Howry signs with Cubs (yes, it's official)

[Wheelimus]

If we get Howry, we have the makings of the best bullpen in the NL, presuming Dempster remains a dominent closer. Dempster, Howry, Eyre, Williamson, Ohman, and Rusch/Williams (whoever isn't our 5th starter), with Wuertz/Novoa/etc. left to fight it out if Dusty is stupid again and wants a 12 man pitching staff. Give me that any day of the week.

 

I'm becoming more and more resigned to not getting Giles though, Hendry has so many trade chips he's going to HAVE to spend some of them, so I think that might get us our impact bat. I really wish he'd wow Cincy, they need pitching and we have it to give. And I want Dunn! :lol:

[Lefty]

This is bizarro world. With the Cubs recent history of overpaying free-agent or nearly free-agent relievers, Alfonseca, Remlinger, Hawkins, and some of the cheap gems like Borwski '02 &'03, Rusch '04, Van Poppell '01, Worrell '00, you'd think that all the scouts that Hendry talks about could find the next Bobby Howry (waivers 2004) or Scott Eyre (waivers 2002) for the league minimum. Hendry is the guy who buys a stock after it's been the top performer for two years running because now he feels he can trust it.

 

He's done that with relief pitching, but not all his acquisitions. Barrett and Ramirez weren't exactly at their peak when the Cubs acquired them. That said, relief pitching is probably the worst position to focus on when it comes to expensive free agents.

 

That's what I meant. The variablity of relief pitcher performance is so great, it is indefensible to spend this much money on two guys (if true).

 

If you have unlimited resources, fine. But not even the Yankees have unlimited resources. You have to collect arms and sort them out. Even the Cubs do it. Dempster, Rusch, Williamson and Chad Fox were all reclamation projects. Why they still sign middle-relievers after the Remlinger, Hawkins (who I liked personally) and Alfonseca experiences is beyond me.

[Lefty]

I also think assembling bullpens and getting the right middle-men is something of a crap shoot and you need some good fortune.

 

Look at the Cards and White Sox. Taverez, Eldred and King. Hermanson, Pollite and co. They had some good fortune. Could easily have gone the other way.

 

But that's the point. Those guys were paid nothing. Each team built a bullpen where the first year salary was about the same as Howry is supposedly getting.

[Lefty]

 

We're committing 7M/year and getting pitchers no better than Wuertz and Ohman. Who knows, maybe they're durable enough to hold up to Dusty's usage patterns. That would be a plus.

 

Whoa whoa. You're saying that Howry and Eyre are equal to Wuertz and Ohman?

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.

 

Ohamn career era - 4.17

Eyre career era - 4.52

 

Wuertz career era - 3.96

Howry career era - 3.58

 

Derrek Lee career OBP - .363

Ryan Freel career OBP - .369

 

Aramis Ramirez career OBP - .329

Bobby Hill career OBP - 343

 

So are Lee and Freel equal? Are Ramirez and Hill?

 

You can't just look at a player's career stats and tell me that they are one and the same at the current stage.

 

You left out SLG. That's half the equation.

[Lefty]

Interesting effort, but don't you think that ERA is a bit more encompassing a stat for a pitcher than OBP for a hitter?

 

quote]

 

ERA is also highly variable. On Opening Day Andy Sisco pitched 2 1/3 scoreless innings and left with the bases loaded. The reliever gave up a grand slam. Sisco's ERA went from 0 to nearlty 12 after he left the game. Even after 60 innings this episode added nearly half a point tohis ERA.

 

ERA might be more encompassing, RA is better, but it can swing greatly from year to year. That's the problem with paying big money for an outlier.

[JeffH]

Why they still sign middle-relievers after the Remlinger, Hawkins (who I liked personally) and Alfonseca experiences is beyond me.

 

Can we please stop referring to Hawkins as an example of big money middle reliever contracts gone bad?

 

Hawkins was terrific for us in a setup role and probably still would be if Buttermaker hadn't ruined him.

[Southpaw191679666239]

If you have unlimited resources, fine. But not even the Yankees have unlimited resources. You have to collect arms and sort them out. Even the Cubs do it. Dempster, Rusch, Williamson and Chad Fox were all reclamation projects. Why they still sign middle-relievers after the Remlinger, Hawkins (who I liked personally) and Alfonseca experiences is beyond me.

 

Because unlike when they signed Remmy and Hawkins, this time there is no "serious" talk of Eyre or Howry (if signed) to be their closer. They are signed (or will be?) to be relievers or set-up men - and God-willing - that will be their job all year. I realize that Eyre has a bonus pending if he becomes the closer, but as long as Dempster maintains his form of 2005, there is no reason for that bonus to kick-in.

[RynoRules]

Would any of you feel any different about signing guys like Howry/Eyre if it meant we were able to package some of out other arms for contributions to say CF?

 

No, middle relievers for pricey 3 year deals are bad ideas. Especially ones like Eyre who don't have any sustained success.

 

As an aside, does anyone know what happened to Howry's K's this year?

Look, I agree that 3-years and 3.75 mill is a lot more than any of us wanted to spend. But you certainly don't think that going to battle with a pen of Dempster, Ohman, Wuertz and the question mark of Williamson would be enough, do you?

 

Assuming you don't and you agree with the need to improve the bullpen, who would you have gotten instead of Eyre who would have been just as good but much cheaper?

 

Dotel, Howry, and maybe some others I haven't stumbled upon would be good FA's for 1-2 year deals. I've been campaigning for quite a while to make an acquisition via trade. Minnesota, Cleveland, and maybe a few others have overloaded bullpens and are under cash constraints. Romero and Riske are both arby eligible set up men with cheap, capable replacements. Prime trade targets. I'd also target Betancourt from the Cleveland pen, I've advocated trying to get him and Crisp in a deal where we give up a bit of talent. This is another indictment of the Eyre signing. Making it as early as it was, before other options potentially open up.

 

Sure, but then som would complan about who we gave up when all we had to do was spend money on FAs. You cannot please everyone, and whose to say that the Twins or Tribe would make those guys available?

[Lefty]

If you have unlimited resources, fine. But not even the Yankees have unlimited resources. You have to collect arms and sort them out. Even the Cubs do it. Dempster, Rusch, Williamson and Chad Fox were all reclamation projects. Why they still sign middle-relievers after the Remlinger, Hawkins (who I liked personally) and Alfonseca experiences is beyond me.

 

Because unlike when they signed Remmy and Hawkins, this time there is no "serious" talk of Eyre or Howry (if signed) to be their closer. They are signed (or will be?) to be relievers or set-up men - and God-willing - that will be their job all year. I realize that Eyre has a bonus pending if he becomes the closer, but as long as Dempster maintains his form of 2005, there is no reason for that bonus to kick-in.

 

Hawkins wasn't signed to be the closer. And I personally don't believe in the whole closer thing anyway although Hawkins pushed my beliefs quite a bit.

 

We paid Hawkins $8 million for about 90 innings. So that is a bad contract.

[Careless]

Hawkins wasn't signed to be the closer. And I personally don't believe in the whole closer thing anyway although Hawkins pushed my beliefs quite a bit.

.

There was a LOT of talk about hawkins being the closer immediately after he was signed and for the rest of the offseason and early in the season right up until he actually became closer. It was something that everyone gave thought to, unlike this time where at least one of us (me) isn't thinking about it.

[Southpaw191679666239]

Hawkins wasn't signed to be the closer. And I personally don't believe in the whole closer thing anyway although Hawkins pushed my beliefs quite a bit.

 

We paid Hawkins $8 million for about 90 innings. So that is a bad contract.

 

No he wasn't signed to be the closer, but Dusty didn't hesitate to pull the trigger when JoBo went down. Dempster proved himself worthy of another season as the full-time closer w/o thinking of pulling him for Eyre (or Howry) .. unless Dempster implodes, which I don't forsee happening.

[RynoRules]

Howry had an unbelieveably lucky season. However, we have a GM and staff that has no idea what the acronym "BABIP" stands for or why it is important.

 

In 2004, Cleveland had one of the worst pens in the majors - for much of the year it was ranked as one of the worst ever. In 2005, they had one of the strongest pen in the majors.

 

It was mainly the same guys.

 

Spending big money on the pen doesn't make sense unless you spend REALLY big money on the pen. And even that doesn't work very well. Most successful pens are built from home-grown guys, astute waiver-wire pickups and cheap FA's. Big money bullpens have a distinct tendency to be mediocre.

 

Great, you sit around and wait for Todd Wellemeyer and Roberto Novoa and Cliff Bartosh to figure it out and have a "high BABIP" year. Me, I won't be holding my breath. I like my odds better on going with guys that have at least shown they can have ML success, than guys who have never had any.

 

Or, we could use that money to sign someone like Ryan who's been lights out for a while, or trade for someone who's capable and we don't have to make a 3 year commitment to.

 

Not unless Dempster wants to set-up. Ryan says he wants to close, which is why the Yanks are not getting him.

[Southpaw191679666239]

There was a LOT of talk about hawkins being the closer immediately after he was signed and for the rest of the offseason and early in the season right up until he actually became closer. It was something that everyone gave thought to, unlike this time where at least one of us (me) isn't thinking about it.

 

This is true as well; forgot about all that scuttlebutt.

[RynoRules]

I agree with Kessinger's earlier post that this is a good move in terms of need, but that i would not have spent as much as JH did. My problem with many of the arguments I have read is that many seem to think there are so many equivalent and less expensive optiosn out there, that BJ Ryan is waiting around for the takling, or that some how Novoa, Wuertz, and Bartosh = Eyre and Howry.

 

I disagree.

 

- BJ Ryan wants to close. He's not going to do that here.

- Guys like JC Romero might be available, but they'll cost you pitching prospects that I'd rather use to get Dunn or Abreu.

- I don't buy that Wuertz, Novoa and Bartosh are the answers based on last years performance. To me, they are not set-up guys to be relied on consistently.

[SCCubbieFAN]

Hawkins wasn't signed to be the closer. And I personally don't believe in the whole closer thing anyway although Hawkins pushed my beliefs quite a bit.

 

We paid Hawkins $8 million for about 90 innings. So that is a bad contract.

 

No he wasn't signed to be the closer, but Dusty didn't hesitate to pull the trigger when JoBo went down. Dempster proved himself worthy of another season as the full-time closer w/o thinking of pulling him for Eyre (or Howry) .. unless Dempster implodes, which I don't forsee happening.

 

I believe Hawkins' contract also paid him bonuses for games closed so it must have been contemplated when he was signed that he would close some games.

[Southpaw191679666239]

I believe Hawkins' contract also paid him bonuses for games closed so it must have been contemplated when he was signed that he would close some games.

 

Right, and we found out Eyre's contract has a bonus if he becomes the closer. However at the start of '06, that shouldn't even be a factor, injuries notwithstanding.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

I agree with Kessinger's earlier post that this is a good move in terms of need, but that i would not have spent as much as JH did. My problem with many of the arguments I have read is that many seem to think there are so many equivalent and less expensive optiosn out there, that BJ Ryan is waiting around for the takling, or that some how Novoa, Wuertz, and Bartosh = Eyre and Howry.

 

I disagree.

 

- BJ Ryan wants to close. He's not going to do that here.

- Guys like JC Romero might be available, but they'll cost you pitching prospects that I'd rather use to get Dunn or Abreu.

- I don't buy that Wuertz, Novoa and Bartosh are the answers based on last years performance. To me, they are not set-up guys to be relied on consistently.

 

That's not what anyone argued. The difference between Ohman/Wuertz and Eyre/Howry isn't worth the millions. That's the arguement. We already have the less expensive options. Who brought Bartosh into this argument?

 

BJ Ryan isn't out for the taking. I agree. That decision was made back when we re-signed Dempster to close. I don't agree with it, especially when we run out and overpay on Eyre and howry, but that was the first domino to fall.

[goonys evil twin]

- I don't buy that Wuertz, Novoa and Bartosh are the answers based on last years performance. To me, they are not set-up guys to be relied on consistently.

 

Maybe Hendry shouldn't have wasted a talented prospect in that worthless trade for Bartosh, or given up on Farnsworth for the lesser Novoa.

[JeffH]

That's not what anyone argued. The difference between Ohman/Wuertz and Eyre/Howry isn't worth the millions.

 

Whether or not you like the Eyre signing and the potential Howry signing, this really isn't a valid argument.

 

We're not replacing O&W with E&H. We're adding the two. If there's one thing the last few years have shown us is that having your manager trust only a portion of your bullpen is death. Those guys get overworked and, ultimately, cooked. Then you've got no effective pitchers down there.

 

If you don't like the acquisitions, argue the money or their inconsistent track records.

[RynoRules]

I agree with Kessinger's earlier post that this is a good move in terms of need, but that i would not have spent as much as JH did. My problem with many of the arguments I have read is that many seem to think there are so many equivalent and less expensive optiosn out there, that BJ Ryan is waiting around for the takling, or that some how Novoa, Wuertz, and Bartosh = Eyre and Howry.

 

I disagree.

 

- BJ Ryan wants to close. He's not going to do that here.

- Guys like JC Romero might be available, but they'll cost you pitching prospects that I'd rather use to get Dunn or Abreu.

- I don't buy that Wuertz, Novoa and Bartosh are the answers based on last years performance. To me, they are not set-up guys to be relied on consistently.

 

That's not what anyone argued. The difference between Ohman/Wuertz and Eyre/Howry isn't worth the millions. That's the arguement. We already have the less expensive options. Who brought Bartosh into this argument?

 

BJ Ryan isn't out for the taking. I agree. That decision was made back when we re-signed Dempster to close. I don't agree with it, especially when we run out and overpay on Eyre and howry, but that was the first domino to fall.

 

Dempster was a ton cheaper than Ryan, and based on wha he did last year, I believe he can close games. Ad if you look back to the beginning of this thread, there was some talk that, dueo the unpredictable nature of bullpens, we might have been better off staying with what he have in-house. I was attempting to synthesize those arguments.

 

In the end, Hendry can spend as much as he likes in the pen, just so long as we solve our problems in th OF and in the middle IF.

[CubinNY]

That's not what anyone argued. The difference between Ohman/Wuertz and Eyre/Howry isn't worth the millions.

 

Whether or not you like the Eyre signing and the potential Howry signing, this really isn't a valid argument.

 

We're not replacing O&W with E&H. We're adding the two. If there's one thing the last few years have shown us is that having your manager trust only a portion of your bullpen is death. Those guys get overworked and, ultimately, cooked. Then you've got no effective pitchers down there.

 

If you don't like the acquisitions, argue the money or their inconsistent track records.

 

ah, but your logic is faulty as well grasshopper.

 

Just because E&H are added to O&W does not mean the Cubs Zen master will not overwork any one of them.

[fromthestretch]

The difference between Ohman/Wuertz and Eyre/Howry isn't worth the millions. That's the arguement.

 

I agree 100%. If given a similar number of opportunities, there's a possibility that Wuertz/Ohman could outperform Eyre/Howry. Not saying it's going to happen, but it's certainly possible.

[RynoRules]

- I don't buy that Wuertz, Novoa and Bartosh are the answers based on last years performance. To me, they are not set-up guys to be relied on consistently.

 

Maybe Hendry shouldn't have wasted a talented prospect in that worthless trade for Bartosh, or given up on Farnsworth for the lesser Novoa.

 

I understood why Farns was moved, but didn't lik what we got in return. The Bartosh deal still makes me scratch my head.

[JeffH]

Just because E&H are added to O&W does not mean the Cubs Zen master will not overwork any one of them.

 

Nor does adding Pierre and Furcal necessarily mean that RumDum will not bat Neifi second.

 

It does greatly lower the odds, though.

[Southpaw191679666239]

Whether or not you like the Eyre signing and the potential Howry signing, this really isn't a valid argument.

 

We're not replacing O&W with E&H. We're adding the two. If there's one thing the last few years have shown us is that having your manager trust only a portion of your bullpen is death. Those guys get overworked and, ultimately, cooked. Then you've got no effective pitchers down there.

 

If you don't like the acquisitions, argue the money or their inconsistent track records.

 

=D>