Cubs offseason rumors/transactions

[beckdawg]

I don't see the point in Britton frankly. I think he's scheduled to make around $12 mil in the last year of arbitration. Why give up a prospect and $12 mil when you can likely sign Davis for $15-16 mil? I mean I get the idea of Edwards being the closer long term but the thing is you're always going to want a dominant bullpen. This would also mark the fourth time they would deal prospects for a closer which is pretty stupid because rather than trading for chapman they could have offered more for Miller and saved themselves a lot of trouble. I get that the yankees wanted schwarber and the cubs weren't going to move him but surely Soler, Paredes, Candelario, and whomever they might have to deal for Britton would have been enough to change the Chapman package to Miller.

 

[brett05]

I don't disagree but it's three month less of Britton and he has risk attached. You're not giving up one of the top 3 pitchers for him.

I agree, but the issue is the Cubs don't really suit well in a trade market for impact players without using the 25 IMO

 

[DanTown]

I don't see the point in Britton frankly. I think he's scheduled to make around $12 mil in the last year of arbitration. Why give up a prospect and $12 mil when you can likely sign Davis for $15-16 mil?

Because Davis will cost that much over four years and I don't believe the Cubs want to spend that much long term money on a closer. The history of relievers who have gotten long-term deals is questionable at best and most don't work out. I like Davis but there is a lot to be worried about in his peripheral numbers that four years at a high dollar would scare the shit out of me. In fact, I wouldn't give Wade Davis a four year deal under any realistic dollar amount and I wouldn't give him more than 14 a year for three years. I know you're going to say that he'll never sign that and that's fine.

Britton is a bridge for me that makes sense if the cost is right. I wouldn't give Albertos, Azolay, or Ademan but I'd be fine giving up anyone else.

 

[chibears55]

And the Cubs have reached out to Cobb with interest...


http://www.bleachernation.com/2017/...cobb-reached-out-to-him-early-in-the-process/


Im guessing an offer would be something like 3 yrs guarentee with the 4th and or 5th being options and or performance based...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[beckdawg]

Because Davis will cost that much over four years and I don't believe the Cubs want to spend that much long term money on a closer. The history of relievers who have gotten long-term deals is questionable at best and most don't work out. I like Davis but there is a lot to be worried about in his peripheral numbers that four years at a high dollar would scare the shit out of me. In fact, I wouldn't give Wade Davis a four year deal under any realistic dollar amount and I wouldn't give him more than 14 a year for three years. I know you're going to say that he'll never sign that and that's fine.

Britton is a bridge for me that makes sense if the cost is right. I wouldn't give Albertos, Azolay, or Ademan but I'd be fine giving up anyone else.

But what's the difference if you're literally trading prospects every fucking offseason to get an elite closer? Like it's dumb because the prospects you're giving up can be used else where. I mean if you don't want to invest heavy in a closer fine but they are. They just aren't investing money. Those prospects they've given up likely could have bought them a very decent young starter.

 

[DanTown]

But what's the difference if you're literally trading prospects every fucking offseason to get an elite closer? Like it's dumb because the prospects you're giving up can be used else where. I mean if you don't want to invest heavy in a closer fine but they are. They just aren't investing money. Those prospects they've given up likely could have bought them a very decent young starter.

I don't think the guys they traded to get Wilson and Davis would have gotten them anything. They're solid pieces but none of them was an elite prospect. What good young starter was traded for a package built around the quantity of "meh" prospects? I was upset at the cost they paid to get Chapman but I also understood that deal in the prism of their 2016 WS run. According to their own data, they thought acquiring Chapman took them from 10% to win the WS to 25%. To trade nothing but prospects, even high value ones, to take your WS chance that much is probably worth it.

When you pay Wade Davis 16 million a year, you severely limit the rest of your FA options for not only this year but in 2019, 2020, etc. Jason Heyward is a classic example where the highest cost of FA is never the money you pay him but the amount of money you CANNOT pay other players. That's why the Cubs aren't going to pay a ton to keep a closer, besides the fact that a one inning guy like Davis is simply not worth the money that he would cost. I mean Wade Davis' previous years do not matter; I don't understand why someone would pay 16 million for four years to a guy to get 230 outs and then be a one inning guy.

 

[Omeletpants]

We need a long term closer solution cause with our shitty bullpen and undisciplined, inconsistent hitters we are winning nothing without that role filled

 

[CSF77]

I don't think the guys they traded to get Wilson and Davis would have gotten them anything. They're solid pieces but none of them was an elite prospect. What good young starter was traded for a package built around the quantity of "meh" prospects?

When you pay Wade Davis 16 million a year, you severely limit the rest of your FA options for not only this year but in 2019, 2020, etc. Jason Heyward is a classic example where the highest cost of FA is never the money you pay him but the amount of money you CANNOT pay other players. That's why the Cubs aren't going to pay a ton to keep a closer, besides the fact that a one inning guy like Davis is simply not worth the money that he would cost.

I keep hearing this but teams like NYY and LAD disagree.

 

[CSF77]

We need a long term closer solution cause with our shitty bullpen and undisciplined, inconsistent hitters we are winning nothing without that role filled

Bingo

If anything resigning Davis and Duensing should be a start. Then you work on fixing Edwards and Wilson. That give you 4 quality arms to lean on.

If you want to go cheap then make Tseng pitch in a 2 inning role with Montgomery.

That set the pen at 6. Strop makes 7. Maples should start in Iowa to get his walks under control.

Now at worst Davis degrades but still provides stability as a 8th inning guy while either Maples or Edwards takes over the closer role.

Basically staying the same but fixing the BB issue.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

And the Cubs have reached out to Cobb with interest...


http://www.bleachernation.com/2017/...cobb-reached-out-to-him-early-in-the-process/


Im guessing an offer would be something like 3 yrs guarentee with the 4th and or 5th being options and or performance based...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

I'm hearing 4/$68 for Cobb. I would think it comes within 10% of that either way.

 

[beckdawg]

I don't think the guys they traded to get Wilson and Davis would have gotten them anything. They're solid pieces but none of them was an elite prospect. What good young starter was traded for a package built around the quantity of "meh" prospects? I was upset at the cost they paid to get Chapman but I also understood that deal in the prism of their 2016 WS run. According to their own data, they thought acquiring Chapman took them from 10% to win the WS to 25%. To trade nothing but prospects, even high value ones, to take your WS chance that much is probably worth it.

When you pay Wade Davis 16 million a year, you severely limit the rest of your FA options for not only this year but in 2019, 2020, etc. Jason Heyward is a classic example where the highest cost of FA is never the money you pay him but the amount of money you CANNOT pay other players. That's why the Cubs aren't going to pay a ton to keep a closer, besides the fact that a one inning guy like Davis is simply not worth the money that he would cost. I mean Wade Davis' previous years do not matter; I don't understand why someone would pay 16 million for four years to a guy to get 230 outs and then be a one inning guy.

It's not that any was necessarily "the guy" to get an elite young starter but rather the cumulative effect. For example, it's entirely possible you might have been able to work a deal around Soler/Jiminez for Q rather than Cease and then you have Cease for the next deal and so on. And the thing is Briton isn't even cheap. He's likely $3-4 mil less than Davis is going to get next year. Ok so you are giving Davis 3 years but then who replaces Briton? For example, the last 2 years Davis made $10 mil for the cubs and Chapman made $11.325 mil. Granted in Chapman's case he was a half season rental but my point here is you're saving $3-4 mil a year to not sign a guy and you're giving up a slew of decent prospects. If they go the Briton route they've effectively signed a closer for 3 years $33.325 mil or roughly $11 AAV.

If you don't like Davis as the guy to sign long term fine. But this continual trading of prospect rather than signing someone is just stupid. Find a guy you like and pay him the money. There's also the issue that because the cubs bullpen has been in such flux season to season you end up where they are consistently dealing in season for guys like Montgomery and Wilson.

 

[Omeletpants]

Bingo

If anything resigning Davis and Duensing should be a start. Then you work on fixing Edwards and Wilson. That give you 4 quality arms to lean on.

I like that as a start. Wondering if anyone thinks the pitching coach switch will do anything to fix Wilson and Edwards.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

It's not that any was necessarily "the guy" to get an elite young starter but rather the cumulative effect. For example, it's entirely possible you might have been able to work a deal around Soler/Jiminez for Q rather than Cease and then you have Cease for the next deal and so on. And the thing is Briton isn't even cheap. He's likely $3-4 mil less than Davis is going to get next year. Ok so you are giving Davis 3 years but then who replaces Briton? For example, the last 2 years Davis made $10 mil for the cubs and Chapman made $11.325 mil. Granted in Chapman's case he was a half season rental but my point here is you're saving $3-4 mil a year to not sign a guy and you're giving up a slew of decent prospects. If they go the Briton route they've effectively signed a closer for 3 years $33.325 mil or roughly $11 AAV.

If you don't like Davis as the guy to sign long term fine. But this continual trading of prospect rather than signing someone is just stupid. Find a guy you like and pay him the money. There's also the issue that because the cubs bullpen has been in such flux season to season you end up where they are consistently dealing in season for guys like Montgomery and Wilson.

Honestly I think you both make excellent points here, but here's the issue; bullpens can never be trusted. If you invest money and it fails you're still looking for guys. I think Chapman's contract is going to look abysmal in less than two years. When he loses velo he's going to be awful. There are a handful of pen guys that are consistently good, and the Cubs have a couple of those in Strop and Montgomery but they don't have a stable of guys who can slide in and close. Edwards should have been the guy, he fits the entire profile but he's just not able to maintain consistency in big situations. If the goal is to stay under the luxury tax year after year you can't sing $60 plus million contracts to closers. On the other hand you're run out of prospects and you might hit a wall where you don't have enough starting pitching which is always my concern. Those two points pretty much encapsulate what both of you are saying. The bottom line is that they need some solid relievers to come out of the system in order to be able to spend on a closer. Until that happens I think it's rent-a-closer year after year, and I wish it didn't have to be.

 

[CSF77]

I like that as a start. Wondering if anyone thinks the pitching coach switch will do anything to fix Wilson and Edwards.

Not sure. It wasn’t a issue with Wilson in Det but for some reason he becomes unable to locate after a trade?

Honestly I look at track records vs a 17 inning stint

 

[CSF77]

Honestly I think you both make excellent points here, but here's the issue; bullpens can never be trusted. If you invest money and it fails you're still looking for guys. I think Chapman's contract is going to look abysmal in less than two years. When he loses velo he's going to be awful. There are a handful of pen guys that are consistently good, and the Cubs have a couple of those in Strop and Montgomery but they don't have a stable of guys who can slide in and close. Edwards should have been the guy, he fits the entire profile but he's just not able to maintain consistency in big situations. If the goal is to stay under the luxury tax year after year you can't sing $60 plus million contracts to closers. On the other hand you're run out of prospects and you might hit a wall where you don't have enough starting pitching which is always my concern. Those two points pretty much encapsulate what both of you are saying. The bottom line is that they need some solid relievers to come out of the system in order to be able to spend on a closer. Until that happens I think it's rent-a-closer year after year, and I wish it didn't have to be.

Pitchers lose velocity with age. That is a fact. Some adapt and learn to pitch and sequence vs being lazy and throw harder.

It really falls on Chapman. If he dips to 96 then focuses on playing that 96 off of his slider and locating it he should still be successful. If he is a lunk head at tears his arm off of his socket trying to push another MPH it serves him right.

 

[brett05]

Britton is a bridge for me that makes sense if the cost is right. I wouldn't give Albertos, Azolay, or Ademan but I'd be fine giving up anyone else.

Then you are not getting Britton. I'm not sure you get him if you don't take those guys off the table.

 

[CSF77]

Then you are not getting Britton. I'm not sure you get him if you don't take those guys off the table.

I wouldn’t bother with 1 year. Honestly Davis came in with a better health history and a WS ring and it cost Soler.

Don’t over rate a 1 year rental

 

[brett05]

I wouldn’t bother with 1 year. Honestly Davis came in with a better health history and a WS ring and it cost Soler.

Don’t over rate a 1 year rental

You forgot the cost of less than a one year rental in Chapman.

 

[chibears55]

I like that as a start. Wondering if anyone thinks the pitching coach switch will do anything to fix Wilson and Edwards.

They better hope so, because those 2 guys will be a big part of how successful the bullpen can become next year

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[CSF77]

You forgot the cost of less than a one year rental in Chapman.

Situation dictated a outrageous cost