The 2010 Cubs Free Agent and Roster Moves Thread: SAVEENG OUR KUBBEEZ!!11

[Philberto]

Oh, how I love this team. Letting Harden walk is such a great idea.

I can see not offering arbitration to Johnson or Gregg.  They may not receive multi-year offers and may have accepted arbitration.

But Harden will certainly get a multi-year offer.  I don't think Hendry has quite figured out how this arbitration/compensation thing works.

What's the argument here...that Harden should be on the Cubs or that the Cubs should have offered him arbitration (knowing that he'd probably decline and that the Cubs would get a draft pick back).

Because the latter is okay, but I can't really get behind the former when dollars are short and the offense is a much larger issue.

Most indications I heard said that he was expected to accept it.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Oh, how I love this team. Letting Harden walk is such a great idea.

I can see not offering arbitration to Johnson or Gregg.  They may not receive multi-year offers and may have accepted arbitration.

But Harden will certainly get a multi-year offer.  I don't think Hendry has quite figured out how this arbitration/compensation thing works.

What's the argument here...that Harden should be on the Cubs or that the Cubs should have offered him arbitration (knowing that he'd probably decline and that the Cubs would get a draft pick back).

Because the latter is okay, but I can't really get behind the former when dollars are short and the offense is a much larger issue.

Most indications I heard said that he was expected to accept it.

Exactly.  Arbitration would have gotten him between $8mm and $10mm for one year.  He'll make less than half of that, before incentives, in 2010.

[Slaky]

Oh, how I love this team. Letting Harden walk is such a great idea.

I can see not offering arbitration to Johnson or Gregg.  They may not receive multi-year offers and may have accepted arbitration.

But Harden will certainly get a multi-year offer.  I don't think Hendry has quite figured out how this arbitration/compensation thing works.

Well, he found the time to spend 7.5 million dollars on John Grabass. So that's really not leaving a sour taste in my mouth. I'm not still angry about it.

[Pre]

Even money here that he gets a 1 year deal.  In no reasonable universe does he get more than 2 years.

I don't disagree, but baseball contracts are not part of a reasonable universe.

Yuniesky Betancourt might be the worst player in baseball and he has a 4 year deal.

[Kermit, B.]

Oh, how I love this team. Letting Harden walk is such a great idea.

The story was first reported by David Kaplan on Chicagonow.com.

It's probably still even money that they'll offer.

[Chuck to Chuck]

baseball contracts offered by Jim Hendry are not part of a reasonable universe.

Truth'd

[Armchair_QB]

But Harden will certainly get a multi-year offer.  I don't think Hendry has quite figured out how this arbitration/compensation thing works.

Even money here that he gets a 1 year deal.  In no reasonable universe does he get more than 2 years.

Hendry will give him three with a player option for a fourth.

[Saul Goodman]

Intrepid Reader: @baseballstone

Hendry left Donnie Veal unprotected in last year's Rule 5 draft.  now he's the Pirates ace.  nice choice Jim

[BH]

Intrepid Reader: @baseballstone

Hendry left Donnie Veal unprotected in last year's Rule 5 draft.  now he's the Pirates ace.  nice choice Jim

Don't forget, we have David Patton.

[Philberto]

Well, since the Cubs fucked up that Harden thing, maybe they can hang onto Milton? Probably not. I know I'm probably one of 5 Cub fans who actually want him retained, but I would think it would make more money sense to hang on to him for $10 million than to pick up, say, Burrell, for $15 million or so (His contract plus a good chunk of Milton's). Burrell is shitty and Milton is not. Worn out his welcome in Chicago? Who gives a shit? The fans will probably hate him. They won't stop coming to the park. If someone boycotts them, there will be another schmoe ready to take his/her seats. Clubhouse shit? Fuck that, too. Read this that MB21 of ACB wrote on Kaplan's blog a while back. It's pretty dead on:

Also, chemistry probably has more to do with winning and losing. Players have more fun winning and it will create an exciting environment for all the players. Losing sucks and it will bring out the worst in people.

I don't know how much value chemistry has, but I do know that most managers and general managers have said that it doesn't matter. I also find it hard to believe that Player A is performing worse because Player B is an ass. That's actually something we could verify and I might actually look into it if you were to provide me with 20 or 30 players who are supposedly clubhouse cancers. If people say who they are we can find out if they have any impact on performance.

Think about it, Dave. If you could tell your boss that your performance was lacking because Joe was an ass, what do you think he would say? People can't do that. That's not what happens in real life. We all deal with asses nearly every day of our lives. If you work in a company that has more than a few employees you're working with someone who would be considered a clubhouse cancer. I'm assuming that you couldn't go tell your boss that your poor performance was Joe's fault. As people we have learned how to perform being around those types of people. We've had to. We could not function if we didn't have that ability.

Why are these guys different? Why are athletes so different from carpenters or accountants? They all work with people they'd rather not and they cannot excuse their performance by blaming another.

I do believe that a positive work environment is best, but that's just an opinion. It very well could be the exact opposite of what people think today. It's very possible that 25 guys as friends and buddies perform worse than 25 guys who hate each other's guts. I would not think that would be the case, but I don't know.

I know that many things that were considered common knowledge about baseball have been found untrue. Because of that, I cannot accept as fact that chemistry affects performance. I certainly have an opinion about it. If Joe is having problems performing because of Jack then I'm firing Joe. We have to perform under pressure in our lives and part of that is dealing with these types of people. If you cannot do that, you are the one that should be fired. That's my opinion. I have no idea whether any of it is true or if that's the best thing to do or not. I don't know either way and until someone proves it or disproves it I am going to assume that chemistry is of minimal to no value.

So fuck that stupid myth about team chemistry. Fuck it with the power of the 9 year decade.

[Chuck to Chuck]

The guy is another Kent Mercker.  I don't enjoy watching him play.  Hardly anyone else does.  Sports is supposed to be entertaining.  Milton is not entertaining, at least not in a good way.

He's not good enough to put up with the way we embraced Dennis Rodman around here.

Maddog can quote all the stats he wants.  There's a reason the guy has been on what will be 8 teams in his career yet plenty of other baseball lunatics stay on the same team year after year: The other lunatics' goodness at baseball outweighs their loonyness.

Milton's loonyness far outweighs his goodness.

The Cubs will not be worse off without him.

[Philberto]

The guy is another Kent Mercker.  I don't enjoy watching him play.  Hardly anyone else does.  Sports is supposed to be entertaining.  Milton is not entertaining, at least not in a good way.

He's not good enough to put up with the way we embraced Dennis Rodman around here.

Maddog can quote all the stats he wants.  There's a reason the guy has been on what will be 8 teams in his career yet plenty of other baseball lunatics stay on the same team year after year: The other lunatics' goodness at baseball outweighs their loonyness.

Milton's loonyness far outweighs his goodness.

The Cubs will not be worse off without him.

He didn't quote one stat at all. It was just a simple statement that people need to deal with shitty coworkers.

You're right Chuck, that OF of Soriano, Fukudome, Burrell will be so much better.

I know we watch sports for our entertainment, but if a guy makes your team better (and the 2010 Cubs will be better with Milton than not) then who gives a shit.

[CBStew]

We are really reaching for something to talk about now that the football season is over.

[Tinker to Evers to Chance]

The guy is another Kent Mercker.  I don't enjoy watching him play.  Hardly anyone else does.  Sports is supposed to be entertaining.  Milton is not entertaining, at least not in a good way.

He's not good enough to put up with the way we embraced Dennis Rodman around here.

Maddog can quote all the stats he wants.  There's a reason the guy has been on what will be 8 teams in his career yet plenty of other baseball lunatics stay on the same team year after year: The other lunatics' goodness at baseball outweighs their loonyness.

Milton's loonyness far outweighs his goodness.

The Cubs will not be worse off without him.

He didn't quote one stat at all. It was just a simple statement that people need to deal with shitty coworkers.

You're right Chuck, that OF of Soriano, Fukudome, Burrell will be so much better.

I know we watch sports for our entertainment, but if a guy makes your team better (and the 2010 Cubs will be better with Milton than not) then who gives a shit.

And do teachers have to deal with having their careers fucked with by those same shitty people?

[Richard Chuggar]

Well, since the Cubs fucked up that Harden thing, maybe they can hang onto Milton? Probably not. I know I'm probably one of 5 Cub fans who actually want him retained, but I would think it would make more money sense to hang on to him for $10 million than to pick up, say, Burrell, for $15 million or so (His contract plus a good chunk of Milton's). Burrell is shitty and Milton is not. Worn out his welcome in Chicago? Who gives a shit? The fans will probably hate him. They won't stop coming to the park. If someone boycotts them, there will be another schmoe ready to take his/her seats. Clubhouse shit? Fuck that, too. Read this that MB21 of ACB wrote on Kaplan's blog a while back. It's pretty dead on:

Also, chemistry probably has more to do with winning and losing. Players have more fun winning and it will create an exciting environment for all the players. Losing sucks and it will bring out the worst in people.

I don't know how much value chemistry has, but I do know that most managers and general managers have said that it doesn't matter. I also find it hard to believe that Player A is performing worse because Player B is an ass. That's actually something we could verify and I might actually look into it if you were to provide me with 20 or 30 players who are supposedly clubhouse cancers. If people say who they are we can find out if they have any impact on performance.

Think about it, Dave. If you could tell your boss that your performance was lacking because Joe was an ass, what do you think he would say? People can't do that. That's not what happens in real life. We all deal with asses nearly every day of our lives. If you work in a company that has more than a few employees you're working with someone who would be considered a clubhouse cancer. I'm assuming that you couldn't go tell your boss that your poor performance was Joe's fault. As people we have learned how to perform being around those types of people. We've had to. We could not function if we didn't have that ability.

Why are these guys different? Why are athletes so different from carpenters or accountants? They all work with people they'd rather not and they cannot excuse their performance by blaming another.

I do believe that a positive work environment is best, but that's just an opinion. It very well could be the exact opposite of what people think today. It's very possible that 25 guys as friends and buddies perform worse than 25 guys who hate each other's guts. I would not think that would be the case, but I don't know.

I know that many things that were considered common knowledge about baseball have been found untrue. Because of that, I cannot accept as fact that chemistry affects performance. I certainly have an opinion about it. If Joe is having problems performing because of Jack then I'm firing Joe. We have to perform under pressure in our lives and part of that is dealing with these types of people. If you cannot do that, you are the one that should be fired. That's my opinion. I have no idea whether any of it is true or if that's the best thing to do or not. I don't know either way and until someone proves it or disproves it I am going to assume that chemistry is of minimal to no value.

So fuck that stupid myth about team chemistry. Fuck it with the power of the 9 year decade.

Milton Bradley sucks at baseball.  Bottom line.  Who gives a fuck about how big of a morgan he is?  Get him the shit out of town.  Give it up Yeti, you're wrong.