Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=105696:date=Jul 15 2010, 07:45 PM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Jul 15 2010, 07:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=105692:date=Jul 15 2010, 08:13 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jul 15 2010, 08:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I'd say that it seems pretty obvious that at worst, the Cubs offer was comparable to the Padres and White Sox, and there seems to be no evidence that it was excessive.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Assuming:
(1) the early reports of a comparable White Sox offer were legit;
(2) we're taking hindsight completely out of the equation; and
(3) you were in favor of signing Fuk in the first place (in which case, if you were opposed, signing him for more than ten bucks would have been excessive).
Shrug. I thought the deal sucked balls when it was signed, and I think it didn't take long for that to be confirmed.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Those are all arguable, but I was just replying to your statement that no one offered more than 40. Unless his agent was lying AFTER making the deal, it sounds like other teams were in for 48 or more. Plus, I'd have to assume that Kenny William's massive ego wouldn't let the idea of a guy turning down the Sox to take LESS money with the Cubs stand if it weren't true.
I was all for signing Fuk. There were plenty of bad Japanese signings, but I was hoping for another Matsui or Ichiro, in the sense that he could make the transition. I didn't for a minute think he would be as great as those guys, but I had modest expectations for him. I was thinking a good to great OBP and 15 home runs, with some good defense to boot.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 1,440
Threads: 63
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=105708:date=Jul 15 2010, 09:06 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Jul 15 2010, 09:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=105696:date=Jul 15 2010, 07:45 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Jul 15 2010, 07:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=105692:date=Jul 15 2010, 08:13 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jul 15 2010, 08:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I'd say that it seems pretty obvious that at worst, the Cubs offer was comparable to the Padres and White Sox, and there seems to be no evidence that it was excessive.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Assuming:
(1) the early reports of a comparable White Sox offer were legit;
(2) we're taking hindsight completely out of the equation; and
(3) you were in favor of signing Fuk in the first place (in which case, if you were opposed, signing him for more than ten bucks would have been excessive).
Shrug. I thought the deal sucked balls when it was signed, and I think it didn't take long for that to be confirmed.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Those are all arguable, but I was just replying to your statement that no one offered more than 40. Unless his agent was lying AFTER making the deal, it sounds like other teams were in for 48 or more. Plus, I'd have to assume that Kenny William's massive ego wouldn't let the idea of a guy turning down the Sox to take LESS money with the Cubs stand if it weren't true.
I was all for signing Fuk. There were plenty of bad Japanese signings, but I was hoping for another Matsui or Ichiro, in the sense that he could make the transition. I didn't for a minute think he would be as great as those guys, but I had modest expectations for him. I was thinking a good to great OBP and 15 home runs, with some good defense to boot.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The problem is the weight applied to every signing. Those who dislike a GM are going to jump up and down with "I told you so's" when the player turns out to be mediocre, and those who like him are going to call him a genius when the player works out.
Every signing is a risk. When you start throwing around those kinds of dollars, you've always got an excellent chance of striking out...
When you isolate one or two signings...it's easy to make a case in one direction or another. More big picture, please...
And no...I will not stop talking like this.
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=105708:date=Jul 15 2010, 09:06 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Jul 15 2010, 09:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=105696:date=Jul 15 2010, 07:45 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Jul 15 2010, 07:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=105692:date=Jul 15 2010, 08:13 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jul 15 2010, 08:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I'd say that it seems pretty obvious that at worst, the Cubs offer was comparable to the Padres and White Sox, and there seems to be no evidence that it was excessive.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Shrug. I thought the deal sucked balls when it was signed, and I think it didn't take long for that to be confirmed.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->I was all for signing Fuk. There were plenty of bad Japanese signings, but I was hoping for another Matsui or Ichiro, in the sense that he could make the transition. I didn't for a minute think he would be as great as those guys, but I had modest expectations for him. I was thinking a <b>good to great OBP and 15 home runs, with some good defense to boot.</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And therein lies the rub. You don't pay $12 Million a year (times 4 years !) for that kind of production, especially to a guy already 31, who's almost certainly going to start to decline from the moment the ink dries (because of age).
BT is right though, none of us were expecting Ichiro II. And the Cubs had always been cheap, so it was fun to go after some FA's.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->And therein lies the rub. You don't pay $12 Million a year (times 4 years !) for that kind of production, especially to a guy already 31, who's almost certainly going to start to decline from the moment the ink dries (because of age).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You do if that's the going rate.
You are absolutely correct that this sort of production isn't "worth" 12 million a year. But, and I and don't think I'm exaggerating here, that logic applies to virtually EVERY major free agent signing by anyone. There is no way Holliday is going to be "worth" what he is being paid in 5 years. There is no way Arod is "worth" 30 million a year. There is no way Sabathia is "worth" 25 million a year. There is no way Pujols will be worth what he is going to be paid when he hits the market.
If the Cubs followed the adage that you don't pay (whatever the going rate is) for (whatever big name free agent you are signing), they would literally never sign a big name free agent. Almost invariably, when you sign an impact free agent, you pay a huge premium.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
I'm going to have to disagree with that.
If you're taking the tact of saying that ballplayers have no right to claim to be "worth" $18,000,000 per annum for playing a child's game, while nurses who are actually saving people's lives would take <i>500 years</i> to make that much, then yes, I agree with you.
But if you are saying that A-Rod or Pujols haven't given a solid return on the contracts they've signed, I'd say that you might want to take a look at FanGraphs. When A-Rod signed, it was a shocking amount of cash, but a 26 year-old Gold Glove SS who runs really well and hits 50+ HR a year? I'd say that there is some value there (although I'm sure you'd <i>agree</i>, so we may be disagreeing along semantical lines.)
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 4,684
Threads: 78
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
You don't pay $12 mil for s decent obp and 15 home runs. You just don't. Especially when the player is 31 and never played an inning of Major League ball.
Hopefully the expectations were for more than that, because I gotta think that if all they were looking for was 15 home runs and a .380 obp, there would've been cheaper options playing right here in America.
Wang.
Posts: 2,696
Threads: 47
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=105742:date=Jul 16 2010, 01:00 AM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Jul 16 2010, 01:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I'm going to have to disagree with that.
If you're taking the tact of saying that ballplayers have no right to claim to be "worth" $18,000,000 per annum for playing a child's game, while nurses who are actually saving people's lives would take <i>500 years</i> to make that much, then yes, I agree with you.
But if you are saying that A-Rod or Pujols haven't given a solid return on the contracts they've signed, I'd say that you might want to take a look at FanGraphs. When A-Rod signed, it was a shocking amount of cash, but a 26 year-old Gold Glove SS who runs really well and hits 50+ HR a year? I'd say that there is some value there (although I'm sure you'd <i>agree</i>, so we may be disagreeing along semantical lines.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He's saying over the course of the contract. A-Rod for instance is eventually going to stop producing. When we look back at the end of his contract, we all know he will not have earned his contract. BT was speaking of Pujols in terms of his next contract. We all know Pujols is going to get paid. By the end of his next contract though, I would put money on him not living up to the amount he signs for. But, that's what the market dictates.
The Cubs didn't look at Fukudome and think "This guy will produce ABC, so he deserves to get paid $XYX." The Cubs looked at Fukudome, got a feel for what other teams might try to pay him, and tried to present the most attractive offer to him. If you don't present a worthy offer, you don't get the free agent. If you disagreed with getting Fukudome in the first place, that's a different argument. If you disagree with the amount, BT is saying if the Cubs didn't pay what they paid, there's a good chance they would not have landed him.
Posts: 393
Threads: 1
Joined: Jul 2010
Reputation:
0
Going rate has gotten this team where it is now, in the shitter with more shit to come. You don't pay $12 million for 4 years WITH a fucking NTC to an unproven spinning hack from Japan. I can name two (and they have already been mentioned) players from over there offensively who have panned out in this leage. Like was said, if the team wanted a right fielder who brings 15 hr and a .380 or so OBP, there were plenty of home grown ass holes to fit the profile who would have cost way less. Fuk was a mistake.
Dylan McKay is my hero
Posts: 4,684
Threads: 78
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=105757:date=Jul 16 2010, 08:11 AM:name=Scarey)-->QUOTE (Scarey @ Jul 16 2010, 08:11 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=105742:date=Jul 16 2010, 01:00 AM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Jul 16 2010, 01:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I'm going to have to disagree with that.
If you're taking the tact of saying that ballplayers have no right to claim to be "worth" $18,000,000 per annum for playing a child's game, while nurses who are actually saving people's lives would take <i>500 years</i> to make that much, then yes, I agree with you.
But if you are saying that A-Rod or Pujols haven't given a solid return on the contracts they've signed, I'd say that you might want to take a look at FanGraphs. When A-Rod signed, it was a shocking amount of cash, but a 26 year-old Gold Glove SS who runs really well and hits 50+ HR a year? I'd say that there is some value there (although I'm sure you'd <i>agree</i>, so we may be disagreeing along semantical lines.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He's saying over the course of the contract. A-Rod for instance is eventually going to stop producing. When we look back at the end of his contract, we all know he will not have earned his contract. BT was speaking of Pujols in terms of his next contract. We all know Pujols is going to get paid. By the end of his next contract though, I would put money on him not living up to the amount he signs for. But, that's what the market dictates.
The Cubs didn't look at Fukudome and think "This guy will produce ABC, so he deserves to get paid $XYX." The Cubs looked at Fukudome, got a feel for what other teams might try to pay him, and tried to present the most attractive offer to him. If you don't present a worthy offer, you don't get the free agent. If you disagreed with getting Fukudome in the first place, that's a different argument. If you disagree with the amount, BT is saying if the Cubs didn't pay what they paid, there's a good chance they would not have landed him.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm quite sure kb knew all of that. He's not a dolt.
What kb is saying is that $12 mil for a guy projected to hit 15 home runs and take some walks is too much. I agree with him.
Wang.
Posts: 2,696
Threads: 47
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=105822:date=Jul 16 2010, 12:53 PM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Jul 16 2010, 12:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=105757:date=Jul 16 2010, 08:11 AM:name=Scarey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scarey @ Jul 16 2010, 08:11 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=105742:date=Jul 16 2010, 01:00 AM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Jul 16 2010, 01:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I'm going to have to disagree with that.
If you're taking the tact of saying that ballplayers have no right to claim to be "worth" $18,000,000 per annum for playing a child's game, while nurses who are actually saving people's lives would take <i>500 years</i> to make that much, then yes, I agree with you.
But if you are saying that A-Rod or Pujols haven't given a solid return on the contracts they've signed, I'd say that you might want to take a look at FanGraphs. When A-Rod signed, it was a shocking amount of cash, but a 26 year-old Gold Glove SS who runs really well and hits 50+ HR a year? I'd say that there is some value there (although I'm sure you'd <i>agree</i>, so we may be disagreeing along semantical lines.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He's saying over the course of the contract. A-Rod for instance is eventually going to stop producing. When we look back at the end of his contract, we all know he will not have earned his contract. BT was speaking of Pujols in terms of his next contract. We all know Pujols is going to get paid. By the end of his next contract though, I would put money on him not living up to the amount he signs for. But, that's what the market dictates.
The Cubs didn't look at Fukudome and think "This guy will produce ABC, so he deserves to get paid $XYX." The Cubs looked at Fukudome, got a feel for what other teams might try to pay him, and tried to present the most attractive offer to him. If you don't present a worthy offer, you don't get the free agent. If you disagreed with getting Fukudome in the first place, that's a different argument. If you disagree with the amount, BT is saying if the Cubs didn't pay what they paid, there's a good chance they would not have landed him.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm quite sure kb knew all of that. He's not a dolt.
What kb is saying is that $12 mil for a guy projected to hit 15 home runs and take some walks is too much. I agree with him.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm pretty sure he missed the point. KB talked about Pujols not currently being worth his contract. BT was speaking in terms of Pujols' upcoming contract. I know KB is no dolt, please don't put words in my mouth. I think he misread what BT typed and I was just trying to explain it a little more clearly.
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Scarey, it seems that you and BT are taking the stance (correct me if I'm wrong) that no free agent ever lives up to his contract (and, thus, we shouldn't be pissed that Fuk isn't living up to his contract).
I'm sure that you're a big enough fan of MLB history to know that's plain incorrect, but since Steinbrenner has been in the news, let's look at his most iconic move, signing Reggie Jackson. He may not have put up huge numbers like he did in Oakland, but to say George didn't get his money's worth is downright false.
This is just one of hundreds and hundreds of guys who outdid their FA contracts (DeRosa? Lilly?).
Any time a player wants to renegotiate in the midst of a long-term deal, you can rest assured that he's far outplayed the money he got.
Fuk was a bad signing. Plain and simple. It was bad to target him. It was bad to vastly overpay him.
Bad signing.
This isn't to rag on Jim; I just used Lilly as an example of a good signing, and Jim's fingerprints are all over that deal.
I can admit that Lilly was a good deal. Why can't you guys admit that Fuk was a bad one?
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 2,696
Threads: 47
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=105834:date=Jul 16 2010, 01:36 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Jul 16 2010, 01:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Scarey, it seems that you and BT are taking the stance (correct me if I'm wrong) that no free agent ever lives up to his contract (and, thus, we shouldn't be pissed that Fuk isn't living up to his contract).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No. I'm saying for top free agents, MOST of them will not live up to their contracts. Think of signings like Holiday, Soriano, Teixiera. Pretty much all the big money long term contracts will not be able to live up to the contract, specifically at the end of it. Fuk isn't exactly in the same category, but because there was competition for him, somebody was going to have to overpay to get him... unless the GMs trying to get him got together, agreed upon a price the player was worth, and pulled straws to see who could sign him to that amount.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->I can admit that Lilly was a good deal. Why can't you guys admit that Fuk was a bad one?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, in retrospect it was a bad signing.
Posts: 1,440
Threads: 63
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=105834:date=Jul 16 2010, 01:36 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Jul 16 2010, 01:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Scarey, it seems that you and BT are taking the stance (correct me if I'm wrong) that no free agent ever lives up to his contract (and, thus, we shouldn't be pissed that Fuk isn't living up to his contract).
I'm sure that you're a big enough fan of MLB history to know that's plain incorrect, but since Steinbrenner has been in the news, let's look at his most iconic move, signing Reggie Jackson. He may not have put up huge numbers like he did in Oakland, but to say George didn't get his money's worth is downright false.
This is just one of hundreds and hundreds of guys who outdid their FA contracts (DeRosa? Lilly?).
Any time a player wants to renegotiate in the midst of a long-term deal, you can rest assured that he's far outplayed the money he got.
Fuk was a bad signing. Plain and simple. It was bad to target him. It was bad to vastly overpay him.
Bad signing.
This isn't to rag on Jim; I just used Lilly as an example of a good signing, and Jim's fingerprints are all over that deal.
I can admit that Lilly was a good deal. Why can't you guys admit that Fuk was a bad one?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why is every argument piece-mealed? Would any of us have given that contract, in retrospect? No.
You're acting like it's some humbling admission to say that Lilly was a good signing.
Body of work...
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
I think Scarey and BT's assertion that most big FA contracts are going to be bad deals, and that the teams<i> know</i> that going in, is a side effect of being a Cub fan in the Hendry era, not a rational take on the FA industry.
An easy way to look at it: look at all the "milestone" marker contracts in recent baseball history.
The first FA deal for a half-million: Reggie
1 mil-Nolan Ryan
3- Rickey, before his peak
5-?Maddux to Braves
6-Boby Bonilla (bad deal)
7-Bonds to SF
etc.
Manny's 160M deal paid off, the Yanks haven't complained about Jeter's 189M deal, and A-Rod certainly had a magnificent decade after signing his 10-year deal. Those are the 3 biggest deals ever.
I'd say that history has shown that a big contract <i>doesn't</i> mean catastrophe, as long as you don't do something blatantly stupid (Zito, Soriano).
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 2,696
Threads: 47
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=105849:date=Jul 16 2010, 02:44 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Jul 16 2010, 02:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think Scarey and BT's assertion that most big FA contracts are going to be bad deals, and that the teams<i> know</i> that going in, is a side effect of being a Cub fan in the Hendry era, not a rational take on the FA industry.
An easy way to look at it: look at all the "milestone" marker contracts in recent baseball history.
The first FA deal for a half-million: Reggie
1 mil-Nolan Ryan
3- Rickey, before his peak
5-?Maddux to Braves
6-Boby Bonilla (bad deal)
7-Bonds to SF
etc.
Manny's 160M deal paid off, the Yanks haven't complained about Jeter's 189M deal, and A-Rod certainly had a magnificent decade after signing his 10-year deal. Those are the 3 biggest deals ever.
I'd say that history has shown that a big contract <i>doesn't</i> mean catastrophe, as long as you don't do something blatantly stupid (Zito, Soriano).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm sorry KB, hand picking a bunch of Hall of Famers doesn't really prove anything.
Let's do an analogy.
Let's say ten years from now, I have in my posession a rock. This particular rock was used to bludgeon Jim Hendry to death after a disappointing 2010 campaign by an at-large, unknown, disgruntled fan.
Now, baseball antique experts have appraised it to be worth $500. However, I bring it to a silent auction that happens to have yourself, veryzer, Ruby, and jstraw in attendence and you all value the rock very much... because it's a piece of baseball history.
Anyway, if you know each other and know that each of you wants that rock, what are you going to bid on it? It's valued at $500, are you actually going to bid $500? My guess is if you really want that rock, you're going to go over the valued price. THAT is how I see most valued free agents. Yes, you could buy that rock for $1000and it turns out it was also used to bludgeon Lou Piniella to death as well causing it's value to increase to $1500 (obvious analogy to a Hall of Fame player), but in terms of baseball free agency, more times than not you will just pay that $1000 and get a $500 rock.
Consequently, this is big reason why I am such a proponent in building teams through the farm.
|
