Mooney: Cubs are Interested in Shin-Soo Choo

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Patrick Mooney[/url]"]The Cubs know they have to change their offensive identity, and industry sources say they will make a run at Shin-Soo Choo this winter, part of the plan to collect more left-handed hitters and boost their on-base percentage.

[Hunter]

We need to get more left-handed again!

[Guest]

We need to get more left-handed again!

This isn't a reactionary thing, though. This is anticipating Castro, Baez, Bryant & Soler all being in the lineup.

[davell]

I'd rather go after Choo than Ellsbury personally, due to pricetag. Worst case scenario on Choo is what? 5/75ish? With my guess being he gets 4/60. Re-sign DeJesus as well as a 4th OFer/insurance on Lake and get a RH backup/platoon type to go with Schierholtz. We've got enough bodies to fill out an IF, just need a backup C.

[Clem Fandango]

just need a backup C.

 

Hank White will be available!

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

Just re-sign Navarro.

[rawaction]

Yeah, the Cubs need to get rid of as many OBP black holes in the lineup as they can. An OF of Choo, DeJesus, and Schierholz vs. RHPs will get on base. Rizzo will get on base, assuming his average normalizes. You know you're going to have guys like Castro, Lake, and possibly the C spot bringing down the team OBP. Baez probably won't get on base a ton to start his career when he comes up next year, so I think the key is upgrading Barney. I wish a 3B was emerging by now so Valbuena could start the year at 2B.

[Guest]

Yeah, the Cubs need to get rid of as many OBP black holes in the lineup as they can. An OF of Choo, DeJesus, and Schierholz vs. RHPs will get on base. Rizzo will get on base, assuming his average normalizes. You know you're going to have guys like Castro, Lake, and possibly the C spot bringing down the team OBP. Baez probably won't get on base a ton to start his career when he comes up next year, so I think the key is upgrading Barney. I wish a 3B was emerging by now so Valbuena could start the year at 2B.

 

:-k

[jersey cubs fan]

Yeah, the Cubs need to get rid of as many OBP black holes in the lineup as they can. An OF of Choo, DeJesus, and Schierholz vs. RHPs will get on base. Rizzo will get on base, assuming his average normalizes. You know you're going to have guys like Castro, Lake, and possibly the C spot bringing down the team OBP. Baez probably won't get on base a ton to start his career when he comes up next year, so I think the key is upgrading Barney. I wish a 3B was emerging by now so Valbuena could start the year at 2B.

 

:-k

 

Probably in response to davell who mentioned signing DeJesus this winter.

[Have a seat, Neifi]

I'd rather go after Choo than Ellsbury personally, due to pricetag. Worst case scenario on Choo is what? 5/75ish? With my guess being he gets 4/60. Re-sign DeJesus as well as a 4th OFer/insurance on Lake and get a RH backup/platoon type to go with Schierholtz. We've got enough bodies to fill out an IF, just need a backup C.

Good early guess; the Cincinnati Enquirer's John Fay recently tweeted his guess that the initial asking price for Choo is likely to be around 4 for $60. Granted it looks like this is just this Fay guy's guess, but if you can get Choo on a 4-year deal for a reasonable AAV the Cubs should jump on it.

[WrigleyField 22]

I do 4/60 and structure it like this 10, 15, 17.5, 17.5. Gives us plenty of flexibility for rounding out the rotation and BP. INF probably pretty much set. Sign Sweeney for a few million. Schierholtz probably gets a little bump and find another RH platoon partner. LF -Choo, CF- Sweeney/Lake, RF- Schierholtz/TBD.

[scarey]

I do 4/60 and structure it like this 10, 15, 17.5, 17.5. Gives us plenty of flexibility for rounding out the rotation and BP. INF probably pretty much set. Sign Sweeney for a few million. Schierholtz probably gets a little bump and find another RH platoon partner. LF -Choo, CF- Sweeney/Lake, RF- Schierholtz/TBD.

 

 

Wouldn't it make sense to front load the deal given the projected payroll for the next couple of years is relatively low?

[jersey cubs fan]

I do 4/60 and structure it like this 10, 15, 17.5, 17.5. Gives us plenty of flexibility for rounding out the rotation and BP. INF probably pretty much set. Sign Sweeney for a few million. Schierholtz probably gets a little bump and find another RH platoon partner. LF -Choo, CF- Sweeney/Lake, RF- Schierholtz/TBD.

 

 

Wouldn't it make sense to front load the deal given the projected payroll for the next couple of years is relatively low?

 

Why would that make sense? They don't have much space the next couple years, but do have theoretical space in 3-5 years.

[Backtobanks]

I do 4/60 and structure it like this 10, 15, 17.5, 17.5. Gives us plenty of flexibility for rounding out the rotation and BP. INF probably pretty much set. Sign Sweeney for a few million. Schierholtz probably gets a little bump and find another RH platoon partner. LF -Choo, CF- Sweeney/Lake, RF- Schierholtz/TBD.

 

 

Wouldn't it make sense to front load the deal given the projected payroll for the next couple of years is relatively low?

 

Why would that make sense? They don't have much space the next couple years, but do have theoretical space in 3-5 years.

 

17.5 is quite a bit of money for Choo when he's 34 years old and 35 years old.

[Guest]

I do 4/60 and structure it like this 10, 15, 17.5, 17.5. Gives us plenty of flexibility for rounding out the rotation and BP. INF probably pretty much set. Sign Sweeney for a few million. Schierholtz probably gets a little bump and find another RH platoon partner. LF -Choo, CF- Sweeney/Lake, RF- Schierholtz/TBD.

 

 

Wouldn't it make sense to front load the deal given the projected payroll for the next couple of years is relatively low?

 

Why would that make sense? They don't have much space the next couple years, but do have theoretical space in 3-5 years.

 

17.5 is quite a bit of money for Choo when he's 34 years old and 35 years old.

 

What difference does it make if it's the same overall dollars committed? Paying it later is better, and it would be even if the Cubs weren't supposed to have much more money at that point.

[Old Style]

All I need to know is does this Choo guy know how to do the Fukucopter? If so, sign him up and give him #1. I have some leftover headbands to sell.

[jersey cubs fan]

All I need to know is does this Choo guy know how to do the Fukucopter? If so, sign him up and give him #1. I have some leftover headbands to sell.

 

You think all Asian players are Japanese? This guy is a Choo.

[ConstableRabbit]

Obligatory

 

 

http://miketheindian.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/choo-choo-choose-you.jpg

 

[WrigleyField 22]

I do 4/60 and structure it like this 10, 15, 17.5, 17.5. Gives us plenty of flexibility for rounding out the rotation and BP. INF probably pretty much set. Sign Sweeney for a few million. Schierholtz probably gets a little bump and find another RH platoon partner. LF -Choo, CF- Sweeney/Lake, RF- Schierholtz/TBD.

 

 

Wouldn't it make sense to front load the deal given the projected payroll for the next couple of years is relatively low?

 

Why would that make sense? They don't have much space the next couple years, but do have theoretical space in 3-5 years.

 

17.5 is quite a bit of money for Choo when he's 34 years old and 35 years old.

 

What difference does it make if it's the same overall dollars committed? Paying it later is better, and it would be even if the Cubs weren't supposed to have much more money at that point.

Yea I mainly threw out that structure because it seemed in line with the cubs payroll potential growth. If you aren't gonna spend the saved money you can go ahead and make it a flat 15, but after the sell off this deadline they do have holes to fill and could easily spend $20mil on a starting pitcher and a couple bullpen pieces and platoon guys. I even considered suggesting both Choo and Ellsbury, but I think that leaves too little to round out the pitching staff.

[WrigleyField 22]

For the record I'm no fan of blind backloading. Any contract has to be viewed in its entirety and on a yearly basis. Back loading is advantageous when it lines up with projected revenue gains or as a timing mechanism. Hendry era Cubs backloaded to try and inject short term value (both in wins and sale value) and it was definitely irresponsible spending that was bound to burst. The Cubs of 2013 are not at that point and revenue gains and cost savings should definitely hit the team 3-4 years down the line, not to mention cost certainty with what should be core pieces.

[jersey cubs fan]

For the record I'm no fan of blind backloading. Any contract has to be viewed in its entirety and on a yearly basis. Back loading is advantageous when it lines up with projected revenue gains or as a timing mechanism. Hendry era Cubs backloaded to try and inject short term value (both in wins and sale value) and it was definitely irresponsible spending that was bound to burst. The Cubs of 2013 are not at that point and revenue gains and cost savings should definitely hit the team 3-4 years down the line, not to mention cost certainty with what should be core pieces.

 

You don't need revenue gains to justify a backloaded contract.

[SouthSideRyan]

ALWAYS ALWAYS BACKLOAD

[WrigleyField 22]

No it can also be payroll projections ie- cost savings.

 

In some unique instances like the Cubs stand, cost savings could also be outside savings (needing to save less for the stadium) and reallocation of current funds (better record equals less amateur spending).

 

Without a doubt, IMO, the Zell era Cubs backloaded to the point of only short term value knowing it would be sold off for someone else to deal with.

 

That whole time value of money thing that jives with backloading only works with proper planning, is basically my point.

[Old Style]

All I need to know is does this Choo guy know how to do the Fukucopter? If so, sign him up and give him #1. I have some leftover headbands to sell.

 

You think all Asian players are Japanese? This guy is a Choo.

I don't have anything against the Chooish people. I like General Tso's chicken.

 

Obligatory

 

 

http://miketheindian.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/choo-choo-choose-you.jpg

nice work

[SouthSideRyan]

Unless you're signing 10 guys to identically backloaded contracts, timing shouldn't matter. Oh, you're paying an older Choo too much, well when you sign somebody in 2016 you backload his deal.