Shark Signs w/ Giants - 5/$90M (Happy Derwood?)

[Guest]

I wanted Samardzija on the cheap with hopes of Bosio fixing him. I have little interest at the numbers being talked about now.

 

I'd take a do-over on Zimmerman right around now (ok, not really, but kinda).

[UMFan83]

I'm guessing at this point they are making a big run at Heyward and Lackey and then trying to trade for a #3 pitcher

[davell]

There's an article on Carrasco's trade value today on Fangraphs. Brings up Javy/Soler for Carrasco/Chisenhall with the likelihood there'd be a few other pieces.....

[Guest]

I'm guessing at this point they are making a big run at Heyward and Lackey and then trying to trade for a #3 pitcher

What do you need another pitcher for? If Lackey isn't #3, why is he even being pursued?

[UMFan83]

I'm guessing at this point they are making a big run at Heyward and Lackey and then trying to trade for a #3 pitcher

What do you need another pitcher for? If Lackey isn't #3, why is he even being pursued?

 

As a #4 if you aren't sold on Hendricks/Hammel/Internal options. At least that's how I look at Lackey. If the Cubs are really in a "2 year window" as Kaplan said the Cubs are viewing this, I don't see them signing Lackey to be the 3rd starter, I see them as signing Lackey AND a 3rd starter. But who knows, maybe they do ride with that and re-evaluate the rotation at the deadline.

[nolanwood]

Bruce Miles ‏@BruceMiles2112 18m18 minutes ago

 

Theo described initial dialogue with Samardzija as tasting great and being less filling. #Cubs

[Guest]

There's an article on Carrasco's trade value today on Fangraphs. Brings up Javy/Soler for Carrasco/Chisenhall with the likelihood there'd be a few other pieces.....

 

http://45.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m51pu9IEYc1qzm5y8o5_250.gif

[UMFan83]

Bruce Miles ‏@BruceMiles2112 18m18 minutes ago

 

Theo described initial dialogue with Samardzija as tasting great and being less filling. #Cubs

 

Maybe I'm having a slow day but I don't know if he's trying to say something meaningful there or just quoting the miller lite slogan because they met at a bar.

[UMFan83]

https://twitter.com/CarrieMuskat/status/672886235862581248

 

PTR ALERT

[KingCubsFan]

There's an article on Carrasco's trade value today on Fangraphs. Brings up Javy/Soler for Carrasco/Chisenhall with the likelihood there'd be a few other pieces.....

Carrasco is the only pitcher reportedly available via trade that I'd trade Soler for. If we were trading Baez too, I'd prefer something a bit more useful than Chisenhall.

[Andy]

I'm really, really, extremely not high on the idea of paying for an old pitcher coming off a career year driven by outperformance of his peripherals.

[Guest]

I'm guessing at this point they are making a big run at Heyward and Lackey and then trying to trade for a #3 pitcher

What do you need another pitcher for? If Lackey isn't #3, why is he even being pursued?

 

As a #4 if you aren't sold on Hendricks/Hammel/Internal options. At least that's how I look at Lackey. If the Cubs are really in a "2 year window" as Kaplan said the Cubs are viewing this, I don't see them signing Lackey to be the 3rd starter, I see them as signing Lackey AND a 3rd starter. But who knows, maybe they do ride with that and re-evaluate the rotation at the deadline.

 

To me, anyone who isn't sold on hendricks and hammel as 4th and 5th starters is just wrong.

 

Spiegel today was going off about how hammel can't be in next year's rotation and has to be a swing man. In what world is Jason hammel unacceptable as your fifth best starter?

[Rob]

There's an article on Carrasco's trade value today on Fangraphs. Brings up Javy/Soler for Carrasco/Chisenhall with the likelihood there'd be a few other pieces.....

Carrasco is the only pitcher reportedly available via trade that I'd trade Soler for. If we were trading Baez too, I'd prefer something a bit more useful than Chisenhall.

 

Jose Fernandez?

[SouthSideRyan]

https://twitter.com/CarrieMuskat/status/672886235862581248

 

PTR ALERT

 

When the time comes to compete, the money will be there.

[Guest]

I'm really, really, extremely not high on the idea of paying for an old pitcher coming off a career year driven by outperformance of his peripherals.

 

Career year? What?

 

And we'd likely be paying for the guy in the peripherals, which were still solid, not the guy with the 2.67 ERA...in part because of his age.

[Guest]

Bruce Miles ‏@BruceMiles2112 18m18 minutes ago

 

Theo described initial dialogue with Samardzija as tasting great and being less filling. #Cubs

 

Maybe I'm having a slow day but I don't know if he's trying to say something meaningful there or just quoting the miller lite slogan because they met at a bar.

 

I think he's saying they had pleasant conversations with Samardzija but they weren't substantive enough for them to be close on a deal.

[jersey cubs fan]

Bruce Miles ‏@BruceMiles2112 18m18 minutes ago

 

Theo described initial dialogue with Samardzija as tasting great and being less filling. #Cubs

 

Maybe I'm having a slow day but I don't know if he's trying to say something meaningful there or just quoting the miller lite slogan because they met at a bar.

 

I think he's saying they had pleasant conversations with Samardzija but they weren't substantive enough for them to be close on a deal.

and he had the shits the whole next day

[Derwood]

Well lock this thread up

[seanimal]

The upside of an opt out from the team's perspective is dependent on a player making an irrational decision. Possible, unlikely enough for the benefit to be negligible.

 

given the success rate for big money long-term contracts, especially to aging pitchers, the player doesn't have to be irrational at all for this to work out well for the initial team. just because you get such great age 30-32 seasons from a guy that someone's willing to beat the last four years of the deal in place doesn't mean that you still aren't better off letting him go.

 

that said, i do think these opt-outs do favor the players, just only very slightly. i'd much rather give a player one of those instead of additional money if that's what it takes to get the contract signed.

 

A player opting out for a larger contract may not be as bad as the converse of a player being hurt/ineffective and staying the duration of the deal, but that doesn't make it a positive. Losing a player for nothing who was under contract for less than he can get on the open market is definitionally a negative outcome. If your risk tolerance is such that you don't want to pay the player, then you can get *something* in trade if teams are willing to pay more than the remainder of the contract in free agency.

 

EDIT: Just to make sure I'm clear, I'm with you on the second paragraph. I don't overly care if the Cubs give an opt out, especially if it's to a 30 year old SP like Shark or Price. So if giving Samardzija an opt out after 2 years makes it possible to get him for something like 4+team option at 70 instead of a straight 5/90, sign me up. But at the same time, I recognize that opt out has no positive outcomes for the team itself.

 

when evaluated in a vacuum, true. but this isn't a vacuum, and we can't assume that the potential for 20 mil in payroll flexibility is "nothing" to a team 3 years down the line or whatever. the only way to see this as a net negative outcome in every circumstance is to, again, heavily discount the enormous risk of a 7 year contract to a free-agent pitcher. because yes, a player opt out most definitely can have positive outcomes for the team. just because it may not in a potential year 4 in some scenarios, doesn't imply that it cannot be a net positive in years 5-7. or even in year 4, for that matter

[davell]

Henry Schulman ‏@hankschulman 4m4 minutes ago

 

I'm hearing #sfgiants are close to a deal with starter Jeff Samardzija. Could be today. Didn't waste time licking their wounds.

[davell]

Tim Brown says 5/90 on Shark.

 

I think from a team building standpoint, with no consideration for douchiness, I really, really like the Lackey deal better than that.

[Tryptamine]

Tim Brown says 5/90 on Shark.

 

I think from a team building standpoint, with no consideration for douchiness, I really, really like the Lackey deal better than that.

 

Yeah, that's just too much coming off a 2015 like he had. I think he'll rebound, but I still prefer Lackey over 2 years.

[Guest]

Tim Brown says 5/90 on Shark.

 

I think from a team building standpoint, with no consideration for douchiness, I really, really like the Lackey deal better than that.

I don't know if I really, really like it better. But I like it better.

 

When the rumors for Shark were 4/64 I liked the idea. I'd still be okay with Shark at 5/90, but I prefer the Lackey deal from a baseball standpoint.

[KingCubsFan]

Guess I'm in the minority, but I would have done that for Samardzija. They're both getting signed in large part for their durability, and I'd prefer Samardzija's pure stuff over Lackey's "grit", "mentality" and "toughness" every day.

[imb]

i would have talked myself into either deal so whatever, i wanna fight about the opt out some more