The Cubs and Lackey have agreed to a 2/32 deal, paying Lackey $16m each season. Lackey is coming off his best season since 2007, posting a 2.77 ERA with a 3.57 FIP, along with a ludicrous 82.6% strand rate.
If only the Cubs played in a large market and could afford the likes of David Price or Zack Grienke, but alas.
I trust him more than Jason Hammel, but not $32 million dollars more. The Cubs could have used an innings eater like Lackey going down the stretch last year and certainly in those crazy Hendricks/Hammel games in the playoffs, but I can hardly think of a less exciting upgrade to this team.
Comments
It me the old fart who solidified his baseline for player salaries.
berseliusQuote Reply
Give a math professor a Cubs blog ….
Suburban kidQuote Reply
This is why the Cubs need to get rid of Hendry, with his obsession in picking up old players, and get a new GM like that guy that lead Boston to all those titles.
MillertimeQuote Reply
2/32. I think you have a typo.
We’re discredited again.
dmick89Quote Reply
Suburban kid,
This is why I miss the like button.
dmick89Quote Reply
Hey, I don’t deal with numbers, just Greek letters. Lackey really received a \Omega_{12}^{(32)} deal, pending choice of the underlying molecular model.
berseliusQuote Reply
Given what the projections for the 2016 payroll were, does this really leave much left for anything else? $16M/year for a #3 or 4 starter seems like a lot of money.
TheVanQuote Reply
TheVan,
JA Happ cost $12 million a year for 3 years and he’s a number 5 starter. Happ broke the valuation system. If Heyward was paid in Happ dollars, he’d earn close to $3 trillion over 10 years.
I think it’s a lot too, but it’s not terrible.
dmick89Quote Reply
You are right about one thing, he is not worth $32 million more than Hammel. Good thing he isn’t getting paid $32 million more than Hammel. Hammel is scheduled to make $9 million next year. This is the market for mid rotation arms. We need to develop our own back end arms but they aren’t here yet. Lackey is a short term commitment (any other 2nd tier arm would’ve been a 4-5 year deal). Hopefully by then we have guys like Underwood or Pierce Johnson ready to help in the 4th-5th spots.
ThedudeQuote Reply
TheVan,
This is a legitimate concern but I’m assuming we have more cash available. The gaping hole in CF needs to be filed by somebody, even Parra (with Baez in a platoon) is gonna cost money.
ThedudeQuote Reply
What if he were paid in Stanley Nickels?
berseliusQuote Reply
I’m not saying it’s horrible. I would’ve preferred a bigger name/impact player for the “big” signing. It’s just one of the first transactions that doesn’t really feel like a Theo transaction. 2nd if you count Dan Haren. But Haren was a couple years younger and $12M cheaper. My biggest concern is that this doesn’t allow them to go after Heyward or really anyone else.
TheVanQuote Reply
Thedude,
Maybe I just internalized the rebuild too much, but signing guys in their late 30s to significant contracts feels like the exact opposite of The Plan as we all understood it.
berseliusQuote Reply
I think it’s great. Lackey and Rizzo can talk over the great things they’ve done for people with cancer.
uncle daveQuote Reply
berselius,
This. It just seems out of character.
TheVanQuote Reply
As much as the Cubs are fighting it these days, they are still a large market team. They have the money. It’s just a matter of whether or not they are willing to spend it. I’m guessing they’ll be involved with Heyward up to a point. I can still them going after Alex Gordon too. I don’t think the Cubs are done and I sure hope this wasn’t the big signing of the offseason.
dmick89Quote Reply
How likely is it that the Cubs give the Cards two picks?
Because I am holding out hope for that.
ceruleanQuote Reply
berselius,
But wasn’t The Plan to spend differently once the window was open?
uncle daveQuote Reply
As for waiting for Underwood and Johnson, well, that could be a long wait. Underwood struckout under 17% of the batters he faced this season and Pierce Johnson isn’t exactly putting up great strikeout numbers either. Underwood is below Kyle Hendricks in the minors and Pierce Johnson is also below what Hendricks did at AAA. There’s still time for improvement, but as it stands now, both of these guys will be lucky to fill out the bullpen at the MLB level. The Cubs don’t have shit as far as pitching goes in the minors.
dmick89Quote Reply
Also on my wishlist is a trade for a guy like Miller or Carrasco or Quintana. If that were to happen, I’d expect Hammel and his 2.55 first half ERA to bring a decent prospect at the deadline so Hendricks could get his slot back.
ceruleanQuote Reply
Even then, the talk was more about spending on younger FAs, and bulking up the payrolls when spending the extra money could mean a push to the playoffs. Even if they brought back Fowler and had pretty much the same team as last year (plus Lackey) I’d easily take the under on 90 wins. I’m probably just overreacting to one move of what is hopefully many, but this isn’t really the difference-maker kind of signing you’d want.
berseliusQuote Reply
Greinke ————–> Dbags
Me to SF+LAD fans —————-> ????????????????????????????????
berseliusQuote Reply
uncle dave,
If Heyward is the right price, I don’t the no the Cubs will care too much about that to be honest.
dmick89Quote Reply
dmick89,
Meant to reply to theVan’s comment right before uncle dave’s.
dmick89Quote Reply
berselius,
I just hope they’re done acquiring relievers.
dmick89Quote Reply
dmick89,
Hendricks’ stuff isn’t great, but he is a good pitcher. These other guys have better stuff, but as of yet aren’t good pitchers. I think Hendricks has made it as far as he has because he had to be smarter than the opposition to have success—that is, he needed to learn how to pitch. Most other prospects don’t seem to be forced to learn how until meeting better competition. It may take forever, but baseball is full of late blooming pitchers (like Samardzija) that eventually figure it out.
ceruleanQuote Reply
(dying laughing)
ceruleanQuote Reply
cerulean,
True, but minor league strikeout and walk rates are still great in terms of what to reasonably expect in the future. Bottom line is that both of those guys are going to have to get better and that’s just not something I’d often bet on. Especially for Underwood. That strikeout rate is horrible for the level he was at.
dmick89Quote Reply
berselius,
Sure, this doesn’t fit with what they’d want out of a high-impact signing. But it makes more sense in that context than giving five years to a guy on the wrong side of 30. In this case, it’s a relatively short-term commitment, and one that shouldn’t be crippling with respect to payroll flexibility.
I think that there’s also something to be said about cost certainty once the window of contention opens up as well. You can try out a few guys to take that last rotation spot and probably find one who will have the upside of Lackey eventually, but while you’re dicking around in search of the right answer you’ve absorbed a bunch of bad starts in the process. That’s ok if you’re not expecting to contend, but it matters if you think you should make the playoffs this year.
I dislike this signing because I dislike Lackey, but I think it’s defensible from a baseball perspective.
uncle daveQuote Reply
berseliusQuote Reply
I figure worst case scenario, they can DFA Lackey if he ends up being atrocious. It’s not that much money.
dmick89Quote Reply
dmick89,
Yes, but it can be hard to tell why sometimes. And to be clear, most will fail, but as long as they can throw and are still in the org, they can improve their skills.
ceruleanQuote Reply
For all my bitching, I’m more or less in the same boat. It’s just okay, and I think Lackey is a dirtbag. Maybe this is the natural evolution of the Clark unveiling backlash (dying laughing).
berseliusQuote Reply
cerulean,
I’m not arguing otherwise. I’m just trying to point out why we shouldn’t be reserving spots for them in the rotation just yet. Both have a lot of work to do.
dmick89Quote Reply
On the Greinke signing—this is excellent news for the Cubs playoff chances, and while it raises the trade price even more, hurting their ability to get another starter that way, it also hurts the competition in the same way.
ceruleanQuote Reply
dmick89,
For sure.
ceruleanQuote Reply
What’s the ratio of Schrute Bucks to Stanley Nickels?
PerkinsQuote Reply
berselius,
Yeah, a few wins seem to wash those things away.
uncle daveQuote Reply
I didn’t realize Lackey was so loathed. Is it just because he seems like an angry douche or are there other reasons?
GWQuote Reply
GW,
The whole ditching his wife while she was getting treated for cancer thing rubbed some folks the wrong way, I think.
uncle daveQuote Reply
uncle dave,
(dying laughing) I hadn’t heard about that.
GWQuote Reply
I missed this bit. Fuck John Lackey.
ceruleanQuote Reply
cerulean,
That’s on top of just being a generic West Texas Redneck, of course.
uncle daveQuote Reply
Given what Greinke and Price just got paid I think Lackey got pretty much what one would expect. If his arm doesn’t fall off he’ll eat innings like he’s supposed to. It’s meh, but it’s acceptable meh IMO
Rice CubeQuote Reply
He seems like what would happen if the crud on the floor of a truck stop bathroom suddenly gained sentience.
berseliusQuote Reply
Fixed
dmick89Quote Reply
berselius,
Shit. It’s part of the circle of life.
ceruleanQuote Reply
cerulean,
It’s the wheel of fortuuuuuune
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Rice Cube,
I’d like to buy a vowel.
ceruleanQuote Reply
My skin crawls at the redneck stuff but that can usually be ignored. Guys from New York, LA, Caracas, and Bumfuck, Missouri all look pretty much the same in a baseball uniform (from a distance anyway).
The thing I don’t like is the “pal of Lester and Ross, Theo/RedSox getting the band back together” shit. And as someone mentioned Lackey and Maddon go way back. We heard the same thing this season about old comrade Soriano. How’d that work out?
Suburban kidQuote Reply
I’m fairly certain that part of the narrative is mostly media-driven. If this FO didn’t think Lackey could pitch anymore they wouldn’t have brought him in. This is a meh signing, yes, but it’ll probably end up being worthwhile when it’s all said and done.
And I hate the “How’d that work out” line. The two situations don’t really have anything to do with one another.
“I’m going to a play.”
“Don’t. Abraham Lincoln went to a play too once. How’d that work out?”
“I’m gonna have a ham sandwich.”
“Don’t. Mama Cass once had a ham sandwich. How’d that work out?”
Smokestack LightningQuote Reply
FWIW, it was a really good band.
dmick89Quote Reply
Lackey has to provide about 4 wins over the course of the 2 years. That’s about 2.25 and 1.75 WAR each season. I’d say there’s an excellent chance he meets that and a better than average chance he surpasses it. I’d guess 5.5, but I haven’t looked at his projections.
dmick89Quote Reply
Steamer projects 2.6 fWAR so the projections are estimating he’ll be worth about 4.7 wins over the course of 2 years. Pretty good contract, but still not all that big of a deal. They need to do more, but there’s plenty of time for that.
I think a big question needs to be asked now about whether or not they need another pitcher. Why waste additional money on a pitcher. Just go sign Jason Heyward and get the offseason done.
dmick89Quote Reply
$90 million from the Giants ———–> Jeff Samardzija
dmick89Quote Reply
dmick89,
Not as awful as expected.
ceruleanQuote Reply
cerulean,
No, but too much money for someone coming off a pretty bad season.
dmick89Quote Reply
I just had a memory of reading a Sports Illustrated article in the mid-nineties on Jay Buhner being overpaid at $3M or $5M a year for average production. Today, the league average FA is worth about $15M. Let’s assume that growth rate holds for the next twenty years. That means the league average FA will be worth $45M–$75M a year. Let’s say inflation means that the present day value is half that. So the 2WAR player is paid something between Zimmerman and Price/Greinke.
ceruleanQuote Reply
That’s crazy. Wasn’t Sandberg the first player to get paid $30 million or more? I think Bonds passed him the following year, but something like that.
dmick89Quote Reply
Never mind. Sandberg didn’t even make $30 million in his career according to Baseball Reference. At some point though, Sandberg became the highest paid player in baseball. The most he made in any year was just over $5 million.
dmick89Quote Reply
Baseball Reference is wrong apparently. This is from Wiki and fits more with my memory and my memory is never wrong. (dying laughing)
dmick89Quote Reply
Sandberg was the first $7 million man. http://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/03/sports/sandberg-becomes-highest-paid-player-for-now.html
dmick89Quote Reply
23 years later, Greinke is the first $34 million man.
dmick89Quote Reply
If the same inflation rate holds for the top paid player in baseball since 1992, the highest paid player will earn $400 million in 2050. (dying laughing) At some point it’s got to slow down. The Cubs are in a small market so they won’t even be able to afford a league average player.
dmick89Quote Reply
Cubs are reportedly after a top closer via trade. I guess they’re just going after every reliever this offseason.
Unless it’s Chapman, I do not get it. Makes no sense.
dmick89Quote Reply
dmick89,
The only thing I could think of is that Maddon doesn’t trust Strop and would rather move Rondon to the 8th to solidify that, but getting another closer doesn’t seem like the best use of resources for the Cubs.
PerkinsQuote Reply
dmick89,
By 2100, baseball players will earn all of the money. (dying laughing)
ceruleanQuote Reply
cerulean,
The Molina’s are going to be very wealthy.
dmick89Quote Reply
dmick89,
https://youtu.be/Fdjf4lMmiiI
uncle daveQuote Reply
So the Cardinals are now looking to re-sign Heyward. I doubt they overpay, so I hope Heyward is a real mercenary.
It’s even more imperative that the Cubs push for him and either play him in center or trade Soler for pitching and try to get Baez/Almora/Alcantara working in center. That latter scenario is far worse offensively to the former, but including the upgrade to pitching and defense, it may make the team more balanced.
ceruleanQuote Reply
cerulean,
I think you’re probably also going to have to trade Castro in order to keep payroll down if you go after Heyward. That would put either Baez or LaStella at 2nd. Baez in CF and LaStella at 2nd works for me.
dmick89Quote Reply
Of course, Maddon will want another utility player, but those are fairly cheap.
dmick89Quote Reply
dmick89,
I do think that they should trade Castro by 2018, but they shouldn’t *need* to now. Castro makes less than $8M in 2016. He could be a good deadline player to deal, especially if he doesn’t have such an awful start to the year. I don’t think that they would be wise in trading him right now. And I find the idea that his salary would prevent a Heyward signing to be reprehensible.
Obviously, it is not my money, but it takes money to make money. Investing in Heyward, taking him away from the Cubs’ biggest rival (the only veteran that did anything against them in the NLDS) sounds like a good strategy for winning the division.
ceruleanQuote Reply
I agree. I’m just thinking the Cubs may not want to expand the payroll too much and dealing Castro reduces it some.
dmick89Quote Reply
dmick89,
If it’s me, I keep Castto and sign Heyward. Fuck adding another pitcher. Heyward!
dmick89Quote Reply
So how much do you overpay for heyward just to not have him play for the cardinals?
EnricoPallazzoQuote Reply
I wouldn’t overpay, but I’m not entirely sure what overpaying would be. GW wrote about this awhile back. Heyward is quite unique. There have not been too many free agents like him in recent years.
dmick89Quote Reply
http://obstructedview.net/jason-heyward-is-going-to-get-paid-probably/
dmick89Quote Reply
Chapman may soon be traded to the Dodgers. I won’t miss the possibility of seeing him pitch against the Cubs in so many games.
dmick89Quote Reply
EnricoPallazzo,
Probably the best thing about a deal for Heyward is that *overpay* seems pretty unlikely.
ceruleanQuote Reply
cerulean,
Yeah, seems very likely that whoever signs him is going to get a bargain. That would suck if that’s the Cardinals.
dmick89Quote Reply
Jim Bowden predicts the Cubs will trade for James Shields at the Winter Meetings, giving up a decent prospect while the Pads eat some of his contract.
Meanwhile, Papelbon is on the outs with the whole Nats organization. Might be nice to have someone who never loses his cool in the clubhouse.
ceruleanQuote Reply
cerulean,
Jesus. How much pitching do they need? I saw another rumor they were talking trade with the Rays for another reliever. Someone should show the Cubs or the people writing about this shit this: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2015&month=0&season1=2015&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=16,a
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=np&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2015&month=0&season1=2015&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=16,d
Both were very good, but they clearly need one more than the other.
dmick89Quote Reply
WTF, Bears? You had one job!
RynoQuote Reply
dmick89,
Clearly they need better defense (dying laughing)
ceruleanQuote Reply
Ryno,
How is SF supposed to rebuild without elite players, Robbie Gould? You just cost us at least a few draft slots.
And this is inexcusable:
RynoQuote Reply
Oh look, Moses plays for the 49ers now:
Take solace, Bears fans. Your team lost the battle, but they won the war as we SF fans are likely now stuck with Gabbert moving forward.
RynoQuote Reply
MIA wants Seager and Urias for Fernandez.
RynoQuote Reply
Ryno,
Thanks for showing up so we could have a new post.
http://obstructedview.net/winter-meetings-127-through-1210/
berseliusQuote Reply
RynoQuote Reply