Slightly OT: Cameron signed by Nationals
Potentially important to the Cubs because Washington could have been a destination for Byrd.
5 months ago
elgato
14 comments
0 recs |
Comments
Ah, Mike Cameron.
Twas but a brief couple off-seasons ago that we were debating the merits of Curtis Granderson vs. Mike Cameron vs. Marlon Byrd vs. Rick Ankiel.
"[The Cubs] have a very famous tradition in baseball, and it will be nice to be part of turning it around." ~ Jamie Quirk, Bench Coach
Byrd sure looked like the best choice after 2010. And he might be in the long run, too.
Granderson would have cost us Castro. Cameron was barely above the Mendoza line last year. Ankiel’s been pretty whatever.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Yeah, I'd agree.
I wanted the Grandyman, but we just didn’t match up with Detroit the way the Yankees did. Cameron seems to be in his steep decline phase, which isn’t surprising, and I’ve never been a fan of Ankiel’s.
Using bWAR, Marlon has amassed 4.2 WAR with the Cubs in 2010 and 2011. During that same period, Cameron has been worth only 0.2 WAR (including his season-plus in Boston and time with the Rays) and Ankiel has been worth 2.3 WAR (split-season with Royals and Braves and full season with Nats).
"[The Cubs] have a very famous tradition in baseball, and it will be nice to be part of turning it around." ~ Jamie Quirk, Bench Coach
Not sure what kind of contract Ankiel got ...
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
wasnt it like 1 year, $3.5 mil?
or am i off my rocker….
I think you're very close.
Baseball-Reference indicates he earned $2.75 million in 2010 with the Royals/Braves and then signed another presumably one-year deal with the Nats for $1.5 million for 2011.
"[The Cubs] have a very famous tradition in baseball, and it will be nice to be part of turning it around." ~ Jamie Quirk, Bench Coach
So, he was paid $4.25 million for 2.3 WAR.
Byrd was paid about $10 million for 4.2 WAR.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Sounds about right.
"[The Cubs] have a very famous tradition in baseball, and it will be nice to be part of turning it around." ~ Jamie Quirk, Bench Coach
I'd STILL have been okay with losing Castro for Granderson
by Nunyabidness on Dec 19, 2011 3:54 PM CST up reply actions
Castro is incredibly valuable right now.
He’s so cheap, relative to what he produces. He’s 10 years younger than Granderson and plays a position that’s harder to fill.
Also, it’s not as if Granderson would have made the Cubs contenders in 2010 or 2011.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
by elgato on Dec 19, 2011 4:04 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
The better choice in 2010 would've been Swisher
He was available cheap, and bounced back hard. I really wanted the Cubs to go after him, but we signed Byrd instead.
Yeah. Saw that after the initial tweet.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.




















