2013 Mock Offseason Thread

[illiniguy]

so studs still do become available (Justin Upton also comes to mind)

 

on occasion. Although we may no longer be seeing situations where guys like Cabrera come available when they are actually studs (as opposed to previously listed used to be studs). But you don't build your team with the expectations that you can get some other team's stud later.

Giancarlo Stanton will be available soon. The Marlins can't help themselves.

 

I hope so. That would be so awesome.

Agreed, and you know it's prolly gonna happen. Thanks to the Heath Bell And Jose Reyes deals. They'll want to shed payroll and they have Yellich coming.

[SouthSideRyan]

The 2013-14 class is definitely more interesting.

 

 

The FA class 2 years away is always more interesting because the 2 years in between where half of them get locked up pre-FA hasn't happened yet.

[XZero771679666304]

The 2013-14 class is definitely more interesting.

 

 

The FA class 2 years away is always more interesting because the 2 years in between where half of them get locked up pre-FA hasn't happened yet.

 

 

That fact doesn't make the upcoming class any less of a pile of [expletive].

[jersey cubs fan]

Throwing money at whatever players are the best of a given FA class with abandon

 

Why does it have to be "with abandon"?

 

That's just an unnecessary qualifier to justify the dumbass theory that the Cubs shouldn't acquire more players until some theoretical time in the future when they will be "ready to win".

[davell]

SSR, I mention the 3 guys we have, because I am very hopeful they all 3 become perennial 4 WAR guys. Rightly or wrongly, I think they actually will. Yes, I've been pushing 2014 for a long ass time, but I've also said it may be 2015 before we actually see the playoffs for a while too(yes, I waffled on that based on whats been done so far). As for trading away guys, all we have left of value to trade off is Garza. And we've lost our best chance with him already, if we were to do it. At best, it's a wait and see with him. If he stays healthy, pitches decently, but we don't get a Greinke package offered, we may as well keep him. As for what I want to add right now, how is McCarthy, Marcum types equivalent to nothing? Pitchers are risky in general, so I'd rather go shorter term on them, than on Edwin or Annibal, who aren't going to give much more production as it is. Those guys ARE available every offseason as FA. So why hamper the flexibility now when you can go short term? We're just going to disagree on trading, as a rule. I don't think it'll be a problem at all for us to add a bigtime middle of the order bat and a TOR starter thru trade by the end of 2014. And with the 3 guys we have, other role players that are already here, the rest can be filled in via FA and it doesn't have to be longterm deals unless it's an actual difference maker.

[illiniguy]

The 2013-14 class is definitely more interesting.

 

 

The FA class 2 years away is always more interesting because the 2 years in between where half of them get locked up pre-FA hasn't happened yet.

 

 

That fact doesn't make the upcoming class any less of a pile of [expletive].

But two years ago this class wasn't a pile of poop. It had a lot more guys who have since been extended. That's the point.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Fortunately, the Cubs are also a pile of poop so we don't need an amazing free agent class to improve the team.

[davell]

Seriously though, who out of THIS FA class do people want? Hitting is complete dog [expletive]. Upton? I can buy that and I'm not opposed. But who else? Pitching? Is it Annibal and Jackson? I'm asking because I don't see the guys out there that get us into the playoffs, at least not consistently. I posted a plan with Upton somewhere, I at least saw potential and no longterm commitments other than Upton added on. Butif we aren't making the playoffs and the guys we're acquiring are all available every offseason anyway, why not let some young guys get more of a chance and if we wind up 67-95 instead of 77-85, what's the big deal? We've bettered the draft position, possibly have added another young guy or two to our longterm plans, and can still go get the exact guys we're talking about during the next offseason.

[XZero771679666304]

Throwing money at whatever players are the best of a given FA class with abandon

 

Why does it have to be "with abandon"?

 

That's just an unnecessary qualifier to justify the dumbass theory that the Cubs shouldn't acquire more players until some theoretical time in the future when they will be "ready to win".

 

No one is saying no players should be acquired. But the implication from some seems to be that grabbing ancillary pieces on the FA market isn't enough, and that the FO needs to be pursuing the best FAs, regardless of fit, just because the money is there . That would be spending stupidly, and with abandon.

 

I'm all in favor of pursuing guys who may help now and down the road (like Upton and Sanchez), I just don't suffer from an irrational desire to see money flung about to satiate a need to see the FO "try" and compete when it would just be pretense.

 

And no doubt Jed & Theo will be active in the market, though it might not be to the degree some people would like to see (not pursuing the "best" players on the markey just because they're there).

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Yeah, why would we want the best players anyway.

 

Unless that player is a SS or 1b, there's a fit.

Edited September 28, 2012 by Hairyducked Idiot

[SouthSideRyan]

Here's the thing with the 2014 class. If we go out and win 72 games next year and don't have a protected pick, are you ok giving up all that coveted draft money to sign somebody who's actually really good? Even if you don't think we can contend in the following season? When it's all said and done, how many guys are out there that are worth that to you. Wright and...Wainwright maybe? Johnson? Isn't it concerning that one of the best pitchers on the market that offseason is a guy people are so anxious to trade away?

[XZero771679666304]

Yeah, why would we want the best players anyway.

 

Because the best of a shitty pool might not be that good? Or a good fit? Or even make sense except in that aquiring them might make some petulant kids feel better for five minutes, until they realize it didn't really help all that much?

 

Again, no one is saying not to spend some money on some players, just that emptying the coffers just because the money is there isn't necessarily a good idea.

 

Other than Upton and Sanchez or Greinke, what is there that begs to be bought? Certainly nothing that's turning the 2013 Cubs into contenders, or help beyond next year (unless it's spun off for more prospects).

[WrigleyField 22]

without sacrificing our ability to build from within.

 

That's such an absurd caveat. You can't run a major league baseball team with the idea that you will only use resources on MLB players if there is no conceivable way that the opportunity cost is something that you might have wanted in the future.

 

Well, you can, but you end up with a bullpen full of people nobody ever heard of at and the worst Cubs team in 45 years.

No its not.

 

I had a longer response but my phone freaked out.

 

Bottom line we can make improvements to the big league club gradually while not sacrificing the ability to build our system. Then at some point balance it more towards the ML club. But some people think we can tank and then flip a switch to build the big league club once "we're ready". We have to add talent as its available so when our guys like Castro and Rizzo are in their prime we are able to capitalize right away. But if we try to tank and then try for a 30 game improvement we'll find we have likely wasted at least a year of their prime for nothing except marginally better draft position.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jersey cubs fan]

might make some petulant kids feel better for five minutes, until they realize it didn't really help all that much?

 

Jesus this is stupid. Really stupid nonsense.

[WrigleyField 22]

Yeah, why would we want the best players anyway.

 

Because the best of a [expletive] pool might not be that good? Or a good fit? Or even make sense except in that aquiring them might make some petulant kids feel better for five minutes, until they realize it didn't really help all that much?

 

Again, no one is saying not to spend some money on some players, just that emptying the coffers just because the money is there isn't necessarily a good idea.

 

Other than Upton and Sanchez or Greinke, what is there that begs to be bought? Certainly nothing that's turning the 2013 Cubs into contenders, or help beyond next year (unless it's spun off for more prospects).

Any plan for playoffs in 2013 hinges on Castro, Rizzo, Shark, Wood, Castillo, Garza. But if we trot out Brooks [expletive] Raley or some [expletive], any playoff plan hinges on 2/3 of the league dying in a 20 plane crash.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SouthSideRyan]

Seriously though, who out of THIS FA class do people want? Hitting is complete dog [expletive]. Upton? I can buy that and I'm not opposed. But who else? Pitching? Is it Annibal and Jackson? I'm asking because I don't see the guys out there that get us into the playoffs, at least not consistently. I posted a plan with Upton somewhere, I at least saw potential and no longterm commitments other than Upton added on. Butif we aren't making the playoffs and the guys we're acquiring are all available every offseason anyway, why not let some young guys get more of a chance and if we wind up 67-95 instead of 77-85, what's the big deal? We've bettered the draft position, possibly have added another young guy or two to our longterm plans, and can still go get the exact guys we're talking about during the next offseason.

 

The pitching in this organization stinks out loud. The pitching on the FA market this offseason is quite good and deep. Our current 2013 rotation has a guy with an arm issue in the 1 spot, Travis Wood at the 3, and Roast at the 5(Still better than Casey Coleman) I see no reason not to bring in at least 2 of Villanueva, McCarthy, Marcum, Haren, Sanchez, Jackson, Peavy, Liriano, or Dempster to go along with several relief arms out there who could actually provide some stability to the pen from the word go rather than sorting through 5 shitty arms for the first 3 arms before settling on who actually isn't embarrassing.

Edited September 28, 2012 by SouthSideRyan

[SouthSideRyan]

But the implication from some seems to be that grabbing ancillary pieces on the FA market isn't enough, and that the FO needs to be pursuing the best FAs, regardless of fit, just because the money is there.

 

Did you mean to say inference?

[WrigleyField 22]

By the way we could even see us make a FA signing that costs compensation. Based on age and ability, a guy like Upton could be worth the lost conpensation depending in his cost relative to the market. But we're gonna look at it from all angles.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Yeah, why would we want the best players anyway.

 

Because the best of a [expletive] pool might not be that good? Or a good fit? Or even make sense except in that aquiring them might make some petulant kids feel better for five minutes, until they realize it didn't really help all that much?

 

Again, no one is saying not to spend some money on some players, just that emptying the coffers just because the money is there isn't necessarily a good idea.

 

Other than Upton and Sanchez or Greinke, what is there that begs to be bought? Certainly nothing that's turning the 2013 Cubs into contenders, or help beyond next year (unless it's spun off for more prospects).

 

Okay, so let's buy Upton and Sanchez and Greinke.

 

Like I said, of course there's a fit. There are major-league players available, and we are nowhere near full up on those.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

By the way we could even see us make a FA signing that costs compensation. Based on age and ability, a guy like Upton could be worth the lost conpensation depending in his cost relative to the market. But we're gonna look at it from all angles.

 

The compensation this year would be a 2nd-round pick. If a guy is worth having, he's worth giving up a 2nd-round pick for.

[davell]

Here's the thing with the 2014 class. If we go out and win 72 games next year and don't have a protected pick, are you ok giving up all that coveted draft money to sign somebody who's actually really good? Even if you don't think we can contend in the following season? When it's all said and done, how many guys are out there that are worth that to you. Wright and...Wainwright maybe? Johnson? Isn't it concerning that one of the best pitchers on the market that offseason is a guy people are so anxious to trade away?

actually, if we win 72 games, it means we made solid progress. So while it would sting, I'd give up the 1st, if it looks like a move that puts us truly into contention. I'd try my best to trade for the bat and arm first though.

[SouthSideRyan]

Yeah, why would we want the best players anyway.

 

Because the best of a [expletive] pool might not be that good? Or a good fit? Or even make sense except in that aquiring them might make some petulant kids feel better for five minutes, until they realize it didn't really help all that much?

 

Again, no one is saying not to spend some money on some players, just that emptying the coffers just because the money is there isn't necessarily a good idea.

 

Other than Upton and Sanchez or Greinke, what is there that begs to be bought? Certainly nothing that's turning the 2013 Cubs into contenders, or help beyond next year (unless it's spun off for more prospects).

 

Is there some sort of epidemic wiping out most of this year's free agents some time around November 2013? How do any of the pitchers I listed not help beyond next year?

[XZero771679666304]

Seriously though, who out of THIS FA class do people want? Hitting is complete dog [expletive]. Upton? I can buy that and I'm not opposed. But who else? Pitching? Is it Annibal and Jackson? I'm asking because I don't see the guys out there that get us into the playoffs, at least not consistently. I posted a plan with Upton somewhere, I at least saw potential and no longterm commitments other than Upton added on. Butif we aren't making the playoffs and the guys we're acquiring are all available every offseason anyway, why not let some young guys get more of a chance and if we wind up 67-95 instead of 77-85, what's the big deal? We've bettered the draft position, possibly have added another young guy or two to our longterm plans, and can still go get the exact guys we're talking about during the next offseason.

 

I'd buy Upton, Sanchez, McCarthy and ac ouple potential flips like Marcum and Blanton. I think we have proceed as if BJax is a bust, even if he's not. Other than that, I just don't see anything there worth investing in. Third base is a black hole, but I don't see much hope there on the market. We're set at 1B and SS, and unless Sori and DeJesus are dealt, at LF and RF. I'm not sold on Castillo, but again, there's nothing there at C in the FA pool.

 

Really, there's nothing there at any position aside from OF, where it Bourn, Upton or a reclamation project like Sizemore, and SP, where it's Greinke, McCarthy, Sanchez and Jackson (who is somewhat volitile and represented by Boras, iirc). There's some young pitching and potentially a CF, but the other solutions just aren't there.

 

There are some older guys likely to get multiyear deals that might make next year slightly more tolerable, but would be essentially worthless beyond.

[XZero771679666304]

But the implication from some seems to be that grabbing ancillary pieces on the FA market isn't enough, and that the FO needs to be pursuing the best FAs, regardless of fit, just because the money is there.

 

Did you mean to say inference?

 

I suppose I did.

[davell]

SSR, I have zero issue adding 2 of that group of pitching. I'd just stay away from Sanchez and Jackson because they'll be the two that get longer deals and aren't necessarily any better than the rest.