And apparently Chipper Jones is restructuring his contract:
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/5094676
and It'll save the Braves money. I thought the players' union frowned on this sort of thing (see, A-Rod to Boston).

You mean, "so much better on the road"?

The Players Union doens't mind just as long as the overall value of the contract is not affected. He's going to receive his money as guaranteed money at the end of the contract. I think his option years are being converted to guaranteed years.

The Chipper restructuring isn't really like the ARod deal - with ARod, he would have been giving up guaranteed money and getting nothing back. With Chipper, his option years become guaranteed, so he actually gets more guaranteed money.

It's essentially like signing a contract extention in the middle of a contract and getting rid of the backloaded portion of the original deal (someone correct me if that's wrong).

almost $4M/yr for a LOOGY? Even if he keeps up his good pitching, that seems like a lot of money. If the Yankees signed him to this contract, there would be a huge uproar of how the Yankees can spend any amount of money and how they can even spend $4M/yr for a one-out-per-appearance guy.

Yes, but Eyre isn't just any LOOGY. According to one of the BBWAA voters, he was one of the 10 most valuable players in the the NL during 2005!

:)

Sabernar,

Eyre pitches as much if not more than a good closer. How many of them get just $4 million a year?

As to the Chipper extension, I believe it's correct that the money is just being moved around so the Braves can spend more this year. It helps them now, and if you assume their budget will increase with time, it shouldn't weigh too much on them in the future.

I also believe it's wrong to say that A-Rod was getting nothing in return for contract with Boston. He just wasn't getting anything tangible from the Red Sox. It was expected that endorsement money from working in Boston would make up for the difference, if not exceed it.

Yeah, but good closers have career ERA+'s above 100 (Erye's career ERA+ is 98).

This isn't a horrible signing really. Eyre's shown improvement over the last few years. Even as he turns 34 next season, if he can keep up his numbers from the last two season with a K/9 IP over 8.00 and low walk rates, it'll be a good investment for a team with a sketchy bullpen. He's been pretty good against righties too with a .213/.290/319 line compared to .182/.270/.242 against lefties.

My thoughts are that it may seem like a great deal of money, but we are talking about a bullpen that is excited to have Ryan Demspter helping out. The Cubs need all the positive value they can get out of the bullpen, and Eyre helps to fill that void.

Dave - thanks, I forgot about that aspect of the A Rod contract.

As for Eyre, I'm not sure I do like this. Relievers seem to be getting more these days, but I don't know that Eyre deserved what amounts to a 3 year deal - he's not young, and I don't think he can repeat his production from this year.

He will have value for the Cubs, though, so in the end, I think the Cubs are at least overpaying for someone who will contribute, as opposed to overpaying for someone who won't even be replacement level.

Man, the Cubs have done lost it. Eyre defines "replaceable," and he's had plenty of medicre seasons to balance last year's quality campaign. Furthermore, this contract covers his age 34-36 seasons -- hardly the prime years for a lot of players -- and if he shows that last year was a fluke, the Cubs are still on the hook through 2008. For a LOOGY. I guarantee that there will be at least three or four guys next year making just over the league minimum who will put up better numbers than Eyre.

This -- trying to improve an inferior bullpen -- should be a litmus test for bad organizations. The Cubs had an awful bullpen last year, so they panicked and gave too many years and too much money to the wrong guy. The Cubs fail.

But the Union can't count endorsement money as part of a contract. If a player agrees to negotiate his contract down, that sets a bad precedent - that's what the Union was trying to prevent.

I still think that Eyre is being overpaid. He's 34 and he's had one good year. An ERA+ or 98 isn't worth close to $4M/yr. You can get that number for a lot cheaper. Shoot, the Yankees picked up Sturtze's option for $1.5M for 2006, and his 2005 ERA+ was 94, and Yankee fans were complaining up and down about the option pick up.

Thanks for the talk re: Chipper. The article had said the Braves would save $15 mil over the next 3 years. If it's just back ended ok, and maybe Chipper values winning the division (savings go to get other good players) over a couple more million.

Someone at Baseball Think Factory mentions that Eyre also got a No Trade Clause. Now why would the Cubs give him that in addition to that contract and a player option?

Did they figure that if they wanted to trade him, no team would want a 4 million dollar a year busted reliever anyway?

I really don't get why they would do all that. I wonder if the Cubs came to him with all this stuff besides the NTC on the table, Eyre exchanged an incredulous look with his agent, and said "While you're giving me everything, I also want a NTC and Helga the masseuse"?

I agree that a no-trade moves this contract to the ridiculous.

Probably, No Trade = I won't go to KC, I will think about a contender for another $1 million or so, come July 30th.

Have you heard about the deal offered to AJ Burnett by Toronto? 5 years, $50 million. I think he's a good pitcher, but that's nuts.

I agree that Eyre got too much given his history. However, mitigating point is that apparently he was recently diagnose with ADHD and his stretch of very good pitching has coincided with his beginning to take medicine to treat his ADHD.

Nonetheless, I think 2005 is a fluke for the same reason Pinto does - looking at his away numbers, he had a 0.00 ERA in around half of his away innings at hitters ballparks like the BOB/Chase, Coors, Great American, Minute Maid, and Citizen Bank Park, for example. No way he repeats that, especially now pitching for the Cubs, he will pitch more games against Houston, Cincinnati, and Milwaukee, and less at pitcher's parks like Dodger Stadium and PETCO. And Chicago is a hitters park as well. In addition, 2005 is his first year where he could handle RHH, he was strictly a LOOGY previously. Will he repeat this or was it just a fluke year? Given age and everything, it still looks like a fluke, he has four years of pitching with meds and only last year did he do better against RHH.

However, even with all that, it does look like a 3.00-4.00 ERA is his career norm, not the horrible pitching he did previously in his career, so he should be reasonably good for the Cubs, with the main risk for him being his age for the contract years, not the fact that his stats for the past couple of years are light years away from where there were previously in his career.

wow!!! how much are closers like Hoffy, Billy Wagner, and BJ Ryan going to get???

$8+ million or more a year