Offseason discussion/rumors

[Diehardfan]

Center of attention: With Dexter Fowler likely leaving via free agency, the Cubs need to fill center field and find a new leadoff batter. Albert Almora Jr. is one in-house option, but Epstein said they may look elsewhere for an outfielder.

"I wouldn't rule out the job being his, but I think it would be more likely that we would acquire someone to complement him and allow him to grow into the job more gradually," Epstein said.

The Cubs do have some depth in the outfield with Jorge Soler, who was limited to 86 games because of injuries. Could the Cubs use Soler to acquire more pitching?

"We don't have any untouchables, but I still think there's a lot more in there offensively," Epstein said of Soler. "He hasn't had the season yet where he's put it all together and hit 30 home runs and been a force in the middle of the lineup. It's so obviously in there, we'd like to see him reach his full potential with us if possible."

TheoSpeak for we need time to build up his numbers as his current trade value is nearly non-existent.

 

[CSF77]

Given that it looks like good pitching is even more rare than it was, I think the opposite especially with such an awful FA class right now. Miller's value has gone up, not down, especially with his post season performance. There would be plenty of teams wanting to have him which increases the price more so.

Like I said it has to do with timing. In June and July the cards have fallen where they will. (Not the STL one...) At that point most teams have identified their needs and decide if they are buyers and sellers. At that point the iron is hot and the values of trades are peaking.

In the off season it has more to do with getting rid of contract. Teams looking to buy are looking at prospect's as a cheaper option to over pricing of free agents. I don't see a higher return in Dec than July at all for the same player.

So you have to look at what Cleveland paid for him. That is his high water value. That is when the demand was at the highest to trade. Anyone paying over that is a clown and is worsening the market.

 

[brett05]

Like I said it has to do with timing. In June and July the cards have fallen where they will. (Not the STL one...) At that point most teams have identified their needs and decide if they are buyers and sellers. At that point the iron is hot and the values of trades are peaking.

In the off season it has more to do with getting rid of contract. Teams looking to buy are looking at prospect's as a cheaper option to over pricing of free agents. I don't see a higher return in Dec than July at all for the same player.

So you have to look at what Cleveland paid for him. That is his high water value. That is when the demand was at the highest to trade. Anyone paying over that is a clown and is worsening the market.

I get it and it's just an opinion. That said, everyone (the ones that earn a living to comment on baseball) has said the value is higher in the offseason. Most notable for this was the White Sox in trading Sale/Q

 

[CSF77]

TheoSpeak for we need time to build up his numbers as his current trade value is nearly non-existent.

I agree 100% But that also means that they would rather trade him after he has become a player that will gain a quality return.

 

[CSF77]

I get it and it's just an opinion. That said, everyone (the ones that earn a living to comment on baseball) has said the value is higher in the offseason. Most notable for this was the White Sox in trading Sale/Q

For a
TOR SP with control. Yes I agree. SP tend to be expiring deals in mid season deals. Teams don't like getting weighed down the following year with contract for a solution to that year. Unless the need is a long term on. Like no options in the system for a long time.

If I'm the Sox I'm putting one of the 2 up on the market and I'm making a huge demand for returns. With a 37 yo Rich Hill as the top SP option the market is barren.

 

[CSF77]

And to put this down: If the Sox put Sale up on the market and the Cubs made a deal centered around Schwarber I would not be mad.

You have to pay game changing talent for game changing talent.

 

[brett05]

And to put this down: If the Sox put Sale up on the market and the Cubs made a deal centered around Schwarber I would not be mad.

You have to pay game changing talent for game changing talent.

And you are right, you should not be.

This morning a White Sox fan said if the Cubs would deal Kyle he would do Sale straight up. He justified length of control and that Kyle could be a Hall of Famer. Brobber was tolerant and polite. The called was clearly passionate about improving the White Sox offense, but really he was so clueless on value.

 

[CSF77]

There is also a factor of value. Kyle is a potential great player. Sale is a great player with a track record.

This is the argument against trading Kyle this off season: He has not proven he can catch every day. He has not proven he can hit lefties. He has not proven that he can man LF every day as a fall back option to catcher. He has not broken the magical 30 HR barrier that puts him into the elite power hitter topic.

Just like Soler. Theo is far better holding his treasures until they have properly ripened.

 

[fatbeard]

And to put this down: If the Sox put Sale up on the market and the Cubs made a deal centered around Schwarber I would not be mad.

You have to pay game changing talent for game changing talent.

That's an awful deal from a value perspective. You're giving up five years of control of Schwarber for three years of control of Sale. Figure Sale will give you 15-18 WAR over those three years for $38mil. Schwarber is more of an unknown, but he would only have to average 4.0 WAR per year over his five years of control in order to have more value than Sale, and almost certainly at a lower cost given what his arbitration numbers might be. Now take into account Schwarber's truly elite hit tool, which the Cubs think will make him a better hitter than league-MVP Kris Bryant. Other people have comp'd Schwarber's bat to Votto-Harper-Ortiz, so it's possible you're giving up a 6-7 WAR player, which over five years would be 30-35 WAR.

In short, there's a reason why everyone is asking for Schwarber in a trade. And there's a reason why the Cubs keep laughing and hanging up the phone.

 

[CSF77]

That's an awful deal from a value perspective. You're giving up five years of control of Schwarber for three years of control of Sale. Figure Sale will give you 15-18 WAR over those three years for $38mil. Schwarber is more of an unknown, but he would only have to average 4.0 WAR per year over his five years of control in order to have more value than Sale, and almost certainly at a lower cost given what his arbitration numbers might be. Now take into account Schwarber's truly elite hit tool, which the Cubs think will make him a better hitter than league-MVP Kris Bryant. Other people have comp'd Schwarber's bat to Votto-Harper-Ortiz, so it's possible you're giving up a 6-7 WAR player, which over five years would be 30-35 WAR.

In short, there's a reason why everyone is asking for Schwarber in a trade. And there's a reason why the Cubs keep laughing and hanging up the phone.

Naive answer

 

[Washington]

That's an awful deal from a value perspective. You're giving up five years of control of Schwarber for three years of control of Sale. Figure Sale will give you 15-18 WAR over those three years for $38mil. Schwarber is more of an unknown, but he would only have to average 4.0 WAR per year over his five years of control in order to have more value than Sale, and almost certainly at a lower cost given what his arbitration numbers might be. Now take into account Schwarber's truly elite hit tool, which the Cubs think will make him a better hitter than league-MVP Kris Bryant. Other people have comp'd Schwarber's bat to Votto-Harper-Ortiz, so it's possible you're giving up a 6-7 WAR player, which over five years would be 30-35 WAR.

In short, there's a reason why everyone is asking for Schwarber in a trade. And there's a reason why the Cubs keep laughing and hanging up the phone.

One can easily argue that "known" elite pitching trumps "projected" elite hitting. It is also best when teams can trade from their strengths. The team won 103 games without Kyle. The need for controllable pitchers is going to become a reality more sooner than later. The system has more bats than arms. That said, I would love to see Kyle for a complete season but the thought of Sale is very intriguing.

 

[fatbeard]

One can easily argue that "known" elite pitching trumps "projected" elite hitting. It is also best when teams can trade from their strengths. The team won 103 games without Kyle. The need for controllable pitchers is going to become a reality more sooner than later. The system has more bats than arms. That said, I would love to see Kyle for a complete season but the thought of Sale is very intriguing.

"Known" elite pitching trumps "projected" elite hitting is a fine generalization, but look at the specifics of the proposed deal: Sale will be 28 before the season starts; he's reached the upper limit of "young", and is only cost-controlled for three years, after that he's going to be a 31 year old SP who costs $200mil to keep around. As for Schwarber's "projected" hitting, the body of work isn't there, but I really don't think he's much of a projection at this point. He spent half a season in AA and walked into MLB hitting 132 wRC+. His playoff numbers were historically good. Then this year he gets injured, misses the entire season and most of the playoffs, and walks into the WS against some of the best pitching in MLB and crushes it like he never missed a day. He is fucking elite. In my mind, the only "projection" on Schwarber is, "Just how good a hitter can he be?"

 

[beckdawg]

One can easily argue that "known" elite pitching trumps "projected" elite hitting.

Not sure I'd call Schwarber "projected" elite hitting. Is there any other player in the majors who could miss 5 months with a busted knee and come back and hit .400 in the world series with next to no rehab? Think people need to realize Schwarber doesn't just have the potential to be a really good bat. He very well could be an incredibly special hitter. He had a .487 slugging% last year and he hadn't even figured out major league lefties yet. Bryant had a phenomenal rookie year and had a .488 slugging%. It's not unreasonable to suggest that Schwarber has a better eye(walked more and struck out less as a rookie than bryant), as much power and can hit for a higher average. Just so we're being clear here, Kris Bryant is the likely NL MVP and was worth 8.4 fWAR. Whether or not Schwarber is better than Bryant really isn't the point. His bat could be that good and there's maybe 5 bats in baseball that have that potential year to year.

And that's not to say that Sale isn't an amazing pitcher. He's obviously one of the few pitchers who can do what he does. But you don't get better making lateral moves. And I think people need to keep in mind what a terror Schwarber makes the cubs line up. In the 4 games he played during the world series the cubs scored 23 runs and that includes a game they were shut out by Kluber despite Schwarber hitting well. Schwarber/Bryant/Rizzo is the L/R/L stuff of nightmares.

As for getting better at pitching, this year alone proves you can manufacture pitching. Did anyone seriously expect anything out of Jason Hammel this year? I was here. I remember the talk about how he would be shit after a bad second half for two straight years. I was also one of the few trumpeting Hendricks as a #3ish quality starter and he even blew away my expectations. It's taken awhile to figure out as fans but the pretty obvious MO of this front office now is soft contact pitching with amazing defense behind it yields great pitching.

 

[CSF77]

Not sure I'd call Schwarber "projected" elite hitting. Is there any other player in the majors who could miss 5 months with a busted knee and come back and hit .400 in the world series with next to no rehab? Think people need to realize Schwarber doesn't just have the potential to be a really good bat. He very well could be an incredibly special hitter. He had a .487 slugging% last year and he hadn't even figured out major league lefties yet. Bryant had a phenomenal rookie year and had a .488 slugging%. It's not unreasonable to suggest that Schwarber has a better eye(walked more and struck out less as a rookie than bryant), as much power and can hit for a higher average. Just so we're being clear here, Kris Bryant is the likely NL MVP and was worth 8.4 fWAR. Whether or not Schwarber is better than Bryant really isn't the point. His bat could be that good and there's maybe 5 bats in baseball that have that potential year to year.

And that's not to say that Sale isn't an amazing pitcher. He's obviously one of the few pitchers who can do what he does. But you don't get better making lateral moves. And I think people need to keep in mind what a terror Schwarber makes the cubs line up. In the 4 games he played during the world series the cubs scored 23 runs and that includes a game they were shut out by Kluber despite Schwarber hitting well. Schwarber/Bryant/Rizzo is the L/R/L stuff of nightmares.

As for getting better at pitching, this year alone proves you can manufacture pitching. Did anyone seriously expect anything out of Jason Hammel this year? I was here. I remember the talk about how he would be shit after a bad second half for two straight years. I was also one of the few trumpeting Hendricks as a #3ish quality starter and he even blew away my expectations. It's taken awhile to figure out as fans but the pretty obvious MO of this front office now is soft contact pitching with amazing defense behind it yields great pitching.

It was a what if theory. And that said I'm still fine if it went down. Sale is that good and that is his price tag.

That said, from what Jed was saying they will look into trading for pitching. Now I do not believe they will trade Schwarber but you know every team will be saying Schwarber then Baez. So with that in mind do not expect a mega deal. I would expect a smaller deal like you said earlier. Which was a excellent post on forgotten guys that hold real value to teams. So a package of excess depth (like Vogelbach and Torres was) vs guys that could have a role like Happ is more likely.

Add to it Jed said they most likely will add a CF to platoon with Almora to ease (IE not have to deal with growing pains in a championship run). So you are looking a a CF short term that bats left. I was thinking Coco myself but there maybe others that fit that mold.

So looking at the plans:

Lower end CF that can lead off in a platoon. Hits from the left.

Young starter with Montgomery as a back up plan.

Trade for a closer with in house as a back up plan.

 

[CSF77]

For CF I'm thinking Coco, Jay, Bourn. Bourn seems like a likely choice.

 

[FrankieLyrical]

You guys are talking about the offseason already? I'm still high on winning the world series, I cant even think about anything else Cubs related

 

[fatbeard]

You guys are talking about the offseason already? I'm still high on winning the world series, I cant even think about anything else Cubs related

Talking about it already? I don't know about anyone else, but I positively cannot wait until April.

 

[TL1961]

I recall, very very early in Schwarber's MLB career lsst summer, my brother declaring his bat "historically significant".

No real position for him that is ideal, but they're not letting that bat get away.

 

[JaySix]

The heart of the order and the core of this offense for years to come will be Schwarber, Rizzo and Bryant... no way they trade Schwarber, they will find a way and a position for him to be in the lineup.

Then if Russell, Baez, Contreras etc develop into good reliable hitters that's a bonus.

For that reason personally I don't expect any mega trades


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CSF77]

I recall, very very early in Schwarber's MLB career lsst summer, my brother declaring his bat "historically significant".

No real position for him that is ideal, but they're not letting that bat get away.

They won't. I see it as him and Soler in LF. At that point they would want to add a left handed CF to lead off. Vs lefties to put Almora in CF and lead off with Zobrist. This keeps Zo out of full time lead off duty.

Then you bank on Heyward bouncing back.

So I don't see them starting Baez every day. He should move around still and see days off vs tough righties. Lefties he should be starting. Maybe Zo in RF that day.

Things should be flexible again.

I like the idea of Bourn. Add some speed? To the lead off.

Outside of that the Cubs were looking at Greg Holland. He would be a nice anchor type in the pen. That would leave a trade for a young starter.