Cubs Sign John Lackey - 2 years $32M per Rosenthal

[Guest]

can we afford heyward now?

 

At a 140 million payroll, you probably have to do something uncomfortable to make Heyward fit(like trading Hammel, Coghlan, or Castro) in addition to backloading Heyward a bit.

 

trading coghlan and/or castro to make room for heyward is like lazyboy comfortable

 

It is until Szczur ends up with 400 ABs if Soler trips down the stairs or whatever his next injury will be. You have to make a sacrifice *somewhere* because the Cubs aren't going to go to the luxury tax, but on December 4th I was hoping the impetus for such a sacrifice would be someone better or with more upside than Lackey.

 

Also, Rosenthal says the deal is 2/32.

[Backtobanks]

Monetarily, its decent value. We've still got the ability to add a major piece.

 

Might be able to re-sign Fowler with what's left and then trade Baez for a young pitcher.

[davell]

I had no problem with them pursuing Lackey as the secondary pitching target of the offseason but if he's getting 17m/year that is hard to imagine.

 

Why? He turned down the QO and was pretty consistent over the last 3 seasons from a peripheral standpoint.

[treebird]

hate lackey the man, tepid on lackey the pitcher, hate the amount of money, thank god it's not three years.

[rocket]

i guess i've softened my stance on leaving your wife who has cancer

[Sammy Sofa]

What the FO presupposes is...maybe last year's team was a little TOO likable.

[Guest]

can we afford heyward now?

 

At a 140 million payroll, you probably have to do something uncomfortable to make Heyward fit(like trading Hammel, Coghlan, or Castro) in addition to backloading Heyward a bit.

 

trading coghlan and/or castro to make room for heyward is like lazyboy comfortable

 

It is until Szczur ends up with 400 ABs if Soler trips down the stairs or whatever his next injury will be. You have to make a sacrifice *somewhere* because the Cubs aren't going to go to the luxury tax, but on December 4th I was hoping the impetus for such a sacrifice would be someone better or with more upside than Lackey.

 

Also, Rosenthal says the deal is 2/32.

 

yeah, i mean, i get that...but the other side of that coin is that our lineup is stacked more or less 1-7 or 8 (or 9) so even if you have to give szczur 400 ABs in that semi catostrophic situation, it's not that awful of a thing.

[Proven Veteran]

Maybe Lester will let us dump Ross now?

[SouthSideRyan]

http://i.imgur.com/meY6cgO.gif

 

Yours is much better.

 

 

can we afford heyward now?

 

At a 140 million payroll, you probably have to do something uncomfortable to make Heyward fit(like trading Hammel, Coghlan, or Castro) in addition to backloading Heyward a bit.

 

trading coghlan and/or castro to make room for heyward is like lazyboy comfortable

 

I'm scared of counting on any one of Baez or Castro at 2B.

[Guest]

hate lackey the man, tepid on lackey the pitcher, hate the amount of money, thank god it's not three years.

 

but that's not a lot of money

 

well i guess it might be in the sense that we might be poor

 

i'd actually prefer that this be how they fill out the rotation over the years, at least in the 3-5 spots, tbqh. short term guys that you get pretty good value on for one reason or another.

[SouthSideRyan]

I don't really like this move in a vacuum, but if it allows us to go after Heyward, Gordon or Upton (more so on the latter 2 if Soler is dealt) I don't mind it as much.

 

in a vacuum how could you not love it? it's almost guaranteed neutral value with some potential for solid surplus plus very short term commitment.

 

it's outside said vacuum that you can find reasons to not like it, IMO

 

How does one of the loyal knights of the [expletive] Pitchers table call this almost guaranteed neutral value.

[Guest]

yeah, i mean, i get that...but the other side of that coin is that our lineup is stacked more or less 1-7 or 8 (or 9) so even if you have to give szczur 400 ABs in that semi catostrophic situation, it's not that awful of a thing.

 

To be clear, I'm not angry at the move, and I get that you can't always sequence moves in ideal order(e.g. if our moves went Heyward, trade for SP, then Lackey the sentiment would be different). However, in addition to overcoming some disdain for Lackey the person, this also marks the death of the ideal offseason unless payroll is markedly higher than expected, so it's a bit bittersweet.

[UMFan83]

So umm....does this basically destroy the Heyward dream? Maybe if they backload the deal?

[Butterscup1679666578]

i like it.

[Guest]

I don't really like this move in a vacuum, but if it allows us to go after Heyward, Gordon or Upton (more so on the latter 2 if Soler is dealt) I don't mind it as much.

 

in a vacuum how could you not love it? it's almost guaranteed neutral value with some potential for solid surplus plus very short term commitment.

 

it's outside said vacuum that you can find reasons to not like it, IMO

 

How does one of the loyal knights of the [expletive] Pitchers table call this almost guaranteed neutral value.

 

the fact that he has to be worth like a shade over 2 wins per season and pretty much always does that and it's only 2 years we have to worry about.

 

i also like that his velo has been consistent for like 8 years (and, as mentioned earlier, is actually up a tick in that span).

[badger1679666666]

pretty sure I hate him more than I hated Jim Edmonds. As a person that is. This is going to take some time on a personal level.

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't really like this move in a vacuum, but if it allows us to go after Heyward, Gordon or Upton (more so on the latter 2 if Soler is dealt) I don't mind it as much.

 

in a vacuum how could you not love it? it's almost guaranteed neutral value with some potential for solid surplus plus very short term commitment.

 

it's outside said vacuum that you can find reasons to not like it, IMO

how is it almost guaranteed neutral value?

 

lackey is old and has recently had two consecutive completely lost value seasons.

[KrisBryantisaBeast]

I can't get behind giving 16 million dollars a year to this douche.

[Butterscup1679666578]

i like it.

 

i guess i should clarify that i'm not in the doom-and-gloom "what if this is our only move/what if we can't go after heyward now." i personally don't think it limits any other major moves.

[shnsajax]

Guessing Lackey's first day in the clubhouse goes like this

 

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view1/1424085/half-baked-i-m-out-o.gif

[Irrelevant Dude]

Gross. If there was one guy I really wanted the Cubs to stay away from it was Lackey.

 

And the fact that the Cubs lose their first round pick while the Cardinals gain one is just more salt in the wound.

[jersey cubs fan]

the fact that he has to be worth like a shade over 2 wins per season and pretty much always does that and it's only 2 years we have to worry about.

 

i also like that his velo has been consistent for like 8 years (and, as mentioned earlier, is actually up a tick in that span).

 

Is the John Lackey I am thinking of a completely different pitcher than the one you are referring to?

[davell]

I don't really like this move in a vacuum, but if it allows us to go after Heyward, Gordon or Upton (more so on the latter 2 if Soler is dealt) I don't mind it as much.

 

in a vacuum how could you not love it? it's almost guaranteed neutral value with some potential for solid surplus plus very short term commitment.

 

it's outside said vacuum that you can find reasons to not like it, IMO

how is it almost guaranteed neutral value?

 

lackey is old and has recently had two consecutive completely lost value seasons.

 

He's thrown 600+ innings and has an 8.4 combined fWAR over the last 3 seasons.

[BigSlick]

I'm not particularly enthusiastic about the signing, I get it, but feel underwhelmed. With Price getting way out of the range of the what the Cubs were able to offer, Greinke seemingly out of the picture, this was the type of move (and I expect one additional move) they were going to make. Emotionally, it kind of feels like the 2015 trading deadline in that there wasn't much risked but the upside isn't crazy high. (Though if Lackey repeats his 2015, it will massively improve the team, I have no expectation a 37 year old Lackey can do that though.) Winning baseball championships isn't about how my fan emotions respond though.

 

Ah well, keep plugging away at it. At the very least with regards to Price, there wont be a 7 year 200 million dollar albatross type deal at the end like our experience with Soriano.

 

He's gonna be a real ugly mug to root for though.

[Guest]

I don't really like this move in a vacuum, but if it allows us to go after Heyward, Gordon or Upton (more so on the latter 2 if Soler is dealt) I don't mind it as much.

 

in a vacuum how could you not love it? it's almost guaranteed neutral value with some potential for solid surplus plus very short term commitment.

 

it's outside said vacuum that you can find reasons to not like it, IMO

how is it almost guaranteed neutral value?

 

lackey is old and has recently had two consecutive completely lost value seasons.

 

almost guaranteed is hyperbole but he's a good bet for it. he projects to surplus value next year and has exceeded what he'd need to do for each of the last 3 years. yes, he got hurt in 2011 and missed 2012, but other than that TJS, he's been very durable, both recently and in the past. his velo has also stayed consistent for almost a decade now. and it's a 2 year commitment, so you aren't asking a lot out of him.