Are the Cubs Considering a Deal for Kerry Wood?
When Chicago Cubs reliever Angel Guzman went down, presumably for the year, rumors picked up about the Cubs adding another right-handed reliever. The kicker, of course, is that the Cubs were already looking for such a right-handed reliever, and efforts to add a guy now will be met with outrageous demands.
But maybe the Cubs can pick up a guy who’s got an outrageous contract, making the deal slightly more palatable. Maybe it could be someone who is loved by Cubs fans.
Kerry Wood, RHP, Indians — He would make a lot of sense for the Twins, as closer Joe Nathan will likely undergo season-ending Tommy John surgery. Wood makes $10.5 million, and with Minnesota’s budget stretched to $96 million and change — highest in team history — the Indians would have to pick up a good slab of it. The Twins are considering in-house candidates, but don’t be surprised if they look around. Wood also is drawing interest from his former team, the Cubs. The Boston Globe.
It is, of course, unclear why the Boston Globe would have unique visibility to the Chicago Cubs’ reliever desires, and this report also ignores recent statements by both Jim Hendry and Tom Ricketts that the Cubs’ payroll is maxed out.
But if they could swing a deal where they only pick up a few million of Wood’s deal? Maybe they’d consider it. Wood, as you know, spent his entire career in Chicago before leaving via free agency last year to Cleveland. Last year was arguably the worst of his career, and assuredly the worst since he became a reliever - he had a 4.25 ERA, a 1.382 WHIP, and converted just 20 of 26 save opportunities.
Still, he’d look pretty great back in a Cub uniform.
ShareAw, Crap - We’re Racist Again
A familiar theme in the baseball world since the days of Dusty Baker is that Chicago Cubs fans are racist. As absurd as it seems to most of us, LaTroy Hawkins said it, Milton Bradley said it, Dusty Baker all but said it, and then there was Jacque Jones who really said it.
And he’s still really saying it.
But perhaps as much as anything, Jones needs a positive experience in baseball again. Even his past two full seasons, with an underachieving Cubs team, weren’t good ones. A free-agent signing after the 2005 season, Jones was deemed a disappointment despite batting .285 and matching his career high of 27 home runs in his first season at Wrigley Field.
When he received racist hate mail, Jones called out Chicago fans and compared them, unfavorably, with Twins fans. That didn’t exactly make him a fan favorite.
“I said what I said in the beginning, and everyone was upset, you know, ‘Twins fans are different than Cubs fans.’ And it’s still true,” he said. “After that, I didn’t say a word.”
As for the racism, Jones said, “I got some letters and words and stuff like that. It was a learning experience. You would think that stuff would be dead and gone, but it’s not. But I kind of took everything in stride and still went out and did my job.
“Looking back on that situation, I was proud of myself for doing what I did, being able to still go out and play good baseball.” TwinCities.com.
Most thinking Cubs fans were greatly embarrassed when Jones was booed in that first season. The fans weren’t so much booing Jones’ performance; they were booing his presence - he was not the right guy for the job that year, and fans were very disappointed with the signing. That doesn’t excuse the booing, but it partially explains it.
As for the racial items, it continues to perplex me.
ShareHere’s Something Scary: Carlos Silva Was Really Trying in Seattle
Whenever the Chicago Cubs bring a reclamation project on board, there are certain things that can inspire optimism. The guy was playing through pain or with a lingering injury the last couple of years. The guy was having family issues that distracted him. The guy had signed a huge contract and became complacent.
Any of these things would allow Cubs fans to have just the tiniest shade of optimism about new arrival, Carlos Silva. Silva, acquired in a crap-in, crap-out swap with the Mariners for Milton Bradley, was absolutely horrible in his two seasons in Seattle. Sure, he was hurt last year, but he was awful in 2008, long before the injury. But, he had signed a huge contract before 2008, so maybe, for those first two years, he had let himself go a little bit. Maybe he let himself get comfortable - and we can cling to the hope that he will rededicate himself now. Yes. Yes. I’m starting to feel the optimism.
The only thing that could bring me down would be to learn that Silva was really committed to being the best he could be when he arrived in Seattle.
Silva now is battling not only for a spot in the Cubs rotation but also to redeem himself.
“To be honest, for me, my last two years have been very disappointing, and not for Seattle, but for myself,” Silva said Friday. “It was disappointing because I worked very hard for my numbers and to have a good season.
“But here [with the Cubs], I’m coming with a clear mind. This is my first year in the big leagues, know what I mean? I don’t care how long I’ve been in the big leagues.”
Actually, his first season was 2002. Silva made his Major League debut on April 1 that year for Philadelphia. But he’s decided to make a fresh start. Forget the two seasons with the Phillies or the four with the Twins, although his success in Minnesota helped him get a four-year, $48 million contract with the Mariners in December 2007.
Now, Silva joins Jeff Samardzija, Tom Gorzelanny and Sean Marshall as candidates for a spot in the Cubs rotation.
“We’ll just let ‘em pitch,” Cubs manager Lou Piniella said. “We have a lot of split-squad games early, so we’ll need some innings. There’s some jobs to be won here right now, not only in the rotation but in our bullpen.”
That’s fine with Silva.
“I like to have competition, I like to be fighting for my job, I like to own my spot,” Silva said. “When I signed the contract with Seattle, my mind changed so much. I wanted to maybe impress everybody. I wanted to show people why they paid me so much money — I don’t know why, but I think that’s how I felt. cubs.com.
Son of a crap. If that’s what Silva pitches like when he’s really trying, when he’s committed to being all he can be, what’s he going to look like for the Cubs? Throw in the fact that he’s reportedly out of shape, and it’s probably absurd for us to hope for anything more than Silva taking up space in the bullpen.
Then again, maybe he was saying that, after signing that big contract, he put too much pressure on himself to perform. Maybe he got out of his usual routine, and tried too hard. Maybe now that the expectations could not possibly be any lower, Silva will be able to get back to what made him a (moderately) successful pitcher in the first place - throwing strikes, using his defense, keeping the ball down. Maybe he really can pull it together enough to be a 4.30ish ERA, fifth starting innings eater for the Cubs. Maybe.
Aw crap. Look at me getting optimistic again.
ShareThe Bad News? No Orlando Hudson. The Good News? No Adam Kennedy.
The Chicago Cubs were never really into Orlando Hudson, despite his ability at the top of the order and the fact that he plays the one position that the Cubs could reasonably add a bat (after center field). And now that the Twins have signed him to a deal around $5 million, we know why - he was going to cost too much.
But in the meantime, we kept hearing the Cubs’ name attached to another second baseman - one that was decidedly not an upgrade over what the Cubs currently have - Adam Kennedy. Well, the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away.
A few hours after losing out to the Twins in the Orlando Hudson sweepstakes, the Nationals stayed busy by agreeing to terms with free-agent second baseman Adam Kennedy, according to a baseball source. Terms of the deal were not disclosed.
The Nationals have not confirmed that a deal has been reached.
The left-handed-hitting Kennedy had a nice comeback season in 2009, hitting .289 with 11 home runs and 63 RBIs for the Athletics. The previous two years, he played in just a combined 202 games because of injuries. MLB.com.
Obviously if Kennedy plays like he did last year, he’s a starting caliber second baseman, particularly on a team like the Nationals. But for the Cubs to have spent money on him would have been a crime.
ShareJim Hendry’s Public Mea Culpa for All Things Bradley
Following today’s abysmal trade of Milton Bradley to the Seattle Mariners for Carlos Silva and cash, Chicago Cubs General Manager Jim Hendry offered a statement about the trade, about Bradley, and about the state of the team. For your consideration:
“Obviously, it was a trade we’ve been working on for quite some time. There wasn’t any easy solution to it, by any means. Many of the names that were bantered were obviously deals that would have never been considered ideal. But we also knew that we had to move the player.
“In hindsight, obviously, it was an acquisition that I’m responsible for that obviously didn’t work out. The intent, obviously, was to get a quality offensive player from the left side or a switch hitter that had been outstanding for a few years before we got him in our quest to improve on a 97-win team. Obviously, it didn’t work out. I bear the responsibility for that not working out.
“That being said, we have a tremendous amount of really good players that may not have played as well as they would have liked last year. But they certainly are guys that play hard, obviously good teammates, respectful of the great opportunity that they have here to play in front of our great fans. Obviously, in this case, it did not work out like we planned. In this case, this was also responsible for the reason that I sent Milton home, as I mentioned in September, not going to be tolerated, to treat our fans, teammates and members of the media the way he did. It’s just time to put it behind us and go forward. I think this deal helps us in a lot of ways. Hopefully, Mr. Silva will get back to where he was a few years ago. Obviously, he has struggled since (signing) his contract, but he was a quality free agent when he left the Twins. We have been monitoring him a little bit on the side and in games in Venezuela. We’ve done a lot of work on him. Hopefully, he’ll be able to get back and at least have a successful spot on our club in some way, and then we’ll go about our business of trying to add a few more pieces to make the club better before spring training.”
h/t Bruce Miles
ShareChicago Cubs Looking at Kelvim Escobar
When it comes to pitchers, Chicago Cubs general manager Jim Hendry has shown a penchant for loving two things: middle relievers and reclamation projects.
So when an opportunity to combine his two passions came along, he simply couldn’t pass it up.
The Cubs sent a scout to watch Kelvim Escobar throw in Venezuela. The right-hander had surgery in 2008 to repair a torn labrum in his shoulder. He won 18 games in 2007 but has been limited to one game over the last two in the big leagues because of shoulder problems. Other teams watching Escobar throw included the Rays, Brewers, Giants, Pirates, Tigers, Mariners and A’s. Muskat Ramblings.
I’m a bit too hard on Hendry in this instance. Escobar is not expected to get a Major League deal, and so if he wants to join the Cubs on a minor league deal with a Spring Training invite, so be it. Just don’t expect much: Escobar, for all intents and purposes, has not pitched in over two years. A torn labrum is a notoriously difficult injury for a pitcher to overcome.
But he is still just 33, and when he was able to pitch, he was always very good.
ShareBruce Miles Defends the Harden Arbitration Decision - and Fails
The Chicago Cubs’ decision yesterday to not offer arbitration to pitcher Rich Harden has been the subject of much hand wringing. We’ve been no exception. So it is a credit to anyone who can cogently defend the move, as Bruce Miles has done. But that said, Bruce is just plain wrong.
I really hate to do it, because I generally find Bruce Miles to be the best of the Cubs’ mainstream writers.
It’s been pretty clear since the middle of last summer that the Cubs were not going to offer arbitration to Harden, and this has been the subject of much consternation among some followers of the Cubs. Harden, a Type B free agent, made $7 million last year, and it’s possible that he and his agent would be seeking $10 million or more in arbitration. DailyHerald.com Blogs.
If it has been clear since mid-summer, the Cubs should have put on the full-court-press to move Harden when their chances in the NL Central (don’t get me started on the Wild Card - er, actually, I’ll get started in a few paragraphs) fizzled around the same time.
Further, where does that $10 million number come from? First of all, just because Harden would seek it doesn’t mean he’d get it. I’ve been seeking Jessica Simpson for years, and I still can’t get it (even after she … expanded). Harden would assuredly get a raise, but there is no reason to believe he would get a near 50% raise for barely topping 140 innings, posting an ERA over 4 and a .500 winning percentage.
If the Cubs offered arbitration to [Harden] (or to Johnson, who made $3 million), [he] would immediately accept, and the Cubs would be on the hook to pay out money they don’t have.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Is this based on some information to which you are privy that we all are not? I have read nothing - not one thing - that would indicate that Harden was a lock to accept arbitration. To the contrary, I’ve read multiple reports regarding other teams who are interested in signing Harden. Immediately accept? Without exploring those possibilities? Absurd.
Let’s see how it plays out with Harden. Teams figure to be very cautious about handing out a multiyear deal to a pitcher with a history of shoulder problems and to a guy who had to be held out of starts near the end of the year.
Ah, so if the gamble in not offering Harden arbitration happens to prove correct (i.e., Harden does not get a better deal than he would have by accepting arbitration with the Cubs), then Jim Hendry gets the credit. Fair enough. Except…
The other question I’ve been asked is why the Cubs didn’t trade Harden to Minnesota after the Twins claimed him on waivers in August. From what I’ve been told, there would not have been much in the way of prospects coming back, and the Cubs weren’t ready to quit on the season at that point.
Hendry was WRONG about that gamble! Jim Hendry gambled that Rich Harden’s presence in September would somehow catapult the Cubs over five other teams in the Wild Card race. Albert Pujols couldn’t have done that for the Cubs. And given that Harden ultimately started just three times in September, I’d say this decision was a colossal mistake. So where’s the blame for Hendry?
Not much in the way of prospects? That’s more than not much in the way of anything, no?
The Cubs would never come out and say a guy is a medical risk, but when they praise the pitching coach and trainer for getting the player ready to start 26 games, you can pretty much figure there could be trouble ahead. And what would people be saying if Harden were to blow out in spring training with the Cubs having to pay him $10 million to rehab?
This last point is Bruce’s best, but even it feels like it is lacking. Notably, unless the Cubs became aware of medical issues that precluded offering Harden arbitration only after the trade deadline, they can hardly now offer it as an excuse to having lost Harden for nothing. If the Cubs felt he was such a risk that they might end up paying him big money to rehab next year, that’s a reason to trade him when it should have been clear that the Cubs were realistically out of the race. The fact that Harden was ultimately shut down for the last few weeks of the season only reinforces this point. Are we to believe the Cubs felt it was necessary to Harden’s health - a guy that they knew they weren’t resigning and upon whom they’d pinned their Wild Card hopes - to shut him down, and yet the revelation that Harden had serious shoulder issues had only just dawned on them?
In the muddied mess of possible explanations for this turn of events, none cast the Cubs and Jim Hendry in a positive light. Trying to put together a grab bag of partial explanations, that, when taken together, could possibly explain how the combination of not trading Harden and then not offering him arbitration was not a comedy of errors is a mistake. Sometimes a spade is a spade.
ShareTuesday is the Arbitration Deadline - Cubs Plan No Offers
Tuesday is the deadline for Major League teams to offer arbitration to their free agents. If the player accepts, he will get a one-year contract at a rate determined by an arbitrator (if necessary), and that rate almost always represents a raise over the prior year’s salary. If the player declines and then signs elsewhere, the player’s original team will get draft pick compensation if the player was one of the top players in the league at his position. “Top players,” is of course subject to some debate, but a formula at the Elias Sports Bureau makes the evaluation - you can question the utility of a formula and procedure that designates Matt Holiday and Kevin Gregg as equivalent free agents, but whatever.
On to the news:
The Cubs were not expected to offer arbitration to Kevin Gregg, Rich Harden, Reed Johnson and Chad Fox by Tuesday’s deadline. Muskat Ramblings.
With respect to Gregg, Johnson, and Fox, this is no surprise. Rich Harden is also not a surprise, but a mind-bogglingly frustrating non-surprise.
Harden, a Type B free agent (signing team would not have to give up a pick in order to sign Harden, but the Cubs would get a sandwich pick between the first and second round of the draft), made $7 million in 2009, and would thus likely receive around $8 or 9 million in 2010 through arbitration. Still, the Cubs are apparently unwilling to take the chance that he accepts such a one-year deal - you know, when there are plenty of teams likely willing to offer him a multi-year deal.
That said, not offering Harden arbitration, alone, is not an indictable offense. He’s got a rickety shoulder, and does not manage to go deep into games. Arbitration would be, at least, a small risk.
But if the Chicago Cubs knew they were not going to re-sign Rich Harden when the season ended (and they did), and if they knew they were not going to offer him arbitration (they should have known), then why in the WORLD did they not trade him at the trade deadline or the non-waiver trade deadline this year for whatever they could get? Harden was claimed on waivers by the Minnesota Twins, and they wanted him as late as the non-waiver trade deadline at the end of August - when everyone could see that the Cubs were out of the race. And even if the Cubs believed they weren’t, Harden made just three more starts for the Cubs after that date.
As I see it, there are only two remote, but reasonable explanations - which must be offered simultaneously for me to accept them - for not trading Harden AND not offering him arbitration:
1.) Jim Hendry believed Rich Harden was healthy, and would dominate in September, leading the Cubs back into the race; thus, he refused to trade him; AND
2.) Between August 31 and today, something critical has changed: either Rich Harden’s shoulder profoundly deteriorated or was discovered deteriorated (which would mean the Cubs repeatedly lied as the season wound down), or the Cubs’ finances changed so dramatically that the risk of Harden accepting arbitration would crush the team’s plans.
Together, it all seems like a stretch. What is more likely is a mealy-mouthed, half-assed combination of the explanations - gee willackers, well I thought the Cubs might come back in September, and the offer for Harden wasn’t very good, and gee willackers, I didn’t really think ahead about the likelihood of re-signing Harden versus offering him arbitration, and what the market for a pitcher like him would be like this off-season.
Gee willackers, indeed.
Share
