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

[NorthsideAvenger]

First Eyre, now Howry (alledgely)? Who's next? Trading for Keith Foulke? I hear Matt Karchner, Roberto Hernandez, Kelly Wunsch, and Shingo Takatsu are available. If we are going to target ex-White Sox relievers, we might as well go all out.

 

 

Ok, ok, ok, don't take my advice. I do believe both Eyre and Howry will be at-worst solid for two yrs, in which the Cubs could trade both by June/July of their free agency yr.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I don't consider the money we spent on Eyre or will spend on Howry as bad news at all. I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow it. I'd say throwing Howry and Eyre in the mix along with a complete season of Dempster closing will pick us up another 12-15 wins. And I'd rather spend that money on two proven veterans than dump it all and more on Wagner or Ryan. Now, if we pick up a legitimate lead off hitter with some speed, a solid bat for the OF, and a stud pitcher we should be looking really good.

 

12-15 wins? Cmon now. Even if you replace those innings with our worst relievers last year, I doubt you're going to see more than a 5 game difference, if that.

[Mizzou]

 

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.

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

 

BTW - I wish we had Freel. ;)

 

Perhaps, but you're missing the point that career stats don't mean near as much as recent stats. And I'm a big Freel fan myself. I'd love to pry him away.

[nolanwood]

I don't consider the money we spent on Eyre or will spend on Howry as bad news at all. I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow it. I'd say throwing Howry and Eyre in the mix along with a complete season of Dempster closing will pick us up another 12-15 wins. And I'd rather spend that money on two proven veterans than dump it all and more on Wagner or Ryan. Now, if we pick up a legitimate lead off hitter with some speed, a solid bat for the OF, and a stud pitcher we should be looking really good.

Ah, finally. The "proven veteran" phrase has arisen.

 

 

Ahh....since we sucked last year we shouldve just taken our chances on more schlubs that weren't proven and never had dominant seasons like Novoa and almost every other guy in our bullpen.....that would get us really far next season. Once again, I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow game after game, and if it takes 7 mil to help that out (especially in regards to the fact we had 30 to spend), that is definitely money well spent.

[ltb]

i don't think ohman's career ERA should mean much....it's just last year + the games he played in 2001, no?

[RockTheIvy]

Just a question, but when is it okay to overspend. The Red Sox needed a closer for the 2004 season and they overspent for Keith Foulke, even providing him an extra year. People saw that as a good move. He had a great season, followed up by a disaster. Boston also needed a short stop, so they paid Renteria 40 mil. Again, not a great signing, but they were paying for the best.

 

In short, I think sometimes teams need to pay more to get more, and not rely on cheaper, more unpredictable alternatives.

Looking at the year by year stats for Eyre and Howry, what is it that is there that inspires confidence in you that they're especially predictable?

 

Well let's assume we actually sign Howry. His career ERA is 3.58. Over the past 125 and change innings he has walked 28 batters and has given up only 9 home runs. Is that worth 4 million? Probably not in a perfect market. But I like Howry's control and think overspending for him is not a bad idea, AS LONG AS WE IMPROVE THE OFFENSE.

[Sabermetrician]

I would have no problem giving Eyre and Howry this kind of money usually but Hendry has it backwards. These deals would be fine, had we already filled our other holes like RF, CF, SS, and perhaps a SP. Because in that scenario, we'd have our major holes filled and we'd know exactly how much money we have left for the bullpen. The problem with spending all this money on relievers now is that it could eventually be the difference maker in not getting a player at an offensive position that we really need. Giles may end up costing $10 million, which we could afford usually now couldn't because we have $7 million tied into two relievers. It's a lot easier to fill bullpen spots for cheap either through the system, via trade or late during free agency, but if we lose out on some offensive positions there may be no other viable option for them.

[don_kessinger_was_good]

Just a question, but when is it okay to overspend. The Red Sox needed a closer for the 2004 season and they overspent for Keith Foulke, even providing him an extra year. People saw that as a good move. He had a great season, followed up by a disaster. Boston also needed a short stop, so they paid Renteria 40 mil. Again, not a great signing, but they were paying for the best.

 

In short, I think sometimes teams need to pay more to get more, and not rely on cheaper, more unpredictable alternatives.

Looking at the year by year stats for Eyre and Howry, what is it that is there that inspires confidence in you that they're especially predictable?

 

Since you choose to belabor your point...it was reported extensively that Eyre suffers from acute ADD, and has been on treatment for it the last few years. His numbers have been outstanding in that time. Yes, I would consider a three-year run after a life-changing event a run of sustained performance that leads to some confidence that the trend will continue.

 

Bob Howry had three solid years for the White Sox--two of which were terrific--then started having arm trouble, culminating in surgery in 2003. Since coming back from surgery, his numbers are excellent to near-ridiculous. Yes, I think that constitutes a trend of good pitching that the odds say can reasonably be expected to continue.

[nolanwood]

I don't consider the money we spent on Eyre or will spend on Howry as bad news at all. I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow it. I'd say throwing Howry and Eyre in the mix along with a complete season of Dempster closing will pick us up another 12-15 wins. And I'd rather spend that money on two proven veterans than dump it all and more on Wagner or Ryan. Now, if we pick up a legitimate lead off hitter with some speed, a solid bat for the OF, and a stud pitcher we should be looking really good.

 

12-15 wins? Cmon now. Even if you replace those innings with our worst relievers last year, I doubt you're going to see more than a 5 game difference, if that.

 

umm.....I think latroy was responsible for 5 blown games alone!! Providing Dempster performs as well as he did last year, which is very realistic, I think 12 extra wins is attainable with the upgrades to the bullpen and a full year of Dempster. This theory is ultimately relies on the fact we have at least as much offense as we did last year, though.

[Tim]

 

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.

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

 

BTW - I wish we had Freel. ;)

 

Perhaps, but you're missing the point that career stats don't mean near as much as recent stats. And I'm a big Freel fan myself. I'd love to pry him away.

And I'm saying that you need to place performance within a context. Even if you want to look at a four year sample for Eyre, he's had ERA's of 4.46, 3.3, 4.1 and 2.63. So, what are we gonig to get in 2006? Well, looks like it's a 50/50 shot of an ERA above 4.0 for our $3M.

 

Gee, that's tough to find...

[frostwyrm]

Hendry already had a habit of selling low, now he's also buying high. I don't see anything in Eyre's and Howry's numbers to make me believe they'll duplicate their 2005 performances, especially not at their ages. I could say the same about Neifi too.

[RockTheIvy]

I could say the same about Neifi too.

 

Oh I'm gonna go out on a limb and say he'll be terrible. Again. :lol: :cry:

[Tim]

I don't consider the money we spent on Eyre or will spend on Howry as bad news at all. I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow it. I'd say throwing Howry and Eyre in the mix along with a complete season of Dempster closing will pick us up another 12-15 wins. And I'd rather spend that money on two proven veterans than dump it all and more on Wagner or Ryan. Now, if we pick up a legitimate lead off hitter with some speed, a solid bat for the OF, and a stud pitcher we should be looking really good.

Ah, finally. The "proven veteran" phrase has arisen.

 

 

Ahh....since we sucked last year we shouldve just taken our chances on more schlubs that weren't proven and never had dominant seasons like Novoa and almost every other guy in our bullpen.....that would get us really far next season. Once again, I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow game after game, and if it takes 7 mil to help that out (especially in regards to the fact we had 30 to spend), that is definitely money well spent.

The point is that neither vet has "proven" to be reliably exceptional across their careers. Nor have they proven to be consistently better than what we could expect from Wuertz & Ohman in 2006.

[CubsWin]

If Hendry were actually paying top dollar for good relievers, I'd agree with the strategy.

 

Paying top dollar for middle aged relievers coming off career years is not a path to success in my mind. Some days, the sun shines on the dog's butt. But most days, it's still just a dog's butt.

 

You are being entirely too negative about the quality of Eyre and Howry. These guys aren't scrubs.

 

As for the money, big deal, at least it's being spent on something here that can help the team, unlike the Neifi and Rusch signings.

 

An improved Cub bullpen is worth an extra 8 to 10 games over the course of a season. That's puts us back to the upper 80 win total category and a playoff contender again. Add a leadoff man and some respectable outfielders and this team is ready to go.

Both of these guys are average players who happen to be coming off extremely lucky seasons. Not only were both lucky on a balls in play perspective, but both were well under their typical HR/IP last year.

 

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

Tim, I expected better out of you than career ERA. You are a wiz with the stats. What matters most is what have they done in the last two years or so. Pitchers figure things out during the course of their career's. It sure looks like Eyre has.

 

Eyre suffered from an undiagnosed disease earlier in his career which has since been diagnosed and treated. You can claim that his disease had nothing to do with his earlier struggles, but concentration is a key to success for any athelete. Plus, is it just coincidence that ever since receiving treatment for his ADHD, he has steadily improved?

 

Is Hendry spending a lot for him/them? Perhaps. But it will only matter if he doesn't have enough money left over to improve the offense the way it needs to be improved. Do you know what his payroll is this season? Do any of us?

[Tim]

Just a question, but when is it okay to overspend. The Red Sox needed a closer for the 2004 season and they overspent for Keith Foulke, even providing him an extra year. People saw that as a good move. He had a great season, followed up by a disaster. Boston also needed a short stop, so they paid Renteria 40 mil. Again, not a great signing, but they were paying for the best.

 

In short, I think sometimes teams need to pay more to get more, and not rely on cheaper, more unpredictable alternatives.

Looking at the year by year stats for Eyre and Howry, what is it that is there that inspires confidence in you that they're especially predictable?

 

Since you choose to belabor your point...it was reported extensively that Eyre suffers from acute ADD, and has been on treatment for it the last few years. His numbers have been outstanding in that time. Yes, I would consider a three-year run after a life-changing event a run of sustained performance that leads to some confidence that the trend will continue.

 

Bob Howry had three solid years for the White Sox--two of which were terrific--then started having arm trouble, culminating in surgery in 2003. Since coming back from surgery, his numbers are excellent to near-ridiculous. Yes, I think that constitutes a trend of good pitching that the odds say can reasonably be expected to continue.

So you're a big fan of Eyre's 4.10 ERA in 2004? I'm glad you're happy spending that kind of money on peformance you can get at league minimum.

 

I'm not.

[Tim]

If Hendry were actually paying top dollar for good relievers, I'd agree with the strategy.

 

Paying top dollar for middle aged relievers coming off career years is not a path to success in my mind. Some days, the sun shines on the dog's butt. But most days, it's still just a dog's butt.

 

You are being entirely too negative about the quality of Eyre and Howry. These guys aren't scrubs.

 

As for the money, big deal, at least it's being spent on something here that can help the team, unlike the Neifi and Rusch signings.

 

An improved Cub bullpen is worth an extra 8 to 10 games over the course of a season. That's puts us back to the upper 80 win total category and a playoff contender again. Add a leadoff man and some respectable outfielders and this team is ready to go.

Both of these guys are average players who happen to be coming off extremely lucky seasons. Not only were both lucky on a balls in play perspective, but both were well under their typical HR/IP last year.

 

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

Tim, I expected better out of you than career ERA. You are a wiz with the stats. What matters most is what have they done in the last two years or so. Pitchers figure things out during the course of their career's. It sure looks like Eyre has.

 

Eyre suffered from an undiagnosed disease earlier in his career which has since been diagnosed and treated. You can claim that his disease had nothing to do with his earlier struggles, but concentration is a key to success for any athelete. Plus, is it just coincidence that ever since receiving treatment for his ADHD, he has steadily improved?

 

Is Hendry spending a lot for him/them? Perhaps. But it will only matter if he doesn't have enough money left over to improve the offense the way it needs to be improved. Do you know what his payroll is this season? Do any of us?

What matters is that Eyre and Howry both benefited from lower than expected home run rates and ridiculously low batting averages on balls in play (which is pretty much random from year to year, for those not paying attention).

[frostwyrm]

I could say the same about Neifi too.

 

Oh I'm gonna go out on a limb and say he'll be terrible. Again. :lol: :cry:

 

Yeah, but in 2005 he actually got within sniffing distance of a .700 OPS in a neutral park. Put him on the list of Cubs who are several years into their 30's, coming off a career year, with brand new big fat multi-year contracts from Jim Hendry. Let's see how long the list gets.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I don't consider the money we spent on Eyre or will spend on Howry as bad news at all. I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow it. I'd say throwing Howry and Eyre in the mix along with a complete season of Dempster closing will pick us up another 12-15 wins. And I'd rather spend that money on two proven veterans than dump it all and more on Wagner or Ryan. Now, if we pick up a legitimate lead off hitter with some speed, a solid bat for the OF, and a stud pitcher we should be looking really good.

Ah, finally. The "proven veteran" phrase has arisen.

 

 

Ahh....since we sucked last year we shouldve just taken our chances on more schlubs that weren't proven and never had dominant seasons like Novoa and almost every other guy in our bullpen.....that would get us really far next season. Once again, I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow game after game, and if it takes 7 mil to help that out (especially in regards to the fact we had 30 to spend), that is definitely money well spent.

 

Last 3 years

 

Eyre: 1.25 WHIP, 1.88 K/BB

Howry(4 years since he missed '03): 1.13 WHIP, 2.61 K/BB

 

2005

 

Ohman: 1.29 WHIP, 1.88 K/BB

Wuertz: 1.32 WHIP, 2.23 K/BB

 

Howry is a pretty good reliever, but giving him 3 years when you aren't THAT bad off with Wuertz, Williamson, and I guess Eyre isn't smart. ESPECIALLY when you could get someone like Ryan for not much more than you're paying Eyre and Howry.

Edited November 22, 2005 by Transmogrified Tiger

[nolanwood]

I don't consider the money we spent on Eyre or will spend on Howry as bad news at all. I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow it. I'd say throwing Howry and Eyre in the mix along with a complete season of Dempster closing will pick us up another 12-15 wins. And I'd rather spend that money on two proven veterans than dump it all and more on Wagner or Ryan. Now, if we pick up a legitimate lead off hitter with some speed, a solid bat for the OF, and a stud pitcher we should be looking really good.

Ah, finally. The "proven veteran" phrase has arisen.

 

 

Ahh....since we sucked last year we shouldve just taken our chances on more schlubs that weren't proven and never had dominant seasons like Novoa and almost every other guy in our bullpen.....that would get us really far next season. Once again, I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow game after game, and if it takes 7 mil to help that out (especially in regards to the fact we had 30 to spend), that is definitely money well spent.

The point is that neither vet has "proven" to be reliably exceptional across their careers. Nor have they proven to be consistently better than what we could expect from Wuertz & Ohman in 2006.

 

 

Wuertz and Ohman have only had ONE quality year in the pen apiece. Not much of a sample size to go on - I like the idea of adding two more guys who have had more than ONE quality year, giving us twice as many options for stopping runs after Prior peters out with 110 pitches in the 6th, or Rusch struggles in the 6th after he came in to relieve Wood in the 2nd.

[Tim]

I don't consider the money we spent on Eyre or will spend on Howry as bad news at all. I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow it. I'd say throwing Howry and Eyre in the mix along with a complete season of Dempster closing will pick us up another 12-15 wins. And I'd rather spend that money on two proven veterans than dump it all and more on Wagner or Ryan. Now, if we pick up a legitimate lead off hitter with some speed, a solid bat for the OF, and a stud pitcher we should be looking really good.

Ah, finally. The "proven veteran" phrase has arisen.

 

 

Ahh....since we sucked last year we shouldve just taken our chances on more schlubs that weren't proven and never had dominant seasons like Novoa and almost every other guy in our bullpen.....that would get us really far next season. Once again, I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow game after game, and if it takes 7 mil to help that out (especially in regards to the fact we had 30 to spend), that is definitely money well spent.

The point is that neither vet has "proven" to be reliably exceptional across their careers. Nor have they proven to be consistently better than what we could expect from Wuertz & Ohman in 2006.

 

 

Wuertz and Ohman have only had ONE quality year in the pen apiece. Not much of a sample size to go on - I like the idea of adding two more guys who have had more than ONE quality year, giving us twice as many options for stopping runs after Prior peters out with 110 pitches in the 6th, or Rusch struggles in the 6th after he came in to relieve Wood in the 2nd.

Okay. You go with your proven vets in the pen at $3.5M each. I'll go with the youngsters and have enough money left over to pay for a $6M player. Or most of Brian Giles for RF.

[don_kessinger_was_good]

So you're a big fan of Eyre's 4.10 ERA in 2004? I'm glad you're happy spending that kind of money on peformance you can get at league minimum.

 

I'm not.

 

Scott Eyre, 3-year trend, ERA: 3.32, 4.10, 2.63; WHIP: 1.51, 1.33, 1.08; BAA: .268, .219, .200

 

And the splits are even better, since Dusty will likely use Eyre more against LH batters:

 

2003--WHIP 1.14, BAA .219; 2004--WHIP 0.95, BAA .200; 2005--WHIP 1.04, BAA .182.

 

Yup, looks terribly inconsistent and unpredictable to me.

[nolanwood]

I don't consider the money we spent on Eyre or will spend on Howry as bad news at all. I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow it. I'd say throwing Howry and Eyre in the mix along with a complete season of Dempster closing will pick us up another 12-15 wins. And I'd rather spend that money on two proven veterans than dump it all and more on Wagner or Ryan. Now, if we pick up a legitimate lead off hitter with some speed, a solid bat for the OF, and a stud pitcher we should be looking really good.

Ah, finally. The "proven veteran" phrase has arisen.

 

 

Ahh....since we sucked last year we shouldve just taken our chances on more schlubs that weren't proven and never had dominant seasons like Novoa and almost every other guy in our bullpen.....that would get us really far next season. Once again, I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow game after game, and if it takes 7 mil to help that out (especially in regards to the fact we had 30 to spend), that is definitely money well spent.

The point is that neither vet has "proven" to be reliably exceptional across their careers. Nor have they proven to be consistently better than what we could expect from Wuertz & Ohman in 2006.

 

 

Wuertz and Ohman have only had ONE quality year in the pen apiece. Not much of a sample size to go on - I like the idea of adding two more guys who have had more than ONE quality year, giving us twice as many options for stopping runs after Prior peters out with 110 pitches in the 6th, or Rusch struggles in the 6th after he came in to relieve Wood in the 2nd.

Okay. You go with your proven vets in the pen at $3.5M each. I'll go with the youngsters and have enough money left over to pay for a $6M player. Or most of Brian Giles for RF.

 

 

I'm sorry, but Brian Giles alone isn't going to win the Cubs many games...he can hit 2 home runs in the first 6 innings, but when Novoa comes in and blows the lead, those Brian Giles homers means nothing. We have consisently been in the upper echelon of run scoring the last few years, and it doesn't get us anywhere. On the contrary, our bullpen has sucked big time and look where that got us.....

 

We need to protect that dominant pitching staff in the later innings, which is something we have failed to do the last couple years.

[Tim]

So you're a big fan of Eyre's 4.10 ERA in 2004? I'm glad you're happy spending that kind of money on peformance you can get at league minimum.

 

I'm not.

 

Scott Eyre, 3-year trend, ERA: 3.32, 4.10, 2.63; WHIP: 1.51, 1.33, 1.08; BAA: .268, .219, .200

 

And the splits are even better, since Dusty will likely use Eyre more against LH batters:

 

2003--WHIP 1.14, BAA .219; 2004--WHIP 0.95, BAA .200; 2005--WHIP 1.04, BAA .182.

 

Yup, looks terribly inconsistent and unpredictable to me.

He apparently started taking the meds in 2002. You forgot his 4.46 ERA from that year. Ooohhh. I'm all aquiver with excitement.

[abuck1220]

I'm all aquiver with excitement.

 

might be ADD. you should have that checked out.

[Tim]

I don't consider the money we spent on Eyre or will spend on Howry as bad news at all. I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow it. I'd say throwing Howry and Eyre in the mix along with a complete season of Dempster closing will pick us up another 12-15 wins. And I'd rather spend that money on two proven veterans than dump it all and more on Wagner or Ryan. Now, if we pick up a legitimate lead off hitter with some speed, a solid bat for the OF, and a stud pitcher we should be looking really good.

Ah, finally. The "proven veteran" phrase has arisen.

 

 

Ahh....since we sucked last year we shouldve just taken our chances on more schlubs that weren't proven and never had dominant seasons like Novoa and almost every other guy in our bullpen.....that would get us really far next season. Once again, I'm tired of watching our bullpen blow game after game, and if it takes 7 mil to help that out (especially in regards to the fact we had 30 to spend), that is definitely money well spent.

The point is that neither vet has "proven" to be reliably exceptional across their careers. Nor have they proven to be consistently better than what we could expect from Wuertz & Ohman in 2006.

 

 

Wuertz and Ohman have only had ONE quality year in the pen apiece. Not much of a sample size to go on - I like the idea of adding two more guys who have had more than ONE quality year, giving us twice as many options for stopping runs after Prior peters out with 110 pitches in the 6th, or Rusch struggles in the 6th after he came in to relieve Wood in the 2nd.

Okay. You go with your proven vets in the pen at $3.5M each. I'll go with the youngsters and have enough money left over to pay for a $6M player. Or most of Brian Giles for RF.

 

 

I'm sorry, but Brian Giles alone isn't going to win the Cubs many games...he can hit 2 home runs in the first 6 innings, but when Novoa comes in and blows the lead, those Brian Giles homers means nothing. We have consisently been in the upper echelon of run scoring the last few years, and it doesn't get us anywhere. On the contrary, our bullpen has sucked big time and look where that got us.....

 

We need to protect that dominant pitching staff in the later innings, which is something we have failed to do the last couple years.

:-k

 

Cubs Rank in MLB:
                2002   2003   2004   2005
Runs Scored       22     20     16     20
Bullpen Runs      25     16     15     19

I'm not sure I can agree with your point...