Big "Z"

by sftxfan on Aug 17, 2007 9:03 AM CDT

Is going to sign a 5 year 90 mill dollar extension with the Cubs today.

The only ace on the market next year is gone so do we sign any big contracts next year?

Min is 300 so I guess I have to keep typing till I hit that amount so if I keep going I will finally hit the amount that I need to hit to be able to post this entry.

Tweet Comment 26 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

link?

by hightowersmith on Aug 17, 2007 9:14 AM CDT reply actions

I heard it reported on ESPN radio

this morning.

Kind of sad, but it wasn't particularly likely we would have gotten him.

by DJCahill on Aug 17, 2007 9:15 AM CDT up reply actions

Baseball Digest Daily

also reporting this. Press conference at 10:15 CST.

Signature

by t ball on Aug 17, 2007 9:20 AM CDT reply actions

Zambrano

The Cubs' website also has a note on the front page confirming the press conference.

"Then I met some friends for a beer, went to a BoDeans's concert, and son of a vondruke, if I didn't leave him at the concert hall."

by RCCook on Aug 17, 2007 9:21 AM CDT reply actions

Got to admit

I'd a thought he'd get more years.

He's young. It wouldn't even necessarily be imprudent.

Then again, I guess the dude wants to make sure he hits the market again...

by hightowersmith on Aug 17, 2007 9:36 AM CDT up reply actions

let's start the Santana signing bandwagon!!

i mean....the Santana DREAM bandwagon.....because it's more than likely not reality....

"I'm too God Damn Drunk to taste this Chicken" -Colonel Sanders

by slash on Aug 17, 2007 9:29 AM CDT reply actions

No way the Rangers get Santana

If Zambrano can get $18 million a year, you know Santana can get $22-25 million a year, and Hicks is not going to go there.

Wait til the year after next!

by chadero on Aug 17, 2007 9:38 AM CDT reply actions

I think Hicks would have no problem going up there for Santana. He still won't sign here since his agent will just use the Rangers to up the bidding on everyone else. Kind of like what Zito and Clemens have done. He's going to one of the New York teams.

Derek

Signature! I don't need no stinking signature!!

by DerekSTheRed on Aug 17, 2007 9:51 AM CDT up reply actions

Yeah

I'm actually using the Hicks cheapness accusations as a gauge for whether people actually follow the Rangers.

Needless to say, this idea is bullshit.

I love how lean this team's payroll is, and has been for years. With ARod coming off, it's about to get leaner.

Kudos to Hicks and the Rangers.

by hightowersmith on Aug 17, 2007 9:55 AM CDT up reply actions

UH...

Tommy Hicks would most definetely go there...

the guy inked one of the most lucrative contracts ever with Alex... and say what you will about it... Rodriguez did what was expected of him...

i could see him ponying up the dough for Santana... or at least making him a more-than-substantial offer.

by oc on Aug 17, 2007 10:12 AM CDT up reply actions

Hicks

said the A-Rod signing was a mistake. The Rangers will offer Santana $20 million or so, knowing there is no way he signs.

Hicks said spending alot of money on the Stars was a mistake, even though they won the Stanley cup. I am not saying he is "cheap", but he has a cash cow, and is only going to feed it enough so it keeps giving him milk.

Wait til the year after next!

by chadero on Aug 17, 2007 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions

Right

So, you say this with the memory of the Teixeira and Zito offers in mind, right?

by hightowersmith on Aug 17, 2007 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions

Wrong

Adam had a post here that linked to a Kat O'Brien article in Newsday (which now requires a fee). The article states that both ARod and Hicks said they didn't regret the signing and would do it again.

Derek

Signature! I don't need no stinking signature!!

by DerekSTheRed on Aug 17, 2007 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions

Underwhelming

I thought he would get far more.

sportsdeals.blogspot.com

by BudLight on Aug 17, 2007 10:03 AM CDT reply actions

Years

I thought about $18 mil or so might do it, but I thought he'd demand more years.

Signature

by t ball on Aug 17, 2007 10:09 AM CDT up reply actions

I guess...

Zambrano likes playing in Chicago. I bet he could have gotten more money and maybe more years on the open market.

by bflood36 on Aug 17, 2007 10:10 AM CDT reply actions

5 years, $91.5 mil

according to Fox, with a player option for a 6th year at $19.25 mil.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7130616

Guess he really likes Chicago.

Signature

by t ball on Aug 17, 2007 10:11 AM CDT reply actions

Zambrano

Do you think that Zambrano would have signed the contract if the Cubbies did not surge back into the post-season race after Sweet Lou's tirade? Also, i think this is a horrible deal for Zambrano, call me Boras if you'd like, but if he hits the Free Agent market, he is looking at possible 100 million + for the same amount of years. Teams however may be looking at the barry zito situation and the gargantuan contract he was given.

baseBALLIN!

by kevzta on Aug 17, 2007 11:00 AM CDT reply actions

I've never understood that thinking

"i think this is a horrible deal for Zambrano, call me Boras if you'd like, but if he hits the Free Agent market, he is looking at possible 100 million + for the same amount of years."

What on God's green earth can a man buy for 115 million that he can't buy for 90?

Other than this, maybe:

http://www.ussubs.com/submarines/luxury.php3

Is it purely some pathetic ego issue? Is the player such an easily manipulated dufus that he defers to his greedy agent?

Why, when the question is A) earn 80 million for a random team you are lukewarm about, or B) earn 60 at the place where your heart truly wants to be, do so many players choose option A?

I'd really love to hear a reasonable explanation there...

I will not get my comeuppance!

by Brian Thomas on Aug 17, 2007 6:42 PM CDT up reply actions

I'd like one of those...

as a matter of fact, if I find a cruise service that operates one of those larger ones, I'm saving my money.

by benmor78 on Aug 17, 2007 7:43 PM CDT up reply actions

Good

I didn't want Zambrano.

by JBImaknee on Aug 17, 2007 11:35 AM CDT reply actions

Why...

...not?

The depressing thing about tennis is that no matter how good I get, I'll never be as good as a wall.

by Suicide Prince on Aug 17, 2007 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions

He's good

but I worry about signing players who are that big to long term contracts. He's a really big dude - I think there is a decent risk that he'll take a Bartolo Colon turn to his career - he'll may compete for Cy Youngs one or two more seasons, but it isn't obvious his body will hold up for the length of contract it would take for us to get him.

That and Cubs pitchers are notorious for being overused when young. I don't want to give a long-term contract to any pitcher who has spent more than 3 months under the auspices of Dusty Baker and his shoulder-destroying ways...

by JBImaknee on Aug 17, 2007 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions

Signing him was never realistic anyway

at least hes staying in the NL then. oh well.

and i like seeing a player take a discounted deal to stay with their teams.

by DShep on Aug 17, 2007 3:50 PM CDT reply actions

In Zito's case

I suspect there's no way he'd be able to get 5/70 in five years from now, or even next year.

by a bebop a rebop on Aug 18, 2007 11:41 PM CDT reply actions

Maybe, but

that doesn't take into account the chance of injury or Zito-like ineffectiveness. A 5-yr. deal over a 7-yr. deal benefits the team/owner much more than the player because of the risk reduction.

Signature

by t ball on Aug 19, 2007 5:04 AM CDT reply actions