Yes, I am ok with signing a starting pitcher for $5 m, but just as I ripped on the cocky south side gm, I would say TheoJedJason get no major credit if the guy pans out. They are rolling the dice on a injured player and if it works, great, doesn't take any super baseball jeanus too shop in the bargain section and try and get a steal, because most times it doesn't work out.

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”

The O fucked up by not getting a team option for a second year. He gets healthy on your dime and then has no obligation to the club.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

He rejected Minnesota because they insisted on the option. I would have like that as well, but I'll settle and take IMU's option.

_________________

Paul Maholm had a team option

This is more like the Dempster reclaimation.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

That's Hendryesque negotiating. It's not like they just absolutely had to have the great Scott Baker.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

Coming off a 100+ loss season and sign a guy coming off an arm replacement.

All part of the grand plan I suppose!

_________________

Two years isn't long term. A team option isn't long term. All the team option does is compensate the team should the guy break out after the team invested seed money in his reclamation.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

He has a no-trade?!?!

_________________

If Baker pitches well this year, the Cubs are going to trade him at the deadline anyways. THEY DON'T WANT HIM LONG TERM. If he doesn't pitch well, they won't resign him anyways. The only reason they signed him was the possibility of him being valuable to another team at the deadline and at the same time provide the Cubs with some competitiveness during the season.

My original post states my point pretty clearly. This wasn't a particularly well considered/negotiated signing by the infalliable management team.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

AGAIN, a team option is not long term. It is a one year contract unless the team picks up the option. The team option also makes him more valuable on the trade market.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

You act like the Cubs are negotiating with themselves. The guy doesn't have to sign any old contract thrown in front of him. He clearly did not want a contract with any team that had a team option in it. So what are you going to do? Pout about it?

Jealousy. Sox have at least 4, possibly 5 starters better than Baker.


So they sign the guy just to try and move him? Then you get the same scrub-like guys pitching after the AS break like you had last year. I guess Theo's plan is to lose 95+ games again this year, and you all seem to be ok with that.

_________________

Do what the Twins chose to do and sign one of the dozens of other Scott Baker types out there instead. You have said he is a fungible item to next year's team, well treat him like it.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

I would say that going from 103 losses one season to 85 losses the following season is a fairly marked improvement. Which is exactly why that even though both clubs fell short of the ultimate goal, the 2007 Cubs and the 2008 White Sox were very successful seasons.

_________________

Really, thats how gambling works? You try to find the wager you think will work out the way you want? OK, now I got it.

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”

Scott Baker is this years Paul Maholm which means he'll help them to a last place finish and they'll flip him for more damaged goods. 2016 here we come.

???

_________________
That's my purse! I don't know you!

Of all the injuries to be coming off of, this one (Tommy John surgery to repair it) has the most predictable results. Baker may well be more effective that he has ever been, with increased velocity on his fastball. Yes, he is only a rental, who will VERY likely be traded before the deadline. But until the team is ready to contend, this is the perfect kind of player to sign. Low salary, with good potential to prove himself worthy of a good prospect in return for his services at the deadline. The team is surely not done, as they need 1, probably 2 more starters to fill out the rotation. They need to have some depth in the event an injury occurs in spring training. Thats what they did last season, when Volstad and Wells were sent to the minors after competing for jobs in the rotation and I expect they will operate similarly this year as well. Dempster and/ or Marcum would be nice additions. Gotta be on deals of only 1-2 years though.

_________________
Go Cubs!!!!