Offseason rumors/discussion thread

CSF77 · Feb 3, 2019

Omeletpants said:
Yeah, that only happens in the Tin Foil Hat Fantasy League

I don't recall if there is a rule against but never heard of it happening either in the MLB. this is more of a creative cap deal that other leagues use

beckdawg · Feb 3, 2019

CSF77 said:
That would be a interesting CBA topic. NBA this is common.

Well i mean you can already do the whole eating contracts for competitive balance picks. That's an area that Atlanta was smart about in their rebuild. The more interesting aspect to me would be the NFL style trade down during the draft that doesn't currently exist. The issue with the draft is that college players go early for obvious reason. But often those college players would be better suited for competitive teams than teams in a full on rebuild. So, it would be really interesting to see teams have the ability to trade say a top 10 pick for multiple picks down the line. For example, you might see something like the #10 pick for a small market team giving up their normal first round pick as well as a competitive balance pick and a 2nd or 3rd round pick if it netted them a college player who might help them in 1-2 years.

beckdawg · Feb 3, 2019

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/02/cubs-sign-christian-bergman.html

CSF77 · Feb 3, 2019

beckdawg said:
Well i mean you can already do the whole eating contracts for competitive balance picks. That's an area that Atlanta was smart about in their rebuild. The more interesting aspect to me would be the NFL style trade down during the draft that doesn't currently exist. The issue with the draft is that college players go early for obvious reason. But often those college players would be better suited for competitive teams than teams in a full on rebuild. So, it would be really interesting to see teams have the ability to trade say a top 10 pick for multiple picks down the line. For example, you might see something like the #10 pick for a small market team giving up their normal first round pick as well as a competitive balance pick and a 2nd or 3rd round pick if it netted them a college player who might help them in 1-2 years.

Trading up and down would be a nice mechanic. Say you are trying to add a player in May so you trade down in the first round with a team to add a player. Teams flip picks and the player moves in the deal. It is not reinventing the wheel as it is common in the NBA.

CSF77 · Feb 3, 2019

beckdawg said:
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/02/cubs-sign-christian-bergman.html

Read that. They are just adding injury depth. Think most are just non 40 man deals. I see most cut in S/T as this is more about volume in early spring. Early spring pitchers are on limits and injury is common so having excess arms is more common going in then they start weeding them out. Some get cut others reassgned. So have clauses that they can bounce to grab another opertunity

JimJohnson · Feb 3, 2019

beckdawg said:
You worry about the draft now because if you don't then in 3 years when all these guys start making real money you have nothing behind them and you're all the way back to 2012. Now sure you can't be singularly focused on it. For example, if you need a reliever in july to have a shot at the playoffs then fine. You move the parts to make it happen. Likewise if Harper is *the guy* to make it all work and win a championship then fine. You pay the price. But I don't believe he makes enough of a difference. And as we've seen with Heyward and Darvish in 2 of the last 3 years just because you land a guy to "put you over the top" it doesn't mean it's guaranteed to work out.

So, it's less about worry about draft picks and more about being smart with where you give up your resources. The more talent you have in your system when you eventually start that rebuild the less time that eventual rebuild takes. Additionally, the more talent you have to draft and pull from IFA the longer you can sustain your current run via trades for missing pieces. If the cubs believe a guy fixes all their woes then like I said go get him and damn the price. But on the other hand if you're just talking marginal upgrades you really don't want to be throwing away resources because they are already thin.

That's what I'm saying though. Cubs may need to do another rebuild in 3 years. So there isn't much point in worrying about draft picks now at the expense of not winning a WS in the existing window.

Plus I don't see Theo sticking around after his deal expires so I doubt he gives 2 shits about the future either. He cares about winning now.

beckdawg · Feb 3, 2019

JimJohnson said:
That's what I'm saying though. Cubs may need to do another rebuild in 3 years. So there isn't much point in worrying about draft picks now at the expense of not winning a WS in the existing window.

I think you're missing what I'm saying. There's a vast difference between doing a rebuild in 4-5 years where by you have a farm system like 2012 as opposed to one that is what they have now plus a few more interesting guys. Setting aside for a moment the fact it's now even harder to rebuild because of IFA changes, the reason the cubs farm system today is some what barren is because there was nothing of value in it in 2012. If you throw caution to the wind and say screw the draft the next 3 years so long as it gives you the best chance to win that means you're headed right back there.

On the contrary there's another way, the so called "power rebuild." If you have some base level talent in your system as well as some established players you can suck for one or two years to acquire what you're missing. This would be more akin to what the Yankees did or Boston where they had to retool to remain competitive. The reason they can do that is because they still had enough talent int heir system that by tanking 1 or 2 seasons and getting some decent talent in the draft as well as via trades they were able to put together a winning team and then supplemented that with their financial weight.

As I said before, there's times where it makes sense to lose the type of resources you would for Harper. My only point is you can't entirely ignore the draft for the next few years or instead of being in a 1-2 year rebuild you're on a full on 4-5 year tank fest. And in particular those can be death spirals because you can end up in a situation like the sox were where they had a lot of really good players like Sale/Eaton/Q that they eventually sold off for prospects because those players weren't enough to get them over the hump.

chibears55 · Feb 3, 2019

beckdawg said:
On the contrary there's another way, the so called "power rebuild." If you have some base level talent in your system as well as some established players you can suck for one or two years to acquire what you're missing. This would be more akin to what the Yankees did or Boston where they had to retool to remain competitive. The reason they can do that is because they still had enough talent int heir system that by tanking 1 or 2 seasons and getting some decent talent in the draft as well as via trades they were able to put together a winning team and then supplemented that with their financial weight.

This is what I think their basically doing this season, minus the tank part.

I think their banking on the SP to carry them and hoping they get enough offense to win..

But

I think their playing out the season with the young core group to see who amongst them takes the next level or not..

Then next offseason they with money off the book and all, theyll do what needs to be done to build another core on parent club

Castor76 · Feb 3, 2019

chibears55 said:
This is what I think their basically doing this season, minus the tank part.

I think their banking on the SP to carry them and hoping they get enough offense to win..

But

I think their playing out the season with the young core group to see who amongst them takes the next level or not..

Then next offseason they with money off the book and all, theyll do what needs to be done to build another core on parent club

Here's the danger I find in that strategy. If the players perform well, great, your only problem is deciding which ones to keep and who to sell off. But if they don't, then they really lose value. Schwarber, Happ, and Almora right now are platoon players but could become good or more everyday players. If they just maintain, IMO, they're busts.

chibears55 · Feb 3, 2019

Oh look another depth signing for the bullpen

The Cubs have signed right-handed swingman Christian Bergman to a minor league contract, according to Matt Eddy of Baseball America.
The 30-year-old Bergman was a member of the Mariners over the previous two seasons, though he spent the majority of that period with their Triple-A affiliate.

CSF77 · Feb 3, 2019

beckdawg said:
I think you're missing what I'm saying. There's a vast difference between doing a rebuild in 4-5 years where by you have a farm system like 2012 as opposed to one that is what they have now plus a few more interesting guys. Setting aside for a moment the fact it's now even harder to rebuild because of IFA changes, the reason the cubs farm system today is some what barren is because there was nothing of value in it in 2012. If you throw caution to the wind and say screw the draft the next 3 years so long as it gives you the best chance to win that means you're headed right back there.

On the contrary there's another way, the so called "power rebuild." If you have some base level talent in your system as well as some established players you can suck for one or two years to acquire what you're missing. This would be more akin to what the Yankees did or Boston where they had to retool to remain competitive. The reason they can do that is because they still had enough talent int heir system that by tanking 1 or 2 seasons and getting some decent talent in the draft as well as via trades they were able to put together a winning team and then supplemented that with their financial weight.

As I said before, there's times where it makes sense to lose the type of resources you would for Harper. My only point is you can't entirely ignore the draft for the next few years or instead of being in a 1-2 year rebuild you're on a full on 4-5 year tank fest. And in particular those can be death spirals because you can end up in a situation like the sox were where they had a lot of really good players like Sale/Eaton/Q that they eventually sold off for prospects because those players weren't enough to get them over the hump.

I still say if you are planning on a full rebuild you can do the 5 year plan or sell off the team and preload that window, Cubs did this somewhat also with Dempster for Hendricks, Garza for really Edwards, and so on. Then they signed 1 year flips in the rotation. And that part was shrewd and very talented in targeting pitchers who looked to rebound.

The way to rebuild is a all in attack and playing the act with crappy draft spots really lowers the success rates. They have the 2nd worst system in baseball right now so the focus has been a bit off IMO.

I for one wouldn't be sad to see a new team hired. The team from the Rays have been very successful and not over rated.

CSF77 · Feb 3, 2019

Castor76 said:
Here's the danger I find in that strategy. If the players perform well, great, your only problem is deciding which ones to keep and who to sell off. But if they don't, then they really lose value. Schwarber, Happ, and Almora right now are platoon players but could become good or more everyday players. If they just maintain, IMO, they're busts.

Not really tricky. If you are out this year sell Zobrist, Hamels and Strop. All 3 should hold value to contenders. That should get some decent returns on contracts that are shedding.

It really is not that difficult to figure out honestly then you give those jobs to Alozay and Meekes. I wouldn't rush other talent unless it is warranted in season up to that moment.

beckdawg · Feb 3, 2019

Castor76 said:
Here's the danger I find in that strategy. If the players perform well, great, your only problem is deciding which ones to keep and who to sell off. But if they don't, then they really lose value. Schwarber, Happ, and Almora right now are platoon players but could become good or more everyday players. If they just maintain, IMO, they're busts.

Schwarber had a 115 wRC+ last year. i'd hardly call him a platoon player. And regardless his "bad" side is LHP which you see only about 25% of the time. Happ isn't a platoon player at all. He hit .239 from vs LHP and .244 vs RHP in his career. If you have issue with him it's that he strikes out way too much but that's nothing to do with his platoon splits.

As for danger in the strategy.... not really. I mean no one is buying them right now for anymore than they would be a year from now. Until Happ proves he can hit without striking out as much as he has he's purely a potential play and whether you were to acquire him now or next year you're banking on fixing him. Almora doesn't really have value unless he breaks through regardless. He's a 4th outfield albeit a nice one. And as for Schwarber I don't understand why people continually want to get rid of him.He was well above average last year and I could literally make a great case that had he been a little better with runners on base last year he would have had a monster season. He hit .263/.378/.510(141 wRC+) with no one on base in 2018 and .205/.326/.411(77 wRC+) with runners on base. Objectively there shouldn't be any reason he's that much worse and in fact many would argue you should be better with runners on base.

That's not to say there's nothing for him to improve on but if he's a 141 wRC+ that's a typical Bryant/Rizzo type year. My point here is he could very easily have a monster season without getting that much better. I suspect the issue with runners on has to do with them no longer shifting against him and possibly that screwing with him as well as him trying to go the other way more. You'd need more data than i have access to to draw firm conclusions here but we've seen more than enough glimpses of the monster hitter he can be. Sooner or later he's going to put it all together.

Castor76 · Feb 3, 2019

beckdawg said:
Schwarber had a 115 wRC+ last year. i'd hardly call him a platoon player. And regardless his "bad" side is LHP which you see only about 25% of the time. Happ isn't a platoon player at all. He hit .239 from vs LHP and .244 vs RHP in his career. If you have issue with him it's that he strikes out way too much but that's nothing to do with his platoon splits.

As for danger in the strategy.... not really. I mean no one is buying them right now for anymore than they would be a year from now. Until Happ proves he can hit without striking out as much as he has he's purely a potential play and whether you were to acquire him now or next year you're banking on fixing him. Almora doesn't really have value unless he breaks through regardless. He's a 4th outfield albeit a nice one. And as for Schwarber I don't understand why people continually want to get rid of him.He was well above average last year and I could literally make a great case that had he been a little better with runners on base last year he would have had a monster season. He hit .263/.378/.510(141 wRC+) with no one on base in 2018 and .205/.326/.411(77 wRC+) with runners on base. Objectively there shouldn't be any reason he's that much worse and in fact many would argue you should be better with runners on base.

That's not to say there's nothing for him to improve on but if he's a 141 wRC+ that's a typical Bryant/Rizzo type year. My point here is he could very easily have a monster season without getting that much better. I suspect the issue with runners on has to do with them no longer shifting against him and possibly that screwing with him as well as him trying to go the other way more. You'd need more data than i have access to to draw firm conclusions here but we've seen more than enough glimpses of the monster hitter he can be. Sooner or later he's going to put it all together.

If none of those 3 show improvement in 2019 their potential trade value goes down as they have a year less control with no sign of being better than they already are.

Schwarber wasn't just bad last season with runner on. It's his MO so far. Over 2017 and 18 he's .203/.318/.417 with Runners on and he get's worse if they're RISP. Happ OTOH is .255/.354/.406 and .259/.392/.459 in the same period. I don't worry too much about his strike outs because is O-sing% is fine. He just needs to increase his contact%.

JimJohnson · Feb 3, 2019

Bottom line is Cubs need to do whatever it takes to win a WS in the next 2-3 seasons. Anyone who disagrees with that wrong.

If Cubs can win another title, I really don't care about the following 5-10 years.

fatbeard · Feb 4, 2019

JimJohnson said:
Bottom line is Cubs need to do whatever it takes to win a WS in the next 2-3 seasons. Anyone who disagrees with that wrong.

If Cubs can win another title, I really don't care about the following 5-10 years.

I hate to break it to you, but that is not the model that this organization is built on.

beckdawg · Feb 4, 2019

Castor76 said:
If none of those 3 show improvement in 2019 their potential trade value goes down as they have a year less control with no sign of being better than they already are.

I don't agree with this. Teams aren't typically buying guys like them who still have questions. So, the market for trading someone like Happ right now isn't that big and frankly no where near "fair" value to begin with. Losing a year of control doesn't change that. Sure if you want to be technical about it he has less theoretical value but his value is already low enough that the cubs aren't going to trade him for the offers that are out there right now so it's a moot point. The point I was making is none of these guys are even close to the value it would take for the cubs to get an offer they consider fair right now which means even if they theoretically lose value it doesn't change the equation.

CSF77 · Feb 4, 2019

Happ holds little trade weight can't hit RH. Plays many positions poorly. And strikes out far too much for a lead off type. Teams have plenty of that so it is not a desired type.

Almora holds more value because of his D and can hit .300

JimJohnson · Feb 4, 2019

fatbeard said:
I hate to break it to you, but that is not the model that this organization is built on.

Then prepare for a massive fail.

CSF77 · Feb 4, 2019

JimJohnson said:
Then prepare for a massive fail.

They went for it in 2016. Won it with that trade.
2017 lost with that trade and emptied their talent
2018 they traded some interesting non top 30 talent and lost again.
2019 they have 2 in the top 100. 2 fringe 150. Rest are not going to buy much.
On roster Schwarber they won't trade. Russell I just see them 100% in. Happ has value as a LH bat. I doubt they trade him. Almora doesn't hold enough trade pull.

So I could see them using Soto headlining a trade for a controlled pen arm midseason. I just don't see them selling Contreras. Nico IMO will end up with Baez long term up the middle. Russell traded when he is ready. They will have to chose Baez vs him long term and Baez is a better player.

That is how I see it playing out. They are not going to shock anyone this off-season. They will have a few chips to add and if it falls short they have a few chips to sell. I just don't see them all in this year at all. If they were then Teddy would t have said that budget is in place. That would be a non factor. So they are not all in and they are seeing if was more so a coaching disconnect and the talent is good enough to win it all.

Offseason rumors/discussion thread

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member