Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=23726:date=Mar 17 2009, 07:40 PM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Mar 17 2009, 07:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Man, it's hard to take a contrarian position on something... I wonder how KB does it all the time. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img]
But seriously, I think you guys are wrong to think that if there's a tie, money won't be factored in. That's just ludicrous to think it isn't in there somewhere.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is a remote chance that Hendry says to Lou "If all things are exactly even, it would save us a few bucks if you make Gregg the closer", but I really really doubt it. For starters, it's amatuer hour. Secondly, if it ever got out, both Lou and Hendry's credibility would go out the window. Lastly, it's only a factor IF all of your assumptions are true, and I don't think they are. I don't think they believe Gregg is a one year rental, and if he isn't, then your plan would cost them a LOT more money than letting Marmol do it.
It would be VERY tough for Hendry to let Gregg walk if he is our closer for the whole year after letting Wood walk this year. Not gambling on Wood can be explained away by his injury history. Not so with Gregg. And if Gregg isn't our closer for the whole year, then your plan goes in the shitter anyway.
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: 7,162
Threads: 138
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
I think they intended to keep Gregg longer than just one year as well.
@TheBlogfines
Posts: 540
Threads: 26
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
I think Ace's math is correct. Gregg's salary will be set by the market, which will probably still be down next year. Marmol's salary is set by a formula which will not fully reflect the down market and will overvalue saves. When making a decision, the Cubs have to consider the future of the team, which includes future salaries and the fact that if Gregg is not made the closer he is less likely to want to re-sign next year.
I like you guys a lot.
Posts: 2,647
Threads: 75
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=23726:date=Mar 17 2009, 06:40 PM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Mar 17 2009, 06:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Man, it's hard to take a contrarian position on something... I wonder how KB does it all the time. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img]
But seriously, I think you guys are wrong to think that if there's a tie, money won't be factored in. That's just ludicrous to think it isn't in there somewhere.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Give me a fucking break. Lou is 66 years old and has 2 years to win a title with the Cubs. The last thing he's going to be worried about when it comes down to deciding between Gregg or Marmol for closer is how much Marmol is going to cost the Cubs in 3 years.
Posts: 4,641
Threads: 210
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=23763:date=Mar 18 2009, 01:31 AM:name=ColoradoCub)-->QUOTE (ColoradoCub @ Mar 18 2009, 01:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=23726:date=Mar 17 2009, 06:40 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Mar 17 2009, 06:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Man, it's hard to take a contrarian position on something... I wonder how KB does it all the time. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img]
But seriously, I think you guys are wrong to think that if there's a tie, money won't be factored in. That's just ludicrous to think it isn't in there somewhere.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Give me a fucking break. Lou is 66 years old and has 2 years to win a title with the Cubs. The last thing he's going to be worried about when it comes down to deciding between Gregg or Marmol for closer is how much Marmol is going to cost the Cubs in 3 years.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's like you can't read the word "tie."
Posts: 4,641
Threads: 210
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
And I want to be sure that I understand what you guys are saying:
You're saying that even if Piniella thought Gregg and Marmol could be nearly the same level of effective as closer - with Marmol having the slight edge, so Piniella is set to name him closer - he and Jim Hendry would never discuss the matter. And that even if they did discuss the matter, Hendry would have no input on breaking what is close to a tie. And even if he did have a little bit of input, he definitely wouldn't take the Cubs payroll future into consideration.
Seems absurd to me, but ok.
The only point I can't really disagree with is that I'm assuming the Cubs never intended to resign Gregg - but even if my assumption is wrong there, I think the Cubs still probably save more money over the life of Marmol's arbitration years than they would on an increased one-year deal for Gregg.
Posts: 2,647
Threads: 75
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=23772:date=Mar 18 2009, 05:16 AM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Mar 18 2009, 05:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=23763:date=Mar 18 2009, 01:31 AM:name=ColoradoCub)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ColoradoCub @ Mar 18 2009, 01:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=23726:date=Mar 17 2009, 06:40 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Mar 17 2009, 06:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Man, it's hard to take a contrarian position on something... I wonder how KB does it all the time. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img]
But seriously, I think you guys are wrong to think that if there's a tie, money won't be factored in. That's just ludicrous to think it isn't in there somewhere.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Give me a fucking break. Lou is 66 years old and has 2 years to win a title with the Cubs. The last thing he's going to be worried about when it comes down to deciding between Gregg or Marmol for closer is how much Marmol is going to cost the Cubs in 3 years.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's like you can't read the word "tie."
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Lou is making it a competition out of fairness with Gregg, but we all know how much Lou likes Marmol... He has an advantage here, and it's entirely Lou's call to make. If Lou decides he wants Marmol in a setup role, it will be because of how he pitched in that role last season, not because of his potential arbitration #'s three years from now.
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=23759:date=Mar 17 2009, 11:41 PM:name=leonardsipes)-->QUOTE (leonardsipes @ Mar 17 2009, 11:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think Ace's math is correct. Gregg's salary will be set by the market, which will probably still be down next year. Marmol's salary is set by a formula which will not fully reflect the down market and will overvalue saves. When making a decision, the Cubs have to consider the future of the team, which includes future salaries and the fact that if Gregg is not made the closer he is less likely to want to re-sign next year.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But you are forgetting that first year arbitration numbers don't come near matching Free Agency numbers. How much would Jonathan Papelbon be worth in the open market? 10 million? 15 million? He just signed for 6 million. Which, by the way, is the all time record for first time arbitration eligible relievers. So that would be the absolute MAX that Marmol could hope for. Conversely, Kerry Wood, after one year of closing, with multiple stints on the DL, just signed for 10.5 million. Arbitration is cheaper for stars than Free Agency is.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->And that even if they did discuss the matter, Hendry would have no input on breaking what is close to a tie. And even if he did have a little bit of input, he definitely wouldn't take the Cubs payroll future into consideration.
Seems absurd to me, but ok.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Really? Absurd? The GM dictating to the manager who plays seems like the more obvious scenario to you? Frankly, your scenario depends on
A: The Cubs, a full year ahead of time, fully planning on dumping a newly acquired asset that they gave up one of their best prospects to get, AND
B: Both Marmol and Gregg performing SO IDENTICALLY that no mere mortal can decide between the two, AND
C: Lou not telling Hendry "FUCK YOU" when Hendry suggests that the closer be determined by placing the guy who might save the club one or two million dollars. In the most important position in the bullpen for a championship quality club.
Unless all 3 of those criteria are met, your scenario falls apart. I could see this happening if Hendry pushed Lou to play Fuk instead of Gathright, in order to trade Fuk, because that could save a substantial amount of money. I can't see him even bothering to get into it in order to save 2 million.
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: 4,684
Threads: 78
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=23719:date=Mar 17 2009, 05:52 PM:name=Fella)-->QUOTE (Fella @ Mar 17 2009, 05:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think the decision will be made by Lou and I doubt he gives a shit about future monetary concerns.
I also think it will be Marmol.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
bingo.
Wang.
Posts: 248
Threads: 6
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
I look at it taking the money out of the equation. Saves are an overated and wrongly figured stat.
A pitcher come in to a game, ninth inning, nobody out, nobody on and a two run lead. He gets three in a row out and is awarded the save. However, in the seventh inning with the same two run lead your starter is struggling, got one out but walked the bases loaded. A pitching change happens and the new pitcher strikes out the next two, or gets a double play. He is done for the day without a save credited, however he clearly "saved" the game.
I'd rather see Marmol on the bump in those tight situations.
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
I think Gregg should be the closer and Marmol should be the 7th/8th inning guy, but Lou's probably gonna do the opposite. It has nothing to do with $$$ though, I don't think there's a single reason to think otherwise.
Posts: 14,113
Threads: 90
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=23799:date=Mar 18 2009, 09:59 AM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Mar 18 2009, 09:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think Gregg should be the closer and Marmol should be the 7th/8th inning guy, but Lou's probably gonna do the opposite. It has nothing to do with $$$ though, I don't think there's a single reason to think otherwise.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, unless the players in question are utter douches and don't deserve consideration, monetary considerations should never play into a decision like this. Lou doesn't think in this way either.
Posts: 4,684
Threads: 78
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
i think we should all pummel ace repeatedly and really give him the business. maybe give him a poo finger or a wet shirley.
Wang.
|
