2015 Cubs Offseason Discussion

[beckdawg]

Sure it solves a problem. . They need a TOR starter and a building piece for the rotation..

They end up signing 1 or 2 one year deal guys and their rotation is still headed by Arrieta and Hendricks its a bust of an off season. . not because their bad starters but because they didn't improve at the top..

You're welcome to your opinion but mine is that improving at the top this year and likely next year doesn't mean much because I don't believe they are ready to be playoff contenders. As such, I don't see that as a bust. Sometimes the best moves are the moves you don't make. Lester would make the cubs better next year no doubt but he also ties down money and it's entirely possible that they would be better off waiting until the 2016 or even 2017 offseason to spend the same money they are allotting on someone like Lester.

 

[CSF77]

Are any of those players guaranteed to A) play well and B) play well enough in the next two years to get them +15 wins? Look, the players can be as talented as all get out but there's a large chance that they will require some build up time if they are to ever even meet their potential. I'd also like to point out I'm not one to shit on the cubs for the sake of shitting on them. I said prior to this season I thought they were a 70-75 win team. However, you're talking about them needing to gain 15 wins to get to this year's wild card teams. That's an enormous jump and last year a lot of things went right. Hammel could have been a train wreck. Arrieta took a huge step forward. Rizzo took a huge step forward. Any kind of back slide from them is a set back of a year.

Long story short, could lots of shit go right and they make the playoffs in the next two years? Sure but typically that's not how things work. In 2010 the Royals were in a very similar situation to the cubs. They'd "the greatest farm system ever" and were coming off a 67 win season. In 2011 they won 71 games, 72 in 12, 86 in 2013 and finally broke through this year with 89. That's 4 years from a similar position to where the cubs are. Now of course the cubs can throw around a bit more money but that's not exactly a guarantee of anything.

they do not have the payroll potential of the Cubs either.

 

[beckdawg]

they do not have the payroll potential of the Cubs either.

And payroll doesn't guarantee more wins. The 2011 Marlins won 71 games. After that season they went out and spent like crazy on Jose Reyes($106 mil over 6 years), Mark Buehrle($58 mil over 4 years), and Heath Bell($27 mil over 3 years). They ended up winning 69 games the following year.

 

[beckdawg]

Look I'll put this as simply as I can. Everyone is prone to talk about how great the cardinals are. So the cardinals have a huge need after a tragic accident to one of their future "stars." Do they go out and spend like crazy on Melky Cabrera to fix their problem for a team that is far closer to the world series than the cubs presently are? No, they instead trade a promising young player to get Heyward who's 25 and while he only has a year left on his contract does anyone honestly believe they wont find some way to sign him? That's why I think all this hope being put on Lester is silly. It's also why I have no problem trading someone like Baez. Heyward is a star player who's pre-prime and who they can re-sign and have for most of his prime rather than paying for a player who you hope to get 3-4 years and then you're eating the back end of a contract. That's how they do business. They traded for Rolen in a similar fashion. They traded for Holliday in a similar fashion. So on and so forth.

 

[CSF77]

Look I'll put this as simply as I can. Everyone is prone to talk about how great the cardinals are. So the cardinals have a huge need after a tragic accident to one of their future "stars." Do they go out and spend like crazy on Melky Cabrera to fix their problem for a team that is far closer to the world series than the cubs presently are? No, they instead trade a promising young player to get Heyward who's 25 and while he only has a year left on his contract does anyone honestly believe they wont find some way to sign him? That's why I think all this hope being put on Lester is silly. It's also why I have no problem trading someone like Baez. Heyward is a star player who's pre-prime and who they can re-sign and have for most of his prime rather than paying for a player who you hope to get 3-4 years and then you're eating the back end of a contract. That's how they do business. They traded for Rolen in a similar fashion. They traded for Holliday in a similar fashion. So on and so forth.

Only guy I would want them to trade Baez for is Hamels.

I believe they need to be all in on Lester now they lost out on Martin. There is really no excuse other than Lester wanted to go back to Boston. $$$ should not be an excuse here. Martin kinda made sense as they were just looking for a better inbetween catcher for Schwarber to develop. 82 mil was overboard.

But for a legit ace ya it is worth the investment. Add to it LH's traditionally get better after 30. http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/53526/half-full-half-empty-jon-lester goes into this debate.

He has lost a few MPH off of his fastball but he has upped his cutter usage to 30% and it is a true strike out pitch. Down side he is more of a #2 type but they have a potential #1 in Arrieta so it should work out fine.

Now the argument of waiting? Here is a counter: The Cubs need to prove they are willing to spend big $$$ for future F/A's to be willing to sign here. We saw this with Sanchez how he used the Cubs to get more cash out of the Tigers. Getting Maddon made it a posability again but even if it is just Lester this offseason and Hammel as a back of the rotation innings sucker it makes it easier to lure more when this team starts to need them.

 

[beckdawg]

Now the argument of waiting? Here is a counter: The Cubs need to prove they are willing to spend big $$$ for future F/A's to be willing to sign here. We saw this with Sanchez how he used the Cubs to get more cash out of the Tigers. Getting Maddon made it a posability again but even if it is just Lester this offseason and Hammel as a back of the rotation innings sucker it makes it easier to lure more when this team starts to need them.

This argument is circular logic. You're saying they need to prove they are willing to spend by spending money. If that were indeed a hang up for players why would Lester sign here to begin with? And logically if they have the ability to sign Lester what's stopping them from having the ability to sign <x> player 2 years from now? Again, you're welcome to your opinion but in my opinion players will go to a team that A) is willing to pay them the most and B) gives them a good shot at winning in that order. Sanchez used the cubs because they weren't a winning team and clearly weren't going to be a winning team for several years and the difference in money wasn't much.

I'm of the opinion you make incremental improvements until you're at a position to where you're a legit team and then you go for it. I don't believe you make the big money play in the hope that it puts you as a legit team. Again, if they sign Lester I'm pretty ambivalent to it. I don't hate it and I don't love it. I'm of the opinion that it wont really make a huge impact in terms of wins/losses.

 

[JZsportsfan]

And just like that the Yankees are back. Supposedly eyeing Scherzer

 

[JZsportsfan]

So there's that...

Is he implying that Miller could be flipped to the Cubs? Why didn't they just try and ship Heyward to Chicago then?

 

[Boobaby1]

This argument is circular logic. You're saying they need to prove they are willing to spend by spending money. If that were indeed a hang up for players why would Lester sign here to begin with? And logically if they have the ability to sign Lester what's stopping them from having the ability to sign <x> player 2 years from now? Again, you're welcome to your opinion but in my opinion players will go to a team that A) is willing to pay them the most and B) gives them a good shot at winning in that order. Sanchez used the cubs because they weren't a winning team and clearly weren't going to be a winning team for several years and the difference in money wasn't much.

I'm of the opinion you make incremental improvements until you're at a position to where you're a legit team and then you go for it. I don't believe you make the big money play in the hope that it puts you as a legit team. Again, if they sign Lester I'm pretty ambivalent to it. I don't hate it and I don't love it. I'm of the opinion that it wont really make a huge impact in terms of wins/losses.

Well here's my take on this.

A. You sign said player because right now, the larger market teams, meaning the Yanks, Dodgers, Phillies, and Tigers are not all that interested, although, things can always change. Next year, or two years from now, that is very likely to change and we have seen already, the Cubs simply WILL NOT go the route other teams will as far as years, money, and no-trade clauses. Maybe they go one of the three or two, but their is always a catch by some other team that seems to doom the Cubs.

B. It is of the utmost importance to me to also send a message to your team that the FO indeed is behind you and believes that a couple of moves just might make the difference in preparation for the upcoming year. Competitors want a chance to win, and having E-Jax and Travis Wood taking the hill every fourth and fifth day spells doomsday all over again. I know if I were a player, I would be pissed. I don't know how long everyone thinks that Rizzo and Castro are going to wait around for things to happen.

You want incremental changes? Go and get a frontline pitcher and build off of that. Then in pursuit of pitching next year or the following year, you at least have two ponies in the stable and can get that all important third one via free agency or trade. If the Cubs were not thinking along the same lines, they wouldn't even be talking to Lester tomorrow..........or today.

 

[SilenceS]

The Cardinals will have to pay Heyward a pretty huge contract to stay. They essentially traded to shell out money.

 

[brett05]

I never suggested anyone was "scared". Nice try.

But if you think other teams aren't eyeing the Cubs right now, you've got your head in the sand.

And you should breathe between chugs of kool aid

 

[fatbeard]

The Cardinals will have to pay Heyward a pretty huge contract to stay. They essentially traded to shell out money.

Exactly how huge of a contract would you give to .262/.351/.429?

I say have at it, St. Louis!

 

[Shawon0Meter]

Not sure if this has been mentioned but Peter Gammons said in a radio interview that the Cubs don't expect to be able to prevent Lester from returning to Boston.

 

[CSF77]

Not sure if this has been mentioned but Peter Gammons said in a radio interview that the Cubs don't expect to be able to prevent Lester from returning to Boston.

I agree if both offers are similar Boston would have the advantage. We are talking about a team with a 150 mil payroll to a team showing a 110 payroll. When it comes down to it Boston has proven that they will add players to win in the biggest market battle. The Cubs have lowered pay roll to match their division's market size vs using the size of their personal market to dominate the division. In the end none of the competition could match what the Cubs potentially could bring in.

 

[CSF77]

My opinion that has been holding the Cubs back. Sure they needed to overhaul but at the end of the day the Rickett's sacrificed years to rebuild while earning the highest profit margins. Even with attendance dropping they still were the most profitable team in baseball.

Right now this team should be looking to add. They have 2 of the core 4 on the team. 1 is 3 weeks out from joining. The 4th should be at worst in AA. To boot Russell should be at AAA and Schwarber at AA. This team needs to add pitching in a bad way because the offence is almost set.

If they lose out on Lester and they settle on Masterson... IDK because he just seems like a 1 year flip to me. Last year he was injured for the most part and he should go back to TOR at 100% healthy. I just don't believe the Cubs should go that direction. Reason is they already have 1 guy in the rotation in that situation in Wada. If they signed Masterson to a flip deal then next year they would be in the sme situation. Needing to add 2. This has been going on now ever sense Jed and Theo took over. And they have gotten no where fast over that time frame. Just recycling pitchers.

Adding 2 long term arms is the best bet here.
Name xFIP
Arrieta 2.73
Hendricks 3.92
Wada 3.96
Turner 4.37
Doubront 4.65
Wood 4.51
Jackson 4.12
Jokisch 3.70

Arrieta really stands out here. Jokisch had limited exposure. Hendricks and Wada were league avg. Rest were below avg or worse. That rotation would suck balls.

They need 2.

 

[TL1961]

I'm late - I just posted the Lester thing in the FA thread. Too slow.

Masterson would not be a bad pickup WITH a TOR starter, but not AS a TOR starter.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

You're welcome to your opinion but mine is that improving at the top this year and likely next year doesn't mean much because I don't believe they are ready to be playoff contenders. As such, I don't see that as a bust. Sometimes the best moves are the moves you don't make. Lester would make the cubs better next year no doubt but he also ties down money and it's entirely possible that they would be better off waiting until the 2016 or even 2017 offseason to spend the same money they are allotting on someone like Lester.

You've made some solid points in this thread and my opinions are probably closer to yours than they seem superficially. Some of the key differences are that I think the team as currently constituted is a little better than you think it is. You mentioned in a post that they only won 73 games and that they had a lot of things go right to get them there. I actually think they had a lot of things go wrong which held them back. This was a team that was essentially .500 from May on and that was with a horrific Edwin Jackson and a very bad Travis Wood in the rotation and significant injury injury time for both Castro and Rizzo. Jesse Rogers said in a piece a few weeks ago that he thought of them as essentially a 78 win team by the way they finished and I agree with that. I think Castro and Rizzo will both improve on their 2014 seasons in no small part to the addition of Soler for a full season and the expected addition of Bryant in late April. With all that said I think it's time for a statement piece to signal the beginning of "phase 2". I would have been OK with Martin as that piece at a decent price and I feel the same way about Lester.

The other thing is the difference between "contend" and "compete" I fully believe the FO when they say that they intend to compete in 2015. My definition of competing is being a potential buyer at the trade deadline, which with the 2 wild cards means .500 give or take in July. Add 2 starting pitchers, hopefully a TOR and a second tier guy to fill #1 & #3 in the rotation and I think they'll be a little better than that. Even without Lester that should still happen. August and September are the months where the pennant races get hot and often young players wilt under pressure. I fully expect that to happen for some of the young guys and it's one of the key reasons I don't expect them to "contend" which I would define as being a serious playoff threat. Now all that being said baseball is a funny game and tons of things can change. They could not be where I expect them to be in July, they could be better or they could make the key move we were all expecting this offseason at the trade deadline and momentum could turn them into contenders. I won't and don't ever try to predict those things. I think in those details is where we have more in common in what we think this team is than we have disagreements. They are not ready to win anything in 2015 and the only thing that will change that is the good favor of the baseball gods. I don't talk to them much. They do need to take a solid step though and that's why I thin a cornerstone piece is needed. Getting Lester could be that piece. Trading for a younger pitcher could also be that piece as could signing Kenta Maeda if he's posted. Right now I like the idea of Lester because all he cost is money (no picks or prospects), left handers have a better track record of actually maintaining or improving over 30 than right handers do and he would be a piece his teammates could get excited over.

I guess the bottom line is this would it be a disaster if the offseason yielded a guy like Masterson or McCarthy (neither costs a pick), Johnny Gomes and the recent trade for Tommy LaStella? No, but there would be disappointment inside and outside the organization. Signing Maddon raised a lot of hopes and I don't think it would take much to keep them high, but it also wouldn't take much to dash them in the short term. Just something to think about.

 

[Parade_Rain]

FA just getting started. What about the Korean pitcher that is getting posted, etc.?

 

[TC in Mississippi]

FA just getting started. What about the Korean pitcher that is getting posted, etc.?

Kwang-Hyun Kim. The Padres got him last week in a blind bid which is still used with the Koreans. There was talk that he might be pulled back though and posted again next year.

 

[brett05]

Kwang-Hyun Kim. The Padres got him last week in a blind bid which is still used with the Koreans. There was talk that he might be pulled back though and posted again next year.

Plus he really wasn;t all that good as far as I could see from his numbers.