Acquring Young Stud Pitchers

[brett05]

Yeps it's not about throwing endless money at FA's and automatically winning WS. Look at the teams with the highest payrolls:

1) Dodgers
2) Yankees
3) Red Sox
4) Tigers
5) Giants
6) Nationals
7) Angels
8) Rangers
9) Phillies

Not one of those teams made it to the NLCS and 7 didn't even make the playoffs. The Red Sox and Phillies are two of the worst teams in baseball.

Those teams are saddled with atrocious contracts. We don't want to end up like them. You got one guy in Lester, okay fine. But you throw in Price? We could find ourselves on that list if we're not careful.

And they probably never will either.

 

[brett05]

I'll quote myself from another thread...



Perception isn't always reality. If the media tells fans their teams pitching is bad enough times it sticks. That's not to say they can't improve because there are very few cases where you can't improve. But the talk of needing at least 2 starters to me is ignorant. I don't mean ignorant as an insult. I mean it as the actual definition of the word(lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about something in particular.). It's easy to forget this team won 97 games because they finished 3rd in their devision. Teams that win 97 games usually have pretty damn good pitching.

Simply put, you honestly aren't going to do much better than the staff they had this year realistically speaking. Even as absurd as the cardinals pitching was this year the cubs were better in a number of areas which is why they had more fWAR. The one area they realistically can improve on is the #5 starter because as mentioned it was a bit of a mess most of the year. Now setting your sights on a #5 is probably not worth your time. I think ideally you want to push Hammel to the #5.

Another thing I mentioned in that other topic is Pierce Johnson probably starts in AAA and IIRC is pitching in the AFL because he missed some time this season. What that likely means is he doesn't necessarily need a full year at AAA if all goes according to plan. It's easy to forget because he's been over shadowed by guys like Bryant and Russell but Johnson has #3 stuff. In 98 IP in AA this year he had a 2.08 ERA(3.47 FIP). His k/9 and bb/9 weren't as good as you'd like but he was coming back from an injury so that's not too surprising. If you were to slot him in ahead or behind Hendricks around midseason that is a pretty solid staff. It's not "holy shit" amazing but look at those rankings i posted at the top and imagine someone with some talent throwing say 20 starts instead of Wada/Richard/Harren/Roach.

I'm sure they will consider dealing for pitching but I don't think it is as obvious as some make it out to be. Seems to me it's more a case of it being the right price for the right player. The obvious talk will be about trading Baez and/or Castro. But I had a thought that maybe the front office has too. Typically when NL teams have to play AL teams with a DH they lose because they don't have a full time hitter that's really good enough. But the cubs do... and they are all cheap. Sure it's a bit clunky having someone as talented as Baez or Castro or whomever riding the bench but we've seen Maddon make it work. And it's also very nice protection against injury. For example, what if Russell had pulled his hammy in July instead of in the playoffs? It's nice to have someone like Baez to just slot in with no worry and you're not having to give up a ton of young talent at the deadline to replace a hurt player.

Additionally, I posted something the other day talking about the likely bump in revenue the cubs will enjoy thanks to this playoff run. In that I commented that since 2006 there hasn't been a single offseason where more than 2 pitchers got monster deals. Last offseason was sort of a typical case. You had Scherzer getting $30 mil/season. Lester got $25.8 mil. Shields got $18.75 mil/season. That seems to be a some what typical spread for the 1-3 guys. Top guy makes <x>. #2 guy makes <x-$5 mil>. #3 guy makes <x-$10 mil> or there about. If that's the case, you're going to have Grienke and Price as the two top dogs. But behind those guys you have Jordan Zimmermann, Jeff Samardzija, Bud Norris, Mike Leake, Justin Masterson, Kyle Lohse, Tim Lincecum, Cliff Lee($27.5 mil team option), Mat Latos, John Lackey, Ian Kennedy, Kyle Kendrick, Scott Kazmir, Hisashi Iwakuma, J.A. Happ, Yovani Gallardo, Doug Fister, Marco Estrada, Johnny Cueto, Wei-Yin Chen, Brett Anderson, and Chad Billingsley. That is an absurd amount of depth.

Even if Cueto, Shark, Leak and Zimmerman all are close to $20 mil which history suggests is unlikely, you still have a crap load of interesting mid rotation starters. The example I used in the other topic was say the cubs sign John Lackey to a 2 year $30 mil deal. That then buys them time with some of their younger guys like Underwood and Johnson. And in this FA market is Lackey even going to get $15 mil/season? Even if he does, you're talking about the division rival cardinals game 1 starter at that price.

The historic year of Jake really skews how good the Cubs Starting Staff truly was

 

[DanTown]

I'll quote myself from another thread...



Perception isn't always reality. If the media tells fans their teams pitching is bad enough times it sticks. That's not to say they can't improve because there are very few cases where you can't improve. But the talk of needing at least 2 starters to me is ignorant. I don't mean ignorant as an insult. I mean it as the actual definition of the word(lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about something in particular.). It's easy to forget this team won 97 games because they finished 3rd in their devision. Teams that win 97 games usually have pretty damn good pitching.

Simply put, you honestly aren't going to do much better than the staff they had this year realistically speaking. Even as absurd as the cardinals pitching was this year the cubs were better in a number of areas which is why they had more fWAR. The one area they realistically can improve on is the #5 starter because as mentioned it was a bit of a mess most of the year. Now setting your sights on a #5 is probably not worth your time. I think ideally you want to push Hammel to the #5.

While I agree that the Cubs pitching (both bullpen and SP) wasn't as bad as it appears sometimes, I think that the team has to drastically improve the depth of the rotation due to Hammel being 34 and Hendricks being a guy Maddon purposely doesn't let through the order the third time through a lineup.

Another thing I mentioned in that other topic is Pierce Johnson probably starts in AAA and IIRC is pitching in the AFL because he missed some time this season. What that likely means is he doesn't necessarily need a full year at AAA if all goes according to plan. It's easy to forget because he's been over shadowed by guys like Bryant and Russell but Johnson has #3 stuff. In 98 IP in AA this year he had a 2.08 ERA(3.47 FIP). His k/9 and bb/9 weren't as good as you'd like but he was coming back from an injury so that's not too surprising. If you were to slot him in ahead or behind Hendricks around midseason that is a pretty solid staff. It's not "holy shit" amazing but look at those rankings i posted at the top and imagine someone with some talent throwing say 20 starts instead of Wada/Richard/Harren/Roach.

While I think Pierce Johnson may have a shot at the #5 spot in the rotation in 2016, I'd much prefer to give him another year in the minors (let's remember that he's thrown a guy who only has 130 IP in AA as the highest he's progressed) who doesn't posses a ton of swing and miss stuff. As Hendricks has proven that doesn't mean you can't be a guy in the rotation but Pierce Johnson isn't talented enough nor is he close enough to say "let's wait a few years". The Cubs window obviously doesn't last forever (see the Washington Nationals for a reminder in window length) so I'm not a fan of waiting on anyone.

I'm sure they will consider dealing for pitching but I don't think it is as obvious as some make it out to be. Seems to me it's more a case of it being the right price for the right player. The obvious talk will be about trading Baez and/or Castro. But I had a thought that maybe the front office has too. Typically when NL teams have to play AL teams with a DH they lose because they don't have a full time hitter that's really good enough. But the cubs do... and they are all cheap. Sure it's a bit clunky having someone as talented as Baez or Castro or whomever riding the bench but we've seen Maddon make it work. And it's also very nice protection against injury. For example, what if Russell had pulled his hammy in July instead of in the playoffs? It's nice to have someone like Baez to just slot in with no worry and you're not having to give up a ton of young talent at the deadline to replace a hurt player.

I agree with this. There is absolutely no reason for the Cubs to trade anyone away unless it's a move that you feel makes you better. But I would consider FA a better option to adding the type of depth the SP rotation needs, especially when you consider how many quality arms will be available AND not cost you draft pick compensation to sign them.

Additionally, I posted something the other day talking about the likely bump in revenue the cubs will enjoy thanks to this playoff run. In that I commented that since 2006 there hasn't been a single offseason where more than 2 pitchers got monster deals. Last offseason was sort of a typical case. You had Scherzer getting $30 mil/season. Lester got $25.8 mil. Shields got $18.75 mil/season. That seems to be a some what typical spread for the 1-3 guys. Top guy makes <x>. #2 guy makes <x-$5 mil>. #3 guy makes <x-$10 mil> or there about. If that's the case, you're going to have Grienke and Price as the two top dogs. But behind those guys you have Jordan Zimmermann, Jeff Samardzija, Bud Norris, Mike Leake, Justin Masterson, Kyle Lohse, Tim Lincecum, Cliff Lee($27.5 mil team option), Mat Latos, John Lackey, Ian Kennedy, Kyle Kendrick, Scott Kazmir, Hisashi Iwakuma, J.A. Happ, Yovani Gallardo, Doug Fister, Marco Estrada, Johnny Cueto, Wei-Yin Chen, Brett Anderson, and Chad Billingsley. That is an absurd amount of depth.

Even if Cueto, Shark, Leak and Zimmerman all are close to $20 mil which history suggests is unlikely, you still have a crap load of interesting mid rotation starters. The example I used in the other topic was say the cubs sign John Lackey to a 2 year $30 mil deal. That then buys them time with some of their younger guys like Underwood and Johnson. And in this FA market is Lackey even going to get $15 mil/season? Even if he does, you're talking about the division rival cardinals game 1 starter at that price.

While I agree there's depth, the Cubs actually don't need a depth arm but rather they need a quality one. The Cubs rotation is perfectly fine with having Hendricks pitch 180 innings through the year and riding out whatever you want to get from Hammel. But if you go with a depth arm like say Scott Kazmir, you have to be prepared to deal with the consequences of saving that money. Kazmir is a guy, much like Hammel, who has struggled to pitch 180 quality innings throughout the year and he's a guy who had arm issues. How confident do you feel starting Kazmir or Hendrick in a 1-1 series against elite competition? Without seeing prices for guys but just historical pricing, I'd be fine with Grienke around the rumored price (5/125) or Zimmerman if he gets Bailey+ money (6/100). Hell, I'd say if those two guys are both only that little money, I'd say trade a guy like Monetro, rely on your veteran pitching to carry the staff, and let Schwarber (the best if not most consistent arm) catch full-time next year and be the 2nd best overall C in the NL.

To me, I think the Cubs rotation should set out to be something like

Lester + Arrieta + another good SP who has a history of being good
Hendricks + other cheap options to give you 180 or so innings

To me, that's a team that wins both over 162 games and who has a great chance in 4 out of 7 series. Because as much as we want to say Arrieta+Lester is a good top 2, it's fairly comparable to many playoff teams so the more you have depth, the more likely you're to lose out to teams with deeper pitching. Because as we can see with Jake right now at 260ish innings, the more the Cubs have to rely on Jake to eat up innings to save the bullpen for other starts, the worse off you make him.

 

[JZsportsfan]

Cubs should enter next season with Hendricks as the #5 starter. If that happens, the team will be in a great spot

Should trade for a #2ish starter (Ross would be perfect), and then sign another.

 

[beckdawg]

I get what you're saying. My point is that they don't have the type of playoff rotation you would like to have a solid shot a World Series every time you make the playoffs.

I guess I just don't agree with this which I mean is fine. Opinions are subjective. Are this years cubs as good a staff as this years mets? From a talent perspective probably not. But are this years cubs starters good enough to win a world series? Is Pedro Martinez, Curt Schilling, Derek Lowe, Bronson Arroyo and Tim Wakefield significantly better than Arrieta, Lester, Hendricks, Hammel, +1? At the top Arrieta was basically one of the best pitchers ever in the second half. Lester probably wasn't as good as Pedro/Schilling at that time but overall that seems close to a wash. Derrek Lowe had a 5.42/4.26 ERA/FIP in 2004. Wakefield had a 4.87/5.08 ERA/FIP. Arroyo had 4.03/3.82 ERA/FIP. Obviously that's steroid era and an AL team but even if you cut say a run off those ERAs they aren't stellar. And that is a team build by the current GM in a similar fashion with a lot of hitting.

I'll freely admit I'm way higher on Hendricks than most. But at the same time, I don't think many give him enough credit comparatively to other very good teams who've won world series. Those great Braves teams of the 90's with Maddux, Glavine, and Smoltz had Steve Avery as their #4 who had a 4 ERA 94-96 and Kevin Millwood who outside two really good seasons had a 4 ERA. The great Yankee run started with Cone and Pettite but then degraded to David Wells(4.21/3.81 ERA/FIP), Kenny Rogers(6.27/5.34) and Dwight Gooden(4.96/5.29). Next year they upgraded with Hideki Irabu(4.00/5.24) and Orlando Hernandez(3.13/3.53). They upgraded again the following year with Roger Clemens(4.60/4.36) and Hernandez ballooned up to 4.12/4.45.

Maybe I'm beating a dead horse here but I honestly don't think Hendricks gets anywhere near the respect he deserves. In his first full season at 25 he had a sub 4 ERA with 8.35 k/9 and 2.15 bb/9 and was worth 3.4 fWAR. Jordan Zimmermann who before this season was a hot name cubs fans wanted pitched roughly 120 innings before his first "full" season at 25 where he posted a better ERA at 3.18 but only a 6.92 k/9 and a 1.73 bb/9 and was worth 3.4 fWAR. The K/9 rates suggest Hendricks fools more batters than Zimmermann does and I feel like most fans would feel perfectly fine throwing Zimmermann in a playoff game. As for the difference in ERA, if we look at xFIP, Zimmermann had a 3.78 xFIP where as Hendricks had a 3.25. Obvious conclusion there is HR's hurt Hendricks this year but his HR/FB was well above the league average which tends to be fairly consistent over a longer timeframe. And at the end of the day, he's 25 so you would expect him to get better. Ultimately, whether or not Hendricks is "better" than Zimmermannn isn't all that relevant to me. I think I've shown numerically they are fairly similar and it's within the realm of believability that age 29 Hendricks could looks pretty similar.

I just don't think it's fair to look at the Mets and say the cubs don't have enough pitching to win a world series because they are clearly the exception just like it's not fair for another team to look at the cubs young hitting and have that as the expectation. If you look no farther than last years SF championship team you had Bumgarner doing his best Arrieta impression, Tim Hudson with a decent mid 3's ERA, Vogelsong with a 4 ERA, Lincecum with a mid 4 ERA and a strung together #5. That team won a world series(2nd in 3 years). Obviously Cain ideally would have been in that as their #2. Not sure off the top of my head if he pitched in the playoffs but he was clearly hurt by regular season innings pitched. Even with Cain, assuming Hendricks can drop a half run off his ERA by his prime, you would have a pretty similar top 3 for both teams before you even talk about the potential of Pierce Johnson.

And again, I'm not saying the cubs shouldn't look to get better. Any decent team is always trying to get better. My only point is that to suggest this isn't a World Series quality pitching staff severely undersells a 97 win team. You don't win essentially 100 games by smoke and mirrors. And if the cubs lose this series it wont be on their #3 and #4 pitchers.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Of course it's all opinions and it's all good but that Giants team is a really good example of what I'm talking about. I watched every game they played and they looked to me like they had a rotation put together with paper mache and spit. Every night Bumgarner wasn't out there i picked them to lose. Somehow they won more than they lost and Bumgarner was a beast. I'd rather have better guys than that ideally but of course you can win a WS like that. To me it's all about increasing your probability. All told I think you'd like to go into a series with a better chance than What SF had or that this team has now. On the other hand sometimes teams stockpile aces and get nowhere, see Washington Nationals. There's a balance there to be had and like to see that. All i'm saying.

 

[beckdawg]

While I think Pierce Johnson may have a shot at the #5 spot in the rotation in 2016, I'd much prefer to give him another year in the minors (let's remember that he's thrown a guy who only has 130 IP in AA as the highest he's progressed) who doesn't posses a ton of swing and miss stuff. As Hendricks has proven that doesn't mean you can't be a guy in the rotation but Pierce Johnson isn't talented enough nor is he close enough to say "let's wait a few years". The Cubs window obviously doesn't last forever (see the Washington Nationals for a reminder in window length) so I'm not a fan of waiting on anyone.

Well like I said, I wasn't suggesting he break camp with the cubs. My suggestion was a midseason call up. And I mean he's not *that* far away. He's 24 years old which is when you should be in the majors if you're any kind of decent pitcher. Obviously injuries set him back a year or so. But he's still thrown roughly 200 innings in AA and as I mentioned is pitching in the AFL so that's more work for the time he missed. I could honestly see him having a pretty similar path to the majors that Hendricks took with a early July call up. That would then leave you figuring out what to do for 15-17 starts. Given they have Turner on a semi-cheap option and probably would like to give him a shot to capture his ability I don't really have a problem with them giving him a shot at the #5 in camp with Wood and one or two others also having a shot. If any performs better than expected there's no real hurry.

While I agree there's depth, the Cubs actually don't need a depth arm but rather they need a quality one. The Cubs rotation is perfectly fine with having Hendricks pitch 180 innings through the year and riding out whatever you want to get from Hammel. But if you go with a depth arm like say Scott Kazmir, you have to be prepared to deal with the consequences of saving that money. Kazmir is a guy, much like Hammel, who has struggled to pitch 180 quality innings throughout the year and he's a guy who had arm issues. How confident do you feel starting Kazmir or Hendrick in a 1-1 series against elite competition? Without seeing prices for guys but just historical pricing, I'd be fine with Grienke around the rumored price (5/125) or Zimmerman if he gets Bailey+ money (6/100). Hell, I'd say if those two guys are both only that little money, I'd say trade a guy like Monetro, rely on your veteran pitching to carry the staff, and let Schwarber (the best if not most consistent arm) catch full-time next year and be the 2nd best overall C in the NL.

I think people are expecting too much if you want more than Kazmir as your #3 pitcher. I mean the Astros literally traded for him to be their #3 starter. I understand what you're saying about him not being a lock to pitch amazing but who is? Zimmermann had an ERA a full run higher than 2014 albeit still decent enough at 3.68. Cueto's ERA went up over a full run and from 2014 and he was pretty bad in KC after being traded. That's not to say I wouldn't love to have someone like Price or whomever as a #3 starter. I just think it's totally unrealistic because few teams have Arrieta Lester as #1/2. So while you might not love Kazmir as a #3, there's probably some teams out there that would look at him as a #2. There's just not that much talent at the top. In fact, unless I'm forgetting someone, I'm pretty sure he was the #2 in Oakland behind Gray.

 

[DanTown]

I guess I just don't agree with this which I mean is fine. Opinions are subjective. Are this years cubs as good a staff as this years mets? From a talent perspective probably not. But are this years cubs starters good enough to win a world series? Is Pedro Martinez, Curt Schilling, Derek Lowe, Bronson Arroyo and Tim Wakefield significantly better than Arrieta, Lester, Hendricks, Hammel, +1? At the top Arrieta was basically one of the best pitchers ever in the second half. Lester probably wasn't as good as Pedro/Schilling at that time but overall that seems close to a wash. Derrek Lowe had a 5.42/4.26 ERA/FIP in 2004. Wakefield had a 4.87/5.08 ERA/FIP. Arroyo had 4.03/3.82 ERA/FIP. Obviously that's steroid era and an AL team but even if you cut say a run off those ERAs they aren't stellar. And that is a team build by the current GM in a similar fashion with a lot of hitting.

I'll freely admit I'm way higher on Hendricks than most. But at the same time, I don't think many give him enough credit comparatively to other very good teams who've won world series. Those great Braves teams of the 90's with Maddux, Glavine, and Smoltz had Steve Avery as their #4 who had a 4 ERA 94-96 and Kevin Millwood who outside two really good seasons had a 4 ERA. The great Yankee run started with Cone and Pettite but then degraded to David Wells(4.21/3.81 ERA/FIP), Kenny Rogers(6.27/5.34) and Dwight Gooden(4.96/5.29). Next year they upgraded with Hideki Irabu(4.00/5.24) and Orlando Hernandez(3.13/3.53). They upgraded again the following year with Roger Clemens(4.60/4.36) and Hernandez ballooned up to 4.12/4.45.

Maybe I'm beating a dead horse here but I honestly don't think Hendricks gets anywhere near the respect he deserves. In his first full season at 25 he had a sub 4 ERA with 8.35 k/9 and 2.15 bb/9 and was worth 3.4 fWAR. Jordan Zimmermann who before this season was a hot name cubs fans wanted pitched roughly 120 innings before his first "full" season at 25 where he posted a better ERA at 3.18 but only a 6.92 k/9 and a 1.73 bb/9 and was worth 3.4 fWAR. The K/9 rates suggest Hendricks fools more batters than Zimmermann does and I feel like most fans would feel perfectly fine throwing Zimmermann in a playoff game. As for the difference in ERA, if we look at xFIP, Zimmermann had a 3.78 xFIP where as Hendricks had a 3.25. Obvious conclusion there is HR's hurt Hendricks this year but his HR/FB was well above the league average which tends to be fairly consistent over a longer timeframe. And at the end of the day, he's 25 so you would expect him to get better. Ultimately, whether or not Hendricks is "better" than Zimmermannn isn't all that relevant to me. I think I've shown numerically they are fairly similar and it's within the realm of believability that age 29 Hendricks could looks pretty similar.

I just don't think it's fair to look at the Mets and say the cubs don't have enough pitching to win a world series because they are clearly the exception just like it's not fair for another team to look at the cubs young hitting and have that as the expectation. If you look no farther than last years SF championship team you had Bumgarner doing his best Arrieta impression, Tim Hudson with a decent mid 3's ERA, Vogelsong with a 4 ERA, Lincecum with a mid 4 ERA and a strung together #5. That team won a world series(2nd in 3 years). Obviously Cain ideally would have been in that as their #2. Not sure off the top of my head if he pitched in the playoffs but he was clearly hurt by regular season innings pitched. Even with Cain, assuming Hendricks can drop a half run off his ERA by his prime, you would have a pretty similar top 3 for both teams before you even talk about the potential of Pierce Johnson.

And again, I'm not saying the cubs shouldn't look to get better. Any decent team is always trying to get better. My only point is that to suggest this isn't a World Series quality pitching staff severely undersells a 97 win team. You don't win essentially 100 games by smoke and mirrors. And if the cubs lose this series it wont be on their #3 and #4 pitchers.

You continue to use Kyle Hendricks' numbers as some great beacon without being fair in how he got those numbers. Hendricks routinely was poor against good teams (he had an ERA of close to 5 against +.500 teams where it was close to 3 against sub .500 teams), Maddon consistently didn't let him pitch deep into games because Hendricks got hit to a tune of .329/.374/.520 third time through the lineup, and Hendricks only got into the seventh seven times in 32 starts.

While it's great you quote Zimmerman's FIP this year, you have to remember the Nationals were a mess all year. And Zimmerman's terrible year was a seemingly random fluke split in the middle innings where his career numbers say he's close to the same pitcher first time through the order (.232/.276/.357) versus third time (.257/.309/.403). I'm not a scout nor a GM so I don't know how his arm looks but his velocity on the fastball is still 93 (he's never had a season at 94 nor below 93) but his fastball, with near the same velocity as last year, was hit significantly better (.237 vs .290). Obviously the question with Zimmerman is opportunity cost both this year and the future but if his market isn't there, he's a guy who could be helpful to you. And unlike let's say James Shields last year, you're not getting a guy with a ton of MLB miles.

 

[beckdawg]

Of course it's all opinions and it's all good but that Giants team is a really good example of what I'm talking about. I watched every game they played and they looked to me like they had a rotation put together with paper mache and spit. Every night Bumgarner wasn't out there i picked them to lose. Somehow they won more than they lost and Bumgarner was a beast. I'd rather have better guys than that ideally but of course you can win a WS like that. To me it's all about increasing your probability. All told I think you'd like to go into a series with a better chance than What SF had or that this team has now. On the other hand sometimes teams stockpile aces and get nowhere, see Washington Nationals. There's a balance there to be had and like to see that. All i'm saying.

I mean I get where you're coming from but I just don't know that it's realistic to assume that will happen. At the end of the day, the cubs have Arrieta/Lester as #1/2. There's a lot of teams that don't even have that. So all of the guys that cubs fans will drool over either via trade or FA, some other team likely needs them more. And typically speaking that team will pay more either in terms of prospects or money. I'd love to have a staff as good as washington's seemed on paper before the year but what does that cost you? For example, let's say Tyson Ross costs Baez+ which is probably low actually. Is Ross better than Baez+ whatever mid tier starter you can pick up for $10-15 mil? I don't even love Baez that much and I'm not really that sold.

Historically, if you look at what the cardinals have done pitching wise over the past 15 years, they have made a killing finding those mid-tier starters for less money in FA and coaching them up into all-stars be it Suppan/Loshe...etc. They've won titles with those type of players. To me, unless there is a once in a generation type trade I'm just not sure you're that much better off. For example if you have the pitching version of the Miggy trade to detroit then absolutely do that. But I'm not sure SD parts with Ross for anything approaching decent value for the cubs. I'd love to get Teheran but again what cost? Also, I think you'd be stupid to deal those players in this pitching market because who in their right mind is going to give up prime value when there are so many decent mid-tier guys for money alone?

 

[DanTown]

Well like I said, I wasn't suggesting he break camp with the cubs. My suggestion was a midseason call up. And I mean he's not *that* far away. He's 24 years old which is when you should be in the majors if you're any kind of decent pitcher. Obviously injuries set him back a year or so. But he's still thrown roughly 200 innings in AA and as I mentioned is pitching in the AFL so that's more work for the time he missed. I could honestly see him having a pretty similar path to the majors that Hendricks took with a early July call up. That would then leave you figuring out what to do for 15-17 starts. Given they have Turner on a semi-cheap option and probably would like to give him a shot to capture his ability I don't really have a problem with them giving him a shot at the #5 in camp with Wood and one or two others also having a shot. If any performs better than expected there's no real hurry.



I think people are expecting too much if you want more than Kazmir as your #3 pitcher. I mean the Astros literally traded for him to be their #3 starter. I understand what you're saying about him not being a lock to pitch amazing but who is? Zimmermann had an ERA a full run higher than 2014 albeit still decent enough at 3.68. Cueto's ERA went up over a full run and from 2014 and he was pretty bad in KC after being traded. That's not to say I wouldn't love to have someone like Price or whomever as a #3 starter. I just think it's totally unrealistic because few teams have Arrieta Lester as #1/2. So while you might not love Kazmir as a #3, there's probably some teams out there that would look at him as a #2. There's just not that much talent at the top. In fact, unless I'm forgetting someone, I'm pretty sure he was the #2 in Oakland behind Gray.

I'm saying that if you think Kazmir is an upgrade on the #5 than yeah, that's true. But Kazmir and Hammel are similar in style and and Kazmir comes with the added risk of arm issues and a guy who's literally fallen out of the league before. And just how well did Kazmir work out as the #3 for Houston? It didn't work out mostly because he was close to hot garbage in the second half for the second straight year.

If the Cubs want to go cheap with starters and get a bullpen like a KC bullpen with four or five high quality arms then I'd say that's fine. I just don't see the guys available to do that so I think the Cubs will have to get a better rotation via SP. So if you're going to spend money on a guy like Kazmir, why not spend a little more and actually get a difference maker?

One of the great things about having literally zero high cost hitters if you can afford to pay top-end SP more than other teams. I'd say the Cubs best plan is to resign Fowler, let Almora play a full-season in AAA, let Schwarber continue to platoon both as the third catcher and LF with Ross around another year then when Ross retires in 2017, you call up Almora to play CF and bat 9th, move Fowler to LF, and let Schwarber C/play the OF. And you'd have Monetro and Jackson's cap hits gone as Arrieta's new payday comes.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Yeah, I want to trade for Ross this offseason as well as sign Price. That's whats needed come playoff time. 3-4 horses. Not Hendricks and fucking Hammel

I don't want to sign Price. He is 0fer in the playoffs. I want to sign starters who can throw 95+.

 

[beckdawg]

You continue to use Kyle Hendricks' numbers as some great beacon without being fair in how he got those numbers. Hendricks routinely was poor against good teams (he had an ERA of close to 5 against +.500 teams where it was close to 3 against sub .500 teams), Maddon consistently didn't let him pitch deep into games because Hendricks got hit to a tune of .329/.374/.520 third time through the lineup, and Hendricks only got into the seventh seven times in 32 starts.

I'm not going to get into this debate again but you assume that Hendricks wont get better. And I'm certain I could find you any number of all-star pitcher's who were terrible against .500+ teams their first year. Go back and watch the Cardinals playoff game. He gave up a lead off HR. He then retired like 15 straight or something like that and exited in the 5th when he gave up 2 more solo shots. Clearly the HRs are a problem but through the middle part of that game he totally shut down the cardinals who were the best team in baseball this year.

He's not a finished product and I never said he was. But if you can't see the good of a 25 year old with a sub 4 ERA and those k/9 bb/9 splits then again, I think you're underestimating him.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

I don't want to sign Price. He is 0fer in the playoffs. I want to sign starters who can throw 95+.

I don't want to sign him either but I'm not holding his playoff record against the likely Cy Young winner. Pitching is tricky. Kershaw gets a bad playoff rap and dude is the best active pitcher in the game. I think they're going to need a guy who's stuff ages well. Greinke could be that guy but I don't buy the low $ folks are thinking in this thread, if they're true then hell yeah. I think he'll be similar to Lester only right handed in that he'll probably be able to pitch fairly well past his prime. He's got good stuff but isn't completely stuff dependent. Add him, trade for Ross or even Carrasco and now you have something that will strike fear in the playoffs.

 

[beckdawg]

I'm saying that if you think Kazmir is an upgrade on the #5 than yeah, that's true. But Kazmir and Hammel are similar in style and and Kazmir comes with the added risk of arm issues and a guy who's literally fallen out of the league before. And just how well did Kazmir work out as the #3 for Houston? It didn't work out mostly because he was close to hot garbage in the second half for the second straight year.

If the Cubs want to go cheap with starters and get a bullpen like a KC bullpen with four or five high quality arms then I'd say that's fine. I just don't see the guys available to do that so I think the Cubs will have to get a better rotation via SP. So if you're going to spend money on a guy like Kazmir, why not spend a little more and actually get a difference maker?

One of the great things about having literally zero high cost hitters if you can afford to pay top-end SP more than other teams. I'd say the Cubs best plan is to resign Fowler, let Almora play a full-season in AAA, let Schwarber continue to platoon both as the third catcher and LF with Ross around another year then when Ross retires in 2017, you call up Almora to play CF and bat 9th, move Fowler to LF, and let Schwarber C/play the OF. And you'd have Monetro and Jackson's cap hits gone as Arrieta's new payday comes.

You're assuming the cubs have the choice to get whatever you want. Arrieta still hasn't been signed long term. 2-3 years from now you'll be looking at deals for Schwarber, Bryant, Russell and possibly Baez. That means that any deal you make this offseason has to account in roughly year 4 for those pay raises as well as Rizzo and Castro(if still here) being more expensive. Additionally, putting yourself basically at your payroll threshold like that precludes the ability to make other possibly necessary moves. For example, take CF. There's varying opinions on what to do be it re-sign Fowler, sign a hold over like Span until Almora/whomever is ready and so on. Obviously your'e suggesting re-sign Fowler. That's yet more money in that 4 year time span. You could be talking like $85-95 mil in Arrieta, Lester, Rizzo, Castro and Fowler alone and that's before talking about raises for the rookies. I'm not going to even speculate what the cubs payroll will be at that time. But, filling up the rest of the team is easily another $50 mil. So, unless they are pushing around $200 mil in that time span, adding another $20 mil/season player just might not fit in their budget. And again, maybe Soler doesn't work out as a prospect. Maybe multiple prospects don't. Then you're dipping into FA again which is really expensive.

Ideally, I think whomever they get if they go the FA route should be someone on a 4 year deal and I'm dubious they can get the type of pitcher you want for 4 years. Last year 4 years got you James Shields, Ervin Santana and Brandon McCarthy which isn't exactly the pitchers you're talking about. If they can then by all means because on that short of a deal you don't really have the same hard spending choices and 4 years is more than enough time to get you through what's hopefully the younger pitchers.

But like I said I just don't really see this as being likely.

 

[DanTown]

I'm not going to get into this debate again but you assume that Hendricks wont get better. And I'm certain I could find you any number of all-star pitcher's who were terrible against .500+ teams their first year. Go back and watch the Cardinals playoff game. He gave up a lead off HR. He then retired like 15 straight or something like that and exited in the 5th when he gave up 2 more solo shots. Clearly the HRs are a problem but through the middle part of that game he totally shut down the cardinals who were the best team in baseball this year.

He's not a finished product and I never said he was. But if you can't see the good of a 25 year old with a sub 4 ERA and those k/9 bb/9 splits then again, I think you're underestimating him.

So your argument to me saying Hendricks isn't going to be that great is to quote a game where he doesn't even go five innings, spotted a multiple run lead in the second inning, and gives up three HR? I don't think Hendricks is going to all of the sudden develop some great skill. Most guys don't magically some higher ability to pitch. That's great you think he is and even if he does, you still need to replace Hammel in a year so it's not like Hendricks wouldn't have a chance.

 

[DJMoore_is_fat]

I don't want to sign him either but I'm not holding his playoff record against the likely Cy Young winner. Pitching is tricky. Kershaw gets a bad playoff rap and dude is the best active pitcher in the game. I think they're going to need a guy who's stuff ages well. Greinke could be that guy but I don't buy the low $ folks are thinking in this thread, if they're true then hell yeah. I think he'll be similar to Lester only right handed in that he'll probably be able to pitch fairly well past his prime. He's got good stuff but isn't completely stuff dependent. Add him, trade for Ross or even Carrasco and now you have something that will strike fear in the playoffs.

So 6 year and $160M for Grienke? To me that sounds too risky. I think Theo said it best when we must set ourselves up for sustained success over the course of a decade. The thought is if you make the playoffs 7 times in 10 years -- you have a good chance of punching through one of the years.

But if we sign Grienke to a 6-year deal, and Lester is already on the hook for 6-years, plus all our studs will be due for huge extensions in 4-5 years -- doesn't that lower our window from the above mentioned 10 years to more like 4-5 years? Five years from now we'll have a payroll loaded with aging/declining albatross salaries.

After giving the different scenarios some thought, I think we might be better suited trading for a guy like Tyson Ross and sliding Hendricks and Hammell down a spot. If we're in the hunt in 2016 and pitching is still suspect, we could pursue a SP at the dead line. I think its less risky than giving such a monster deal to a SP1 who is over 30.

I just want to keep Theo's vision of a 10-year long window open.

 

[DanTown]

You're assuming the cubs have the choice to get whatever you want. Arrieta still hasn't been signed long term. 2-3 years from now you'll be looking at deals for Schwarber, Bryant, Russell and possibly Baez. That means that any deal you make this offseason has to account in roughly year 4 for those pay raises as well as Rizzo and Castro(if still here) being more expensive. Additionally, putting yourself basically at your payroll threshold like that precludes the ability to make other possibly necessary moves. For example, take CF. There's varying opinions on what to do be it re-sign Fowler, sign a hold over like Span until Almora/whomever is ready and so on. Obviously your'e suggesting re-sign Fowler. That's yet more money in that 4 year time span. You could be talking like $85-95 mil in Arrieta, Lester, Rizzo, Castro and Fowler alone and that's before talking about raises for the rookies. I'm not going to even speculate what the cubs payroll will be at that time. But, filling up the rest of the team is easily another $50 mil. So, unless they are pushing around $200 mil in that time span, adding another $20 mil/season player just might not fit in their budget. And again, maybe Soler doesn't work out as a prospect. Maybe multiple prospects don't. Then you're dipping into FA again which is really expensive.

Ideally, I think whomever they get if they go the FA route should be someone on a 4 year deal and I'm dubious they can get the type of pitcher you want for 4 years. Last year 4 years got you James Shields, Ervin Santana and Brandon McCarthy which isn't exactly the pitchers you're talking about. If they can then by all means because on that short of a deal you don't really have the same hard spending choices and 4 years is more than enough time to get you through what's hopefully the younger pitchers.

But like I said I just don't really see this as being likely.

Let's get a few things right
Rizzo - Team control through 2021; doesn't cost more than 14.5 million
Castro - Team control through 2020; doesn't cost more than 12 million until 2020 when Cubs have one million/16 million option
Lester -Drops to 20M in 2020 and 2021 is 10M/25M team option

When does Arbitration 1 kick-in
LaStella - Arbitration 1 in 2017
Baez - Arbitration 1 in 2018
Hendricks - Arbitration 1 in 2018
Bryant - Arbitration 1 in 2018
Russell - Arbitration 1 in 2018
Schwarber Arbitration 1 in 2019

The Cubs won't have to pay for hitters until 2019 (that's year four of any deal signed this off-season) and even then, they don't have FA to deal with on these guys until 2021. And the Cubs this year are paying Edwin Jackson 13 million, Montero (might be gone) 12 million, Wada 4.5 million, so there is PLENTY of money to still have a not Dodgers-esque payroll and sign guys both now and later.

Just to show you the flexibility, they can do the following

Pay Fowler the same as what they're paying him+Wada+Motte (16 million)
Pay Arreita what they're paying him+Jackson+Monetro (30 million)

 

[Midwaymonster75]

Theo is too busy drafting the ultimate lineup of thumpers to worry about young stud pitchers.

They should figure out how to sign a premiere veteran (Grienke, Zimmerman, Price) while preparing trade pieces to add Shark at the deadline.

Arrieta, Greinke, Lester, Shark, Hammels ought to get it done.

Thats a formidable rotation but something teams are going to have to ask themselves over the next few years is "do these 3 match up p4p with Harvey,deGrom and Syndergaard?" Right now the answer is no! Arrieta,Greinke and Lester dont match up as lester is the weak link. Arrieta and Greinke are not a better combo than Kershaw/Grienke and they still got beat. I think fans outside of met fans dont seem to understand just how good these met pitchers are. Those 3 guys are ACES that can match up with anyones number 1`s. The scary part is theyre only going to get better. Harvey is only in his second full season, deGrom the same and Sydnergaard is a rookie. And oh yeah btw we have Zack Wheeler who when healthy was lights at times and arguably better than Harvey before Harvey was injured. If Wheeler comes back from his surgery and hes good to go that wont even be fair. And finally we have a 22 year old Left hander in Matz who hits 95 regularly and looks like an absolute stud! If he can stay healthy which is his only question mark he is going to be another ace quality arm in our rotation. I dont think baseball has ever seen a rotation that has the potential to be this deep, with this quality and so young. Not bragging just making a point that people just dont realize how good these guys are. Ive watched these kids from day one and seen every pitch and they are the real deal. The only thing that can derail this group is injury.

 

[DanTown]

Thats a formidable rotation but something teams are going to have to ask themselves over the next few years is "do these 3 match up p4p with Harvey,deGrom and Syndergaard?" Right now the answer is no! Arrieta,Greinke and Lester dont match up as lester is the weak link. Arrieta and Greinke are not a better combo than Kershaw/Grienke and they still got beat. I think fans outside of met fans dont seem to understand just how good these met pitchers are. The scary part is theyre only going to get better. Harvey is only in his second full season, deGrom the same and Sydnergaard is a rookie. And oh yeah btw we have Zack Wheeler who when healthy was lights at times and arguably better than Harvey before Harvey was injured. If Wheeler comes back from his surgery and hes good to go that wont even be fair. And finally we have a 22 year old Left hander in Matz who hits 95 regularly and looks like an absolute stud! If he can stay healthy which is his only question mark he is going to be another ace quality arm in our rotation. I dont think baseball has ever seen a rotation that has the potential to be this deep, with this quality and so young. Not bragging just making a point that people just dont realize how good these guys are. Ive watched these kids from day one and seen every pitch and they are the real deal. The only thing that can derail this group is injury.

No, people understand how good the Mets rotation and unless the Cubs go nuts in FA and sign Price AND Grienke (which has a 0% of happening), the Cubs offense should be miles ahead of the Mets offense in future years while the Mets great pitchers will probably be much closer to the Cubs (assuming they signed a TOR arm). While great pitching is great to build around, the Mets 2-0 lead was entirely built by the top of their lineup which includes two guys they likely won't resign (Cespedes and Murphy) and two older players (Granderson is 35 next year, Wright 33). I'm not begrudging their 2015 team because I thought if the guys at the top bat as well as they did against LA than they're dangerous but it's not a sustainable offense.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

So 6 year and $160M for Grienke? To me that sounds too risky. I think Theo said it best when we must set ourselves up for sustained success over the course of a decade. The thought is if you make the playoffs 7 times in 10 years -- you have a good chance of punching through one of the years.

But if we sign Grienke to a 6-year deal, and Lester is already on the hook for 6-years, plus all our studs will be due for huge extensions in 4-5 years -- doesn't that lower our window from the above mentioned 10 years to more like 4-5 years? Five years from now we'll have a payroll loaded with aging/declining albatross salaries.

After giving the different scenarios some thought, I think we might be better suited trading for a guy like Tyson Ross and sliding Hendricks and Hammell down a spot. If we're in the hunt in 2016 and pitching is still suspect, we could pursue a SP at the dead line. I think its less risky than giving such a monster deal to a SP1 who is over 30.

I just want to keep Theo's vision of a 10-year long window open.

I wouldn't pay that for Greinke. If I was going that route I'd chase price at $200 million plus. He's a better pitcher. Just heard Bruce Levine say that he's hearing that the Cubs top two targets in the off season will be Samardzija and Jason Heyward to play CF. I can't quite see paying that much for Heyward to play CF which is hardly is ideal position, but hey what do I know? Do that, trade Castro for Ross and that's a pretty damned good pitching staff with a better hitter in CF than you have now. I don't always trust Levine though and that position blocks both Almora and today's acquisition of Eddy Julio Martinez who admittedly might take a couple of years. I'll believe it when I see it.