Cubs offseason needs/ Talk

[RacerX]

I don't believe in any of this talk of "statement deals" or "signals", bunch of nonsense.

Getting into a $300MM + bidding was with the Giants and Yankees over one player is no way to build a sustainably winning roster.

 

[Castor76]

I don't believe in any of this talk of "statement deals" or "signals", bunch of nonsense.

Getting into a $300MM + bidding was with the Giants and Yankees over one player is no way to build a sustainably winning roster.

The Dodgers have spent money like it's water for a decade plus and they seem to be okay even if they only have 1 title to show for it. In the end, it's about profitability. The Cubs will have to put a competitive team on the field to keep the revenue stream large enough to make the contracts worth it.

 

[TL1961]

I don't believe in any of this talk of "statement deals" or "signals", bunch of nonsense.

Getting into a $300MM + bidding was with the Giants and Yankees over one player is no way to build a sustainably winning roster.

I’ve watched teams spend like drunken sailors and not walk away with championships. I’m not saying to be irresponsible or spend spend spend forever and on everything.

You have to be in a position that it makes sense. Right now the Cubs don’t have any expensive players, so signing one is not going to break the bank.

Let me put it this way: if you are in the third largest market in America, have your own TV network, own everything in the entire neighborhood around you including the $500 night hotel, and have just added a freaking sports book literally onto your federal landmark stadium and cannot afford to spend, then maybe owning a team isn’t for you. Maybe you just aren’t cut out for this.

Salaries aren’t going to go down. You cannot sustain a roster of 25 guys with $300 million contract but by God if you can’t squeeze one guy in out of 25 you don’t understand the game and you better just give up.

Salaries are not going to go down in two years, four years, six years. If anything they are probably kicking themselves for not doing the $300 million deal one year ago. They would’ve saved money in the long run.

You can read a lot of people on here suggesting what they want the Cubs to do or a lot of people on Twitter doing the same and you will see people expecting them to sign six or eight people and I have never ever been one of those people.

I don’t expect them to get a shortstop and a starting pitcher and this and that and the other thing all in one off-season.

There’s no question they have to be able to supplement the big money guys with low-cost homegrown talent or in this case talent they acquired through trades.

And as I have stated repeatedly, I think they did the right thing not signing the core and making the trades. As much as we liked those guys and liked what they accomplished, trading them was actually the right thing to do.

The Cubs are at a critical point in many areas both on the field and off.

They’ve asked fans to be patient while they go through a second rebuild in a decade. When you do that and then make a statement that you’ve given your GM the greenlight to spend whatever it takes, it’s a good idea to spend whatever it takes.

Fans are not going to be forgiving if the Cubs march out a starting lineup with Nick fucking Madrigal, Patrick wisdom and Matt Mervis in the starting infield next year and a rotation with zero reliable aces while Willson Contreras openly talks of dreaming of playing in St. Louis.

As my Obvious Shirt t-shirt says, “ I don’t have another 108 years.“

 

[CSF77]

Cole Hamels Planning Comeback In 2023

Cole Hamels is looking for one more shot at continuing his baseball career, and told The Associated Press that he …

www.mlbtraderumors.com

Kinda why not. They need a vet lefty in the pen. Give him a shot. No real commitment

 

[CSF77]

I’ve watched teams spend like drunken sailors and not walk away with championships. I’m not saying to be irresponsible or spend spend spend forever and on everything.

You have to be in a position that it makes sense. Right now the Cubs don’t have any expensive players, so signing one is not going to break the bank.

Let me put it this way: if you are in the third largest market in America, have your own TV network, own everything in the entire neighborhood around you including the $500 night hotel, and have just added a freaking sports book literally onto your federal landmark stadium and cannot afford to spend, then maybe owning a team isn’t for you. Maybe you just aren’t cut out for this.

Salaries aren’t going to go down. You cannot sustain a roster of 25 guys with $300 million contract but by God if you can’t squeeze one guy in out of 25 you don’t understand the game and you better just give up.

Salaries are not going to go down in two years, four years, six years. If anything they are probably kicking themselves for not doing the $300 million deal one year ago. They would’ve saved money in the long run.

You can read a lot of people on here suggesting what they want the Cubs to do or a lot of people on Twitter doing the same and you will see people expecting them to sign six or eight people and I have never ever been one of those people.

I don’t expect them to get a shortstop and a starting pitcher and this and that and the other thing all in one off-season.

There’s no question they have to be able to supplement the big money guys with low-cost homegrown talent or in this case talent they acquired through trades.

And as I have stated repeatedly, I think they did the right thing not signing the core and making the trades. As much as we liked those guys and liked what they accomplished, trading them was actually the right thing to do.

The Cubs are at a critical point in many areas both on the field and off.

They’ve asked fans to be patient while they go through a second rebuild in a decade. When you do that and then make a statement that you’ve given your GM the greenlight to spend whatever it takes, it’s a good idea to spend whatever it takes.

Fans are not going to be forgiving if the Cubs march out a starting lineup with Nick fucking Madrigal, Patrick wisdom and Matt Mervis in the starting infield next year and a rotation with zero reliable aces while Willson Contreras openly talks of dreaming of playing in St. Louis.

As my Obvious Shirt t-shirt says, “ I don’t have another 108 years.“

Love it

We have to remember that Bellenger is a rental. CF will drop in costs. Happ will hit F/A. Another cut. LF drops in cost. Hendricks gone. Yet another cost cut. Heyward will be off the books.

Every guy listed is replaceable with the current farm system.

So why not.

Now I am not saying Correa > Swanson. Both are better than Hoerner.

So if you want to win then you have to invest. Cash is coming off the books to get under cap. Which means can retool for 2024.

Worrying about costs is not what we should be concerned about we should be concerned if Tom tells Jed to spend and turn it around and then Jed plays the cheap card for another .500 season.

I like the two signings. But both were not major signings. They were value deals.

And to add. I'm pretty sure that the lotto draft plays into this. Losing guarantees nothing. Winning adds to the box office.

It is better to invest and win and increase revenues. Than lose and suffer at the box office. For what a better odds of a pick? Pretty dumb logic.

 

[TL1961]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601757372875436032

 

[Castor76]

With Suzuki on the books for the next 4 seasons, the Cubs have 3 top OF prospects for 2 spots come 2024. Reality is at least 1 won't make the jump unless the Cubs get really lucky. Signing one of the remaining SS plugs a major hole as it allows Hoerner to go back to 2B and then it's just about C and 3B presuming Mervis works at 1B. And you just never know really when it comes to pitching.

I'm not asking them to sign bad deals. I'm just asking they make good attempts to get guys. If another team goes crazy and pays a guy 40M a season, so be it. It was like what the Mets did with Scherzer. I would have loved the Cubs to try to get him, but not at 43M per. Let the Mets deal with that and their 97M over the threshold for next year.

 

[SilenceS]

With Suzuki on the books for the next 4 seasons, the Cubs have 3 top OF prospects for 2 spots come 2024. Reality is at least 1 won't make the jump unless the Cubs get really lucky. Signing one of the remaining SS plugs a major hole as it allows Hoerner to go back to 2B and then it's just about C and 3B presuming Mervis works at 1B. And you just never know really when it comes to pitching.

I'm not asking them to sign bad deals. I'm just asking they make good attempts to get guys. If another team goes crazy and pays a guy 40M a season, so be it. It was like what the Mets did with Scherzer. I would have loved the Cubs to try to get him, but not at 43M per. Let the Mets deal with that and their 97M over the threshold for next year.

Meh, this ia business and there no reason to over spend. Swansby was offered less than 144 million form the braves. Dont sign just to sign. Now, if they lose him or Carlos due to like 2 million then thats a different thing.

 

[TL1961]

The minute Correa signs, the market for Swanson explodes. And he's just not the same player as the other SS that were on the market.

Improvement? Sure. But c'mon.
How is getting a little better when you suck "intelligent spending"?

I don't want them to "spend just to spend". I want them to spend because this is not a retail where you can go get whatever you want at a later date.

I have actually thought for this off season that the Cubs would get Correa and I truly believe they're in on him. But when you hear "length of contract" is a concern, it's a bad sign. Of course a GM should dislike signing a guy for 10 years or more when you could recently do 7 or 8. But the market has changed.

 

[Castor76]

Meh, this ia business and there no reason to over spend. Swansby was offered less than 144 million form the braves. Dont sign just to sign. Now, if they lose him or Carlos due to like 2 million then thats a different thing.

And I said nothing about overspending. I said make offers, hopefully competitive ones. You want to live in a certain neighborhood for whatever reasons, you can either pay what they are asking for homes there or wait and hope for a market crash to slip in when you can. The Cubs should not be in a "Wait and Hope" mode. They have 75-90M coming off the books after 2023 with projected players to fill most those slots. The 2023 FA class isn't deep. So it's either take a shot now or wait until 2025.

 

[czman]

The Dodgers have spent money like it's water for a decade plus and they seem to be okay even if they only have 1 title to show for it. In the end, it's about profitability. The Cubs will have to put a competitive team on the field to keep the revenue stream large enough to make the contracts worth it.

When did the Dodgers sign a free agent for 10+ years, let alone one that is 28? I mean the Dodgers have been great at finding players and signing people to shorter deals or signing them when they are younger so they get out of the deal earlier.

I think if you use an example it should actually be applicable.

 

[Castor76]

When did the Dodgers sign a free agent for 10+ years, let alone one that is 28? I mean the Dodgers have been great at finding players and signing people to shorter deals or signing them when they are younger so they get out of the deal earlier.

I think if you use an example it should actually be applicable.

Mookie Betts, 12 years. Does that apply?
You have to go back to 2012 to find the last time the Dodgers weren't in the top 4 of MLB payrolls. They had the highest 7 of the last 9 seasons.

 

[TL1961]

I just noticed that one of the ads on this site says "The only market certainty is uncertainty."

 

[TL1961]

Senga reportedly signing with Mets for 5/$75 million.

Cubs can't afford $15 million per year.

 

[Probie2429]

Senga doesn’t have to be the ace in that rotation. Zero pressure for him unlike what would happen in Chicago. Signing there was likely more about the transition to MLB than anything.

 

[SilenceS]

Senga reportedly signing with Mets for 5/$75 million.

Cubs can't afford $15 million per year.

I didnt see a point to senga once they signed Taillon. The Cubs have a plethora of young pitching that is ready or close. Senga isnt an Ace which is what the Cubs are missing

 

[CSF77]

I didnt see a point to senga once they signed Taillon. The Cubs have a plethora of young pitching that is ready or close. Senga isnt an Ace which is what the Cubs are missing

If you go there go with Rodon. If they feel Wicks and Brown are close and TOR quality starters then hold the deck.

Both should be at Iowa on opening day. Unless Jed packs in AAAA types for injury relief. Then add Kilian. He struggled with control but I don't count out his talent. WHIP was sub 1.00 until last year. So this feels adjustment vs dud.

So this is an area that Jed could just keep organic and add at the deadline.

 

[TL1961]

Senga doesn’t have to be the ace in that rotation. Zero pressure for him unlike what would happen in Chicago. Signing there was likely more about the transition to MLB than anything.

The Cubs just gave 17.5 million to Taillon but they should not have given 15 million to Senga because he would’ve become the teams ace?

 

[TL1961]

If you go there go with Rodon. If they feel Wicks and Brown are close and TOR quality starters then hold the deck.

Both should be at Iowa on opening day. Unless Jed packs in AAAA types for injury relief. Then add Kilian. He struggled with control but I don't count out his talent. WHIP was sub 1.00 until last year. So this feels adjustment vs dud.

So this is an area that Jed could just keep organic and add at the deadline.

So “hold the deck“ because two unproven, not quite ready for the majors pitchers in the minors are both going to be top of the rotation?

Therefore they don’t need more pitching that could be had for cash and cost zero prospects? But then you add the phrase “add at the deadline“ meaning you expect the Cubs to be contending and suggest they would give up prospects for pitching halfway through the season rather than get a guy for the full season for strictly cash?

If the Cubs think they have all the pitching they need why are they in on singer in the first place? That’s not a question of whether they thought they needed them it’s a question of why they thought they needed them and $15 million was too rich for their blood.

 

[Discus fish salesman]

So “hold the deck“ because two unproven, not quite ready for the majors pitchers in the minors are both going to be top of the rotation?

Therefore they don’t need more pitching that could be had for cash and cost zero prospects? But then you add the phrase “add at the deadline“ meaning you expect the Cubs to be contending and suggest they would give up prospects for pitching halfway through the season rather than get a guy for the full season for strictly cash?

If the Cubs think they have all the pitching they need why are they in on singer in the first place? That’s not a question of whether they thought they needed them it’s a question of why they thought they needed them and $15 million was too rich for their blood.

I can't imagine the cubs weren't offering more than 15/year. There has to be other factors. Opt outs, winning immediately, location(?). I could be wrong but I'm hoping other factors were involved and not just cubs not outbidding that offer