Offseason rumors/discussion thread

[zack54attack]

Parkins and Spiegs actually brought up tampering about an hour or so ago on their show while breaking down Machado/Harper

 

[anotheridiot]

Tewksbury hired to handle Darvish..lol

They said Tewks has worked with Lester and Rizzo in the past, but yeah, Chatwood and Darvish lol.

I just found it interesting how he worded it, made it sound like Joe had no say in it.

 

[CSF77]

The lack of movement on Harper, or even updates on active negotiations at this point, is so surprising to me. Beginning to feel like this is a sham bidding process and he's really just waiting for his preferred suitor to clear space. If he was going to sign in Philly or LA, what's the holdup? There doesn't appear to be a bidding war going on.

I've heard that the Nat's are not out on Harper. The owner has talked to Harper 5 times over the offseason.
Phillies most expect to make the biggest offers to both.

W.Sox I pretty sure are more on Manny right now over Harper. With NYY signing Trulo to fill SS I'm pretty sure that the Sox have become the fav on Manny right now. The real question is if they go 300M worth though. I can't see why not. 10 year off for a 26 YO is not stupid at all.

 

[fatbeard]

I've heard that the Nat's are not out on Harper. The owner has talked to Harper 5 times over the offseason.
Phillies most expect to make the biggest offers to both.

W.Sox I pretty sure are more on Manny right now over Harper. With NYY signing Trulo to fill SS I'm pretty sure that the Sox have become the fav on Manny right now. The real question is if they go 300M worth though. I can't see why not. 10 year off for a 26 YO is not stupid at all.

I think there's a 0% chance Harper wants to spend the rest of his career in either Philadelphia or DC. He'll end up in LA, Chicago, or NY. NY appears to be out of the running, LA isn't getting any traction despite clearing the decks, so that leaves Chicago, but contracts have to move for that to happen. It would explain the slow pace of negotiations.

 

[Castor76]

I think there's a 0% chance Harper wants to spend the rest of his career in either Philadelphia or DC. He'll end up in LA, Chicago, or NY. NY appears to be out of the running, LA isn't getting any traction despite clearing the decks, so that leaves Chicago, but contracts have to move for that to happen. It would explain the slow pace of negotiations.

Contracts don't have to move. We, as a fanbase, can want them to move, but there's no hard line in baseball.

Cincy has been making moves and still needs a CF. I wonder if the Cubs could move Heyward there with the idea of him being that for them. Probably not, but one never knows until you ask.

 

[Castor76]

I also wonder if Haprer might not go the one year route just to have more teams in the possible mix next season.

 

[fatbeard]

Contracts don't have to move. We, as a fanbase, can want them to move, but there's no hard line in baseball.

Every bit of reporting indicates the Cubs are not willing to add $30mil more to their payroll without subsequent offsets, even if they are financially capable of doing it. That was my point.

 

[Castor76]

Every bit of reporting indicates the Cubs are not willing to add $30mil more to their payroll without subsequent offsets, even if they are financially capable of doing it. That was my point.

I know, but it's just the idea of that it can't happen otherwise. It's not the NFL with a hard cap. It's simply a team not wanting to spend the money. This isn't to blame them for that. It's just that the Cubs could sign Harper and then work on unloading contracts. It's riskier, but still possible.

 

[fatbeard]

I know, but it's just the idea of that it can't happen otherwise. It's not the NFL with a hard cap. It's simply a team not wanting to spend the money. This isn't to blame them for that. It's just that the Cubs could sign Harper and then work on unloading contracts. It's riskier, but still possible.

Signing a contract you can't afford and then being forced to offload salary in response is a damn good way to guarantee you'll have no leverage in those negotiations.

 

[Castor76]

Signing a contract you can't afford and then being forced to offload salary in response is a damn good way to guarantee you'll have no leverage in those negotiations.

As opposed to everyone knowing why you're trying to make deals before attempting to sign a guy? It's the same thing.

 

[fatbeard]

As opposed to everyone knowing why you're trying to make deals before attempting to sign a guy? It's the same thing.

"Attempting to sign a guy" and "actually being on the hook for $300-$350mil you can't afford" are not, in fact, the same thing.

 

[Castor76]

"Attempting to sign a guy" and "actually being on the hook for $300-$350mil you can't afford" are not, in fact, the same thing.

You're reason for making the trade is.

 

[Castor76]

Are you really thinking any MLB front office would get a call from the Cubs asking what they'd offer for Heyward or Chatwood wouldn't immediately think, "The Cubs must be getting ready to move on Haprer."?

 

[fatbeard]

Are you really thinking any MLB front office would get a call from the Cubs asking what they'd offer for Heyward or Chatwood wouldn't immediately think, "The Cubs must be getting ready to move on Haprer."?

Of course they would think that. And the Cubs still have the option of not signing Harper and not moving the contracts necessary to do so. Therein lies the difference in leverage.

It's the difference between telling your boss you want a raise or you "might look elsewhere" and walking into his office with an offer letter from a competitor and telling him to match it or you walk. Try it, and see which one gets you the raise.

 

[Castor76]

That's a bad analogy because you didn't include to option of not asking for a raise, which would be the Cubs just standing pat. If the Cubs at any point "ask for the raise," the boss knows why they're asking and what they're hoping for so they don't have the "letter in hand" regardless of when they might make the trade.

 

[Goose22]

I happen to believe if you went with a Almora and Zobrist swapping back and forth from Lead Off and the #6 slot, they could be very effective.

IMHO...this is the best option the Cubs currently have and will probably be the best option they will have come opening day, provided Joe can put the puzzle pieces together of RHP/LHP matchups, days off for both players to coincide with those matchups, and both players stay healthy throughout the year. With the Cubs being as cash strapped as they are right now, I really don't see any other option...other than Joe committing to Rizzo to be the lead off 90% of the days he plays...which I am not sure is a good option???

 

[CSF77]

Cubs don’t have holes in their team to justify going over 246. This is pure want Vs need driven.

Upgrading Heyward to Harper is fine if 100% of the contract is removed. If they move Heyward and then take back another deal that fills a missing need that is fine also. Not as ideal but why not.

Moving nothing and adding contract is dumb. That handcuffs you from retaining Bryant. Bryant > Harper. It is simple as that.

 

[CSF77]

As far as the other teams go:

NYY must not feel like they need to go there with signing Trulo.
Phillies must feel that they would end up as a fall back plan and covered them selves early.

 

[Castor76]

Cubs don’t have holes in their team to justify going over 246. This is pure want Vs need driven.

Upgrading Heyward to Harper is fine if 100% of the contract is removed. If they move Heyward and then take back another deal that fills a missing need that is fine also. Not as ideal but why not.

Moving nothing and adding contract is dumb. That handcuffs you from retaining Bryant. Bryant > Harper. It is simple as that.

Agree with the want versus need, but you're conflating deterrent for restriction. The only restriction is the 25 and 40 man roster. A team can spend 300 million a season on base payroll if they want to. Reality is draft picks in baseball are fairly worthless. The average 1st or 2nd round pick will spend 2 years at least in the minors. The real key is player development once you have them and getting lucky in later rounds so you have a crop sooner than expected along with hitting a few Free Agents.

 

[CSF77]

Agree with the want versus need, but you're conflating deterrent for restriction. The only restriction is the 25 and 40 man roster. A team can spend 300 million a season on base payroll if they want to. Reality is draft picks in baseball are fairly worthless. The average 1st or 2nd round pick will spend 2 years at least in the minors. The real key is player development once you have them and getting lucky in later rounds so you have a crop sooner than expected along with hitting a few Free Agents.

Seems Nats just went over on their last offer. Now well over 300M. Sox offer to Manny is closer to 200.

I take this as Was was not going to let Philly get Brice. Manny IMO has not seen a offer near 300. If he did then the Sox wouldn’t have lowballed their offer.

I just don’t see Brice in a Cub uni