Offseason discussion/rumors

[SilenceS]

Tell that to the White Sox

You are all over the map. Chris Sale is a good to great pitcher. Kris Bryant is a top 3 player in baseball and positioning himself to be the face of MLB baseball. He is 24 years old coming off an MVP season and still isnt done growing. He is a once in a generation player. In 3 years, he will be smacked dab in his prime. He is untouchable. The thought that you want to trade in him in 3 years is pretty insane. The Cubs have a plethora of players they would trade before Bryant.

 

[SilenceS]

So you're going to pay him $40M a year in 2021?

If the market dictates it and he stays his trajectory, yes. You are talking about a pure stud with little flaws in his game. The Cubs TV contract is up in 2019 and they are probably going to get the largest contract in history since they won the series.

 

[SilenceS]

The new contract lost its importance now with the new luxury tax system in place. Beck has already talked extensively about that in previous threads so I don't need to rehash it.

So, you think the new luxury tax is going to stop players and major market teams from paying large sums of money? You also think getting humongous tv contract will have no impact?

 

[CSF77]

Players are still going to get their money but the talent will be better distributed among a variety of teams rather than concentrated on a few teams. Cubs are still going to pay up obviously but they're going to have to pay Schwarber, Rizzo, Baez, Russell, Contreras, and Bryant all around roughly the same time, give or take a few years. I mean I hate to break it to you but they're not going to spend $300 million per year on payroll. All of those guys are going to ask for a big deal but Bryant will no doubt be at the very top and probably set a historically large deal.

I see Schwarber moved to 1B and Rizzo moving on when his deal is up. Bryant should get a mega here. Russell also but not as huge. Baez I see as not a complete player so they move on.

 

[beckdawg]

Arrieta is going to have a massive year next season going for that big pay day.

If you trade Arrieta, who are you going to replace him with? You need 3 stud pitchers to win. As of now, Lester, Hendricks, Arrieta. Take him out and who fills his spot? Unless you tell me that the Cubs have a deal lined up for Archer, I have no interest in trading Jake.

My focus right now is solely on repeating. If the Cubs repeat, and Jake walks, so be it. I'm okay with that. Why? Because they fucking repeated which nobody does. You can hang your hat on a repeat for the rest of your life.

Not saying they have to trade him but they can't let him walk for that. If they aren't going to deal him they have to re-sign him. Losing him would be a massive loss in depth that it would hurt very badly to re-fill because like Arrieta, Lackey will also be gone and to sign any half decent pitcher will take a 2nd and a 5th round pick if you are over the luxury tax.

Basically as I see things, the options are trade Arrieta or re-sign him and probably Davis, eat the luxury tax and use your remaining prospects to replace lackey rather than dealing with FA. That's not a great option but it's what it is.

 

[CSF77]

Arrieta will be 32 when he signs. A 5 year deal puts him at 36. That is where I believe Theo's breaking point is. Jake most likely want to be covered until he is 38. So a 5 vs a 7 year offer.

Based off the last 2 years his mechanics altered. There is plenty of video out there showing how off his mechanics became. So he was able to get by with pitichability and plenty of run support.

In view of this I wouldn't resign him at all. He is a pitcher that thrived off of his D behind him and his O support. I can see Boras shooting for 30 mil per for 9 years as his starting point. I then believe he could be talked down to 27.5 per for 7. Theo would start at 22.5 for 3 and go up to 25 per for 5. Any further he would want full rights to walk away from the deal.

So in view of this I believe they will not come to a agreement for a extension.

In that class I would rather them go after Chris Tillman.

 

[beckdawg]

Arrieta will be 32 when he signs. A 5 year deal puts him at 36. That is where I believe Theo's breaking point is. Jake most likely want to be covered until he is 38. So a 5 vs a 7 year offer.

I'm sure that's likely where the cubs would put a break point. Whether or not Arrieta takes it is debatable. If the cubs offer him 5 years at say $125 mil or something in that range and he doesn't agree that's when the situation becomes interesting because the obvious question becomes what do you do about his impending FA? I get why people don't like the idea of dealing him. No one ever wants to think about the long term but ultimately if you don't you end up in a bigger hole later. My thing is if you just roll the dice on 2017 and let him walk for a 4th round pick you're really setting yourself up for failure long term. Assuming both Davis and him leave as FA's and Lackey retires or goes some where else you're needing to replace 2 starters and your closer. 2 5th round picks isn't going to replace that value. So if you can re-sign him then do so but for god sake don't let him walk for next to nothing.

I think at present time there's options out there for replacing him that are at least interesting. I mean you're not going to fully replace his value unless you manage to swing a deal for Archer. However, if you can get say a 2-3 win player instead of the likely 4 win player he projects to be plus the prospects he would return in a trade I think you set yourself up far better. For example, I know Smyly had a down year but you're talking about someone who appears to be rather close to dirt cheap given every one in the majors knows TB has to move someone. He's a guy with great underlying numbers(8.71 k/9 and 2.54 bb/9) and a career 3.74/3.82 ERA/FIP over 570.1 IP. If you don't like him, the Sox likely have to deal Buchholtz or Eduardo Rodriguez. If you don't like either of them, Oakland could still deal Sonny Gray. If you don't like him Arizona would probably listen on some of their starters.

And the other aspect of this is that people need to remember that the strength of last year's starters wasn't one dominate guy a la Kershaw. It was 4 really good guys in Lester Arrieta Hendricks and Lackey and an average starter in Hammel. If you brought in someone with similar value to Lackey you'd be losing some ground but they would still have a good staff and the pieces you get as part of trading Arrieta would set you up well to go hard after say Archer at the trade deadline or whomever. And the added side benefit is if you did bring in someone with similar value to lackey, you're likely talking about having his 2018 replacement already in house.

 

[The-0]

What is hammel trying to get? If we could get him for a two year deal that would give us some flexibility next offseason so we aren't forced to do anything crazy. It would also put Montgomery in the pen and as the 6th starter this year which is where I think we want him.

 

[Omeletpants]

What is hammel trying to get? If we could get him for a two year deal that would give us some flexibility next offseason so we aren't forced to do anything crazy. It would also put Montgomery in the pen and as the 6th starter this year which is where I think we want him.

The Cubs don't like the fact that Hammel falls apart in the second half of every season. Makes him useless in the playoffs. So whether Hammel is 12 or 13M it's still a lot more than his replacement

 

[beckdawg]

The Cubs don't like the fact that Hammel falls apart in the second half of every season. Makes him useless in the playoffs. So whether Hammel is 12 or 13M it's still a lot more than his replacement

Think it's more about just giving young pitching a chance. I'm sure that plays into matters but ultimately you're not finding people long term if you just keep plugging 30+ year olds in.

 

[CSF77]

I'm sure that's likely where the cubs would put a break point. Whether or not Arrieta takes it is debatable. If the cubs offer him 5 years at say $125 mil or something in that range and he doesn't agree that's when the situation becomes interesting because the obvious question becomes what do you do about his impending FA? I get why people don't like the idea of dealing him. No one ever wants to think about the long term but ultimately if you don't you end up in a bigger hole later. My thing is if you just roll the dice on 2017 and let him walk for a 4th round pick you're really setting yourself up for failure long term. Assuming both Davis and him leave as FA's and Lackey retires or goes some where else you're needing to replace 2 starters and your closer. 2 5th round picks isn't going to replace that value. So if you can re-sign him then do so but for god sake don't let him walk for next to nothing.

I think at present time there's options out there for replacing him that are at least interesting. I mean you're not going to fully replace his value unless you manage to swing a deal for Archer. However, if you can get say a 2-3 win player instead of the likely 4 win player he projects to be plus the prospects he would return in a trade I think you set yourself up far better. For example, I know Smyly had a down year but you're talking about someone who appears to be rather close to dirt cheap given every one in the majors knows TB has to move someone. He's a guy with great underlying numbers(8.71 k/9 and 2.54 bb/9) and a career 3.74/3.82 ERA/FIP over 570.1 IP. If you don't like him, the Sox likely have to deal Buchholtz or Eduardo Rodriguez. If you don't like either of them, Oakland could still deal Sonny Gray. If you don't like him Arizona would probably listen on some of their starters.

And the other aspect of this is that people need to remember that the strength of last year's starters wasn't one dominate guy a la Kershaw. It was 4 really good guys in Lester Arrieta Hendricks and Lackey and an average starter in Hammel. If you brought in someone with similar value to Lackey you'd be losing some ground but they would still have a good staff and the pieces you get as part of trading Arrieta would set you up well to go hard after say Archer at the trade deadline or whomever. And the added side benefit is if you did bring in someone with similar value to lackey, you're likely talking about having his 2018 replacement already in house.

I believe they need to sign 1 to replace Jake. 1 in house to replace John. If you can get both from in house the better.

Ideally Montgomery takes off this year and takes over for the 4 then steps up in the play offs again. At that point you are looking at a rotation of Lester, Hendricks, Montgomery with a 4-5 needed. Seeing how you only need a 4 1 time per series vs 2 it lessens the impact for signing a F/A.

Another thing I was thinking was pushing Edwards to AAA to start this year and promoting Black to cover his role. This puts Rob Z, Johnson and Edwards with Williams at the starting 4 in Iowa. Think Buchanan is in the mix. That way Buchanan becomes the emergency starter while the others polish their skills and work on extending their durability.

At the end of the day I believe if they can start to go in-house for their main resource and it is a reliable resource we all would be satisfied.

Another option is what they did with getting Arrieta but they are not in fire sale mode where they are looking at selling rentals.

 

[Raskolnikov]

The Pitchers will have to come off the books.

The Cubs have to decide on the core. Is Arrieta core? I think he is because he will outlast Lester physically, and Lackey. His stuff is better than Hendricks and I would trust him more going forward.

Rizzo
Bryant
Schwarber
Russell
Arrieta
Baez
Hendricks
Contreras
Davis...

Heyward by contract

is the "core" order I would select and build around as best you can with funds available. As Ommy said, next year "core" and dynasty don't matter. Just don't make Heyward type moves that jeopardize the future core. He is a problem, because they picked him into the core, but he shouldn't be. Can he be shipped? Next year it doesn't matter, but Lester/Lackey/Heyward/Zobrist are going to have to come off the books as young core guys get contracts eventually. We are probably talking about problems arising in the seocnd half of a dynasty's decade.

I can't recall a team this good being assembled so young with this many possibilities ahead. But if you look at the history of championships, I would not get rid of the middle defense, Baez and Russell. Just ride that. Center fielders can be found, or Heyward. The middle defense is amazing. That middle defense is a hallmark of several past championship level teams.

Also...having 2 big bats like Ramirez and Ortiz. But 3 is a magic elevator. So Schwarber/Bryant/Rizzo have to stay, which should in a salary cap league effect pitching just a little, but basically Epstein is going to be dealing from those core 5 players and probably Arrieta/Hendricks/Davis

Contreras would be kept on most teams, and might be a 6th core fielder. Plus Heyward. But see.....you just can't have 9 core fielders, 4 core starters, and a full bullpen, can you?

Lets revisit in 2 years, the only thing that matter now is the question of Arrieta, and if you are given an opportunity by someone to move Heyward you do it. Or Schwarber if you are given the entire world by an AL team and put him where he belongs in baseball.

But you would think that can wait until the team salary is unmanagable, not projected 8 under.

 

[CSF77]

Think it's more about just giving young pitching a chance. I'm sure that plays into matters but ultimately you're not finding people long term if you just keep plugging 30+ year olds in.

Little of both. I believe they were looking at relocating resource into the BP vs spending again on a guy that disappears after the ASG.

 

[CSF77]

The Pitchers will have to come off the books.

The Cubs have to decide on the core. Is Arrieta core? I think he is because he will outlast Lester physically, and Lackey. His stuff is better than Hendricks and I would trust him more going forward.

Rizzo
Bryant
Schwarber
Russell
Arrieta
Baez
Hendricks
Contreras
Davis...

Heyward by contract

is the "core" order I would select and build around as best you can with funds available. As Ommy said, next year "core" and dynasty don't matter. Just don't make Heyward type moves that jeopardize the future core. He is a problem, because they picked him into the core, but he shouldn't be. Can he be shipped? Next year it doesn't matter, but Lester/Lackey/Heyward/Zobrist are going to have to come off the books as young core guys get contracts eventually. We are probably talking about problems arising in the seocnd half of a dynasty's decade.

I can't recall a team this good being assembled so young with this many possibilities ahead. But if you look at the history of championships, I would not get rid of the middle defense, Baez and Russell. Just ride that. Center fielders can be found, or Heyward. The middle defense is amazing. That middle defense is a hallmark of several past championship level teams.

Also...having 2 big bats like Ramirez and Ortiz. But 3 is a magic elevator. So Schwarber/Bryant/Rizzo have to stay, which should in a salary cap league effect pitching just a little, but basically Epstein is going to be dealing from those core 5 players and probably Arrieta/Hendricks/Davis

Contreras would be kept on most teams, and might be a 6th core fielder. Plus Heyward. But see.....you just can't have 9 core fielders, 4 core starters, and a full bullpen, can you?

Lets revisit in 2 years, the only thing that matter now is the question of Arrieta, and if you are given an opportunity by someone to move Heyward you do it. Or Schwarber if you are given the entire world by an AL team and put him where he belongs in baseball.

But you would think that can wait until the team salary is unmanagable, not projected 8 under.

The best way of balancing payroll is keeping a high quality farm system.

 

[chibears55]

Who's the backup catcher if they trade Montero? Don't say Schwarber.

@ CSF, I doubt very much Cubs re-sign Bryant. I love the guy but he's going to ask for a 10 year deal worth more than $300 million. Cubs could trade him a couple years before and probably get the biggest prospect haul in MLB history to rebuild their farm.

If they trade Montero, my guess is they sign Saltamachia

Sent from my LG-V495 using Tapatalk

 

[chibears55]

. The Cubs have a plethora of players they would trade before Bryant.

Like Schwarber...
I think he'll be traded next off season


Sent from my LG-V495 using Tapatalk

 

[chibears55]

Why next season? If they wanted to trade Schwarber, they could do it now and get anyone they want.

Not really....

Gotta remember, despite being able to hit some in WS..
Still don't know how he'll do running around in OF everyday post injury.

Plus

Despite having a very high ceiling, he is still an unknown on the MLB level..

Yes we seen him have a good playoff last year and 4 games this year in WS..
But
Remember he only has about a half season of MLB under his belt in which he struggled some the last month of it.

All I'm saying is sure teams would love to have him but IMO
I don't think theyd be willing to give up what the Cubs would want right now for him, which is young controlled pitching.

At least in my mind, if I'm the team giving up young pitching
Id want to be sure the guy I'm getting can do what everyone thinks he can do for a full season and id also like to see him play the field first and make sure he is healthy.

Why I think one of the reason they wait til next off season.


Sent from my LG-V495 using Tapatalk

 

[chibears55]

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. I'll concede that if the Cubs have a deal lined up for someone like Archer, then trading Jake is obvious. What I simply don't agree with is trading Jake for a couple mid level prospects in order to build our farm. We're trying to repeat right now and I want the Cubs to go for the repeat with all their strength and might even if that means Jake walks for nothing at the end of 2017.

In some of your posts, I feel like you're too concerned with the future and not enough about there present which I don't quite understand.

I thought they would look to deal him in a package this off-season for both an under 30 starter they could plug in rotation now and a future arm.
But I'm guessing now that maybe
their considering trying to make a deal with him that would satisfy both side
Or
They feel they can get a better return for him if they waited til deadline to deal him..
But
Of course, they would have to make sure they have an equal or better replacement before dealing him because I'm sure they will be on another playoff run.


Sent from my LG-V495 using Tapatalk

 

[beckdawg]

What I simply don't agree with is trading Jake for a couple mid level prospects in order to build our farm. In some of your posts, I feel like you're too concerned with the future and not enough about there present which I don't quite understand.

You're not getting a couple of mid level prospects for Arrieta. You've seen what Sale returned. At a minimum you're talking about 2 top 100 prospects for Arrieta and likely one of those being top 50. Half a season of David Price returned detroit Jairo Labourt, Matt Boyd and Daniel Norris. Norris was a top 20 prospect on several lists. Labourt is detroits #13 prospect and Boyd more of a possible mid rotation starter than a top end guy but still useful. And I would argue that the market this year is more valuable than that year.

As for future vs present, I don't see it that way. My view is that Arrieta largely doesn't make as much difference in the cubs chances vs some of the possible alternatives. Obviously if he pitches in the same manner he did in 2015 then he would be a huge difference. But the thing is he had a 3.69 ERA in the second half of last season and he clearly struggled with his command even in the first half when he was better in terms of ERA. If that's the player you're getting next season are you really that much worse off trading for a cheap Smyly(or equivalent player)? And even if Arrieta is closer to 2015, I don't really think he makes much of a difference until the playoffs because I honestly think he's irrelevant in terms of them making the playoffs. Odds are probably around 80% they make the playoffs with or without him going into the season.

As for the playoffs, think the part you're missing here is that I'm not saying you should deal Arrieta for prospects and call it a day. In fact, quite the opposite. In my view, the 2 top 100 prospects you get for Arrieta make it easier to go after someone like Archer. Maybe that is this offseason. Maybe that is at the following trade deadline. The point is they give you options you don't have if Arrieta walks after 2017. And it's a very real possibility the cubs could get pitching in AAA for Arrieta. For example, I think right now Houston would strongly consider an Arrieta for Francis Martes and David Paulino swap(plus minor pieces as well). They were rumored to want Sale/Quintana but were unwilling to meet the demand of either Bergman and/or Springer. However, Martes and Paulino while good prospects aren't really sacrificing the core of their 2017 team in the same way Bergman/Springer would. Maybe you dangle them in a trade offer or maybe you keep them but they are close enough to the majors where they might actually provide you some impact by midseason and both have a ceiling as frontline starters.

Regardless, if the cubs can simply re-sign Arrieta that would probably be my first choice as it's the less complicated move. However, if that was going to happen I honestly think it would have already happened. And if they can't re-sign him I don't see any way you can let him walk for minimal compensation. Dealing him allows you to position yourself for the next move and add depth in an area they lack which is upper minors pitching. I'm honestly comfortable with Lester, Hendricks, and Lackey as #1, #2, and #3 so long as they get a younger guy with upside to slot into the #4 slot. Worst case scenario is your #4 and #5 guys are fairly weak and you look to deal for a starter at the trade deadline but the cubs are going to be in that position regardless of them keeping Arrieta anyways.

 

[CSF77]

You're not getting a couple of mid level prospects for Arrieta. You've seen what Sale returned. At a minimum you're talking about 2 top 100 prospects for Arrieta and likely one of those being top 50. Half a season of David Price returned detroit Jairo Labourt, Matt Boyd and Daniel Norris. Norris was a top 20 prospect on several lists. Labourt is detroits #13 prospect and Boyd more of a possible mid rotation starter than a top end guy but still useful. And I would argue that the market this year is more valuable than that year.

As for future vs present, I don't see it that way. My view is that Arrieta largely doesn't make as much difference in the cubs chances vs some of the possible alternatives. Obviously if he pitches in the same manner he did in 2015 then he would be a huge difference. But the thing is he had a 3.69 ERA in the second half of last season and he clearly struggled with his command even in the first half when he was better in terms of ERA. If that's the player you're getting next season are you really that much worse off trading for a cheap Smyly(or equivalent player)? And even if Arrieta is closer to 2015, I don't really think he makes much of a difference until the playoffs because I honestly think he's irrelevant in terms of them making the playoffs. Odds are probably around 80% they make the playoffs with or without him going into the season.

As for the playoffs, think the part you're missing here is that I'm not saying you should deal Arrieta for prospects and call it a day. In fact, quite the opposite. In my view, the 2 top 100 prospects you get for Arrieta make it easier to go after someone like Archer. Maybe that is this offseason. Maybe that is at the following trade deadline. The point is they give you options you don't have if Arrieta walks after 2017. And it's a very real possibility the cubs could get pitching in AAA for Arrieta. For example, I think right now Houston would strongly consider an Arrieta for Francis Martes and David Paulino swap(plus minor pieces as well). They were rumored to want Sale/Quintana but were unwilling to meet the demand of either Bergman and/or Springer. However, Martes and Paulino while good prospects aren't really sacrificing the core of their 2017 team in the same way Bergman/Springer would. Maybe you dangle them in a trade offer or maybe you keep them but they are close enough to the majors where they might actually provide you some impact by midseason and both have a ceiling as frontline starters.

Regardless, if the cubs can simply re-sign Arrieta that would probably be my first choice as it's the less complicated move. However, if that was going to happen I honestly think it would have already happened. And if they can't re-sign him I don't see any way you can let him walk for minimal compensation. Dealing him allows you to position yourself for the next move and add depth in an area they lack which is upper minors pitching. I'm honestly comfortable with Lester, Hendricks, and Lackey as #1, #2, and #3 so long as they get a younger guy with upside to slot into the #4 slot. Worst case scenario is your #4 and #5 guys are fairly weak and you look to deal for a starter at the trade deadline but the cubs are going to be in that position regardless of them keeping Arrieta anyways.

If they traded Jake for 2 top 100 players then flipped both and 2-3 guys to the Rays for Archer it would be the way to go.

I would go status que if not. If they can come to a mutual deal with Boras then move that direction. If not then let the season dictate their choices. They drop out then sell. They are in it then hold the rudder and let the pieces fall where they will.