17 Seconds

who's ready for castillo in the 2 hole all year?

he is? Marshall's 2009 FIP was 4.10 Grabow's 2009 FIP was 4.29 in PIT and 3.83 for CHC The difference in salary is now ridiculous, of course Grabows FIP was worse in 2009 Grabow 2009- 4.20 Marshall 2009- 4.19 Grabow 2008- 4.54 Marshall 2008- 4.39 Grabow 2007- 4.28 Marshall 2007- 4.62 Also Marshall is 27 and has gotten better each of the last 3 seasons. Grabow is 31 and hasn't really shown any trend of improving.

yea if you dont have enough to pay for a good player you might as well waste the money you do have by overpaying for mediocrity.

i fuckin love this team

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. not that it matters, but those guys aren't really middle relievers

just give us one

remember that guy who won the lottery twice in like a month? luck, or awesome lottery skills?

cubsfan26 you're not very good at logic

but he does that on purpose because he's only worried about his era.... which is the only stat that matters don't hate

Like I said before there becomes a time when something isn't a fluke anymore. Ok if he does this for the next 8 years in a row, we can talk. Deal?

lolol

I'm sorry you find it embarrassing. I'm also sorry I factor in actual results of how many runs a guy allowed to score in the innings he pitched. I saw all the fangraph stats and I saw his WHIP, and the walks per inning and strike out stats. But none of that tells me why Grabow has gotten such good results when it comes to letting runs score two years in a row. Baseball is a game played by humans not computers, so there's human factors in things. I don't buy that Grabow just got lucky two years in a row. Or understand if he allows so many guys on base. Then why does he not do it when he comes into games with guys on base? So find this or that embarrassing or call me names all you want. There's no perfect stat systems in baseball and no perfect way to say why something was successful or not. So until then I'm sometimes gonna factor in results even if some stats say to disgard those results. I know alot of people on this board are set in there ways when it comes to some stats, but that doesn't mean I gotta agree with it. Show me a reliever who made a career of having a really low ERA that doesn't match up with his mediocre-to-below average numbers. They don't exist. Why? Because you can get lucky for a while, but it eventually catches up to you. If Grabow is such a badass at stranding runners, why did he just start doing it the last couple years? Did he suddenly learn how to be crappy enough to allow a lot of baserunners, but get out of it by THEN getting the outs? This Grabow is a weird character

Your entire argument is based around the fact that "he did it 2 years in a row, so it's not luck". Do you know how often that happens with relievers? Yes, it's luck. John Grabow doesn't have magic powers that turn him into a better pitcher with runners on base. It's not like he's trying harder or something. "Oh [expletive], I let a couple guys get on base. I completely forgot that I was supposed to get outs. Good thing this reminded me." *strikes out the side* ERA is close to useless when determining how effective/good a reliever has been, and Grabow is a perfect example of why.

but era

But when a guy does it two years in a row. There becomes a point were you have to consider that the guy is one of those rare guys who gets good results even though he allows a good amount of base runners. No. If he does it 2 years in a row it just means he's more likely to have it catch up to him. Seriously, stop using ERA to justify this. It's the only thing you have to go on and it's weak. And is it going to be like last offseason when you blindly defend every bad move Hendry makes, and then yell at people who criticize him because we have to "give the moves a chance"? Apparently it is, considering you keep trying to talk Grabow up based on a single stat that in no way shows how good or effective he was.

seriously, stop using era. it's embarrassing http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/john-grabow-gets-paid

25 innings with a badass 12/16 bb/k part of me almost hopes grabow gets shelled all next year just to make hendry look like an even bigger moron

he is?

hahahahahahah [expletive] [expletive]

It's only better if 2009 Millwood shows up and not 2007-2008 Millwood.

iirc, he had a ridiculous babip last season and it ended up catching up to him in the second half.

so we're going to end up ADDING payroll for a guy who is unlikely to contribute anything of value to the cubs. i'd rather eat most of bradley's contract and just dump him for nothing. millwood blows

you misread something. next year will be the last year of his contract and he'll make 12m No, it's his signing bonus. They had deferred it until 2011, before it starts getting paid. By the looks of what was said in the original post, we'd be on the hook for all of it..... my fault, it was me that misread it. u read it as 15 mil a year from 11-15 so would the cubs definitely be on the hook for that? if so, that would be a garbage trade. millwood is terrible. so who is ready for an april rotation of zambrano/dempster/millwood/wells/marshall? ugh. we thought last offseason was ugly. i think this one is going to top that.

you misread something. next year will be the last year of his contract and he'll make 12m

the problem is that the only position that figgins is good at is 3b, and obviously he can't play there.