Offseason rumors/discussion thread

Castor76 · Mar 1, 2019

CSF77 said:
Getting rid of that would be worth a time clock on pitching. That would be a fair CBA trade off.

I also think it's as much a big market versus small market fight.

TL1961 · Mar 1, 2019

anotheridiot said:
But if you are a top team and end up with your first round pick being 25 or later every year, its basically a compensatory pick anyway. Its not like a top 5 guy is not being chosen.

Football is different, because most of the top 90 players picked in the draft are actually on a professional roster, but the bears gave up two first round picks to get Mack, and its not like they are going to be franchise changing players like if they are top 5 picks. (yes, there are cases like Eddie Jackson who would have been there if not for a serious injury that you pick up later) but there are still the few like Tom Brady and Russell wilson , or Mookie Betts in this conversation that was a 5th round pick that can throw it all out of balance. But that is why you invest millions in scouting.

You act as though there is no difference between having a 1st rounder and not having a first rounder because "it's like a compensatory pick".

That has no bearing. It's a player you don't otherwise have. And we haven't had a compensatory pick in forever, so it doesn't help to just throw that out there.

TL1961 · Mar 1, 2019

Castor76 said:
It becomes nothing because the bust rate is so high, especially in the latter part of the first round. It's part of my argument with being afraid of the 10 spot drop for CBT penalty. There's a higher chance of success for picks 31-40 versus 21-30. If you're signing a Type-A free agent, you're supposed to be getting a proven MLB talent. You might overpay versus what production you get, but you're buying known product.

The Houston Astros won the 2017 WS and are still a top team due to the players they got by acquiring draft picks. There is no argument you can make regarding draft picks meaning nothing that will make sense.

Castor76 · Mar 1, 2019

TL1961 said:
The Houston Astros won the 2017 WS and are still a top team due to the players they got by acquiring draft picks. There is no argument you can make regarding draft picks meaning nothing that will make sense.

And the Cubs won the 2016 WS and are still top team despite not having a highly rated farm system. The Cubs lack of a farm system isn't due to them losing their top pick because they signed a bunch of Type A FAs, it's because they traded away their top prospects to acquire MLB ready talent.

It'll be interesting to see what Houston does this year since they didn't repeat last year and 3 of their 5 starters are in their walk years.

CubsFaninMN · Mar 1, 2019

Picks you get in the draft from a team who signs a guy you made a QO to at the end of the last season aren't always even first round picks. The pick the Cubs got from the Phillies for Arietta was from the compensation round at the end of the second round. Why? Because Philly had already signed someone else's QO-offered FA, and owed that team the pick from the first-round compensation round.

The whole qualifying offer thing needs to go away, I think. If you want to keep a guy heading into free agency, either negotiate an extension with him, or make him an offer in FA that's better than the other teams will offer. All the QO is doing is making it so teams can say "either you stay with us at less than what you'll get in FA, or we'll make it such that more than half the teams in the league will stamp you NO WAY because they'll have to give something up to sign you." Basically, **** you if you don't do what we tell you and accept what we offer.

For the three or four top FA's a year, the QO makes no difference. In most other cases, it limits the market for the given FA. Sometimes enough to have to take less than their perceived value if they don't want to either sit out or retire. And, face it, you're not going to give a QO to a guy who's about to retire.

What was the QO supposed to accomplish, anyway? To apply pressure on potential FAs who won't agree to extensions to shut up and take what they're offered?

-Doug

beckdawg · Mar 2, 2019

The point of the QO isn't really about players. It's to reward essentially small market teams who can't afford to keep their FA's. What I don't really get though is why they set it up such that the team signing the player pays a pick. Like... you could just essentially do what the NFL does where if you lose a good player you're granted a pick but the other team doesn't lose anything.

All that being said, I don't really like the way the MLB handles the draft in general. Trading picks should be allowed. Competitive balance picks are kinda bullshit. And obviously the QO system is weird. However the biggest issue is the players association doesn't give a shit about fixing that because they don't care about amateurs

CSF77 · Mar 2, 2019

anotheridiot said:
It was pretty simple to me, get Harper and lose Bryant, Rizzo or Baez, possibly 2/3. I guess our cub fans are not to attached to them since we should have position players set for the next 5 years, but somehow they want them to be replaced for a bigger name.

Cubs can support 4 players on mega deals at the same time as long as they have a quality farm producing cheaper supporting.

4×30Mil =120 Mil. Cubs can afford that. #1 and 2 pitcher and 2'top end hitters. That leaves 80 mil to push a roster. 10 on min deals 5 M. 75 M to spend on 11 mid tier arb cases.

It is honestly doable and that is a 200M team. Cubs are 20-30M over that even.

I feel the main problem is they are adding depth that should be supplied by the farm taking away from that impact 2nd hitter.

CSF77 · Mar 2, 2019

It is also my problem with inking Heyward to that much. I get it if he is hitting 30+ hr every year. He never has. It was a bad investment

anotheridiot · Mar 2, 2019

TL1961 said:
You act as though there is no difference between having a 1st rounder and not having a first rounder because "it's like a compensatory pick".

That has no bearing. It's a player you don't otherwise have. And we haven't had a compensatory pick in forever, so it doesn't help to just throw that out there.

You claimed bust rate was 50%, so thats 15 players out of the top 30, I would think that by the time you get to the end of the first round, your percentages drop drastically. The point was, if you truly have a need, and you go out and get that need, losing the 25-28th or bottom five pick in the draft is not as bad as losing a top 5 pick when maybe 1 of those last 5 will ever play in MLB.

NFL guys have been looking for the next Brady, 180 whatever pick in the draft, when MLB teams are looking for the next 172nd choice in the draft in Mookie Betts. As big as they make the international pool of free agents ten years ago when there were only a few teams with a presence in the dominican when they were choosing guys who had barely played organized baseball and were just full of raw talent. If you are a top team, and other teams are taking best players available, its not that big of a deal.

Castor76 · Mar 2, 2019

anotheridiot said:
You claimed bust rate was 50%, so thats 15 players out of the top 30, I would think that by the time you get to the end of the first round, your percentages drop drastically. The point was, if you truly have a need, and you go out and get that need, losing the 25-28th or bottom five pick in the draft is not as bad as losing a top 5 pick when maybe 1 of those last 5 will ever play in MLB.

NFL guys have been looking for the next Brady, 180 whatever pick in the draft, when MLB teams are looking for the next 172nd choice in the draft in Mookie Betts. As big as they make the international pool of free agents ten years ago when there were only a few teams with a presence in the dominican when they were choosing guys who had barely played organized baseball and were just full of raw talent. If you are a top team, and other teams are taking best players available, its not that big of a deal.

To be fair, I was the one who put out the 50% number. I used this as my source. https://community.fangraphs.com/success-rate-of-mlb-first-round-draft-picks-by-slot/

TL1961 · Mar 2, 2019

Castor76 said:
It becomes nothing because the bust rate is so high, especially in the latter part of the first round. It's part of my argument with being afraid of the 10 spot drop for CBT penalty. There's a higher chance of success for picks 31-40 versus 21-30. If you're signing a Type-A free agent, you're supposed to be getting a proven MLB talent. You might overpay versus what production you get, but you're buying known product.

No.

That makes no sense.

We are watching teams tank to get high picks, and we have seen teams have success with it. And at that same time, you are suggesting it doesn't matter if you get high picks. We have 4 regulars on our team, including an MVP and a player who was 2nd in MVP voting who were drafted with high picks. We have tow more young regulars who have played a ton who were top 10 picks. One of our starters was top 20.

Picks matter.

TL1961 · Mar 2, 2019

Castor76 said:
And the Cubs won the 2016 WS and are still top team despite not having a highly rated farm system. The Cubs lack of a farm system isn't due to them losing their top pick because they signed a bunch of Type A FAs, it's because they traded away their top prospects to acquire MLB ready talent.

It'll be interesting to see what Houston does this year since they didn't repeat last year and 3 of their 5 starters are in their walk years.

The Cubs farm system rating went down primarily because they promoted several guys to the majors: Baez, Bryant, Schwarber, Happ, Contreras - all of whom are with the team and under contract for years.

Castor76 · Mar 3, 2019

TL1961 said:
No.

That makes no sense.

We are watching teams tank to get high picks, and we have seen teams have success with it. And at that same time, you are suggesting it doesn't matter if you get high picks. We have 4 regulars on our team, including an MVP and a player who was 2nd in MVP voting who were drafted with high picks. We have tow more young regulars who have played a ton who were top 10 picks. One of our starters was top 20.

Picks matter.

If you get HIGH picks. Picks in the latter 20s don't matter that much, which is what we're talking about giving up with respect to Harper. What matters much more is identifying and developing players.

Castor76 · Mar 3, 2019

TL1961 said:
The Cubs farm system rating went down primarily because they promoted several guys to the majors: Baez, Bryant, Schwarber, Happ, Contreras - all of whom are with the team and under contract for years.

And the Cubs have been drafting players in the years and trading some away for former and current players. HOU traded for both Verlander and Cole. Guess what both will be after this season. Does Houston trade more away to keep their window open or hope they can either re-sign or replace those two?

The numbers don't lie. If you have 5 Top 10 picks in a row, chances are 2 or 3 will be studs but the others will blow. But you have 5 25-30 picks and maybe one is a stud, one is okay, and 3 suck.

I personally hate the idea of having to forfeit a pick to sign a player, but those are the current rules. History tells you not to let it stop you from signing a guy if you're in a position to compete for a WS.

Philly just said "Let's win now." SD is saying, "Look look out because we'll be dangerous maybe even next year." Or they bought a shiny toy to keep fans happy for a couple of seasons.

anotheridiot · Mar 3, 2019

TL1961 said:
The Cubs farm system rating went down primarily because they promoted several guys to the majors: Baez, Bryant, Schwarber, Happ, Contreras - all of whom are with the team and under contract for years.

This excuse is getting old. Its not like any of them were just promoted last year.

Its what could have been but they deal these guys like Eloy and Cease away. Hell, even the Gleybor trade has been 3 years ago and passed its statute of limitations.

chibears55 · Mar 3, 2019

Between 2010 and 2015 the cubs had 8 1st Rd picks (3 in 2012) and of the 8 , 5 all hitters are on major league roster.
3 who aren't are pitchers

2016 they had no pick

2017 Brendon Little pitcher struggling in A ball

2018 Nico Hoerner hitter could be up late this year or next year

So yes their a little behind in the minor league system because of no 1st rd pick in 2016 and a pitcher in 2017, plus their main focus in 2nd rd and higher has been pitching the last couple years with the better ones being in their lower system now

DanTown · Mar 3, 2019

How many teams have a top farm system within five years of seeing a ton of promotions and while the team is winning at a high level and signing players that cost draft picks?

It’s pretty clear that the Cubs have been drafting for depth with their “high” picks and trying to get guys to fill out the back of the rotation cheaply. Pitchers (where the Cubs have an obvious need) are close to impossible to predict. Who breaks down? Who doesn’t have it mentally? Who struggles mechanically? The Cubs know this and are using the draft to help a contending team and do not seem to be drafting for talent or else they wouldn’t have been so in love with college starters.

TL1961 · Mar 3, 2019

Ahhhh, the offseason.

Reading coverage of the Cubs and I am happy to see that Yu Darvish has corrected all his issues, Willson Contreras has perfected his worst in MLB framing and his power issues, Kyle Schwarber has made an adjustment to his stance that will correct all his issues at the plate......

162-0?