Hoyer, McLeod officially join Cubs

[Hairyducked Idiot]

you're being VERY charitable calling anyone in that outfield average.

 

I already addressed Byrd and Jackson.

 

Soriano cleared the NL and MLB average for RF OPS last season, and he did it with a .266 BABIP.

[USSoccer]

ETA: I just caught that you declared Jackson to be average in CF and Byrd to be average in RF. Come on, Kyle. You can argue better than that.

 

Yeah, that was cheating a bit on Byrd. But Jackson's a legit projection.

 

2011 average NL CFer: .262 .333 .409

2012 ZIPS projection for Brett Jackson: .254 .335 .419

 

And again, the Chicago Cubs, with a $130 million dollar payroll in a division with such economic powers as Milwaukee, Cincinatti and St Louis, shouldn't be relying on ZIPS projections for a rookie CF in order to be merely mediocre offensively.

 

Do you guys really believe this, or is this just some sort of academic, devil's advocate sort of thing?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

 

And again, the Chicago Cubs, with a $130 million dollar payroll in a division with such economic powers as Milwaukee, Cincinatti and St Louis, shouldn't be relying on ZIPS projections for a rookie CF in order to be merely mediocre offensively.

 

Do you guys really believe this, or is this just some sort of academic, devil's advocate sort of thing?

 

Remember, we're not talking about we want. We're talking about your admittedly Ramirez-fan-fueled nightmare where we don't improve *anything* on the offense in free agency or trades and spend all of our extra money on pitching.

 

Even in that scenario, the offense is within spitting distance of average.

[USSoccer]

 

And again, the Chicago Cubs, with a $130 million dollar payroll in a division with such economic powers as Milwaukee, Cincinatti and St Louis, shouldn't be relying on ZIPS projections for a rookie CF in order to be merely mediocre offensively.

 

Do you guys really believe this, or is this just some sort of academic, devil's advocate sort of thing?

 

Remember, we're not talking about we want. We're talking about your admittedly Ramirez-fan-fueled nightmare where we don't improve *anything* on the offense in free agency and spend all of our extra money on pitching.

 

Even in that scenario, the offense is within spitting distance of average.

 

And again, what pitching outside of Wilson is worth spending on? And assuming you get him, you have Wilson and Garza, not Lincecum and Cain. Wilson isn't Cliff Lee.

 

I'm saying if we miss out on one of the 1B FA's, we're screwed.

[dew1679666265]

Sizemore has been broken for like 2 years now and just got non-tendered by Cleveland. You're hoping you catch lightning in a bottle with him. I have no idea what a Headley is, but it sounds like a league average player. Its settling for like the 5th best options out there.

 

Sizemore has been broken for a couple of years, but is a very talented player with a ton of upside. I'm not expecting him to become his old self again next year, but there's a chance it could happen. Burnitz was never the player Sizemore is when healthy, though, so I'm still not sure where that comparison is coming from.

 

As for Headley, he's been well above league average third baseman the past couple of years and will be 27 next year - the beginning of his prime. I'm not convinced he'll make a huge jump upon entering his prime years, but if he's going to then next year is the time to do it. He showed solid power in the minors and has always been a patient hitter, so it's not like I'm advocating bringing in a guy with little to no upside.

 

And you're on drugs if you're going to put all your eggs in the "Matt Kemp will definitely hit the market, and when he does we'll sign him so it's ok to pass/miss out on every good offensive player going into 2012 because we'll get Matt Kemp" basket. That's not exactly the kind of sound planning that wins championships.

 

Not sure where I've made this argument. I said I'm very much in support of going all out for Prince/Pujols this year and it's very important we get one of the two. But if the worst case scenario happens and we miss out on them, then putting the money into two stud pitchers is better than putting it into an old, oft-injured third baseman who is likely to decline.

 

At that point, you do the best you can in a bad scenario and you surround your fantastic pitching staff with high upside offensive guys who have the potential to help you long term and could help you short term. Then you have the money to pursue a guy like Kemp next offseason should he come available.

 

Again, it's not ideal but it's better than pouring too much money into Aramis hoping for an old, oft-injured third baseman to stay healthy and productive enough to warrant his $15 million per year contract through his age 37 season.

 

If we sign Pujols or Fielder, fine. Whatever. If we don't, no amount of mental gymnastics and projecting 2013 signings or whatever will make us not suck on offense. There's no really likely scenario where we aren't really below average in 2012 offensively.

 

Below average would probably be the likely outcome for that offense, but with the upside to be above average. Really below average is probably the worst case scenario - it's assuming no improvement from Headley, more injuries for Grady and another down year for Soto.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

And again, what pitching outside of Wilson is worth spending on? And assuming you get him, you have Wilson and Garza, not Lincecum and Cain. Wilson isn't Cliff Lee.

 

I'm saying if we miss out on one of the 1B FA's, we're screwed.

 

Let's just say we spend the remaining $40 million on Wilson and someone middling like Oswalt.

 

If we take Aramis Ramirez's mother's projections for his 2012 and assume that the Baker Brigade is replacement level, then you are still left with no more than a 4-win gap. A realistic projection is more like a 1-2 WAR gap.

 

Assuming Pena drops back a little and Pujols recovers to his 2010 numbers, that'a 5-win gap. From Fielder to Pena is about 3.5.

 

Using 2011 WAR (extrapolating to a full season for Oswalt), you get 5.8 WAR for replacing the fifth-starter horrors with CJ Wilson, and you get 3 wins for replacing Wells with Oswalt.

 

There are many paths by which the Cubs' remaining $40 million can improve the team significantly. It's absurd to simultaneously argue that the Cubs are terrible and that there's only two ways that $40 million worth of players can improve them.

[treebird]

you're being VERY charitable calling anyone in that outfield average.

 

I already addressed Byrd and Jackson.

 

Soriano cleared the NL and MLB average for RF OPS last season, and he did it with a .266 BABIP.

 

ONE clearing the ops average for your position by 11 points while sporting an obp 40 points below average does not make you an average offensive left fielder.

 

TWO the numbers for the position as a whole are just that: for the position as a whole. if you are a starter and hit what the position as a whole hit, you are below average, as those numbers incorporate all sorts of other crap guys who got at bats there but weren't good enough to be starters. the cubs are going to have those guys too, and they are going to bring our numbers for the positions as a whole down as well.

[Guest]

Is that offense that much worse than this one?

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/SFG/2010.shtml

 

Right. It's clearly not ideal, but having a fantastic pitching staff and a really good defense can work if you get some breaks.

 

A team with a $130m payroll in the NL Central shouldn't have to rely on pitching health and "breaks"

 

That's going to be the case next year whether they bring back Ramirez or not. I mean, just run the math. 135 million payroll last year. This year..

 

70 million committed for 6 players(Soriano, Z, Byrd, Marmol, Marshall, Dempster)

19 million for 5 arbitration eligibles using MLBTR estimates(Garza, Soto, Wells, Baker; DeWitt & Hill non-tendered) + Samardzija

5 million for 11 pre-arbitration players(Castro, Jackson, Barney, Colvin, Campana, Lemahieu/Flaherty, Castillo, Cashner, Russell, 2 AAAA relievers)

 

Which leaves 40 million to fill 1B, 3B, and one SP spot, and a need for an impact player at all 3 of those spots to even have a prayer of competing(since we've filled in with minimum guys everywhere possible). Can you make Pujols/Fielder, Ramirez, and a real good SP work for 40 million? Maybe, but it's going to require some creativity(heavy backloading, trading Z/Soriano, possibly some combination of these), and you have little in the way of near-MLB ready assets to trade because you need them all to fill out this roster.

[davell]

Screwed how? For 2012? I'll give you that. But that's it. You spend hugely in the draft, build up the system to where you can afford to make a big deal or two and you add another elite player or 2 through FA. There's not a position player we HAVE to have for 2012. But heading into 2013, we've got to have added 2 middle of the order bats. But neither has to be Pujols or Fielder. Edited November 2, 2011 by davell

[Hairyducked Idiot]

you're being VERY charitable calling anyone in that outfield average.

 

I already addressed Byrd and Jackson.

 

Soriano cleared the NL and MLB average for RF OPS last season, and he did it with a .266 BABIP.

 

ONE clearing the ops average for your position by 11 points while sporting an obp 40 points below average does not make you an average offensive left fielder.

 

TWO the numbers for the position as a whole are just that: for the position as a whole. if you are a starter and hit what the position as a whole hit, you are below average, as those numbers incorporate all sorts of other crap guys who got at bats there but weren't good enough to be starters. the cubs are going to have those guys too, and they are going to bring our numbers for the positions as a whole down as well.

 

You are severely both effects, imo. Unless you aren't considering average to be a range and that a player who is a fractional run below the strict league average is a "below-average" player.

 

Remember, we're taking this in the context of a conversation that says that with Ramirez or an elite 1bman, the Cubs offense will be soooo bad that they'll lose 90 games even without an elite pitching staff.

Edited November 2, 2011 by Hairyducked Idiot

[treebird]

And again, what pitching outside of Wilson is worth spending on? And assuming you get him, you have Wilson and Garza, not Lincecum and Cain. Wilson isn't Cliff Lee.

 

I'm saying if we miss out on one of the 1B FA's, we're screwed.

 

Let's just say we spend the remaining $40 million on Wilson and someone middling like Oswalt.

 

If we take Aramis Ramirez's mother's projections for his 2012 and assume that the Baker Brigade is replacement level, then you are still left with no more than a 4-win gap. A realistic projection is more like a 1-2 WAR gap.

 

Assuming Pena drops back a little and Pujols recovers to his 2010 numbers, that'a 5-win gap. From Fielder to Pena is about 3.5.

 

Using 2011 WAR (extrapolating to a full season for Oswalt), you get 5.8 WAR for replacing the fifth-starter horrors with CJ Wilson, and you get 3 wins for replacing Wells with Oswalt.

 

There are many paths by which the Cubs' remaining $40 million can improve the team significantly. It's absurd to simultaneously argue that the Cubs are terrible and that there's only two ways that $40 million worth of players can improve them.

 

see, that's where i got messed up. i didn't know that the way to solve the problem was to sign 35 year old pitchers with back problems and pretend the would pitch full seasons at previous levels of ability.

 

yes, we can make this work if that happens.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

see, that's where i got messed up. i didn't know that the way to solve the problem was to sign 35 year old pitchers with back problems and pretend the would pitch full seasons at previous levels of ability.

 

yes, we can make this work if that happens.

 

If I'd been using previous levels of ability, the gap would have been a lot higher.

 

Are you saying that you don't think Hoystein can find a 3-WAR starting pitcher (which is what I was projecting for Oswalt) with whatever is left over of $40 million after signing Wilson?

[treebird]

you're being VERY charitable calling anyone in that outfield average.

 

I already addressed Byrd and Jackson.

 

Soriano cleared the NL and MLB average for RF OPS last season, and he did it with a .266 BABIP.

 

ONE clearing the ops average for your position by 11 points while sporting an obp 40 points below average does not make you an average offensive left fielder.

 

TWO the numbers for the position as a whole are just that: for the position as a whole. if you are a starter and hit what the position as a whole hit, you are below average, as those numbers incorporate all sorts of other crap guys who got at bats there but weren't good enough to be starters. the cubs are going to have those guys too, and they are going to bring our numbers for the positions as a whole down as well.

 

You are severely both effects, imo. Unless you aren't considering average to be a range and that a player who is a fractional run below the strict league average is a "below-average" player.

 

Remember, we're taking this in the context of a conversation that says that with Ramirez or an elite 1bman, the Cubs offense will be soooo bad that they'll lose 90 games even without an elite pitching staff.

 

what are you saying here? i am severely what-ing both effects? overstating? i am overstating the fact that you think soriano is an average left fielder with a 289 obp? i disagree.

 

the second line doesn't make much sense either. i guess you mean lose 90 games even WITH an elite pitching staff. and i don't think this offense is that bad. as soon as you tell me how we're getting an elite pitching staff (and 2011 + wilson + mystery 3war pitcher we can get without giving anything up) doesn't count.

[dew1679666265]

yeah, i could've phrased that better. meant starting pitchers, not starting position players.

 

Sorry about that, I read that as offensive starters and three relievers. The argument could easily be made that Wilson is better than Lincecum's 2010 and that Garza is better than Cain's 2010. Darvish is clearly a question mark, but Sanchez was a 2.4 WAR pitcher in 2010 and I don't think it's outlandish to think Darvish could provide close to that.

 

2010 Lincecum: 4.9 WAR

Wilson avg as starter: 5.2 WAR

 

2010 Cain: 3.7 WAR

2011 Garza: 5.0 WAR

[dew1679666265]

i guess people are talking about darvish.

 

Oh yeah. Pissing away eleventy billion dollars on a posting fee + contract for a Japanese pitcher is totally the way to go. I mean, those guys have a proven track record of stardom in MLB. Way better than a shorter term, lower dollar commitment to a guy who's been the best 3B in Chicago for like 30 years.

 

BRB, checking on how Daisuke/Irabu/Iwamura are doing.

 

Since all Japanese pitchers are exactly the same? Darvish is far from my #1 target, but there's plenty of reason to believe he can be very successful in the majors.

 

Velocity also continues to add some separation. Darvish has hit 97 mph with his fastball this year, and sat at 94 mph for most of the season. Kei Igawa never averaged better than 90 mph; Daisuke’s best season had him at 92 mph — and even Hideo Nomo wasn’t known for his velocity. Hiroki Kuroda averages 92 mph with his fastball. Here’s the list of qualified American starters who sat better than 94 mph this past season: Alexi Ogando, Justin Verlander, David Price, Michael Pineda, Edwin Jackson and Derek Holland.

 

Matsuzaka had a 2.95 ERA in eight seasons in Japan. He never once had an ERA under 2.00. He had an 8.7 K/9. Darvish just completed his fifth-straight season in which he had an ERA under 2.00 and a whip under 1.00. This year was his finest to date: 16-5, 1.48 ERA, 0.84 WHIP, 240 K, 32 BB, 5 HR in 207 IP (stats as of Sept. 27). Overall, Darvish managed a 1.996 ERA in his seven NPB years, with an 8.9 K/9. Demonstrably better.

[CUBZ99]

As for Headley, he's been well above league average third baseman the past couple of years and will be 27 next year - the beginning of his prime. I'm not convinced he'll make a huge jump upon entering his prime years, but if he's going to then next year is the time to do it. He showed solid power in the minors and has always been a patient hitter, so it's not like I'm advocating bringing in a guy with little to no upside.

 

I'm very much in favor of Headly over Ramirez, if the Padres are willing to move him for a reasonable price. He is a better defender and entering his prime.

 

Any idea of what the Padres would require to trade him?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

what are you saying here? i am severely what-ing both effects? overstating? i am overstating the fact that you think soriano is an average left fielder with a 289 obp? i disagree.

 

I type gud late at night.

 

Yes, overstating. If a guy is above the league average in OPS, then the weighting difference on OBP isn't going to take him that much further below average. Yes, he might technically be below the exact average, but unless you never want to call a player average (only above and below), then he's close enough.

 

 

the second line doesn't make much sense either. i guess you mean lose 90 games even WITH an elite pitching staff. and i don't think this offense is that bad. as soon as you tell me how we're getting an elite pitching staff (and 2011 + wilson + mystery 3war pitcher we can get without giving anything up) doesn't count.

 

I didn't say we were getting an elite pitching staff. I said that I was disagreeing with someone who said that the offense was that bad.

 

This is getting pointlessly bogged down by nitpicks and semantics.

 

Here are the two points I am making:

 

1) In an imaginary world where the Cubs re-sign Pena, put Jackson in CF, and do not make any other upgrades via FA or trade, the 2012 offense should still project to about 30 runs below league average. That's 2011 Atlanta: not good, but not something that goes down in the annals of awful.

 

2) There are other routes to improve the 2012 roster besides Prince-bert. The Cubs got 2.6 fWAR from Pena last season and he'd likely be available again at about the same price. They got 72 starts from No. 4 or worse pitchers last year totalling 0.8 fWAR. Spending the team's remaining $40 million on two starting pitchers to replace most of those 72 starts likely gives an immediate improvement in the same ballpark as signing one of the elite first basemen and one pitcher.

[dew1679666265]

see, that's where i got messed up. i didn't know that the way to solve the problem was to sign 35 year old pitchers with back problems and pretend the would pitch full seasons at previous levels of ability.

 

yes, we can make this work if that happens.

 

So your preferable route is to overpay for a 34 year old, oft-injured third baseman who has missed significant portions of time (60 games one year and 80 games another) in 2 of the past 3 seasons? Why is a good, but injury risk pitcher a bad idea, but a good, but injury risk hitter is a good idea?

[dew1679666265]

I'm very much in favor of Headly over Ramirez, if the Padres are willing to move him for a reasonable price. He is a better defender and entering his prime.

 

Any idea of what the Padres would require to trade him?

 

We were talking about that in another thread last night. I was guessing (complete guess) some package centered around Vitters. toonsterwu was speculating a package surrounding either McNutt or Szczur.

 

I'm wary about giving up that much for Headley, but could buy into it with enough persuasion, maybe. I really like Headley as a player, though.

[treebird]

see, that's where i got messed up. i didn't know that the way to solve the problem was to sign 35 year old pitchers with back problems and pretend the would pitch full seasons at previous levels of ability.

 

yes, we can make this work if that happens.

 

So your preferable route is to overpay for a 34 year old, oft-injured third baseman who has missed significant portions of time (60 games one year and 80 games another) in 2 of the past 3 seasons? Why is a good, but injury risk pitcher a bad idea, but a good, but injury risk hitter is a good idea?

 

the whole point from the beginning has been i am scared of what the team is next year if we don't sign aramis or pujols or fielder.

 

i don't know what "overpay" means in the context of ramirez, but i would rather bet on him being good and healthy next year than oswalt.

[dew1679666265]

And again, what pitching outside of Wilson is worth spending on? And assuming you get him, you have Wilson and Garza, not Lincecum and Cain. Wilson isn't Cliff Lee.

 

As I posted, 2011 Garza posted a better WAR than 2010 Cain and the 2 year average of Wilson starting posted a better WAR than 2010 Lincecum. If you want to compare Garza to Lincecum and Wilson to Cain, the two Cubs pitchers were still better. If you want to take either of Wilson's two seasons as a starting pitcher instead of an average, you still get a better WAR than either Lincecum or Cain.

 

Garza appears to have taken the next step to elite status and Wilson has been elite each of the two years he's been a starter. Garza will be 28 all of next season and while Wilson will be 31, he's only thrown around 700 ML innings so his arm should have more mileage than most 31 year old pitchers.

[davell]

What would it take to trade for Billy Butler? He's got 3 years at 24 mill left on his deal. Very solid with upside still as well and a definite heir apparent in Hosmer. How about finding a way to trade for Billingsley, Liriano, or Danks? We can probably swing one trade this offseason, but any of these guys would greatly help us and allow for a bigtime FA acquisition as well.

[dew1679666265]

the whole point from the beginning has been i am scared of what the team is next year if we don't sign aramis or pujols or fielder.

 

I'd be scared of the team next year with Aramis under contract. He's not a good bet to be healthy and he'll be 34 next year - his offense could easily decline even if he stays healthy.

 

As for Pujols/Prince, I've tried to be pretty clear in this thread that signing either of them is by far the most important thing we should do this offseason. However, what I've been arguing is that we're not hopelessly screwed if we miss on them. We can still cobble together a below average to average offense with some upside and a really good to elite pitching staff.

 

i don't know what "overpay" means in the context of ramirez, but i would rather bet on him being good and healthy next year than oswalt.

 

I probably would simply because he's not a pitcher, but the chances of either being healthy most of next year are pretty low. I'd prefer it if we stay away from both. And overpaying for Aramis would be giving him something a little below what he's likely to get on the market - for example, a $15 mil per year contract that runs through his age 37-38 seasons. Given the third base FA market, a 3/45 deal for him might be a hometown discount. I could see him getting an extra year and a few extra million AAV as a free agent.

[dew1679666265]

What would it take to trade for Billy Butler? He's got 3 years at 24 mill left on his deal. Very solid with upside still as well and a definite heir apparent in Hosmer. How about finding a way to trade for Billingsley, Liriano, or Danks? We can probably swing one trade this offseason, but any of these guys would greatly help us and allow for a bigtime FA acquisition as well.

 

Danks is the only guy I'm really interested in trading for this offseason, along with maybe Headley. I'm afraid Butler would cost too much in prospects for not being much of a power hitter at first, but I'd be willing to explore it.

[toonsterwu]

I'm not sure the Royals will move Billy Butler. He's always been viewed as a DH 1st, and a 1st baseman 2nd. I think they feel that their young offensive core is close to ready to take off and I could see them get aggressive and try to and find the pitching to make a push.