Levine: Eyre done deal. 3 years $11 million

[USSoccer]

Giles wants alot of YEARS, and at some point he will drop of dramatically.

 

 

Kerry Wood. Games 1 and 5, 2003 NLDS. Entire month of September 2003.

Carlos Zambrano. ERA below 3 after the ASB from 2004-5.

Mark Prior: Games 3 NLDS, Game 2 NLCS.

 

Those stats are good, but we have nobody in the bullpen to get that cruical out. Not to mention, it would be nice if the Cubs can have a full season of pitching from the twin ragdolls.

 

First of all, Scott Eyre is a nice reliever. He's not worth the years and money we gave him though. Coupled with the other 2 signings, it's bad money management.

 

Next, if you want to question Wood's ability to stay healthy, that's fair game. But Prior has been hurt 4 times as a Cub. 3 of them have been complete freak things. It's a bit unfair to label him a rag doll.

 

Also, Giles's best asset is his batting eye. That generally stays with players as they age. And I haven't seen any offer longer than 3 years yet for him. That's the same number of years they just gave to Scott Eyre, who's about the same age, and who plays a position where guys drop off the face of the earth production wise at random.

[badger1679666666]

I hope soon that this offseason starts changing to where we are hearing moves we like. So far, these moves by Hendry have just made me sick.

 

Seriously, to you and every Cub fan that wants to commit mass cult suicide together based upon 2 weeks of nothing exciting, relax, calm down step off the ledge.

 

Only 1 MAJOR signing has occured so far this season - Godzilla. Before committing suicide over inNeiffable, Rusch, and Eyre (who's a solid reliever) lets all take a collective deep breath.

 

What do you expect to happen 2 weeks into the post season? No deals have been made. It's quite frightening to see the stress levels of fans this early into the post season.

 

Second, and someone whose said "11 million, sickening" please explain why it matters if the CUBS overpay. We'll be spending 105 million this off season, we CAN overpay. Reacting to the years, I understand, but reacting to the pay, I don't. Hendry still has 25-30 million to spend. As long as the big deals are real good, these little ones don't mean squat.

These 3 signings mean that there's an extremely high probability that the cubs will have a bad outfiield in 2006 unless a player or two hass an unexpectedly fantastic season.

 

Ok, then please explain to me how these 3 insignificant signings in ANY way lead you to believe we have a high probability of a bad outfield?

 

Do they directly affect the outfield? No.

Do they affect how many position players we have? Yes, but only by one bench player.

Do they impact how much money we have to get said good players? NO. We have 30 million, we could have Giles and Furcal and Burnett (maybe) for that amount of money. We most certainly COULD get those guys, so the signings themselves have NO effect on the outfield.

 

No, the organizational philosophy has more of a bearing on that and Hendry's newfound obsession for players who can catch has a bearing on that, but not the 2 scrubs and 1 good reliever.

[USSoccer]

I hope soon that this offseason starts changing to where we are hearing moves we like. So far, these moves by Hendry have just made me sick.

 

Seriously, to you and every Cub fan that wants to commit mass cult suicide together based upon 2 weeks of nothing exciting, relax, calm down step off the ledge.

 

Only 1 MAJOR signing has occured so far this season - Godzilla. Before committing suicide over inNeiffable, Rusch, and Eyre (who's a solid reliever) lets all take a collective deep breath.

 

What do you expect to happen 2 weeks into the post season? No deals have been made. It's quite frightening to see the stress levels of fans this early into the post season.

 

Second, and someone whose said "11 million, sickening" please explain why it matters if the CUBS overpay. We'll be spending 105 million this off season, we CAN overpay. Reacting to the years, I understand, but reacting to the pay, I don't. Hendry still has 25-30 million to spend. As long as the big deals are real good, these little ones don't mean squat.

These 3 signings mean that there's an extremely high probability that the cubs will have a bad outfiield in 2006 unless a player or two hass an unexpectedly fantastic season.

 

Ok, then please explain to me how these 3 insignificant signings in ANY way lead you to believe we have a high probability of a bad outfield?

 

Do they directly affect the outfield? No.

Do they affect how many position players we have? Yes, but only by one bench player.

Do they impact how much money we have to get said good players? NO. We have 30 million, we could have Giles and Furcal and Burnett (maybe) for that amount of money. We most certainly COULD get those guys, so the signings themselves have NO effect on the outfield.

 

No, the organizational philosophy has more of a bearing on that and Hendry's newfound obsession for players who can catch has a bearing on that, but not the 2 scrubs and 1 good reliever.

 

You're making the assumption that Lee doesn't get extended, and that Zambrano doesn't get a big arby raise, and what about our bench? Do you want the same bunch coming off to PH late i the game this year?

[Careless]

I hope soon that this offseason starts changing to where we are hearing moves we like. So far, these moves by Hendry have just made me sick.

 

Seriously, to you and every Cub fan that wants to commit mass cult suicide together based upon 2 weeks of nothing exciting, relax, calm down step off the ledge.

 

Only 1 MAJOR signing has occured so far this season - Godzilla. Before committing suicide over inNeiffable, Rusch, and Eyre (who's a solid reliever) lets all take a collective deep breath.

 

What do you expect to happen 2 weeks into the post season? No deals have been made. It's quite frightening to see the stress levels of fans this early into the post season.

 

Second, and someone whose said "11 million, sickening" please explain why it matters if the CUBS overpay. We'll be spending 105 million this off season, we CAN overpay. Reacting to the years, I understand, but reacting to the pay, I don't. Hendry still has 25-30 million to spend. As long as the big deals are real good, these little ones don't mean squat.

These 3 signings mean that there's an extremely high probability that the cubs will have a bad outfiield in 2006 unless a player or two hass an unexpectedly fantastic season.

 

Ok, then please explain to me how these 3 insignificant signings in ANY way lead you to believe we have a high probability of a bad outfield?

 

Do they directly affect the outfield? No.

Do they affect how many position players we have? Yes, but only by one bench player.

Do they impact how much money we have to get said good players? NO. We have 30 million, we could have Giles and Furcal and Burnett (maybe) for that amount of money. We most certainly COULD get those guys, so the signings themselves have NO effect on the outfield.

 

No, the organizational philosophy has more of a bearing on that and Hendry's newfound obsession for players who can catch has a bearing on that, but not the 2 scrubs and 1 good reliever.

So hendry's immediate signings of 3 mediocrities (at best, in 2 cases) to large contracts implies to you that he's going to fill every spot except 3 with minimum wage players for the next 3 years? we don't even have enough money to get all 3 if we do that.

[badger1679666666]

Okay, disregarding any notion of performance, we just gave a 33 year old relief pitcher 3 years and 8 figures. That's pretty bad unless the person is lights out. Unfortunately for us, the only time he's really been above average is this year. At least Remlinger and Hawkins had more than one good season of good performance when they got long term deals.

 

From what I've heard he's had increasingly improved seasons, and has had 3 other well above average years. His whip has gone down consistently, his BAA has been always great with lefty's and has improved for the last couple years (NOT EVEN counting last year).

 

Remlinger was old and decrepid. Eyre isn't.

[USSoccer]

Okay, disregarding any notion of performance, we just gave a 33 year old relief pitcher 3 years and 8 figures. That's pretty bad unless the person is lights out. Unfortunately for us, the only time he's really been above average is this year. At least Remlinger and Hawkins had more than one good season of good performance when they got long term deals.

 

From what I've heard he's had increasingly improved seasons, and has had 3 other well above average years. His whip has gone down consistently, his BAA has been always great with lefty's and has improved for the last couple years (NOT EVEN counting last year).

 

Remlinger was old and decrepid. Eyre isn't.

 

I think Hoops posted this, but his ERA in even numbered years was in the hugh 4's. In odd numbered years it's in the 3's. That's a sort of consistency, but not the sort you'd like to have.

 

But again, Eyre on his own isn't the issue. It's Eyre at the rate we signed him at + Neifi and Rusch's deals. That'sa a lot of money for incremental improvement.

[cubbyvirus00]

I just think people shoulden't jump off of the cliff because of this signing.

 

I think Hendry will get Furcal, and add somebody else.

 

As long as we fix our bullpen and our leadoff hitter, we'll fix two of the glaring weaknesses of our team.

 

Judge Hendry at the end of the FA season.

[Blueheart05]

People cry when Hendry does something, people cry when he doesen't do something.

 

If you THINK you can do a better job, you're fooling yourself. The FA market is VERY thin, and the Cubs need to improve their bullpen. Our bullpen the last two seasons has absolutely sucked terribly. We've mostly had young pitchers, who can't even utter the phrase "big game." This gives us a BIG GAME PROVEN pitcher, with good stats. This is a move for desperation, and Hendry didn't want to banter back and forth with 3 other teams lobbying for the same guy.

 

Kerry Wood. Games 1 and 5, 2003 NLDS. Entire month of September 2003.

Carlos Zambrano. ERA below 3 after the ASB from 2004-5.

Mark Prior: Games 3 NLDS, Game 2 NLCS.

 

I think your hyperbole got ahead of the facts.

 

And actually, there are a few members here at NSBB I think could do an effective job at being a GM. Also, I'm not sure how Scott Eyre qualifies as a "big game proven pitcher". He's a reliever. He's not a closer. He's not a starter. He's a setup guy at best, Those guys don't win you divisions.

 

Unfortunately, I have to disagree on your last point. A good setup guy or guys can be the difference between winning and losing. Look no further than the Sox to see how valuable relievers like Politte (and to some extent Cotts) can be as a bridge to the closer.

[badger1679666666]

So hendry's immediate signings of 3 mediocrities (at best, in 2 cases) to large contracts implies to you that he's going to fill every spot except 3 with minimum wage players for the next 3 years? we don't even have enough money to get all 3 if we do that.

 

I don't get your first question, but you didn't answer my first question either.

 

I don't want Burnett at 5/55 we can certainly get 2 very good players + shore up the bench for 30 million. Guaranteed. Whether JH does it or not is a different story.

 

Please answer my first question though, and clarify yours.

[cubbyvirus00]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^ bingo.

 

I'd like to see the stats, that show the 8th inning is more important in terms of stopping the other team then the ninth. I'm pretty sure teams mount their attack mainly in the 8th inning, and what happens then, determines the outcome of the game alot more.

[USSoccer]

People cry when Hendry does something, people cry when he doesen't do something.

 

If you THINK you can do a better job, you're fooling yourself. The FA market is VERY thin, and the Cubs need to improve their bullpen. Our bullpen the last two seasons has absolutely sucked terribly. We've mostly had young pitchers, who can't even utter the phrase "big game." This gives us a BIG GAME PROVEN pitcher, with good stats. This is a move for desperation, and Hendry didn't want to banter back and forth with 3 other teams lobbying for the same guy.

 

Kerry Wood. Games 1 and 5, 2003 NLDS. Entire month of September 2003.

Carlos Zambrano. ERA below 3 after the ASB from 2004-5.

Mark Prior: Games 3 NLDS, Game 2 NLCS.

 

I think your hyperbole got ahead of the facts.

 

And actually, there are a few members here at NSBB I think could do an effective job at being a GM. Also, I'm not sure how Scott Eyre qualifies as a "big game proven pitcher". He's a reliever. He's not a closer. He's not a starter. He's a setup guy at best, Those guys don't win you divisions.

 

Unfortunately, I have to disagree on your last point. A good setup guy or guys can be the difference between winning and losing. Look no further than the Sox to see how valuable relievers like Politte (and to some extent Cotts) can be as a bridge to the closer.

 

But look what they signed for. You find bullpen guys on the cheap. They're not sound investments. I agree that stability and production are needed in the pen, but you cannot convince me that a middle reliever is going to be a difference maker to the point you have to overpay for one.

[Careless]

So hendry's immediate signings of 3 mediocrities (at best, in 2 cases) to large contracts implies to you that he's going to fill every spot except 3 with minimum wage players for the next 3 years? we don't even have enough money to get all 3 if we do that.

 

I don't get your first question, but you didn't answer my first question either.

 

I don't want Burnett at 5/55 we can certainly get 2 very good players + shore up the bench for 30 million. Guaranteed. Whether JH does it or not is a different story.

 

Please answer my first question though, and clarify yours.

We can get 2 very good players for the ~20 million we have left. Hendry's signings thus far have left major doubt as to how he will spend it (as in, many of us expect him to overpay on another vet at this point)

it's not enough to sign all 3 players you mentioned. If Giles and Furcal both sign at the upper half of their rumored contracts, it's not enough to sign both of them. Of course, there's no reaosn to think hendry has any intention of getting tiles

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Okay, disregarding any notion of performance, we just gave a 33 year old relief pitcher 3 years and 8 figures. That's pretty bad unless the person is lights out. Unfortunately for us, the only time he's really been above average is this year. At least Remlinger and Hawkins had more than one good season of good performance when they got long term deals.

 

From what I've heard he's had increasingly improved seasons, and has had 3 other well above average years. His whip has gone down consistently, his BAA has been always great with lefty's and has improved for the last couple years (NOT EVEN counting last year).

 

Remlinger was old and decrepid. Eyre isn't.

 

He's had a WHIP below 1.30 once in his career. He's 33. He's been pretty good against LH, but making him a priority like this is a bit misguided(IMO a second LH specialist should come after everyday players and SP on the priority queue), and giving him that contract is absurd. You sign him to a contract like Mercker in January and no one will complain. You waste time negotiating a 3/11 deal with him in mid-November and people will rightfully get upset.

[USSoccer]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^ bingo.

 

I'd like to see the stats, that show the 8th inning is more important in terms of stopping the other team then the ninth. I'm pretty sure teams mount their attack mainly in the 8th inning, and what happens then, determines the outcome of the game alot more.

 

I'm pretty sure there's not going to be a stat that shows that. You might find a stat that teams score a lot in the 6th and 7thm but that's usually because a starter is out and the team's middle relief sucks.

 

Like I keep saying, Eyre is a nice player, a nice reliever. But is he 10 times better than Ohman? Will he be 10x better than whoever is an option in 2007? I doubt it. Middle relievers and setup men are best developed and not bought.

[badger1679666666]

So hendry's immediate signings of 3 mediocrities (at best, in 2 cases) to large contracts implies to you that he's going to fill every spot except 3 with minimum wage players for the next 3 years? we don't even have enough money to get all 3 if we do that.

 

I don't get your first question, but you didn't answer my first question either.

 

I don't want Burnett at 5/55 we can certainly get 2 very good players + shore up the bench for 30 million. Guaranteed. Whether JH does it or not is a different story.

 

Please answer my first question though, and clarify yours.

We can get 2 very good players for the ~20 million we have left. Hendry's signings thus far have left major doubt as to how he will spend it (as in, many of us expect him to overpay on another vet at this point)

it's not enough to sign all 3 players you mentioned. If Giles and Furcal both sign at the upper half of their rumored contracts, it's not enough to sign both of them. Of course, there's no reaosn to think hendry has any intention of getting tiles

 

I was at the understanding reading the "how much do we have left" thread that even with Z's raises etc. we have 30 million LEFT to spend, not 20 million. 10 mil is a lot and definitely has an impact on my viewpoing in this debate.

[Andy]

People cry when Hendry does something, people cry when he doesen't do something.

 

If you THINK you can do a better job, you're fooling yourself. The FA market is VERY thin, and the Cubs need to improve their bullpen. Our bullpen the last two seasons has absolutely sucked terribly. We've mostly had young pitchers, who can't even utter the phrase "big game." This gives us a BIG GAME PROVEN pitcher, with good stats. This is a move for desperation, and Hendry didn't want to banter back and forth with 3 other teams lobbying for the same guy.

 

Kerry Wood. Games 1 and 5, 2003 NLDS. Entire month of September 2003.

Carlos Zambrano. ERA below 3 after the ASB from 2004-5.

Mark Prior: Games 3 NLDS, Game 2 NLCS.

 

I think your hyperbole got ahead of the facts.

 

And actually, there are a few members here at NSBB I think could do an effective job at being a GM. Also, I'm not sure how Scott Eyre qualifies as a "big game proven pitcher". He's a reliever. He's not a closer. He's not a starter. He's a setup guy at best, Those guys don't win you divisions.

 

Unfortunately, I have to disagree on your last point. A good setup guy or guys can be the difference between winning and losing. Look no further than the Sox to see how valuable relievers like Politte (and to some extent Cotts) can be as a bridge to the closer.

Politte was at best mediocre, at worst crappy in every single season of his career before 2005. Cotts's ERA went from 5.65 in 04 to 1.94 this year.

 

I'm not saying they weren't valuable in 2005, I'm just pointing out that neither of those guys should have been expected to be a bridge to anywhere except mediocrity.

[Careless]

We can get 2 very good players for the ~20 million we have left. Hendry's signings thus far have left major doubt as to how he will spend it (as in, many of us expect him to overpay on another vet at this point)

it's not enough to sign all 3 players you mentioned. If Giles and Furcal both sign at the upper half of their rumored contracts, it's not enough to sign both of them. Of course, there's no reaosn to think hendry has any intention of getting tiles

 

I was at the understanding reading the "how much do we have left" thread that even with Z's raises etc. we have 30 million LEFT to spend, not 20 million. 10 mil is a lot and definitely has an impact on my viewpoing in this debate.

I was subtracting the 3 new contracts from that

[CubsWin]

Okay, disregarding any notion of performance, we just gave a 33 year old relief pitcher 3 years and 8 figures. That's pretty bad unless the person is lights out. Unfortunately for us, the only time he's really been above average is this year. At least Remlinger and Hawkins had more than one good season of good performance when they got long term deals.

And so has Eyre.

[USSoccer]

People cry when Hendry does something, people cry when he doesen't do something.

 

If you THINK you can do a better job, you're fooling yourself. The FA market is VERY thin, and the Cubs need to improve their bullpen. Our bullpen the last two seasons has absolutely sucked terribly. We've mostly had young pitchers, who can't even utter the phrase "big game." This gives us a BIG GAME PROVEN pitcher, with good stats. This is a move for desperation, and Hendry didn't want to banter back and forth with 3 other teams lobbying for the same guy.

 

Kerry Wood. Games 1 and 5, 2003 NLDS. Entire month of September 2003.

Carlos Zambrano. ERA below 3 after the ASB from 2004-5.

Mark Prior: Games 3 NLDS, Game 2 NLCS.

 

I think your hyperbole got ahead of the facts.

 

And actually, there are a few members here at NSBB I think could do an effective job at being a GM. Also, I'm not sure how Scott Eyre qualifies as a "big game proven pitcher". He's a reliever. He's not a closer. He's not a starter. He's a setup guy at best, Those guys don't win you divisions.

 

Unfortunately, I have to disagree on your last point. A good setup guy or guys can be the difference between winning and losing. Look no further than the Sox to see how valuable relievers like Politte (and to some extent Cotts) can be as a bridge to the closer.

Politte was at best mediocre, at worst crappy in every single season of his career before 2005. Cotts's ERA went from 5.65 in 04 to 1.94 this year.

 

I'm not saying they weren't valuable in 2005, I'm just pointing out that neither of those guys should have been expected to be a bridge to anywhere except mediocrity.

 

One addendum to that:

 

Usually, teams that win have really good bullpens? Why? Because they aren't exposed as often as bad team's bullpens are, because winning teams almost always have starting pitching that gets you to the 7th inning. If a team can stay out of their middle relief, chances are they can win a lot of games.

[CubsWin]

$11m? What a joke.

Why?

[Keener98]

The Trib article on the Eyre signing mentions that now the Cubs can pencil in Rusch as the 5th man in the rotation and can no longer have to pursuit another starter.

 

YUCK YUCK YUCK!! So that means we are probably trading Jerome. The trade of Williams better bring in a big time bat because having Rusch as our #5 is asking for problems. Id 100x's rather have Jerome.

As 5th starters go, what makes you so sure that Rusch is so terrible?

 

Going back to 2004, he was quite good for a 5th starter and last season, out of 19 starts only 4 or 5 of them were bad. The rest were quite good. I know Glendon's numbers from last season overall were nothing to write home about, but if you look more closely, he was great in April and May and the first week or so of June and then he lost something. His numbers were down the rest of June, all of July and August, but whatever it was that was off, he fixed it because in September, he was back to performing like he was in 2004.

 

If it is accurate that Glendon figured out what was wrong in the middle part of last season and fixed it, then he would be a 5th starter capable of posting an ERA in the mid-3s or even lower. Now, that might not be accurate. I guess we will have to find out.

 

With the injuries on our pitching staff the last few years I would rather have somebody who has more upside then Glendon Rusch. So just in case one of our starters goes down then suddenly instead of Rusch being a decent #5 now he is a not so good #3 or 4. I also really like Jerome Williams plain and simple. I think he could be a very very good #5 for this team. I dont like the idea of Jerome out of the bullpen though, and I feel if they go into spring training with Rusch vs Williams as the # 5 that Williams would probably have to greatly outpitch Rusch because Dusty likes having a lefty in the rotation. But like I said if they decide to trade Williams I hope they get fair value(which too me is him being packaged with some others for a BIG bat) because I think Jerome has a bright future and will in my opinion definatly be a better pitcher than Rusch.

 

I also see noway that Rusch puts up under a 4 ERA over a full season, and it will probably be more around 4.50 or so. But thats just my opinion.

Edited November 18, 2005 by Keener98

[badger1679666666]

We can get 2 very good players for the ~20 million we have left. Hendry's signings thus far have left major doubt as to how he will spend it (as in, many of us expect him to overpay on another vet at this point)

it's not enough to sign all 3 players you mentioned. If Giles and Furcal both sign at the upper half of their rumored contracts, it's not enough to sign both of them. Of course, there's no reaosn to think hendry has any intention of getting tiles

 

I was at the understanding reading the "how much do we have left" thread that even with Z's raises etc. we have 30 million LEFT to spend, not 20 million. 10 mil is a lot and definitely has an impact on my viewpoing in this debate.

I was subtracting the 3 new contracts from that

 

The how much do we have left thread INCLUDES those 3 signings and still says 25-30 million is left (with Z's raises etc., including the signings too).

 

So in that case you wouldn't subtract an extra 10 because it's included in the projections (we're around 74 million right now with Eyre, Rusch, Neifi, the rest of the team, Z's raise, minus Corey and T-Walk.

[badger1679666666]

People cry when Hendry does something, people cry when he doesen't do something.

 

If you THINK you can do a better job, you're fooling yourself. The FA market is VERY thin, and the Cubs need to improve their bullpen. Our bullpen the last two seasons has absolutely sucked terribly. We've mostly had young pitchers, who can't even utter the phrase "big game." This gives us a BIG GAME PROVEN pitcher, with good stats. This is a move for desperation, and Hendry didn't want to banter back and forth with 3 other teams lobbying for the same guy.

 

Kerry Wood. Games 1 and 5, 2003 NLDS. Entire month of September 2003.

Carlos Zambrano. ERA below 3 after the ASB from 2004-5.

Mark Prior: Games 3 NLDS, Game 2 NLCS.

 

I think your hyperbole got ahead of the facts.

 

And actually, there are a few members here at NSBB I think could do an effective job at being a GM. Also, I'm not sure how Scott Eyre qualifies as a "big game proven pitcher". He's a reliever. He's not a closer. He's not a starter. He's a setup guy at best, Those guys don't win you divisions.

 

Unfortunately, I have to disagree on your last point. A good setup guy or guys can be the difference between winning and losing. Look no further than the Sox to see how valuable relievers like Politte (and to some extent Cotts) can be as a bridge to the closer.

Politte was at best mediocre, at worst crappy in every single season of his career before 2005. Cotts's ERA went from 5.65 in 04 to 1.94 this year.

 

I'm not saying they weren't valuable in 2005, I'm just pointing out that neither of those guys should have been expected to be a bridge to anywhere except mediocrity.

 

One addendum to that:

 

Usually, teams that win have really good bullpens? Why? Because they aren't exposed as often as bad team's bullpens are, because winning teams almost always have starting pitching that gets you to the 7th inning. If a team can stay out of their middle relief, chances are they can win a lot of games.

 

That makes me like Eyre more, because with that crap team in SF, he was exposed and still pitched exceptionally well. I worry that Dusty will pitch him till his arm falls off though.

[imb]

Okay, disregarding any notion of performance, we just gave a 33 year old relief pitcher 3 years and 8 figures. That's pretty bad unless the person is lights out. Unfortunately for us, the only time he's really been above average is this year. At least Remlinger and Hawkins had more than one good season of good performance when they got long term deals.

And so has Eyre.

 

Lol, when? those 16 great innings in 2001? I guess you mean 2003, when he struck out 35 in 60+ innings.

[CubsWin]

Giles wants alot of YEARS, and at some point he will drop of dramatically.

 

 

Kerry Wood. Games 1 and 5, 2003 NLDS. Entire month of September 2003.

Carlos Zambrano. ERA below 3 after the ASB from 2004-5.

Mark Prior: Games 3 NLDS, Game 2 NLCS.

 

Those stats are good, but we have nobody in the bullpen to get that cruical out. Not to mention, it would be nice if the Cubs can have a full season of pitching from the twin ragdolls.

 

First of all, Scott Eyre is a nice reliever. He's not worth the years and money we gave him though. Coupled with the other 2 signings, it's bad money management.

Next, if you want to question Wood's ability to stay healthy, that's fair game. But Prior has been hurt 4 times as a Cub. 3 of them have been complete freak things. It's a bit unfair to label him a rag doll.

 

Also, Giles's best asset is his batting eye. That generally stays with players as they age. And I haven't seen any offer longer than 3 years yet for him. That's the same number of years they just gave to Scott Eyre, who's about the same age, and who plays a position where guys drop off the face of the earth production wise at random.

That's true only if the Cubs payroll is low enough that it prohibits Hendry from acquiring the kind of players the Cubs need to win.

 

You are making a sound and educated guess, but you are forgetting to qualify your statement as only a guess. We don't know what the Cubs payroll will be next season and we don't know that the players Hendry will eventually acquire will have the team win or not.

 

It may be bad money management. It may not be.