Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Gonfalon Cubs > Discussion
Gonfalon Cubs
— Cubs Baseball for Thinking Fans

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Andere Richtingen Posted: August 31, 2006 at 03:02 PM (#2163009)
There is certainly no reason to rush his promotion. The Cubs have plenty of talent to audition.
   2. John Lowenstein Apathy Club Posted: August 31, 2006 at 04:32 PM (#2163126)
Hendry should go to Miller right now, before he gets called up, and try to negotiate a deal for 2007. If Miller still doesn’t want to talk or says he wants to keep his options open, the Cubs should keep him in Iowa.

If such a tactic were tried, I would think the union would grieve, and rightly so. I don't think it's a legitimate negotiating tactic to offer a callup as a carrot (or a continued minor league assignment as a stick, however you want to look at it).

I agree that that would make a lot of sense from the Cubs' perspective, just not on the legitimacy of the tactic.
   3. McCoy Posted: August 31, 2006 at 05:50 PM (#2163277)
I asked before and got no real answer who was on the hook for Miller's rehab? You can't cut a player while he is on the DL right? And I am pretty sure that his team has to pay to fix his injury but what happens afterwards? Does the DL vanish once the season ends, and does rehab not count as part of fixing the injury?

All that aside I think it was pretty stupid of Hendry to throw millions at Miller and only get a one year contract out of him. He should have just walked away once Miller made his position known. It should have been very obvious to all that Millers thinking was that once he was healthy he was/is going to try and cash in on a very lucrative contract.
   4. paytonrules Posted: August 31, 2006 at 09:39 PM (#2163793)
If a player can hold-out, why can't the cubs not play him?

They may not be able to keep him in Iowa (a veteran is allowed to dictate his callup per union rules if I recall the Hundley saga correctly) but they don't have to start him.
   5. 100 Years is Nothing Posted: August 31, 2006 at 10:07 PM (#2163831)
I fail to see how this matters at all.
   6. Boogie Nights Powell Posted: September 01, 2006 at 12:13 AM (#2163959)
Did anyone notice Dusty said, "what <u>we</u> have for next year"?
   7. Rough Carrigan Posted: September 01, 2006 at 01:41 AM (#2164097)
In Miller's first start for the Red Sox late last May(IIRC) he looked fan-freaking-tastic. He was throwing 95 mph with great command and a nasty curve. But he looked progressively worse with each subsequent outing and never hit 95 again. It was very disappointing. For a few days there it looked like they'd struck paydirt. I wonder if he'll every be completely healthy again.

In one newspaper article, Miller recounted making three or four starts for the Astros while his arm felt terrible and ached but he wanted to suck it up and prove his toughness or something. I sure hope it gave him millions and millions of dollars worth of satisfaction.
   8. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: September 01, 2006 at 02:44 AM (#2164194)
If such a tactic were tried, I would think the union would grieve, and rightly so. I don't think it's a legitimate negotiating tactic to offer a callup as a carrot (or a continued minor league assignment as a stick, however you want to look at it).

I didn't mean that Hendry should "offer a callup as a carrot"; rather, I meant to suggest that if Miller isn't willing to talk, then there shouldn't be any real rush to bring him up.

I realize that the MLBPA can raise a dispute about it, but it seems to me that Hendry could certainly say something like "Miller is still rehabbing and we were being overly cautious." Seeing that Miller's outings in Iowa have been mixed, it would seem quite reasonable for Hendry not to needlessly risk bringing up Miller.

Even if he must call him, though, there is certainly nothing wrong with calling him up and leaving him on the bench. To my knowledge, there are no rules mandating that a team actually use a player under these circumstances. (Dusty would pitch him every 5th day, but that's another issue.)

There have been instances in which a team signs a player to a contract with incentives (say, 500 ABs), then holds that player out of the lineup when he comes close to meeting that goal. In those cases, the MLBPA has filed grievances and rightfully so. That's not the case here, however. Miller has no incentives and will be paid as much if he doesn't pitch as if he pitches 30IP.
   9. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: September 01, 2006 at 02:54 AM (#2164214)
I asked before and got no real answer who was on the hook for Miller's rehab? You can't cut a player while he is on the DL right? And I am pretty sure that his team has to pay to fix his injury but what happens afterwards? Does the DL vanish once the season ends, and does rehab not count as part of fixing the injury?

I'm not really sure I understand your questions, but let me take a shot:

* What do you mean by being "on the hook for Miller's rehab"? The Cubs are paying Miller a flat salary, regardless of whether he actually even throws a pitch this season. Whether he plays in the majors, the minors, or even if he can't throw a baseball at all this year, the Cubs still owe him the salary to which they agreed.

As it happens, Miller presumably went though a bunch of strength and conditioning exercises, therapy, etc. before he was ready to see a rehab start. I would presume that the Cubs would be paying the bills for therapists, etc., but I could be wrong. Either way, it's de minimis and it isn't something the Cubs would be able to get back anyway.

While he's been in the minors, of course, he's still drawing his salary. I hope this is what you mean by "on the hook." If not, feel free to be more specific.

* I'm not 100% sure about cutting a player on the DL. It's quite possible that you cannot release him. In Miller's case, though, it's really irrelevant. There is no reason for the Cubs to release Miller -- because he's on the 60 day DL, he's not taking up any roster space. The only reason I can see for the Cubs to release him would be if they had some sort of amicable understanding with Miller to allow him to try to find another MLB club who would give him a chance this September.

* As for "his team has to pay to fix his injury but what happens afterwards," I'm not sure what
   10. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: September 01, 2006 at 03:01 AM (#2164229)
Oops, got cut off --

I'm not sure what you mean by "what happens afterwards." When the Cubs feel he's healthy, they can call him up. (Of course, they can rush him as well -- see, e.g., Derrek Lee earlier this year.)

If Miller doesn't become fully healthy until, say, November, then that's just too bad for the Cubs. He'll become a FA at the end of the year. He'll also be a FA even if he's still hurt.

Finally, I'm also unsure what you mean by "rehab not count[ing] as part of fixing the injury." It's all the same thing. A team is allowed to send an injured player to the minors for rehab purposes. They can activate him when they believe he's healthy. What else do you mean?
   11. McCoy Posted: September 01, 2006 at 02:30 PM (#2164552)
I mean if the Cubs hadn't signed him would the Red Sox be on the hook for his post surgery medical expenses? I'm not looking at it from the Cubs perspective but from the Red Sox perspective going into this season. Then wondering what happens to a free agent that had surgery and has to have a long recovery. Who pays for the recovery if no one signs him to a contract? The union? Himself? His last team?
   12. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: September 01, 2006 at 06:28 PM (#2164853)
I mean if the Cubs hadn't signed him would the Red Sox be on the hook for his post surgery medical expenses?

Of course not. He was a FA, not under contract to anyone. Presumably, he would be paying those expenses (more likely an insurer). The Red Sox may have been paying some rehab/therapy bills while he was still under contract with the team, but once the contract ends, so would any obligation by the Red Sox.

I suppose it's possible that the MLBPA offers benefits such as that to it's membership, but I would doubt it.
   13. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: September 01, 2006 at 06:54 PM (#2164881)
Even if he must call him, though, there is certainly nothing wrong with calling him up and leaving him on the bench. To my knowledge, there are no rules mandating that a team actually use a player under these circumstances. (Dusty would pitch him every 5th day, but that's another issue.)

Well, the Cubs did call up Miller, so at this point, the question is how much he'll play. Seeing that they don't have him locked up for 2007 and have no shot this year, I don't see why they need to give him much/any playing time -- especially considering that he may not be absolutely 100% anyway.
   14. Cooper Teenoh Posted: September 01, 2006 at 07:10 PM (#2164903)
It doesn't seem that hard to figure out. The Cubs will, very possibly, be one of the teams seeking to sign Miller to a 2007 contract. So, it would benefit them, as well as other interested teams, to see what he's got in live circumstances. And, I'm presuming, they are hoping that they managed to engender some good will by signing him for this year, which could give them a leg up on other teams. To bury him would negate that good will, and would leave the Cubs even with (if not behind) other teams in the bidding.

If Miller was able to come back and pitch, I would think that he would be interesting. He's been a pretty solid pitcher when he was on. The Cubs could use that sort of guy, and they love paying less than retail.
   15. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: September 01, 2006 at 07:35 PM (#2164922)
Sure, I understand that. The Cubs want a look just like other teams, and like other teams, they've had the chance to see him in Iowa. I just figure that Miller might be feeling some sense of guilt/loyalty to the Cubs and may be interested in signing now, and it makes sense for Hendry to send out feelers now.

OTOH, if Miller is demanding a lot more than the Cubs would want to pay or hints he wants to go elsewhere, it doesn't make much sense to show any more loyalty to him this month than he's willing to show to the Cubs -- especially for a guy who may still be less than 100%.
   16. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: September 10, 2006 at 12:06 AM (#2172365)
Miller is getting the start tonight and, again, I say -- why?

I realize the Cubs want a look at him, but why not get a look at Jae Kuk Ryu instead -- someone they *know* will be back with the team next year. That's a look that might actually be useful, but for some reason, the Cubs seem to have predetermined that Ryu is nothing more than bullpen fodder, even though he's consistently been a starter in the minor leagues, including this season in Iowa.

For that matter, even if they don't want to start Ryu, why not Glendon Rusch, who hasn't pitched in five days and has only pitched 2 innings in the last 2 1/2 weeks? I realize he shouldn't be a starter for the team, but isn't he on the roster for just this very situation -- when the team needs someone to step in for a spot start?

Seriously, as much as we'd all like to see Rusch gone from this team, if he isn't used in games like this, why does Hendry have him on the roster in the first place?
   17. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: September 10, 2006 at 12:08 AM (#2172367)
And, less than 5 minutes after my post, Ryu is up in the bullpen. Go figure.
   18. Moses Taylor loves a good maim Posted: September 10, 2006 at 08:41 AM (#2172536)

For that matter, even if they don't want to start Ryu, why not Glendon Rusch, who hasn't pitched in five days and has only pitched 2 innings in the last 2 1/2 weeks? I realize he shouldn't be a starter for the team, but isn't he on the roster for just this very situation -- when the team needs someone to step in for a spot start?


Is this a serious post? Who in their right mind would rather see Rusch than Miller? Which do you think is more likely to help the Cubs next season? Which is more likly to crap the bed? Yes, I'd rather see Ryu, but I don't blame the team for wanting to see some return on their investment. If MIller can do anything (and I wouldn't bet on it), he'd be a much, much better option that #######.
   19. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: September 10, 2006 at 02:28 PM (#2172559)
Considering the chances that Miller will stick around with this s[t]inking ship, I think the chances of him helping this team next year are about the same as Rusch's.

As for "getting a return on their investment," Moses, you tell me -- how much of a return did last night's start give the Cubs? At this point, he's being paid $333,333 for each unproductive inning.

My greater point, though, was to ask why Rusch is on the roster. Yes, he sucks, but Hendry has kept him on the team for some reason. If it wasn't to come if for a spot start in a situation like this, what is it? Why does Hendry think he needs Rusch at all?

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
BDC
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.2388 seconds
35 querie(s) executed