#Cubs reach agreement with David DeJesus. Will be their everyday right fielder. #MLB
— Ken Rosenthal (@Ken_Rosenthal) November 30, 2011
DDJ->Cubs 86
86 thoughts on “DDJ->Cubs”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
#Cubs reach agreement with David DeJesus. Will be their everyday right fielder. #MLB
— Ken Rosenthal (@Ken_Rosenthal) November 30, 2011
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Dodged the worst case scenario.
A meteor was redirected?
I mean, wasn’t the offer of arbitration, rejection and signed elsewhere a stone cold lock?
He might have accepted arb (though there was some speculation that he had agreed in advance not to), thinking that he could get a little more money in the short term while also building back up his free market value for next year.
As it is he’s taking a 20% pay cut from last year, and though the max 20% pay cut rule doesn’t apply to him, I think in practice arbitrators don’t tend to cut salaries very much.
Yay.
Heyman says it’s 2 years + option, $10M.
Now for the Astros signing Willingham….
We don’t want that, do we? I thought we were working off the old system where we only get the bottom 15 pick for Type A’s still?
Nope.
Pig is a special circumstances Type A. His new team doesn’t surrender a draft pick; instead, the A’s get a 1st round pick immediately preceeding the new team’s slot.
Woah. Really?
That’s way better.
Aside from when the Yankees or Red Sox get the first pick in the draft when a shitty team signs one of their players. Won’t happen often, but you gotta figure eventually it will and the shit may hit the fan (or better).
sent you an email
Is it about launching a coup on **?
Give it another month or so for a coup. Let the silence really sink in.
WOO.
Thanks, and go As.
Did not receive said e-mail.
Hm.
Try again. It may have ended up in my Junk pile, which I dumped this morning.
Or… if it’s work safe… what’s up?
Eh, I’ll just ask here: you know of any good (online?) resource for aerial wildfire-fighting photography?
Best place I can think of for stored images.
Thanks!
Okay… dear Houston, SIGN THE PIG!
Are you sure? The only reference I can find to this says:
i.e. still bottom 15 of the first round, or top 15 of the second round.
As sure as I can be without having the actual CBA in hand.
Link.
That’s the same as what my link says – a pick immediately before the pick they would have gotten under the old system. So the top half of the first round is still excluded.
It wouldn’t make sense for teams to get better compensation for marginal type A players like Willingham and Cuddyer than for Pujols and Fielder.
In fact, Callis clarifies this in the comments on your link:
The comment reads clearer than the original quote.
Dammit.
Ok, go Nats signing Willingham! Ha.
I’m just pissed I read the original comment and didn’t understand the words…
Then there’s this…
Need. Source. Material.
I don’t think the new Basic Agreement has actually been signed yet; they have a Memorandum of Understanding but the lawyers need to get in there and dot the i’s. The MLBPA site has the same info as above and when the new agreement is finalized it should be available in the left-menu there.
I. Hate. Stupid. People.
I feel my Zooks proposal has been somewhat validated.
And the Rockies follow up by signing Ramon.
I wonder how my 1/$4 million plus $4.5 million option ($500K buy-out) would have compared…
2 years/6.5 million. I think Ramon would have taken your deal. Assuming money is the only factor.
Here’s what I don’t get…
The Angels trade a 22 year old SP for Iannetta, a 29 year old Catcher who’ll make $3.55 million next year and can void his $5 million option for 2013.
The Rockies immediately turn around and sign 36 year old Ramon Hernandez to a 2 year/$6.5 million deal to be their primary Catcher.
(All ages for the 2012 season).
Why didn’t the Angels just sign Hernandez?
Because Scioscia saw a montage of Ramon not blocking the plate, and developed a new facial tic.
Heh.
Find a suitable picture(s)?
Handed the link off to my art director
What’s the project?
Iannetta’s low avg/high bb profile isn’t exactly Scioscia’s style either.
Iannetta is younger, healthier, and provides better defense, which is probably important for Scioscia. You can project him to be about a win or so better than Hernandez and for a team like the Angels looking to win immediately in 2012, that probably justifies the additional price of a 22 year pitcher who has done nothing in his professional career thus far to think he’d be a MLB caliber starter.
Maybe.
Just not sure Chatwood+Ramon isn’t better than Iannetta.
Then again, it’s the Angels… fuck ’em.
Can we just give them Gio for Profar?
Something’s been bugging me about the new CBA. Again and again you hear complaints about how capping the draft is going to hurt small market teams.
The 2011 draft skews the numbers a bit, as a lot of teams threw a bunch more money than they typically did in what might be the lastv uncapped draft in baseball. Per this list, the 10 teams that spent the most on signing bonuses were:
Pirates $52,057,400
Nationals $51,084,600
Royals $45,204,900
Red Sox $44,097,250
Orioles $41,219,700
Rays $40,582,200
Blue Jays $38,429,600
Mariners $36,055,900
Padres $35,768,100
Diamondbacks $35,261,000
According to MLB this criticism appears to be vlaid: of this Top 10 list Pittsburgh, KC, Baltimore, Tampa, San Diego and Arizona are all “small market/lower revenue” clubs. THE NEW CBA HURTS SMALLER CLUBS!!!
But what happens when we exclude the feeding frenzy that was the 2011 draft?
Looking from 2007 – 2010, we see that 11 teams spent more than $25 million cumulative on their draft classes. Here’s a link for 2008 – 2010. (I added the 2007 figures by hand.) Pittsburgh, Baltimore, KC and Tampa are in this group; but they’re joined by Boston, Washington, Detroit, SF, NYY, Texas and Toronto. Then, looking at 2006, we see that 9 teams spent at least $6 million on bonus money. They were: Boston (8.6) Atlanta (8.1) NYY (6.7) KC (6.7) AZ (6.6) Cleveland (6.5) SD (6.3) Colorado (6.2) and Detroit (6.0).
Simply put, if you exclude the 2011 draft large market/high revenue teams have been spending more on draft bonuses than their small market/low revenue brethren. The old CBA did nothing to check that fiscal advantage. Hopefully, the new CBA’s cap will change that.
I have a larger concern about capping the draft. I’m concerned about what it does to mlb’s ability to remain competitive with other major sports. We already see many of the better athletes choosing football or basketball over baseball. With limits on the amount that can be spent on the draft I worry that fewer of the players that have basketball or football scholarships will opt to sign baseball contracts.
Perhaps I’m mistaken and the flexibility that teams are allowed in how they allocate that money means that teams will pay more for those players and spend less elsewhere.
It’s my understanding that they can pay more for players if they’re paying less on others. It’s an overall cap, not an individual one. Even still, baseball by it’s very nature is less attractive because can’t get into the big bucks right away like basketball/football. Anything that might add to that will only hurt it more.
Still the number of teams willing to spend 7m on Donavan Tate when they won’t have any other draft picks that theyll be able to sign is going to be negligible.
Probably. I think it’ll eventually screw over a team at some point, but not likely too happen often.
Wrong, it screws over the whole MLB because it decreases the talent level dramatically.
It screws over the fans the most, because if the owners are ALL spending less on talent, the talent drain is felt across all teams.
I sincerely doubt this changes anything in that regard. There’s more than enough in the money pool to pay out. The real “killer” is no major league contracts from draft picks which quite frankly is more a good thing even if it causes a very small percentage of players to choose another sport.
Im sorry but this is just terrible analysis. Both high end and mid range tools players who have other sports options will not choose baseball because of the significant cap on player bonuses. Furthermore, the likelihood that the individual player makes good money is way higher in other sports already because of the difficulty of baseball.
I think it’s actually a pretty difficult choice for a HS senior, particularly one whose other sport is football.
You could be drafted/paid now, or play 4-5 years in college and risk injury/failure/etc before NFL money pours in. For college kids it’s a different choice.
Nah. They’re royalty as football players in college, and they probably make better money than minor leaguers do — on top of not having to play in shitty little towns with like 400 fans etc etc
Capping bonuses is going to FKing kill the draft.
Thanks, and go As.
agreed
Right but you also know that the pay out for baseball less certain over the long run. The vast vast majority of baseball draftees are only paid their bonus and then live subsistence living as minor leaguers, which is why capping the bonus will significantly undermine the talent entering the league.
I agree.
The vast majority of baseball draftees get meek bonuses and already declared baseball as their sport by playing it in college and entering the draft anyway. The only players this really matters for are high school kids who have proven little and have to choose between a “modest” payout (with a likely “we’ll pay for college” clause if that’s important) and an ultra competitive (and unpaid) college football career with no guarantees after 3 – 4 years of any payout nor of a “complete” education since most of that time is spent on preparing for games.
The vast majority of draftees are not college kids, they are high school kids.
Right. Cash now or maybe more later.
right so if you decrease cash now same more later is more appealing
Depends on the from/to.
A guaranteed multi-million dollars is a pretty sweet thing for an 18 year old.
{adds to decontextualized quote bank for blackmailing nm when he runs for office}
but now its not millions is hundreds of thousands of dollars.
I don’t think players choose baseball right now unless they’re already committed to the sport precisely because it’s difficulty level. I don’t buy the notion that this change will have significant impact on that. Kids choose their sport early on and in the end, either A) choose the sport they’re the best at B) choose the sport they love the most C) choose the sport that’ll make them the most money fast. The only possible change is how players who, after playing sports of decade or more, is how they view “C” and this does very little to that. Basketball & Football have had significantly higher payouts early on while getting to the big stage significantly faster. And that was before the change. The rare two sport star player would already be choosing the other sport unless “B” applied. The added cap won’t change any of that.
The idea that kids choose their sport early on is crap quite frankly. Tons of kids are multi sport athletes and don’t face competition that necessitates them focusing on one sport more than others until the late stages of high school. But there are plenty of kids with aptitude for both baseball and football, whether it is Bubba Starling, Zack Lee, or Rashaun Dixon (who had a legit football schollarship and whose brother plays on the niners). Loving the game isn’t going to be enough to offset the higher pay outs of playing a different sport when you are going to have to go to college and play for free anyway.
Dude, the only players this affects are the top-tier of the top-tier of players. The “good” players will likely get what they have been getting. The are very few players that are genuine two sport STARS. Not just “good” and generally speaking those players have more passion for one sport or the other. While money certainly has an affect on what direction they might take, you are WAY over-inflating the impact of that decision. The only players it would have a serious impact on are players who are arrogant enough to think they belong in the majors from day one and who’s dedication to the sport does leave the option of choosing another sport (Harper, Strasburgh, Drews of the sport). The rest will wind up with near what they’d normally get. The rare overpay will still happen at the expense of another prospect who will wind up signing cheaper.
I disagree. There are a LOT of players who, while they may not be two sport stars, get bonuses large enough to buy them out of taking college scholarships.
(or don’t, zomg Justin Smoak)
Thanks, and go As.
Youre telling me that we are going to sign Rashaun Dixon to a 400k over slot deal when it would cost us two first round picks? Youre fking insane.
I hear Tate Donovan is available for much less.
Gotta find a way to make a deal with the Blue Jays…
Link.
wow. 17 guys ranked B- or higher?!
And a bunch of the C+ guys have the tools to grade higher down the road.
Yeah AA has done a fantastic job with the system.
Deck + Wojo + Michael Crouse for Bailey? Too much?
I went out to lunch with an old friend yesterday, and he, like a lot of my friends, says I should go into politics. I don’t think I’m quite ignorant enough, although I’m more than adequately morally bankrupt. I don’t think I’m greedy enough, either. Money bores me, as do small amounts of power.
It’s kinda funny… A lot of my friends and family live in their own little worlds and completely ignore politics and current events, due to how depressing the news always seems to be, at least to them. I’m a big news/political guy to them just because I don’t willfully ignore it all like they do. In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.
I don’t ignore it because it’s too depressing. I ignore it because I get too involved, it angers the blood and convinces me that humanity is in need of a real rain to fall and wash all the scum off the streets.
Then, I turn off Frontline and decide against weapons purchases.
Pretty much this. Add in the vehement from both sides just blasting away with ignorant hate and the need to use those weapons you’re pushed to consider purchasing and it’s just better to walk away from it. That being said, Viva the new nation: Pacific States of America!!
I can just imagine the opposition TV ads, doubtless replete with damning photographs. “Here’s spwc with several unknown individuals at the Folsom Street Fair circa 1987. Would you want this “man” giverning your state?”
You’d have to go pre-emptive and use them in the campaign:
“spwc – always gets to the bottom of things”
“spwc – bound to succeed”
etc
Where’s the like button on this god damned thing?
TWHS
Buttons. Plural. You have to hit them all at the same time. Del, Ctrl, and Alt. Hit them all at once to show “Like”. And if you really, like it, keep hitting them over and over again.
I’d vote for him.
Well… those Folsom Street pictures won’t do them any good. When he comes out in fishnet shirts and in flamboyant drag everyday for press conferences, tv ads, debates, etc., really, what’s the point?
Bell -> Marlins