Offseason rumors/discussion thread

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
17,960
Liked Posts:
2,775
Location:
San Diego
As far as the Cubs go I think that they should focus on extending Baez, Bryant and Rizzo. All 3 have proven their cases. Schwarber needs to break out first but I see him as a team first guy like Rizzo and him extending wouldn’t be a issue. Contreras with arguably a better catcher in A ball. I wouldn’t at this point.

Pitching: Hendricks I’m on the fence honestly. He loses 5 MPH with age he become vulnerable as we have seen already. Extending him is sketchy.
 

jooo83

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 16, 2013
Posts:
2,893
Liked Posts:
1,373
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. DePaul Blue Demons
As far as the Cubs go I think that they should focus on extending Baez, Bryant and Rizzo. All 3 have proven their cases. Schwarber needs to break out first but I see him as a team first guy like Rizzo and him extending wouldn’t be a issue. Contreras with arguably a better catcher in A ball. I wouldn’t at this point.

Pitching: Hendricks I’m on the fence honestly. He loses 5 MPH with age he become vulnerable as we have seen already. Extending him is sketchy.

The Cubs hold team options on Rizzo through 2021. At that point he would be 31. Why would they extend him now?
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,723
Liked Posts:
3,723
As far as the Cubs go I think that they should focus on extending Baez, Bryant and Rizzo. All 3 have proven their cases. Schwarber needs to break out first but I see him as a team first guy like Rizzo and him extending wouldn’t be a issue. Contreras with arguably a better catcher in A ball. I wouldn’t at this point.

Pitching: Hendricks I’m on the fence honestly. He loses 5 MPH with age he become vulnerable as we have seen already. Extending him is sketchy.

Re: Hendricks, that's honestly a terrible take. Jamie Moyer in 2008 had a 3.71 ERA at 45! with a 81.2 average fastball. Hendricks isn't at all reliant on speed. I mean sure there's gotta be some separation between his fastball and his offspeed/breaking stuff but the reason he's successful is because he can put the ball pretty much wherever he wants and the fact that his tunneling is absurd. I mean seriously look at this shit right here...



As long as the difference in MPH between those two pitches stays consistent it doesn't matter if it's 87 or 83 you're not hitting that.
 

anotheridiot

Well-known member
Joined:
Jul 15, 2016
Posts:
5,935
Liked Posts:
799
I picked the Yankees because theoretically, the only teams capable of signing Trout would be your annual deep pocket teams Dodgers, Sox, Yanks, Cubs etc.
But yeah, Trout is insane. He is damn near tied with Dawson right now in WAR!

I think they took themselves out of Trout and Harper when the got Mike Stanton. They have not been the top spenders since George relinquished the team. Its going on 10 years since his death.
 

chibears55

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2013
Posts:
13,554
Liked Posts:
1,924
Unless they have some significant signings or trades, I predict cubs will be a .500 team in 2020 as guys like Lester Heyward and Darvish that are tying up money will decline in production ..
 

Castor76

Active member
Joined:
Nov 2, 2018
Posts:
983
Liked Posts:
239
Unless they have some significant signings or trades, I predict cubs will be a .500 team in 2020 as guys like Lester Heyward and Darvish that are tying up money will decline in production ..

Well, they'll have about 25-30 M in CBT space with 4 slots open just then. So they will have some room to work with.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
17,960
Liked Posts:
2,775
Location:
San Diego
Re: Hendricks, that's honestly a terrible take. Jamie Moyer in 2008 had a 3.71 ERA at 45! with a 81.2 average fastball. Hendricks isn't at all reliant on speed. I mean sure there's gotta be some separation between his fastball and his offspeed/breaking stuff but the reason he's successful is because he can put the ball pretty much wherever he wants and the fact that his tunneling is absurd. I mean seriously look at this shit right here...



As long as the difference in MPH between those two pitches stays consistent it doesn't matter if it's 87 or 83 you're not hitting that.

That is the key. Speed diffence. When he has lost off his fastball he has hammered
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,723
Liked Posts:
3,723
Unless they have some significant signings or trades, I predict cubs will be a .500 team in 2020 as guys like Lester Heyward and Darvish that are tying up money will decline in production ..

We're back to this attitude again? They won 95 games last year. They are losing what Hamels Zobrist and a couple of relievers? That's what you're worried about being a 15 game swing in the negative? For the vast majority of 2018 they were easily the best team in the NL and that would still be the case had the Brewers not have literally like 5-6 guys who had career years.

2020 isn't the worry. The worry is whether or not the cubs actually lock down any of their young talent because as of yet it hasn't happened. But that's a 2021+ problem not a 2020 problem.
 

chibears55

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2013
Posts:
13,554
Liked Posts:
1,924
We're back to this attitude again? They won 95 games last year. They are losing what Hamels Zobrist and a couple of relievers? That's what you're worried about being a 15 game swing in the negative? For the vast majority of 2018 they were easily the best team in the NL and that would still be the case had the Brewers not have literally like 5-6 guys who had career years.

2020 isn't the worry. The worry is whether or not the cubs actually lock down any of their young talent because as of yet it hasn't happened. But that's a 2021+ problem not a 2020 problem.

What attitude???

Simply giving an opinion that if they dont make any significant additions this offseason and next , I see them being a .500 team because a couple of their key players like Lester, Heyward, possibly Darvish that taking up salary will most likely be on a decline in production..

Never mentioned Hamels Zobrist or relievers

What young talent are you looking to lock down now that you know will be worth that?
Right now it just Baez and Bryant and we have no idea if Baez just had a career year or if Bryant will bounce all the way back from his injury

2019 is basically going to be a season of seeing and hoping the young talent take a step forward and not backward ..
Contreras Baez Schwarber Happ Almora Bryant

If not, the team will basically take a step back as a whole

The SP right now is dependent on 2 old guys in Lester and Hamels along with a giant question mark in Darvish..
 

fatbeard

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 25, 2013
Posts:
13,173
Liked Posts:
12,172
Unless they have some significant signings or trades, I predict cubs will be a .500 team in 2020 as guys like Lester Heyward and Darvish that are tying up money will decline in production ..

Nominated for Worst Baseball Take of 2019.
 

Castor76

Active member
Joined:
Nov 2, 2018
Posts:
983
Liked Posts:
239
Heyward has been getting better offesvely since his first season in Chicago. Worth the money? No, but still getting better. It is true we don't know what will become of Darvish or if Baez was a peak or a breakthrough. But, you could take every question you have and apply that to just about every team in the majors.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,723
Liked Posts:
3,723
What attitude???

The extremely overly negative attitude you often seem to have. It's one thing to say they are gonna fall back. It's entirely another to say they are going to be 15 games worse than a team that lost Darvish for most of the season when he was signed to be their ace and also lost their closer for half the season and Bryant for another half. The cubs weren't lucky to win 95 games last year. They are that good.

I mean look you wanna say you're pessimistic about them going forward fine but that's not a drop from 95 wins to 80. If they are going to disappoint they are going to be the 88-74 cardinals of 2018 not a .500 team. I don't know how else to say this but you have no clue about talent level if you think that. You need to be ~35 WAR to win 80 games. Just going super conservative, bryant and Rizzo alone should be 8 in a typical year. Baez should be good for 3+. If you get 2 wins out of the other 5 starters that's a total of 21 from the offense. If you get 2 wins out of each of the starting 5 that's another 10 leaving you needing ~4 wins from the bench/bullpen. And that's being absurdly conservative because in a down year Contreras put up 2.6 fWAR. In what many consider a disappointment year Heyward put up 2 wins. Schwarber put up 3.2....etc. Going from 80 to high 80's isn't even remotely hard with the floor they have from this group of players.

It's just a frankly ridiculous argument. It's not even worth debating. Again if you want to be pessimistic about the team the question shouldn't be whether or not they can win more than 80 games. It should be whether or not the team is built to win in the playoffs. As an example here, that 2018 cards team in a different year or in a different division may have squeaked into the playoffs but could they have won? Likewise, this cubs team I have little doubts can make the playoffs in any given year but can they hit well enough to win? That's the debate worth having.
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
Joined:
Jun 10, 2010
Posts:
9,268
Liked Posts:
6,692
Location:
Western Burbs
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Heyward has been getting better offensvely since his first season in Chicago. Worth the money? No, but still getting better. It is true we don't know what will become of Darvish or if Baez was a peak or a breakthrough. But, you could take every question you have and apply that to just about every team in the majors.

Took the words out of my mouth.....there are no guarantees in this game. Who expected Bryant to fall off the cliff like he did after 3 really strong years? It's the kind of shit that happens all the time in MLB. Every player on every team is a question mark to certain degree...no matter who they play for or how much money they make.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
17,960
Liked Posts:
2,775
Location:
San Diego
The Cubs‘ reported lack of spending capacity has been the offseason’s main storyline out of Wrigley Field, though in a recent radio interview on 670 The Score (partial transcript here), president of baseball operations Theo Epstein dismissed the idea that the Competitive Balance Tax is “dictating any of our actions or inactions this winter at all.” In regards to the $206MM threshold, “there are times when strategically you want to make sure you’re under it or where you don’t mind going above it. This isn’t one of those offseasons where strategically it makes a heckuva lot of difference to us,” Epstein said. “It’s just sort of traditional budgeting. You spend what you have. You don’t spend what you don’t have….We have more than enough resources to win, and that’s the way we’re going to continue to approach it.”

It should be noted that the Cubs are already over the CBT threshold, as Roster Resource calculates a luxury tax figure of slightly under $228.5MM for the current 40-man roster. If crossing the $206MM line altogether isn’t a concern for Epstein and his front office, a bigger issue could be the $246MM threshold, which would trigger a larger tax payment for the Cubs and a ten-position drop in the first round of the 2020 draft. If this estimated $17.5MM of payroll space is what the team really has to work with, it still doesn’t leave room for a major addition like Bryce Harper, who has been rumored as a target if the Cubs can shave some more salaries off the books.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
17,960
Liked Posts:
2,775
Location:
San Diego
I’m thinking that they would love to move 10M before even concidering Harper. I still think Heyward and Contreras for Flowers is the easiest solution. A secondary one would be Zobrist for prospects. That would clear the needed also.
 

JimJohnson

Well-known member
Joined:
May 31, 2014
Posts:
5,190
Liked Posts:
884
The extremely overly negative attitude you often seem to have. It's one thing to say they are gonna fall back. It's entirely another to say they are going to be 15 games worse than a team that lost Darvish for most of the season when he was signed to be their ace and also lost their closer for half the season and Bryant for another half. The cubs weren't lucky to win 95 games last year. They are that good.

I mean look you wanna say you're pessimistic about them going forward fine but that's not a drop from 95 wins to 80. If they are going to disappoint they are going to be the 88-74 cardinals of 2018 not a .500 team. I don't know how else to say this but you have no clue about talent level if you think that. You need to be ~35 WAR to win 80 games. Just going super conservative, bryant and Rizzo alone should be 8 in a typical year. Baez should be good for 3+. If you get 2 wins out of the other 5 starters that's a total of 21 from the offense. If you get 2 wins out of each of the starting 5 that's another 10 leaving you needing ~4 wins from the bench/bullpen. And that's being absurdly conservative because in a down year Contreras put up 2.6 fWAR. In what many consider a disappointment year Heyward put up 2 wins. Schwarber put up 3.2....etc. Going from 80 to high 80's isn't even remotely hard with the floor they have from this group of players.

It's just a frankly ridiculous argument. It's not even worth debating. Again if you want to be pessimistic about the team the question shouldn't be whether or not they can win more than 80 games. It should be whether or not the team is built to win in the playoffs. As an example here, that 2018 cards team in a different year or in a different division may have squeaked into the playoffs but could they have won? Likewise, this cubs team I have little doubts can make the playoffs in any given year but can they hit well enough to win? That's the debate worth having.

I made the argument a while back that this Cubs team isn't built to win in the playoffs. And you ripped into me too. So you're not being sincere here.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,723
Liked Posts:
3,723
I made the argument a while back that this Cubs team isn't built to win in the playoffs. And you ripped into me too. So you're not being sincere here.

I didn't say I agreed with the argument. I'm saying there's a difference between saying that and saying the team will be a .500 team. The point I'm making is that while I entirely disagree with that argument, that's at least debatable. Suggesting the team in 2 years will be 15 games worse isn't a debate.

And just to be clear here, I think suggesting the team can't win in the playoffs is a pretty bad argument too. It's just that it's a more nuanced one. Winning in the playoffs isn't entirely the same as winning 162 games. In the playoffs you'd likely prefer to have the 2 Randy Johnson/Schilling types rather than a deep 5 man staff who's not as good at the top. The reverse of that is true in the regular season. In the regular season walks are likely a bigger deal for hitters but when you're more commonly facing good pitchers on longer rest it's likely not as impactful in the playoffs.

So, to extent I get the argument you made. But my point in disagreement with you is they have more than enough talent to win in the playoffs. If you want to make the case that stylistically they have a bad mesh of playoffs then ok but that's kind of an opinion thing. Personally I believe that it's a case of young players struggling and that you have to live with the first 4 years of Baez to get 2018 Baez just like you have to live with 2018 Happ if you want to get to his potential.
 

chibears55

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2013
Posts:
13,554
Liked Posts:
1,924
The extremely overly negative attitude you often seem to have. It's one thing to say they are gonna fall back. It's entirely another to say they are going to be 15 games worse than a team that lost Darvish for most of the season when he was signed to be their ace and also lost their closer for half the season and Bryant for another half. The cubs weren't lucky to win 95 games last year. They are that good.

I mean look you wanna say you're pessimistic about them going forward fine but that's not a drop from 95 wins to 80. If they are going to disappoint they are going to be the 88-74 cardinals of 2018 not a .500 team. I don't know how else to say this but you have no clue about talent level if you think that. You need to be ~35 WAR to win 80 games. Just going super conservative, bryant and Rizzo alone should be 8 in a typical year. Baez should be good for 3+. If you get 2 wins out of the other 5 starters that's a total of 21 from the offense. If you get 2 wins out of each of the starting 5 that's another 10 leaving you needing ~4 wins from the bench/bullpen. And that's being absurdly conservative because in a down year Contreras put up 2.6 fWAR. In what many consider a disappointment year Heyward put up 2 wins. Schwarber put up 3.2....etc. Going from 80 to high 80's isn't even remotely hard with the floor they have from this group of players.

It's just a frankly ridiculous argument. It's not even worth debating. Again if you want to be pessimistic about the team the question shouldn't be whether or not they can win more than 80 games. It should be whether or not the team is built to win in the playoffs. As an example here, that 2018 cards team in a different year or in a different division may have squeaked into the playoffs but could they have won? Likewise, this cubs team I have little doubts can make the playoffs in any given year but can they hit well enough to win? That's the debate worth having.
I was talking about 2020 not 2019....

I said IF they dont make significant moves in the next year..

which I feel if based on payroll because their paying a couple guys high salary and those guys production are likely to diminish and they may have to pay up on Bryant and possibly Baez and or Rizzo, so there a chance the talent level on the team may drop a bit if there no significant upgrade....
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,723
Liked Posts:
3,723
I was talking about 2020 not 2019....

I said IF they dont make significant moves in the next year..

which I feel if based on payroll because their paying a couple guys high salary and those guys production are likely to diminish and they may have to pay up on Bryant and possibly Baez and or Rizzo, so there a chance the talent level on the team may drop a bit if there no significant upgrade....

And I literally gave you the 2 major players who are gone after 2019(Zobrist and Hamels). Zobrist and Hamels aren't worth 15 wins. And more to the point, it's not like the players the cubs have are going to fall off hard from 2018 performance. If anything they should be better. Baez is likely the only one who over performed outside of Zobrist who will likely be gone anyways.

I think you are just throwing out a wild ass guess of a number with no context of what 80 wins really looks like which is my gripe. To put some context into this, the 2014 cubs went 73-89. That teams starting 8 was Welington Castillo, Rizzo, Darwin Barney, Starlin Castro, Luis Valbuena, Chris Coghlan, Arismendy Alcantara and Nate Schierholtz. Their starting 5 was Travis Wood, Jake Arrieta, Edwin Jackson, Jason Hammel, Jeff Samardzija/Hendricks. So what you're talking about is a team that's 7-8 wins better than that. Which is like Bryant on a good year being 4-5 wins and a 2-3 win player like Schwarber was better than that 2014 team. There's FAR more talent on the current cubs than that 2014 team. Barney couldn'thit to save his life. Valbuena wasn't a starter. Alcantara(breaks my heart) wasn't either. Schierholtz was a 4th/5th OF who started......etc.
 

anotheridiot

Well-known member
Joined:
Jul 15, 2016
Posts:
5,935
Liked Posts:
799
I hope Alzolay takes a step forward then. In all reality, guys like Zobrist and Hamels are probably not ever going to be paid more than they get this year, so either of them will be seen as taking a discount.

You just need to question the desire to let the Botes and Happ develop when you go and take away 2B games for both of them by signing Decalso. Probably the only reason Bote makes the opening day roster is because Russell is suspended and they just end up jamming up the playing time in the outfield.
 

Top