Playoff Roster?

[TC in Mississippi]

And I do not buy Soler over his career. He is Mr now though.

He is better in a LF platoon with Schwarber next year and starting when Schwarber DH's.

Too injury prone for my tastes but with limited playing time it lessens the wear and tear

I liek Soler and would like to see him on the playoff roster but long term I don't see him on the team. The better he plays the better the value but I'd bet pretty heavily on him being moved in a deal for starting pitching this winter, especially if it's coming off a WS win.

 

[fatbeard]

I liek Soler and would like to see him on the playoff roster but long term I don't see him on the team. The better he plays the better the value but I'd bet pretty heavily on him being moved in a deal for starting pitching this winter, especially if it's coming off a WS win.

I think it's a no-brainer that Soler is on the team next year. The FA market for starting pitchers looks terrible. Anyone who wants a good one is going to have to trade, and the lack of other options will drive up the asking price to king's ransom levels. By trading Soler now you're selling low and netting a poor return. Keeping him bolsters depth, hedges against the downside risk of Schwarber returning from injury, and gives you the chance to deploy him in favorable matchups and build his value back up.

 

[CSF77]

I liek Soler and would like to see him on the playoff roster but long term I don't see him on the team. The better he plays the better the value but I'd bet pretty heavily on him being moved in a deal for starting pitching this winter, especially if it's coming off a WS win.

I agree with FB here. Schwarber's splits vs LH pitching was not good. But if they resolve the catching issue next year fast and Schwarber starts to blast out lefties then Soler becomes expendable.

 

[Omeletpants]

I think it's a no-brainer that Soler is on the team next year. The FA market for starting pitchers looks terrible. Anyone who wants a good one is going to have to trade, and the lack of other options will drive up the asking price to king's ransom levels. By trading Soler now you're selling low and netting a poor return. Keeping him bolsters depth, hedges against the downside risk of Schwarber returning from injury, and gives you the chance to deploy him in favorable matchups and build his value back up.

Because it's important to stockpile below average hitters that need to be replaced on defense in the 7th inning.

 

[CSF77]

I can prove your quote in my sig


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He said that when the Cubs were nice enough to let the other contenders close enough to smell their butt holes for a sec. They were put into the dust soon after.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

I think it's a no-brainer that Soler is on the team next year. The FA market for starting pitchers looks terrible. Anyone who wants a good one is going to have to trade, and the lack of other options will drive up the asking price to king's ransom levels. By trading Soler now you're selling low and netting a poor return. Keeping him bolsters depth, hedges against the downside risk of Schwarber returning from injury, and gives you the chance to deploy him in favorable matchups and build his value back up.

Correct, there are no FA pitchers worth a damn which to me makes this winter the perfect time for the Cubs to act. The caveat here is that for them to go as bold as I think they might they're probably going to have to be coming off a World Series win. One thing we know is that Theo and company have been searching for a cost controlled young starter forever. They were linked to the likes of Miller, Salazar, Teheran, Sonny Gray, Archer and others both last offseason and at the trade deadline. They're going to lose Arrieta after next year and Hammel has a 2017 option that they would be wise to pick up. I think they might get that young pitcher, Soler maybe involved, trade Arrieta and Hammel and bring back a nice haul possibly replacing what they gave up. Now you're talking a 2017 rotation of Lester, Hendricks, Archer (or one of the others), Lackey with a battle for the 5th starter among the likes of Zastryzny and Montgomery. If they don't win it this year I think that's too massive a shakeup but if they do they've solidified a pitching staff past 2018 whereas now they're in real trouble when they get there. Think about it, if 1 1/2 years of Samardzija and 3 months of Hammel netted Addison Russell what would one full year each of Arrieta and Hammel net in a weaker pitching market?

Obviously this is all speculation but I followed the Red Sox pretty closely when this group was there and I guarantee you that those types of thoughts are on the table.

 

[Raskolnikov]

Arrieta needs to get paid to be a Cub.

Schwarber should be the catcher going forward with Contreras, and play some spot first base and LF/DH.

Soler should be traded for the first good deal, if they ever get another solid offer for him.


They should have traded Montero after the sentimental walk-off single. He still gets a ring if Cubs win this year. I wish that was his final memory.

I think he is finished physically and psychologically and Ross should catch at least 2 of 4 pitchers in playoffs.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Arrieta needs to get paid to be a Cub.

Schwarber should be the catcher going forward with Contreras, and play some spot first base and LF/DH.

Soler should be traded for the first good deal, if they ever get another solid offer for him.


They should have traded Montero after the sentimental walk-off single. He still gets a ring if Cubs win this year. I wish that was his final memory.

I think he is finished physically and psychologically and Ross should catch at least 2 of 4 pitchers in playoffs.

Why would you pay Arrieta? He's a stuff guy that will be 32 years old and while he's shown that his stuff can overcome his occasional command problems if his velo goes I don't think there's a pitcher there. Someone is going to give him 6 years at close to $200 mil, I don't want that to be the Cubs.

 

[CSF77]

Why would you pay Arrieta? He's a stuff guy that will be 32 years old and while he's shown that his stuff can overcome his occasional command problems if his velo goes I don't think there's a pitcher there. Someone is going to give him 6 years at close to $200 mil, I don't want that to be the Cubs.

Might be wrong but he said he will need to get paid if he remains a Cub vs the Cubs need to pay him.

He will get paid. Grenke is showing why that is not a great plan.

The whole Schwarber bit. Well ideally if he is a great catcher then you want him starting over Contreras. He lost a year of development add to it Contreras has shown more as a catcher in his chance vs Schwarber not really showing much.
But. In a perfect world, yes it would be ideal but wasted IMO. Contreras would be worth more in a trade to net a young arm vs sitting out of position.

 

[DanTown]

If you're trading Jake to get back future prospects, then it makes the most sense to trade a guy like Schwarber to get as good a SP as you can to replace Jake. It'd be great to see Soler headline a package for a young arm who has potential of being sub 3 ERA/200 innings but that just isn't going to happen. So if you traded BOTH guys, it would make some sense where as trading one of them does you nothing really. If you trade Jake and keep Kyle, where are these prospects going to play with Kyle, Russell, Rizzo, Bryant, Contreras firmly entrenched in your future lineups? And if you trade Kyle and keep Jake, do you really want to rely on 1200+ PA from Soler/Baez/Almora at two positions next year? That's a lot of risk both in skill/ability as well as in injury in the case of Soler.

To me, I'd wait for the DBacks to fire Stewart/La Russa, make a buy low on Shelby Miller as a future 3/4 and then hope you can continue to find value in other places. To be perfectly honest, the highest upside pitcher I can imagine being in the organization is already here and that's Dylan Cease. I don't think a team would give up a higher potential arm than that even in a deal for Kyle simply because that kind of arm is valuable that you won't really risk that all on Kyle + other prospects.

I mean there is no real problem with the Cubs giving Jake fifteenish million next year and then him playing out the year as a top 10 SP in the NL with potential to be top 3 while you're trying to win a WS. This year, the Cubs had a ton go right with the rotation both in terms of performance and injury; not so sure I'd just give up a top 10 SP because he wants a lot of money. If he wants a lot of money, offer the QO, get the pick, then go sign his replacement in FA at about 75% of the cost and hope the system can you give you a guy who's 90% of what Jake is.

Wouldn't surprise me at all if the Cubs go after Tyson Ross this off-season because his stuff fits perfectly with what they want to do and if you have him for the year, the team would be better prepared to offer a long term deal with regards to how healthy he can hopefully stay.

 

[fatbeard]

Cubs aren't trading Schwarber. Full stop. They think there's something special there.

 

[CSF77]

Cubs aren't trading Schwarber. Full stop. They think there's something special there.

Schwarber balances the line up.

It would change the 3,4 5 to Rizzo, Bryant, Schwarber.

Right now the line up only has Rizzo as the lone LH power threat. From the right side there is Soler, Baez, Bryant, Contreras. The Cubs are more dominate vs LHP for a reason.

 

[fatbeard]

Schwarber balances the line up.

It would change the 3,4 5 to Rizzo, Bryant, Schwarber.

Right now the line up only has Rizzo as the lone LH power threat. From the right side there is Soler, Baez, Bryant, Contreras. The Cubs are more dominate vs LHP for a reason.

It's not just that he balances the lineup, or that he's a great locker room guy, they believe he's going to be a better hitter than Bryant--and Bryant is on a HOF trajectory. Ponder that.

 

[CSF77]

It's not just that he balances the lineup, or that he's a great locker room guy, they believe he's going to be a better hitter than Bryant--and Bryant is on a HOF trajectory. Ponder that.

Let's not go that far yet. First of all the whole team are great locker room guys...if it matters much. But Joe created that atmosphere so that is a non issue.

Projections are fine. He needs to make it real before we christen him anything.

I would consider Rizzo a better hitter than Bryant also. But it doesn't change the fact that Bryant is out pacing him. Peeps get wrapped up in Bryant's SO ratio too much.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Let's not go that far yet. First of all the whole team are great locker room guys...if it matters much. But Joe created that atmosphere so that is a non issue.

Projections are fine. He needs to make it real before we christen him anything.

I would consider Rizzo a better hitter than Bryant also. But it doesn't change the fact that Bryant is out pacing him. Peeps get wrapped up in Bryant's SO ratio too much.

Rizzo is not a better hitter than Bryant.

 

[brett05]

Let's not go that far yet. First of all the whole team are great locker room guys...if it matters much. But Joe created that atmosphere so that is a non issue.

Projections are fine. He needs to make it real before we christen him anything.

I would consider Rizzo a better hitter than Bryant also. But it doesn't change the fact that Bryant is out pacing him. Peeps get wrapped up in Bryant's SO ratio too much.

I agree with you. Though before Joe got here the lockerroom was a great group too.

 

[CSF77]

Rizzo is not a better hitter than Bryant.

If you look at BB:SO ratios the numbers favor Rizzo. Bryant creates loft in his swing path that removes many GB's. Thus his low DP total.

Looking at the numbers it is close this year. Bryant is producing more but is on a 160 SO pace. Rizzo has 40 less SO's and is catching up in the HR department. If he stays hot this month he could surpass Bryant.

So it is very debatable.

 

[CSF77]

I agree with you. Though before Joe got here the lockerroom was a great group too.

And the team sucked at that point.

Talent increases the chances to win.

Winning makes players happier.

Happier players creates better lockeroom environments.

 

[Parade_Rain]

If you look at BB:SO ratios the numbers favor Rizzo. Bryant creates loft in his swing path that removes many GB's. Thus his low DP total.

Looking at the numbers it is close this year. Bryant is producing more but is on a 160 SO pace. Rizzo has 40 less SO's and is catching up in the HR department. If he stays hot this month he could surpass Bryant.

So it is very debatable.

As you've stated it's debatable, the comment that Rizzo is a better hitter than Bryant doesn't make sense.

 

[CSF77]

As you've stated it's debatable, the comment that Rizzo is a better hitter than Bryant doesn't make sense.

Considering Rizzo is 27 and has improved every year. His OPS is higher than in the past. High mark for HR's was 32 so he should break that making him a 30 HR guy 3 years in a row. OBA over .380 3 years running. Bryant has eclipsed Rizzo's highest ever SO total of 127 already. That was the year he hit .233.

Bryant has an insane BABIP running. .340. Rizzo .309 which is closer to the league avg