Transmogrified Tiger

When it comes to the likelihood of becoming a successful major leaguer, the drop from 1st to 2nd round is larger than any other. But that's beside the point. The point is with 3-4 guys that are quality back end options at Type A(Soriano, Gonzalez, Valverde, probably Wagner), and considering how hesitant people were to go after type A relievers last offseason(see Juan Cruz), there's a decent chance their value gets suppressed to the point where it's worth paying them plus a 2nd rounder. If not, then there's still the other plethora of options I proposed, like trading for a guy who's undervalued(the aforementioned Cruz), being on the right side of a Wuertz like trade(Crain, I posted several options somewhere in a thread after the season ended), or letting a couple of the literally dozen internal options have a shot. All of these are preferable to signing Grabow to his contract, and really he's not so much better than any option that it makes sense to sign him right now at all(unless it was for nothing) considering how far into the offseason we are.

I've seen like 5 times in the last 10 minutes where the bulls have numbers or they catch the lakers in an offensive set but they end up with a contested shot anyway. I can't figure if it's poor positioning from the Bulls(since they're moving the ball pretty quickly) or good defense by the Lakers.

Those guys will be getting much bigger contracts then Grabow got. They are all Type A FA's, which is going to depress their value. They also stand a fighting chance of being worth their contract, even if it's higher than Grabow's. Pay for quality, not mediocrity. Oh my lord just imagine the howling on here if Hendry were to follow your recommendation and forfeit a first-round pick to sign a middle reliever to a contract larger than the one Grabow got. Oh brother. The Cubs have a protected 1st rounder this year.

He's a reliever. Very often, he leaves runners in the hands of other pitchers, or is entrusted with runners from other relievers. Even more important, Grabow has thrown less than 150 innings the last two years. Very often starting pitchers have fluke years in ERA in more IP than that. This is even more obvious in Grabow's case because every other performance measure is mediocre and in line with what he's done his whole career.

The last two years, Grabow has put up a 7.2 K/9, 4.7 BB/9, 0.8 HR/9, and 1.34 WHIP. He hasn't been very good at all.

Well we can't exactly expect Guzman to be healthy all season. No more than we can expect Grabow to be any good.

There's a AAAA joke that has been made too many times. Okay, cut the list to 12 guys instead of 13.

Those guys will be getting much bigger contracts then Grabow got. They are all Type A FA's, which is going to depress their value. They also stand a fighting chance of being worth their contract, even if it's higher than Grabow's. Pay for quality, not mediocrity. Shouse is a LH specialist not a full inning reliever like Grabow, and we already been there and done that with Cruz. I don't think taking him after a crap year is a good idea. The is with Grabow were not only getting a LH were also getting our set up guy. So if you bring in a guy like say Shouse then you still need to bring in someone to pitch in the 7th or 8th. I never said they shouldn't have waited. But there's no doubt in mind that they would had to pay a reliever a simliar contract or more then Grabow got. We already have Marmol and Guzman on board on the back end, and for the money were capable of adding a much better reliever than Grabow. He's a completely fungible reliever. It's not difficult to put up a 1.4 whip to go with 7+ K/9 and 4+ BB/9. That's the point, Grabow has no track record. He's consistently mediocre. If you want to pay for security, fine, pay Soriano to be lights out at the back end. But don't pay Grabow just because you're afraid that somehow every single one of Gaub, Stevens, Parker, Caridad, Atkins, Gorzelanny, Marshall, Samardzija, Patton, and even Maine, Cashner, Jackson, and Coleman will not be able to be merely below average coming out of the pen.

There's still an entire offseason. They could sign Rafael Soriano, or Mike Gonzalez, or Crazy Eyes Valverde, or Billy Wagner, or a lesser guy like Shouse or trade for Juan Cruz(who's making less than Grabow and is about a jillion times more likely to be good), or find a Wuertz-esque guy in trade like Jesse Crain, or.. you get the point. Not signing Grabow, a mediocre reliever, to a long term deal does not = we want to fill our pen with 7 guys who have a combined -10 relief appearances at the Major League level.

Maine has real solid numbers, wonder what his stuff is like. And White has a sub .100 ISO as a first baseman, I didn't think we had a shortage of 1B around Daytona. Trades like this are why signing Grabow to his contract was a dumb idea. Maine joins Marshall, Gorzelanny, Gaub, and Russell in the "probably just as good as Grabow, but definitely not 3.5 million worse than him" club.

Better strikeout and walk rate, nearly identical FIP, and did it over nearly 30 more innings than Carpenter. I think that does make his season better.

I'm not 100% sure, I think it's somewhere in the neighborhood of 60.

Lincecum - 8.2 WAR Vazquez - 6.6 Haren - 6.1 Wainwright - 5.7 Ubaldo - 5.7 Carpenter - 5.6 WAR isn't precise enough to be accurate to the decimal point(although I believe it's better for pitchers than hitters), but it's not like they're lunatics for voting that way.

You've shown me a guy who is marginally better than Marquis, you haven't come close to showing he's good. It seems to me like the obvious solution again is just not making the deal. They need Milton more than they need a better version of Marquis. Millwood and Bradley are both 2-3 win guys, and Miles is nothing, from a value standpoint it's about the same, without considering the off the field stuff that means it's impossible they keep Bradley. It's a deal that trades Bradley without surrendering value or cash, I don't think there are too many of those out there.

It means that with the exception of last year(which is much more about Marquis than Millwood), that Millwood has consistently been anywhere from 10 to 30+ runs better than Marquis. He has similar good qualities, but he's much, much better. Except you're talking about what he did in his prime late 20's years while some of Marquis's time includes his young 20's. And as a 35 year old now, Millwood's value at 29 is meaningless. He is not a very good pitcher. He's a pitcher who shows up and generally doesn't get destroyed. The Cubs don't need guys who can show up, they have that, they need guys who can either shut down opponents to compensate for their weak offense, or help them score more runs. You're focusing too much on the 8 years thing, it was added merely to show Millwood's extraordinary level of consistency. Your coming up with a Marquis comparison just because they're both durable, and it doesn't work, Millwood is much better. He's not top flight, but to get his value in return for Bradley and Miles is a good deal. Unless there's a comparable 2B or CF/RF you think is out there for Bradley, you're not going to do any better and improve the offense. Plus the deal is cash neutral so it doesn't hinder your ability to sign anyone this year, and it allows you to more freely use Marshall/Gorzelanny/Samardzija in a trade.

UZR has Kouzmanoff as 10 runs above average at 3B, a full win above average. They have Zimmerman at 20.

Some 2 star KU football recruit started a fight with him, so he had to leave before meeting with Self. Seems rushed, I think a Mangino screaming at him joke would've played better.

It means that with the exception of last year(which is much more about Marquis than Millwood), that Millwood has consistently been anywhere from 10 to 30+ runs better than Marquis. He has similar good qualities, but he's much, much better.

How much better is Millwodd than Marquis? Including his 3.8 WAR season with the Rockies this year, Marquis has accumulated a 9.6 WAR the last 8 seasons, 1.2 per season. He was 1.7 and 1.8 his two years with the Cubs. Millwood has amassed a 29.7 WAR the last 8 seasons, 3.7 per year. His last 3 seasons have been 2.7, 3.3, and 2.4.

Millwood is plenty good and plenty valuable. He's averaged 30+ starts going back to 2002, and in that time he's never been below a 2.4 WAR. He doesn't project to be worlds better than Marshall or Gorzelanny, but he's got consistency on his side that Gorzelanny doesn't, and durability on his side that Marshall doesn't. We could do far, far worse than getting Millwood for Bradley and Miles.

He's not, that's why this is such a waste. One of Marshall/Gorzelanny is headed to the pen, and John Gaub spent last year incinerating Triple-A hitters. There's not a hole here to be filled. Russell is lying around if you want depth, and if things go bad I'm sure you can do what you did last year, and trade for a mediocre LH reliever at the deadline.

Depending on how much you like Marshelanny and/or projection systems, it might not be a bad idea to let Harden walk. Not offering him arbitration is lunacy though, but I don't think a Millwood deal would hinder that/happen before the arby deadline.

the guy had a 2.49 ERA, 175 ERA+ and pitched 238 innings. I'd say he's in the team picture Greinke was 25 runs better. That's more than the difference between Fontenot and Aramis.

Those remind me of ugly jerseys from 25 years ago. Not a fan.

that about sums it up. I wonder who we could get to fill the position. I hear good things about Bill Callahan.