Grabow to sign
by BarryLB on Nov 19, 2009 7:57 AM CST
Email
Print
http://espn.go.com/chicago/columns/b...07/name/levine
Free agent pitcher John Grabow and the Chicago Cubs are close to agreeing on a two-year contract worth nearly $7.5 million for the left-handed pitcher.
Grabow, who was traded to the Cubs last summer from Pittsburgh, will be the North Siders' primary set-up man from the left side before Cubs manager Lou Piniella goes to new closer Carlos Marmol.
A source with knowledge of the negotiations said the deal should be done by Thursday. Friday is Nov. 20, the date that free agents can begin negotiating with other teams on money and years. Until Friday, only teams that have pending free agents of their own can talk contract language.
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.
159 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Sounds like a lot of $.
But I like Grabow, and this seems about market rate for someone of his ability.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Relievers get a lot of $
Not saying its good or bad, but when you look at what set-up men are getting these days, its quite a bit.
How much would the Cubs pay me to ROLL the ball up to home plate from the mound?
Now only 12,859 on the "Cubs Season Tickets Waiting List"...
Can you do it Left Handed?
That’s not true!!! WHY THE F*CK WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU AHOLE!! Ok maybe your right but you gotta give a little something here for it to work. I don’t know what I’m going to do this is the worst thing I’ve ever read, this day could not get any worse. Fine, F*ck it, you’re right.
by Ditkavsworld
TWSS
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 19, 2009 9:40 AM CST up reply actions
Now we just need the
other 23 players to do their job and get the ball to Grabow and Marmol for a win once in a while
Join the BCB Flickr Group: http://flickr.com/groups/bleedcubbieblue
More on the deal
http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2009/11/cubs-grabow-agree-to-2-year-deal.html
According to Paul Sullivan, the sides have agreed and an announcement could come later today.
sigh
1) the money… ridiculous overcompensation
2) primary setup man? WHAT? the guy has posted a WHIP below 1.4 TWICE in the last 5 years and last year was largely because of incredible luck (.274 babip against). Pairing him and Marmol at the back end of games is going to lead to a ton of blown saves done by walks
this is a horrible idea, save the money over the next two years and work on developing internal options… or i don’t know if you’re going to spend the money might as well spend it on someone who is actually good at their job or just save it
Grabow is a LH Aaron Heilman
develop Caridad, or stick with Guzman in the role… this is stupid for a budget conscious team to be spending nearly 4 million on a replacement level asset
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 10:03 AM CST reply actions 8 recs
I couldn't agree more...
coupled with the fact that they could just offer Grabow arbitration, and force him back for 2010 on a one-year deal, it truly is ridiculous.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 19, 2009 10:07 AM CST up reply actions
"force him into a one year deal"
I don’t think so. He would get a two year deal elsewhere. Good left handed relievers are a hot commodity and before you drool over you compensation pick there is a pretty good chance you only get sandwich round one.
The money is on the high side but the main reason for doing this is because Lou seems to trust him and he sure as hell is NOT going to trust Gaub, Marshall, Cotts etc to come in in th 8th inning etc. If Lou and more patience we would probably still have Eyre but he didn’t and pretty much terrorizes any of the younger ones so if you don’t sign Grabow you have another season of Lou going through the BP to find a lefty and it would not be pretty.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 10:13 AM CST up reply actions
two things
1) if we lose him we get compensation
2) he’s not a good LH, that’s a very LOOSE definition
3) Lou trusted Scott Eyre in ’07 before banishing him in ’08, Grabow = Eyre in terms of performance
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 10:16 AM CST up reply actions
i guess that's three things...
a kings ransom for an edit button
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 10:16 AM CST up reply actions
1) if we lose him we get compensation
if he sings before a specified date, i believe its December 1st. some teams will wait until December 2nd to offer if they are going to lose a pick
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
If a team offers a type A player arbitraition
and the player declines, any team signing him will give up draft picks. This is in effect until after the draft in the summer.
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Nov 19, 2009 1:47 PM CST up reply actions
thanks
i thought there was a date sooner, and i stand corrected.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Yeah, I said force...
I’ve be very interested to know what team that you think would offer Grabow a premium, multi-year deal, AND surrender a first-round pick, especially given that guys like Mahay, Beimel, Wagner, and Gonzalez are out there, all of whom are better, and/or won’t cost a pick.
And glad to see you got your keyboard replaced.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 19, 2009 10:17 AM CST up reply actions
Most teams won't have to give up a first round pick
Yankees, Mets, Red Sox who will likely all be in the market are all also likely to be signing OTHER “A” FA’s so they don’t care. In fact I think the Mets were so bad they can’t even lose a pick. Grabow is not a closer as are some you mentioned but bottom line you sign him because the alternatives are much, much worse and you all seem to have a short memory on how badly thinks have been all of 08 and this year till Grabow arrived with Lou’s using lefties out of the bullpen.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 11:11 AM CST up reply actions
I don't have a short memory...
It’s fairly long actually. Certainly long enough to realize that Grabow is exactly the sort of reliever that Piniella tires of quickly.
They’re paying him as a late-inning setup guy, thinking that while they’re overpaying for a lefty middle reliever, they are echnically underpaying for a setup man. Once Lou sours on him in that role — fairly inevitable, given Grabow’s past performance — he’ll just be a wildly expensive middle reliever.
I won’t begrudge Hendry for the move in isolation, but this is yet another example of how he apparently lacks the ability to fine tune the club enough to keep them competitive.
Sign Beimel, keep half that money, and use it to find someone with real talent.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 19, 2009 11:20 AM CST up reply actions
Beimel is a BAD apple
and after what he did to the Dodgers in the 08 playoffs I don’t think any team would or should trust him. Why do you think he had to sign with the Nats last year AFTER the start of Spring Training. ? He is exactly the kind of player Lou would NOT get along with.
Basically you have two choices, sign a guy who will probably be a bit overpaid but who Lou does trust or sign some questionable FA. The bad thing about this deal to me is not the money but that it shows Hendry coddling Lou but if Lou is the manager you don’t have any choice. We all know what happens if he does not trust a pitcher in particular.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 11:28 AM CST up reply actions
Lou needs to go
Hendry is losing his grip because Lou is losing his mind.
"Those guys were the suckiest bunch of sucks that ever sucked" - Homer defines the Bears '09 season in less than 12 words.
So Lou's mental issues are contagious?
Somebody better make sure Alan Trammel doesn’t wander out into traffic.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
I'd say
when a manager is pressuring the GM to make questionable personnel decisions based on his comfort level rather than performance, then yes, he’s somewhat lost his mind.
"Those guys were the suckiest bunch of sucks that ever sucked" - Homer defines the Bears '09 season in less than 12 words.
That would only make sense if...
…Grabow were flat-out awful, which he’s not. And it’s not like Lou insisted Hendry bring Bob Howry back either.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Not awful
but I think the money could be spent more wisely.
"Those guys were the suckiest bunch of sucks that ever sucked" - Homer defines the Bears '09 season in less than 12 words.
disagree on Eyre
He was only signed through 2008. I don’t know if we can say he would have been back if Lou just had more patience.
He never wanted to leave so I am pretty sure he could have been re-signed
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 11:06 AM CST up reply actions
Oh come on.
It’s not good, but it’s not the end of the world. It’s the price of Lou. If you don’t re-sign Grabow, then Lou jerks around Gaub and at mid-season Hendry has to trade for a veteran lefty.
Is he traded yet?
i'm confused
that people seem to think Grabow will be competent in this role and won’t get jerked around himself
why? He has basically the same career numbers as Heilman and Eyre, both of whom were jerked around and ultimately discarded
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 1:42 PM CST up reply actions
I'm hoping Lou's seen enough of Grabow to be constant.
Eyre wasn’t his choice. Heilman came in just this year.
Is he traded yet?
Was Heilman really jerked around?
Going only on my memory, he seemed to get fairly regular playing time this past season. And any playing time he lost was pretty well-deserved.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
heilman's role
got jerked around starting as a setup man, then moving to mop up duty, etc
Heilman posted a 1.41 WHIP last year, Grabow’s WHIP for his career is 1.437
Heilman’s a better pitcher than Grabow… this is going to be a disaster
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 1:58 PM CST up reply actions
But didn't he get moved to mop-up duty because he wasn't pitching very well?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
yes
you’re missing the point that heilman is better than grabow, thus this EXACT situation is likely to play out with Grabow
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 2:07 PM CST up reply actions
No, I get that point.
Heilman had some truly outstanding years with the Mets that Grabow will likely never match. I just don’t think Heilman was necessarily “jerked around.” I think Lou gave him plenty of playing time and the results just weren’t there. Whereas, I don’t think Scott Eyre really got that chance after he got injured in ’08.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
well to be fair
eyre had a pretty horrible year in ’07 with Lou as the manager which i think factored into how he was treated in ’08.
but all these guys are VERY similar in terms of career production: Heilman, Eyre, Grabow and we’ve seen Lou get frustrated with 2 of the 3
there’s little reason to think that won’t happen with the third
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 2:23 PM CST up reply actions
performance
unless you have a better metric…
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/heilmaa01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/grabojo02.shtml
better k/9, same bb/9, better hr/9, fewer h/9
better career whip by over .1
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 20, 2009 1:25 PM CST up reply actions
neither are some numbers
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Nov 21, 2009 12:12 PM CST up reply actions
huh?
the numbers are reflecting what actually took place on the field
how are they not reality?
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 21, 2009 12:15 PM CST up reply actions
uhho
reality vs perception vs projections now will become a three way cage match lol
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Feel free
I’ll pass. Numbers do not tell the whole story and can be manipulated to support a POV.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Nov 24, 2009 5:19 PM CST up reply actions
Hmmm ...
I like Grabow, and I’m glad he’s coming back. But it does seem like a lot of money (especially given our cash crunch). I could see this deal going either way.
I'm not sure that's the best way
to get the most out of a player.
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Nov 19, 2009 11:57 AM CST up reply actions
not how arbitration works
He’d still be a free agent. Offering him arbitration would not have meant he would have had to settle for a one year deal. Further do you really want a malcontent on your team? Sticking it to a player is not likely to lead to guys who want to play hard for you.
come on...
a guy on a 1 yr deal would play less hard after being offered arbitration? That’s ridiculous… he’d be in a contract season and have every reason to play up to his best abilities
and this is based on the idea that players “raise” their level of effort based on situation, which i think is a bit of a stretch in any matter… they’re all competitors
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 11:59 AM CST up reply actions
read the post..
…. that I’m replying to. He said “stick it to him for one year”. That is, first off, based on a misunderstanding of how arbitration works. But the “working less hard” was based on the fact that if you “stick it” to a player, don’t expect good things to come out of the situation.
ok...
well the premise that offering arbitration is “sticking it to someone” is wrong
and the premise that a player would work less hard in a contract year is…. also wrong
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 12:11 PM CST up reply actions
who knows
There are all sorts of players with all sorts of attitudes and if a player feels like he’s been screwed over, there are lots of things that can happen. All I know is that sticking it to someone may lead to a guy who you don’t want in your clubhouse and may lead to a guy who feels less than inclined to give his all for you. Who knows… I just think the concept of sticking it to a player who is going to be on your team for the next year is beyond stupid.
It's also not very good business to treat people poorly.
I think it directly relates to productivity and employee performance.
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Nov 19, 2009 1:50 PM CST up reply actions
Over paying and overvaluing
players has been a staple of the Cubs for a few years now.
"Those guys were the suckiest bunch of sucks that ever sucked" - Homer defines the Bears '09 season in less than 12 words.
further...
… it was beyond a false premise on the part of the original poster, it was a total lack of understanding on what it means to offer someone arbitration. At least from his wording, he seems to think that an arb. offer in this situation automatically locks someone into a one year deal.
I know how arbritration works.
No noe is going to give up a 1st round pick for John Grabow .Therefor you dont have to give him a multiyear deal and probably dont have to pay him so much. It is very easy to understand
4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42
Disagree
Someone would likely be willing to give up a 1st round pick. Since you understand arbitration, you likely also know that if a team already signs a Type A free agent with a higher ranking than Grabow, they’d lose a 2nd or 3rd rounder, not a 1st rounder.
Not a huge fan
Of the $ spent, but on the other hand – someone else would have done this deal if we didn’t. But of relievers to resign hes one of the better ones.
"Ask Dad. He'll know. And on the off chance he doesn't, he'll make something up"
Not so sure about this
While I think Grabow’s a decent pitcher I think that the budget constraints on this team going forward make this a questionable deal. Bullpens are basically a crapshoot anyway and I would be apprehensive giving 7M to him. If losing him nets a 1st round pick I think it may have been wiser to let him go and explore other options and spend that money elsewhere.
Hendry is a bad GM
If Grabow is making $7.5 million, it better be over three years, not two. Especially when the team is turning over sofa cushions trying to make up for previous overspending / mistakes.
I agree with posters above that arbitration makes a TON more sense than handing that much cash to a decent middle reliever.
If the notion that the team has about $10 million to play with for 2010 is correct, then this deal looks absolutely abysmal. Don’t get me wrong, I wanted to keep Grabow, but $2.5 a year should be his max value unless he’s turning a corner in his career.
Hmm... late in game... Lou brings in Grabow... other team brings in RH slugger to pinch-hit...
…Ballhawk gets up from lawn chair and mans his post out on Waveland…
yep, I like this signing. I like it a lot.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Good deal!
The Cubs have no “internal options” for replacing him. Cotts? Is he still a Cub, even if he was he sucks, Marshall? Long reliever/spot starter at best.
Who cares what they paid him? Its not like any of us are paying his salary, Ricketts has the money.
The Cubs needed a solid lefty in the late innings, every time Cotts came in last year he seemed to blow the game. Waddell was a joke too, I don’t even think he’s in the organization anymore. Leave Marshall and Gorzo to compete for the 5th starter spot, or 4th.
well, there's a reason to care if he's overpaid ...
It might limit what else the Cubs can do.
Yep
I don’t get why people don’t get that . . . the team is operating on a budget.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Nov 19, 2009 12:58 PM CST up reply actions
Probably
Because most people operate on a “moving budget” that flucuates with every whim. You know like “I really can’t afford that cardigan from Banana Republic, but its just so soft”
In the business world – and I’m thinking to a successful business man like Ricketts, budgets have real meaning.
"Ask Dad. He'll know. And on the off chance he doesn't, he'll make something up"
then why did he approve the signing?
I can’t imagine Hendry isn’t acting WITHOUT Ricketts’ say-so.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Nov 19, 2009 3:17 PM CST up reply actions
I could be wrong
But is the Grabow deal an indicator that Ricketts is spending outside of budget constraints? Signing Grabow likely results in less dollars available to spend.
My argument was based on the notion that fans like me sometimes buy into:
That teams can spend, spend, spend with reckless abandon.
The well may run deep, but eventually it dries up.
"Ask Dad. He'll know. And on the off chance he doesn't, he'll make something up"
Argue about the money if you want
but arbitration is a RED HERRING. The idea that a guy for whom there is clearly a healthy market is going to accept arb and NOT want a multi-year contract is wishful thinking in the extreme. As for compensation you are basically looking at a sandwich round pick, not terrible but don’t act as if it that big a deal. You get the same if Harden is offered arb. In order to get a first round pick ( and low a that) he would have to be signed by a team in top half ( I think top 14 but not sure) who does NOT sign another higher ranked FA . It is possible but not very likely. So you get a sandwich pick for Grabow and another season of watching Lou go using Marshall to get one out or ruining Gaub, or you sign a likely inferior pitcher. Not a pretty picture anyway you look at it you still dont’ get to pretend Grabow just accepts arb and you get to keep him for a year or that you get a first round pick for him.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 11:51 AM CST reply actions
you're way too caught up
on the chance of losing him
most of us who are in the camp of offering him arbitration view him as completely replaceable and do not fear the chance at losing someone eating up 3-4 million worth of payroll and likely producing replacement level value
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 11:56 AM CST up reply actions
Fair enough
but a lot of people here seem to believe that he would just happily sign a one year deal or Cubs would get a good draft pick out of him and I don’t think either is true.
There are certainly options internal and outside but in my view none of them is as reliable as Grabow and I can’t emphasize enough how hard it is for Lou to actually find a lefty he wants to use. To me the risk of spending another season watching Lou kill lefties and way overuse & misuse the bullpen at least in part because of that far outweighs slightly overpaying Grabow.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 12:08 PM CST up reply actions
i think a big part of your argument is lou's willingness to use him
and i think this is questionable long-term based on what we’ve seen from guys lou tends to be weary of… which is guys who cant throw strikes…. which is EXACTLY Grabow’s problem
Lou might have been comfortable with him last season, but that doesn’t guarantee he’ll be comfortable with him this season… and then we’ll just be in the same place we are now just along with a 7.5 million dollar commitment over 2 years
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 12:10 PM CST up reply actions
Perhaps
but the alternatives are worse. We know Lou is not going to give someone like Gaub a chance and he is probably not ready anyway. Cotts no way. Using Marshall to get one out is just insane. The FA market for lefties is filled with a lot
of problem guys in both personality and skill.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 12:47 PM CST up reply actions
the alternatives are not necessarily worse...
Piniella will have to use SOMEone. I think it would be better we have that someone be Marshall (at a much lower salary) than overpaying for Grabow, who is very likely to be no more productive.
"using marshall to get one out is just insane."
If we’re paying Grabow $3.75 million per year to get one out, then THAT is just insane. And if we’re paying Grabow that money to be a setup man, then I’d argue even more that the money should be saved and have Marshall do the job for cheap.
It’s a poor use of limited resources, and it’s likely based on Hendry’s overvaluing of Grabow’s performance.
This deal
makes me think that Hendry perceives a need for a lefthanded bullpen arm. I agree with you that Marshall would be a cheaper pen arm but based on the frailty of our starting rotation he is much more valuable as a 6th starter than as a reliever. Replacement starters are much more expensive than 3.75M. So I can’t fault Hendry with targeting a lefty reliever this offseason. Marshall is pretty much the insurance option on our starting rotation, and his replacement cost in this case is 3.75M.
Whether 3.75M is overpaying for the flexibility to use Marshall in the rotation is another story. Could a Grabow equivalent have been had during the season by trade for less? Could a Grabow equivalent have been had this offseason for less?
The answers to those questions will tell us whether or not this is a bad deal by Hendry. I don’t think we can say this deal is insane just yet.
The problem is that Grabow isn't as good as his run with the Cubs would suggest...
I have fewer qualms about the idea of having a strong LH option in the bulppen. I just don’t think Grabow is that option.
to add to that thought...
I’d rather pay for a scrap heap 6th starter (those are always available and generally for cheap) that we might not end up needing than to overpay for a mediocre reliever.
That's fair
I agree that in a lot of ways Grabow was better with the Cubs last we than we should expect him to be going forward. His HR/9, H/9, and BB/9 were all much better than usual (though his K/9 and K/BB were also worse than his career numbers would suggest) during his time with the Cubs. Hendry shouldn’t be paying expecting Grabow to replicate that.
I wonder what it would take to pick up a guy like James Parr from the Braves (who have a glut of pitching). He’d be the kind of guy to go after if you wanted to get cheap insurance through a trade. A cheap veteran…I don’t know how much you’d be able to save there and still get decent production.
Anyway, I was just saying I think Hendry’s plan is at least sane even if an alternative might be better.
Grabow pitched well for the Cubs last year.
One of the reasons was his walk rate was much lower than before the trade when he pitched for the Pirates last year.
Maybe there’s a specific reason why that happened, such as a slight change the Cubs made that increased Grabow’s success.
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Nov 19, 2009 2:29 PM CST up reply actions
nice story
but factually inaccurate
Grabow’s BB/9 as a Cub 4.3 BB/9
Grabow’s career BB/9 4.1 BB/9
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 2:30 PM CST up reply actions
No Cow guy is right
Grabow’s BB/9 for the Pirates LAST year was .5.3
for the CUBS it was. 4.3 so he did have a better rate with the Cubs AFTER the trade which is what he said. I don’t think is that big a deal but if you want to use those stats use the ones he is talking about.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 2:38 PM CST up reply actions
pssssst....I'm a girl!
I’m just speculating that there may things we don’t know. Maybe it’s just coincidence but I remember when Grabow was acquired by the Cubs, Larry mentioned in an interview that he had some ideas of how to improve his performance. I’m just wondering if that’s what happened.
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Nov 19, 2009 2:43 PM CST up reply actions
oops
happens to me too.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 3:22 PM CST up reply actions
there's an inference
that there was something magical learned by Grabow when he came to the Cubs that made him a better pitcher than he previously was
this isnt accurate
if you’d like to argue semantics over the time-frame of that assessment that’s fine, but ultimately meaningless.
The point was is Grabow better as a Cub than he was pre-Cub. The answer for the previous 4 months was slightly, the answer for his entire career was NO not at all
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 3:02 PM CST up reply actions
This is a friendly discussion, it's really not necessary to make nasty comments.
First, nowhere did I say there was anything magical about the difference in Grabow’s 2009 walk rate between his Cubs and Pirate appearances. I merely wondered if there could be a reason for the difference. Isn’t it possible there is a reason for the difference besides coincidence? Only Grabow and the Cubs know if that is the case but it seems possible to me.
Second, I said I was only talking about his numbers last year, aka 2009. I never mentioned any career numbers, just 2009 numbers.
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Nov 19, 2009 3:23 PM CST up reply actions
How were
DCF’s comments nasty? I mean seriously if you think that is nasty then you ain’t seen nothing yet. And I know you’ve been here for game threads.
While I might not agree with the sentiment, I thought the “magical” comment was spot on. And strikes to the very core of the “intangilbles” arguments.
"Ask Dad. He'll know. And on the off chance he doesn't, he'll make something up"
The next time someone tells you
that you said something you didn’t, you might feel different.
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Nov 20, 2009 11:34 AM CST up reply actions
It happens
But I rarely would consider it “nasty”
I did not sense any ill will from his comment. I could see if he called you a name or said you were stupid, but that was not the case. I’m not trying to make much of an issue – just suggesting you might have been a little quick on the draw for calling him out on this.
"Ask Dad. He'll know. And on the off chance he doesn't, he'll make something up"
No there was a statement
that Grabow pitched better for the Cubs than the Pirates LAST YEAR and specifically that is BB/9 improved. Both of these are true. There was an inference that a change of scenery helped. I think getting out of Pittsburgh tends to help a lot of players.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 3:25 PM CST up reply actions
I don't think
we’d get a good pick for him because I don’t think anyone would sign him to a multi-year deal if they had to give up a pick for him. Particularly the teams with the better records, since they’d be giving up a first round pick.
I fail to see any downside to offering him arbitration. If he accepts, we either get Grabow on a one year deal or we get a pick. If he declines, then we can sign someone else. It’s not as though he is a fantastic talent—he’s a solid, not terrific middle reliever (who happens to be left-handed, though I never saw him shutting down lefties so he might as well have been right handed) who is signing for AT LEAST what he’d get on the open market.
We’re not getting a discount, we’re not getting a pick, and we’re not getting a player to be excited about. There is nothing good about this move.
DEJESUS!!!
What is good about this deal
is getting a known quantity that Lou has been comfortable with. It is not ideal just a lot better than watching him go through left handed relievers like crap through a goose.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 1:34 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah, in some sense...
…this is not unlike the Jason Marquis signing back in ‘07. Hendry is looking to add a veteran presence to add some stability to what was a fairly chaotic part of the team in 2009. I’m still not crazy about the number of dollars involved, though.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Who would you replace Grabow with?
And don’t say Marshall. Because he’ll be in the pen or starting rotation with or without Grabow. Marshall is not a replacement for Grabow.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 19, 2009 12:42 PM CST up reply actions
I am confident
that there are effective left-handed middle relievers available on the open market, in the minors, or in trade, particularly if you have a budget of 7.5 million dollars over 2 years to work with.
DEJESUS!!!
But who?
The Cubs just traded for Grabow. Should they really trade for another LHP??
If there was a lefty ready in the minors, I think we would have seen them last September.
Here’s the free agent list
Left-handed relievers
Joe Beimel (32) – Type B
Bruce Chen (33)
Alan Embree (40)
Scott Eyre (38) – Type B
Casey Fossum (32)
Mike Gosling (29)
John Grabow (31) – Type A
Eddie Guardado (39)
Mark Hendrickson (36)
Ron Mahay (39)
Will Ohman (31) – Type B
Darren Oliver (39) – Type A
Horacio Ramirez (30)
Glendon Rusch (35)
Scott Schoeneweis (36)
Brian Shouse (41) – Type B
Ken Takahashi (41)
Jack Taschner (32)
Ron Villone (40)
Jamie Walker (38)
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 19, 2009 1:19 PM CST up reply actions
Wait Glenden Rusch is available ?
Well than forget re-signing Grabow.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 1:30 PM CST up reply actions
Hate to sign like a broken record
but Beimel’s behavior in the 08 playoffs made him a pariah and there is a reason he had to sign with the Nats
AFTER the start of Spring Training.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 2:41 PM CST up reply actions
Well, the Cubs do have
Neal Cotts on the payroll – Arbitration eligible for 2010. woo hoo…
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 19, 2009 3:00 PM CST up reply actions
And guess what?
Just about anyone on that list is either someone you wouldn’t want, or someone you’d have to pay as much money for (Beimel).
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
you could look at it the other way
and say if all those guys are equivalent to Grabow or worse and you don’t want them…
why do you want Grabow?
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 3:19 PM CST up reply actions
Hee's another thought,
the grass is not always greener on the other side. Meaning, you better be sure you can get somebody better before you get rid of the guy you have.
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Nov 19, 2009 3:25 PM CST up reply actions
so you would pay any price
to make sure you have “something” that can fill in, even if the money spent is a net loss in terms of value?
that concept seems misguided. A player producing below their cost is a net loss, even if there isn’t another solution for that specific spot, the net loss in value has impacts at other spots that it could be made up
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 4:14 PM CST up reply actions
Because WAR can't measure Lou's need/use of a lefty
Good luck saving 3.5 million this year and trying to use Marshall/Gaub as the LOOGY. Take another case, let’s suppose the Cubs had not traded DeRosa and he had been available to play 3B when A-Ram went down ? Even if DeRo was not making a ton his value in that situation would have been far greater than his salary. The Cubs need a lefty Lou will actually use as a LOOGY. The domino efffect of how he goes through the bullpen is already bad but without a LOOGY he trusts it gets a lot worse.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 4:29 PM CST up reply actions
lou will be afraid of grabow
mid way through the season
the same pattern happened with heilman, gregg, eyre… all relievers who struggled with command
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 19, 2009 4:44 PM CST up reply actions
I understand that's your theory but I respectfully disagree.
I simply don’t think you can measure a player only by looking at a balance sheet. I believe you need to evaluate players multiple ways.
I’m saying Grabow was a Cub for over 2 months and the organization had an up close look at John Grabow the player and person. The Cubs evaluated Grabow the player and Grabow the person. There are things that don’t show up on a stat sheet.
And no, I wouldn’t pay any price. Not sure why you’re saying I would since I never said that.
Exaggerating what someone else has written isn’t the best way to persuade them to your way of thinking.
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Nov 19, 2009 4:42 PM CST up reply actions
Right, and...
… I think DartmouthCubsFan is making far too big a deal about what is, in today’s market, about a market-rate signing.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I agree it's a market-rate signing.
But, from what I’ve read, Hendry paid at the high-end of that market rate, which, given the team’s budget constraints, is rubbing a lot of people the wrong way.
I can definitely see the sabermetric argument against this deal, but I also think this is another example of Hendry being more of a players’ GM: Grabow did well with the Cubs; he more than likely fits in well with the team and organization; and Jimbo wants to keep him around – so he paid him accordingly.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
true
but lefties usually draw more interest and larger contracts, jut for being a lefty. i am sure that played into it
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
market-rate signings for middling players
are what we’ve done for years
jacque jones, jeremy burnitz, scott eyre, bob howry, etc
you’re inherently paying a premium in the FA market compared to developing the players internally. Its the way the FA market works in baseball. So when you go out and pay that premium you want to do it for PREMIUM players, not average players
This is the same mistake this organization CONTINUES to make year in and year out. We spend in FA on middling alternatives
So we make a mistake on the dollar/year, but the FA market also places a premium on the number of years you tie yourself into a player, so its a compounding mistake
the best teams are the ones that let average players walk OR re-sign them before hitting FA to below-market deals
We do the exact opposite
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 20, 2009 9:34 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
because at least
he’s a known quantity.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Nov 19, 2009 3:26 PM CST up reply actions
I didn't say they were equivalent.
I think Grabow’s better than anyone on the list, except possibly Beimel.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Very true, Al
I just shake my head and laugh at Cubs fans sometimes. This is the price of poker, people. Quit whining about it.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Nov 19, 2009 4:24 PM CST up reply actions
Who would you replace Grabow with?
And don’t say Marshall. Because he’ll be in the pen or starting rotation with or without Grabow. Marshall is not a replacement for Grabow.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 19, 2009 12:43 PM CST up reply actions
MARSHALL !
There I said it ( but you know I didn’t mean it)
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 19, 2009 12:48 PM CST up reply actions
Think Jan Brady
“MARSHALL! MARSHALL! MARSHALL!”
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 19, 2009 12:56 PM CST up reply actions
Well, I'm not going to get too upset about this...
…because, like many of us, I saw this coming a mile away. That’s a lot of money to be paying a reliever with Grabow’s career numbers. If I’m reading Fangraphs correctly, he’s never come close to earning $3.75 million a season. But, clearly, he won Hendry (and presumably Lou) over.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Fangraphs' Dave Cameron does not like this signing
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/john-grabow-gets-paid
In general, I have to agree – he’s not worth this kind of money. Should have offered him arb, and let him go if he didn’t accept.
by false cognate on Nov 19, 2009 2:46 PM CST up reply actions
way too much money....
why not save the cash and use marshall as the lefty out of the bullpen? It’s not like grabow is much better than marshall.
So now whats left for the offseason since we just spent a big chunk of the open payroll?
Absolutely ridiculous...
7.5M for Grabow is beyond absurd. God, Hendry and his love for overpaying bullpen arms. So maddening.
I guess the good part of it is we’re only stuck with that awful contract for two years, not the typical three.
I'm ok with this deal
But based on the Miles contract my expectations are pretty low. At least Grabow will be an important part of the team next year. He’s very average, as many have pointed out already. But, I guess he’s pretty decent against right handed batters so at least he’s average to both sides of the plate. I’d rather pay a little too much for people like that than overpay someone for warming the bench.
Of course, we won’t really know how much Hendry is overpaying (or underpaying) until we see how the market shakes out. There are no internal options, so this contract really should be evaluated from the perspective of how much similar pitchers sign for this offseason.
Good re-sign
solid lefty set up guy.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
Does signing Grabow give the Cubs the flexibility
to use Sean Marshall in a trade?
Would that change anyone’s opinion of signing Grabow?
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Nov 19, 2009 2:03 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
crystal ball
yes
Numbers may not lie, but they don’t tell the whole truth (and nothing but the truth), either. -- Doug Glanville
Hmmmmmmm, interesting question.
Well, obviously it would depend on who the Cubs got back in any trade involving Marshall, but – yeah – methinks you may be on to something.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Grabow's improvement and role in the pen
Overall, I am indifferent to this deal. As some have noted, Grabow is an average reilever… and therefore that is a fairly hefty contract. As others have noted, “baseball” people are not going to look at the stats and say you could replace Grabow with “just about anyone”. Just a couple of notes that I haven’t really seen spelled out in much depth.
Grabow was better as a Cub. This certainly could be a “fluke” as some have suggested. Though the Cubs were more of a fringe contender than a real threat, maybe playing in games that actually “mattered” was good for Grabow, who certainly never had that experience as a Pirate. There certainly are players who perform better when the stakes are higher (using that word fairly loosely as it relates to the 09 Cubs) and those who generally perform worse (looking at you, Heilman).
Now I’m under no spell that suggests Grabow is the second-coming by any means. But he pitched in 30 games (25 IP) for the Cubs. He gave up more than one hit three times. He NEVER walked more than one batter. He gave up more than one base runner seven times. His WHIP as a Cub was 1.25 (which was inflated by his three poor outings when he gave up 8 hits and a walk in 1.2 IP… all games count, but his WHIP drops to under 1 without those three games… which suggests he was a really effective reliever 88% of the time he took the mound). He allowed a run (of his own) in five games.
Further… when the Cubs were “in the race” - let’s call it through August - Grabow’s WHIP was under 1 and he didn’t allow a run (as a Cub).
It just seems people are getting a bit too bent out of shape about this. There is simply NO WAY Lou would go into the season with Marmol and Marshall as his most veteran relievers. It just wasn’t going to happen. Whether you think that’s right or wrong - doesn’t matter (though you are certainly welcome to your angst over the matter)… it is what it is. So Grabow is here to be an average to solid LH reliever and provide some “veteran leadership” at what is probably an inflated price.
Barring more deals that impact the pen, the Cubs relievers will be cheap… particularly compared to the rest of the squad. But even with our “constraints”, this isn’t the deal that breaks the budget. At least you get something out of Grabow. You get negative value out of Miles for $3M.
by fsuapollo on Nov 19, 2009 5:11 PM CST reply actions 9 recs
I wish there was a way
to push this comment to the top of the thread.
Rec’d.
"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." ~Winston Churchill
I agreed with everything you said, but I can't rec a post that contains the phrase "it is what it is".
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Nov 19, 2009 6:28 PM CST up reply actions
At the end of the day
you gotta do what you gotta do.
"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." ~Winston Churchill
Well put, and if I might add
a friend of mine mentioned that “you can always find a guy in AAA who can do what Grabow does”. And that’s true. You can. But how many train wrecks do you have to go through before you find a LH major league replacement guy? Could be on the first try. Or you could go through a lot of guys, and blow a lot more games than Grabow ever would before you find one.
"Enough foreplay- let's get crackin'"- Fred Garvin
The signing says to me the Cubs really do see Grabow as primary set-up guy material...not just another lefty
"Cubs will win 79 to 83 games." BLou (7/21/09)
I hope that's true, because...
… maybe Lou will finally learn that LHP can get all kinds of hitters out, not just LHB.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
you get negative value out of Grabow for 3.75 million
he’s never been worth that much
not to mention you’re citing his WHIP as a Cub without noting the influence of particularly fortunate luck in an extremely small sample. His entire career suggests he’s a high 1.3’s/low 1.4 WHIP guy
You’re also trying to exaggerate an argument for why he’s so good by removing some of the worst parts o his sample, which can be said for any player. If you remove the times they suck, they probably look pretty good!
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 20, 2009 9:38 AM CST up reply actions
This says to me that Hendry, Piniella and Rothschild see upside in Grabow
Grabow does have a good arm. I’ll give the hierarchy the benefit of the doubt on this move. Clearly to have spent this kind of money over 2 years while in the midst of a cash crunch says that Grabow was a major offseason priority.
"Cubs will win 79 to 83 games." BLou (7/21/09)
I like this signing
We need 1-2 more bullpen arms though.
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
It's official.
Grabow signed today, two years, “terms not disclosed” per the press release.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
