Judging Sosa Deal (New Baltimore-based article added p.5)

[dalgreen]

I realize this. What i have been saying all year long is that, that deal was horrible. If people beleive he had to leave, fine. So be it. He is doing badly this year, so its probably best we have someone else. However, hendry could've done so much better than that. The organization did a horrible job dealing with the whole sosa thing. If they could've kept their darn traps shut, and not went blabbing to the media, his stock probably woulda been higher, and we couldve gotten more, and/or paid less of his contract. This was a bad offseason all around in cubbie land.

 

 

Why do you believe his stock could've been higher? He was coming off of three straight years of declining numbers in hrs, OBP, avg, rbi's and total bases. I think slugging pct, too, but I'm not sure. I am sure of the other categories, though. I don't know what team would've overpaid an aging guy with those numbers.

 

I suppose Sosa's value might have been higher if more teams wanted him. I doubt they could have gotten much more for him. However, had they gotten Cliff Floyd it might have made a substantial difference in the standings. His hot start coupled with Lee's could have been big.

 

But we have no way of knowing if the Mets-or anyone else- were even interested. I also reject the idea that the bad pub hurt his value. The Cubs publicly were shopping him because of clubhouse issues. That had to be better than trading him because he's no good anymore. Sosa having something to prove was enough to convince many people that he'd rebound. He still might put together a decent season.

 

I was one that was very interested in getting Floyd. I was only concerned with his knees, though. But the pub surrounding Sosa didn't have as much to do with lowering his value as much as his offensive stats declining over the past three years.

[Guest]

I realize this. What i have been saying all year long is that, that deal was horrible. If people beleive he had to leave, fine. So be it. He is doing badly this year, so its probably best we have someone else. However, hendry could've done so much better than that. The organization did a horrible job dealing with the whole sosa thing. If they could've kept their darn traps shut, and not went blabbing to the media, his stock probably woulda been higher, and we couldve gotten more, and/or paid less of his contract. This was a bad offseason all around in cubbie land.

 

 

Why do you believe his stock could've been higher? He was coming off of three straight years of declining numbers in hrs, OBP, avg, rbi's and total bases. I think slugging pct, too, but I'm not sure. I am sure of the other categories, though. I don't know what team would've overpaid an aging guy with those numbers.

I think what Roast was alluding to was the fact that everyone in the league pretty much knew that Hendry had to trade Sosa during the offseason. The organization's (over)reaction to the whole leaving early fiasco more ore less hung an "or best offer" sign around Sammy's neck. In short, I'd say that it was definitely a buyer's market for anyone interested in acquiring Sosa last winter, and Hendry probably did pretty well just to come out of it with what he did.

 

To be fair, Hairston and Burnitz have outperformed my expectations in the first half, though it's no sure thing that will continue over the season's final few months. I freely admit that, so far, the deal has turned out to be a positive one for the Cubs. I still think that a first-ballot HOFer (even one in the twilight of his career) who puts a lot of butts in the seats and a $15 million check should have netted more than an injury-prone utility player, a prospect who may one day become a decent utility player, and a pitcher who gives up the game 3 months after he's traded.

[SouthSideRyan]

Other than oppurtunity cost, I don't see how anyone can say Sosa for Fontenot, Hairston, and Burnitz is a loss.

 

And I really think Sosa's trade value was too low to get much more than that.

[Sarcastic]

I don't think there is much solid ground for saying we would be better off having kept Sosa than doing what was done based on the numbers that have been posted here. As for the idea that the trade was bad because Sosa had more value than what we recieved in return, consider the following:

 

2002: G 150/BA .288/OBP .399/SLG .594

2003: G 137/BA .279/OBP .358/SLG .553

2004: G 126/BA .253/OBP .332/SLG .517

 

This player, though he is probably a future hall of famer, has declined significantly for the last over the last few seasons. He also happens to be in his mid thirties and have a $17,000,000 contract. Would you give up serious talent for this player? I know I wouldn't.

 

Sure, Sammy has done well in the past, but as has been said many times on this board, you shouldn't value a player for what he has done in the past, but for what you think he will do in the future. For example, Maddux's contract has been said, quite reasonably, to be too high based on what we could actually expect him to produce.

 

Maybe Hendry could have gotten some foolish GM to bite based on what Sosa did from 1998 to 2001, but I doubt that. If there is one thing you can say for Hendry, it is that he knows how to negotiate a trade. I think it is quite likely that the reason Hendry had to settle for a bag of balls when trading Sosa was low interest. I'm sure the wide publicizing of Sosa's problems with the club didn't help, but I doubt it hurt as much as his age, contract, and declining performance.

 

One more thing: I fail to see how paying a big chunk of Sosa's contract is truly terrirble. For one thing it was pretty much necessary, unless we were going to trade Sosa by swapping bad contracts, and then we wouldn't have the extra money anyway. The money we saved allowed us to sign Burnitz without much of a raise in payroll, and Burnitz has definitely given us better production than Sosa has given the Orioles.

Edited July 11, 2005 by Sarcastic

[Bench Coach]

Look, Sosa was a bad seed that needed to go.

 

As far as Burnitz, even when he's not hitting he's a MASSIVE defensive improvement compared to Sammy. He cuts off balls that could easily turn into doubles, that Sammy would have let by him. And, on a ball hit into the outfield he knows which base to throw too: trying to get a runner at third, as opposed to airmailing over the catcher's head futilly trying to get the runner heading for home.

 

As far as hitting, he has hot days and cold days, but hasn't really had a prolonged bad strecth at the plate. He has power that makes opposing pitchers recognise, and can shoot it up the middle. He runs the bases intelligently (not withstanding the two times he was picked off in the last week, but everybody has bad days, and overall he's been great on the bases) and has enough speed that, on occasion, he can steal a base.

 

But, most of all, he's a down to Earth guy. he doesn't have a chip on his shoulder, like Sammy. He just goes out there and does his job, never wines, and always contributes. I admit I wasn't very excited when the Cubs signed Burnitz, but he has proven himself to me.

[Soul]

Burnitz wasn't part of the Sosa deal.

 

Saying Sosa had to leave is one thing. Paying another team for one of their players' salary is another thing entirely.

[Bench Coach]

Burnitz wasn't part of the Sosa deal.

 

No, but Burnitz replaced Sosa.

 

I'd rather pay $15 mil (or whatever it is) for Sosa to hit .230 for the Orioles then pay him 20 mil (or whatever we would have had to pay him this year) to hit .230 for us.

 

As far as Hairston, he needs to continue to start in Center and leadoff. He's a guy we need: a table setter.

Edited July 11, 2005 by Bench Coach

[SouthSideRyan]

Burnitz wasn't part of the Sosa deal.

 

Saying Sosa had to leave is one thing. Paying another team for one of their players' salary is another thing entirely.

 

Burnitz was bought with the money saved in the Sosa deal.

 

Paying the money earmarked Sosa for Burnitz, Hairston, and Fontenot has been far more valuable statistically than paying the money earmarked for Sosa to Sosa. And that's without getting into any sticky arguments over team chemistry or clutchness.

 

People seem so hung up on this idea of paying Sosa to play for another team. Do you honestly think there was a trade out there that shedded Sosa's entire salary? If there wasn't, would you rather be paying him to suck here rather than paying Burnitz, Hairston, and Fontenot the money to be contributors?

[Soul]

Burnitz wasn't part of the Sosa deal.

 

Saying Sosa had to leave is one thing. Paying another team for one of their players' salary is another thing entirely.

 

Burnitz was bought with the money saved in the Sosa deal.

 

Paying the money earmarked Sosa for Burnitz, Hairston, and Fontenot has been far more valuable statistically than paying the money earmarked for Sosa to Sosa. And that's without getting into any sticky arguments over team chemistry or clutchness.

 

People seem so hung up on this idea of paying Sosa to play for another team. Do you honestly think there was a trade out there that shedded Sosa's entire salary? If there wasn't, would you rather be paying him to suck here rather than paying Burnitz, Hairston, and Fontenot the money to be contributors?

 

3/4 of his salary still being paid by us? Yes, I think there was a deal out there that would have shed more of his salary than that.

[jjgman21]

Burnitz wasn't part of the Sosa deal.

 

Saying Sosa had to leave is one thing. Paying another team for one of their players' salary is another thing entirely.

 

 

you are paying $18M for Burnitz's production instead of $20M for Sosa's production. who cares where the money goes? I don't care if the Baltimore hotdog vendors got a bonus out that the Cubs had to pay, bottom line is you are getting more bang for the buck out of rightfield because of this trade.

 

 

and on the 'Hendry could have done so much better if the Cubs didn't trash him' theory, nonsense. trashing Sosa made him willing to drop the automatic vesting option if traded clause of his contract. fact is, nothing would have happened if the Cubs didn't trash him because the only thing that made any deal whatsoever even feasible was Sosa dropping that clause.

 

in retrospect, if that was their intent, trashing Sosa was a piece of PR genius

[Sarcastic]

3/4 of his salary still being paid by us? Yes, I think there was a deal out there that would have shed more of his salary than that.

 

I have two questions.

 

1) Why do you think the organization could have gotten more for Sosa than it did?

 

2) Why do you think that better deal went undone if it existed?

[jjgman21]

Burnitz wasn't part of the Sosa deal.

 

Saying Sosa had to leave is one thing. Paying another team for one of their players' salary is another thing entirely.

 

Burnitz was bought with the money saved in the Sosa deal.

 

Paying the money earmarked Sosa for Burnitz, Hairston, and Fontenot has been far more valuable statistically than paying the money earmarked for Sosa to Sosa. And that's without getting into any sticky arguments over team chemistry or clutchness.

 

People seem so hung up on this idea of paying Sosa to play for another team. Do you honestly think there was a trade out there that shedded Sosa's entire salary? If there wasn't, would you rather be paying him to suck here rather than paying Burnitz, Hairston, and Fontenot the money to be contributors?

 

3/4 of his salary still being paid by us? Yes, I think there was a deal out there that would have shed more of his salary than that.

 

there you go. the deal was bad because some theoretical trade that exists only in your mind was available to shed more of his salary. before it was bad because we are paying a guy to play for another team. now the deal was bad because we could have paid him less to play for another team?

 

let go of it.

[10man]

I was all for the Sosa deal and totally against the signing of Burnitz so I'll take the split on that and keep rooting for Jeromy to continue his good production.

[CubFanPhilly]

Does anyone think that Baltimore is happy right now about paying Sosa $9 million this season? Does anyone think Sosa would've been significantly better in Chicago this season than in Baltimore's lineup?

 

The Cubs got the better end of this deal - forget about the $13 mil., it's meaningless. The Orioles gambled that Sammy might've rebounded this year. So far he hasn't. The Orioles are grossly over-paying for a guy with a .689 OPS. A guy who's only played in 3/4ths of their games.

 

It's as simple as that.

 

CFP

[TrueBlueCubFan]

The money that the Cubs paid Baltimore to take on Sosa & the rest of his contact was already paid for. What do I mean by that? Sosa received the 4 yr contract b/c of his 3 incredible season of 60+ Hr's & MVP type seasons. During those seasons the Cubs made more money off of Sosa than they paid him for those 4 years. Now that he is a below average OF in MLB & a constant cancer in the clubhouse, JH & the Cubs decided it was best for both Sosa & the Cubs to move on, even if it meant eating the majority of the LY of that contract.

 

This is turning out to be a good move. Burnitz is showing, despite his age, he continues to play good solid fundamental bb & is as good or better than he has been in his career. On the other hand, Sosa has taken a huge step downward in his career production & is a year or 2 away from retirement.

 

What Sosa did for Cub fans & the game of baseball up to 2003 was incredible. He will never be forgotten & is a lock as a first ballot HOF er'.

However, this is a "what have you done for me lately" business & Sosa has been very dissapointing the last two seasons. Injuries,lack of production both offensively & defensively & me first attitude before the team, got him run out of town.

 

Those who are dissapointed about Sosa no longer with the Cubs are still caught up in what he did in those 3 incredible seasons. Those who are good to see him gone realize that he was no longer able to help the Cubs & if he did stick around he would have hurt this team.

 

Burnitz is a selfless player who plays all out & is still productive from the left side of the plate something the Cubs needed. Sosa is the complete opposite..

[Fred Hornkohl]

Look, Sosa was a bad seed that needed to go.

 

As far as Burnitz, even when he's not hitting he's a MASSIVE defensive improvement compared to Sammy. He cuts off balls that could easily turn into doubles, that Sammy would have let by him. And, on a ball hit into the outfield he knows which base to throw too: trying to get a runner at third, as opposed to airmailing over the catcher's head futilly trying to get the runner heading for home.

 

As far as hitting, he has hot days and cold days, but hasn't really had a prolonged bad strecth at the plate. He has power that makes opposing pitchers recognise, and can shoot it up the middle. He runs the bases intelligently (not withstanding the two times he was picked off in the last week, but everybody has bad days, and overall he's been great on the bases) and has enough speed that, on occasion, he can steal a base.

 

But, most of all, he's a down to Earth guy. he doesn't have a chip on his shoulder, like Sammy. He just goes out there and does his job, never wines, and always contributes. I admit I wasn't very excited when the Cubs signed Burnitz, but he has proven himself to me.

 

Just a small point..... Burnitz did have a pretty bad go of it in May.

 

Burnitz        AB   R   H  2B  3B  HR  TB RBI  BB  SO     BA    OBP    SLG    OPS
04/04 - 05/01  92  15  28   7   2   5  54  17   6  20  0.304  0.337  0.587  0.924
05/02 - 06/01 106  11  23   3   0   3  35  13   8  16  0.217  0.272  0.330  0.602
06/02 - 06/22  73  16  27   7   0   4  46  12   7  12  0.370  0.425  0.630  1.055
06/23 - 07/10  55   8  12   2   0   2  20   6  13  10  0.218  0.368  0.364  0.731

Overall       326  50  90  19   2  14 155  48  34  58  0.276  0.342  0.475  0.817

[BeerHere]

Difficult to gauge the Sosa trade without taking the $$ into account though. What could Hendry have done with the $$? Could he have picked up some better pieces for the pen? Maybe a #5 or #6 (spot) starter?

 

Fontenot and Hairston were decent pickups but th simpel fact is this, we're paying Sosa to play (admittedly poorly) elsewhere. A portion of your ticket $'s go to pay his salary. I'm glad he's gone, but it wasn't a great deal from the Cubbie standpoint.

 

Addition by subtraction is 100% correct. But I gotta believe we could've done better.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I'm of the presusasion that Hendry got the best deal he could considering the factors he was working with.

 

1. He needed a team willing to take Sosa and a team that could afford him.

2. He needed Sosa to waive the automatic vesting of 2006 if traded.

3. He had to find a team Sosa would waive his no-trade clause to go to.

 

All those hindered other possible deals.

 

I don't look at us wasting money paying Sosa to play for someone else. That money would be wasted there or wasted on Sosa. We had 17 million tied into Sosa one way or the other. Looking at his production, getting back 8 million of that to use is better than giving all 17 million to Sammy.

[TrueBlueCubFan]

Difficult to gauge the Sosa trade without taking the $$ into account though. What could Hendry have done with the $$? Could he have picked up some better pieces for the pen? Maybe a #5 or #6 (spot) starter?

 

Fontenot and Hairston were decent pickups but th simpel fact is this, we're paying Sosa to play (admittedly poorly) elsewhere. A portion of your ticket $'s go to pay his salary. I'm glad he's gone, but it wasn't a great deal from the Cubbie standpoint.

 

Addition by subtraction is 100% correct. But I gotta believe we could've done better.

 

How could they have done any better? please explain

[boilerXmen4116]

Well, I might as well admit that I also was wrong. I was expecting a semi-rebound year for Sosa, and certainly did not expect anything near this production from Burntiz. The money is still a concern, however.

 

i agree... i never understood how we get hairston for sosa (just the name and past production should be more). not only that but the money we had to pay for sosa's contract. i'm not a business management major, and dont know very much about contractual obligations in the sports industry, but i felt we got the lower end of that deal at the time. we admittedly lost a cubs hero and run producer (as much as you'd like to deny it, he was a hero and producer in right)... and for a guy that i personally had only heard his name mentioned a few times before, and never knew what position he played until he arrived. plus we had no replacement for RF at the time, which is always to be concerned.

 

but none of us knew (some expected) that sosa would have a flake year... and we would get burnitz in FA and he'd be producing as well as he is away from coors.

[Beer Kaese]

I can honestly say I was ecstatic when Sammy was traded. I can also say that I was one of the few who didn't think Burnitz was a bad move.

 

I would have agreed with you both times (and you can probably find my posts but who cares.)

 

Sammy had to go.

[jjgman21]

Difficult to gauge the Sosa trade without taking the $$ into account though. What could Hendry have done with the $$? Could he have picked up some better pieces for the pen? Maybe a #5 or #6 (spot) starter?

 

Fontenot and Hairston were decent pickups but th simpel fact is this, we're paying Sosa to play (admittedly poorly) elsewhere. A portion of your ticket $'s go to pay his salary. I'm glad he's gone, but it wasn't a great deal from the Cubbie standpoint.

 

Addition by subtraction is 100% correct. But I gotta believe we could've done better.

 

I'm not sure what you are suggesting with the part bolded above. if you are asking what the Cubs could have done with the money they are paying Sosa to play in Baltimore, not a darn thing. there's nothing Hendry could have done with that money because MacPhail signed Sosa to that deal years ago, contractually obligating the Cubs , or the team he is traded to (or a combination thereof as it turns out) to pay Sosa that sum of money.

 

if you are referring to Burnitz's money, do you seriously suggest the Cubs should have started the year with an outfield of Dubois, CPatt and Hollandsworth?

[Bench Coach]

Just a small point..... Burnitz did have a pretty bad go of it in May.

 

I stand corrected. Still, he was driving in some runs.

[Soul]

Since it's only 1 years' salary in any case, and Burnie has done a pretty good job (as I have stated many times in other threads)----it's all going to be a moot point after this season anyway.

 

I just believe 2 things:

 

1) We needed bullpen help before the season and we all knew it.

 

2) Baltimore or some other team sure would have given at least a little more on the Sosa deal. All it would have taken was a couple million to make it nearly a 50/50 salary deal--and only for 1 season. I just believe Hendry could have gotten a bit more money wise. Is it in my head? Yes. So the idea that there was NO possible better deal is only an idea in someone else's head. Tit for tat.

 

I'm certainly glad we have Hairston----a guy who can play mediocre baseball in Center field, which is infinitely better than what Corey was providing.

 

And I'm glad Sosa is gone----his tiresome act had grown so old and irritating there was really no going back with the guy.

 

But if the Trib was really cash-strapped (something I really don't believe, but whatever), then Hendry needed a little more to sign another reliever, and he fell a little short. I think the couple extra million could have come from the Sosa deal.

 

But oh well, it's water under the bridge and the end result is we have better play from the right field position and a replacement to help us through while Corey attends therapy sessions in Des Moines.

[neely crenshaw]

we won and we lost on this switch. we are basically still paying both players. baltimore gets a free player. burnitz has better stats than sammy but they are certainly not stud numbers. they probably won't match sammy's last years numbers. we are far worse a team than we were last year and our outfield and offense is worse.