletive] terrible and if you can believe we don't even have a Dominos anywhere within 20 miles from where I live.

 

Luckily there's a mom and pop pizza place a mile from me that serves quality [expletive].

Posted
random pizza musings

 

The Papa John's in my area is not bad at all. Pizza Hut is [expletive] terrible and if you can believe we don't even have a Dominos anywhere within 20 miles from where I live.

 

Luckily there's a mom and pop pizza place a mile from me that serves quality [expletive].

 

there's some good pizza in tulsa, but nothing close to us. hilariously there is a "chicago-style" pizza place a couple miles away that i've yet to try

Posted
We've got a chain called Donato's that makes amazing pepperoni pizza. They put a million slices on, and the pepperoni is really crispy, which is amazing
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Cubs community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of North Side Baseball.

×
×
  • Create New...