Rizzo

[Guest]

 

Bullpen excepted, the problem the team has is lack of stars. It's going to be very difficult to find those externally

 

Well, there are 2 available externally this offseason at a position where we have nobody blocking them...

 

I understand you're going off my definition here, but there's a little bit of nuance. Like I mentioned somewhere else, they can and should look into Ellsbury or Choo, and that would definitely help hedge against Castro and Rizzo not being great. Those guys carry performance/injury risk of their own though, and outside that, don't have the MVP level upside that Rizzo and Castro do. I guess you could make an argument for Ellsbury having that upside, but he's also way more volatile an investment than Choo.

 

They're more like adding Jackson than trading for Stanton, to put an example to the idea. Not that it should dissuade you from pursuing either, but for the purposes of making the Cubs a playoff team, adding Choo or Ellsbury alone won't do the trick if one of Castro/Rizzo doesn't break out or continues to slump.

[Guest]

I'd love to see them go after Stanton with I couple of those top 20 kids. I'd give a lot to get him.

[Guest]

The problem isn't whether he has big time power or not. He is very good. He has a lot of value because of defense but the simple fact is that this team needs him to be more than what he is currently. We need Goldschmit/Davis output not Adam Laroche.

He is supposed to be the cornerstone of the future, and certainly he can continue to improve. However the timeline of the turnaround of this team is based on Rizzo and Castro being stars not just good, or solid players.

Sometimes expectations can tarnish a players actually performance because fans want more.

 

this isn't the nba, 150 points of OPS from anthony rizzo isn't going to determine whether the team is good or not.

A .750 OPS Anthony Rizzo vs. a .900 OPS Anthony Rizzo would have a pretty significant effect on the team.

Especially when couple with a not horrible Starlin Castro versus a horrible Starlin Castro.

 

The Cubs may not be all that great even if those guys get really good, but they will definitely not be good if those guys aren't good.

 

that's silly. they both suck right now and the cubs could still be good with a decent bullpen and maybe one other bat. this is baseball, those 2 guys will have a large part in determining how good the cubs are in the next few years, but saying they couldn't be good without them is dumb.

[jersey cubs fan]

that's silly. they both suck right now and the cubs could still be good with a decent bullpen and maybe one other bat. this is baseball, those 2 guys will have a large part in determining how good the cubs are in the next few years, but saying they couldn't be good without them is dumb.

 

This tired nonsense about how good they would be with a better bullpen is pointless. Bullpen arms come and go. Even if this group was better the team wouldn't be all that special. The hope is that they will one day be an actual good team, like one that wins divisions and isn't just settling for being in contention for the second wild card spot. They need Castro and Rizzo to both be good, and especially not suck, in order to get there anytime soon. A bullpen isn't going to be the difference.

[Sammy Sofa]

Yeah, The Plan is clearly hinged on Castro, Rizzo and Shark being consistently very good at the very least.

[apete6]

Yeah, The Plan is clearly hinged on Castro, Rizzo and Shark being consistently very good at the very least.

 

With what they are paying Castro and Rizzo, they aren't expecting them to be the best players on the team. I still expect at least 1 mega free agent deal sometime in the next 2 offseasons. Who that will be is a mystery as there aren't likely too many big stars coming to free agency, especially hitters.

[Sammy Sofa]

Yeah, The Plan is clearly hinged on Castro, Rizzo and Shark being consistently very good at the very least.

 

With what they are paying Castro and Rizzo, they aren't expecting them to be the best players on the team. I still expect at least 1 mega free agent deal sometime in the next 2 offseasons. Who that will be is a mystery as there aren't likely too many big stars coming to free agency, especially hitters.

 

They're not expecting them to necessarily be the best players, but they are gambling on them being at least really good.

[jersey cubs fan]

Yeah, The Plan is clearly hinged on Castro, Rizzo and Shark being consistently very good at the very least.

 

With what they are paying Castro and Rizzo, they aren't expecting them to be the best players on the team. I still expect at least 1 mega free agent deal sometime in the next 2 offseasons. Who that will be is a mystery as there aren't likely too many big stars coming to free agency, especially hitters.

 

What they are paying them has nothing to do with anything. Their salaries are based strictly on what each party's negotiating position was at the time of the deal.

[Banedon]

Yeah, The Plan is clearly hinged on Castro, Rizzo and Shark being consistently very good at the very least.

 

With what they are paying Castro and Rizzo, they aren't expecting them to be the best players on the team. I still expect at least 1 mega free agent deal sometime in the next 2 offseasons. Who that will be is a mystery as there aren't likely too many big stars coming to free agency, especially hitters.

 

What they are paying them has nothing to do with anything. Their salaries are based strictly on what each party's negotiating position was at the time of the deal.

 

If they were banking on them being stars, they surely would've thrown an extra few mil on top, just for being awesome.

[treebird]

Yeah, The Plan is clearly hinged on Castro, Rizzo and Shark being consistently very good at the very least.

 

With what they are paying Castro and Rizzo, they aren't expecting them to be the best players on the team. I still expect at least 1 mega free agent deal sometime in the next 2 offseasons. Who that will be is a mystery as there aren't likely too many big stars coming to free agency, especially hitters.

 

What they are paying them has nothing to do with anything. Their salaries are based strictly on what each party's negotiating position was at the time of the deal.

 

If they were banking on them being stars, they surely would've thrown an extra few mil on top, just for being awesome.

 

it worked out perfectly with soriano.

[apete6]

Yeah, The Plan is clearly hinged on Castro, Rizzo and Shark being consistently very good at the very least.

 

With what they are paying Castro and Rizzo, they aren't expecting them to be the best players on the team. I still expect at least 1 mega free agent deal sometime in the next 2 offseasons. Who that will be is a mystery as there aren't likely too many big stars coming to free agency, especially hitters.

 

What they are paying them has nothing to do with anything. Their salaries are based strictly on what each party's negotiating position was at the time of the deal.

 

No, but I think that Mike Trout or someone like that would have gotten a whole hell of a lot more than Castro and Rizzo did. If they can be slightly above league average at their positions throughout the length of their cost-certain contracts, it will still be a bargain for the Cubs and allow them to go out and spend big at other positions. If they have to slightly overpay for David Price or Robinson Cano or Chase Headley in the next couple of years, then whatever...assuming the minor league guys continue to develop.

[jersey cubs fan]

No, but I think that Mike Trout or someone like that would have gotten a whole hell of a lot more than Castro and Rizzo did. If they can be slightly above league average at their positions throughout the length of their cost-certain contracts, it will still be a bargain for the Cubs and allow them to go out and spend big at other positions. If they have to slightly overpay for David Price or Robinson Cano or Chase Headley in the next couple of years, then whatever...assuming the minor league guys continue to develop.

 

Again, what they are paid does not matter. They got what they got because of the strength of each party's negotiating stance. As the Cubs are constructed, and with what is available to improve from outside, they need Castro and Rizzo to be good in order for the team to be good anytime soon. Their prospects are too far away, and far too unknown, from providing that production. And there's not much out there on the market to make a difference.

[Guest]

i love how we're just assuming the cubs aren't adding any significant major league pieces in the next 2 years, and that's there's "not much out there". there's as much out there as there always is through trades and FA, unless you're bemoaning the lack of guys like pujols. hamilton, and prince.

 

castro and rizzo have about the lowest combined production you could possibly imagine and the team is still a few breaks away from being .500 or better. i don't know how you can say the cubs can't be good in the next few years if rizzo/castro aren't great.

[Backtobanks]

i love how we're just assuming the cubs aren't adding any significant major league pieces in the next 2 years, and that's there's "not much out there". there's as much out there as there always is through trades and FA, unless you're bemoaning the lack of guys like pujols. hamilton, and prince.

 

castro and rizzo have about the lowest combined production you could possibly imagine and the team is still a few breaks away from being .500 or better. i don't know how you can say the cubs can't be good in the next few years if rizzo/castro aren't great.

 

There's not as much out there through FA as there used to be because teams are extending their young stars. There are differnce makers out there in the trade market, but they will be expensive in terms prospects to be traded in exchange. Obviously timing is important because the FO needs to assess which prospects to keep and which to trade.

[EhDubya]

No, but I think that Mike Trout or someone like that would have gotten a whole hell of a lot more than Castro and Rizzo did. If they can be slightly above league average at their positions throughout the length of their cost-certain contracts, it will still be a bargain for the Cubs and allow them to go out and spend big at other positions. If they have to slightly overpay for David Price or Robinson Cano or Chase Headley in the next couple of years, then whatever...assuming the minor league guys continue to develop.

 

Am I the only one around here...

 

..that thinks that "Chase Headley" belongs nowhere near the names "Trout, Price and Cano"?

[Guest]

i love how we're just assuming the cubs aren't adding any significant major league pieces in the next 2 years, and that's there's "not much out there". there's as much out there as there always is through trades and FA, unless you're bemoaning the lack of guys like pujols. hamilton, and prince.

 

castro and rizzo have about the lowest combined production you could possibly imagine and the team is still a few breaks away from being .500 or better. i don't know how you can say the cubs can't be good in the next few years if rizzo/castro aren't great.

 

Think about what your second statement means. The marginal improvement from adding guys who aren't really, really good isn't as great because the baseline the team has is fine. Again, bullpen excepted, there aren't many gaping holes on the roster. At the moment the Cubs have an entire lineup and 4 rotation spots locked in for next year that you could say with a pretty decent level of confidence that you expect them all to be league average(if not better). Fixing the bullpen will make a difference, yes, and adding more guys like Edwin Jackson or Shin Soo Choo will make the team better and less reliant on Castro and Rizzo. But without improvement from Castro and Rizzo to above average and beyond, it's just going to help keep the team close to .500 rather than heading to a playoff spot.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

Am I the only one around here who doesn't have a problem with Rizzo's production this year?

 

He has been prone to getting into cold streaks, yes, but even during those times he finds a way to get on base with walks. I'm fine with 13 home runs and 26 doubles (which lead all first baseman in baseball) at this point and feel he's doing fine given his age and first full year in the big leagues.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

He's also 11th in WAR for first baseman.

 

To me, he's been much better than just average this season.

[neely crenshaw]

He's also 11th in WAR for first baseman.

 

To me, he's been much better than just average this season.

 

The problem there is that he gets a lot of value from his defense and I think most people are simply talking about his offensive performance. Right now he is being out performed offensively by guys like Brandon Belt, Chris Carter and James Loney. I don't think anyone had that in mind for him this season.

His defense is top notch but talking purely offense he has been toward the bottom of first basemen.

[sneakypower]

Rizzo comes in at #37 in Dave Cameron's Trade Value Series

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2013-trade-value-40-36/#37

 

Given normal development, Rizzo looks to be on course to turn into an offensive force. It’s not a guarantee, of course, but he’s showing all the signs of being an offensive machine, and it may happen in the very near future.

[The-Kris-Bryant]

He's also 11th in WAR for first baseman.

 

To me, he's been much better than just average this season.

 

The problem there is that he gets a lot of value from his defense and I think most people are simply talking about his offensive performance. Right now he is being out performed offensively by guys like Brandon Belt, Chris Carter and James Loney. I don't think anyone had that in mind for him this season.

His defense is top notch but talking purely offense he has been toward the bottom of first basemen.

Not that disagree with your point nor do I think those three are better than Rizzo, but it's funny you mention those three. Loney, Carter and Belt were all at one point higher in Baseball America's Top 100 Prospects than Anthony Rizzo ever was.

[Guest]

The use of defensive metrics to calculate WAR is irresponsible. The metrics are so unreliable they have almost no value at all. I can't really imagine how to differentiate the defensive performance of first basemen using those tools. Besides that, 1st is the easiest position to play so the median guy isn't that much worse than the best guy.

[jersey cubs fan]

The use of defensive metrics to calculate WAR is irresponsible. The metrics are so unreliable they have almost no value at all. I can't really imagine how to differentiate the defensive performance of first basemen using those tools. Besides that, 1st is the easiest position to play so the median guy isn't that much worse than the best guy.

 

I love how passionate you are about this topic. I'm not as hardline about it but in general agree with the sentiment behind it.

[Cubswin11]

The use of defensive metrics to calculate WAR is irresponsible. The metrics are so unreliable they have almost no value at all. I can't really imagine how to differentiate the defensive performance of first basemen using those tools. Besides that, 1st is the easiest position to play so the median guy isn't that much worse than the best guy.

 

I love how passionate you are about this topic. I'm not as hardline about it but in general agree with the sentiment behind it.

I'm really surprised there isn't a better defensive metric out there yet or a better more consistent way to calculate defensive WAR.

[Guest]

If UZR was such an atrocious metric, then fWAR would have a lot more trouble adding up correctly than it does. First base and catcher you have to take with the largest grains of salt because of the nature of those positions, but the wholesale dismissal is even more silly than taking WAR or UZR as gospel to the decimal point.