Cubs "Probably Out" On Top-End Free Agents

5 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

I can’t quite connect how - after a decade+ of begging for payroll efficiency to be prioritized over all else and whining about every dollar spent in FA - this possible outcome is like a shock or upsetting to Cubs fans. We’ve helped mold the human life landscape into something more owner friendly than ever, labor’s just getting cheaper, easier to discard, easier to discredit, easier to replace, and I guess a “good” thing out of that is its very possible to build a high quality MLB/NBL team (:confetti cannon:)

While there is a small contingent of fans who *love* Rays-style baseball, I'm not one of them and I suspect most fans feel the same.

As someone who was recently immersed in the Red Sox, watching them get back to their spending ways and get into the mix on literally every good free agent this winter is pretty damned fun.

Feel like Jed has a secret extension in place. Seems like this would be the offseason to finally do something bold (and maybe he still will via trade) to make the playoffs but he doesn’t seem to be too concerned about it

It’s going to be funny when we’re in June after the offense hasn’t hit yet again for a 6 week stretch and Jed is sitting there acting surprised

1. This is Bob Nightengale, in the slowest period of the major league season, needing to write something to fulfill his job title as 'baseball writer'. Yawn, grain of salt, etc etc

2. While I kinda get Tom's point, even in his very Tom way of saying it, I think it's....putting the cart before the horse? Is that the right analogy? There's a budget of debatable firmness in place internally as well as league wide guardrails that reinforce those budget constraints. I wish the players took home 80% of the revenue and we could stop worrying about making sure PTR gets his standard 15% yearly ROI for effectively doing nothing. But that's not the case. I want Jed to go out and spend every single dollar he can pry away from the ownership group, and I realize that with that pool of money, there are decisions that need to be made to maximize actual production on the field. $20m or $30m or whatever doesn't just add 3-4 wins to your record. I'm not sitting here griping about Cody Bellinger Making Too Much Money. I'm saying I would rather have Corbin Burnes because I think it makes us win more, and while there exists a world where we can have a both, it's much less likely than in a world where someone else is paying Bellinger the money he deserves. To use one example. 

9 minutes ago, UMFan83 said:

Feel like Jed has a secret extension in place. Seems like this would be the offseason to finally do something bold (and maybe he still will via trade) to make the playoffs but he doesn’t seem to be too concerned about it

It’s going to be funny when we’re in June after the offense hasn’t hit yet again for a 6 week stretch and Jed is sitting there acting surprised

They'll blame the weather. It's always something that is uncontrollable so we can all shrug our shoulders. It doesn't matter. Jed is a placeholder. Whoever comes next will be a clone. That's what the Ricketts want. 

13 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

They'll blame the weather. It's always something that is uncontrollable so we can all shrug our shoulders. It doesn't matter. Jed is a placeholder. Whoever comes next will be a clone. That's what the Ricketts want. 

Yep, if Jed is gone it will be someone similar to him. That is what Ricketts wants.

Probably? Those new coaches will probably be the highlight of the offseason. And some dumbo fans will eat it up. 

Do you think that going slightly over the luxury tax last season is in any way playing a factor in the offseason decision making?  I was told that it's not a big deal that the Cubs went slightly over, but if Jed being unable to track his spending correctly is the reason the Cubs decided to have a boring offseason, I'm gonna be so annoyed.

10 minutes ago, UMFan83 said:

Do you think that going slightly over the luxury tax last season is in any way playing a factor in the offseason decision making?  I was told that it's not a big deal that the Cubs went slightly over, but if Jed being unable to track his spending correctly is the reason the Cubs decided to have a boring offseason, I'm gonna be so annoyed.

Probably not. I doubt that the reason the Cubs aren't even bothering with Soto or Burnes is because:

1. They'd have to give up a 5th round pick now and a little IFA money
2. That they had to pay 10% tax on the difference in going over the tax

They'd be just as out on those players if they had ended a few million under the LT. I don't necessarily think it has to be a boring offseason because they're not going after Burnes or Soto. They have to be trade aggressive and what I think gets lost in the reporting and the framing of this is that just because the Cubs aren't in on Burnes doesn't mean they can't be in on another exciting, top-line rotation arm, for example. 

The Cubs rarely make any chatter or smoke when it comes to trades and rumors, so that stuff could be very much bubbling under the surface and we just don't know. 

So never count out the Ricketts finding ways to disappoint, but the linking of Bellinger trade rumors with "payroll is going down" feels reactionary. 

Anyone who's tried to game out this offseason (say with a certain website's handy payroll blueprint tool) can see things are really tight even with payroll being flat at the LT.  If you want Jed to make substantial improvements this winter, which everyone seems to, the options are to free up money or expend a good bit of prospect capital.  Bellinger is easily the most logical choice for the former.  There's also the simple fact that money becomes less useful the deeper into FA we get into FA, so what Boob framed as desperation might be more like urgency.

1 hour ago, UMFan83 said:

Do you think that going slightly over the luxury tax last season is in any way playing a factor in the offseason decision making?  I was told that it's not a big deal that the Cubs went slightly over, but if Jed being unable to track his spending correctly is the reason the Cubs decided to have a boring offseason, I'm gonna be so annoyed.

I think it's rather amusing, we have several here who do an excellent job tracking cub payroll pro bono publico following each roster move. And Jed has an entire compensated accounting staff that can't add 2+2 and carry the one.

40 minutes ago, Bertz said:

So never count out the Ricketts finding ways to disappoint, but the linking of Bellinger trade rumors with "payroll is going down" feels reactionary. 

Anyone who's tried to game out this offseason (say with a certain website's handy payroll blueprint tool) can see things are really tight even with payroll being flat at the LT.  If you want Jed to make substantial improvements this winter, which everyone seems to, the options are to free up money or expend a good bit of prospect capital.  Bellinger is easily the most logical choice for the former.  There's also the simple fact that money becomes less useful the deeper into FA we get into FA, so what Boob framed as desperation might be more like urgency.

But as I noted in a differnt thread, Bellinger is likely tied to Soto in a way that he's a consultation prize. The longer Soto drags this out, and he's a Boras dude, so like January, the less valuable the money will be. If the Cubs discount him, then they are not accomplishing the reason for trading him. If they're not discounting him and not taking back a bad contract (which again negates the reasons), they aren't getting much for him but salary relief. The urgency part makes their hand weaker still.

1 hour ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Probably not. I doubt that the reason the Cubs aren't even bothering with Soto or Burnes is because:

1. They'd have to give up a 5th round pick now and a little IFA money
2. That they had to pay 10% tax on the difference in going over the tax

They'd be just as out on those players if they had ended a few million under the LT. I don't necessarily think it has to be a boring offseason because they're not going after Burnes or Soto. They have to be trade aggressive and what I think gets lost in the reporting and the framing of this is that just because the Cubs aren't in on Burnes doesn't mean they can't be in on another exciting, top-line rotation arm, for example. 

The Cubs rarely make any chatter or smoke when it comes to trades and rumors, so that stuff could be very much bubbling under the surface and we just don't know. 

I agree, jed doesn't tip his hand on trades. After Thanksgiving, there's the industry expectation this offseason should be very busy.

BTW 1908, I recall you gave a short list of names who were 5th round picks by the cubs in years past. Do you recall any.? Were any exciting?

3 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

But as I noted in a differnt thread, Bellinger is likely tied to Soto in a way that he's a consultation prize. The longer Soto drags this out, and he's a Boras dude, so like January, the less valuable the money will be. If the Cubs discount him, then they are not accomplishing the reason for trading him. If they're not discounting him and not taking back a bad contract (which again negates the reasons), they aren't getting much for him but salary relief. The urgency part makes their hand weaker still.

All of what you said makes complete sense. So they just keep him. Not really a big deal. Plus there are teams that could use him that have nothing to do with Soto. Mariners & Phillies are examples of two teams but I am sure there are more. Seems only the Mets, Yankees, LA, Jays and maybe one more team are going after him. So that leaves over 20 other teams to talk to. Honestly if no one wants him at Jed’s price I am fine with him on the team. I am glad Jed isn’t rolling over and trading him just to trade him. 

4 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

All of what you said makes complete sense. So they just keep him. Not really a big deal. Plus there are teams that could use him that have nothing to do with Soto. Mariners & Phillies are examples of two teams but I am sure there are more. Seems only the Mets, Yankees, LA, Jays and maybe one more team are going after him. So that leaves over 20 other teams to talk to. Honestly if no one wants him at Jed’s price I am fine with him on the team. I am glad Jed isn’t rolling over and trading him just to trade him. 

I'm not against it, but they will have to go the trade route and to get pitching through trades is costly indeed. 

8 minutes ago, LBiittner said:

I agree, jed doesn't tip his hand on trades. After Thanksgiving, there's the industry expectation this offseason should be very busy.

BTW 1908, I recall you gave a short list of names who were 5th round picks by the cubs in years past. Do you recall any.? Were any exciting?

Brandon Birdsell was a 5th round pick! So they're not 100% awful all the time, but here's the Cubs 5th rounders going back to 2016

Bailey Clark, RHP
Nelson Velazquez, OF
Andy Weber, 2b
Jake Burgmann, RHP
Koen Moreno, RHP
Liam Spence, RHP
Brandon Birdsell, RHP
Michael Carico, C
Ariel Armas, C

Most of these names are "who the hell is that?" (looking at you Jake Burgmann). I could probably replace 6 or 7 of these names with completely made up people and 95% of people wouldn't know...you'd kind of have to be a draft dork to even remember most of them! Every so often a Nelson Velazquez breaks through as a fringe player, and Brandon Birdsell will almost assuredly make the MLB at some point. But if the price you pay for signing talent is missing out on Bailey Clark or Liam Spence...you make that trade every time and twice on Sunday.

8 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

I'm not against it, but they will have to go the trade route and to get pitching through trades is costly indeed. 

They have enough prospects to make a trade for pitching if they need to. But I also think they can just sign a FA pitcher if the asset cost is too much for a pitcher they have interest in. Any of this could be done with or without Bellinger. 

1 minute ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Brandon Birdsell was a 5th round pick! So they're not 100% awful all the time, but here's the Cubs 5th rounders going back to 2016

Bailey Clark, RHP
Nelson Velazquez, OF
Andy Weber, 2b
Jake Burgmann, RHP
Koen Moreno, RHP
Liam Spence, RHP
Brandon Birdsell, RHP
Michael Carico, C
Ariel Armas, C

Most of these names are "who the hell is that?" (looking at you Jake Burgmann). I could probably replace 6 or 7 of these names with completely made up people and 95% of people wouldn't know...you'd kind of have to be a draft dork to even remember most of them! Every so often a Nelson Velazquez breaks through as a fringe player, and Brandon Birdsell will almost assuredly make the MLB at some point. But if the price you pay for signing talent is missing out on Bailey Clark or Liam Spence...you make that trade every time and twice on Sunday.

Thank you and oh my. Hardly nothing to regret losing. 

How is this news?  This is more confirmation on what we already knew. 

With Jed you have to set your expectations like this. There's the tier he should shop in which is the Soto/Burnes tier. Then there's the tier we expect him to shop in, like Alonso/Flaherty/Kikuchi/etc. Wherever we expect him to shop, drop it one more tier and that's where Jed is going to be. They'll once again be projected for somewhere between 80-84 wins and some here will desperately cling to theory about some bigger picture. When reality is more mediocre baseball and hoping to stumble into a wild card spot.

Anybody on this forum could have written an article saying "Cubs probably out on the high end FAs" and have an 80% chance of being correct every year.

Don't see how Bob is breaking any news here, but using the word "probably" sounds more like speculation.

19 hours ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Brandon Birdsell was a 5th round pick! So they're not 100% awful all the time, but here's the Cubs 5th rounders going back to 2016

Bailey Clark, RHP
Nelson Velazquez, OF
Andy Weber, 2b
Jake Burgmann, RHP
Koen Moreno, RHP
Liam Spence, RHP
Brandon Birdsell, RHP
Michael Carico, C
Ariel Armas, C

Most of these names are "who the hell is that?" (looking at you Jake Burgmann). I could probably replace 6 or 7 of these names with completely made up people and 95% of people wouldn't know...you'd kind of have to be a draft dork to even remember most of them! Every so often a Nelson Velazquez breaks through as a fringe player, and Brandon Birdsell will almost assuredly make the MLB at some point. But if the price you pay for signing talent is missing out on Bailey Clark or Liam Spence...you make that trade every time and twice on Sunday.

Point/counterpoint:

Point: I agree with you, 98% of draft picks are not worth nearly as much as an actual major league player, or even the incremental cost or however you want to define it.

Counterpoint: Extending that sample size to 2014 brings in a certain Mississippi southpaw who has been kinda awesome the last few years.

Countercounterpoint: If you would tell me that the last remaining barrier in signing a QO player this offseason would be that we were giving up a top 30ish starter in 2033, I'd still make that trade. 

12 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Point/counterpoint:

Point: I agree with you, 98% of draft picks are not worth nearly as much as an actual major league player, or even the incremental cost or however you want to define it.

Counterpoint: Extending that sample size to 2014 brings in a certain Mississippi southpaw who has been kinda awesome the last few years.

Countercounterpoint: If you would tell me that the last remaining barrier in signing a QO player this offseason would be that we were giving up a top 30ish starter in 2033, I'd still make that trade. 

Ah yeah, Justin Steele was a 5th rounder! Sometimes I forget how long ago it was when we picked him and how long it took for him to break out. And a fair point to make. Probably means I need to take the Jake Burgmann slander back. Guy still has a chance...

All kidding aside, I entirely agree with everything here. A 5th round pick should never be the reason we worry about signing a FA. They so rarely become anything meaningful (we had to go back to 2014 to find the first stable MLB player the Cubs picked in that round) that the risk of trading a potential MLB player for the chance to sign a guaranteed good player today should always be taken. 

42 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Ah yeah, Justin Steele was a 5th rounder! Sometimes I forget how long ago it was when we picked him and how long it took for him to break out. And a fair point to make. Probably means I need to take the Jake Burgmann slander back. Guy still has a chance...

 

All kidding aside, I entirely agree with everything here. A 5th round pick should never be the reason we worry about signing a FA. They so rarely become anything meaningful (we had to go back to 2014 to find the first stable MLB player the Cubs picked in that round) that the risk of trading a potential MLB player for the chance to sign a guaranteed good player today should always be taken. 

I agree with both you and squally that losing a pick shouldn’t matter. But I think it does for the cubs. Not necessarily the 5th round pick. Had they not gone over the LT this year and lost only be a 2nd round pick, I don’t think they would so it anyway. 

1 minute ago, Rcal10 said:

I agree with both you and squally that losing a pick shouldn’t matter. But I think it does for the cubs. Not necessarily the 5th round pick. Had they not gone over the LT this year and lost only be a 2nd round pick, I don’t think they would so it anyway. 

I think it's maybe a problem of conflating causation and correlation. Like there are only a handful of these guys every year, us not signing one (and we have before) does not equate to the Cubs overly/disproportionately caring about the pick loss as much as it means that there are just not a lot of these players out there and there are 30 teams. Like, the conclusion of the Juan Soto saga will not be that 29 teams were unwilling to commit serious money to a free agent of his caliber, it just means that he can only sign with one team. 

The value lost in the QO is not the 1 in 15 chance of drafting another Justin Steele, it's the pool money that impacts the rest of the class(including what you can offer your 1st round pick) on top of losing that pick.  This is why with rare exception the best run teams(even those who spend significantly above the Cubs level) do not sign a QO FA unless they've also lost a QO FA to hedge.