2014 Cubs Payroll under $75 mil?

[Cubswin11]

Phil Hughes, Kazmir, Josh Johnson, Jason Hammel, and Jason Vargas all intrigue me as FA options to varying levels.

[davell]

We have one for now. Hopefully he's willing to give us a longterm deal in the offseason. That said, even if he does, I want a second one.

[treebird]

if the cubs' payroll is at or near 75 million next year, i will take that as the final invitation i need to ditch the franchise. not particularly concerned that this will actually happen though. sullivan likes to say things to upset people.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

I thought Paul Sullivan was supposed to go away.

[davell]

I don't see the payroll at 75, but I don't see a splurge either. I'm hoping for an impact trade for a middle of the order bat or a TOR pitcher. Could easily be that neither happens though. If thats the case, I expect a decent OFer to be added, an innings eater on a short term contract OR a potentially better arm thru IFA, and a few bullpen arms. I'll be surprised though, if we don't enter the year expecting a .500 team.

[Guest]

I don't see the payroll at 75, but I don't see a splurge either. I'm hoping for an impact trade for a middle of the order bat or a TOR pitcher. Could easily be that neither happens though. If thats the case, I expect a decent OFer to be added, an innings eater on a short term contract OR a potentially better arm thru IFA, and a few bullpen arms. I'll be surprised though, if we don't enter the year expecting a .500 team.

 

 

Why is it that you see them willing to trade for an impact player (and thus give up, presumably, significant minor league asset(s)) but you can't see them signing a free agent that they'd have to give up the #11 (or lower) pick in the draft for or something?

[davell]

I don't see the payroll at 75, but I don't see a splurge either. I'm hoping for an impact trade for a middle of the order bat or a TOR pitcher. Could easily be that neither happens though. If thats the case, I expect a decent OFer to be added, an innings eater on a short term contract OR a potentially better arm thru IFA, and a few bullpen arms. I'll be surprised though, if we don't enter the year expecting a .500 team.

 

 

Why is it that you see them willing to trade for an impact player (and thus give up, presumably, significant minor league asset(s)) but you can't see them signing a free agent that they'd have to give up the #11 (or lower) pick in the draft for or something?

Salary-related. The traded for guy presumably would be making less money than the FA, plus they'd be younger as well.

[jersey cubs fan]

I thought Paul Sullivan was supposed to go away.

this transaction is taking longer than the rumored Garza deal.

[Guest]

I don't see the payroll at 75, but I don't see a splurge either. I'm hoping for an impact trade for a middle of the order bat or a TOR pitcher. Could easily be that neither happens though. If thats the case, I expect a decent OFer to be added, an innings eater on a short term contract OR a potentially better arm thru IFA, and a few bullpen arms. I'll be surprised though, if we don't enter the year expecting a .500 team.

 

 

Why is it that you see them willing to trade for an impact player (and thus give up, presumably, significant minor league asset(s)) but you can't see them signing a free agent that they'd have to give up the #11 (or lower) pick in the draft for or something?

Salary-related. The traded for guy presumably would be making less money than the FA, plus they'd be younger as well.

 

 

Unless that guy is Stanton, count me out on giving up more things when we can just give up money and get a really good player.

[XZero771679666304]

I don't see the payroll at 75, but I don't see a splurge either. I'm hoping for an impact trade for a middle of the order bat or a TOR pitcher. Could easily be that neither happens though. If thats the case, I expect a decent OFer to be added, an innings eater on a short term contract OR a potentially better arm thru IFA, and a few bullpen arms. I'll be surprised though, if we don't enter the year expecting a .500 team.

 

 

Why is it that you see them willing to trade for an impact player (and thus give up, presumably, significant minor league asset(s)) but you can't see them signing a free agent that they'd have to give up the #11 (or lower) pick in the draft for or something?

Salary-related. The traded for guy presumably would be making less money than the FA, plus they'd be younger as well.

 

I don't know. If it were a TOR pitcher (such as the oft rumored David Price), I think the intention would be to immediately sign them to an extension, for at least near market value. Also, trading for an impact player would likely take at least 2 of the Cubs' top prospects, whereas signing a FA, even one with a QO, would only cost one potential top prospect.

 

I do think that a deal involving impact talent coming in and multiple prospects going out is a near certainty in the next year or two, but I don't think that precludes a big ticket signing.

[neely crenshaw]

Let's just figure a way to get David Price and Stanton and call it a day...

[Guest]

I (probably naively) believe that we're going to make a big splash this offseason. No action at the deadline, and all this money coming off the books has me firmly believing we're ready to go for it next year.

[Guest]

it's like everyone always forgets that the cubs spent a lot of money last offseason

[AlwaysaCub]

Shin-Soo Choo could be a huge asset to the Cubs. Wrigley's small center field allows average-minus defenders with decent offensive skills to be plus players. He's currently hitting .283/.418/.460. Even with an OBP reduction, say .270/.380/.440, Choo would add several marginal wins next year. And in 2014. those wins will be both quantitatively and qualitatively valuable for this org.

 

Just as importantly, Chu plugs a serious hole, given the on turrible on-base skills of the current roster. Theo/Jed have repeatedly commented about the lack of patience on this team. Given that payroll, which to all appearance means surplus cash, I'd be surprised if the FO didn't go after him.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'm just excited for FacebookCubs to bring the complaints about getting another Japanese guy

[Irrelevant Dude]

The attendance drop of around 4,250 fans per home game means the Cubs will slash payroll, despite added revenue from a new national TV deal, new signage and a jumbo-sized video board at Wrigley Field.

Well that certainly makes perfect sense. The best way to win those fans back is by slashing payroll!

[Little Slide Rooter]

It makes sense and goes along with what my theory's been for a while. We currently have a handful of young, cost effective, potential long term impact players on the big league level, notably at 1B, SS, a few starting pitchers, and maybe 1-2 relievers.

 

We also have plenty of prospects scattered throughout the system. Several 3B, OF, and pitchers. While none of these are by any means sure things, as prospects rarely are, by mid-late 2014, they should have a pretty good idea of who will be ready to contribute by 2015.

 

Then when the pre-2015 offseason roles around, they'll have a pretty good idea of what they have and what holes they need to fill; and they'll have a substantial chunk of change to fill those holes, as well as expendable prospects, again, depending on who pans out, to use as trade chips for big league talent.

 

And between Soler, Baez, Olt, Alcantara, Hendricks, Arrieta, Cabrera, Grimm, Rosscup, Vitters, Ha, Jackson, Villanueva, Szczur, (obviously not all)we should have a lot of quality big league additions funneling in between now and this time in 2014, with Almora and Bryant being the only of our big impact guys I really can't see ready by then, as well as the Low A-A+pitchers. Also, Vogelbach, but I see his biggest contribution coming as a trade chip.

 

Long story short; I could easily see a $75MM payroll in 2014, not because they can't afford more, but because they prefer to A. Save the money for 2015 and beyond and B. because they don't want to spend big on anyone they feel that they have a potentially equal or better alternative in the not too distant horizon.

[Cubswin11]

Are any of the top 5-10 picks protected for signing a type A FA (Choo, Ellsbury, Cano, etc.)?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Are any of the top 5-10 picks protected for signing a type A FA (Choo, Ellsbury, Cano, etc.)?

 

The first 10, though we don't technically know who will be type A yet.

[Guest]

Are any of the top 5-10 picks protected for signing a type A FA (Choo, Ellsbury, Cano, etc.)?

 

The first 10, though we don't technically know who will be type A yet.

Maybe I've been too absorbed with work lately, but I thought they got rid of the whole type A/B/C thing and just work off who gets a qualified offer and who doesn't.

[Guest]

That's correct, the only way that the three players Cubswin11 mentioned don't get a qualifying offer is if they suffer major injuries in the next 7 weeks.

[Cubswin11]

Are any of the top 5-10 picks protected for signing a type A FA (Choo, Ellsbury, Cano, etc.)?

 

The first 10, though we don't technically know who will be type A yet.

Maybe I've been too absorbed with work lately, but I thought they got rid of the whole type A/B/C thing and just work off who gets a qualified offer and who doesn't.

Yeah they did and also got rid of the rule that pending FA who gets traded, even if they receive a qualifying offer (Garza for example), can't net the acquiring team a compensation pick.

[jersey cubs fan]

Are any of the top 5-10 picks protected for signing a type A FA (Choo, Ellsbury, Cano, etc.)?

 

The first 10, though we don't technically know who will be type A yet.

Maybe I've been too absorbed with work lately, but I thought they got rid of the whole type A/B/C thing and just work off who gets a qualified offer and who doesn't.

Yeah they did and also got rid of the rule that pending FA who gets traded, even if they receive a qualifying offer (Garza for example), can't net the acquiring team a compensation pick.

 

Wait, they got rid of that rule, or implemented that rule?

[Cubswin11]

Are any of the top 5-10 picks protected for signing a type A FA (Choo, Ellsbury, Cano, etc.)?

 

The first 10, though we don't technically know who will be type A yet.

Maybe I've been too absorbed with work lately, but I thought they got rid of the whole type A/B/C thing and just work off who gets a qualified offer and who doesn't.

Yeah they did and also got rid of the rule that pending FA who gets traded, even if they receive a qualifying offer (Garza for example), can't net the acquiring team a compensation pick.

 

Wait, they got rid of that rule, or implemented that rule?

Got rid of it, that's why guys like Garza have a slightly dimished trade value as the teams can't even net a compensation pick if he leaves via FA the next season.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Are any of the top 5-10 picks protected for signing a type A FA (Choo, Ellsbury, Cano, etc.)?

 

The first 10, though we don't technically know who will be type A yet.

Maybe I've been too absorbed with work lately, but I thought they got rid of the whole type A/B/C thing and just work off who gets a qualified offer and who doesn't.

 

I just meant that the guys receiving qualifying offers are analogous to "Type A."