Eyre to the Cubs

by Dan from NM on Nov 17, 2005 6:06 PM PST

Does this mean the Giants automatically get supplemental-first and second-round draft picks, or is there a technical way that Sabean can forfeit the picks?

Anyway, I wish Eye luck. It's probably best that the Giants spend their money in other areas.

This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.

Tweet Comment 26 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Et tu, Eyre

First The Neifi! and now Arugula. Does the human heart know no end to treachery?

Does it bother anyone else that the year we finally decide to accumulate draft picks, a dearth of first class prospects exist>

Did you ever go to sleep with Bo Derek and wake up with Bo Diddley?

by kenshin1 on Nov 17, 2005 6:11 PM PST reply actions

Re: Eyre to the Cubs

fveck - it means we get a 1st and 2nd, as opposed to a 1st and 1st. That sucks ass.

Also, if all it took is a 2 year deal - how much money must it have been for the Giants to not match ?

by Aadik on Nov 17, 2005 6:43 PM PST reply actions

Re: Eyre to the Cubs

I'm not sweating this too much... it always seems like the Giants' draft sheets look a little different than everyone else's anyway. Who's to say that we won't get the same player at #55 or so (at a discount) that we would have wanted at #25?

Maybe that's being a little too optimistic, but after suffering through last year's draft, the fact that we'll have a Top 10 pick, a supplemental pick, and (maybe) two picks in the first half of the second round sounds awfully nice.

"Robb Nen is going to get you" - Benito Santiago to Chipper Jones, 10/7/02

by Pants Man on Nov 17, 2005 9:44 PM PST up reply actions

Wow

The Associated Press says it's a two-year, $11 million contract. That's a heckuvalot, man.

by Dan from NM on Nov 17, 2005 6:58 PM PST reply actions

I like Eyre...

and think that some of last year's performance reflected actual improvement; however, 11 mill for a player who until last year was a loogy is insane.

Did you ever go to sleep with Bo Derek and wake up with Bo Diddley?

by kenshin1 on Nov 17, 2005 7:15 PM PST up reply actions

Re: I like Eyre...

I agree.

Somehow I don't think the money we could have saved on Fassero would have matter much in the Eyre deal. The Giants are not going to pay him $5.5M per year; makes Hawkins deal look cheap now, of course it's the Cubs again, first Remlinger, then Hawkins, now Eyre.

Unless they are making him the closer - which is possible but Dempster was OK in the closer role last season - this is extremely expensive.

And yes, it sucks that we don't get two first round picks. It would suck even more if the Cubs sign, say, Burnett, because that would push us to a 3rd round pick...

by Martin BiasedGiantsFanatic on Nov 17, 2005 9:31 PM PST up reply actions

Re

I concur as well.

For the record, I thought he would get at least 4/12, and prob 4/16.

I think, only from memory, that the compensation [for competing picks] has to do with the team that loses the player and not the player. So, if I am right, the only way the Giants wouldn't get the Cubbies #2 pick is if the Cubbies signed a Type A from a team w/ a worse record than the Giants.

The Dodgers ARE evil.

by irwin on Nov 17, 2005 9:55 PM PST up reply actions

Who gets which pick

Its confusing because the rules are different for the pick the signing team gives the former team and for the sandwich-round pick.

When a team signs more than one Type-A free agent, its higher pick goes to the team that lost the higher-rated of the players. For instance, if the Cubs also sign Furcal, as expected, then Atlanta will get Chicago's 2nd-rounder and we will only get their 3rd-rounder, because Furcal's rating (78.325) is higher than Eyre's (70.611).

However, in determining the order of the additional sandwich-round picks (between the 1st and 2nd rounds of the draft) given to teams that lost an A-ranked free agent - there the determining factor is the teams' record, so we would pick before Atlanta because we had the poorer record this year.

Hope that makes sense...

by FavoriteSpring on Nov 18, 2005 10:40 PM PST up reply actions

It does

Thanks

The Dodgers ARE evil.

by irwin on Nov 19, 2005 2:49 PM PST up reply actions

Two years guaranteed...

...the contract totals $11M if Eyre exercises his third year option. So, it's essentially 3 years, 11 million, or quite possibly the largest contract for a lefty set-up man in history. Sad to see him go, but the odds are he won't be worth it.

Of course, the Cubs had an extra $4M+ that they aren't paying Hawkins to offer up.

"Robb Nen is going to get you" - Benito Santiago to Chipper Jones, 10/7/02

by Pants Man on Nov 17, 2005 9:38 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Two years guaranteed...

With all the escalations built in, it's only 11 for 3 if he stinks on ice. If he pitches even close to last year, it's closer to 13/3.

by prospecthound on Nov 18, 2005 3:07 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Two years guaranteed...

Actually,
Arthur Rhodes got 4-13 a few years ago. Moot point. ;)

And yeah, the cost was higher than I thought - the Giants were right to wave goodbye. I only wish it had been a team from whom we could have gotten a 1st round pick.

by Aadik on Nov 18, 2005 6:35 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Eyre to the Cubs

Here is the ESPN link:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2227664

" The 33-year-old left-hander had received a two-year offer with a club option to stay with San Francisco, but was hoping for a three-year deal and wanted to play closer to his family in Florida.

"It had nothing to do with the Giants' contract offer," Eyre said Thursday night. "They couldn't do anything about it. They can't move their team any closer.""

by dvail on Nov 17, 2005 9:43 PM PST reply actions

Classy

He signs a magnificent (to the point of insane) deal and looks good doing it. His quotes make the Cubs sound generous and welcoming, and the Giants sound noble and blameless.

Everybody looks good, nobody loses face, and his (and his agent's) classy play has guaranteed him lifetime employment. I am seriously impressed.

by antinous on Nov 17, 2005 10:20 PM PST reply actions

Good for Eyre

That's a lot of coin for a set-up man, but hey, if someone's dumb enough to pay you $5.5 mil/year to face three batters in the eighth inning of games, why turn down the offer?

Scott Eyre was one of my favorite Giants, I'm sad to see him go.

Anyone know if the contract protects the Cubs in case his arm falls off in mid-May after Felipe had him throwing in the pen during the entire 2005 season?

by Kitspool on Nov 18, 2005 12:46 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Classy

Good observation, antinous! He does come off as very classy. Oh, and is that "anti nous" or what?

by Lyle @ McCovey Chronicles on Nov 18, 2005 4:29 PM PST up reply actions

Eyre yes, but Tanzer, don't know

A comment Tanzer said, that I found in the latest AP news of the signing, had him saying this,"This game is about relationships. It's about relationships and trust, and there's not enough of that left." Now he could be talking about his good relationship with Hendry, which I caught somewhere. But that has an implied knock against the Giants, in my opinion, seemingly saying that the Giants don't have that.

Perhaps his quote was cut off and he really was specifically saying this about Hendry. I detailed how different media outlets offered different snippet of information and interpretations in my blog on Sabean speaking on Colletti's departure, so maybe Tanzer had qualified his statement in some way. But the quote, as is, implied to me that Tanzer was saying this is something missing from the Giants.

Or am I reading too much into it?

by Martin BiasedGiantsFanatic on Nov 18, 2005 4:47 PM PST up reply actions

So what's the contract amount???

Thanks for the link - it was reported as 2 years, $11M in all the news reports I had heard previously.

I get the $11M and 3 years, 3/4/4. However, it mentions $1.5M bonus, does that mean his salary in 2006 will be $1.5M with a $1.5M bonus?

Speaking of which, does anyone know why a player would want a bonus instead of a salary? Is there a tax advantage to the player? Or is there a tax advantage to the team? Or what?

by Martin BiasedGiantsFanatic on Nov 18, 2005 12:27 AM PST reply actions

Luxury tax

it doesnt count towards that or something.

by rod beck on Nov 18, 2005 8:13 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Luxury tax

Why not? Seems like a pretty big loophole, the Yankees could just pay Godzilla $10M in bonus and $3M salary (just saying, don't know the details so perhaps they did...) or something crazy like that to get under the luxury tax.

Then again, when does baseball rules make sense? :^)

by Martin BiasedGiantsFanatic on Nov 18, 2005 10:37 AM PST up reply actions

A Guess

I don't think it makes a tax difference for the player because they are going to easily be in the highest tax bracket for every paycheck anyway. But it does give them a big chunk of money up front, instead of every two weeks, which is nice.

My reading of the deal is:
A) If he pitches less than 70 games each year the deal is 3yrs/$11M
B) If he pitches 80 games each year the deal is 3yrs/$11.9M
C) If he becomes the closer and pitches 80 games each year the deal will be 3yrs/$13.4M

$1.5M signing bonus for 2006
$1.5M salary for 2006
$4M salary for 2007
$4M player option for 2008 (he has to have two crazy-good years to turn this down)
$100K incentive each year for pitching 70 games
additional $200K incentive each year for pitching 80 games
$1.5M incentives for closing (don't know the details)

I'm very happy with the draft picks.

by Nick Schulte on Nov 18, 2005 9:31 AM PST up reply actions

Re: A Guess

Good point about it being upfront. Yeah, I figure the tax bracket would provide no advantage, that's why I was wondering why anyone would do it. But cash in hand is definitely a big thing vs. getting a little bit the rest of the year. Based on time value of money, that actually increases your net cash value, though in this low inflation period, not by that much.

I am happy with the draft picks, though I still wish it was two first rounders.

by Martin BiasedGiantsFanatic on Nov 18, 2005 10:35 AM PST up reply actions

Re: A Guess

Me too, I really wish we had two first rounders!!

Are there any other of our FA's that if signed, will get us draft picks??

Sabean stop giving away our first round draft picks!!

by z4 landshark @ McCovey Chronicles on Nov 18, 2005 9:48 PM PST up reply actions

Theoretically, Tomko and Snow

Both are B-ranked, so the signing team could owe us their first-rounder - if its not top-15 and if they don't sign higher-ranked free agents etc etc (there is no additional sandwich-pick compensation for B-players). However, we receive that compensation only if we offer them arbitration by Dec. 7 (Snow: very hard to believe; Tomko: unlikely but possible if it doesn't look like we'll be able to sign someone better) OR if someone signs them before that date, which won't happen. So overall the odds are pretty slim that we'll be getting more picks.

by FavoriteSpring on Nov 18, 2005 10:28 PM PST up reply actions

Another ex-Giant screws us ?

The Chicago papers are reporting that the Cubs are hot after Bobby Howry, he of the White Flag Trade of '97 - offering him Eyre-type years and money.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/cubs/cst-spt-cub23.html

Howry (77.318) is a higher-ranked free agent than Eyre (70.611) - so if the Cubbies sign him too it will mean that the pick they owe us for Eyre will only be a 3rd-rounder... And if they sign Furcal too, it will drop to a 4th-rounder... And if...

Damn.

by FavoriteSpring on Nov 23, 2005 3:03 PM PST reply actions

Re: Another ex-Giant screws us ?

Bad but not crippling, the odds of picking a useful or better player is not much better 2nd round pick vs. 3rd round pick vs. 4th round pick. Better definitely, but we're talking minimal enough to not lose much sleep over it.

by Martin BiasedGiantsFanatic on Nov 23, 2005 9:44 PM PST up reply actions