A complete review of the Cubs payroll and options against the Hot Stove rumors

by Ivy Walls on Jan 1, 2009 2:50 PM CST

I decided on this holiday watching the football fest (Go Big Ten!) to put together a spread on Cubs payroll projected out 5 years. I made some assumptions with pre arb eligible and arb eligible players and even included the current minor league 40-man rosters. I tried to make it as if I were in charge of the payroll budget to see what the maximum cost would be and then included the rumors of Peavy, Roberts, Bradley and now Winn (thanks DGU), one could go further an insert Hermida, Teahan or Kubel as well.The other assumption was clearing Marquis's spot and adding Vizcaino.

Possible rumored trades I held that Peavy would demand Vitters, Hart, Pie, Cedeno, Stevens and the other lefty from Cleveland. Regarding Winn I took DGU's suggestion of Vizcaino and then added Wuertz. Regarding Roberts I made the assumption that Fontenot, Castillo, Hoffpauir and someone like Jackson. I had to make some salary assumptions to subtract.

Here is what emerged: Right now the Cubs are at the following salary commitment liabilities; 2009-$124.68M; 2010-$137.37M; 2011-$93.23M; 2011$87.50M; 2012-$62.55M, 2013-$41M

Bottom line is that regardless what if anything Hendry & Co. do they are all in 2009 and 2010 and must play to win period. The other assumption is what I have read and that $145M appears to be this year's ceiling and probably that or $150M in 2010. Now remember the Luxury salary level for 2009 is $162M and $170M in 2010, so there is no danger of paying extra.Here is the entire spread:

Position	Player	09 Salary	10 Salary	11 Salary	12 Salary	13 Salary	14 Salary

SP	Zambrano	17.75M	17.875M	$17.88M	$18M	$19.25M
SP	Dempster	$8M	$12.5M	$13.5M	$14M
SP	Lilly	$12M	$12M
SP	Harden	$7M
SP	Marshall	$420K	arb	arb	arb	FA
SP	Hill	$450K	arb	arb	arb	FA
subtotal		$45.49M	$42.37M	$31.38M	$32M	$19.25

RP	Marmol	$500K	$850K	$1M	arb	arb	arb
RP	Gregg	$4M-arb?	arb	FA
RP	Samardzija	$2M	$2M	$2M	$2.M-opt	$2.5M-opt	FA
RP	Wuertz	$1M-arb?	arb	FA
RP	Cotts	$1.1M	FA
RP	Vizcaino	$3.5M	$4M or $500K buyout
RP	Gaudin	$2M	arb	FA
RP	Guzman	$420K	arb	arb	arb	FA
RP	Hart	$400K	$420	arb	arb	arb	FA
RP	Ascanio	60K	60K	60K	arb	arb	arb
RP	Atkins	60K	60K	60K
RP	Berg	60K	60K	60K
RP	Mateo	60K	60K	60K
RP	Stevens	60K	60K	60K
RP	Wells	60K	60K	60K
subtotal		$13.6M	$21.7M	$8.6M	$11M	$10.5M	$10M

1B	DLee	$13M	$13M	FA
2B	Miles	$2.2M	$2.7M	FA
SS	Theriot	$500K	arb	arb	arb	FA
3B	Ramirez	$15.65M	$15.75M	$14.65M opt	$16M club or $2M	FA
LF	Soriano	$16M	$18M	$18M	$18M	$18M	$18M	FA
CF	Fukudome	$11.5M	$13M	$13.5M	FA
OF	Johnson	$3M	arb	FA
OF	Gathright	$800K	arb	arb	FA
OF	Pie	$420K	$450K	arb	arb	arb	FA
Catcher	Soto	$420K	$500K	$1M	arb	arb	arb	FA
Catcher	K Hill	$60K
IF	Cedeno	$500K-arb	arb	arb	FA
IF	Fontenot	$420K	$450K	arb	arb	arb	FA
Catcher	Fox	60K
IB	Hoffpauir	$400K	$420K	$500K	arb	arb	arb
OF	Snyder	$60K	$60K
OF	Fuld	$60K
subtotal		$66.09M	$75.3M	$53.25M	$44.5M	$32.8M	$31M

total w/o rumors		$124.68M	$135.37M	$93.23M	$87.5M	62.55M	$41M

OF	Bradley	$10M	$10M	$10M	FA
IF	Roberts	$8M	FA
SP	Peavy	$11M	$15M	$16M	$17M	$22M or $4M
OF	Winn	$8.25M	FA

w/Bradley		$135.68M	$145.37M	$103.23M	$87.5M	$62.55M	$41M
w/Roberts		$132.68M	$135.37M	$93.23M	$87.5M	$62.55M	$41M
w/Peavy		$134.18M	$149.5M	$108.5M	$104M	$84.5M	$41M
w/Winn		$128.5M	$123.5M	$93.23M	$87.5M	62.55M	$41M


w/Peavy&Bradley		$144.18M	$159.5M	$118.5M	$104.M	$84.5M	$41M
w/Peavy& Winn		$138.58M	$149.5M	$108.5M	$104M	$84.5M	$41M
w/Peavy&Roberts		$141M	$149.5M	$108.5M	$104M	$84.5M	$41M

w/Roberts&Bradley		$143.68	$145.37M	$103.23M	$87.5M	$62.55M	$41M
w/Roberts&Winn		$136.18M	$135.37M	$93.23M	$87.5M	$62.55M	$41M

w/Peavy,Roberts, Bradley		$154.68M	$159.5M	118.5M	$104M	$84.5M	$41M
w/Peavy,Roberts, Winn		$145.68M	$149.5M	$108.5M	$104M	$84.5M	$41M

What picture emerges?

Cubs cannot acquire Peavy, Roberts and Bradley for it is not budget acceptable---period
Peavy, Roberts and Winn is barely acceptable if the 2010 ceiling is $150M but the Cubs would not have a RF'er or 2B and would have to acquire something or develop one or have to trade down for salary room.
Peavy is the problem in 2010 since no matter what the Cubs start at 135M without him and with him at $149M.
Bradley is no bargain his $10M per year places the Cubs at $145M in 2010

Thus my thoughts are to quickly engage with the Giants and acquire Winn for one year at $8.25M while trying to lay off $4.5M in salary spending $3.75M this year and having Winn off the books in 2010.

The Roberts deal if available the Cubs could make and really improve their lineup and defense again acquiring Roberts for about $7M or gaining two players for the roughly the annual price of Bradley and probably more durable OR bringing the April roster to $135M which published reports had this as Hendry's target.

Now this is cold but by doing this the Cubs could go fire sale hunting in spring training where a team like KC or Minn or Det or TB or FL might be willing to trade a bona fide starter at a bargain where the salary better fits into 2010's liability structure. Heck Pettit might even come available this spring for $10M for one year---one never knows.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

Tweet Comment 80 comments | 4 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Nicely done

I hope your work becomes moot once we have a new owner though! But who knows if that will ever happen.

Im a little confused about Winn though and where he fits in with this team; hes certainly not the middle of the order lefty Lou reportedly wants.

Again, nice effort, it makes me think again that, if any trade is to be made, it should be for Roberts w/ Bradley I suppose; that would be a nice lineup despite Bradleys fragility.

What I really wonder is what the FA class of 2011 will look like b/c it appears we could be major players in that market, especially if Vitters is dealt along with some of the Cleveland guys.

in any event, definitely rec’d

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Jan 1, 2009 3:38 PM CST reply actions

you pose the vexing decision Bradley or Winn,

Bradley offers potentially more pop from the left side compared to Winn who last year hit over .300, 10 HR’s and .363 OBP and a .426 SLG (almost .800 OPS), he is 10 years with 104 HR’s so you know he is 10-14 HR a year guy a professional .285-.305 hitter.

It is his defense, durability and locker room presence that is the difference plus the $$$$$$ a future FA at $8.25M (minus the salaries dealt) he offers much more flexibility. Last year he played 10 games at CF and in 2007 he recorded 36 games there.

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 1, 2009 4:01 PM CST up reply actions

I have no problems or worries about Bradleys demeanor

Im just worried about his health, and to sign someone presuming hes only going to start 90 or so games, for 30M dollars, seems foolish to me, and having to safeguard against his injury with another OF isnt the best use of roster space. If they do sign MB, I’ll hope for the best and be extremely intrigued by what he could do batting cleanup or wherever.

So I suppose if they can get Bradley at 8M or so, that would be a bit easier to swallow. As for Winn, putting him in CF and RJ/KF in the right field combo leaves Soriano as the only power threat in the outfield, which doesnt seem to be Lous optimal formation, which is also exacerbated by Lees declining power numbers….which of course, leads us to Milton Bradley/Adam Dunn debate.

Which again leads me to believe that Hendry should get the fire going on the Roberts deal again.

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Jan 1, 2009 4:17 PM CST up reply actions

many ways to score runs

Power helps but if the Cubs actually had a lead off hitter they could move DLee down to the second hole where his spraying of the ball and patience feeds better.

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 1, 2009 4:24 PM CST up reply actions

Thats why I was advocating Roberts again

But Lee’s double play propensity in the 2 hole is frightening

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Jan 1, 2009 4:46 PM CST up reply actions

that was an aberration

part of that problem was that there were men on base but not moving. Roberts would be moving

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 1, 2009 5:12 PM CST up reply actions

Cubs were 5th in home runs in the NL

with 184. Cincinati was 4th, with 187 and Milwaukee 3rd, with 198… So home runs aren’t a big problem, although I’d like to see Lee sent to SF and Dunn signed to play 1st… That would make up for the loss of power from DeRo and Edmonds..

It doesn’t seem that SF necessarily needs to cut payroll, but rather move some OF’s, as they have too many with Wiin, Roberts, Rowand and Shierholtz. So maybe Lee for Winn’s a possibility,and yes Lee has a NTC, but he also grew up nearby in Sacramento.

SORIANO! YESSSSSSSS! JIMBO!!!

by CubFaninCA on Jan 1, 2009 4:27 PM CST up reply actions

Don't forget Fred Lewis in SF...

They started him for much of 2008.

Proud recipient of a hot dog shot from the Iowa Cubs hot dog gun.

by IowaCubs- on Jan 2, 2009 3:58 PM CST up reply actions

Great post

Lots of money invested in 2010 even without adding in Harden… Would be nice if they could deal D. Lee..

SORIANO! YESSSSSSSS! JIMBO!!!

by CubFaninCA on Jan 1, 2009 3:55 PM CST reply actions

that is why I am now not for signing Bradley or Dunn

they smother the 2010 roster and force moves like that. I would rather have DLee for 2010 in a FA year and see him really bear down defending the WS crown. Same for Ramirez and then let them go FA bringing up Vitters and Colvin and retooling.

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 1, 2009 4:04 PM CST up reply actions

If its a three year deal for Bradley, ending in '11, would that be so bad?

Presuming neither Peavy or Roberts is added, the majority of the team would be under wraps for ’10, wouldnt there be enough left to resign Harden?- the ’10 budget with just Bradley would be 145 or so, couldnt they weather the storm for one year until all that money comes off in 2011

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Jan 1, 2009 4:24 PM CST up reply actions

It is not what Bradley costs initially

It is whether you would be happy with 80 game starts and 120 game appearances. Also note that RJohnson is arb eligible and would probably command another raise to $4.5M, then you have 8 others including players like Marshall, Gaudin, Gathright, R Hill (if he makes it back), Theriot, Cedeno, Gregg, Wuertz, this all accounts for at least $10M or more in raises so basically unless you trade on the margins and able to bring up league minimums payroll in 2010 starts out at $140M minimum without Bradley…..

It is just not smart if your budget is $145M

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 1, 2009 4:33 PM CST up reply actions

That would be a difference of only 5M

And i cant believe you got me defending signing Bradley, ha. I have my doubts if Gregg will be here too long, ditto for Cedeno.

I suppose my point was that it would only be “bad” for 2010 and with a lot coming off the books in ’11, it shouldnt be unfeasible.

This freaking sale is ruining everything

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Jan 1, 2009 4:50 PM CST up reply actions

sale is doing anything, Cubs have increased payroll substantially since it started

IIRC Cubs were at the mid ’90’s when the sale began, last year increased payroll almost 20% to $118M and now they are at $124M and discussing the fact that they are going to add $10-15M more to that number with a published budget of $145M (19% increase)

Any year that is bad is bad. Listen the risk is sharper for 2010 with the expected economic recession hitting bottom at the beginning of 2010.

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 1, 2009 5:08 PM CST up reply actions

Good points

I suppose what I was getting at is the payroll uncertainty for next year while we wait for the winning bid to be announced and the subsequent organizational changes that would ensue.

This offseason there seemed to be more uncertainty than in years passed in terms of payroll

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Jan 1, 2009 5:14 PM CST up reply actions

The payroll is sufficiently high...

It’s among the top 5 in baseball. It’s not the payroll uncertainty that is the problem.

The problem is that we have some bad investments. We’re paying $12 million per year for a guy who was terrible after April last year and remains such a question mark moving forward that we need to platoon him and address the position we thought he was addressing last year. We are also having to dump the salary of a guy that

The other problem is that we have had such a bad farm system for so many years. Because of that, we’ve had to invest so heavily in free agents, overpaying for the quality that we get in nearly every case (that’s simply the nature of free agency).

A $130-140 million payroll should be sufficient. Sure, it’s not Yankee spending or Red Sox spending, but it’s plenty good.

by SouthernCub on Jan 1, 2009 5:30 PM CST up reply actions

Fukudome will produce at expected levels

Many people knew it would take a year for him to adjust just like Matsui

Repeat that:

Many people knew it would take a year for him to adjust just like Matsui

The other investments are Soriano, Zambrano, Ramirez, Lee, Dempster, & Lilly this all adds up to roughly $92-93M or 75% of the payroll

As I see it, the 3 starters got a pair of 18 wins and 16 last year, Soriano on the field the Cubs won over .600 and Ramirez was their most consistent hitters. DLee had a tired 2nd half and I think Lou has to learn to rest him once a week while we are back to Fukudome.

Repeat again

Many people knew it would take a year for him to adjust just like Matsui

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 1, 2009 5:37 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs

It doesn't sound like the Cubs are as confident as you...

And I doubt they KNEW it would take a year for him to adjust, just like Matsui.

Saying something three times doesn’t make it true. It’s just obnoxious.

I hope you’re right, but the fact that the team is freaking out about Fukudome’s performance and moving him to CF and into a platoon doesn’t sound like they feel the same confidence as you.

by SouthernCub on Jan 1, 2009 6:55 PM CST up reply actions

SouthernCub is right here.

The Cubs had ludicrous expectations for Fukudome. Lou wanted to bat him 4th and was disappointed with Dome long before any of us were. That’s why Randy Winn isn’t realistic if you have to work with Lou.

What Jim Hendry has to ask himself is whether he can deal with Lou’s disappointment or if he’s just going to make moves that put the long-term future of this club in more and more jeopardy.

Is having right-handed hitters, good hitters, batting 3-4-5, really so much of a problem that you have to create other problems to address it?

The author of this post is not a certified scout, doctor, agent, statistician, manager, or journalist, nor was he ever a very good player, though he tried very hard to be like Ryne Sandberg and was about as scrappy as it gets (in T-ball). Any opinion expressed above should in no way be confused with fact, truth, or reality and is hereby qualified in the following ways: 1) The author does not know as much about baseball as Lou Piniella. 2) The author does not know as much about baseball as Jim Hendry. 3) The author does not know as much about baseball as either Dusty or Darren Baker.

by DGU on Jan 1, 2009 8:11 PM CST up reply actions

Winn's a fallback if Bradley gets too expensive.

He would at least breakup the 1-6 righties, but batting him 2nd between Sori & Lee..

SORIANO! YESSSSSSSS! JIMBO!!!

by CubFaninCA on Jan 1, 2009 8:19 PM CST up reply actions

SouthernCub...

Obnoxious?

Come on, have a little confidence that someone knows a little before they spend $48M. Except for Ichiro who is quite special every Japanese position player has had to experience a period of adjustment and in many respects their numbers were less than what they had in the smaller ball yards of Japan.

IURC, Fukudome had a .305/.397/.543 line in his career and was one of the island nation’s best players where he was even the MVP in the inaugural WBC. Now except for his power numbers his other lines remained pretty much the same for the first half of the season last year. Now what was known also was that he was still recovering from an injury and was not in the best of shape which in many ways probably contributed to his 2nd half swoon. This on top of adjusting to a new club, time zone, league, pitchers, travel contributed to a downturn. Now PERCOTA called for the following line:289/.401/.504.
April he had a 327/.436/.480
May 293/.388/.404 where in 234 appearances he had 35 BB’s kind of Bonds
June 264/.387/.402 his numbers almost the same as May

But of course as we know starting in July the spiral like how a WWII Zero goes down after running out of gas.

July .236/.306/.382
August .193/.293/.253
Sept/Oct .178/.288/.289
OR
1st half: .349 BABIP and popular All Star
2nd half: .251 BABIP and essentially a platoon OF’er

What I am assessing is that you don’t recognize that human factors remain human factors even when there is big money paid—-that in my mind resentment and not reality. Now resentment towards players who make big money or play a child’s game is normal for many fan[atics] but still….

Is this obnoxious enough for you?

Now I think and it is simply an opinion that Fukudome will recover closer to his career line outside his power numbers but be better.

There is nothing that hurts a competitive player like fatigue. IIRC an acquaintance of mine in 1976 who was on the top college BB team, a senior, the leader, was dragging through the mid-season and then it was discovered he was not eating right, junk food—-staying up late typical 22 year old stuff. That was changed and he was required to eat at a training table and go to bed by 10PM and he then led his team to a NCAA championship, get drafted and star for over 14 years in the NBA. Talking with him about that time in Jan-Feb he told me it was simply fatigue. He was not mentally sharp, physically he wanted to perform but the little things he couldn’t win.

It is my thoughts that Fukudome is going to adjust. He will find a way to eat properly even on the road. It is getting the best sushi delivered to his hotel room so be it. Getting sleep and best workout regimen, for he is not lazy nor stupid.

In the end I see next year a consistent line like April of 2007 315/.406/.480 resulting in 18 or 19 HR’s.

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 2, 2009 10:27 AM CST up reply actions

Yes... obnoxious...

And you prove my point for me in this long-winded post. After April, Fukudome was mediocre in May and June and then terrible in July-Septemeber.

I’m quite confident that the Cubs did their due diligence. Just like the Mets did their diligence on Kaz Matsui. Just like the Yankees did their diligence on Hideki Matsui. What I think you’re suggesting, however, is ridiculous. The Cubs may have anticipated an adjustment period, but they most certainly did not anticipate Fukudome being atrocious in the second half of the year. The fact that they pegged him for the 4th or 5th spot in the order suggests you’re wrong on this one.

Further, I didn’t say your suggestion was obnoxious – I just said I think it’s wrong. I said your repeating the suggestion three times was obnoxious.

I’m not saying Fukudome won’t bounce back to being a .380-.400 OBP guy with 10-15 HR power this year. I certainly hope he does, and it’s certainly a reasonable possibility. I’m just saying that the fact that the Cubs are frantically keeping track of him this offseason and moving him into a CF platoon suggests the Cubs aren’t 100% confident he’ll bounce back.

by SouthernCub on Jan 2, 2009 10:40 AM CST up reply actions

funny thing about obnoxious

is that it just seems that is a common derogatory term used by those who hail south of the Ohio River.

You see it is easy to call names from a keyboard, a personal judgmental thing, where I find this behavior only distracting that you strongly disagree—-fine and so what you disagree but that is not obnoxious only a difference of a strong opinion.

Back to Fukudome. My experience with sports athletes, is that a former producer at a high level comes in a few sizes:
Soriano & Sosa where they are super gifted, they worked at that gift but by and large they possess something that can’t be coached.
Then there is a Sandburg/Jeter type, someone who is a good athlete but finds a way to outwork and out-think their opponents in situations and discipline.
Then there is the pretty much gifted who doesn’t really work at it but still can perform, Aramus Ramirez reminds me of this a natural works at his craft in a usual manner.
Then there is the good athlete that makes himself very good.

I find Fukudome in the 2nd area where his work ethic, smarts and good athlete and when challenged he will find a way to succeed.

Fukudome was embarrassed last year, swapped over by a situation that never happened before at still a relatively young age.

The coaching and front office are doing the right things since they cannot appropriately not manage around Fukudome continuing a slump but they are doing things even looking at bringing in other Japanese players for a natural roommate. IIRC correctly Piniella and CO said he had to change his off season workout regimen. Now he is not being replaced.

The biggest incentive of a player is competition so going into Spring Training with the prospects of a platoon is not a bad thing early on. It challenges his pride and I am certain will have him keen coming in. RJohnson is not so much insurance for him as insurance for the expected Bradley signing.

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 2, 2009 5:09 PM CST up reply actions

A lot of text wasted there...

as I never said Fukudome wouldn’t bounce back. I just said that he didn’t meet expectations, and the Cubs are now concerned about him, and (at least partly) due to that they are having to spend big again in search of the lefty power bat that they thought he’d provide.

I repeat: the Cubs are concerned about Fukudome because he didn’t meet expectations last year and doesn’t provide the power they’d hoped.

If I had to bet, I’d say Fukudome bounces back to the .380+ OBP and ~.800 OPS type of hitter, which would be solid for sure. But that’s not what they paid him $12 million per year to do. They expected more power. They thought he was going to be the middle-of-the-order lefty bat that Piniella desired last offseason.

I repeat: the Cubs are concerned about Fukudome because he didn’t meet expectations last year and doesn’t provide the power they’d hoped.

by SouthernCub on Jan 3, 2009 11:57 AM CST up reply actions

Matsuzaka was the WBC MVP

I think Fukudome will be fine and I hope he gets a lot of AB, b/c hes our best defensive outfielder at this point

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Jan 2, 2009 2:24 PM CST up reply actions

Well, I think it's hardly a given...

…that Dome will “produce at expected levels” (well, depending on what those expectations are, of course). And simply invoking Matsui’s name doesn’t help matters any.

That said, your point about fatigue triggers the thought that perhaps this is why Lou has decided to platoon Dome with Reed Johnson. Both players have excellent fundamentals but tend to rather obviously wear down if played too often.

Maybe Lou’s plan is to play Dome much like he played RJ and Fontenot this past season – put Kosuke in situations where he can best succeed and, hopefully, reap some good results even though Dome’s number of ABs – and number of innings played – will be much lower. Doing so will make Lou’s job a lot harder, but at least he’ll have a better idea of what to expect from Kosuke.

Yes, yes ... winter is indeed a pond upon which all of us must skate, braving frostbite and runny noses in the hopes that our cars will start and we shan't embarass ourselves slipping on a patch of black ice. Spring is more a quagmire of cold mud and slush, and fall is a pile of fallen leaves that may or may not hide a pile of doggy doo-doo. But summer, ah summer is an oasis of endless green that disappears all too quickly beneath our feet as we rush through its warm, glorious bliss.

by daver on Jan 2, 2009 3:45 PM CST up reply actions

I'd guess that if all works properly...

Johnson will act as a super-sub for all three OF, keeping them all fresh. I’d expect he could get 50-60 starts in that role (more if Bradley is out for substantial time).

The caveat is that this assumes Fukudome bounces back and is solid next year. If he’s not, then it becomes more necessary to have a full platoon situation.

by SouthernCub on Jan 2, 2009 3:55 PM CST up reply actions

This is giving me a headache...

Nice thread, though.

Proud recipient of a hot dog shot from the Iowa Cubs hot dog gun.

by IowaCubs- on Jan 2, 2009 4:00 PM CST up reply actions

I'm thinking Peavy and Bradley

but 144.18 mil might be too much for this year alone. However, if they do indeed get those 2 players, watch out NL.

by lexmarklover on Jan 1, 2009 4:14 PM CST reply actions

That's What I'm Thinking, Too...

… but the figures look more like $149M to me…

My 2008 Christmas wish list includes this jersey. In Hendry We Trust!

by initram on Jan 2, 2009 8:39 PM CST up reply actions

really a side note

allow me to dream for a moment (that is, I don’t think this would happen) but I think if we are going to target the Giants, and if the Giants land Manny, I’d rather try and pursue a Fred Lewis/Jon Sanchez package and find a third team to fit their needs if need be. That offers a 2nd rotation lefty and an OF at cheap costs, but it would be a costly package. That said, I’m dreaming.

2nd note, I do think it would take more than that to land Brian Roberts in a deal. I know, people are using the DeRosa trade as a barometer of sorts, but Roberts offers a unique skillset that isn’t available on the market right now. Jackson would have to be a PTBNL, which could be a small issue, although probably not.

Anyhow, I’ll comment on Ivy and DGU’s post when I have time this evening. Interesting stuff, though.

by toonsterwu on Jan 1, 2009 4:38 PM CST reply actions

I dont think Sanchez would be a good play at Wrigley

He just too erratic, we might as well use Hill

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Jan 1, 2009 4:53 PM CST up reply actions

Sanchez is THAT erratic?

by daver on Jan 2, 2009 3:35 PM CST up reply actions

thanks 'Toons'

what I wanted to inform the participates is the context the talent acquisition demands have on the payroll box.

The good is that Hendry has put the entire organization on the block that they are playing to win in 2009 and 2010….with the winds of the league running for safe financial harbor. In the business world this would be a strategy to gain dominant market share from a position of strength. Yankees are doing the same and it appears to a measured way so is Boston and LAD.

That means if they are not complete (and they are not) they still have to play. The danger is that if they come up short in 2009 and again get swept out of the playoffs they have little room to maneuver. So that is why the smart play is to acquire Winn & Roberts.

Interesting is the suggestion on paper to trade DLee, which I am against, he is a field and locker room leader on this team and I think he will bounce. Maybe Piniella will learn from last year and begin resting DLee if he has Hoffpauir on the bench and play Micah once a week and give DLee two days off a week periodically.

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 1, 2009 5:22 PM CST up reply actions

I'm wondering how much SF's willing to spend this offseason??

If they do Winn for Lee that’s $5 million in savings for the Cubs.. Of course, the Cubs would have to get Dunn to play 1b.. Another option is Lee & VIzcaino for Roberts and Winn, which would about $2 million.

SORIANO! YESSSSSSSS! JIMBO!!!

by CubFaninCA on Jan 1, 2009 5:31 PM CST up reply actions

highly doubt that will get past the fantasy baseball musings

DLee has a NTC

repeat that again

DLee has a NO TRADE CLAUSE

He might entertain going back to SF but why? Think they will beat LAD in their division even with Manny and Randy? Looks like an DL roster to me.

DLee is on the best team in their division and possibly best team in the NL or at least tied with Phila.

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 1, 2009 5:40 PM CST up reply actions

A lot less pressure in SF

and LA will be lucky to finish over .500 without Lowe, Manny and Furcal…

SORIANO! YESSSSSSSS! JIMBO!!!

by CubFaninCA on Jan 1, 2009 5:46 PM CST up reply actions

Disregard the Furcal comment

SORIANO! YESSSSSSSS! JIMBO!!!

by CubFaninCA on Jan 1, 2009 5:46 PM CST up reply actions

actually I think LA is a team on the come

Aren’t they leading the Dunn sweepstakes?

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 1, 2009 5:50 PM CST up reply actions

haven't seen a leader

and Dunn’s no Manny and Lowe’s a huge loss.

SORIANO! YESSSSSSSS! JIMBO!!!

by CubFaninCA on Jan 1, 2009 5:53 PM CST up reply actions

How you get a $21.5 subtotal

for relief in 2010? You’re assuming Gregg gets a substantial raise??

SORIANO! YESSSSSSSS! JIMBO!!!

by CubFaninCA on Jan 1, 2009 4:43 PM CST reply actions

actually that estimte might be low

First with this team the Cubs are in the playoffs and a true WS contender.

I will break it down

RP Marmol $850K
RP Gregg 5.5-arb?
RP Samardzija $2M
RP Wuertz 2M-arb?
RP Cotts 3.0M-FA?
RP Vizcaino $4M or $500K buyout
RP Gaudin $3M arb?
RP Guzman $850K-arb?
RP Hart $450K
RP Ascanio $400K
RP Atkins 60K 60K
RP Berg 60K 60K
RP Mateo 60K 60K
RP Stevens 60K 60K
RP Wells 60K 60K
subtotal $21.75M

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 1, 2009 5:03 PM CST up reply actions

I'm skeptical about Gregg being around

especially if Shark and Guzman step up..

SORIANO! YESSSSSSSS! JIMBO!!!

by CubFaninCA on Jan 1, 2009 5:09 PM CST reply actions

Maybe in 2010

but Gregg would only move the payroll bar $5M

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 1, 2009 5:11 PM CST up reply actions

Do those minor league salaries count against the ML payroll?

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Jan 1, 2009 5:26 PM CST reply actions

I had the same question and yet it appears

If a player is on the 40-man they either get a MLB salary (contract) or a minor league contract but the parent pays so it has to come from somewhere.

Seems to me that a parent club has about 5-7 major league salaries in the minors, guys that go back and then 8-10 on minor league contracts. All told that comes out to $600K max, and then $2M for the other stuff, not chomp change but not budget busters.

Basically with that one probably could conceivably say $2.6-$3M is for the 26-40 man roster budget going in. In some ways this might separate teams like Pitt, KC, Milw, Oak, TB, and FL from teams like the Cubs where a team might have 12-13 players at 60K in the 40-man side ($900-$1M) and then having 2-or 3 at 400K trying to save a million.

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 1, 2009 5:57 PM CST up reply actions

only if they are on the 40 man

by toonsterwu on Jan 2, 2009 12:12 AM CST up reply actions

Ivy Walls, well done.

I’ve rec’d this and hope it gets enough rec’s to move up. I hope I can comment on this as it deserves in the next day or so.

’Till then, thanks for the work.

by DGU on Jan 1, 2009 8:16 PM CST reply actions

My Math...

…shows that you’re off by about $6M. With Bradley and Peavy, I had us around $149M… you’re at around $143. I am not sure where we are off, but another way of looking at it was as follows:

Before the beginning of this week, we were at a payroll of about $136M. If we factor arbitration values of about $5M for the sum of Gregg, Cedeno and Wuertz, putting us at around $141M. Now, include this week’s transactions, that netted a reduction in about $9M, that puts us at $132M. That’s a difference of about $7.5M. That’s pretty significant.

My 2008 Christmas wish list includes this jersey. In Hendry We Trust!

by initram on Jan 1, 2009 10:44 PM CST reply actions

Ivy Walls' math does appear off...

Ivy has put his/her numbers on this post, so we can see his/her math pretty clearly. As far as I can tell, there are indeed a few errors in the math that Ivy Walls did. The $13.6 million seems a bit low for the relievers (should be about $15.6 million). That would make the overall total about $127 million. Then, adding $10 million for Bradley and $11.5 million for Peavy would give us about $148 million. So it would appear your estimate of $149 appears to be a better guess.

by SouthernCub on Jan 2, 2009 10:12 AM CST up reply actions

Thanks, the detailing of addition always gets me

The arb numbers are simply an estimate.

The circumstance of $124.5M and $127M is small potatoes when looking at the whole and don’t get consumed by that minor stuff, the question is more like scale or class.

Remember Cubs were in the mid $90’sM class in 2006 when Lou came and won the first of his division titles. This class of payroll was pretty constant with Tribune, McPhail and Hendry & Co’s management going back to 2003 era. Last year the Cubs moved out and beyond the $100M level to just below $118M and if you factor in the front office salaries plus Piniella & crew it grows to probably $125M. That is essentially a move of 15% and an strategy decision.

Now it appears that the Cubs budget line is increasing to $150M in total. If that is Hendry’s maximum permission against the maximum revenues that is the line. Now a good manager never goes to the final line unless it is his last resort and final card play (metaphor) so my guess is that $140-$145M is his April 2009 line.

What I was trying to show was that there is a limit this year, meaning I really don’t think Peavy can be part of this year’s package even a late July trade. His liability is just too high for 2010 and beyond.

So then the question comes back as to what can be done? To me the most sense is to trade for players who are FA next year. Two reasons; 1) FA veterans tend to have best years with champ teams (that is tend) in their final years. 2) They fall off the payroll that is expected to be locked in at above $130M next year offering some semblance of flexibility.

Signing Bradley is to me the final fall back position and since the market is soft right now best to hold on him. That is what is done in business and what is being done here. They know his cost and know the timetable.

The Manny Ramirez rumor with SF offers a dynamic since naturally they need to move an OF’er and Winn looks obvious but I think ‘Toons’ thoughts toward Lewis looks like an obvious choice where the Cubs could flip Lewis w/Stevens or Gaub for either FL’s, MN’s or KC’s real RF’er. This saves beaucoup bucks and then offers the Cubs a reasonable proposition to go after a leadoff middle infielder who is a FA.

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 2, 2009 10:52 AM CST up reply actions

I agree that we probably aren't getting two more big-price guys...

It appears it would be Bradley and an in-house option for the #5 spot (Marshall/Gaudin/Samardzija) or Peavy and a cheap alternative via trade.

I’m not terribly excited about the idea of Randy Winn, and I doubt the Giants move Lewis. I’d suspect that, if the Giants get Manny, they’d want to trade Winn, Roberts, or Rowand.

Unless the ownership gets resolved AND that ownership okays a substantial payroll increase, I think we’re limited in what we’re going to get.

by SouthernCub on Jan 2, 2009 12:00 PM CST up reply actions

LOL, "his/her"

I think the picture on Ivy Wall’s profile clarifies things.

by daver on Jan 2, 2009 3:36 PM CST up reply actions

Touche...

I’m always wary of making the assumption that a poster is male. Even though I suspect the vast majority are males, it’s better to be safe than sorry. I probably could have done the requisite research though. Oops. :)

by SouthernCub on Jan 2, 2009 3:57 PM CST up reply actions

Um...

… if you are stating here that Ivy Walls is female, you’d be incorrect.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Jan 3, 2009 8:51 AM CST up reply actions

You need to

add $1M to the 2009 total for Peavy, as that is his insurance premium.

by azjazzman on Jan 2, 2009 12:16 AM CST reply actions

Is This The $500K...

…that Peavy gets if traded? Or is this something else?

Peavy’s pay if he is a Cub will be $11.5M. I highly doubt cash will come with him.

My 2008 Christmas wish list includes this jersey. In Hendry We Trust!

by initram on Jan 2, 2009 10:11 AM CST up reply actions

No

I don’t know anything about the $500K. The San Diego Union reported yesterday that there is an insurance premium on Jake that costs $1M in 2009, and that the Cubs would have to factor this in to their budgeting were they to acquire Peavy.

by azjazzman on Jan 2, 2009 12:39 PM CST up reply actions

Always liked Randy Winn...

Good ball player.

I'm not going to even bother trying to update this sig everyday anymore... that's what the standings column on ESPN is for.
Updated on May 25, 2008

by SackMan on Jan 2, 2009 12:34 PM CST reply actions

Just wanted to name drop for a second: Jeff Francoeur

I know he’s not a lefty, but he’s a great “buy-low” candidate right now, and a guy who could rebound in a big way. Don’t know what happened to him last year, but even in an absolutely atrocious season, he still managed to drive in 71 runs. Plus, his arm in RF is superb.

I'm not going to even bother trying to update this sig everyday anymore... that's what the standings column on ESPN is for.
Updated on May 25, 2008

by SackMan on Jan 2, 2009 12:39 PM CST reply actions

I'd pass on Francoeur...

Sure, he’s got a good arm in RF. But, he’s a pretty poor hitter. Aside from his rookie year in 2005, he’s been average (103 OPS+ in 2006) or well below average in his other three years. His career OPS+ is 92. That’s not very exciting. And on top of that, he’s a RH batter, which defeats the purpose. I’d argue we’d have been better off sticking with DeRosa as the everyday RF if the team was willing to go with a RH bat in that spot.

Francoeur’s value is overstated based on his RBI numbers (which have been inflated by hitting behind guys like Chipper Jones, Kelly Johnson, and Edgar Renteria. He doesn’t walk at all and his average hasn’t historically made up for it.

by SouthernCub on Jan 2, 2009 1:11 PM CST up reply actions

I am going to say that Atlanta, Seattle, Detroit and LAA

could be as strong a target for salary dumps as other usual targets

Seems their fiscal situations are worse than I thought and if Hendry is smart he could make a helleva deal.

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 2, 2009 5:18 PM CST reply actions

FUZZY MATH.................

Is what It looks like to me………….

by cubs north on Jan 2, 2009 6:00 PM CST reply actions

Is That In The Same Cirriculum...

… as fuzzy logic?

My 2008 Christmas wish list includes this jersey. In Hendry We Trust!

by initram on Jan 2, 2009 8:40 PM CST up reply actions

Appears they can get to $140million

even if signing Bradley and trading for Peavy by dealing Vizcaino and backloading Bradley’s deal….

SORIANO! YESSSSSSSS! JIMBO!!!

by CubFaninCA on Jan 2, 2009 9:48 PM CST reply actions

Or...

… you wait on Peavy until the new owner is in place later this month and allow them to take credit for allowing the signing to happen!

Really, where else would Peavy be going. I am convinced that Towers and Hendry have decided on the players. Let’s wait to see if the O’s need to be involved for Olsen. When we see the Marquis deal and Bradley signing finalized, look for the signing of Bako and the deal. Then, let’s see if the deal for Pie happens. If it does, the writing is on the wall…

We don’t really need to new owner to approve the 2009 salary, but rather the 2010 payroll… this is one deal that would make a big difference in being shutout in the NLDS.

Then again, this is just my opinion… I could be wrong.

My 2008 Christmas wish list includes this jersey. In Hendry We Trust!

by initram on Jan 3, 2009 1:29 AM CST up reply actions

new owner is not going to do much different as far as spending above the 60%

they will not be the wizard of OZ, but I think they might be from Kansas or is it Nebraska?

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 3, 2009 2:10 PM CST up reply actions

winn

was,nt he basically traded for lou.the rays had to send him to seattle to get permission to bring lou home.

by NOMAR on Jan 3, 2009 4:59 AM CST reply actions

Hey good job Ivy

Think 2010 is gonna be much more of a headache than 2009 unless new ownership is the full-speed-ahead type. $140M seems to be the cap for this upcoming season.

With that said, Bradley only with a little wiggle room would be it; that is unless more salary from other areas are moved in additional acquisitions.

Sweet Lou for Mayor in '11.

by blackhawk24 on Jan 3, 2009 12:31 PM CST reply actions

thank you kindly

I know this was verbose but as I worked through all the available numbers including finding the broadcast revenues I simply don’t see the Cubs going above $140M this year and if they get the WS they will be hard pressed increasing revenues another $20M in 2010 and going to $150M

I think they have hit their cap.

After 2011 they will begin shrinking that liability quotient and could become quite aggressive by 2012-2013, by then I think there will be contraction in MLB, possibly down to 24 teams where the next phase will be to expand internationally into Mexico and So America, Europe even Asia.

Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."

by Ivy Walls on Jan 3, 2009 2:15 PM CST up reply actions

What are the odds of a trade like this....

Derrek Lee, prospects – SF
Jake Peavy, Randy Winn – CUBS
Prospects from both SF/CUBS – Padres

Also, I had no idea Hoffpauir is scheduled to make that much in the future. Pretty good for a career minor leaguer!

PHISH IS BACK!!!
HAMPTON, VA - MARCH 6, 7 and 8th!!!!

by TheBeerBaron on Jan 4, 2009 9:31 PM CST reply actions

Probably not.

Three-way deals aren’t easy to make. Plus, with the Padres likely to be sold in the next few months, the urgency to deal Peavy has vanished.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Jan 5, 2009 4:38 AM CST up reply actions

Lee

doesn’t want to move.

"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella

by drewishdrewid on Jan 5, 2009 11:52 AM CST up reply actions

My wishes that will not come true.....

It has been rumored on the web for a while that D. Lee was one of the Giant’s highest talents on their wish list. I personally think that Lee is a Cub the rest of the way for his career. The only thing I could see them doing is what Gracey got, Maddux as well. Give them a shot a ring if we are on hard times.

MY ultimate deal would be the following:

Baltimore giving up Hendry’s favorite 2nd Baseman Brian Roberts, as well as Nick Markakis for a combination of the following Cubs:

Guzman
Cendeno
Pie
Hart
Maybe 1 or 2 of the pitchers we received for Dero.

There has to be something legitimate in our organazation that we could reasonably give up for Markakis and Roberts. MacPhail has enough of his finger prints left on the organization that there has got to be someone he is in love with that we could part with.

I am also hoping that Bradley will pan out for us. I would have rather had a guranteed full season of 40 HR, 100 RBI, high walks in front of Lee and Ramirez and a .250 avg instead of one good season waiting on a fight with the umps or worse yet Lou and maybe 125 games.

by Cub In NC on Jan 6, 2009 11:59 AM CST reply actions

Roberts is going nowhere.

And Markakis is going nowhere fast.

And what exactly would the Cubs do with Markakis anyway? They just signed Milton Bradley, y’know.

by daver on Jan 6, 2009 12:42 PM CST up reply actions

Before

I was hoping something of this would happen pre-Bradley. I don’t really want Roberts to be honest. He is injured too often. I was saying that Markakis would look great for us in right field. But…….. if wishes and buts were candy and nutts, right?

by Cub In NC on Jan 6, 2009 12:54 PM CST up reply actions

Yeah, Markakis is a helluva hitter...

…but if MacPhail wouldn’t let Roberts go for anything less than a king’s ransom, he wouldn’t give up Markakis without various body parts and first-born children being thrown into the deal. I think Hendry walked away from last year’s Roberts negotiations with a really bad taste in his mouth, and I wouldn’t be surprised if we don’t see a Cubs-Orioles deal for a long, long time.

by daver on Jan 6, 2009 1:06 PM CST up reply actions

I was thinking about that....

The stalemate that hung over the team for the first 20 some games with Roberts. I would like to see Fontenot get more at bats. He came through in some tough spots last year. I think Michah will be starting by the end of the year for us in right.

by Cub In NC on Jan 6, 2009 2:06 PM CST up reply actions

It appears Fontenot will get a bigger role this year.

I hope your prediction about Hoffpauir doesn’t come true, however. That would be a sad state of affairs, indeed.

by daver on Jan 6, 2009 2:40 PM CST up reply actions

So is this right?

With the Bradley signing, Marquis trade, Miles signing and DeRo trade – in nice round numbers – the Cubs 2009 payroll stands at $136M…? So they have $4M of wiggle room assuming the Arb numbers are very close or they’d have to move more salary in order to take more on.

Looks like there isn’t much more for Hendry to do before 31Jul, unless he moves more money or gets ‘new ownership’ approval to go past that magic $140-141M we’ve been hearing.

Sweet Lou for Mayor in '11.

by blackhawk24 on Jan 6, 2009 4:48 PM CST reply actions