joe girardi managerYesterday, I mentioned that New York Yankees GM Brian Cashman had met with the media to discuss a variety of end-of-the-year things, including the status of his soon-to-be free agent manager, Joe Girardi.

Cashman indicated, as he has before, that the Yankees want to keep Girardi on board as the manager, and said that, “We’re going to give him a real good reason to stay.” The GM is expected to sit down with Girardi’s agent today and negotiate further. You can read more of Cashman’s thoughts on Girardi here.

Will the Cubs get a chance to get in Girardi’s ear before things are finalized with the Yankees? Well, Cashman declined to comment on whether he’d grant the Cubs permission to talk to Girardi before his contract expires at the end of October. I’d think that permission would come at some point – if Girardi won’t re-sign until he gets a chance to talk to the Cubs, the Yankees would have no reason to withhold permission, given that he’s a free agent anyway.

That all said, a source tells Andrew Marchand that permission to talk to the Cubs isn’t going to come until and unless negotiations with the Yankees break down first. If you were the Yankees, why wouldn’t you do it that way? This month of a negotiating window is all the leverage you have at this point, so why not use it to your advantage? It’s not like they’re doing anything unethical. If Girardi really wants to leave, he can leave after the end of October (and, if the Cubs really want to sign Girardi, they, too, can wait).

Hell, if I’m the Yankees, I tell Girardi: “Here’s our best offer. Take it now, or leave it on the table and go talk to other teams. We can’t promise it’ll be there when you get back, because we’ve got to get started on our own search if you’re not returning.” That way, you don’t allow Girardi to use other offers as leverage against you if he truly wants to return to the Yankees anyway. You also might be able to lock him down before anyone else can make their best offer.

Everyone on the Yankees’ side seems to think their negotiations will go quickly, so it’s possible we’ll learn of a re-signing or permission to talk to other teams within a week. On the timing of things, and the idea of permission, Cashman elaborated a little bit yesterday:

“It’s harder for me to answer [whether I’m concerned about Girardi delaying negotiations until November 1] because ultimately, clearly it’ll depend on my dialogue with Joe Girardi, with [Girardi’s agent] Steve Mandell, and Hal Steinbrenner and Randy Levine. And that will dictate the pace of a deal getting done quickly and a deal not getting done at all . . . it will pick up tomorrow, because I’ll be talking to Steve directly about my conversations with Joe already. And now I’ll be dealing with his representative, Steve. Which I’ve done before. I think after tomorrow, I’ll have a real good feel for where we’re at.”

In other words, it sounds like Cashman plans on doing just what I said I’d do: try to play a little friendly hardball today, and get a sense of whether you can nail Girardi down this week without ever having to get into the sticky issue of either granting permission, or having to hold off on negotiations until Girardi’s contract expires.

If so, the ball is very much in Girardi’s court. How much does he want to return to the Yankees? How much does he at least want to hear what the Cubs – or other teams – are going to say?

  • itzscott

    If it’s all about money and which team offers the most, the Cubs cannot compete with the Yankees.

    If it’s about Girardi coming back to the midwest, different story.

    • MichiganGoat

      Of course we could compete with the Yankee’s for Joe’s salary. He made 3M last year and wants a significant increase, so even if its doubled to 6M its not like it a major hit to the teams payroll. Hell Scott Baker basically made that much last year. So if the Cubs are willing they can compete with the Yankees unless the Yankees want to pay him like 10M a year. The bigger question will be the years, the amount personnel control, and who sells the overall better package.

      But we can afford to pay Girardi without a major dent to the MLB and this is one person I doubt the Yankees can over spend to get, but if Girardi wants to stay and the Yankee’s offer is around what he desires he might just accept it before the Cubs have a chance to outbid that offer.

      • LWeb23

        I agree. This regime (from Ricketts all the way down to McCloed), have not shown hesitation in spending money to bring in personnel to get the best out of the on-field talent as possible (from scouting coordinators, scouts, talent evaluators, etc.) Girardi is part of that movement. The highest paid manager in all of baseball is Mike Scioscia, at $5M a year. Even if the Yankees go above that to say, $6M, I think the Cubs could get it done. This is all, of course, if it’s about the money.

        • itzscott

          You’re both wrong….

          In a bidding war it’d be Ricketts that backs down, not the Yankees.

          You forget all the free agents over the years and how the Yankees became known as the evil empire…. The Yankees get who they want when they’re available. Money has never been the issue.

          • Eternal pessemist

            We aren’t going to win a bidding war with NY (if they want Girardi) and it would probably be a bad idea to try. $’s are a relatively scarce resorce for the cubs.

  • Brian Peters

    What about Non-Girardi options? I don’t think he’s coming here, which I’m not too terribly upset about. I don’t just want a homie to get the job so Tommy Boy can fill seats. I want the right guy, and that guy doesn’t necessarily have to be Girardi.

  • Brian Peters

    I clicked on an espn link this morning titled “new managerial candidate coming to the surface” or something like that, but because I’m an outsider, they would let me read it.

    • sprtswiz1

      AJ Hinch from San Diego. Former Diamondbacks manager in 2009-10.

  • Brian Peters

    * would NOT let me read it.

  • http://Bleachernation Lou Brock

    Steve Mandell , Girardi’s Chicago based agent, knows very well how to play this game. He is well established in the Chicago media market as well and has been Mike Ditka’s agent for a very long time. If Girardi wants to leave New York Mandell will get him the best deal possible from Ricketts. This is all about the timing and if Theo can be patient he will get Girardi.

  • Die hard

    Black or Kessinger

    • TWC

      That’s racist.

      • miggy80

        Not white like Barry White but white like Frank Black is.

  • SenorGato

    There’s so many decent candidates, though I want Girardi by a good amount, that I don’t really give a damn about the manager hiring. I want good players. Go get good f’n players.

    Hinch…Ausmus…Martinez…POSSIBLY maybe Tony Pena…Sandy Alomar Jr…names we haven’t even really heard or thought of…no matter what that new guy is fucked without a strong offseason acquiring on field talent.

    • mjhurdle

      i agree with you 100%.

    • Toby

      There will be many fans that probably want Girardi as much as you Senorgator, but if Girardi is not the new manager fans will not give the new manager a chance. You seem that the sky isn’t going to fall if the Cubs do not get Girardi.

    • Jay

      The new guy’s going to be hosed anyway–for at least one more year and maybe two or three. The question is, will he be able to actually develop talent, communicate effectively, and actually manage a pitching staff. Dale didn’t get fired because of the won-loss record, he got fired because he failed in all the other areas I just mentioned.

  • cubfanbob

    My thoughts

    1. If Joe was going to resign with the Yankees it would have been a done deal already.

    2. Cashman only has one year left on his contract with a decent chance he will not return. Why would any manager want to sign a lengthy contract with a mlb team knowing the entire front office will have turn over in a year ?

  • CeeDeeVee

    I like the approach that the Yankees are taking. I think it benefits the Cubs whether the Yankees sign him or not.

    One reason I want Girardi is because I am almost positive that one thing he will say needs to be part of the deal is that the Cubs spend some more money than they initially planned. If Girardi signs, I believe the Cubs will sign or atleast be in the running for 2 big FAs.

    • Brian Peters

      So, you want the Cubs to do what they’ve done for years on end–spend big money on FAs–so they can dig themselves in a hole again??? Throwing money at players….let’s see….hmmm….has that worked? Hell no, that hasn’t worked. I’ll never understand the ilk who believe money buys championships. If that were the case, Girardi’d have FIVE rings instead of one. SMDH!!

      • SenorGato

        Um, what? The Cubs have been big spenders on FAs for years on end? Am I missing the one before 2007? Andre Dawson in the late 80’s?

      • CeeDeeVee

        Nope not saying that at all. I didn’t say I want them to go all Hendry/Dodgers. That is why I said “ATLEAST n the RUNNING”. Theo and Jed know when the bidding is too high. If they sign Choo for 3, 4 years and Tanaka would you say they dug a big hole for themselves?

        • On The Farm

          Agreed, I mean really they could spend money on Tanaka, Choo/Ellsbury, McCann/Salty, and of course a SP and they probably wouldn’t be too bad off. Obviously that is a ton of money and I can’t see the future, so I can’t say for certain this is obviously the right thing to do. But, for all intents and purposes, this team would look competitive, probably be competitive, and would ease the transition/reliance on the young up-and-comers (Castro, Rizzo, Baez, Bryant..)

          • jt

            MLBTR had an item as to The Royals need to shed a few dollars.
            They are going to want to get out from under Shields and Gordon this year and Butler next. They are going to want value in return.
            Kyle Zimmer is an attractive pitching prospect zooming through their system.
            I’d give up a lot (including Shark) to get Shields for a year followed by Zimmer for 6 years. Remember that in the Beckett/Hanley trade Lowell was a throw-in to save money. I’d wouldn’t mind taking Gordon and his 3yr/$35M for Schierholtz/Vogelbomb (I think Vogelbach projects as similar player as Butler and K.C. could trade Butler next year). Not enough? Cubs have Lake, Hendricks, Szczur, Bogusevic…… I’d guess K.C. also has its complement of such prospects to even things out.
            OK, this deal probably is not going to happen. But I’m guessing there is a similar deal out there somewhere that the FO is trying to conjure.

            • On The Farm

              I would love to get a .167 ISO, .340 wOBA, and wRC+ 110 player. The only problem is the Cubs could use an everyday CF, and I am not sure if Lake can play there (yet), and and if you are already going to spend $10M+ on an OF, looking into Choo might be a smarter allocation of resources.

              • jt

                I’m thinking that Kyle Zimmer will be as good as Shark. I’m thinking age 24 (2015) through age 29 he will cost minimum plus his arbitration years. So, the cost of Gordon would be made up by Zimmer. I also do not believe K. C. gives up Zimmer and Gordon quite so easily. But 3 years of Gordon would get get him through age 32 which would cost a lot less than 5 years of Choo through age 35. So, I wouldn’t mind dishing out a bit more in the deal.
                To your point, there are short term holes created. I’ve seen CF being played at Fenway and I’ve seen it being played at Wrigley. There is a big difference in need. If the corners OF’ers are good The Cubs FO can cheat a bit as to the defensive quality in CF.
                I really do not know the value of prospects so I don’t know what an equitable player swap be. But I think the conceptual framework kind’a works. Long and short of it: I feel there are holes now. I take your point that there would be holes after such a deal. I just don’t feel those holes would be as deep as that were originally there.
                Again, I really don’t think this deal gets done. I just think there is a similar deal somewhere that they are trying to create.

                • On The Farm

                  I am not saying I don’t like your suggestion, its a good one. With no one here really being prospect experts I agree its hard to try and imagine a trade scenario that would be fair. But you are probably right and Choo isn’t much of a true CF either now that I think about it. I would love to land Zimmer.

            • TomDettore

              Hi all. As a Cubs fan first and a Royals fan second (I live in NE KS but originally from Chicago), there is no way in He1l that KC makes that trade. Schierholz, seriously? While they’re at it should they also throw in Hosmer and Salvy Perez for Donnie Murphy?

              • On The Farm

                Um I am pretty sure even with as inconsistent as Shark has been, offering him, Schierholtz and Vogelbach for Zimmer and Gordon, KC would definitely listen and think about it.

                • jt

                  thanks for the input. Like I say, I’m not on solid ground in that sort of evaluation so I find it interesting

  • YourResidentJag

    Per Jerry Crasnick: Ausmus is out. Not enough experience. My response: Hinch would be an impossible sell job then.

    • On The Farm

      Just saw Jerry Tweet:Cubs have talked to Padres about A.J. Hinch. They have yet to ask for permission to interview, but probably will shortly.

    • Jason Powers

      pretty reliable source. Maybe Hitch is available to solve our ‘hooking up’ with another manager…situation.

      • YourResidentJag

        Too funny!

  • Ivy Walls

    Been here in other industries.

    Loyalty test; NYY “Here is our best and final offer, sleep on it and get back to us in 24 hours. Period. If you decide on market opportunities we need to move on as soon as possible as what is good for the organization.”

    NYY offer is probably 2 year extension $5M matching Scioscia who is highest paid but possibly coming onto the market. This takes Girardi past Cashman’s contract.

    Cubs probably have general terms communicated to Mandell, higher in $$ and years…again probably a year past Epstein’s terms of 2016. The details will be how much control and input Girardi has on player movement, coaches/staff etc.

  • Beardface

    I’ll do the job for $50,000 if they sign some better pitchers.

    • On The Farm

      If they pay me $50,000 I will take the team as is.

      • hansman1982

        I’d let them tell me exactly what to do and when. Just be an empty track suit.

        • On The Farm

          The question isn’t how much it would cost them, but how little. Although I wonder if they would let me wear the number 44?

          • hansman1982

            I’d do it for free. Just sleep in the office.

            • MichiganGoat

              I just need an open tab at a couple of breweries and a keg of old style in dugout, I can guarantee a number overall pick for multiple years in a row… that’s the MG Promise.

              • Cubbie Blues

                MG, that would cost more than the $50,000/yr that On the Farm offered.

                • MichiganGoat

                  Shut you mouth Timmy they don’t know that… and yes 50K would barely pay for my tab during a Cardinal series.

                • Scotti

                  I was pretty sure Goat was going to be our new manager until he asked for the Old Style. With the new Bud contract that simply isn’t going to happen.

              • On The Farm

                I would do it just to have Theo Epstein say to the media (about me), “The goal for the 2014 Chicago Cubs is to win the World Series, and this is our guy who is going to lead us there.”

            • On The Farm

              I have a feeling you would need a hamburger phone installed next to the bullpen phone.

              • hansman1982

                They would, in fact, be one in the same. We’d get the Hamburglar as our mascot and he would drive the relievers to the mound.


  • cubsin

    Brett, I couldn’t comment on the Bears writer topic, so forgive the off-topic comment. I’m wondering whether a Blackhawks writer and/or Bulls writer is planned later if the Bears writer succeeds. FWIW, I’m not a candidate for any of these positions, merely curious.

    • MichiganGoat

      I just want to be the “Lead Michigan Craft Beer GoatWriter” if we are going to have sub sections of BleacherNation… I’d like to claim dibs on GoatNation

      • LWeb23

        Better act fast, your domain name is indeed for sale…

        • MichiganGoat

          Holy Snark Snacks…. that name is worth almost $3000… man the internet is a silly place.

          • hansman1982

            Bah that’s nothing… is going for $45,000. is a mere $7.5M

            • MichiganGoat

              Yeah well is going for $750… SOLD!

    • Corey

      Nobody could comment. He did that on purpose, as he wants legitimate people to write for that side of the blog. Might get spammed if he opened the comment section.

    • Brett

      It’s possible down the road, depending on how the Bears possibility goes and how it is received. It’s not on my radar any time soon, though.

      • On The Farm

        Growing the site so you can fish in the Hamptons more often? :)

      • dumbledoresacubsfan

        Go Pack Go!


      • CubChymyst

        How did Cutler work out for your fantasy team on Sunday?

        • On The Farm

          Even with 3 picks, in my league he scored 23+ points, not bad for a bye week QB

      • OregonCubsFan

        Personally, I would prefer that this remain a Cubs only site. I come here because I love baseball and love the Cubs. Though my loyalty in most other sports lies in Chicago, I’d rather not visit a Chicago sports site. I come here because of the focus. I would fear that expanding to the Bears, and then Bulls or Blackhawks would muddy the waters.
        I understand it could hugely increase your subscribers. But I think the cost would be we’d get more non baseball folks spilling in and making comments on baseball issues. Heck, if you cover the Bears, I may spill in and make comments even though I know much, much less about football and am not a Bears fan (the one Chicago team that does not have my loyalty). I would be out of place.
        Just some initial thoughts. No worry at losing me as a reader though – your analysis and coverage continues to be top notch.

        • Brett

          Thank you for the thoughts. I wrote the opening paragraph to that post for a reason, however. Precisely this one, in fact. Have a little faith. All will be OK – I’m not insensitive to blurring any lines.

  • Voice of Reason

    Once Girardi officially declines the Cubs offer or even their desire to speak with him, can we have Bob Brenly move to the front of the line, please?

    There is not a more viable candidate than him!

    • Cubbie Blues

      There are plenty more viable than him. He is under contract.

      • hansman1982

        Hey, Reason has spoken! How dare you question.

    • OregonCubsFan

      Agree. I’ve always liked Brenly. I wonder, however, if he would be patient with developing players. He could be awfully critical of Castro and others when they made young player mistakes (though he is definitely not that tool Bobby Valentine).

    • Dustin S

      Brenly and the FO are on about as bad terms as could be. Brenly kind of burned his Cubs bridges when and since he left. From a baseball standpoint I’d say yes he’d be a great candidate, but that poor relationship situation is why you haven’t really heard his name mentioned. Since he left he bashes the Cubs every chance he gets, and it didn’t get any better after the Cubs cut Brenly’s son.

      • cms0101

        I loved Brenly as an announcer, but you have to wonder why he never got a second bite at the managerial apple after he was fired from Arizona. Here’s a guy who won a World Series, and he never gets a second opportunity to manage. Why? I think his outspoken persona gets in his way, unfortunately. It was odd that they cut his son when the organization is lacking catching depth, then they went out to get a few journeymen catchers to fill in at Iowa and Tennessee. I would say it’s pretty accurate that the relationship between Brenly and the team is distressed.

  • arta


  • jmc

    good idea to cover the Bears the Cubs prospects are woeful.any distractions Cubs fans have are welcome

  • macpete22

    Olney says ownership is pushing hard for Girardi

    • Chad

      I saw that, but the sentence prior said that the FO was still keeping an open mind. I think that is just talk. I think everyone would like Girardi but it would be dumb to focus on him as the only option.

  • Jim

    Is Dave McKay an option? He worked wonders turning Soriano into a good outfielder, plus learned under one of the best in LaRussa. Maybe he doesn’t want to manage but I think he could be a good option.

    • YourResidentJag

      An interesting thought.

    • baldtaxguy

      Very good idea.

  • ssckelley

    Do the Cubs need permission from the Yankees to talk to Girardi’s agent?

  • Leo L

    Theo still has some of his red sox blood and just wants to screw Yankees over. He is probably not that interested in Giardi other than to drive up the price on the yankees

    • baldtaxguy

      No chance “his” interest in Girardi is not about the Cubs.

  • jon

    It’s tough to get a read on AJ Hinch. The first thing that crossed my mind was “Were not the Diamond backs really terrible in 2010 and really really good in 2011? ” So what changed?

    First let’s look at the 2010 Diamondbacks juxtaposed against the 2011 Diamondbacks. The 2010 Diamond backs went 65-97 that year and Hinch was 31-48 before getting fired. The 2011 Diamond backs were 94-68. So what changed between 2010 with Hinch and Gibson the following year?

    The 2010 Diamondbacks scored 713 rus, allowed 836 with a pythag of 69-83. The 2011 squad scored 731 runs, allowed 666 with a pythag of 88 wins, exceeding projected expectations.

    At a high level, what jumps out in 2011 is indeed the pitching. Mainly the acquisition of Hundson, and Suanders was healthier and much better. On offense, 2011 gave a much healthier and productive Justin Upton, but that maybe be balanced out by Kelly Johnson and Drew being less productive in 2011

    Since the offense was basically the same, I think it boils down to the pitching staffs

    2010 FIP
    Rodrigue Lopez 5.21
    Ian Kennedy 3.80
    Dan Haren 3.71
    Edwin Jackson 3.55
    Barry Enright 6.98
    Joe Saunders 4.47

    Ian Kennedy 2.88
    Daniel Hudsen 3.28
    Joe Suanders 3.69
    Josh Collmenter 3.80

    So what does this mean? The 2011 were much better because they had a much better pitching performance. But they only had one external acquisition in Daniel Hunsen. The 2011 staff got a ton more out of Ian Kennedy, got great production in a young Collmenter ….and kept all their starters healthier. I think it’s safe to say the Gibson and his staff were much better at managing roster than his predecessor. They got better performance from their existing SP, stabilized the rotation and got huge contributions from newcombers Collmeter and Hudsen.

    If I was Theo, I’d be trying to find a way to pry Kurt Gibson out of the desert.

    • bbmoney

      Are we really ready to give Gibson credit for his pitchers health in 2011? And the ignore the fact that Kennedy was terrible again after 2011 and Daniel Hudson hasn’t pitched in a year and a half? If Gibson gets credit in 2011 for health and performance I also put the blame on him for Kennedy’s performance since and Hudson’s injury.

      Gibson loves grit. So if that’s what the Cubs are looking for he would be a good choice.

  • YourResidentJag

    The #Cubs/AJ Hinch rumor mill picks up steam. Presented, w/o comment, are 2 managers’ W-L records:
    Hinch: 89-123 (.420)
    Quade: 95-104 (.477)

    • jon

      As I posed above. I don’t see the AJ Hinch love. If you ignore the records, I think GIbson and his staff got much better production/development from players, especially the pitching staff.

    • Dustin S

      Hinch doesn’t excite me at all. It also seems hypocritical if they say they want someone with proven experience and they’d have a guy on their short list who has never coached a full season (Hinch started coaching part-way through the 2009 season and got fired during the 2010 season – and never coached in the minors), or Ausmus who has never coached at any level. Honestly either of those make not hiring Sandberg when they could have look like a huge mistake. I keep waiting for an alternate big name that no one has mentioned yet to come out of the woodwork.

  • http://Bleachernation Lou Brock

    Mick Kelleher is one of Girardi’s coaches handling first base duties and working with the infield defense. He has experience in the Cub organization both as a player and coach. I would think he would be an excellent mentor for the young middle infielders, Castro, Baez, and Alcantara.

  • Brian Peters

    I don’t think that would ever happen.

  • YourResidentJag

    Well, looks to me like the Cubs have two options they should also consider: one from the post above (Dave McKay) and another in Manny Acta.

  • Brian Peters

    By “I don’t think that would ever happen,” I meant Gibson leaving AZ.

    • OregonCubsFan

      Good – because I’m a huge Mick Kelleher fan. Have no idea what he’s like as a coach or how he’d be as a manager but loved Mighty Mick when he played for the Cubs. He’s the kind of guy who played the game right fundamentally – very good fielder, ran the bases right, just didn’t have the ability to hit consistently. He was pretty much the Darwin Barney of the ’70’s. Plus he took on Dave Kingman at second base even though he gave up 10 inches to him.

  • Pingback: Obsessive New Manager Watch: Girardi, Hinch, Ausmus, Cooper, More | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary()

  • Garrett

    I think the best plan B option behind Girardi is Brad Ausmus. Smart baseball guy, knows the game as well as anybody, but the lack of experience can kill you sometimes. I can see the front office taking a risk on someone like this though.

  • pfk

    I don’t believe Girardi is going to leave the Yankees. His kids love it in New York, the fans like him, the media likes him and the front office likes him. He knows the Yankees will do what it takes to compete at the highest level. He doesn’t know that yet about the Cubs because there are concerns the exorbitant costs of the Rickett’s purchase of the Cubs coupled with the high cost of the Wrigley renovation, may not leave much money to spend on talent. Of course, the Cubs have done a better job of building the minors than the Yankees but it remains to be seen if they will spend big to fill holes. Lastly, he’s already won a World Series and with a few more (highly possible with the Yankees) he could become a baseball legend. Yes, he could become a legend with the Cubs but I think there are still too many “ifs.” Why leave the premier job in baseball?

  • jmc

    exactly. Why leave a proven winner for proven loser

    • slothinator

      Because the “proven winner” is getting ready for a downturn. They have a lot of big contracts, players on the wrong side of 30, and very little coming through the farm system. With more and more teams locking players up early, free agency isn’t the answer for the Yankees like it used to be. They might be in for a dry spell, kind of like 89-92. Girardi might not be willing to wait it out in NY.