Levine: Eyre done deal. 3 years $11 million

[frostwyrm]

I feel like we overpaid for Eyre and that player option on the third year is worse than just getting him for three years with no option (for the cubs, not Eyre). However, he's a quality arm.

 

Welcome to the team, Scott! :D

 

Agreed. No use in not welcoming him. If the team plays well enough, he's the kind of guy wo could help us in the playoffs. We can hope anyway.

 

I'd be happy to have Eyre, but not at 3yrs/11mil.

[swordsman]

Does anybody really doubt that Eyre got this contract because he's coming off a career year, one which was easily his best? He'll be 34 next May, and 36 in May of 2008, when he's making $4M. I see absolutely no reason to believe he'll match his 2005 numbers with the Cubs.

 

I refer you to my previous post that discusses his ADD and how he credits getting a drug that helps him with it with turning his career around. It could be that he bucks the trend of people falling after having a career year. It seems he actually has somthing he can point to that has made a difference for him.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

I feel like we overpaid for Eyre and that player option on the third year is worse than just getting him for three years with no option (for the cubs, not Eyre). However, he's a quality arm.

 

Welcome to the team, Scott! :D

 

Agreed. No use in not welcoming him. If the team plays well enough, he's the kind of guy wo could help us in the playoffs. We can hope anyway.

 

I'd be happy to have Eyre, but not at 3yrs/11mil.

 

water under the bridge, mi amigo.

[frostwyrm]

Does anybody really doubt that Eyre got this contract because he's coming off a career year, one which was easily his best? He'll be 34 next May, and 36 in May of 2008, when he's making $4M. I see absolutely no reason to believe he'll match his 2005 numbers with the Cubs.

 

I refer you to my previous post that discusses his ADD and how he credits getting a drug that helps him with it with turning his career around. It could be that he bucks the trend of people falling after having a career year. It seems he actually has somthing he can point to that has made a difference for him.

 

If his treatment for ADD has improved his pitching, then let him show it for more than one season before you give him a huge contract.

[goonys evil twin]

I feel like we overpaid for Eyre and that player option on the third year is worse than just getting him for three years with no option (for the cubs, not Eyre). However, he's a quality arm.

 

Welcome to the team, Scott! :D

 

Agreed. No use in not welcoming him. If the team plays well enough, he's the kind of guy wo could help us in the playoffs. We can hope anyway.

 

I'd be happy to have Eyre, but not at 3yrs/11mil.

 

water under the bridge, mi amigo.

 

This is a very long bridge, and there's an offer lot of water rushing through it.

[Blueheart05]

In case anyone missed it, Cubs.com now has a new article about Eyre which shows the money break down:

 

The free agent reliever signed a two-year contract with the Cubs on Thursday night that includes a player option for a third year. If the option is picked up, the total package is worth $11 million. The deal includes a $1 million signing bonus, and will pay Eyre $2.7 million in 2006 and $3.5 million in 2007. The player option year in 2008 is for $3.8 million.

 

Link

[CardsFanInChiTown]

BP has a rant about this signing...

 

Traded RHP Jon Leicester to the Rangers for a PTBNL. [11/15]

 

Signed LHP Scott Eyre to a two-year, $11 million contract. [11/17]

 

Wow. Now, I know and you know that Eyre was a top-20 reliever in Expected Wins Added, but really, what does this kind of money for a situational lefty achieve? Besides possibly cutting into Pepto use in the dugout, but even then, that sweet pink relief is just going to be repurposed by the beancounters who will have to fret that much more about how to maximize the Cubs' legalized scalping profits. More basically, though, it's as if the decision to give up on Mike Remlinger served no didactic purpose whatsoever. Skip avian flu, there's a creeping case of Wade-ry in the Windy City, as Jim Hendry feverishly tries to give his manager a pitcher he's comfortable using, at whatever absurd price, just to avoid further confrontations on whether or not the organization might want to trust any of the homegrown kids Dusty hasn't heard of. Just as it didn't work with Remlinger in '03-'05, I guess I'm just not wild about how this is going to turn out.

 

As for the decision to avoid getting to know the kids, because it's easier to board them in Texas and send postcards, dumping Leicester is an obvious bit of 40-man roster tweaking. However, beyond elaborate compensation gestures to cover up Dusty's feelings of bullpen inadequacy, I'm more than a little mortified that the Cubs have essentially disposed of a player because they felt a desperate, overriding need to avoid a gentleman's agreement with Neifi Perez. They could have let Perez know they'd be happy to sign him after the Rule 5 draft, but instead, they just had to have him, because god only knows what you'd do if you didn't have Neifi locked up instead of helping you win games by playing for somebody else.

 

There are other 40-man mistakes: Henry Blanco, of course, but that's the penalty of signing Blanco to a two-year contract. But why keep Jose Macias for the privilege of offering him arbitration? Even then, though, there are other suspects. Russ Rohlicek? Richard Lewis? Ryan Theriot? This isn't a system short of talent, so finding a few old, middling, not-so-prospect-y-anymore guys like that trio are a bit of a surprise. Not that all three can't play, but all three also aren't really guys where you're risking a lot of upside if you leave them unprotected during the Rule 5 draft.

 

If there's a silver lining, it's the possibility that they'll get something worthwhile from the Rangers for having given them a talented pitcher.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4612#CHN

[abuck1220]

but, hey, it's only the crazy pessimists from this board that don't like what the cubs are doing. everyone else obviously thinks hendry is great.

[sethuel1]

but, hey, it's only the crazy pessimists from this board that don't like what the cubs are doing. everyone else obviously thinks hendry is great.

 

I would say i feel validated, somewhat.

[Keener98]

BP has a rant about this signing...

 

Traded RHP Jon Leicester to the Rangers for a PTBNL. [11/15]

 

Signed LHP Scott Eyre to a two-year, $11 million contract. [11/17]

 

Wow. Now, I know and you know that Eyre was a top-20 reliever in Expected Wins Added, but really, what does this kind of money for a situational lefty achieve? Besides possibly cutting into Pepto use in the dugout, but even then, that sweet pink relief is just going to be repurposed by the beancounters who will have to fret that much more about how to maximize the Cubs' legalized scalping profits. More basically, though, it's as if the decision to give up on Mike Remlinger served no didactic purpose whatsoever. Skip avian flu, there's a creeping case of Wade-ry in the Windy City, as Jim Hendry feverishly tries to give his manager a pitcher he's comfortable using, at whatever absurd price, just to avoid further confrontations on whether or not the organization might want to trust any of the homegrown kids Dusty hasn't heard of. Just as it didn't work with Remlinger in '03-'05, I guess I'm just not wild about how this is going to turn out.

 

As for the decision to avoid getting to know the kids, because it's easier to board them in Texas and send postcards, dumping Leicester is an obvious bit of 40-man roster tweaking. However, beyond elaborate compensation gestures to cover up Dusty's feelings of bullpen inadequacy, I'm more than a little mortified that the Cubs have essentially disposed of a player because they felt a desperate, overriding need to avoid a gentleman's agreement with Neifi Perez. They could have let Perez know they'd be happy to sign him after the Rule 5 draft, but instead, they just had to have him, because god only knows what you'd do if you didn't have Neifi locked up instead of helping you win games by playing for somebody else.

 

There are other 40-man mistakes: Henry Blanco, of course, but that's the penalty of signing Blanco to a two-year contract. But why keep Jose Macias for the privilege of offering him arbitration? Even then, though, there are other suspects. Russ Rohlicek? Richard Lewis? Ryan Theriot? This isn't a system short of talent, so finding a few old, middling, not-so-prospect-y-anymore guys like that trio are a bit of a surprise. Not that all three can't play, but all three also aren't really guys where you're risking a lot of upside if you leave them unprotected during the Rule 5 draft.

 

If there's a silver lining, it's the possibility that they'll get something worthwhile from the Rangers for having given them a talented pitcher.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4612#CHN

 

Wow, that must have been written by Jon Leicasters mom or somebody, because whoever wrote it thinks Leicaster is great. I just think whoever wrote that really over values Jon Leicaster but hey thats just me.

[Careless]

Does anybody really doubt that Eyre got this contract because he's coming off a career year, one which was easily his best? He'll be 34 next May, and 36 in May of 2008, when he's making $4M. I see absolutely no reason to believe he'll match his 2005 numbers with the Cubs.

 

I refer you to my previous post that discusses his ADD and how he credits getting a drug that helps him with it with turning his career around. It could be that he bucks the trend of people falling after having a career year. It seems he actually has somthing he can point to that has made a difference for him.

 

If his treatment for ADD has improved his pitching, then let him show it for more than one season before you give him a huge contract.

And here I thought that amphetemines only helped hitters

[goonys evil twin]

Wow, that must have been written by Jon Leicasters mom or somebody, because whoever wrote it thinks Leicaster is great. I just think whoever wrote that really over values Jon Leicaster but hey thats just me.

 

I don't see anything that talks glowingly of Leicester in that article. They basically said it was a 40-man roster move, but a rather unimaginative one.

 

They could have dumped Macias, or kept Neifi off the list, or gotten rid of plenty of other worthless players to clear 40 man space. They could have kept Neifi off the roster, but signed him after the 40 man draft.

[JeffH]

I imagine that this transaction was done partly as a favor to Leicester.

[Dr. Cub]

BP has a rant about this signing...

 

Traded RHP Jon Leicester to the Rangers for a PTBNL. [11/15]

 

Signed LHP Scott Eyre to a two-year, $11 million contract. [11/17]

 

Wow. Now, I know and you know that Eyre was a top-20 reliever in Expected Wins Added, but really, what does this kind of money for a situational lefty achieve? Besides possibly cutting into Pepto use in the dugout, but even then, that sweet pink relief is just going to be repurposed by the beancounters who will have to fret that much more about how to maximize the Cubs' legalized scalping profits. More basically, though, it's as if the decision to give up on Mike Remlinger served no didactic purpose whatsoever. Skip avian flu, there's a creeping case of Wade-ry in the Windy City, as Jim Hendry feverishly tries to give his manager a pitcher he's comfortable using, at whatever absurd price, just to avoid further confrontations on whether or not the organization might want to trust any of the homegrown kids Dusty hasn't heard of. Just as it didn't work with Remlinger in '03-'05, I guess I'm just not wild about how this is going to turn out.

 

As for the decision to avoid getting to know the kids, because it's easier to board them in Texas and send postcards, dumping Leicester is an obvious bit of 40-man roster tweaking. However, beyond elaborate compensation gestures to cover up Dusty's feelings of bullpen inadequacy, I'm more than a little mortified that the Cubs have essentially disposed of a player because they felt a desperate, overriding need to avoid a gentleman's agreement with Neifi Perez. They could have let Perez know they'd be happy to sign him after the Rule 5 draft, but instead, they just had to have him, because god only knows what you'd do if you didn't have Neifi locked up instead of helping you win games by playing for somebody else.

 

There are other 40-man mistakes: Henry Blanco, of course, but that's the penalty of signing Blanco to a two-year contract. But why keep Jose Macias for the privilege of offering him arbitration? Even then, though, there are other suspects. Russ Rohlicek? Richard Lewis? Ryan Theriot? This isn't a system short of talent, so finding a few old, middling, not-so-prospect-y-anymore guys like that trio are a bit of a surprise. Not that all three can't play, but all three also aren't really guys where you're risking a lot of upside if you leave them unprotected during the Rule 5 draft.

 

If there's a silver lining, it's the possibility that they'll get something worthwhile from the Rangers for having given them a talented pitcher.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4612#CHN

 

Wow, that must have been written by Jon Leicasters mom or somebody, because whoever wrote it thinks Leicaster is great. I just think whoever wrote that really over values Jon Leicaster but hey thats just me.

 

While I agree that Leicester isn't a great talent; all the article said about him was that he was talented. There were a grand total of 2 sentences that included Leicester's name. That is enough to think his mom wrote the article? I'd say the article is dead on about the foolishness that is the Cubs management.

[Keener98]

Wow, that must have been written by Jon Leicasters mom or somebody, because whoever wrote it thinks Leicaster is great. I just think whoever wrote that really over values Jon Leicaster but hey thats just me.

 

I don't see anything that talks glowingly of Leicester in that article. They basically said it was a 40-man roster move, but a rather unimaginative one.

 

They could have dumped Macias, or kept Neifi off the list, or gotten rid of plenty of other worthless players to clear 40 man space. They could have kept Neifi off the roster, but signed him after the 40 man draft.

 

Ok fair enough. After reading it a couple more times I agree with what their point was. For some reason the first time I read it they just came off to me as really puffing up Leicaster. But I agree about plenty of other ways to clear the 40 man.

[CubfaninCA]

The guy from BP thinks he signed for 2 and 11? No wonder such a ramble.

[goonys evil twin]

The guy from BP thinks he signed for 2 and 11? No wonder such a ramble.

 

ESPN.com was showing that all last night, and I about died. 3/11 isn't great, but it's much more feasible.

[Brian]

While I agree that Hendry is making some dumb moves. He did the right moves mostly with the huge problem of the 40 man roster that he had. Of the 3 prospects he was upset that were on their 2 were just cut and (I think) that Theriot and Fontenot are similar players with Riot's ability to play short making him more valuable. Yes giving Blanco and Neifi multi year deals were not the best moves but Blanco did more than what was asked of him last year.

[goonys evil twin]

While I agree that Hendry is making some dumb moves. He did the right moves mostly with the huge problem of the 40 man roster that he had. Of the 3 prospects he was upset that were on their 2 were just cut and (I think) that Theriot and Fontenot are similar players with Riot's ability to play short making him more valuable. Yes giving Blanco and Neifi multi year deals were not the best moves but Blanco did more than what was asked of him last year.

 

If Macias is taking up space, that's bad.

[Brian]

I thought all anti-Macias stuff was implied. I hate even wasting my finger strength on him anymore :(

[Bgbird68]

Heard an interview with Eyre today on the Score.

 

He said he liked the fact that Dusty runs a "loose" clubhouse and he's the type of manager who doesn't care if you bring your kids to the park.

 

Teams of choice were St. Louis because of their "winning tradition" and the Cubs "of course, for their winning tradition."

 

I almost spit my Diet Pepsi up when I heard that one.

 

Sounds like a pretty cool guy. Of course, I would be too after hitting the lottery.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Teams of choice were St. Louis because of their "winning tradition" and the Cubs "of course, for their winning tradition."

 

I almost spit my Diet Pepsi up when I heard that one.

 

Was that a joke by Eyre?

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Teams of choice were St. Louis because of their "winning tradition" and the Cubs "of course, for their winning tradition."

 

I almost spit my Diet Pepsi up when I heard that one.

 

Was that a joke by Eyre?

 

he didn't specify which decade, did he?

[MPrior]

Teams of choice were St. Louis because of their "winning tradition" and the Cubs "of course, for their winning tradition."

 

I almost spit my Diet Pepsi up when I heard that one.

 

Was that a joke by Eyre?

 

he didn't specify which millenium, did he?

 

fixed

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Teams of choice were St. Louis because of their "winning tradition" and the Cubs "of course, for their winning tradition."

 

I almost spit my Diet Pepsi up when I heard that one.

 

Was that a joke by Eyre?

 

he didn't specify which millenium, did he?

 

fixed

 

hehe. every team has a bad century.