Updated Roster Status of Cubs players

Here is the updated roster status of players in the Cubs organization who are on the 40-man roster, and players on outright assignment who are either eligible to be six-year minor league free-agents after 2006 season or who are eligible for the Rule 5 Draft after 2006 season. Players on the 40-man roster who are optioned to the minor leagues use up an option year once they have spent 20 days in the minors in a given championship season. If a player is optioned to the minors for less than 20 days in a given championship season, the player does NOT use up an option AND accrues MLB service time for the days spent on option tom the minors. Also, players with no MLB service time who are spending their first season on a 40-man roster are NOT entitled to the MLB split contract minimum salary ($54,750). * 2006 minor league option has been exercised NO OPTIONS LEFT: Freddie Bynum, IF-OF Michael Restovich, OF HAD ONE OPTION YEAR LEFT AS OF SPRING TRAINING 2006: Ronny Cedeno, SS Angel Guzman, RHP (has spent 19 days on option to the minors in 2006) Roberto Novoa, RHP (has spent 12 days on option to the minors in 2006) Will Ohman, LHP Jerome Williams, RHP (was optioned to minors 4-22-06, will have no options left as of Spring Training 2007 if he is not recalled by 5-11-06) NOTE: Depending on how many days he has spent on DL in previous seasons, Angel Guzman could get an additional (4th) option year in 2007 even if he spends at least 20 days on option to the minors in 2006 and uses up his 3rd option, because it appears that he will have accrued only four ìfull" seasons by the end of this season (other seasons were cut short due to injuries). A "full" season is accrued only if a player spends at least 60 days on an active major league or minor league roster in a given season. WILL HAVE ONE OPTION YEAR LEFT AS OF SPRING TRAINING 2007: * David Aarsdma, RHP * Rich Hill, LHP * Geovany Soto, C * Michael Wuertz, RHP NOTE: Even though he had used up two option years and normally would have had only one minor league option left coming into the 2006 season, David Aardsma will get an additional (4th) option year in 2007, because players get a 4th option year IF they have not played five "full" seasons in the major leagues or minor leagues by the time they have used up three minor league options. HAD TWO OPTION YEARS LEFT AS OF SPRING TRAINING 2006: Angel Pagan, OF Mark Prior, RHP Carlos Zambrano, RHP WILL HAVE TWO OPTION YEARS LEFT AS OF SPRING TRAINING 2007: * Brian Dopirak, 1B (1st year on 40-man roster/no MLB service time) * Carlos Marmol, RHP (1st year on 40-man roster/no MLB service time) * Scott Moore, 3B (1st year on 40-man roster/no MLB service time) * Felix Pie, OF (1st year on 40-man roster/no MLB service time) * Jose Reyes, C (1st year on 40-man roster/no MLB service time) * Jae-Kuk Ryu, RHP (1st year on 40-man roster/no MLB service time) * Ryan Theriot, INF HAD THREE OPTION YEARS LEFT AS OF SPRING TRAINING 2006: Sean Marshall, LHP Matt Murton, OF ----------------------------------------------------------- ELIGIBLE TO BE MLB TYPE XX FREE-AGENT AFTER 2006 SEASON: Henry Blanco, C Jerry Hairston, Jr, IF-OF Kerry Ligtenberg, RHP (is presently assigned outright to AAA Iowa) John Mabry, OF-1B (ìno tradeî until 6-15-06) Greg Maddux, RHP Wade Miller, RHP Juan Pierre, CF Aramis Ramirez, 3B (player option for 2007-08) Todd Walker, INF Scott Williamson, RHP Kerry Wood, RHP (club option with buy-out for 2007 - also ìno tradeî through 2006) NOTE: Aramis Ramirez is signed through 2006, and then he has a player option for 2007 that also includes 2008, and if he exercises this option, then there is either a mutual option for 2009 or a player option vests for 2009 if Ramirez plays 270 games combined in 2007 & 2008. Kerry Wood is signed through 2006 (with a complete "no trade"), then there is a club option (with $3m buy-out if club declines option) for 2007. -------------------------------------------------------------- SIGNED BEYOND 2006: Michael Barrett, C (through 2007) Neifi Perez, INF (through 2007) Glendon Rusch, LHP (through 2007) Scott Eyre, LHP (through 2007 and player option for 2008 - also ìno tradeî through 6-15-06) Ryan Dempster, RHP (through 2008) Bob Howry, RHP (through 2008 - also ìno tradeî through 6-15-06) Jacque Jones, OF (through 2008 - also ìno tradeî through 6-15-06) Derrek Lee, 1B (through 2010 - also "no trade" through 2010) --------------------------------------------------- WILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR ARBITRATION AFTER 2006: Carlos Zambrano, RHP (FA after 2007) Will Ohman, LHP (FA after 2008) Mark Prior, RHP (FA after 2008) COULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR ARBITRATION AFTER 2006: Jerome Williams, RHP NOTE: Jerome Williams would be eligible for salary arbitration after 2006 season if he accrues at least 97 days of MLB service time in 2006, although he would likely qualify as a ìSuper Twoî with about 75 days of MLB service time. He has accrued 19 days of MLB service time so far in 2006. He was optioned to Iowa on April 22nd. -------------------------------------------------------------------- SIX-YEAR MINOR LEAGUE FREE-AGENT (PLAYER OPTION) IF NOT ADDED TO 40-MAN ROSTER BY 10-11-06 (WITHIN 10 DAYS AFTER CLOSE OF 2006 REGULAR SEASON): BOLD indicates player is likely to be added to 40-man roster after 2006 season Gary Cates, IF-OF (West Tenn) Buck Coats, IF-OF (Iowa) Kevin Collins, OF-1B (Peoria) Jeff Deardorff, OF-1B (Iowa) Brandon Emanuel, RHP (Iowa) Nic Jackson, OF (West Tenn) Casey Kopitzke, C (Iowa) Aaron Krawiec, LHP (DL - Daytona) Luis Montanez, OF (West Tenn) Augie Ojeda, INF (Iowa) Matt Padgett, OF (Iowa) Carlos Perez, LHP (Daytona) Carmen Pignatiello, LHP (West Tenn) Brandon Sing, 1B (Iowa) Carlos Vasquez, LHP (Daytona) Les Walrond, LHP (Iowa) Mark Watson, LHP (Iowa) Aron Weston, OF (Daytona) ---------------------------------------------------- ELIGIBLE FOR 2006 RULE 5 DRAFT IF NOT ADDED TO 40-MAN ROSTER BY 11-20-06 (* not assigned to a minor league club at this time): BOLD indicates player is likely to be added to 40-man roster priot to next Rule 5 Draft Thomas Atlee, RHP (West Tenn) Federico Baez, RHP (Iowa) Justin Berg, RHP (Daytona) * Oscar Bernard, RHP Todd Blackford, RHP (Peoria) * Chadd Blasko, RHP * Jerry Blevins, LHP Clint Brannon, LHP (DL at Daytona) Bobby Brownlie, RHP (West Tenn) Edward Campusano, LHP (Peoria) * Jose Caridad, RHP David Cash, RHP (DL at West Tenn) Rocky Cherry, RHP (West Tenn) Robinson Chirinos, INF (Peoria) Matt Ciaramella, OF (Peoria) Matt Craig, 1B (Daytona) * Darin Downs, LHP Mike Fontenot, 2B (Iowa) Jake Fox, C (Daytona) * Alfredo Francisco, RHP Alberto Garcia, 1B (Peoria) Danny Gonzalez, SS (Daytona) Adam Greenberg, OF (Iowa) * Lee Gwaltney, RHP * Luke Hagerty, LHP Ryan Harvey, OF (Daytona) Lincoln Holdzkom, RHP (West Tenn) Micah Hoffpauir, 1B (West Tenn) Jonathan Hunton, RHP (Daytona) Carlos Jan, LHP (West Tenn) Scott Koerber, LHP (Peoria) Tim Layden, LHP (Daytona) Richard Lewis, INF (West Tenn) * Jose Martinez, RHP Juan Mateo, RHP (West Tenn) J. R. Mathes, LHP (West Tenn) * Zach McCormack, LHP Casey McGehee, 3B (Iowa) Adalberto Mendez, RHP (Daytona) * Carlos Morla, LHP Ryan Norwood, 1B (Peoria) Ryan O'Malley, LHP (Iowa) * Billy Petrick, RHP * Jose Pina, RHP * Elvin Puello, 3B * Robert Ransom, RHP Clay Rapada, LHP (West Tenn) Tony Richie, C (West Tenn) Alan Rick, C (Daytona) Carlos Rojas, SS (West Tenn) Issmael Salas, IF-OF (Daytona) Paul Schappert, LHP (West Tenn) * Eduard Serrano, INF Chris Shaver, LHP (West Tenn) Andy Shipman, RHP (Iowa) Jemel Spearman, 3B (Daytona) Nate Spears, 2B (Daytona) Raul Valdes, LHP (Iowa) Jesus Valdez, OF (Peoria) Chris Walker, CF (West Tenn) Matt Weber, RHP (Daytona) Randy Wells, RHP (West Tenn) Olin Wick, C (Daytona) Jesus Yepez, LHP (Peoria) NOTE: Although they were selected in the 2004 Rule 4 (June) Draft, Randy Brown, Jeff Culpepper, Jesse Estrada, Sam Fuld, Grant Johnson, and Eric Patterson will NOT be eligible for the Rule 5 Draft until after the 2007 season because the first contracts they signed were for the 2005 season.
Return to Homepage

Comments

WOW!!!!! Arizona Phil........This is almost more information than an old man like me can assimilate. Great job and thanks.

NOTE: Aramis Ramirez is signed through 2006, and then he has a player option for 2007 that also includes 2008, and if he exercises this option, then there is either a mutual option for 2009 or a player option vests for 2009 if Ramirez plays 270 games combined in 2007 & 2008.

In other words, Aramis can walk this winter if he wants to.

Any words on if Wood would be willing to waive his no trade clause?

NO OPTIONS LEFT:
Freddie Bynum, IF-OF
Michael Restovich, OF

Are these guys still on the team?

Arizona Phil,

At this point, do you think the Cubs will pick up Kerry Wood's contract next year?

cwtp - I don't think we have a clue at this point if the Cubs will pick up Wood's option.

If he comes back healthy and pitches like he is capable of, I would think that the Cubs would seriously consider picking up the option.

#5 of 5: By cubswinthepennant (May 8, 2006 12:02 PM)
Arizona Phil,

At this point, do you think the Cubs will pick up Kerry Wood's contract next year?

--

CWtP: As long as Wood doesn't blow out something else before the end of the season, yes I do.

If the Cubs were to buy-out Kerry Wood, they would have to replace him with a premier pitcher, and free-agency being a blind competition with other clubs and making a trade being dependent on getting the other club to agree, there is too much risk that they won't be a be able to adequately replace Woody.

I expect the Cubs will work out something with Aramis Ramirez to keep him from exercising his player option, even if it means having to guarantee 2009 and/or giving him a contract extention through 2010.

I also expect Greg Maddux will leave and sign a two-year deal with Ned Colletti and the Dodgers, and I believe every other potential Cub free-agent (Blanco, Hairston, Ligtenberg, Mabry, Miller, Pierre, Walker, and Williamson) will be allowed to walk except Wood.

I believe Felix Pie will essentially be given the CF job going into 2007, and that Geovany Soto will be given a very good chance to be the back-up catcher. I also would think Buck Coats will be given a chance to take the super-sub utility job currently held by Freddie Bynum and formerly held by Jose Macias (although I expect Bynum--and Restovich--to be long gone by the end of the season). I expect Angel Pagan will be the 4th OF in 2007, and that John Mabry will be replaced by a different cheap ($1m-ish) veteran lefty PH-1B-OF.

With the resulting $25m savings in payroll from the departed free-agents, I expect the Cubs will sign Zambrano long-term (for about $6m per season above what he is making now) and will give Prior a nominal one-year raise of about $2m, and then will use the remaining payroll after that (about $17m) to acquire (sign or trade for) a front-line second-baseman and a good, healthy, veteran starting pitcher.

And if the Cubs do decide to buy-out Wood after the season, they would save $10m in 2007 payroll after the buy-out, but would have to use that $10m (plus probably a little bit more) to sign or trade for a top-drawer starting pitcher.

I also expect the Cubs to actively shop Mark Prior, Jacque Jones, Glendon Rusch, and Jerome Williams during the off-season (if not sooner), resulting in the Cubs acquiring a new RF, additional bullpen help, and perhaps still another starting pitcher (#4-#5 type) before 2007.

Prior getting a nominal $2 million raise???

Geez...he should be thankful if he gets the same $$ next year.

Also, bring Coats up now. Restovich stinks, and at least Coats has some versatility and speed. He's also hitting .340, which isn't bad

Thanks for the DETAILED response Az P.

Unfortunately, barring four major turn-arounds, we'll be trying to move Mark Prior, Jacque Jones, Glendon Rusch, and Jerome Williams when their value is pretty low.

I don't think Maddux will leave after this year. I think the Cubs will sign him (possibly to a one year with option) and hope he finishes his career with the Cubs. Pierre will probably depend on what kind of season he ends up having. Hendry seems to like him so he has a good chance to return. If Pie is with the Cubs next year, I am guessing it will be in right (if they can move Jones) I don't think they will try to move Prior b/c his value is too low now. He will need to have a full season at 100% (which may never happen) to have any real trade value.

I can't type, that should say Pierre will resign depending on what kind of season he has.

If we let Pierre walk away, that would be so sad. If we wanted a 1 year rental to play leadoff boy, Kenny Lofton would have been a much better idea. I don't mind the trade we made to get Pierre if he resigns. If not, boy, we threw away some good young talent. While people may not think much of those guys who were traded (I don't think they'll be that good), we could have traded them for somebody that may be around for a couple of years.

I have a hard time understanding why a club would agree to a "player option". Does it really make the deal that much more attractive to the player? Why would a club leave the ball in the player's court for the final year or 2?

Interesting that Pie was in RF last night, Coats in CF for the Iowa cubbies. Maybe it was just a Sunday switchup to rest another OF, but you never know...

Great article Phil! If I were Jim Hendry this is what I would do after the season.

1. Offer salary arbitration to Todd Walker,Jerry Hairston,Juan Pierre ensuring that they either come back on 1 year deals or that you recieve draft pick compensation if they leave. Do this with Greg Maddux as well.

2. If he comes back and is effective, pick up Wood's option. If he struggles with injury, decline Kerry Wood's option and offer him arbitration as well. Reason being that his arbitration number will be low if he accepts

3. Shop Jacque Jones and fill Right field with Aubrey Huff. Huff is the rightfielder that we should have gotten last winter in the 1st place. Jacque Jones will be a very nice 4th outfileder if his contract proves to hefty to trade.

4. Work out a resolution to Aramis' contract situation.

5. Never offer these ridiculous Player options in a contract ever again. Use mutual options and read some books about about contract leverage.

I can't prove it, but I think that Hendry likes Todd Walker. If he really wanted him gone, he would be gone. I believe that Walker will back next year

#13 of 15: By EricW (May 8, 2006 01:33 PM)
I have a hard time understanding why a club would agree to a "player option". Does it really make the deal that much more attractive to the player? Why would a club leave the ball in the player's court for the final year or 2?

I agree with that. It seems like it makes it hard to plan for the future when you allow players all the leverage. If they outperform the deal, they can leave. If they underperform the deal, you have an albatross contract. This is the epitome of a lose/lose situation for the ballclub.

I know, it's magical thinking but I found out why we suck in May...

Todd Hollandsworth is the poster child for May 06 in the Cubs official 2006 calendar. How stupid was that as he was dumped last August. Do they print these things up years in advance?

April was solid because Maddux was the calendar pic.

and June...Kerry Wood is featured.

July is Barrett but August is another problem month (Burnitz). Walker is Sept.

impact move the cubs offense has been waiting for!
---
Looking to add some offense and speed to a struggling lineup, the Cubs called up second baseman Ryan Theriot from Triple-A Iowa on Monday, sources told the Tribune.

The 26-year-old Theriot, a right-handed hitter, was one of the final roster cuts in spring training. He was hitting .309 at Iowa with five stolen bases and 12 RBIs in 110 at-bats.

A September call-up in 2005, Theriot went 2-for-13 in nine games with the Cubs.

Since Todd Walker's move to first base, Theriot is expected to get some playing time with second baseman Jerry Hairston and infielder Neifi Perez both struggling at the plate.
--

looking to add offense? theriot != offense. at his very best he'll be a 300 hitter with a 300 slugging. what a bunch of crap.

over under on # of feet of HRs that hill gives up to bonds tomorrow night: 750

so is this the end of Fast Flubbie Freddie Bynum's Cub tenure?

...who was dropped to make room for The-Riot?

Sorry to be positive for a moment, and I hate to jinx it - but has anyone noticed that Aramis hasn't made an error this year? Give him some credit for staying focused in the field (an issue in the past) while struggling at the plate. By the way, he's on pace for 30HR, and the average will come, so let's lighten up a bit.

#12 of 20 : "If we let Pierre walk away, that would be so sad."...
I agree 100% Chad. Way too much for a one year rental. Bad winter for trades. (I know I'll catch hell for this but I am still upset over the JVB and Koronka trades as well).
I believe though,that we do get some compensation if we lose Pierre. So its not a total waste. maybe.

#12 of 20 : "If we let Pierre walk away, that would be so sad."...
I agree 100% Chad. Way too much for a one year rental. Bad winter for trades. (I know I'll catch hell for this but I am still upset over the JVB and Koronka trades as well).
I believe though,that we do get some compensation if we lose Pierre. So its not a total waste. maybe.

only if Hendry offers arbitration. Unfortunately he has hesitated from doing this in the recent past. Burnitz would have netted a 1st and 2nd round pick last year, Nomar would have netted a 1st rounder had Jim Hendry done his job correctly.

I agree with Aaron and Chad on the JVB trade.
He may never pan out for the Sawx, but he pitched well at aa, and AAA for the Cubs, and we decide to keep, instead of JVB, Rafael Fucking Novoa!!!

What a stupid decision....then, and now.

Burnitz would have very likely accepted arbitration and made tremendously more than whatever his option year called for. Pretty much same goes for Nomar as he would have netted a lot more than he got from the Dodgers. Arbitration $$$ has little to do with what a player should get, it is just a comparision of players with equal service time. In Burnitz's case particuraly, Hendry would have looked quite foolish ending up paying more for a guy than he would have paid if he just picked up his option. In Nomar's case, if you wanted him around (which I wouldn't have minded), then offering arbitration would have been smart, cause it's very likely that Nomar would have accepted it.

JVB's minor league #s mean nothing...he throws very violently across his body, is very wild, and comes off the mound in no possition to field.

bunts will kill his career if a comebacker to the back of the skull doesn't first.

he's also not able to be fixed unless something clicks with him. colorado tried to fix him for years...he ended up in indie ball where no one cared what he did. he did well enough to end up in the cubs system for a second chance. when the cubs tryed to unsuccessfully toy with his motion, it failed...they let him go back to his effective, but horrible mechanics.

its not even an injury scare with him as much as it is his wildness and how badly he comes off the mound. he might be able to get some deception Ks in the minors, but that act wont play well in the bigs.

if you've never seen him...he falls off the mound at the end of his motion with his BACK facing the batter off the 1st base side.

oh yeah...almost forgot his nail in the coffin...

his motion is soooo long you can basically steal at will off him...pitching out of the stretch is disaster for him.

Van Buren was traded because he slept with Roger Dorn's wife...

I have to disagree with you on this Rob. In arbitration the 2 sides both offer a contract and an independant arbitrator picks 1 or the other. I find it hard to Believe that Jeromey Burnitz would have made any more money than what Jacque Jones,Juan Encarnacion or Preston Wilson got. The benefit of arbitration is that it is only a 1 mil is a better value than Jacque Jones for years. Nomar Missed 60% of the previous 2 seasons so there is no evidence that an arbitrator would have given him a raise on his 05 salary. ( 8 mil). However uncle Ned in LA gave him close to it. Any way you slice it, Jim Hendry no longer maximizes his resources.

i meant to say 1 yr deal.

aaron...burn got 6.7m from pitt after turning down 6.5m from baltimore.

his market value was very much above 5m a year.

Last time the cubs used the arbitration system to their advantage was after the 2001 season. They ended up with 4 1st round picks by offering arbitration to the following players.

Todd Van Poppel
David Weathers
Matt Stairs

Now management wiffed on all 4 of those picks. However its better to have a bullet in the gun than to not have one.

The 6.7 burnitz got wouldnt have been an issue. The only reason that he got that money is because Jones,Encarnacion and preston Wilson had already signed elsewhere. Pittsburgh overpaid because they felt they had to. You guys make it sound like Burnitz was in line for a 10 million dollar deal. Worst case situation on Burnitz would have been him accepting Salary arbitration and getting a 1 yr deal for 4.5-6 million dollars. That is a better situation than we have now with Jacque jones in Right for the next 3 years.

I don't disagree with your last sentence and I stand corrected about the service time, that only applies to players with 5 years of service or less. Here's a prety good piece what can be heard in an arbitration case.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/200301...

It's completely subjective but I'll stand by the fact that Burnitz gets about $8 mil and Nomar around $8-$10 mil if they went to arbitration. They really don't take into account decline.

in arb there's a lot more in play than just your batting average, ob%, and slugging.

there's the market itself.

the RF market the past 2 years has been non-existant.

you can get CF'rs...SS's...3rd basemen...catchers...all the usual tricky finds, but RF has been dead.

reggie sanders has never made more than 4m a year in his life, but due to the market...he gets a 2yr/10m contract. yeah, there's a KC effect, but its doubtful he wasnt hearing offers for 4-5m as it is.

burn is not only a RF who has slugging (25+HR capability), but he's left handed, has a great glove, and a good arm. his value is not solely derived from his bat and his value reflects it.

an arbitrator would have to take all this into consideration before picking which piece of paper to give the nod to.

I'm not saying that's what they'd be worth, it's just the funny way arbitration works.

we will have to agree to disagree on how much they would have gotten. I really dont see burnitz and Nomar getting raises in arbitration from 05 salaries with the years they had. unless they had Johnny Cochran and a chewbacca defense up their sleeve.

Unless I have it totally wrong, the Cubs could not refuse the option they held on Burnitz and then offered him arbitration. They either had to pick up the option or let him become a free agent (they could have signed him later), arbitration was not a possibility.

An arbitrator looks at what similar players make in comparison. I think that the RF market was actually very clearly defined last winter. Reggie Sanders,Juan Encarnacion,Jacque Jones,Preston Wilson ALL signed for about the same money. That would lead me to believe that Burnitz would be in that same group. I would like to see Burnitz argue otherwise.

#38 of 39: By Newman (May 8, 2006 02:58 PM)
Unless I have it totally wrong, the Cubs could not refuse the option they held on Burnitz and then offered him arbitration. They either had to pick up the option or let him become a free agent (they could have signed him later), arbitration was not a possibility.

yes they could

aaronb - Can you reference a link or something that backs up your response? I'm pretty sure that a team cannot refuse an option and offer arb to the same player.

and in reference to the JVB trade. The mismanagement there was that the guy had 3 option years left and was given away for absolutely nothing. The excuse was the need to 40 man roster spots while guys like Macias sat on the roster. It was total mismanagement any way you look at it. He should be an option to shuttle back and forth between Iowa and Chicago. Which is esentially what role he fills in Boston. His option years made him more valueable than Leicster, wellemeyer and probably Mitre.

van buren was given to boston in good faith, because murton was stolen in the nomar trade (boston was supposed to get another prospect or two in return) and the red sox could have held up the deal or tried to negate it afterwards.

they did not, and this was a thank you gesture on hendry's part. that's how you keep from getting blackballed by other GMs.

I don't have an article but AZ Phil wrote a piece at the deadline that seemed to indicate that Burny could be offered arbitration

http://www.all-baseball.com/cubreporter/archi...

aaron...what?

have you EVER SEEN jvb?

mismanagement?

YOU REALLY NEED TO ACTUALLY WATCH THIS GUY PITCH.

lthe guy cannot hold runners, he is wild, and his motion is HORRIBLE. he is in no position to field coming off the mound. when i say he's in no possition, i really really mean it. his back isnt kinda toward the hitter...it is toward the hitter and more shocking, so is his head.

he has no business on this team and he'll be lucky to have a career.

and his role in boston? WHAT??!?!??! are you serious? dude...guy rolled into boston, let 2-3 steals happen and 3 runs rain down on his watch in his 1st appearance and it was due solely to his pitching mechanics. he did okay with no one one, but with his wildness that's not even a sure thing if you give him a blank inning to pitch in.

jvb is not a prospect and not a good pitcher by any measure.

I dont have a link handy. But it was stated that the cubs declined to offer arbitration to Nomar and Burnitz on Dec 7th. However the cubs had declined Burnys option as soon as the season was over. Burny was a free agent as soon as the cubs declined his option, however nobody offered him a contract until after he was non tendered arbitration on the 7th. Thus avoiding draft pick compensation.

Thanks, Rob G. Obviously I was wrong.

guys...van burren is nothing.

no scout likes him...not many clubs like him...these flaws arent even things like "tips his slider via his wrist angle gripping the ball in the glove" or anything semi-hard to spot.

you really have to look beyond his numbers and realize that his mechanics issue isnt even an injury concern as much as it is dangerous to the game on the field itself. when van burren pitches...unless something dribbles to him...the field has 8 defenders. he can't hold runners cuz of his long motion and inability to pitch out of the stretch. he's wild.

while I could really care less about JVB, I do agree it was poor 40 man roster mismanagement that got him traded more than anything else. The Cubs needed to free up some space and JVB was the odd man out. I doubt the Cubs will regret the move, but the Cubs forced their own hand on that one, which is pretty silly.

I am not saying that JVB was a great prospect or anything. I will say that he put up flat out dominant numbers in AAA last year. I can care less if his motion was violent, or he didnt come off the mound in position, or if he was a closet communist. By only care is that he could have been more useful to us than he ultimately was. Now if this was indeed a makeup deal for the Murton/Nomar trade, then that is OK. If it was to clear up a roster spot, while Macias was still on said roster, then it was a terrible roster management deal.

Sorry Aaron, but your conclusions don't exactly match up with baseball reality.

Burnitz would have certainly made at least 7 million in arbitration. Burnitz walks into the hearing says they gave me a 7 million dollar option last year, I performed up to expecations, so I expect 7 million dollars. He would win the case, and the Cubs would end up playing him more money, because they'd have to buy out his contract before offering arbitration.

BTW-Newman, that is the key, the could have offered Burny arbitration, but only AFTER spending a half million to buy out his contract.

Now, keeping Burnitz around for one year might not have been a bad move, but offering him arbitration would not have made sense.

How many teams supposedly got screwed out of a player in the Nomar deal?

Supposedly it was Minnesota who was supposed to get an extra player, which is why the Cubs supposedly signed Blanco before the arbitration deadline last year (giving MN an extra draft pick).

I'd never heard the JVB was payback for Nomar before, and quite frankly I don't buy it. The mis-managed 40 man roster makes much more sense. JVB isn't a great prospect, but the Cubs really shouldn't have put themselves in a position where they had to trade them.

>>I'd never heard the JVB was payback for Nomar before, and quite frankly I don't buy it. The mis-managed 40 man roster makes much more sense.
>>

...why?

Burnitz was given that contract with the 7 million dollar option when he was comming off a 37 homer season in 2004. His 2005 season was a dissapointment by comparison. But that is all subjective. My only point is that even if Burnitz accepted arbitration, he is still a better value for 1 year at 7 mil than Jacque Jones is at 16 mil over 3 seasons. Especially when you factor in that we had to pay him 500K to leave town.

First, I've never heard of Boston complaining about the trade before now - and I'd say a world series ring would probably have cleared up any bad blood.

Second, If there had been a problem with the trade, it would have been cleared up after the 2004 season, not after the 2005 season.

Third, Jim Hendry doesn't have a very good track record when it comes to managing the 40 man roster, and when pre-rule 5 additions were made, many people were puzzled by the decisions, and forsaw overcrowding problems.

#41 of 47: By Newman (May 8, 2006 03:04 PM)
aaronb - Can you reference a link or something that backs up your response? I'm pretty sure that a team cannot refuse an option and offer arb to the same player.

--

NEWMAN: When a player or a team decline an option for the following season, the contract is terminated and the player is either:

1. Eligible for free-agency under Article XX of the CBA (if the player has six or more years of MLB service time), and then the club can still re-sign the player or offer arbitration to the player just like with any other of the club's free-agents, or

2. Eligible for salary arbitration under Article VI if the player has three or more years--but less than six years--of MLB service time, or if he qualifies as a "Super Two" by virtue of having between two and three years of MLB service time, where the player's service time is in the top 17% of all players with at least two but less than three years of MLB service time, as long as the service time is at least two years plus 86 days (86 days is exactly half a season), or

3. Subject to "auto-renewal" (where the club can unilaterally renew the player's contract for the following season), if the player has less than three years of MLB service time and does not qualify as a "super two."

So when the Cubs declined their 2006 option on the contract of Jeromy Burnitz, they had to pay him $500,000 (contract buy-out), and then because Burnitz had more than six years of MLB service time, it just meant that Burnitz became eligible to file for FA under Article XX, just like any other player in his class whose contract had expired. Which he did. And then the Cubs were free to re-sign him or offer him arbitration, just like with any other Cubs player who filed for free-agency during the Free-Agency Filing Period (which is the first 15 days immediately following the conclusion of the World Series).

And it works both ways. For instance, if Aramis Ramirez exercises his "player option" to terminate his contract after this season, the Cubs will have the same right to re-sign him or offer arbitration to him as they would with any other of their players who might opt to file for free-agency.

So basically whether the club or the player decline an option, it just means that the multi-year contract between the player and the club is terminated, and that the player is not signed for the following season.

Phil, What is your take on the JVB to boston and the Burny/Nomar moves?

#55 of 56: By Bleeding Blue (May 8, 2006 03:40 PM)
Jim Hendry doesn't have a very good track record when it comes to managing the 40 man roster, and when pre-rule 5 additions were made, many people were puzzled by the decisions, and forsaw overcrowding problems.

----

BLEEDING BLUE: Amen, brother.

Adding Brian Dopirak and Scott Moore to the 40-man roster last November not only squeezed-out Jermaine Van Buren, it also started the "option clock" ticking on two players who were VERY, VERY unlikely to be lost in the Rule 5 Draft, and now Dopirak will be out of options in Spring Training 2009, two years before Derrek Lee's contract expires!

I realize D-Lee was not signed past 2006 when Dopirak was added to the 40 last November, but it should have seemed logical and likely that Lee was probably going to be re-signed to a multi-year contract sometime before the end of the 2006 season, and that should have factored into the decision to add Dopirak to the 40-man roster.

Not only that, but it is ALWAYS better to not put a player on the 40-man roster and risk losing him in the Rule 5 Draft (with the chance that he will not make the new teams's 25-man roster--see Jason Dubois in 2003, Jason Szuminski in 2004, Luke Hagerty in 2005, and Juan Mateo in 2006--and be returned), than it is to put a player on the 40-man roster, and then have to later put him on irrevocable outright waivers to take him off the 40 to make room for somebody else, because unlike players selected in the Rule 5 Draft, players claimed off outright waivers CAN be immediately optioned to the minors (presuming they have options left).

That doesn't mean a club should not protect a young player from the Rule 5 by placing him on the 40, just that you have to know what type of player is usually selected (and that would be pitchers out of Hi-A, AA, and AAA who can be used as long relievers, LOOGYs and/or mop-up guys, catchers who can "catch & throw," and position players who are fast so that they can be used as pinch-runners and late-inning defensive replacements). Dopirak and Moore defintely do not meet those criteria.

Hendry seems to use the 40-man roster as a carrot & stick reward (sort of like promoting a player to the "Varsity" in college) rather than as a method to protect players from being lost in the Rule 5 Draft who actually are likely to be selected.

#57 of 58: By aaronb (May 8, 2006 03:52 PM)
Phil, What is your take on the JVB to boston and the Burny/Nomar moves?

----

AARON B: As I said in my previous post, JVB was removed from the 40-man roster because he got squeezed-out by two players (Dopirak and Moore) who shouldn't have been added to the 40 in the first place. And I expect (fear) similar foolishness next off-season.

As for the Cubs offering arbitration to Burnitz and Nomar, I understand why Hendry does not like to go to arbitration, especially when veteran players who could make millions of dollars are involved. So I would have just let Nomar walk.

But given the gaggle of mediocre FA RF candidates on the market last off-season (J. Jones, J. Encarnacion, P. Wilson, and R. Sanders, and Burnitz, too, once he became a FA), I would have just held my nose and exercised the $7m 2006 option on Burnitz, because the other guys wanted multi-year contracts, and none of them were (are) worth that.

When I say that I would have "held my nose" and exercised the option on Burnitz, I'm not trying to put Burnitz down, but he IS an aging player who was (is) likely to start having significant diminished performance very soon. But what I liked about Burnitz was that his 2006 option was a ONE YEAR DEAL for a KNOWN PRICE ($7m). That's what made retaining Burnitz attractive to me over the idea of signing one of the others for two or three years. Plus, Burnitz is a stable defensive player with a true RF arm, and he has more acceptable LHP/RHP splits than a guy like Jacque Jones (for instance).

BTW, Jacque Jones would be acceptable as a platoon LF, except the Cubs didn't need that.

BTW, Jacque Jones would be acceptable as a platoon LF, except the Cubs didn't need that.

I have to LOL at that because we have all seen his splits. I wouldnt mind Jones if we would platoon him.

X
  • Sign in with Twitter