Offseason rumors/discussion thread

beckdawg · Nov 6, 2018

CSF77 said:
I see stable then break out vs normal improvement to nose dive after personal issues and injury.

And you would have sold on Zobrist's 2018 after 2017 with those comments. I think you're vastly underestimating how big injuries effect hitting. I mean for christ sake look at the shell of a hitter Bryant was this past season. Russell was supposedly dealing with 3 separate injuries in the second half of 2018.

Also why are you brining up $5 mil like it's that big of a deal? The cubs gave Duensing $3.5 mil to pitch 37.2 innings with a 7.65 ERA. If Russell is healthy for 4 months he EASILY outplays that price tag. He literally would need like half a win to be worth $5 mil. And if Russell making $5 mil next year is the reason you can't sign Machado/Harper then you have much bigger problems.

anotheridiot · Nov 6, 2018

I dont know if it just happened or if I am just hearing about it, but the cubs signed Corey Black yesterday. Dont know if he is #40 or if the will go straight to the DL again

CSF77 · Nov 6, 2018

beckdawg said:
And you would have sold on Zobrist's 2018 after 2017 with those comments. I think you're vastly underestimating how big injuries effect hitting. I mean for christ sake look at the shell of a hitter Bryant was this past season. Russell was supposedly dealing with 3 separate injuries in the second half of 2018.

Also why are you brining up $5 mil like it's that big of a deal? The cubs gave Duensing $3.5 mil to pitch 37.2 innings with a 7.65 ERA. If Russell is healthy for 4 months he EASILY outplays that price tag. He literally would need like half a win to be worth $5 mil. And if Russell making $5 mil next year is the reason you can't sign Machado/Harper then you have much bigger problems.

Not the same. Russell has never broke out as a hitters

They flipped Smyly’s 7M. It matters.

CSF77 · Nov 6, 2018

Add to it.

Wasted value deals:

We are going fWAR

Chatwood. .1 for 12.5M
Heyward: 2.0 for 28M
Darvish 0.2 for 25M

So they paid 65M+ for 2.3 WAR this year. Sure 1 guy was injured. Eventually accountability has to happen. Thus the whole broken issue coming out. I believe that it starts at the top. There were some broken signings that were ill advised. Eventually that will come to a head.

Parade_Rain · Nov 6, 2018

CSF77 said:
Add to it.

Wasted value deals:

We are going fWAR

Chatwood. .1 for 12.5M
Heyward: 2.0 for 28M
Darvish 0.2 for 25M

So they paid 65M+ for 2.3 WAR this year. Sure 1 guy was injured. Eventually accountability has to happen. Thus the whole broken issue coming out. I believe that it starts at the top. There were some broken signings that were ill advised. Eventually that will come to a head.

I don't want to go negative on Theo. He's as sharp as they come, but he made a few puzzling FA moves in Boston, too. And TBH, Boston has chugged right along since he came to Chicago. When Theo speaks of accountability, I do believe he looks at himself in the mirror, too. You meant ownership, of course, but I do think he will turn this around and get the Cubs back on course.

CSF77 · Nov 6, 2018

Parade_Rain said:
I don't want to go negative on Theo. He's as sharp as they come, but he made a few puzzling FA moves in Boston, too. And TBH, Boston has chugged right along since he came to Chicago. When Theo speaks of accountability, I do believe he looks at himself in the mirror, too. You meant ownership, of course, but I do think he will turn this around and get the Cubs back on course.

EJax and Chatwood came on the heels of rejections of targeted pitching. Heyward came at a unexpected time. 2015 they had Soler in RF Fowler in CF and a platoon in LF. Schwarber was up and coming. The Zobrist signing was brilliant. They should have targeted Fowler right away vs the ST announcement. It would have been Schwarber/Fowler/Soler which was in tune with the youth movement.

End of the day Heyward has been a backwards investment.

Now the whole idea that MLBTR came up with on platooning Heyward and Almora. Well it would minimize the negitive wRC+ In the line up to 1 position. Adding Clutch at 3/45. He had a -3 or was it -.3 URZ150 in RF. I believe and I think had a 120 wRC+. I don’t remember but I did look it up. .255 BA with 20 HR hitting in the run suppressing Giants park. Honestly 15M per here would be disappointing honestly. I believe it would work though. Clutch can hit still. So in theory it is like what they did with Murphy to condense Heyward and Almora’s impact.

Ideally you want Harper but I don’t see the Rickett’s removing the pay roll and letting lose. If Tom was running the mother ship I believe he would. Daddy warbucks running it no. 1/2 Billion matter when it comes to a kids hobbby

Now most of his best deals have come inseason. So historically speaking this is when he has sucked the most. Darvish was 11th hours and I believe educated. Chatwood rushed and made to fit In payroll. He could have gone a tier up in talent but chose to save. Morrow same thing but he proved to be real value. Cishek real value. Duesing was never that talented. So the 2 year not a smart choice. Kintzler having a 5 mil player opt should have passed. His history didn’t justify it.

It adds up

So what to do? Well I believe that looking at the farm for the pen is a smart choice. They have Strop, Morrow and Cishek as the base. Montgomery as a swing. Makes sense.

On adding a bat: honestly rather trade vs add payroll. Fowler makes more sense. Get rid of Chatwood. Could even add in Duesing to even payroll.

beckdawg · Nov 6, 2018

Parade_Rain said:
I don't want to go negative on Theo. He's as sharp as they come, but he made a few puzzling FA moves in Boston, too. And TBH, Boston has chugged right along since he came to Chicago. When Theo speaks of accountability, I do believe he looks at himself in the mirror, too. You meant ownership, of course, but I do think he will turn this around and get the Cubs back on course.

That's FA in general though. Those deals inherently are risky no matter who the player is.

beckdawg · Nov 6, 2018

CSF77 said:
Not the same. Russell has never broke out as a hitters

They flipped Smyly’s 7M. It matters.

So because Russell hasn't broke out means he can't....ok. As for Smyly, there were a bunch of incentive in his deal on top of the base salary that people hadn't brought up. The simple point of the matter is Smyly was a redundant part because he's not really a reliever. He's a starter and while he probably could be a reliever, he would be a very expensive one. It's just not an efficient use of resources.

CSF77 · Nov 7, 2018

beckdawg said:
So because Russell hasn't broke out means he can't....ok. As for Smyly, there were a bunch of incentive in his deal on top of the base salary that people hadn't brought up. The simple point of the matter is Smyly was a redundant part because he's not really a reliever. He's a starter and while he probably could be a reliever, he would be a very expensive one. It's just not an efficient use of resources.

You could say the same with 6M in Baez, 12.5M in Zobrist. 5M on 5 months of Russell. It made sense with Baez pre Arb. Now that they have to invest where do you spend? I he MVP candidate or the wife beater?

anotheridiot · Nov 7, 2018

beckdawg said:
So because Russell hasn't broke out means he can't....ok. As for Smyly, there were a bunch of incentive in his deal on top of the base salary that people hadn't brought up. The simple point of the matter is Smyly was a redundant part because he's not really a reliever. He's a starter and while he probably could be a reliever, he would be a very expensive one. It's just not an efficient use of resources.

I thought the point was that Addison did break out with the power numbers at least and never got back there. He is basically a .250 hitter that will strike out 125 times a year while walking 40 that might get to 12 home runs and 40 rbi's.

CSF77 · Nov 7, 2018

anotheridiot said:
I thought the point was that Addison did break out with the power numbers at least and never got back there. He is basically a .250 hitter that will strike out 125 times a year while walking 40 that might get to 12 home runs and 40 rbi's.

2018 his BABIP went up from .289 to .314. Thus .239 to .250. His ISO went from .179 to .090. SLG .418 to .340 So he tried to aim for contact more last year.

SO have hovered around 21-23% so that is stable. BB 8% hovering. So both are good. Basically he got wrapped up in contact vs power which could be tied to Davis' philosophy. That makes sense with the nose dive but the result of reducing SO's didn't pan out.

Parade_Rain · Nov 7, 2018

beckdawg said:
That's FA in general though. Those deals inherently are risky no matter who the player is.

Yeah. Sure. It's like going to dinner with Milton Bradley and signing him because he seemed like a good guy.

beckdawg · Nov 7, 2018

anotheridiot said:
I thought the point was that Addison did break out with the power numbers at least and never got back there. He is basically a .250 hitter that will strike out 125 times a year while walking 40 that might get to 12 home runs and 40 rbi's.

Not sure what you're referring to here. His power numbers were actually down in 2018 with a .090 ISO compared to .179 the previous 2 years. Even in March-June when he was healthy they were down from the previous 2 years at .122. But that largely seems to be an issue with Chili given he's not the only cub hitter who suddenly lost power.

As for him being a .250 hitter.... yeah no. He hit .285 march-june. His minor league line over 1090 PAs was .301/.376/.521. You compare that to the March-June line i've repeatedly cited and that was .285/.355/.407. So the BA and OBP were roughly 15 points lower than his minor league numbers which isn't that atypical. His power is down rather substantially from his minor league numbers but if he were roughly 50 points higher to his 2016/17 iso numbers you're talking about him being roughly 35 or so points off. Regardless, my point here is this is the hitter more or less Russell was expected to be. There's maybe a bit more improvement but the reason why I pointed this out is that his March-June numbers weren't a "hot streak." They were the type of hitter he was in the minors just marginally worse.

What annoys me about the conversation is people go around and use his age 21 year where he was clearly over matched, his age 22 year when most great prospects become rookies and his age 23 year when most rookies are in their terrible second year and just say that's all the guy ever will be. No.... just.... no. That's not how development works. Rizzo at 21 hit .141/.281/.242. Rizzo 21-23 hit .238/.324/.412(103 wRC+). I already mentioned Baez so I wont bring him up again but the point here is Russell isn't abnormally bad at this age.

If you don't want Russell on the team for the DV issue then whatever but people need to stop with this talk of performance. Not many hitters under 26 are Kris Bryant. The vast majority of them struggle. It's literally the same story with Schwarber and the fact he's already positive as a hitter is a great sign because that's not "what he is" but rather it's an indication of his floor with his ceiling still being much higher.

anotheridiot · Nov 7, 2018

beckdawg said:
Not sure what you're referring to here. His power numbers were actually down in 2018 with a .090 ISO compared to .179 the previous 2 years. Even in March-June when he was healthy they were down from the previous 2 years at .122. But that largely seems to be an issue with Chili given he's not the only cub hitter who suddenly lost power.

As for him being a .250 hitter.... yeah no. He hit .285 march-june. His minor league line over 1090 PAs was .301/.376/.521. You compare that to the March-June line i've repeatedly cited and that was .285/.355/.407. So the BA and OBP were roughly 15 points lower than his minor league numbers which isn't that atypical. His power is down rather substantially from his minor league numbers but if he were roughly 50 points higher to his 2016/17 iso numbers you're talking about him being roughly 35 or so points off. Regardless, my point here is this is the hitter more or less Russell was expected to be. There's maybe a bit more improvement but the reason why I pointed this out is that his March-June numbers weren't a "hot streak." They were the type of hitter he was in the minors just marginally worse.

What annoys me about the conversation is people go around and use his age 21 year where he was clearly over matched, his age 22 year when most great prospects become rookies and his age 23 year when most rookies are in their terrible second year and just say that's all the guy ever will be. No.... just.... no. That's not how development works. Rizzo at 21 hit .141/.281/.242. Rizzo 21-23 hit .238/.324/.412(103 wRC+). I already mentioned Baez so I wont bring him up again but the point here is Russell isn't abnormally bad at this age.

If you don't want Russell on the team for the DV issue then whatever but people need to stop with this talk of performance. Not many hitters under 26 are Kris Bryant. The vast majority of them struggle. It's literally the same story with Schwarber and the fact he's already positive as a hitter is a great sign because that's not "what he is" but rather it's an indication of his floor with his ceiling still being much higher.

We thought he did break out in 2016 when he hit 21 home runs and drove in 95 which was his age 22 season when he actually got 5 points of votes for MVP putting him 19th on the list.

Then who knows what happened since that was when the domestic violence most probably happened. You can argue stats all you want, but if the guy is not right in the head it does not matter who is coaching him. I highly doubt he was one of the guys that was doing what Davis was preaching and thats why his numbers dropped.

beckdawg · Nov 7, 2018

anotheridiot said:
We thought he did break out in 2016 when he hit 21 home runs and drove in 95 which was his age 22 season when he actually got 5 points of votes for MVP putting him 19th on the list.

Then who knows what happened since that was when the domestic violence most probably happened. You can argue stats all you want, but if the guy is not right in the head it does not matter who is coaching him. I highly doubt he was one of the guys that was doing what Davis was preaching and thats why his numbers dropped.

Not sure who "we" is in that first statement. It wasn't me. Hitting .238/.321 isn't what I'd call a break out even with a nice HR total. There's a vast difference between that and hitting .285/.355 he hit in the first half of 2018. You're not going to be a productive player with a .240 average and a .320 OBP. But then this is sort of the point I suppose. Development isn't linear. So, you may see the HR's in 2016 and think he's "there." But it can take several years for another part of his game to progress to the point it's useful.

As for him not being right in the head? Seriously? You're going there?

As for Davis, he's EXACtlY the type of guy who Davis influenced. The two previous seasons his flyball rate was 37.7% and 36.8%. In 2018 it was 33.0%. He stopped hitting the ball in the air to cut down on his k rate(22.6% and 23.6% in 2016/17 vs 21.3%). His K rate was 20.9% in the first half when he was playing well.

Parade_Rain · Nov 7, 2018

beckdawg said:
Not sure who "we" is in that first statement. It wasn't me. Hitting .238/.321 isn't what I'd call a break out even with a nice HR total. There's a vast difference between that and hitting .285/.355 he hit in the first half of 2018. You're not going to be a productive player with a .240 average and a .320 OBP. But then this is sort of the point I suppose. Development isn't linear. So, you may see the HR's in 2016 and think he's "there." But it can take several years for another part of his game to progress to the point it's useful.

As for him not being right in the head? Seriously? You're going there?

As for Davis, he's EXACtlY the type of guy who Davis influenced. The two previous seasons his flyball rate was 37.7% and 36.8%. In 2018 it was 33.0%. He stopped hitting the ball in the air to cut down on his k rate(22.6% and 23.6% in 2016/17 vs 21.3%). His K rate was 20.9% in the first half when he was playing well.

What's silly is that not hitting the ball in the air has nothing to do with striking out. A player can swing to meet it with 2 strikes and still hit a nice line drive over the MIF head.

beckdawg · Nov 7, 2018

Parade_Rain said:
What's silly is that not hitting the ball in the air has nothing to do with striking out. A player can swing to meet it with 2 strikes and still hit a nice line drive over the MIF head.

Well you know me I am not a mechanical person. You're more knowledgable than me there. All I'm saying is Russell strikes me as the exact type of issue the cubs hitter had with Chili for whatever reason.

Parade_Rain · Nov 7, 2018

beckdawg said:
Well you know me I am not a mechanical person. You're more knowledgable than me there. All I'm saying is Russell strikes me as the exact type of issue the cubs hitter had with Chili for whatever reason.

I apologize, if you thought I was arguing with you. I was pointing out what I feel was a bad philosophy that was being taught to avoid K.

beckdawg · Nov 7, 2018

Parade_Rain said:
I apologize, if you thought I was arguing with you. I was pointing out what I feel was a bad philosophy that was being taught to avoid K.

Nah it's all good I just didn't have anything insightful I could add haha. As for this comment, I sort of agree given we've seen high contact guys increase their launch angle with great results. Obviously you're probably better equipped to handled this than me but I feel like the issue is more a case of drafting the wrong guys. Presumably launch angle is easier to teach than good contact skills which is interesting given the types of hitters the cubs have drafted of late are high contact types.

Parade_Rain · Nov 7, 2018

beckdawg said:
Nah it's all good I just didn't have anything insightful I could add haha. As for this comment, I sort of agree given we've seen high contact guys increase their launch angle with great results. Obviously you're probably better equipped to handled this than me but I feel like the issue is more a case of drafting the wrong guys. Presumably launch angle is easier to teach than good contact skills which is interesting given the types of hitters the cubs have drafted of late are high contact types.

Yes. You are on the right track. It's my experience that hitters hit. There is too much concern with scouts grading speed and size. Clubs think they can turn players with size and/or speed into hitters. How is Hamilton coming along as a hitter? That is one of my beliefs as to why there are more strike outs in the game right now. If MLB teams want to eliminate K, then start drafting guys who actually can hit and demonstrate they can hit with 2 strikes at the collegiate level.

Offseason rumors/discussion thread

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

CCS Donator

My favorite teams

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

CCS Donator

My favorite teams

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

CCS Donator

My favorite teams

Well-known member

CCS Donator

My favorite teams

Well-known member

CCS Donator

My favorite teams