pick an outfielder...

[Chris J]

Puig sucks

 

[CSF77]

Speed guys with chronic hamstring issues (Crawford and Kemp) -- I'll pass.

There's a 0% chance Puig is going anywhere, for obvious reasons.

Either, to me, is the most intriguing -- but let me follow that up by saying that he certainly isn't a foundational player. His contract is a huge overpay and he is what he is -- a nice role player who compliments a deep lineup well. He wouldn't offer any true lineup protection to help improve the chances of Rizzo, Castro, Castillo, etc.

It's apparent the Dodgers are willing to spend whatever it takes to keep their team a contender, so moving him is a byproduct of having an embarrassment of riches in the outfield. His slash line was on par (albeit a bit lower than normal) with what he's done over his career, but the drop in power is a concern for me. He's a solid defender and has postseason experience, but I'm honestly not sure the statistical upgrade over Schierholtz is worth giving up prospects and tying up all that money when you have Vitters and Szczur sniffing an audition for the upcoming year.

I guess it would really matter what the Dodgers would want in return for Ethier. I'd be apprehensive to give up something substantial for him because I don't consider him a cornerstone piece. A nice upgrade in right, sure, but what exactly is he worth giving up? If we were to go after him, I would anticipate that the Cubs would also look to make additional big moves during the offseason. However, that's contradictory to what has been floating around in the press since the season ended.

Like Ethier also. I think Sweeney may end up impressing us over the next few years. Gut check with him.

When he signed with the cubs and slightly before he was almost always .330+ which isn't great but it's above average. This year with the cubs his OBP was .287. In 2012 he was .322 but if you go back to 2011 he was .289. You see the difference? At $18 mill/year of course they are going to try to move a player hitting that way.

Like I said he was signed as a lead off when his OBA dropped he got dropped in the order. But he was signed to drive in runs not get on base. That is the one thing he has done is hit HR's. Last year he knocked in over 100 RBI's and did it again this year.

To me that is just being too picky with a player and pointing out flaws when what he was doing right was the best the team had.

Almost as bad as letting Barney hit .220 with OPS under 600 just because he has a good glove.

 

[CSF77]

But If I had to guess they signed Sweeney to play CF or RF if they get a quality offer for Schierholtz. But Schierholtz should be affordable in Arb3 so unless someone wow's them I believe he is sticking in RF. I would also think that they let Lake make or break next year in LF.

That is they way I believe that Theo and Jed will handle business this year. With the delays going on with the city they may lose this off season to put up some new signs so do not expect them to add payroll. Not to mention I do not expect them to push over 100 mil until after the new TV deal is in place. I believe that comes up in 2018.

So at most they may run out a cost effective self developed team and sign some SP. I believe they will start to add vet bats after their self develop make it or bust and they are forced to back fill via F/A but I see that happening after the player they are targeting has over a year to prove their value.

So if Rizzo fails next year I believe they are screwed with extending him early. If that happens I expect them to get gun shy until that player has a break out season.

 

[beckdawg]

Like I said he was signed as a lead off when his OBA dropped he got dropped in the order. But he was signed to drive in runs not get on base. That is the one thing he has done is hit HR's. Last year he knocked in over 100 RBI's and did it again this year.

To me that is just being too picky with a player and pointing out flaws when what he was doing right was the best the team had.

Almost as bad as letting Barney hit .220 with OPS under 600 just because he has a good glove.

Compare the splits with NYY and with the cubs. It's not pointing out nitpick flaws. In his last 2.5 seasons with the cubs he was a decidedly worse player for 1.5 of that. Look at it from the front office's stand point. In 2011 he wasn't all that great. In 2012 he rebounds. In 2013 it's around the trade deadline and he's looking like 2012 as a guy past his prime. Which is more likely, that 2011/this year were an aberration or that 2012 was? In the first half of 2013 if he'd hit like he did in 2012 he wouldn't have been traded. However, Soriano is a very streaky player and when he's bad he's really bad. The problem is in April and June this year he was down right bad. So, to sit here and say that they traded Soriano because of money is a bit silly. Soriano wasn't playing well for the cubs this year and was making $18 mil.

Now you've asked why take on Crawford when they got rid of Soriano. For one, Crawford is 31. He's not about to be 38. Additionally, he's not even remotely the same type of player. As I've painfully detailed, the cubs don't have a lot of options for the #1/#2 slots. If Baez and Bryant come up midseason they have middle of the order type hitters. You've also talked about Sweeney/Lake. The cubs don't have anyone for the righty platoon with Schierholtz. They very well could play one of them as a 4th outfield and platoon partner with Schierholtz.

I mean it really comes down to this, how are they going to improve their current outfield? Here's a list of potential FA OFs. Some of them have team options(Crisp, Dejesus) and Pence was already re-signed. So, there's less than 10 guys who'd actually be an improvement in the #1/#2 holes but of those only Choo and Ellsbury are really guys you'd expect to hit there and they are likely going to be really expensive. That leaves trades as the only way to improve. I suppose they could just roll with what they have but attendance has noticeably sagged and if Sweeney and Lake don't play well you're looking at a really really bad team. And even if they play well, you'd still rather them batting 7th/8th than 1st/2nd.

So, I don't know how they can roll out there with Sweeney and Lake as starters. Like I said, if you don't like Crawford, fine but that doesn't change the fact that going out there with those players is a recipe for a huge disaster. You're counting on Lake to not regress at all and counting on Sweeney to play at his career peak level thus far. Also, you've brought up the Soriano move so I'm going to bring up the Dejesus trade. They could have kept him for $6.5 mil but instead chose to trade him rather than dealing with his $1.5 mil buy out. Why? Dejesus is a far more accomplished player and performed well when healthy. If the cubs are really going cheap mode he fits that to a T. You're not likely to find any where near the player he is for $7 mil in FA. To me that signifies they plan to add a player better than Dejesus. If they didn't plan to do that then why trade Dejesus? You pick up his option, re-sign Sweeney and you have a pretty bad 4 man rotation but it would be cheap.

 

[CSF77]

So, I don't know how they can roll out there with Sweeney and Lake as starters. Like I said, if you don't like Crawford, fine but that doesn't change the fact that going out there with those players is a recipe for a huge disaster. You're counting on Lake to not regress at all and counting on Sweeney to play at his career peak level thus far. Also, you've brought up the Soriano move so I'm going to bring up the Dejesus trade. They could have kept him for $6.5 mil but instead chose to trade him rather than dealing with his $1.5 mil buy out. Why? Dejesus is a far more accomplished player and performed well when healthy. If the cubs are really going cheap mode he fits that to a T. You're not likely to find any where near the player he is for $7 mil in FA. To me that signifies they plan to add a player better than Dejesus. If they didn't plan to do that then why trade Dejesus? You pick up his option, re-sign Sweeney and you have a pretty bad 4 man rotation but it would be cheap.

That is under the assumption that they are trying to win games.

If we were talking about an 79 win team pushing up to a play off contender and they had some quality going on vs a piece or 2 missing I would get what you are coming from but the team is just not good right now. Crawford is a trade when you already have a 3-4-5 that can produce and you need some players that get on base ahead of them.

Think about it trade for Crawford and have Rizzo, Schierholtz and whom ever the guys you are trusting to drive in runs. Ya great.


And again Sori was a #4 hitter. #4 hiters need to drive in runs. Your arguement is geared towards OBA which comes into play more out of the 1-2 hitters. It factors some but doesn't supersede driving in runs.

You can say he produced more with the Yanks but what I say is the team around him was worse and Rizzo and Castro both failed to produce causing him less RBI opportunities.


It makes more sense to get Baez and Bryant up on the team then start thinking on OBA 1/2 hitters. They will have Watkins, Valbuena and Alcantria ready to take over 2B. Watkins and Valbuena are both good at taking walks. Alcantra just looks top 100 prospect talent. Any of them could hit 1-2 in the line up. Castro is going to hit 1 or 2. Unless they trade him out that is not going to change.

They are not going to do anything unless they decide to trade out Schierholtz then they would need to replace a middle of the order bat (SLG not OBA bat)

 

[CSF77]

I'm going to bring up the Dejesus trade. They could have kept him for $6.5 mil but instead chose to trade him rather than dealing with his $1.5 mil buy out. Why? Dejesus is a far more accomplished player and performed well when healthy. If the cubs are really going cheap mode he fits that to a T. You're not likely to find any where near the player he is for $7 mil in FA. To me that signifies they plan to add a player better than Dejesus. If they didn't plan to do that then why trade Dejesus? You pick up his option, re-sign Sweeney and you have a pretty bad 4 man rotation but it would be cheap.

They were cashing in. He had a club option for 2014 and was selling off that option to get return value.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...d-dejesus-trade-why-he-was-placed-on-waivers/

Given the amount of money remaining on DeJesus’s contract, there was some speculation in a Fox Sports report that perhaps the Nationals didn’t really want the 11-year veteran. DeJesus is owed just under $1 million for the remainder of this season as part of his $4.25 million salary for 2013. His contract also contains a 2014 club option for $6.5 million with a $1.5 million buyout. According to a person familiar with the deal, the Nationals assumed DeJesus’ entire contract. In other words, they are on the hook for about $2.5 million.

It was a cash relief deal.

The Cubs have signed outfielder Ryan Sweeney to a two-year, $3.5MM contract, according to Bob Nightengale of USA Today. Sweeney will earn $1.5MM in 2014 and again in 2015. The Cubs hold a $2.5MM option on Sweeney for the 2016 season that contains a $500K buyout, according to Nightengale (Twitter links). Sweeney is a client of Reynolds Sports Management.

So instead of retaining Dejesus for 6.5 mil to play CF. They are now paying Sweeney 1.5 mil to play it. It looks pretty much cash relief to me. Even though there is no needed cash relief. Makes me wonder if they are opening up cash for a major push for Tanaka. Now that is a need.

 

[beckdawg]

That is under the assumption that they are trying to win games.

I think a more accurate way to say this is they are trying to win but they aren't going to try to win at any cost. But here's the thing, you can't just wait until Baez/Bryant et al are up to add players because the players available as FA year to year vary and there might not be a player who fits your needs. Also, you want at least a mildly competent team in place when your prospects hit the majors so they are in a position to succeed. You could make the argument that Rizzo and Castro's struggles come from the fact the team is expecting them to carry the entire weight of the team.

They were cashing in. He had a club option for 2014 and was selling off that option to get return value.

What return value? All they got out of the deal realistically was cash relief as the PTBNL isn't likely to be anything of real value. However, the problem is they have to add someone else to the roster in the OF. On the current 40 man roster they have Bogusevic, Lake, Schierholtz, and Sweeney as MLB level depth. The only other players currently on the 40 man roster in the OF are Jackson(AAA), Soler(High A), and Szczur(AA). Jackson struggled badly in AAA this year so counting on him as a injury call up seems unrealistic. Vitters supposedly is being moved which would give them another option but they are an injury or two away from having next to no depth.

So realistically even if they go cheap on another Schierholtz/Hariston like player they are going to be forking out another 2-3 million. What's that save them? $3 mil at the cost of a capable MLB level player. I mean look I'm not the type saying they should go out and sign Elsbury but if that is really the process they are going to take I find that very disgusting. Before arbitration their current payroll sits in the $60 million range. So, even if they go after Tanaka they have probably $40-50 to put them on pace with their 2013 opening day roster. Adding a $13 mil/year player leaves them a ton of room left over.

Just based off what you've said, you seem to be indicating that if they go after Tanaka they likely will be in the $80 mil payroll range on opening day. Maybe I'm misunderstanding here but that's how it comes off. You seem to indicate they might add some minor players to fill out their roster but nothing in say the Edwin Jackson range. I'm not entirely sure how posting works but I assume you're allowed to push that over multiple years rather than one huge up front chunk. But, for the sake of argument, let's say Tanaka is $18 mil/year including the posting fee. The past two years the cubs payroll on opening day has been at $106 mil and $109. So, presumably they had something in the way of a $110 mil cap. So, if you assume that again is their cap then they have $50 mil they can add. If you assume Tanaka is $18 and various other filler parts are $17 that still leaves them $15 mil they would have to spend.

 

[CSF77]

Just based off what you've said, you seem to be indicating that if they go after Tanaka they likely will be in the $80 mil payroll range on opening day. Maybe I'm misunderstanding here but that's how it comes off. You seem to indicate they might add some minor players to fill out their roster but nothing in say the Edwin Jackson range. I'm not entirely sure how posting works but I assume you're allowed to push that over multiple years rather than one huge up front chunk. But, for the sake of argument, let's say Tanaka is $18 mil/year including the posting fee. The past two years the cubs payroll on opening day has been at $106 mil and $109. So, presumably they had something in the way of a $110 mil cap. So, if you assume that again is their cap then they have $50 mil they can add. If you assume Tanaka is $18 and various other filler parts are $17 that still leaves them $15 mil they would have to spend.

Normally the posting fee doesn't work towards the Lux tax. But from what I have been seeing with the Cubs they have limited resource and may keep payroll reduced to cover the posting fee. We saw how they only were able to put out bids in the 20 mil range and it was not enough. With the Yankee's in the mix it is going to shoot into the 50 mil range because they are more concerned with going over 189 mil payroll but with their resource backing they could drop 50 mil on his posting fee with little problem.

That is what it really comes down to here. To play with the big boys they have to cut resource at the team level. That 50 mil posting has to come out of team resource. The TV deal they have nets them around 400k per game while big markets like the Dodgers are making 1.6 mil per game off of theirs. That adds up fast and that is why the Cubs are falling behind. Out dated resource.

So realistically even if they go cheap on another Schierholtz/Hariston like player they are going to be forking out another 2-3 million. What's that save them? $3 mil at the cost of a capable MLB level player. I mean look I'm not the type saying they should go out and sign Elsbury but if that is really the process they are going to take I find that very disgusting. Before arbitration their current payroll sits in the $60 million range. So, even if they go after Tanaka they have probably $40-50 to put them on pace with their 2013 opening day roster. Adding a $13 mil/year player leaves them a ton of room left over.

What I would do is run Lake in LF, Sweeney in CF. Both can play every day. Schierholtz in RF and in a platoon I would give an opertunity to Vitters to make it as a MLB player at league min costs. Which is 500k. If he is not up to the challenge they may have to look into players that they can sign on minor league deals and promote as needed.

Another option would be Olt, but I believe they should push him to 3B and build his trade value as a full time player. League wise 3B is lacking depth and quality. The Cubs could come into a situation where they could be able to develop a few quality 3B like Christian Villanueva and Olt to use as trade bait while also having Bryant and Baez to choose from as long term options. Even if Vitters is able to adapt to major league pitching some team may come calling wanting a 3B and are willing to let him adapt to the speed of the game. More so than the Cubs are.

We will just have to see how it plays out.

 

[CSF77]

And let me say this: If they run out a 60 mil payroll because they have to cover 50 mil and win the bid for Tanka. Which puts payroll in the 110 mil range (50 mil post added in). Then the following year they look into F/A to add vets around Baez, Rizzo and Bryant. (Because I believe they should be in Chicago this year) I am 100% behind it. Because in the big pitcher adding a top of the rotation arm will pay off more.

Now if they fail the bid then pulling deals like that should be more prevalent this offseason. They could just resign Baker and add a OF bat at that point. But I would not do anything until Tanaka is resolved.

 

[chibears55]

its pretty easy to see that by July 1st they will have castillo at catcher and their infield will be 1b rizzo 2B baez SS castro 3B bryant..

besides pitching, the outfield will be their main concern this off season..

i think they go after FAS jacoby ellsbury, or Choo and if they dont land one then a trade for an outfielder will probably be their next option..

i just dont see them going into the season with sweeney, lake, and schierholtz as their starting 3 unless they plan on soler or someone taking a jump up by July.

 

[SilenceS]

its pretty easy to see that by July 1st they will have castillo at catcher and their infield will be 1b rizzo 2B baez SS castro 3B bryant..

besides pitching, the outfield will be their main concern this off season..

i think they go after FAS jacoby ellsbury, or Choo and if they dont land one then a trade for an outfielder will probably be their next option..

i just dont see them going into the season with sweeney, lake, and schierholtz as their starting 3 unless they plan on soler or someone taking a jump up by July.

I doubt Baez plays second. Bryant is more likely to go to right or left before third.

 

[CSF77]

I doubt Baez plays second. Bryant is more likely to go to right or left before third.

I tend to agree with this.

Now if every thing falls into place this year:

Alcantra 2B
Castro SS
Rizzo 1B
Baez 3B
Bryant RF
Sweeney CF
Lake LF
Castillo C.

That is about as ideal as it gets.

 

[dabynsky]

Another possibility to get Bryant, Baez and Alcantara into the same lineup would be to play Alcantara in center. I am curious to see where Baez ends up playing in Iowa since Alcantara should be manning second at Iowa. Wonder if perhaps Baez and Alcantara end up splitting time between various positions swapping second, short and third.

 

[chibears55]

I doubt Baez plays second. Bryant is more likely to go to right or left before third.

ive yet to read or hear any indication from the cubs brass that their considering moving bryant to the outfield..
he been playing 3B during the AFL.

i have read epstein saying baez will get looks at 2B and 3B when he about ready for the majors, so i think the look at 3b was just in case braynt and Olt dont make it.

i dont think Alcantara will be up this year, so that why i think bryant will be at 3B and baez at 2B,

 

[beckdawg]

ive yet to read or hear any indication from the cubs brass that their considering moving bryant to the outfield..
he been playing 3B during the AFL.

i have read epstein saying baez will get looks at 2B and 3B when he about ready for the majors, so i think the look at 3b was just in case braynt and Olt dont make it.

i dont think Alcantara will be up this year, so that why i think bryant will be at 3B and baez at 2B,

I think Alcantara is a good enough prospect at 2B that you don't want to block him with Baez when you can move Baez to 3B and take advantage of his arm and Bryant to a corner OF position. Also, Alcantara and Baez are closer to the majors than Bryant is.

 

[CSF77]

I think Alcantara is a good enough prospect at 2B that you don't want to block him with Baez when you can move Baez to 3B and take advantage of his arm and Bryant to a corner OF position. Also, Alcantara and Baez are closer to the majors than Bryant is.

That is debatable. Bryant had 3 years of college ball and an advanced approach.

One factor they are looking at in judging how advanced a hitters approach is in with BB%.

Arismendy Alcantara: 62 BB in 494 AB 12.55%
Kris Bryant: 11 BB in 128 AB 8.6% (current: 4 in 28 AB 14.2%)
Javier Baez: 40 BB in 517 AB 7.7%

Baez is a free swinger Bryant is more of an complete hitter. Alcantara has solid OBA skills with 30 SB last year he could become a solid lead off.

Not sure if he can play CF but 2B is more about turning 2 vs anything else and making the pivot. Alcantara has already been switched and will have another year to perfect it. Baez is going to be at SS next year with Villenueva at 3B at Iowa. If they move Baez off position at Chicago it would be dumb as he needs to be adapting to hitting vs both.

 

[beckdawg]

That is debatable. Bryant had 3 years of college ball and an advanced approach.

One factor they are looking at in judging how advanced a hitters approach is in with BB%.

Arismendy Alcantara: 62 BB in 494 AB 12.55%
Kris Bryant: 11 BB in 128 AB 8.6% (current: 4 in 28 AB 14.2%)
Javier Baez: 40 BB in 517 AB 7.7%

Baez is a free swinger Bryant is more of an complete hitter. Alcantara has solid OBA skills with 30 SB last year he could become a solid lead off.

Not sure if he can play CF but 2B is more about turning 2 vs anything else and making the pivot. Alcantara has already been switched and will have another year to perfect it. Baez is going to be at SS next year with Villenueva at 3B at Iowa. If they move Baez off position at Chicago it would be dumb as he needs to be adapting to hitting vs both.

Both finished the season in AA. Bryant finished in A+. Now, maybe he progress thru AAA faster than Alcantara but at the moment they are closer is all I was saying.

 

[SilenceS]

ive yet to read or hear any indication from the cubs brass that their considering moving bryant to the outfield..
he been playing 3B during the AFL.

i have read epstein saying baez will get looks at 2B and 3B when he about ready for the majors, so i think the look at 3b was just in case braynt and Olt dont make it.

i dont think Alcantara will be up this year, so that why i think bryant will be at 3B and baez at 2B,

There are many scouts including jason parks and law that believe what I am saying. I didn't make it up. It's the concerns is amongst experts. Baez would be the best glove at third. Bryant would be an average third basal at best. Baez could be plus. Olt is not over either prospect.

 

[chibears55]

There are many scouts including jason parks and law that believe what I am saying. I didn't make it up. It's the concerns is amongst experts. Baez would be the best glove at third. Bryant would be an average third basal at best. Baez could be plus. Olt is not over either prospect.

sorry..I dont put a lot of stock into where parks and law thinks GMs and managers will play their players.. Baez hasnt even played 3B yet to even suggest he better then bryant now defensively. .

 

[beckdawg]

sorry..I dont put a lot of stock into where parks and law thinks GMs and managers will play their players.. Baez hasnt even played 3B yet to even suggest he better then bryant now defensively. .

SS moving to 3B are fairly common. See A-rod and Cal Ripken. It's typically an easier position defensively because you don't have to have as much of range. However, you do have to have a bit better reflexes as the ball is on you faster.