One name that seems to be popping up here and elsewhere the past few days is Jason Heyward. He is heading into free agency, and the Cubs could definitely use an outfielder, even though Heyward isn't a true centerfielder. Thinking about it a little, the thing that struck me about him is that I can’t remember the last time a player as young and good as Heyward hit free agency. The name that kept popping into my head was Alex Rodriguez in 2000*, as crazy as that may sound.
*ARod signed for $252 million that year, which is approximately $500 million in today’s free agent dollars.
At the beginning of the 2013 season, I wrote a piece about how barren the free-agent landscape projected to be over the next few years. The gist of it was that young players were being extended basically to the end of their useful baseball-playing years, and that as a result, the only players in free agency were going to be old. If the Cubs were going to successfully rebuild, it was going to have to be through trades, prospects, and other gambles; core players just weren’t going to be in the free agent market. I think that article holds up pretty well, which is a true rarity for something I’ve written. The Cubs have rebuilt successfully, and done it largely without the help of free agents. That means that they likely have money to spend, should they choose to do so.
Which brings us back to Heyward. I typically leave the dollar-per-WAR-type calcs to dmick, but I wanted to see what history had to say about his impending free agency. Baseball Reference has a pretty nifty setup for doing that. It lists free agents for each season along with their cumulative WAR from the three seasons preceding their entry. Heyward checks in at 16.5 WAR, per B-Ref, and is heading into his age-26 season. Who are his comps?
To answer that, I started with players that were the most similar in terms of performance over the the past three free agent periods. That is, I looked at players with the best accumulated WAR in the three seasons leading up to their free agency.
| Year | Player | Age | WAR3 | Years | $ | AAV |
| 2013 | Robinson Cano | 31 | 21.7 | 10 | 240 | 24 |
| 2014 | Max Scherzer | 30 | 16.8 | 7 | 210 | 30 |
| 2015 | Jason Heyward | 26 | 16.5 | ?? | ?? | ?? |
| 2012 | Josh Hamilton | 32 | 16.3 | 5 | 125 | 25 |
| 2013 | Jacoby Ellsbury | 30 | 14.8 | 7 | 153 | 22 |
| 2012 | Michael Bourn | 30 | 14.7 | 4 | 48 | 12 |
| 2014 | Chase Headley | 31 | 13.6 | 4 | 50 | 12.5 |
| 2013 | Hiroki Kuroda | 39 | 12.5 | 1 | 16 | 16 |
| 2012 | Torii Hunter | 37 | 12.4 | 2 | 26 | 13 |
| 2014 | Russell Martin | 32 | 11.6 | 5 | 82 | 16.4 |
| 2013 | Mike Napoli | 32 | 11.4 | 2 | 32 | 16 |
| 2012 | Hiroki Kuroda | 38 | 11.3 | 1 | 15 | 15 |
| 2012 | Kevin Youkilis | 32 | 11 | 1 | 12 | 12 |
| 2012 | Shane Victorino | 32 | 11 | 3 | 39 | 13 |
| 2013 | Carlos Beltran | 37 | 10.9 | 3 | 45 | 15 |
| 2012 | Angel Pagan | 31 | 10.4 | 4 | 40 | 10 |
| 2014 | Hanley Ramirez | 31 | 10.3 | 4 | 88 | 22 |
| 2014 | James Shields | 33 | 10.3 | 4 | 75 | 18.75 |
The things that jump out:
- Heyward has been as good as anyone heading into free agency recently, save Cano.
- He’s much younger.
None of those players are great comps. Jacoby Ellsbury and his 7/$153 from two years ago is probably the best of the bunch. So what happens if we skew younger? This time I’ll put an age limit of 28 in place and lower the prior performance boundaries.
| Year | Player | Age | WAR3 | Years | $ | AAV |
| 2015 | Jason Heyward | 26 | 16.5 | ?? | ?? | ?? |
| 2010 | Carl Crawford | 29 | 14.5 | 7 | 142 | 20.3 |
| 2011 | Prince Fielder | 28 | 12.4 | 9 | 214 | 23.8 |
| 2011 | Edwin Jackson | 28 | 9.4 | 4 | 52 | 13.0 |
| 2012 | Anibal Sanchez | 29 | 9.1 | 5 | 80 | 16.0 |
| 2012 | Melky Cabrera | 28 | 8.7 | 2 | 16 | 8.0 |
| 2012 | Zack Greinke | 29 | 8.7 | 6 | 147 | 24.5 |
| 2014 | Pablo Sandoval | 28 | 8.2 | 5 | 95 | 19.0 |
| 2014 | Kris Medlen | 29 | 8.2 | 2 | 8.5 | 4.3 |
| 2010 | Russell Martin | 28 | 8.2 | 2 | 17 | 8.5 |
| 2011 | Jose Reyes | 29 | 7.9 | 6 | 106 | 17.7 |
| 2014 | Colby Rasmus | 28 | 7.3 | 1 | 8 | 8.0 |
| 2012 | Melvin Upton | 28 | 7.3 | 5 | 72.25 | 14.5 |
| 2010 | Jhonny Peralta | 29 | 7.1 | 2 | 11.25 | 5.6 |
| 2013 | Jarrod Saltalamacchia | 29 | 5.5 | 3 | 21 | 7.0 |
| 2013 | Eric O'Flaherty | 29 | 5.3 | 2 | 7 | 3.5 |
| 2012 | Francisco Liriano | 29 | 5.1 | 1 | 13 | 13.0 |
| 2014 | Everth Cabrera | 28 | 5 | 1 | 2.4 | 2.4 |
This list isn’t much better. I had to raise the age limit to 29 and go back to 2010 just to make it even a remotely worthwile excercise. Carl Crawford and Prince Fielder aren’t awful comps, given what we have to work with, but Heyward has them beat- both in performance, and significantly in terms of age. Crawford’s contract probably measures out at around $200 million these days (assuming 7.5% inflation- which is probably in the ballpark).
The question remains, though, how far do we have to go back to find a free agent with a similar age/performance history? To answer that, I looked for players 27 and under with a WAR history that looked anything like Heyward’s. Note: I did this mostly just by scanning, so I may have missed someone.
| Year | Player | Age | WAR3 | Years | $ | AAV |
| 2000 | Alex Rodriguez | 25 | 23.6 | 10 | 252 | 25.2 |
| 2015 | Jason Heyward | 26 | 16.5 | ?? | ?? | ?? |
| 2004 | Adrian Beltre | 26 | 15.1 | 5 | 64 | 12.8 |
| 2004 | Odalis Perez | 27 | 8.7 | 3 | 24 | 8 |
| 2003 | Sidney Ponson | 27 | 7.3 | 3 | 22.5 | 7.5 |
Updated, h/t dmick.
A-Rod was viewed as a generational talent, whereas Heyward clearly isn’t, so I don’t think we can pencil in Heyward for half a billion just yet. Still, it goes to show you how rare it is for someone like this to enter the unrestricted market.
I actually like the Beltre comp quite a bit: really good defender at a non-premium position. Also, I think people still are still uncertain as to what he will look like a few years down the road. He's probably not going to improve much, but just maintaining would be really helpful. Still, I don’t think we can infer much from Beltre’s deal eleven years ago.
In projecting Heyward’s contract, we would probably be better off looking at recent extensions. I’ll leave that to someone else. Just know that the free agent market hasn’t seen anything like him in a long time, and the results may shock us all. The $200 million that some have suggested is probably low, especially if the Dodgers start getting restless come January. Turns out that good baseball players are pretty valuable.
Comments
Perez signed for 3 years and $24 million. Ponson looks like it was 3 years and 22..5 million.
dmick89Quote Reply
Great work here, GW. I think the Beltre and Ellsbury contracts are good comps. Definitely agree that we won’t see an A-Rod like contract and we probably won’t see anything comparable to what Stanton signed for either.
Two knocks against Heyward: doesn’t have the typical power you’d want for someone you pay a shitload of money for and his injury history (a lot of day to day stuff) leaves you wondering how much he’ll be on the field.
Ellsbury prior to free agency: .297/.350/.439 108 OPS+
Heyward: .268/.353/.431 114 OPS+
These two are/were different players and one was older, but their end results were very similar. I think 7/150 is the starting point for Heyward.
dmick89Quote Reply
Updated. Thanks.
dmick89,
Yeah, Ellsbury isn’t bad; better defender. He had a pretty significant history of injuries, though Heyward has had his own fair share of dings.
I think the four extra prime years is going to make a huge difference.
GWQuote Reply
GW,
I think it should make a huge difference, but I’m not sold it will. I won’t be surprised, but I still think a lot of baseball teams, even the ones paying attention to advanced metrics or doing their own statistical analysis, place a lot of emphasis on those HR and RBI figures. I don’t think he’s a middle of the order hitter. He very well could be. Ellsbury wasn’t either. He could end up being a 30 HR per year guy and it wouldn’t surprise me, but I think if any team is expecting that, odds are they’ll be disappointed in the end result.
Ellsbury was a lot easier to guess what you think he’ll end up making. This isn’t the case for Heyward. I would not be surprised to see 7/175 and i wouldn’t be surprised to see 10/250. I don’t think it ends up on either side of those figures unless some team does something like 5/160 or something like that with fewer years and a lot more per year. Heyward could enter free agency again at the age of 31 and looking at those charts above, he’s going to come out of it looking real good if he stays healthy.
If I’m Heyward’s agent, I might even suggest to him he’d be better off looking for something in the 5-year range so he can do it again in 5 years.
Opt out clause is possible after the 5th year too.
dmick89Quote Reply
If the Cubs would have drafted him over Vitters in the first place, this would probably be a very different conversation.
GWQuote Reply
dmick89,
You may be right. The Ellsbury/Crawford deals don’t look great in retrospect.
One thing to be keep an eye on will be how well he ages. I think tall hitters have a pretty poor history in that regard; their strikeouts tend to spike. Then again, Heyward is starting from a pretty good spot, especially relative to the league as it stands now.
GWQuote Reply
Cubs interested in Denard Span according to one of the Tier 3 beat writers.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
I’m not a big fan of Span, but if he gets a qualifying offer, that should eliminate any interest the Cubs have in him. That should eliminate any interest any team has in him, but that’s just me.
dmick89Quote Reply
I’d be worried about Heyward in 5+ years. I’m not sure it will be all the pretty. He looks fairly awkward out there right now at times.
I was thinking, why wouldn’t a team offer Heyward a crazy 4-year base contract worth, say, $40 million AAV with a mutual option for years 5-7 or something at a lower AAV (say $10 million AAV). So it’s a 7/200 contract overall, but assuming he stays healthy, it’s only 4 years. It’s his prime years. Is he worth that much annually? I don’t know. I’d say it’s pretty close.
The player almost always opts out if he’s had a decent start to those kinds of contracts anyway.
dmick89Quote Reply
Suburban kid,
I need to hear it out of one of the guys on the Boston Cubs beat.
berseliusQuote Reply
I am not a fan of that kind of front-loaded deal for the simple fact that it costs more in real dollars than an even or a backloaded contract does—and even in it’s 2% a year, that adds up to a few million bucks more in present value terms. I think given the incentives for the agent and maybe a little vanity for the player, the higher nomimal dollar value is favored over higher present value, so these kinds of deals don’t get done regardless of any benefit to the team avoiding a contract albatross.
ceruleanQuote Reply
cerulean,
Yeah, I agree that backloaded contracts are preferable in many ways. That’s something Cubs failed to grasp when Hendry gave out a few of them. I’m thinking more in terms of what would appeal to the player and not necessarily what’s in the Cubs best interest. The player would of course want as much as soon as possible.
dmick89Quote Reply
One would think so, but I don’t think most know about present vs future value, distracted instead by the lump sum of all the years together. I am curious to know what the agent’s take is and when they get it—is it a percentage of the total taken at the closing of the deal? If that is the case, the higher nomimal value is better for the agent.
ceruleanQuote Reply
I don’t like looking too closely at all of this crap. I keep coming to the conclusion this FO is not going after anybody even moderately expensive.
But unless Heyward signs before FA opens tho and on a sweetheart deal, can’t see this FO letting the Cardinals get him back for anything other than a contract that will hurt. I suspect they’ll at least keep the bidding up to get him out of St. Louis.
Can’t say I’m excited about Span either, especially factoring in the QO possibility (though I wonder if he wouldn’t take it to rebuild value). Jackson wouldn’t be too terrible, perhaps so long as he’s not expected to start 150 games. Anybody think Theo might go after Zobrist instead on a short deal (he’s 35; not likely to get more than 3 years) and rotate 2-3 guys in CF there while moving Zobrist all over the diamond? He appears to have had a bad year defensively, but that might be due to playing in Oakland and KC’s more spacious OFs…
Just a thought. The bat’s still there.
Smokestack LightningQuote Reply
That would be disappointing. Especially if they let Fowler walk.
dmick89Quote Reply
It would be, and perhaps I’m just reading too much into Theo’s circumspect end-of-the-year comments, but right now I’d be shocked if the Cubs spent all that much in free agency this offseason. Even if the money’s there, and it may not be, I have my doubts Theo wants to spend the majority of it on one free agent again, particularly if it’s on another SP heading into his over-30 years.
But I could be wrong. Could be that there are multiple ways to get the sort of players Theo wants and the FO has yet to commit because of that. Unlike last year where it was pretty much free agency or bust for team-building.
But contrary to popular opinion, the FO is fairly transparent about what they’re looking to do, and maybe it was just me, but Theo seemed more ambivalent about landing players via FA than he did a year ago.
Smokestack LightningQuote Reply
What I understood from Theo from the end of season press conference is that there would be an increase in payroll, but it wouldn’t be as high as it would be once they get their tv deal. Assuming that’s the case, the money is there for a free agent. i guess i don’t care how they acquire the talent, but if this team goes into next season trying to win with the same bunch minus Fowler, they’re probably going to be in trouble.
dmick89Quote Reply
dmick89,
I was referring more to Theo’s comments on how arb raises would likely make a dent in whatever payroll increase is coming. And I thought his comments on Fowler seemed a little pessimistic about him coming back, when even with a sizable raise and length of contract, he should be someone the Cubs can afford with relative ease. But, could be the Cubs really have no intention of bringing Fowler back outside of him leaving a pile of dollars on the table because they intend to get better either by bringing in a superior CF, or a combo of players that trumps whatever Fowler + would bring.
Smokestack LightningQuote Reply
I can only speculate of course. I really have no idea. I’d just be really surprised to see this team do nothing. I thought Theo made it clear whether it was this year in years past, when they get to this point (contending), they’ll do what’s necessary to keep them there. So I expect them to improve in some way. In this division, if the Cubs do nothing, they’re screwed.
dmick89Quote Reply
I fully expect the Cubs to try to improve, but if for some reason they don’t, then I’d expect them to sell off resources to improve the farm system. I think doing that is highly unlikely. I see no reason this team won’t be competitive on the free agent market. It’s not entirely up to them as far as what ultimately happens, but I bet they’re active in negotiations for some of the top free agents.
dmick89Quote Reply
Neither do I. I could be completely misinterpreting Theo. Could be that he’s more cautious-sounding because the expectation level is suddenly through the roof, and the roster and payroll is at a place where a mistake now can start to unravel everything he punted multiple seasons to create. The trades for Fowler and Montero last season involved pieces the Cubs are almost certainly not going to regret losing, and if Lester had flopped from the get-go, his contract, onerous as it is, is something the Cubs could work around.
Now, though, the shit gets real. If Theo signs, say, Price, and he underwhelms, that’s going to be hard to work around going forward. Same with Heyward. If Theo deals Soler or Schwarber for Carlos Carrasco and Soler/Schwarbs turns into a 5 WAR OF and Carrasco sucks or gets hurt, it has a much more devastating effect than Lester fumbling around his first go-around in a Cub uni or Fowler being replacement level in a year where the team wasn’t expected to do anything but get a little better anyway.
So, could be just the reality of this team having arrived, and the fierceness of the competition within the division and without for players. Could be Theo knows this is where his predecessors all fucked up, that the honeymoon is finally over and from here on anything less than a deep playoff run is going to be met with serious flack.
Smokestack LightningQuote Reply
http://mglbaseball.com/2015/09/02/team-uzr-to-shift-or-not-to-shift/
dmick89Quote Reply
Big if true
MylesQuote Reply
Can confirm.
berseliusQuote Reply
I just hope that their biggest move wrt the rotation this offseason is not another Hammel-esque deal.
berseliusQuote Reply
berselius,
Of course, they could also just DFA Hammel and then sign him to a new deal (dying laughing).
berseliusQuote Reply
I could see this.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
Jason Hammel October 13 – “I threw one bad pitch”
Jason Hammel October 21 – “I sucked for four months”
Suburban kidQuote Reply
Suburban kid,
(dying laughing)
berseliusQuote Reply
It’s funny, at the time the Hammel deal looked like quite the steal, especially with the first half he had. They still got 2.4 WAR out of him, according to phonographs (which is the correct way to spell Fangraphs).
MillertimeQuote Reply
Just saw Morosi call the NEW YORK Mets a mid-market team. He must be Yellon's source for the "Dallas is a small market" comment (dying laughing).
berseliusQuote Reply
Hopefully the Cubs trade one player and get two back. That’s the surefire way to improve.
mylesQuote Reply
I’m trying to decide what the Cubs are going to do with Dan Vogelbach and the other Rule V eligible guys that are near major league ready in spots the Cubs already have players. Or, in Vogelbach’s case, that the Cubs don’t have the requisite position (DH) available that many scouts have said he will play in the Majors. I mean, there’s a few guys in the list that AZ Phil keeps up that look like have a major league future, at least as a bullpen arm.
SamQuote Reply
Sam,
Someone here or at BN will probably do a 40 man roster analysis + rule 5 implications. The Rule 5 draft will be around December 10th this year.
JonKneeVQuote Reply
Free agents & others that can clear 40 man space:
Dallas Beeler (DFA)
Trevor Cahill (FA)
Dan Haren (retired)
Tommy Hunter (FA)
Eric Jokisch (DFA)
Jason Motte (FA)
Fernando Rodney (FA)
Taylor Teagarden (DFA)
Jonathan Herrera (DFA)
Quintin Berry (DFA)
Chris Denorfia (FA)
Dexter Fowler (FA)
Austin Jackson (FA)
Additional trade candidates: Christian Villanueva, Jacob Turner, Yoervis Medina.
JonKneeVQuote Reply
Which is why I’m fine with him coming back as a 5. Severely miscast as a 3, but rounding out the rotation he could be quite valuable again.
Smokestack LightningQuote Reply
Notable Rule 5 Eligible Players:
John Andreoli, OF
Corey Black, RHP
Jeimer Candelario, INF
Josh Conway, RHP
Pierce Johnson, RHP
Bijan Rademacher, OF
Dan Vogelbach, 1B
The bolded ones are who I think will definitely be traded or protected.
JonKneeVQuote Reply
I’m in about the same position on Hammel, but you have to wonder whether the cumulative effect of his poor second half, Maddon’s attendant quick hook with him, and his abysmal playoff performances haven’t punched his ticket out of Chicago. I can’t imagine Hammel has been a terribly pleasant person for Maddon to work with of late.
That said, his value is probably at a low point and the Cubs held on to Edwin Jackson for as long as they could carry him on the roster, so it wouldn’t be terribly surprising to see him in the rotation to start 2016.
PerkinsQuote Reply
Entirely possible, although Hammel and Maddon go way back. I’d be surprised if there’s been enough friction between the two to sour things permanently and force the FO to ship him out on that alone. Time will tell.
But I don’t think Theo will hold onto Hammel as he did Jackson. Can’t afford to waste roster spots anymore.
Smokestack LightningQuote Reply
Smokestack Lightning,
I’m fine with keeping Hammel around, I’m just hoping the Cubs don’t grab another mediocre guy in his thirties with meh peripherals and hope to catch lightning in a bottle. The two half seasons they got out of him were complete surprises, but what we saw in the second half this year was closer to what I expected out of him.
berseliusQuote Reply
Apparently the Nats are down to two managerial candidates: Bud Black and… Trusty Dusty.
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/25353133/nationals-appear-to-be-down-to-two-for-manager-dusty-baker-and-bud-black
If they pick the latter I think it will be time to officially retire the notion of the Nats having an intelligent front office.
Smokestack LightningQuote Reply
berselius,
I don’t think that’s the plan at all, even if the Cubs aren’t likely to bust the bank for a free agent again. Multiple high-quality arms should be available via trade, and fwiw, I think that’s where the FO is going to concentrate.
If another Hammel-type ends up being all the offseason, it will mean things went wrong in ways even pessimists like me didn’t expect.
Smokestack LightningQuote Reply
I just hope the World Series is a sweep. I’m ready for the offseason to start.
dmick89Quote Reply
That’s something I used to follow and if I do get back into it this year, it probably won’t be until after the Rule 5 Draft in December. Thanks for posting those names here.
dmick89Quote Reply
I think the Cubs will try to trade Hammel. I don’t think they’ll have much trouble finding teams that want him, but I think it might take a long time for his market to play out. I wouldn’t be surprised to see he’s still part of the roster in spring training and it wouldn’t be the worst thing anyway. I do think they’ll end up trading him and they’ll get something decent in return.
dmick89Quote Reply
If the Cubs do make some trades, I’d like them to acquire some top tier pitching prospects in return. They desperately need some.
dmick89Quote Reply
I wouldn’t mind seeing the Cubs try to trade for Jose Quintana. He’s a solid pitcher, and could probably be had quite a bit more cheaply than someone like Chris Sale. Largely because I believe the White Sox front office still looks at pitcher wins and losses as meaningful statistics.
PerkinsQuote Reply
There’s an AL scout who thinks Kyle Schwarber isn’t even playable: http://grantland.com/the-triangle/2015-mlb-playoffs-kyle-schwarber-chicago-cubs-future/
I’ve seen the future and Kyle Schwarber is a Cub. There is literally no chance the Cubs are trading him right now. There’s a better chance they trade Anthony Rizzo and move Schwarber to 1st and nobody in their right mind thinks the Cubs are trading Anthony Rizzo.
dmick89Quote Reply
Whatever team employs this scout is the team I want the Cubs to do business with this offseason. They clearly can’t evaluate talent too well.
dmick89Quote Reply
I think Quintana was the pitcher that Hawk and Stone were gushing about this year. I’d guess they were speaking for the front office and that they’re pretty happy with the guy. Cubs should definitely call them up though.
dmick89Quote Reply
dmick89,
He’s done well for himself over the last three seasons. I could see Stone and Hawk gushing about him, though I wouldn’t know as I’d watch on mute over listening to them call a game. They’re like ear sandpaper.
What makes the White Sox less than ideal as a trading partner is their front office’s seeming dedication to winning just enough not to get a good draft pick and not quite enough to be in contention absent a lot of luck. They’re going to waste the best years of Sale and Abreu’s careers on 75 win teams.
PerkinsQuote Reply
dmick89,
I assume the same scout that said he can’t play LF is the same scout who said “Everything” is stopping him from playing Catcher, too.
I think someone is trying to get employee of the week by decreasing his trade value to AL teams (dying laughing)
AkabariQuote Reply
Either that or there really are still a lot of scouts that are just plain dumb.
dmick89Quote Reply
It’s almost as if a business that draws conclusions on players abilities based on 1-2 game samples isn’t definitive.
berseliusQuote Reply
berselius,
I mean, Kyle Schwarber is on pace for like 250 errors next year, that’s just not playable smh.
berseliusQuote Reply
The funny thing is that with the exception of a couple NLCS games, I thought he played fairly well in the outfield all things considered. He’s a catcher who has played little outfield. Based on the stats included in that article, my eyes weren’t lying too much. Whether or not those are true indicators of his defensive ability remains to be seen, but I thought he played well for the most part. We’re talking left field. It’s not like he was put at shortstop.
dmick89Quote Reply
Ruben Amaro Jr.——->Red Sox 1B Coach
Perkins—–>(dying laughing)
PerkinsQuote Reply
Myles -> (dying laughing)
mylesQuote Reply
dmick89,
Let’s just call it both and agree to agree.
But seriously, I’d much rather have Heyward than Price I think.
I know we’ve discussed the aging curves of different types of players, but would you say a defensively-based player ages the way as a speed-based player, since many of the skills are the same?
Or am I way off base there?
AkabariQuote Reply
Akabari,
I would say there are certain advantages to a player who is above average defensively, but I’m not sure the aging curve is significantly different. I think the reason I want Heyward so much is that I have a feeling that as he ages and naturally loses some of those defensive and speed skills, he’ll hit for a lot more power than he has to this point. I think everybody is surprised he hasn’t hit for more power yet. If his power declines even more as he ages, it could end up being a pretty bad signing even if you get him for under $200 million.
There’s risk with signing any player to that kind of contract, but I think one thing for all of us to remember is that $200 million isn’t what it was 10 years ago. That hard for me to fathom when we’re talking about such a large sum of money, but as GW pointed out, ARod’s long contract more than a decade ago is the equivalent of $500 million today. Insane.
If the Cubs spend big on a free agent, my money is on Price.
dmick89Quote Reply
i was pleasantly surprised by his defense. i mean yeah if he’s not knocking the cover off of the ball then you just staple a mitt to a broom and put that out in LF instead of schwarber, but i expected him to be a hell of a lot worse in the field. there were several plays that i was surprised to see him make successfully.
EnricoPallazzoQuote Reply
Or to be more accurate, the Cubs money would be on Price.
berseliusQuote Reply
Ben Cherington is gonna teach a class at Columbia.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Rice Cube,
Alcohol and Poultry Consumption 101
dmick89Quote Reply
(dying laughing)
Suburban kidQuote Reply
Suburban kid,
It would have worked for the Mets if they did this with their NLCS infielders.
berseliusQuote Reply
http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2015/10/26/world-series-preview-the-mets-and-royals-are-the-vanguard-of-modern-baseball/
???? it begins.
berseliusQuote Reply
berselius,
I wish FJM was still around. It’s a time like this that their work was so necessary.
dmick89Quote Reply
dmick89,
I’m pretty surprised to see Calcaterra go for the lazy narrative here.
berseliusQuote Reply
berselius,
Especially since he’s the same guy who wrote this
http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2015/10/26/rob-manfred-and-the-art-of-magical-thinking/
berseliusQuote Reply
Bryant got a fake Rookie of Year award today, and some news outlets are reporting it as the real one.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
Suburban kid,
OK, the Sporting News’ ROY isn’t fake but it’s not the main one.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
Sporting News polls the players for those, no?
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Rice Cube,
I guess so.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
He won't be the only good writer to fall for it. This was about the worst case scenario WS when the playoffs started. Next worst was KC vs. Chicago and that's only because if KC won I'd go insane.
dmick89Quote Reply
Step up, man. Be the hero we deserve, not the one we need.
Smokestack LightningQuote Reply
I wouldn’t mind seeing the Cubs try and make a deal for Nathan Eovaldi. He turns 26 in Feb, has great stuff, improving peripherals, and the Yankees want bats. Plus I think his ceiling is low enough that the Cubs could get the deal done with depth.
MillertimeQuote Reply
(dying laughing)
berseliusQuote Reply
Vindicated!!
berseliusQuote Reply
What is it with managers in 2015 not starting their best starter in game 1 of a series? It’s like I feel asleep after the LDS and woke up in 1915.
dmick89Quote Reply
berselius,
Wasn’t the “financial prudence” more being hamstrung after losing a bunch of money to Bernie Madoff?
PerkinsQuote Reply
While the idea of seeing the Mets win is loathsome, I still have to favor them over the Royals because a universe wherein Ned Yost gets rewarded for his incompetence isn’t one I want to live in.
PerkinsQuote Reply
Correct.
berseliusQuote Reply
Correct.
berseliusQuote Reply
I’m gonna try that out on the wife the next time Vegas cleans me out. “No, no, babe, it’s called ‘financial prudence,’ not ‘being a dumb fucking moron.'”
Smokestack LightningQuote Reply
Hey! Concepcion isn’t on the 40 man anymore! That’s news to me.
AkabariQuote Reply
Akabari,
There’s no transaction about it on Cubs.com either. When did this happen?
dmick89Quote Reply
(dying laughing)
PerkinsQuote Reply
dmick89,
I have no idea, actually. One site says it happened in 2012? But that can’t be right.
I just looked on the 40 man on the website and he wasn’t there.
According to his news page, the last piece of news about him was your payroll article a few days ago. Recredited! (dying laughing)
AkabariQuote Reply
I can’t wait for Daniel Murphy to go .200/.250/.200 in the WS.
JonKneeVQuote Reply
Akabari,
Did he ever get over his mono?
WaLiQuote Reply
That’s right. The Cubs did remove him from the 40-man back then. They had to have him on the 40-man roster when they signed him, but they took him off after his horrible first season. They may have planned to take him off after that first year if he didn’t excel. I don’t know.
dmick89Quote Reply
JonKneeV,
I hope he doesn’t hit that well.
dmick89Quote Reply
dmick89,
I guess he was just so awful that no one noticed. That 2.337 WHIP this year, woooo
AkabariQuote Reply
Akabari,
He also sucked at the time they signed him: http://obstructedview.net/cubs-sign-gerardo-concepcion/
dmick89Quote Reply
Blast from the past.
mylesQuote Reply
I didn’t know you were a Mormon, DM.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
*holds nose*
go mets
berseliusQuote Reply
Can’t wait for the anonymous quote from a scouts about Cespedes never playing OF again
berseliusQuote Reply
https://twitter.com/barrysvrluga/status/659163927750688768
berseliusQuote Reply
Wow.
Rizzo the RatQuote Reply
berseliusQuote Reply
Enrique Rojas is reporting that Volquez found out on the way to the game. Presumably not from the Royals if the other report is true.
berseliusQuote Reply
(dying laughing), Fox
berseliusQuote Reply
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
berseliusQuote Reply
And now Buck/HR kicked out the international broadcast announcers.
berseliusQuote Reply
berselius,
Ugh. Also why are there empty seats?
PerkinsQuote Reply
Perkins,
Some Mets fan hacked the Royals PA system and announced a jorts sale across town.
berseliusQuote Reply
I must be getting old and soft. Don’t like the focus on the pitcher after he gives up a heartbreaking home run in the WS. I feels bad for him.
Smokestack LightningQuote Reply
That’s how I read that at first. (dying laughing)
dmick89Quote Reply
Wade Davis has become quite good at sports over very small samples.
Smokestack LightningQuote Reply
Finally watched the Escobar inside-the-park homer/routine fly ball.
Rizzo the RatQuote Reply
“I can’t believe they threw Escobar a fastball over the plate for the first pitch!” Have these announcers ever seen a baseball game?
Rizzo the RatQuote Reply
Why, it’s almost as if the pitcher didn’t want to walk the leadoff man!
Rizzo the RatQuote Reply
Rizzo the Rat,
No
dmick89Quote Reply
Proof that Schwarber is unplayable in the outfield.
ceruleanQuote Reply
myles posted new shit: http://obstructedview.net/bulls-97-cavaliers-95-102715/
dmick89Quote Reply
http://obstructedview.net/bulls-97-cavaliers-95-102715/#comment-147949
New Shit
mylesQuote Reply