Readers (reader-?) have commented on the absence of Cubs articles lately (except for Sunday’s “Compromise On the Way To the Fiscal Cliff,” which really wasn’t a Cubs article anyway). One reason might be that it’s the off-season; the Cubs aren’t playing. Of course, sometimes that’s when things are most hopeful for Cubs fans. So here’s a post.
A question: Cubs’ management has said they are looking for a couple of mid-range free agent starting pitchers, like Paul Maholm last year. I certainly agree the Cubs need a couple of starters, but I question how management is going about it. Because, in addition to saying they want to sign some pitchers, management has also told fans that there could come another July when the Cubs might trade away 40% of their starting staff, if that would produce some good prospects.
I appreciate management’s honesty in telling (warning-?) fans about another July fire-sale, but I wonder what kind of message that sends to free agents considering the Cubs. Fans probably don’t appreciate everything that ball players go through. We see them living in fancy hotels, flying on charter flights, etc. Living the good life. Or so we think.
But what if players are like regular people? Maybe they like a routine. Maybe they like working (i.e., playing) with people they know. They sign with a team because that is where they want to play. What if they dislike not knowing, from day to day in late July, where they are going to play the next day? It’s one thing to go on road trips every week or two. But to have to pick up and move, on a day’s notice, to another town, another team, another group of guys – and it’s not in your control. That doesn’t sound like a lot of fun. And who’s going to close up their apartment, move their stuff?
So when a player is deciding where he wants to play, is it important to have some stability and certainty? Obviously, players can get traded anytime. But to sign with a team, knowing that if you do a good job, you’ll probably get traded in late July? Even if the trade is to a playoff-bound team, some guys might not like that uncertainty, that hassle.
While I don’t know for sure, I wouldn’t be surprised if the message being sent by Cubs management (“Sign with us, but p.s. we’ll trade you if you do a good job) isn’t going to make it a little harder easier to sign the pitchers we need.
-----------
UPDATE (11/13/12 9:00 pm): It is sort of funny. Within a few hours after I posted this article about the possible difficulties of signing free agent pitchers when they know you might try to trade them in July, the Cubs signed Scott Baker to a $5.5 million one-year contract.
Of course, Baker is coming off Tommy John surgery and didn’t pitch at all last year, which made him, at least, think that a trade deadline deal was “kind of a far stretch”. Also, maybe getting $5.5 million a year after surgery makes you willing to take a chance on a late July relocation.
We will see. And I hope I am wrong about how hard it is for the Cubs to sign some starters.
Your devoted reader thanks you for this article!
Posted by: Jennie | November 14, 2012 at 11:05 AM