What Theo needs to do in 2018

DanTown

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 31, 2009
Posts:
2,446
Liked Posts:
507
I think Russell signs one some time soon. Presumably his wife divorces him and takes half after his personal issues earlier in the year. Would seem likely he may be looking to get some new cash. Hendricks also might sign an extension. He wasn't a high round draft pick(think 8th rounder and got $125k signing bonus) and he hasn't made big money(league min of ~500k the last 3 years). He's set up to make around $5 mil if the arb. estimates I've seen are correct. So, those two inking long term deals wouldn't shock me. I doubt Baez/Schwarber/Contreras/Happ/Almora sign long term deals just yet. There's really no incentive from a teams perspective for people pre-arbitration unless they get a sweetheart deal to do so. Plus there's some question on all of those except Contreras and their long term place in the cubs.

What will be interesting is how Bryant's arbitration case pays out. Estimates I've seen have put him in the $10 mil range. I'm certain the cubs would like to lock him up long term but supposedly they floated the idea of extensions to some guys last year and nothing really happened. And unlike Russell/Hendricks Bryant probably doesn't need the money. Being the #2 pick gave him a hefty signing bonus not to mention he made $1 mil last year. I think eventually something gets done between the cubs and Bryant but I'm not entirely sure it happens this offseason. If he wins another MVP this year or the following his extension probably gets quite a bit bigger and he's likely in a good place to do that.

Anyways that's how I see things playing out. I'm guessing something like 5 years $75 mil for Hendricks makes sense buying out 3 years of arbitration plus 2 years on the end. That would put him at 32. Russell being 24 you could probably look at something like 6 or 7 years. That would give him another nice bite at the apple. Not entirely sure on a dollar figure. maybe 6 years $60 mil or 7 years $75? On Bryant I don't even want to speculate. He could easily approach $300-350 mil over say 10 years and that might be low.

I think the "long term, option year" deals are dying a quick death for two reasons

1. The deals that were signed 5-8 years ago were done by shrewd GMs who knew that the money in the sport would keep rising so even giving a guy "a lot" of money in option years looks hysterically low when those years come up. Along the same lines, agents are a lot smarter now at pricing FA years to the point teams don't feel that they're getting a good enough deal

2. The Andrew McCutchen case

McCutchen was a former top pick (11) who had a fairly large jump in his development after he signed his deal but his deal took him out of FA when he would have potentially commanded 250M+ for 10 years but instead was on the Pirates for 3/42. Considering his likely raises in arbitration that would follow winning a MVP, the McCutchen contract might be the worst contract signed by any player in the modern history of the sport. That type of "lost" money scares players more so than a Jose Fernandez type incident does.

Hell, Rizzo also signed one of those deals and it looks like it could end up costing him a ton of money as well. There just wasn't a ton of position players who "won" those types of deals because of how easy it is to grow as a hitter and price yourself out of the contract after one year.

Even if I thought Russell could take one because he's younger and he's had some injury history, Scott Boras as your agent shuts the door on any of that being a potential discussion. Russell will be a rare 28 year old FA that plays a premium position so it would take a ton of money to get him to buy out a FA year or two and convince Boras to give that up.
 

DanTown

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 31, 2009
Posts:
2,446
Liked Posts:
507
Interesting to remember about Darvish: the Cubs were one of the teams that Darvish said he would not accept a trade to this summer when the Rangers asked him for his list of ten teams so I'm not sure what that implies about his willingness to come here.

But Darvish as your Jake replacement and then slotting in Tseng as a fifth guy makes a ton of sense for the salary. That would allow you to move Azolay to the bullpen (where he could be electric) and a potential closer as well as make him more of a 2018 option in the middle of the summer if he has a strong eight months.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
17,955
Liked Posts:
2,775
Location:
San Diego
Interesting to remember about Darvish: the Cubs were one of the teams that Darvish said he would not accept a trade to this summer when the Rangers asked him for his list of ten teams so I'm not sure what that implies about his willingness to come here.

But Darvish as your Jake replacement and then slotting in Tseng as a fifth guy makes a ton of sense for the salary. That would allow you to move Azolay to the bullpen (where he could be electric) and a potential closer as well as make him more of a 2018 option in the middle of the summer if he has a strong eight months.

Idk if they will sign a mega deal this offseason. It feels like they are going to keep payroll flex for next offseason where you have Kershaw and Madbum in play. All else fails having that flex let’s them be able to retain talent vs trade out.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
17,955
Liked Posts:
2,775
Location:
San Diego
Alozay in the pen would be a disappointment. He has starters stuff and durability. DE LA Cruz is a more likely candidate
 

anotheridiot

Well-known member
Joined:
Jul 15, 2016
Posts:
5,935
Liked Posts:
799
Interesting to remember about Darvish: the Cubs were one of the teams that Darvish said he would not accept a trade to this summer when the Rangers asked him for his list of ten teams so I'm not sure what that implies about his willingness to come here.

But Darvish as your Jake replacement and then slotting in Tseng as a fifth guy makes a ton of sense for the salary. That would allow you to move Azolay to the bullpen (where he could be electric) and a potential closer as well as make him more of a 2018 option in the middle of the summer if he has a strong eight months.

Tseng has shown he needs to work on remaining calm. His stuff is A+ electric, floating ball tricks. Its between the ears he can use help. I guess that will allow him to remain a starter and not a back end guy in the pen, but one time thru the lineup as a closer would work IF he can calm down.
 

PickSix

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 9, 2015
Posts:
2,673
Liked Posts:
1,459
You guys are all thinking like cheap ass middle market GM's hoping to be a playoff team.
The Cubs are no where near the luxury tax for next year. And quit frankly with the printing press of revenue that they have, they should be around that luxury limit.
They can certainly afford to be in the Arrieta sweepstakes as well as Davis and still have plenty of funds to plug holes in the bull pen and OF.
I'm not trading any of our young guys. When Zo falls off the books next year and we have nothing in the system, we'll be kicking ourselves for giving them away for a cheap starting pitcher when all we needed to do was resign Arrieta.
 

fatbeard

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 25, 2013
Posts:
13,173
Liked Posts:
12,172
You guys are all thinking like cheap ass middle market GM's hoping to be a playoff team.
The Cubs are no where near the luxury tax for next year. And quit frankly with the printing press of revenue that they have, they should be around that luxury limit.
They can certainly afford to be in the Arrieta sweepstakes as well as Davis and still have plenty of funds to plug holes in the bull pen and OF.
I'm not trading any of our young guys. When Zo falls off the books next year and we have nothing in the system, we'll be kicking ourselves for giving them away for a cheap starting pitcher when all we needed to do was resign Arrieta.

Zobrist signed a four-year contract. He doesn't "fall off the books" next year.
 

PickSix

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 9, 2015
Posts:
2,673
Liked Posts:
1,459
Zobrist signed a four-year contract. He doesn't "fall off the books" next year.

Yep. Was referring to 2019. I'm already in 2018 mode. I know it keeps us constipated in 2018, but trying to look longer term.
 

DanTown

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 31, 2009
Posts:
2,446
Liked Posts:
507
Alozay in the pen would be a disappointment. He has starters stuff and durability. DE LA Cruz is a more likely candidate

I don't get where you see he has "starter stuff". He has two good pitches and yet to add a third and he's not been 100% durable but far more durable than the other arms the Cubs were grooming like Cease and de la Cruz. I wouldn't move him to the bullpen tomorrow but I think he could be a 2018 ML if Tseng develops, you sign at least one starter, and then Alozay is not really a guy I think going forward. If Tseng doesn't develop then maybe you keep Alozay and he's ready in 2019. But I think Alozay looks like a future closer instead of a future #3/4.
 

PickSix

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 9, 2015
Posts:
2,673
Liked Posts:
1,459
Yep. Was referring to 2019. I'm already in 2018 mode. I know it keeps us constipated in 2018, but trying to look longer term.

Hmm. My bad. You are right. Not off the books till 2020. Geez. That really blows. Might just have to eat that last year of $12 mill and wish him a happy retirement....if he has another year like this one.
 

JP Hochbaum

Well-known member
Joined:
May 22, 2012
Posts:
2,011
Liked Posts:
1,281
Zobrist did play with a bad wrist all year. I would give him one more year to see if it was age decline or just an injury related fluke year.
 

Parade_Rain

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
9,995
Liked Posts:
3,630
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Illinois Fighting Illini
Zobrist did play with a bad wrist all year. I would give him one more year to see if it was age decline or just an injury related fluke year.

His defense was age decline. IIRC the wrist injury really impacted his RH swing.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
17,955
Liked Posts:
2,775
Location:
San Diego
I don't get where you see he has "starter stuff". He has two good pitches and yet to add a third and he's not been 100% durable but far more durable than the other arms the Cubs were grooming like Cease and de la Cruz. I wouldn't move him to the bullpen tomorrow but I think he could be a 2018 ML if Tseng develops, you sign at least one starter, and then Alozay is not really a guy I think going forward. If Tseng doesn't develop then maybe you keep Alozay and he's ready in 2019. But I think Alozay looks like a future closer instead of a future #3/4.

I believe that you bring up a young starter until his performance dictates a change
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,722
Liked Posts:
3,723
Hell, Rizzo also signed one of those deals and it looks like it could end up costing him a ton of money as well. There just wasn't a ton of position players who "won" those types of deals because of how easy it is to grow as a hitter and price yourself out of the contract after one year.

These deals are never about the player "winning." Teams aren't going to buy out your arbitration years and give you a great deal on top of it. The point of these deals from the players perspective is they guarantee the player money and it allows the player to plan accordingly. If you want to argue Bryant has little motivation to re-sign long term I think that's a fair point. Perhaps even Russell is that way though as mentioned I do think an unplanned divorce in his near future cloudies his future. But Hendricks is a prototypical example of why these re-signings happen. He's been a pro for several hears now and made less than $2 million. And while that sounds like a lot of money to you or me you have to consider how much of a players income gets siphoned off by Agents and getting himself in shape to play via trainers, doctors...etc in the offseason not to mention taxes which are a killer at that tax bracket.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,722
Liked Posts:
3,723
Interesting to remember about Darvish: the Cubs were one of the teams that Darvish said he would not accept a trade to this summer when the Rangers asked him for his list of ten teams so I'm not sure what that implies about his willingness to come here.

No-trade lists rarely are about not wanting to play some where. They almost always are about leverage to get something more on your deal.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
17,955
Liked Posts:
2,775
Location:
San Diego
No-trade lists rarely are about not wanting to play some where. They almost always are about leverage to get something more on your deal.

On Darvish I tend to believe he is a match but I’m wondering is they will aim higher and sit on Kershaw and Madbum. That might be another reason why plan A is Archer and B is a MOR FA vs a TOR FA.

From what Theo said: we are looking to trade from depth for our needs. Not we are looking at FA.

In a way I would think of it as if you were willing to spend on Darvish then why did you not give Jake a same level deal? It is almost a slap in the face and sends a negitive message to the market.

Now saying we have excessive depth (which no one can argue) and we are going to bring back our needs is acceptable. That is just business.
 

fatbeard

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 25, 2013
Posts:
13,173
Liked Posts:
12,172

Top