« Rosenthal's Latest: Burnett, Lowe, Peavy | Main | Blue Jays To Sit Out Free Agent Market? »

Dempster Signing Reactions

By Coley Ward [November 19, 2008 at 8:32am CST]

Yesterday the Cubs signed free agent pitcher Ryan Dempster to a four-year, $52 million deal (the last year is a player option). Dempster also talked to the Blue Jays, Braves, Dodgers, Yankees, and Mets. Reactions to the deal:

Newsday's Ken Davidoff says it "doesn't seem like a great investment in a 31-year-old without a proven history as a starting pitcher."
Umpbump's Paul Moro says "Although he’s on the wrong side of 30, I think that this will be one of the saner deals this offseason."
Bleed Cubbie Blue says, "Good clubhouse guys aren't easy to find, and when you have one like Dempster who gets it, in addition to being dedicated to his craft and staying in shape so he can continue to perform at the high level he did in 2008, you keep him."
Sabernomics says, "Are teams really thinking this guy is a legitimate front-of-the-rotation starter worth $13 million a season for the next four years? ... 2008 screams 'fluke!'"
ESPN's Rob Neyer (whose blog is now free) says, "Dempster gave up only 14 home runs in 2008. I don't believe that number is sustainable."
Dave Cameron likes the deal for the Cubs, noting that the contract assumes Dempster regresses.
Ken Rosenthal notes that the Cubs had extra appeal to Dempster because he has 10-and-5 rights with them.
Dempster has a backloaded contract, but my math says the Cubs will now be above $130MM after arbitration raises. Payroll is expected to rise at least slightly from the $130MM level, but the Cubs don't have much room in the budget for that lefthanded bat right now.

Tim Dierkes also contributed to this post.

Full Story | Comments (14) | Categories: Chicago Cubs | Ryan Dempster

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b9a69e2010535fa3720970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Dempster Signing Reactions:

Comments

How does this signing compare to the Cardinals' signing of Lohse? I'm not sure I would want either for the terms of the contract, but that's free agency.

Posted by: drkong | November 19, 2008 at 08:40 AM

It sounds like every Cubs contract backloaded.

Posted by: Victor | November 19, 2008 at 08:42 AM

drkong- Dempster's a higher risk, with durability issues and whether he regresses back or not, because his "regressed" or "back to reliever" state is worse than Lohse's, but Demp's also a much higher reward than Lohse. Although both signings are landmines.

The contract is backloaded? Oh god. This could get interesting down the road.

Posted by: melonis rex | November 19, 2008 at 08:43 AM

"Dave Cameron likes the deal for the Cubs, noting that the contract assumes Dempster regresses. "

Finally, someone who gets it. This contract isn't paying him like an Ace...which is what he WAS last year. Its paying him like a a really good #3, which is exactly what he should be. He doesn't have to sustain his numbers, but an ERA in the 3.65 range is definitely within the possibility for the life of the contract, and I think that they are paying him to be below 4. Good signing.

"The contract is backloaded? Oh god. This could get interesting down the road. "

Barely. Its 12 mil the first, year, and only goes as high as 14 by the 4th year player option. Thats barely what I would call a "backloaded" contract, expecially considering that backloading them slightly, like this one does, is actually SMARTER because what 12 mil is worth now won't be far from 14 mil then. This is a good deal, and the Cubs had to do it.

Posted by: Aduncaroo | November 19, 2008 at 08:51 AM

melonis-this one's not as backloaded as some of the other ones. someone broke it down in yesterday's post, it's only like a million dollar jump each year, though i might be wrong about that (too lazy to look it up right now). the most valuable year is the player option year (essentially the opt out year) for 13.5 mil. but, i'm with you, i really dislike the backloaded contract philosophy. all things considered, i think it's a pretty good deal, and i'm assuming he regresses somewhat

Posted by: 100backeduptrucks | November 19, 2008 at 08:52 AM

Sometimes signing bonuses don't count against payroll.

Posted by: Tim Dierkes | November 19, 2008 at 08:57 AM

I believe the Cubs are doing so many backloaded contracts for 2 reasons:
1) They are obvious paying to win now, so, to hell with the future we'll figure it out when we get there
2) The current ownership is not the future ownership, so the financial mess that is coming will be a different owners problem, they are putting together a team they can win with and unload the franchise for max profit.
Essentially, as Cubs fans, we need to enjoy the ride now, 'cuz the future could get scary

Posted by: weeha004 | November 19, 2008 at 08:59 AM

"Sometimes signing bonuses don't count against payroll."

Can you name one time? If this were true, wouldn't the Yankees make half of every FA contract be a "signing bonus"? Then they wouldn't have to pay for going over the salary cap.

Posted by: DodgersBruin | November 19, 2008 at 09:26 AM

""Sometimes signing bonuses don't count against payroll.""

THis is true...I'll think of one if i can.

Again people, this isn't some scary backloaded contract, it goes up like a milion and a half dollars over 3 to 4 years. Thats what the value of the dollar does anyway...which is why this contract is fine. soriano, fukudome...those are backloaded. THis one is hardly in the same category.

Posted by: Aduncaroo | November 19, 2008 at 09:32 AM

This contract isn't "backloaded" it's got the normal increase every year, so it keeps up with the inflationary market and the player isn't unhappy they are underpaid in the out years.

This sounds like a fair deal, I'm sure someone would have paid him more, but it's not Ace money either (see Zambrano, CC)

Posted by: Banks1954 | November 19, 2008 at 09:58 AM

Sounds like Luke Scott is a perfect fit. Making league minimum, great left-handed OF. I don't know if the O's will trade him even though they should, though.

Posted by: SrMeowMeow | November 19, 2008 at 11:12 AM

I would have much rather used the $52 mil toward Lowe or Burnett.

Posted by: rememberthecoop | November 19, 2008 at 11:12 AM

Not me. Lowe is talking about "Zito dollars" and Burnett will probably get 75 mil and 4 to 5 years.

I'll take Demp at 4 all day...who outperformed both of the other two last year.

Posted by: Aduncaroo | November 19, 2008 at 12:41 PM

It's gonna be interesting watching the one year wonders regress in 2009. Lohse, Dempster, Burnett, etc.

Posted by: Devlsh | November 19, 2008 at 03:51 PM

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

Posted by: |

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:

Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Dempster Signing Reactions

TrackBack

Comments

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

Post a comment

Top Stories

Search MLBTR

MLBTR Features

Recent Posts

MLBTR Mailing List

Rumors By Team

Monthly Archives

Live Chats


Home Contact About Advertise Archives Widget Twitter RSS Usage