Posted January 14, 200421 yr like this.... 01/14/2004 7:00 AM ET Cubs make offer to Maddux By Carrie Muskat / MLB.com Greg Maddux was 16-11 with a 3.96 ERA with the Braves. (Tannen Maury/EPA) CHICAGO -- The Chicago Cubs have made a formal offer to free agent Greg Maddux, who could return to the team with which he began his Major League career. According to published reports, Cubs general manager Jim Hendry made an offer to Maddux's agent Scott Boras on Tuesday. The deal was believed to be a two-year contract and could range between $13 and $15 million total. Maddux, who turns 38 in April, earned $14.75 million with the Atlanta Braves last year. He was 16-11 with a 3.96 ERA, and enters the 2004 season 11 wins shy of 300 with a career 289-163 record. Maddux won the first of his four Cy Young awards with the Cubs in 1992 when he went 20-11 with a 2.18 ERA. But he left after that year in a money dispute with the team and then-general manager Admin Himes. Maddux, a ground ball pitcher, is perfectly suited to Wrigley Field. He would join an already solid rotation of Kerry Wood, Mark Prior, Matt Clement and Carlos Zambrano and help the Cubs counter the Houston Astros' addition of Roger Clemens.
January 14, 200421 yr He'll probably end up getting 2/18 from the Cubs when he threatens to sign with the Cards. He wouldn't play for us for less than market value, and I don't think it would be smart to commit $10 mil to him. Now, if he would play for us for the $7 mil the Cubs are offering, I'd listen :mischief2
January 14, 200421 yr I hope we can land on Maddux. He did have a bad year last season but he is one of the greatest pitchers right now, he can bounce back. He can at least win 15 games for us if we give him good run support. He would be a nice addition while AJ is out, then we can put Pavz in the Pen to improve the relief pitching position (especially if we dont sign a relief pitcher).
January 14, 200421 yr He'll probably end up getting 2/18 from the Cubs when he threatens to sign with the Cards. He wouldn't play for us for less than market value, and I don't think it would be smart to commit $10 mil to him. Now, if he would play for us for the $7 mil the Cubs are offering, I'd listen :mischief2 the key to this offer is the 2nd year. everyone else is offering Maddux more money, fewer years. are you SURE you want to pay Maddux 7+ mill in 2005?
January 14, 200421 yr It's inconceivable to me that the $$$ number used in this article is correct, it is a typo or or an out and out mistake. Maddux was looking for three years at $13 mil per. Maybe I'm missing something but I think I could name five teams right this second who would stand in line to pay GM $6.5/7.5 mil per. The market may be soft for a Pudge Rodriguez at $10 mil per for four years but not for a guy who has a second half like Maddux had last year and the record of success he's had over the last five+ years. There's always more to these stories than meets the eye but this one doesn't make alot of sense to me. If I were Houston, having added Petite and Clemens, I'd be looking at Maddux really closely especially since they only lost out to the Cubs by what was it, a half game last season. Where are the Yankees? The O's? Sheesh, the list is endless.
January 14, 200421 yr It's inconceivable to me that the $$$ number used in this article is correct, it is a typo or or an out and out mistake. Maddux was looking for three years at $13 mil per. As someone said on another post: "Welcome to the new age of MLB economics." The numbers may indeed be correct. Like you, though, I doubt he would sign for anything close to that.
January 14, 200421 yr It's inconceivable to me that the $$$ number used in this article is correct, it is a typo or or an out and out mistake. Maddux was looking for three years at $13 mil per. Maybe I'm missing something but I think I could name five teams right this second who would stand in line to pay GM $6.5/7.5 mil per. The market may be soft for a Pudge Rodriguez at $10 mil per for four years but not for a guy who has a second half like Maddux had last year and the record of success he's had over the last five+ years. There's always more to these stories than meets the eye but this one doesn't make alot of sense to me. If I were Houston, having added Petite and Clemens, I'd be looking at Maddux really closely especially since they only lost out to the Cubs by what was it, a half game last season. Where are the Yankees? The O's? Sheesh, the list is endless. Maddux originally wanted 2 years, $10 million per, and his agent is Boras, so you know those numbers are inflated. Much like Pudge, Maddux is finding that he will likely need to choose between contract length and contract payout. I think that you are overestimating the marketplace for Maddux. the problem he's running into is this - he is 37, he is coming off of a bad year (despite the acknowledged great 2nd half), and he really promises at best to pitch like a high-quality 3rd starter next year, and who knows the year after that. if you sign Maddux to a 2-year deal, you're saying you're prepared to pay your 3rd starter $7-8 million bucks per year. Most teams barely have that amount to pay a #1 starter, and if they did, they wouldn't want that guy to be Maddux, and especially not until 2005.
January 14, 200421 yr I don't think they Fish will commit to a two years contract. oh well, very unlikely for us to sign him at this point. btw, What are Maddux stats for PPS? I don't know how to find that data. There should be meaninful data, since he has played for Atlanta for so long.
January 14, 200421 yr I have change my mind on Maddux.There really no room for him even though his presence and knowledge will contribute alot in the club house.I don't see urgency to sign Maddux.
January 14, 200421 yr It's inconceivable to me that the $$$ number used in this article is correct, it is a typo or or an out and out mistake. Maddux was looking for three years at $13 mil per. Maybe I'm missing something but I think I could name five teams right this second who would stand in line to pay GM $6.5/7.5 mil per. The market may be soft for a Pudge Rodriguez at $10 mil per for four years but not for a guy who has a second half like Maddux had last year and the record of success he's had over the last five+ years. There's always more to these stories than meets the eye but this one doesn't make alot of sense to me. If I were Houston, having added Petite and Clemens, I'd be looking at Maddux really closely especially since they only lost out to the Cubs by what was it, a half game last season. Where are the Yankees? The O's? Sheesh, the list is endless. Maddux originally wanted 2 years, $10 million per, and his agent is Boras, so you know those numbers are inflated. Much like Pudge, Maddux is finding that he will likely need to choose between contract length and contract payout. I think that you are overestimating the marketplace for Maddux. the problem he's running into is this - he is 37, he is coming off of a bad year (despite the acknowledged great 2nd half), and he really promises at best to pitch like a high-quality 3rd starter next year, and who knows the year after that. if you sign Maddux to a 2-year deal, you're saying you're prepared to pay your 3rd starter $7-8 million bucks per year. Most teams barely have that amount to pay a #1 starter, and if they did, they wouldn't want that guy to be Maddux, and especially not until 2005. I could be overinflating Maddux's worth and you may be correct. I have to admit I look at his second half numbers and I think the guy has alot left to contribute to a contending major league team not to mention his marquee value. Only time will tell.
January 14, 200421 yr Why would we pay 10 million maddox for 15 wins when we could have kept redman (14 wins) for like 3 million? We need a good hitter not an expensive over the hill pitcher.
January 14, 200421 yr What are the Cubs thinking? With their stellar rotation, they'd be much better off spending 10 million per on Pudge so they won't have to start Michael Barrett than they would be spending 8 million per on washed up old Maddux. Although with that said, I wouldn't want to spend the money on either of them.
January 14, 200421 yr What are the Cubs thinking? With their stellar rotation, they'd be much better off spending 10 million per on Pudge so they won't have to start Michael Barrett than they would be spending 8 million per on washed up old Maddux. Although with that said, I wouldn't want to spend the money on either of them. now this i agree with. if the Cubs are prepared to spend this much on a pitcher like Maddux, you'd think they could pony up a few more bucks and land Pudge. that being said, we were prepared to pay Pudge 7-8 million for 2 years, but not prepared to pay any more than that, so i don't see why the Cubs should be prepared to go where we weren't willing to go.
January 14, 200421 yr Why would we pay 10 million maddox for 15 wins when we could have kept redman (14 wins) for like 3 million? We need a good hitter not an expensive over the hill pitcher. so true
January 14, 200421 yr Maddux'll end up either signing with the Cardinals (who need pitching more than any other "contendor" from last year) or he'll use the threat of signing with the Cardinals to scare the Cubs into overspending. Signing him wouldn't be a bad move for us, but I don't think it's a necessity either. Oh, and I believe that at the start of the offseason he and Boras wanted 4 years at $15 mil per, and teams (understandably) laughed at them. Maddux'll probably find a way to end up with 2/18, because he is Greg Maddux, and like was said before, if he'll settle for $6-$7 mil a year I can give you about 10 teams who would offer that...
January 14, 200421 yr I hope we can land on Maddux. He did have a bad year last season but he is one of the greatest pitchers right now, he can bounce back. He can at least win 15 games for us if we give him good run support. He would be a nice addition while AJ is out, then we can put Pavz in the Pen to improve the relief pitching position (especially if we dont sign a relief pitcher). tell me y again would we want to move pavano bak into the pen? I just dont get it.He had 1.03 era in the playoffs and people are still talking about getting more starters to move him back in the pen. WHY!!!!!!! Y not just get a cheaper but still effective starter until AJ comes back and then move him in the pen and AJ to the rotation. that makes more sense to me. Does it make more sense anyone else?
January 14, 200421 yr Y not just get a cheaper but still effective starter until AJ comes back helling looked like he was working for us unfortunately hes no longer available
January 14, 200421 yr I hope we can land on Maddux. He did have a bad year last season but sure . . . he didn't win Cy Young - he sucks!
January 14, 200421 yr If we could get Maddux with a 1 or 2 year deal for 7-8 million per, I would do it. Good pitching beats good hitting on any day, and it would allow us to just keep AJ in the pen for the whole year. Can you imagine how much Maddux would thrive in PPS? It is the ideal stadium for him.
January 15, 200421 yr It's inconceivable to me that the $$$ number used in this article is correct, it is a typo or or an out and out mistake. Maddux was looking for three years at $13 mil per. Maybe I'm missing something but I think I could name five teams right this second who would stand in line to pay GM $6.5/7.5 mil per. The market may be soft for a Pudge Rodriguez at $10 mil per for four years but not for a guy who has a second half like Maddux had last year and the record of success he's had over the last five+ years. There's always more to these stories than meets the eye but this one doesn't make alot of sense to me. If I were Houston, having added Petite and Clemens, I'd be looking at Maddux really closely especially since they only lost out to the Cubs by what was it, a half game last season. Where are the Yankees? The O's? Sheesh, the list is endless. I am also sure that like he, you would still be looking for a job at this time of year. Maddux's value has sunk, but I think a lot of it has to do with the team - the Cubs. They have a great young staff and a chance to make it to the playoffs. Maddux wouldnt want to give that up - the Cards would be harder to get into the playoffs. I am sure Maddux wants to get paid, but he probably wants to win more.
January 15, 200421 yr It's inconceivable to me that the $$$ number used in this article is correct, it is a typo or or an out and out mistake. Maddux was looking for three years at $13 mil per. Maybe I'm missing something but I think I could name five teams right this second who would stand in line to pay GM $6.5/7.5 mil per. The market may be soft for a Pudge Rodriguez at $10 mil per for four years but not for a guy who has a second half like Maddux had last year and the record of success he's had over the last five+ years. There's always more to these stories than meets the eye but this one doesn't make alot of sense to me. If I were Houston, having added Petite and Clemens, I'd be looking at Maddux really closely especially since they only lost out to the Cubs by what was it, a half game last season. Where are the Yankees? The O's? Sheesh, the list is endless. I am also sure that like he, you would still be looking for a job at this time of year. Maddux's value has sunk, but I think a lot of it has to do with the team - the Cubs. They have a great young staff and a chance to make it to the playoffs. Maddux wouldnt want to give that up - the Cards would be harder to get into the playoffs. I am sure Maddux wants to get paid, but he probably wants to win more. Well from what I read since this conversation the Cubs lowball offer has already been rejected, and rightly so.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.