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

[treebird]

INTERESTING PERSPECTIVE

 

maybe we should hate everyone who signs with the cubs. they're all selfish. they see the cubs as the place to go to get PAID. anyone who wants to win will take less money and go elsewhere because they know the cubs are going to waste all their money and finish in 4th forever.

[Geech]

That's a good point, Treebeard, but what ballclub has a good history of winning in recent years despite some relatively tight payroll restrictions?

[Tim]

That's a good point, Treebeard, but what ballclub has a good history of winning in recent years despite some relatively tight payroll restrictions?

Minnesota. ;)

[abuck1220]

tom gordon's agent has GOT to be on the phone to hendry right now. at least 5 yr/$27 mil for flash.

[CUBZ99]

tom gordon's agent has GOT to be on the phone to hendry right now. at least 5 yr/$27 mil for flash.

 

Why Hendry didn't want Gordon after his first go round?

[Tim]

tom gordon's agent has GOT to be on the phone to hendry right now. at least 5 yr/$27 mil for flash.

After all he's even more "proven"!

[E.J.]

21 pages, huh? I wonder how many pages there will be if Hendry actually signs Howry to the rumored 3-year deal.

 

Has there been anything new about the deal today?

[erik316wttn]

I hated that we traded Flash the first time.

[nilodnayr]

That's a good point, Treebeard, but what ballclub has a good history of winning in recent years despite some relatively tight payroll restrictions?

Minnesota. ;)

 

I think he was going moreso for the implied "points to sig"

[Soul]

tom gordon's agent has GOT to be on the phone to hendry right now. at least 5 yr/$27 mil for flash.

After all he's even more "proven"!

 

:lol:

[SouthSideRyan]

That's a good point, Treebeard, but what ballclub has a good history of winning in recent years despite some relatively tight payroll restrictions?

Minnesota. ;)

 

I think he was going moreso for the implied "points to sig"

 

And I think Tim's response with wink was a sarcastic not getting the point.

[maandig]

OK, so Ryan is younger and will strike out significantly more batters than Eyre and Howry. But they appear to be able to get batters out at roughly the same rate and, perhaps lacking vital information, I do not believe that getting batters out via the strikeout is that much more effective than getting batters out by having control in the strike zone and having the batter swing at your pitch. In any event, I understand a little better the affinity for Ryan, though watching him over the years -- admittedly without paying the O's that much attention -- I do not share it (btw Eyre's walk numbers are slightly better than Ryan's).

 

Nevertheless, say that 32 pages of commentary on speculation is not, in the end, entirely futile. While most here seem to be incredibly down on Hendry and the current direction of the team, I will take solace in the Newark Star-Ledger article today that others have probably commented on. http://www.nj.com/sports/ledger/index.ssf?/base/sports-0/1132641043208490.xml&coll=1

 

In particular, I enjoyed the following:

 

Yankees owner George Steinbrenner expressed some concern at last week's organization meetings in Tampa, Fla., about the team's inability (so far) to secure its top free- agent targets. The meetings were held just after the Yankees found out that left-handed reliever Scott Eyre was signing with the Cubs. The Yankees wanted Eyre so badly that they had manager Joe Torre place a recruiting call to him, but they didn't even make Eyre's final four list of teams. The Yankees are pessimistic about their chances of signing top relief-pitching targets such as B.J. Ryan, Bob Howry, Kyle Farnsworth and Tom Gordon, and they're moving down the list to lesser names.

 

When the Yankees aren't able to land players they covet (let alone the fact that the players they covet are Eyre and Howry), times are a'changing.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

OK, so Ryan is younger and will strike out significantly more batters than Eyre and Howry. But they appear to be able to get batters out at roughly the same rate and, perhaps lacking vital information, I do not believe that getting batters out via the strikeout is that much more effective than getting batters out by having control in the strike zone and having the batter swing at your pitch. In any event, I understand a little better the affinity for Ryan, though watching him over the years -- admittedly without paying the O's that much attention -- I do not share it (btw Eyre's walk numbers are slightly better than Ryan's).

 

Nevertheless, say that 32 pages of commentary on speculation is not, in the end, entirely futile. While most here seem to be incredibly down on Hendry and the current direction of the team, I will take solace in the Newark Star-Ledger article today that others have probably commented on. http://www.nj.com/sports/ledger/index.ssf?/base/sports-0/1132641043208490.xml&coll=1

 

In particular, I enjoyed the following:

 

Yankees owner George Steinbrenner expressed some concern at last week's organization meetings in Tampa, Fla., about the team's inability (so far) to secure its top free- agent targets. The meetings were held just after the Yankees found out that left-handed reliever Scott Eyre was signing with the Cubs. The Yankees wanted Eyre so badly that they had manager Joe Torre place a recruiting call to him, but they didn't even make Eyre's final four list of teams. The Yankees are pessimistic about their chances of signing top relief-pitching targets such as B.J. Ryan, Bob Howry, Kyle Farnsworth and Tom Gordon, and they're moving down the list to lesser names.

 

When the Yankees aren't able to land players they covet (let alone the fact that the players they covet are Eyre and Howry), times are a'changing.

 

Welcome to NSBB! I have nothing else to add! :D

[Transmogrified Tiger]

OK, so Ryan is younger and will strike out significantly more batters than Eyre and Howry. But they appear to be able to get batters out at roughly the same rate and, perhaps lacking vital information, I do not believe that getting batters out via the strikeout is that much more effective than getting batters out by having control in the strike zone and having the batter swing at your pitch. In any event, I understand a little better the affinity for Ryan, though watching him over the years -- admittedly without paying the O's that much attention -- I do not share it (btw Eyre's walk numbers are slightly better than Ryan's).

 

It's a pretty widely held belief that the pitcher doesn't have a lot of control on balls put into play(read, hits, non-K outs). Therefore, the better off a pitcher will be when they control how the batter gets out, which is via the K. Plus, there is the added effect of K's not being able to advance or drive in runners like other outs, but that's secondary to the pitcher's lack of control over batted balls.

 

Also, looking over the last several years, Ryan gets out more batters than Eyre, and is similar to Howry. However, because Ryan K's so many and gives up so few XBH's, his OPS against is much better than Howry and Eyre, only similar in their career years this past season.

[maandig]

It's a pretty widely held belief that the pitcher doesn't have a lot of control on balls put into play(read, hits, non-K outs). Therefore, the better off a pitcher will be when they control how the batter gets out, which is via the K. Plus, there is the added effect of K's not being able to advance or drive in runners like other outs, but that's secondary to the pitcher's lack of control over batted balls.

 

Also, looking over the last several years, Ryan gets out more batters than Eyre, and is similar to Howry. However, because Ryan K's so many and gives up so few XBH's, his OPS against is much better than Howry and Eyre, only similar in their career years this past season.

 

Fair enough. The OPS point is well taken. The k vs. non-k out arguments is certainly subject to a number of caveats, as there a number of successful middle-relievers who have less than impressive k/ip numbers. Ray King, Mike Timlin, Jesse Crain, Chad Cordero, Bob Wickman, and Jason Isringhausen jump most immediately to mind as successful pitchers who have averaged less than a strikeout per inning. Had the Cubs acquired Cordero (obviously Chad's much younger than Eyre and Howry) or Izzy or, heaven forbid, King, I'm not sure that there would be the same level of outrage attendant shelling out four or four and a half mil per year as there has been over these moves. Nevertheless, there is certainly nothing wrong with being able to strike guys out, and B.J. has proved that he can do that.

[NorthsideAvenger]

As long as the guy in the Cubs uniform from the bullpen, can get the OUTS consistantly, I have no beef. It's when they struggle, I have a beef with.

[frostwyrm]

What's funny is Kerry will probably land in the bullpen sometime next year. If we also have Howry, Eyre, and Dempster, that will be the most expensive Cubs bullpen we are likely to see this decade.

[Laura]

More circle ... circular discussion about whether Howry is actually ever going to be a Cub.

 

The Trib[/url]"]Despite their need for outfielders and a leadoff hitter, the Cubs seem intent on improving their bullpen first this winter.

 

Less than a week after signing left-handed setup man Scott Eyre, the Cubs may be close to landing right-handed setup man Bobby Howry, a free agent from Cleveland.

 

Howry had been seeking $4 million for each of three years from the Indians, a price the Cubs apparently are willing to pay. The Indians would give him that much only if he were their closer, but right now they are pursuing free agent B.J. Ryan for that role.

 

Cubs general manager Jim Hendry was not available for comment Tuesday and Howry's agent, Craig Landis, did not return a call. But according to a report in New Jersey, Howry was close to signing.

[NorthsideAvenger]

What's funny is Kerry will probably land in the bullpen sometime next year. If we also have Howry, Eyre, and Dempster, that will be the most expensive Cubs bullpen we are likely to see this decade.

 

IF KW is in the bullpen next yr, then it would have been a LONG yr.

[Diffusion]

OK, so Ryan is younger and will strike out significantly more batters than Eyre and Howry. But they appear to be able to get batters out at roughly the same rate and, perhaps lacking vital information, I do not believe that getting batters out via the strikeout is that much more effective than getting batters out by having control in the strike zone and having the batter swing at your pitch. In any event, I understand a little better the affinity for Ryan, though watching him over the years -- admittedly without paying the O's that much attention -- I do not share it (btw Eyre's walk numbers are slightly better than Ryan's).

 

Firstly, Eyre's walk numbers aren't better than Ryan's at all. Working off the statistics that I provided before...

 

BJ Ryan (aged 29, turns 30 in December)

June 19th 2002 (something of a turning point in Ryan's career apparently, all bad before, all brilliant ever since...) through present day

243 IP, 181 H, 11 HR, 104 BB, 316 K, 2.59 ERA, 2.67 FIPS

 

Scott Eyre (aged 33, turns 34 in March)

May 1st 2002 (date Eyre claims he started taking medication for ADHD) through present day

229 IP, 200 H, 16 HR, 101 BB, 188 K, 3.03 ERA, 3.79 FIPS

 

...Eyre has registered 3.97 BB/9, Ryan 3.85.

 

However, this disguises the following split in Ryan's numbers...

 

BJ Ryan...

June 19th 2002 - September 2nd 2003

76.2 IP, 56 H, 3 HR, 40 BB, 85 K, 3.29 ERA, 3.26 FIPS, 4.70 BB/9

 

September 3rd 2003 - present day

166.1 IP, 125 H, 8 HR, 64 BB, 231 K, 2.27 ERA, 2.40 FIPS, 3.46 BB/9

 

In other words, Ryan has kicked it up twice, once taking him from a reliever that just couldn't figure it out to a fine reliever still plagued with control problems, and the second time going from that to, well, pretty much the perfect reliever.

 

If we try and find a similar split for Eyre, it doesn't work, though I suppose we could note that he walked just 8 in his last 36.1 innings in 2005.

 

One thing I guess we could note is this in Eyre's strikeout rate...

 

Scott Eyre

May 1st 2002 - April 26th 2003

110 IP, 109 H, 5 HR, 49 BB, 74 K, 2.70 ERA, 3.78 FIPS, 6.05 K/9

 

April 27th 2003 - present day

119 IP, 91 H, 11 HR, 52 BB, 114 K, 3.33 ERA, 3.80 FIPS, 8.62 K/9

 

However, I guess that strikeout improvement is countered by a thoroughly expected rise in the number of home runs allowed. Being a flyball pitcher can have its advantages - it can allow you to sustain slightly below expected batting averages on balls in play against, since in play flyballs are turned into outs at a better rate than any other type of batted ball. However, there are two problems with flyballs. One, no double play. And two, flyballs have this nasty habit of finding themselves in the bleachers, the home run being the absolute worst thing a pitcher in the business of run prevention can allow to happen. Research has shown that there's a strong and unsurprisingly correlation between flyballs allowed and home runs given up, and, in general, a pitcher can expected to allow a dinger for every ten flyballs he allows.

 

It's therefore highly likely that Eyre's home run rate will stabilise in the long-term around the 11 HR in 119 IP ratio, as opposed to the 5 HR in 110 IP ratio he preceeded that with. Eyre's home run ratio might even go higher. Of those 16 home runs, none were allowed in Coors Field, and with the exception of Arizona, the rest of the NL West features ballparks that are very pitcher friendly, not least SBC, which Eyre has recently called his own. But in the NL Central, it's a different story. Wrigley obviously depends on which way the winds blow, but the Astros and Reds play in launching pads, PNC and Miller Park are no better than neutral, and who knows how the new Busch will play.

 

 

Anyway, regarding the significance of strikeout rate...

 

Individual strikeout rate vs ERA, 1993-2002

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/images/2617_01.gif

Source: Baseball Prospectus

 

That's called correlation. Negative correlation, actually. Essentially, what that graph shows is that pitchers with lower ERAs on average strikeout more batters. It's not a co-incidence. More strikeouts mean fewer balls in play. Fewer balls in play mean fewer hits allowed. And fewer hits allowed mean fewer runs allowed. A strikeout is an out every single time. A ball in play, well, it could go just past the dive of your shortstop with lousy range. Your second baseman could bobble it. Your third baseman could make a nice pick, but throw the ball away. Your centre fielder could take a roundabout route on the ball. Or it could just go where there are no fielders at all. Maybe hit off the outfield wall. Maybe a rocket right down the first base line. Maybe a dribbler down the third base line. A bloop just between infield and outfield. Or it could be turned into an out. Just not always. A pitcher can do everything right, his fielders can do everything right, and it can still go for a hit. That's the trouble with a ball in play, you just never know. A strikeout? Well, unless AJ Pierzynski's around, it's an out every single time.

[Jehrico]

Anyway, regarding the significance of strikeout rate...

 

Individual strikeout rate vs ERA, 1993-2002

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/images/2617_01.gif

Source: Baseball Prospectus

 

That's called correlation. Negative correlation, actually. Essentially, what that graph shows is that pitchers with lower ERAs on average strikeout more batters. It's not a co-incidence. More strikeouts mean fewer balls in play. Fewer balls in play mean fewer hits allowed. And fewer hits allowed mean fewer runs allowed. A strikeout is an out every single time. A ball in play, well, it could go just past the dive of your shortstop with lousy range.

 

I bet if they did the same study with other stats, they'd find the same correlation though. WHIP, hits, walks, would all have a similar correlation as strikeouts, perhaps with a slightly higher standard deviation. I agree that high K rates are a good predictor for future success, but pedestrian K rates isn't necessarily a good predictor of future mediocrity. Maddux was only putting up around 6-7 Ks/9IP during his cy young years. Phil Niekro is in the Hall of Fame with pedestrian K rates throughout his career. Baseball history is littered with examples of guys without the stellar K rates that excelled. Some guys don't have the ability to make guys miss all of the time, but they know how to get guys to take defensive swings and put the ball in play without getting good wood on it. That is a valuable skill set that some pitchers have, some don't.

[JWCUB]

Per Bruce Levine ESPN 1000 the deal for Howry is done pending physical next week. 3 year $12mm. Will be announced next week. Now lets get some bats.

[The Voice of Reason]

21 pages, huh? I wonder how many pages there will be if Hendry actually signs Howry to the rumored 3-year deal.

 

Has there been anything new about the deal today?[/quote]

 

 

Bruce Levine has been reporting the Cubs are close to a 4 yr/$12 million deal with Howry. Also, ESPN insider headline is stating the Cubs may be close to adding a set up man (assume it's Howry). Sorry no access to the Insider article (too cheap).

 

Anyone with ESPN insider access please post the article.

[USSoccer]

Per Bruce Levine ESPN 1000 the deal for Howry is done pending physical next week. 3 year $12mm. Will be announced next week. Now lets get some bats.

 

Hmm. $6m/yr locked up in 2 relievers?

 

Whatever, I was resigned to this a couple days ago. If Hendry signs/trades for an impact OF, all will be forgiven, in my eyes, anyway.

[RynoRules]

Per Bruce Levine ESPN 1000 the deal for Howry is done pending physical next week. 3 year $12mm. Will be announced next week. Now lets get some bats.

 

Exactly.

 

And now that it sems that the signing will be announced, does anyone care to wager on how many pages this thread will top off at? Shall we set the over/under at 51?