The Cubs were lucky to win 97 games. they were talented but got a lot of things that went their way. I like to compare them to the Orioles a few years back. The orioles were like 40 something and a 1 in one run games. It was ridiculous. I think the Cubs have a stronger core but you cant rely on that luck. Someone said it earlier and I agree thats why the Cubs went hard because they don't believe that luck will be on their side again. I will go on record that I did not like the Zobrist signing. We win it this year. Great. We don't then that signing was worth nothing to me. I also am not a fan of the Heyward signing because you just paid 180 million to a guy that isn't going to be our leader. That is Rizzo. All day and all night. Rizzo is the unquestioned leader to me. Does he make our team better? On paper, I would say so but I have never been this huge fan of his. I hope I am wrong on these aspects but if the Cubs don't win it this year or next then its trouble. I find no way Heyward opts out considering who is on the market after his year 3. ****, Trout is going to get close to 300 million. I just hope we do this before Jason MclLeod becomes a GM. I don't hate Theo, but I love McLeod and history has shown that he is the reason for our farm and Boston farm back in the day. Not Theo, not Hoyer it was Mcleod. I just worry Theo over signed when his track record for FA signing isn't the greatest. All and all. Lets go Cubs but the NL Central isn't going anywhere.
I mean Heyward can still opt out year 4 even if he chooses not to after year 3 assuming he was moderately healthy. As for being a leader, maybe, maybe not. What we can say is he's a high character guy who's not going to hurt the team chemistry and who will do the little things you want younger players to learn. If anything, I'd argue he benefits the Bryants/Schwarbers/Russells of the world because he's been the next great hope for a team before and understand the pressures that go with it. Sure Rizzo to an extent has but no one ever compared Rizzo to Hank Aaron when he arrived on the scene. So, I'd argue someone like Bryant and his hype is much closer to what Heyward has been through. And obviously that says nothing of what Heyward brings as a player. I wont get into that here because that's really not the debate but I will say I feel like he'll be a better player with these cubs hitters around him and playing in wrigley than he was in either ATL or STL. He doesn't have godly power but those two locales clearly sapped some of his power as his ISO at home has been .153 compared to .174 on the road. And while his 101 PA sample size in wrigley isn't a huge number, he's hit .311/.376/.522 with a .211 ISO there. So there's that. And In all honesty, I could make a case that you are buying low on Heyward right now as silly as that may sound. You're basically buying his floor since given what we know today if he's healthy this is what he should do. On the other hand, you're talking about a player who is just 26, who has hit 27 HRs before and who has more raw power than he's shown in games. I'm not going to suggest it's a lock he will get back to 25-30 HRs but there's plenty of guys who didn't show their true power potential until their late 20's whether it's Luis Gonzalez, Tino Martinez, Ray Lankford, Edwin Encarnacion...etc. And if he suddenly rediscovers power without losing else where his value starts to approach Mike Trout level which is to say 2014 Trout(8 fWAR). From what I've read, Heyward's swing is sacrificing power for contact which is why you wouldn't bet on his power. With that being said, it's a plus that it is at least there so that if he does make some changes to his swing in a positive manner the possibility exists.
As for Zobrist, like Heyward if we ignore the performance, there's other reasons Zobrist has value. For one thing, he can bat lead off and Castro hasn't shown the OBP you want out of a lead off hitter. You're likely losing Fowler which was your lead off hitter so even if they had identical value as players that ability gives Zobrist a leg up. I've never personally been huge on the "vet leadership" card but Zobrist has been a part of a number of teams to make deep playoff runs. So, if you're someone who does value that sort of thing that's something he has on Castro. The last thing I would argue in favor of Zobrist is while Castro probably could play in the OF if you ask him to he hasn't done it. In that regard, if we view both as place holders for either Alcantara, Baez, Torres or whomever at 2B long term, Zobrist offers you flexibility off the bench when that future 2B is ready for a full time job. And in that capacity he's a switch hitter. If nothing else, Zobrist is consistent. since breaking out in 2009 his OBP has been .405, .346, .353, .377, .354, .354, and .359. And while Zobrist may drop off some, I'm not entirely sure how much it will happen. If you look at a guy like Chipper Johns who was a similarly high walk and low K rate player, he lost most of his prime era power but even age 37-40 he was posting between .344-.388 OBP. This is the case with a lot of guys of that mold be it Moises Alou, Edgar Martinez, Wade Boggs, Barry Larkin, Tim Raines.....etc.
So, that's why I don't really see this as an all in type play for the next 3 years or whatever. To me Zobrist is the same move you are making with Lackey which is a good short term filler until you hopefully replace internally with younger players. You're betting on age with those two but in both cases, you're betting on things that regress well. I already outline Zobrist but with Lackey his swinging strike rate the past 3 seasons have been among his best(2nd, 3rd, and 5th respectively). Both could fall off a cliff the next year or two but you're playing the odds here and the odds suggest they wont. With 2B you could have bet on Castro but Zobrist made more sense with the other moves they made than Castro did.
Heyward is obviously a bit of a different case. The thing is he's basically making $15 mil next year, then roughly $21 mil a season for the next 7 if he doesn't opt out and when the contract finishes he'll get 4 $5 mil deferred payments from 2024-27. It's REALLY hard for him to underperform that deal assuming he's healthy. $21 mil in today's money should buy you around a 2.5-3 fWAR player which is around half what Heyward's been thus far and the next 3-5 years should be his "prime." That doesn't even account for inflation. Rusney Castillo having never played a game in the majors prior to his age 26 season signed a 7 year $72.5 mil deal($10.35 mil or ~$12.5 less a season than Heyward got). That's what "maybe's" in the international market can go for. Detractors will say, "well he hasn't hit more than 15 HRs the past 3 years and he's never drove in more than 82." My counter to that is Derek Jeter was arguably the best #2 hitter of the past generation and through age 22-25 had an ISO of .148, where as Heyward has an ISO of .163. Jeter hit more than 20 HR's 3 times(1999, 2001, and 2004) and drove in more than 80 3 times(1998, 1999, and 2006). Jason Heyward is a #2 hitter(talking more old thinking rather than the newer thinking where some would have you putting say Rizzo #2). The argument always comes down to the fact that #2 hitters aren't prototypical RF's and instead like Jeter tend to be MI or CF. That only matters in so far as you needing a prototypical RF and the cubs don't.
And more to the point, I don't really see a better move they could have made with the money. Year 2 is the worst money wise and they are paying those 3 $55 mil or roughly $18 mil per guy. I have a hard time believing say Price, Fowler and Castro out perform those 3 for roughly similar money. If we look at steamer projections they have Heyward at 4.8 fWAR, Lackey at 2.9 and Zobrist at 3.3 or 11 fWAR. Streamer has Price at 4.9 fWAR, Fowler at 3.2, and Castro at 1.5 or 9.6 fWAR. So, even if the projections are a little too negative on Castro or to high on the other side you're still still talking about equivalent or better usage of the money. Next year's FA class is pretty garbage as well. So, while I can see the present state of the cubs as well as the selling low of Castro being a bit messy because of these moves, I find it hard to argue against them being a better team for it.
