Offseason rumors/discussion thread

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,358
Liked Posts:
2,800
Location:
San Diego
Ideal as is:

Almora
Heyward
Bryant
Rizzo
Baez
Zobrist
Schwarber
Contreras

Almora had his most success there and Heyward would be when he is hot then swap with Zo. Play the hot hand.

But in general static
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,358
Liked Posts:
2,800
Location:
San Diego
Baez is a RBI bat. His baserunning is useful anywhere in the line up. If they were gearing speed then trade for Billy Hamilton.
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
Joined:
Jun 10, 2010
Posts:
9,479
Liked Posts:
6,857
Location:
Western Burbs
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Baez is a terrible option IMO. The type of batter you want for a lead off hitter is someone with a good OBP. Even in an MVP caliber year Baez's OBP was .326. League average for non-pitchers is .323. So, when I say he's not a good OBP I mean it. More to the point, Baez doesn't see pitches. He was really low in pitches per plate appearance. You typically want guys at the top of the order high in those numbers as it gets to a teams bullpen faster. When Baez has hit lead off in his career he's hit .302/.311/.558. that's only 46 PAs but it's not a particularly well suited triple slash for a lead off hitter. The power is nice but you don't really want power out of your lead off hitter. You want power behind guys who get on base. The batting average is nice but because he so rarely walks it isn't really doing all that much good because he's still well below average at getting on base.

IMO Baez should be batting 4th or 5th on a typical team and possibly 6th on a really good offensive team. I've said this before but the way I view hitters like him is you put them as the last big bat behind your OBP guys. I don't think you want him particularly high like the 2 or 3 hole because his OBP limits the damage the guys behind him can do. The ideal scenario for him is a bunch of guys get on and he's up with a chance to either homer or put the ball into play though I would caveat that by saying given his K rate that's why I'd make him the last of your big sluggers hence talking about him hitting 5th/6th.

As a contrast example here, take Schwarber. Schwarber also has a high k rate. But he has the 6th best walk rate in baseball and because of that has a much better OBP. Unlike Baez who largely used a high batting average to inflate his low walk rate in terms of OBP, Schwarber has been the opposite. He doesn't hit well for average thus far but because he walks he's still good at getting on base. Guys like Schwarber IMO should be in front of RBI guys who are higher average where as guys like Baez should be after guys like Schwarber because they can get hits to drive people in.

Yeah, that would be wasting Baez. But to be honest, they haven't tried anyone at leadoff that I thought would be a long term answer....Fowler spoiled us. Switch hitter, the right position, took walks and hit the occasional long ball....he was the right guy at the right time. What's he, like 32 now....that's not that old. He's not well received in Cardinal land, big contract and not living up to it in production. You think the Cards would swap a bad contract for a bad contract....Heyward for Fowler straight up?
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,740
Liked Posts:
3,739
Yeah, that would be wasting Baez. But to be honest, they haven't tried anyone at leadoff that I thought would be a long term answer....Fowler spoiled us. Switch hitter, the right position, took walks and hit the occasional long ball....he was the right guy at the right time. What's he, like 32 now....that's not that old. He's not well received in Cardinal land, big contract and not living up to it in production. You think the Cards would swap a bad contract for a bad contract....Heyward for Fowler straight up?

My idea previously was Chatwood for Fowler. I don't think you can deal heyward and I don't think the cardinals want another OF anyways.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,358
Liked Posts:
2,800
Location:
San Diego
I would take “that might be the right swap” for 400
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
Joined:
Jun 10, 2010
Posts:
9,479
Liked Posts:
6,857
Location:
Western Burbs
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
My idea previously was Chatwood for Fowler. I don't think you can deal heyward and I don't think the cardinals want another OF anyways.

At first look...one would say what?!!?!! Why would they want a pitcher who is virtually useless? But to save around $25 million over the next 3 yrs and get out from under Chatwood's bad deal a year earlier than Fowler's....it might have some legs.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,740
Liked Posts:
3,739
At first look...one would say what?!!?!! Why would they want a pitcher who is virtually useless? But to save around $25 million over the next 3 yrs and get out from under Chatwood's bad deal a year earlier than Fowler's....it might have some legs.

Well that and the fact that Chatwood while not a great asset right now is far more usable to them. You look at all the pitching injuries they've had and at worst he'd be depth. I don't personally love the idea of Fowler at the cost he's making but the same is true for the cubs. They don't have use for another starter. And Fowler checks a few boxes of things they might actually need.

Plus, if you're dealing with your main division rival you're not doing it if it helps them. I don't think either team would really be "happy" with the guy they are getting. It's just that both cases would be better than the alternative. Plus I'm not certain but I believe Fowler has 10/5 rights if not a NTC and we know he liked his time here especially after the front office defended him when mattheny had called him out midseason. So, that would give him a bit of leverage to pick where he goes.
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
Joined:
Jun 10, 2010
Posts:
9,479
Liked Posts:
6,857
Location:
Western Burbs
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Well that and the fact that Chatwood while not a great asset right now is far more usable to them. You look at all the pitching injuries they've had and at worst he'd be depth. I don't personally love the idea of Fowler at the cost he's making but the same is true for the cubs. They don't have use for another starter. And Fowler checks a few boxes of things they might actually need.

Plus, if you're dealing with your main division rival you're not doing it if it helps them. I don't think either team would really be "happy" with the guy they are getting. It's just that both cases would be better than the alternative. Plus I'm not certain but I believe Fowler has 10/5 rights if not a NTC and we know he liked his time here especially after the front office defended him when mattheny had called him out midseason. So, that would give him a bit of leverage to pick where he goes.

I'd be surprised if he didn't want to return....you always want to come back to a place you were successful and comfortable.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,358
Liked Posts:
2,800
Location:
San Diego
I’m pretty sure if Jed talks to the Cards on that deal it could get pulled.

To be honest here 100%. Joe views Almora as a 4th.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,358
Liked Posts:
2,800
Location:
San Diego
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/10/offseason-outlook-chicago-cubs-9.html

Some bits:

Willson Contreras will continue to handle primary catching duties. Contreras, 27 in May, had an argument to be considered the best-hitting catcher in baseball over the period stretching from his June 2016 debut until this year’s trade deadline. Then, from August 2nd onward, he hit .169/.263/.232 with one home run in 160 plate appearances. He went from regularly serving as the Cubs’ #4 or 5 hitter to hitting seventh or eighth most days. Contreras’ collapse is one damning data point for now-former Cubs hitting coach Chili Davis. Getting Contreras back to his established 120 wRC+ level would be a big boost to the 2019 offense. Contreras caught a career-high 1109 2/3 innings in 2018 and would likely benefit from a quality veteran backup. After a strong season in which he made 83 starts for the Braves, free agent Kurt Suzuki might not accept a diminished role, but he’s the type of player the Cubs should target.

I'm kinda in agreement here.

Epstein has gone big game hunting many times for both the Cubs and Red Sox, and figures to be firmly in the mix for Harper or Machado. Which player is the better fit? My vote is for Harper, who has a higher offensive ceiling than Machado and as a left-handed batter breaks up the Cubs’ core of right-handed hitters (Bryant, Baez, and Contreras). Cubs fans can salivate at the prospect of a Murderer’s Row of Bryant, Harper, Baez, Rizzo, and Contreras. Harper would take over as the team’s regular right fielder, pushing Heyward to center and possibly a young outfielder off the roster, which we’ll discuss later.

I've thought this also:

Fans can also dream on a Machado-Baez middle infield combination, although Baez may actually be the superior shortstop. Signing Machado seems to create an inefficiency – pushing Baez back to second, or pushing Bryant to left field. That is, unless Machado is willing to sign under the same conditions most current Cubs position players have, where all but Rizzo, Contreras, and Albert Almora bounce around to multiple positions. I think the Cubs are better-served with Harper in right field and a Heyward-Almora platoon in center.

Almora might be wasted on the short side of a platoon, however, and the Cubs will likely consider trading him under certain scenarios. Likewise, Kyle Schwarber and Ian Happ face the possibility of a trade, particularly if the Cubs acquire a starting outfielder. Schwarber, 26 in March, quieted the talk of his left field defense as a liability. However, he proved powerless against left-handed pitching and was limited to seeing southpaws only 18% of the time under Maddon. There could be another gear for Schwarber if he starts hitting lefties, but as always, Maddon is reluctant to give him that full opportunity on a contending club.

Happ, a 24-year-old switch-hitter, played all three outfield positions and third base this year. Strikeouts were up and power was down in his sophomore season, and he too was unable to hit lefties. Though he’s technically more versatile than Schwarber, Happ seems position-less. He spent more time in center field than any other position (403 2/3 innings) despite being the team’s third-best center fielder. The Cubs limited his time in the infield this year. Schwarber is arbitration eligible for the first time this winter and is controlled for three more seasons; Happ remains near the league minimum and is controlled for five more seasons. It’s simpler retaining Schwarber: keep him in left field, try to unlock his power against left-handed pitching, and he might yet become a middle of the order hitter. Trading Happ is risky, though, given the five remaining years of team control.

Don't know how I feel about this:

While the Cubs will be cautiously optimistic on Darvish and Smyly for 2019, there is no such optimism for Tyler Chatwood. The Cubs gave Chatwood a three-year, $38MM deal last December based mostly on upside, and the righty’s already-poor control became the worst in baseball in 2018. In fact, Chatwood’s 19.6% walk rate was the fifth-worst in baseball history for pitchers with at least 100 innings. The Cubs’ 2018 season served as a reminder how much every win counts, and I can’t see how Chatwood would have a role on the 2019 Cubs. Russell Martin could make for an excellent bad contract swap from the Cubs’ side, though not so much from Toronto’s. Alex Gordon, Zack Cozart, Homer Bailey, and Martin Prado could be other potential targets in my estimation.

Had the same vision as you Beck:

Though the Cubs also have Mike Montgomery as a back-end rotation depth option, there’s more than enough uncertainty to justify picking up Cole Hamels’ $20MM option. Hamels, 35 in December, was excellent in a dozen starts for the Cubs after a July trade from Texas. The Cubs could also attempt to negotiate a two-year deal with Hamels at a lower average annual value.

This may end up the biggest area:

Bottom line: it’s time to turn over at least half the bullpen. I don’t expect the Cubs to make a run at Craig Kimbrel, but the free agent market still offers a long list of options, including Adam Ottavino, Jeurys Familia, David Robertson, Andrew Miller, Joakim Soria, Cody Allen, Zach Britton, and a pair of rehabbing former closers (Kelvin Herrera & Trevor Rosenthal). One veteran worth retaining is Jesse Chavez, who ascended to the top of the Cubs’ decimated bullpen by year’s end and reportedly wants to return.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,740
Liked Posts:
3,739
I’m pretty sure if Jed talks to the Cards on that deal it could get pulled.

To be honest here 100%. Joe views Almora as a 4th.

I don't necessarily think you do it if you're intent on signing Machado/Harper. But, if for whatever reason those moves fall through or aren't interested i could see trying to make the deal. The past 3 calendar years Fowler has hit .248/.354/.425(110 wRC+). To put that in to perspective, Brantley has hit .302/.358/.452(115) over the same time period. Fowler has 3 years at $16.5 mil left. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Brantley got something similar in money/years. The difference here of course is if you're trading for Fowler with Chatwood he's not *really* costing you $16.5 mil. If you effectively view Chatwood as a total write off the difference between him and Fowler is $8 mil per season over 3 years. I think Fowler has slightly more value as a defender as well given he's played passable CF some what recently.

Regardless, it wouldn't necessarily be my first move. If you're getting either Harper or Machado i'd rather they tried to trade Chatwood for Russell Martin and hopefully some what solve the back up C situation.
 

JP Hochbaum

Well-known member
Joined:
May 22, 2012
Posts:
2,040
Liked Posts:
1,279
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/10/offseason-outlook-chicago-cubs-9.html

Some bits:

Willson Contreras will continue to handle primary catching duties. Contreras, 27 in May, had an argument to be considered the best-hitting catcher in baseball over the period stretching from his June 2016 debut until this year’s trade deadline. Then, from August 2nd onward, he hit .169/.263/.232 with one home run in 160 plate appearances. He went from regularly serving as the Cubs’ #4 or 5 hitter to hitting seventh or eighth most days. Contreras’ collapse is one damning data point for now-former Cubs hitting coach Chili Davis. Getting Contreras back to his established 120 wRC+ level would be a big boost to the 2019 offense. Contreras caught a career-high 1109 2/3 innings in 2018 and would likely benefit from a quality veteran backup. After a strong season in which he made 83 starts for the Braves, free agent Kurt Suzuki might not accept a diminished role, but he’s the type of player the Cubs should target.

I'm kinda in agreement here.

Epstein has gone big game hunting many times for both the Cubs and Red Sox, and figures to be firmly in the mix for Harper or Machado. Which player is the better fit? My vote is for Harper, who has a higher offensive ceiling than Machado and as a left-handed batter breaks up the Cubs’ core of right-handed hitters (Bryant, Baez, and Contreras). Cubs fans can salivate at the prospect of a Murderer’s Row of Bryant, Harper, Baez, Rizzo, and Contreras. Harper would take over as the team’s regular right fielder, pushing Heyward to center and possibly a young outfielder off the roster, which we’ll discuss later.

I've thought this also:

Fans can also dream on a Machado-Baez middle infield combination, although Baez may actually be the superior shortstop. Signing Machado seems to create an inefficiency – pushing Baez back to second, or pushing Bryant to left field. That is, unless Machado is willing to sign under the same conditions most current Cubs position players have, where all but Rizzo, Contreras, and Albert Almora bounce around to multiple positions. I think the Cubs are better-served with Harper in right field and a Heyward-Almora platoon in center.

Almora might be wasted on the short side of a platoon, however, and the Cubs will likely consider trading him under certain scenarios. Likewise, Kyle Schwarber and Ian Happ face the possibility of a trade, particularly if the Cubs acquire a starting outfielder. Schwarber, 26 in March, quieted the talk of his left field defense as a liability. However, he proved powerless against left-handed pitching and was limited to seeing southpaws only 18% of the time under Maddon. There could be another gear for Schwarber if he starts hitting lefties, but as always, Maddon is reluctant to give him that full opportunity on a contending club.

Happ, a 24-year-old switch-hitter, played all three outfield positions and third base this year. Strikeouts were up and power was down in his sophomore season, and he too was unable to hit lefties. Though he’s technically more versatile than Schwarber, Happ seems position-less. He spent more time in center field than any other position (403 2/3 innings) despite being the team’s third-best center fielder. The Cubs limited his time in the infield this year. Schwarber is arbitration eligible for the first time this winter and is controlled for three more seasons; Happ remains near the league minimum and is controlled for five more seasons. It’s simpler retaining Schwarber: keep him in left field, try to unlock his power against left-handed pitching, and he might yet become a middle of the order hitter. Trading Happ is risky, though, given the five remaining years of team control.

I think the Cubs error this year was thinking they could use Chili Davis to create more contact hitters from their power hitters. And getting Harper and decreasing Almoras role does the opposite of what they Cubs want in that regard. They still need to strikeout less and hit for higher average. This is what Machado does better than any current Cub beside Zobrist and Rizzo.

The mistake last year was exactly what Theo iterated, reducing the power swings to be more level was a bad miscalculation. I think mid way through the year Davis couldn't keep the team on board with it, even though it was working for a half year.

If you add MAchado to this order we still have plenty of left handers to break up the righties, with Schwarber and Heyward. Almora is a leadoff hitter, plain and simple, he may not get the walks you want but he is a great high fast ball hitter and that works great in the first at bat when pitchers are usually not in the rhythm of the game yet.

Almora, Rizzo, Bryant, Schwarber, Machado, Heyward, Contreras, Baez, the last two can be flip flopped. Your 4th and 5th hitters become your best RBI guys, behind guys that generally get on base in Bryant and Rizzo.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,358
Liked Posts:
2,800
Location:
San Diego
I’m pretty sure the the pen gets a small turn over.

I would target Andrew Miller and have him and Morrow as my closers. Strop offered as my prime set up. Cishek as my leverage arm. Smyly as my other and Chavez offed a deal.

After that trading Chatwood would become the highest priority. Even if it takes trading something good to facilitate. Him and Cartiani for Martin as an idea.

After this bit they need to really look at how much that they are willing to go over. If they ink Hamels on a 2 year and let Tex eat the 6. Say 14 per on a 2. He gets the difference from Texas. Cubs save 6 mil
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,740
Liked Posts:
3,739
I would target Andrew Miller

The market would need to be pretty soft IMO for the cubs to go after him. If he can get $10 mil+ per season I can't see the cubs doing that. I think he'd have to be in the strop/cishek range of $6 mil
 

anotheridiot

Well-known member
Joined:
Jul 15, 2016
Posts:
5,935
Liked Posts:
791
The market would need to be pretty soft IMO for the cubs to go after him. If he can get $10 mil+ per season I can't see the cubs doing that. I think he'd have to be in the strop/cishek range of $6 mil

They went that high with Morrow and it did not work. Cannot go into next year convinced Morrow wont throw out his back putting on his shoes or bang into a wall and get some other bone bruise. I think the only way you do not offer Miller that much is if you are going in to next year considering Strop as your closer.

Carls Jr is trending down, Morrow is a question mark, Strop is Strop, just dont think anyone is convinced we are set up late.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,740
Liked Posts:
3,739
They went that high with Morrow and it did not work. Cannot go into next year convinced Morrow wont throw out his back putting on his shoes or bang into a wall and get some other bone bruise. I think the only way you do not offer Miller that much is if you are going in to next year considering Strop as your closer.

Carls Jr is trending down, Morrow is a question mark, Strop is Strop, just dont think anyone is convinced we are set up late.

I'm not saying they don't go after bullpen depth but you can't afford to pay 2 relievers over $10 mil a year.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,358
Liked Posts:
2,800
Location:
San Diego
The market would need to be pretty soft IMO for the cubs to go after him. If he can get $10 mil+ per season I can't see the cubs doing that. I think he'd have to be in the strop/cishek range of $6 mil

If they are willing to spend 10M on Morrow with health issues 10M on Miller is a bargain
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,358
Liked Posts:
2,800
Location:
San Diego
I'm not saying they don't go after bullpen depth but you can't afford to pay 2 relievers over $10 mil a year.

I accually disagree here. Having a lock down bull pen shortens a game. Add to it withJoe pulling the starter in the 6th it makes sense to not give the game away by that decision.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,740
Liked Posts:
3,739
I accually disagree here. Having a lock down bull pen shortens a game. Add to it withJoe pulling the starter in the 6th it makes sense to not give the game away by that decision.

You're missing my point. I have no issue with having a good pen but what good team are paying 2 relievers $10+ mil? Dodgers aren't. Jansen is over $10 mil but Ryan Madson is the next highest paid reliever making $7.6 mil. Houston isn't paying any reliever more than $10 mil. The Brewers aren't paying anyone more than $9 mil. Boston is paying Krimbrel $13 mil with their next highest reliever making under $5 mil....etc The only competitive team paying their bullpen that much is the yankees.

It's just a very bad investment in money to pay 2 relievers that much money. If you can get Miller for $6-7 mil then sure go for him. But I don't think that's what he's going to be asking for. He's going to want closer money and I'm not paying him that if it's me.
 

Top