Plan the Offseason

[Guest]

1. Sign Mat Gamel

2. ?

3. Profit

[UK1679666180]

Maybe I'm being overly pessimistic but I can't see Colorado giving up CarGo and not getting any proven positional players in return.

 

I'm assuming the payroll will be 90-95 mil next year.

 

1) Sign Tanaka, obviously he bumps up the rotation in a major way, going to overspend in a bidding war. Not including the posting fee, I have him at 5/60.

 

2) Without being able to trade for a superior position players, I see them going for balance in the line-up with guys willing to sign for less than a 4 year deal which eliminates Ellsbury, Choo, Cano, etc. nor would I want to commit those years at this point.

 

I would like to see them sign Cruz at 2 yr. 10 mil per. as well as Kelly Johnson to play 2B.

 

3) Bring back Sweeney at 3.5 and Schierholtz at 5.5 mil.

 

Rotation:

Tanaka-12mil

Jackson-11mil

Wood- 3 mil

Samardzija- 4mil

Arrieta - 600K

 

Bullpen:

Villanueva- 5 mil

Russell - 2 mil

Parker 700K

Rondon 550K

Strop 900K

Rusin 400K

Hanrahan 4 mil (will miss much of '14 from TJS) (this is a 2yr deal)

Fujikawa 4 mil

 

Line up vs. Rh'ers:

Sweeney-CF 3.5 mil

Castro-SS 4 mil

Rizzo-1B 1.25 mil

Cruz-LF 10 mil

Schierholtz- RF 5.5 mil

Valbuena- 3B 1.25 mil

Castillo-C 900K

Johnson - 2B 4.00 mil

 

Bench:

Lake (util/platoon vs. lh'ers)- 625K

Olt/Gamel (corner IF)- 400K

Bogusevic (5th Of'er) - 600k

Barney (mi/platoon vs. occas lh'er)- 1.25

Brayan Pena (backup C) 2.5mil

 

Obligations:

13 mil to Soriano

2 mil to Soler

 

Payroll:

98.920

[SouthSideRyan]

I know some teams (pretty sure the Yankees) pay their players year-round and other teams pay their players just during the season (I think most teams). Any idea how the Cubs handle this?

 

Depends if the closest Coinstar to Wrigley is open year-round

 

#PoorTomRicketts

[treebird]

I know some teams (pretty sure the Yankees) pay their players year-round and other teams pay their players just during the season (I think most teams). Any idea how the Cubs handle this?

 

Depends if the closest Coinstar to Wrigley is open year-round

 

#PoorTomRicketts

 

hardly anybody gives money to tom when he plays the sesame street song on his saxophone outside wrigley during the winter, so it's probably just during the season

[SouthSideRyan]

(Tree's sister reference) Edited October 3, 2013 by SouthSideRyan

[treebird]

I know some teams (pretty sure the Yankees) pay their players year-round and other teams pay their players just during the season (I think most teams). Any idea how the Cubs handle this?

 

Depends if the closest Coinstar to Wrigley is open year-round

 

#PoorTomRicketts

 

placeholder to prevent ssr from deleting his doublepost so everyone can see how dumb he is

[davell]

I like TT's a bunch and mine wouldn't be very different honestly. So, I'll try to go a different direction just to see what happens.....

 

We currently have 47 players on the 40 man, lessened by 5 FA, so we're at 42. I'm going to add Alcantara and Jokisch to it, to make 44. Then drop Putnam, McDonald, Neal, and Boscan to get back to 40.

 

First trade- Shark and Schierholtz to KC for Yordano Ventura and Lorenzo Cain. Gives us an electric arm and a very good defensive CF, gives KC an innings eater with upside and the large side of a platoon with pop.

 

Second trade- Castillo/Alcantara/Vogelbach/Cabrera/Candelario to Tampa for David Price. We get an ace, Tampa fills C longterm finally, gets a MI that likely also becomes a longterm fixture for them and gets a 1B/DH masher as well in a few years. Upside type in Candelario and also a live arm in Cabrera that they'd likely look at as a bullpen piece.

 

These two trades put us at 37 on the 40 man and also leaves us without a C on the roster. That said, it gives us an ace and also gives us a CFer and the payroll, which I have at 69 mill prior to these moves hasn't moved much.

 

To fill the 3 40 man spots, I'm going to sign Salty to a 4/40 deal. Seems high, but I think the lack of C on the market would get him into that range. I'll also sign Jose Molina to a 1/1 deal. And give Scott Baker a 1/3 deal with incentives.

 

Team isn't finished yet, so I'm going to drop Trey McNutt off the 40 man and do the same with Lim, who would cost us 2.5 mill next year, if we kept him.

 

At this point, we need bats, so I'll give Shin Soo Choo 6/102 and Corey Hart 1/5.

 

It puts the payroll at 111 mill, which is fine, since there's no posting fee involved and we save 2 mill off the draft this year and at least 6 off of IFA spending.

 

Lineup on Opening Day

RF Choo

SS Castro

1B Rizzo

LF Hart

3B Valbuena

C Saltalamacchia

CF Cain

2B Barney

BU Molina, Bogusevic, Olt or Vitters or Gamel, Lake, and Murphy or Watkins

 

SP Price, Wood, E-Jax, Baker, Arrieta

 

BP- Strop, Russell. Parker, Bard, Rondon, Grimm, and Villanueva

 

You've got Ventura ready to come up at any point to give the rotation a true boost and you have Rusin as a fallback along with Hendricks.

 

Bullpen has Rosscup, Rivero, Dolis(assuming he's not claimed)Raley, Neil Ramirez, Vizcaino, and Fujikawa coming back midseason.

 

Offense has Javy replacing Barney after Super Two cut off, with possibility of Bryant coming up, if Olt doesn't pan out.

 

Like I said at the outset, I like TT's, Tanaka and CarGo or Stanton are my top options, but this is another way to go and I think that it could put itself into contention and us adding midseason.....

[biittner77]

I realize the hesitance to trade Castro while his value is low coming off a bad season. However, Let's say he gets off to a good start to the season and Baez is deemed ready by mid/ late May. Could anyone foresee Castro being part of a trade for Stanton? If so that would make the deal less costly in terms of prospects.

 

This may seem like selling low on Castro but I could see The Marlins being interested in a guy that they can tout as an all star SS, that is relatively cheap and under control who is also still young.

 

The Cubs meanwhile seem to have multiple options at 3rd base for both the short and long term. If they put Baez at 3rd this year that would seem like a one way trip-i.e. I can't remember a 3rd baseman switching back to SS. If they were planning on moving Baez to 2nd, wouldn't they have put him there last year? They had the perfect excuse with Baez and Alcantara bot being SS playing at the same level.

[Guest]

I don't think the Marlins would want Castro's contract.

 

As for Baez, it's a pretty simple thought process. He's a SS until he either proves he can't be one or needs to be displaced for a better player to play SS. Neither has happened in the minor leagues, but the latter would happen at the MLB level. Moving him to 2B instead of 3B has numerous benefits, including preserving more value by keeping him higher on the defensive spectrum, making a potential switch back to SS easier, giving Baez more touches which people have cited as important for his high-energy style, etc.

[Cubswin11]

I don't think the Marlins would want Castro's contract.

 

As for Baez, it's a pretty simple thought process. He's a SS until he either proves he can't be one or needs to be displaced for a better player to play SS. Neither has happened in the minor leagues, but the latter would happen at the MLB level. Moving him to 2B instead of 3B has numerous benefits, including preserving more value by keeping him higher on the defensive spectrum, making a potential switch back to SS easier, giving Baez more touches which people have cited as important for his high-energy style, etc.

Most importantly getting rid of Darwin Barney

[marc_foust]

catcher- the front office wants get left handed so they will be bidders on salty. if they get him then Castillo becomes a valuable trade chip. if not salty they keep Castillo.

 

1b Rizzo isn't going anywhere for at least 3 years.

 

2b rumors have Barney on his way out and I don't think he makes it past the trade deadline. I think Baez ends up here.

 

ss Castro is the guy and has probably two years to prove who he is for better or worse.

 

3b olts job to lose and he probably platoons with valbuena. if that isn't productive then Bryant is up opening day 2015 or whenever the super 2 deadline is.

 

rf shierholtz is probably here till the deadline. lake grabs a few starts against lefties. if olt pans out we see Bryant here same timeline.

 

cf I think the Sweeney/lake have the spot till almora takes it (late 2015 early 2016)

 

lf the front office kicks the tires on cargo, like the left handed bat that can slot in anywhere in the lineup. they probably try ellsbury, but he is to costly. so we see bargain shopping with granderson, mcclouth, chris young type group leaving cash for sp.

 

sp it looks like shark is all but gone. I think they like Tanaka and are serious players. if that fails I think ubaldo on a Jackson like deal is the plan b. wood Jackson Tanaka/ubaldo with a flip candidate baker/hammel/etc with arrieta the first option for injury or ineffectiveness or at latest the trade deadline.

 

pen stropp Russell villanueva Cabrera arrieta should be locks. bard is there if he is a cub still, Parker if not. then either Ruskin/rosscup.

 

bench valbuena lake vitters Watkins and scrap heap backup catcher. bogey if no of is brought in.

 

I think this off season is about adding a top of the rotation starter priority while we see what Rizzo Castro Sweeney lake Castillo lot can do. not much chance of realistically catching stl can and pit. alcantara vogey shierholtz barney shark are probably gone by opening day 2015

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Back of the napkin fWAR projection based on what we have in place:

 

Sweeney (1.5) /Lake (1.0)/Schierholtz (1.5)

Olt (1.0) /Castro (2.5) /Barney (1.5) /Rizzo (3.0)

Castillo (2.5)

Bench (3.0)

 

Samardzija (3.0) /Wood (2.0) /Jackson (2.0) / Arrieta (0.0) / Rusin (0.0)

Bullpen cast of thousands (2.0)

 

Total: 26.5 (coincidentally the same as 2013)

Some notes: The Cubs actually got about 5 fWAR from their bench this year (defining it as all position players outside of the top 8 in PAs) in an uncommonly strong year. Navarro, Lake, Sweeney, Ransom, Bogusevic, and Murphy combined for 6.8 fWAR in 1232 plate appearances, or roughly two starting jobs' worth. That's a better pace than any of our actual starters except for Castillo.

 

2.0 from the pen would put us around 20th in the league. Below-average, but not aggressively so. This year's pen put up -0.2 for 29th. Next year's pen should be almost entirely turned over and full over very unproven guys, so it's pretty hard to project.

 

So if you want to be competitive in 2014, you need to pick up about 13.5 wins worth of improvements. There's some room for internal improvements in those projections (Castro, Rizzo, Samardzija all seem capable of more than that, the bullpen could have a magic year) but also plenty of room for underperformance (3b could easily become a Stewartian black hole, Castro could be replacement-level again, one of the useful SPs could get hurt).

 

13.5 wins doesn't sound like a lot, but then you realize that the biggest gain to be made would probably be adding a Tanaka or Price to the rotation, and that alone is probably only about 1/3rd of what you need. It's hard to gain big chunks out of that because you are replacing non-worthless players. So if we want to "go for it" in 2014, we probably need to add 4 or 5 starting-quality (2.5 fWAR or better) players this offseason.

 

At this point, I think I'm inclined not to include any projection of a call-up for Baez or Bryant. It's fun to get a rush talking about how they could probably mash in the big leagues right now, but I think a neutral projection for them has to be September call-ups if anything. One guy was last season striking out almost 30% of the time in AA, and the other hasn't yet appeared above A+. A little bit of conservative projection isn't out of line.

[Guest]

Valbuena's put up 3.4 fWAR in just under 700 PAs as a Cub, I have to think he's at least the fat part of a platoon at 3B or 2B for the moment.

 

I think those projections are a touch pessimistic across the board too, but that's the tricky part about WAR. We use round numbers and halves because anything more specific would be REALLY arbitrary, and then slight differences of opinion on players can lead one person to reasonably conclude we need 13+ wins and another to think we need half of that.

 

For specific quibbles, aside from the aforementioned Valbuena, I'd tack a combined run on for Sweeney(3 win pace last year, 2.3 career) and Lake, and I'd definitely give more than combined 4 wins for non-Shark starters. For one, Villanueva(1.0 in 128 IP) should be there if you're going to be that pessimistic about Arrieta(1.3 fWAR/200 IP career) and Rusin/Hendricks, and I think you can reasonably add some more value from Jackson/Wood if you wanted to as well.

 

More to the point though, this offseason will rise and fall with how they handle the OF and SP. They have the flexibility to at least send out okay options at every spot, but Wood and Jackson are the only two out of the 8 I'm confident will be there in a full-time role come opening day.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

You're definitely right that small differences can always be quibbled over. And in that spirit: Valbuena's 3.4 as Cubs is almost entirely based on some huge defensive totals that don't seem particularly sustainable. I did flat-out forget about Villanueva, though. I don't know why I keep doing that.

 

I think in general projections like this *should* seem a touch pessimistic across the board, because that's the easiest way to account for collapse rates. You're going to lose 3 wins to Castro turning into Neifi Perez or Garza's elbow acting up, or in 2012 to Byrd cycling down or Soto forgetting whether he hits better on or off weed. Everyone's projection gets dragged down a little bit because there's a sub-replacement disappointment lurking in all of them, just waiting to be let out at like a 12% per season rate.

[TheDude]

I don't think you can settle on a number of Wins needed from acquisitions and get to a competitive state. Whatever number you think the team needs between 6 and 20, the variance is all tied to the current roster, not the additions.

 

We just witnessed the Red Sox go from 69 wins to WS in one year and a lot of noise is made about the guys they added in the off-season. But the truth is the improved WAR collectively from existing players (Ortiz, Pedroia, Ellsbury, Buchholz, Lester, etc) was substantial between 2012 and 2013. The Cubs don't have the same situation as the Red Sox had in 2013, which is a group of proven talent rebounding from 2012 injuries or bad seasons to yield big gains in WAR year over year.

 

The Cubs need Jackson, Samardzija, Castro, and Rizzo to add double-digit WAR collectively over 2013 numbers to sniff a competitive record no matter who is added to the roster.

 

If I'm advising the GM my primary focus is on Tanaka, regardless of 2014 value. The age and years line up with the progression of the 19-23 year old talent in the minors to stay prime through the growth window. That may be the only splash of the off-season I would care about, all other options for me get relegated to plan B, C, or D.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If I'm advising the GM my primary focus is on Tanaka, regardless of 2014 value. The age and years line up with the progression of the 19-23 year old talent in the minors to stay prime through the growth window. That may be the only splash of the off-season I would care about, all other options for me get relegated to plan B, C, or D.

 

Sure, but after the Yankees and Dodgers both offer up more than your entire baseball budget for Tanaka, you'll have to go to plan B.

[Guest]

 

If I'm advising the GM my primary focus is on Tanaka, regardless of 2014 value. The age and years line up with the progression of the 19-23 year old talent in the minors to stay prime through the growth window. That may be the only splash of the off-season I would care about, all other options for me get relegated to plan B, C, or D.

I tend to agree, I think they need to ask Ricketts to open the wallet and make a winning offer, not a competitive offer.

[Guest]

I think in general projections like this *should* seem a touch pessimistic across the board, because that's the easiest way to account for collapse rates. You're going to lose 3 wins to Castro turning into Neifi Perez or Garza's elbow acting up, or in 2012 to Byrd cycling down or Soto forgetting whether he hits better on or off weed. Everyone's projection gets dragged down a little bit because there's a sub-replacement disappointment lurking in all of them, just waiting to be let out at like a 12% per season rate.

 

That seems like an odd approach that devalues the difference between replacement/below average and average players. Especially when it's leading to results like projecting zero value from a guy like Arrieta, who has consistently done more than nothing, and has upside to do much more that mitigates some of that collapse risk.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Doing it any other way tends to lead to overestimation, in my experience.

 

Late edit to expound on that now that kids' Halloween party is blessedly over.

 

Last year, Castro had never been under 3.0 in a full season. Rizzo was coming off 1.6 six in half a season. Those two came in a 1.5 combined. That happens a lot in baseball. If your projections don't look at least a bit pessimistic for your own team, then I think it's a good bet they are actually overoptimistic.

 

The 13 named players in that post are projected to a combined 21.5 fWAR. Those same 13 players in 2013 produced 16.7. Some of them are in line for more playing time than they got in 2013, but I don't think this is as gross of an underestimation as it may appear if you start assuming too many easy-to-fall-into-as-fans traps, like part-time players doubling their production when their playing time doubles or automatic full bouncebacks from disappointing young players.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I don't think there's anything new in this article from Muskat today. The quotes are from the Sveum press conference, right?

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/chc/chicago-cubs-expect-to-make-minimal-use-of-free-agency?ymd=20131025&content_id=63355730&vkey=news_chc

 

I'm going to guess that they don't make any big trades this offseason outside of selling if they get bowled over on Samardzija or Castro. I could be very wrong. Almost nothing would shock me this offseason. But I just can't see them trading prospects for an MLB player when they aren't in "go for it!" mode, which they don't appear to be. They'll flirt with dumping one of those two for prospects all offseason, but I doubt anyone meets their price.

 

Gosh, everyone's going to get a qualifying offer, aren't they? I feel like we're caught between a rock and a hard place. I don't care about the 2nd-round pick, but the FO appears to. If they're going to give it up in compensation, I'd assume they'd want to blow it on the biggest piece they can and not just an Ubaldo or a Saltalamacchia. But after that, you're in the Ellsbury territory, and I don't think we're prepared to go to the $125m or whatever it's going to take to play on that level.

 

Seeing what I've seen from the front office, I don't think they're happy with any of their choices, but I guess it'll come down to this:

 

1) Do all their due diligence on Tanaka right up to the point where the Yankees, Dodgers and Rangers all drop $60m on a posting bid and we can't come up with half that.

 

2) Flirt with trading Samardzija all winter, hold fast to Rays-ian demands, probably don't get them met, and pick it up again at the deadline if/when we're out of it.

 

3) Drop a surprisingly high AAV on Kazmir as the top non-QO pitcher. Something like 2/$20 or 3/$27, maybe a vesting player option for the third year. Do something similar on an outfielder like David Murphy (2/$15 should get it done) as a DeJesus-style BABIP reclamation project.

 

4) Fill in the rest of the roster with a backup catcher and infielder, both of whom should be veterans with fringe-starting cred. Just enough that you aren't flat-out giving the third base job to Olt or putting too much pressure on Castillo.

 

5) Spend the rest of the offseason hyping the farm-system rankings and new manager.

 

I think the Cubs want to make a big move or three this offseason, but there just aren't any on the board that really make sense given their philosophy and mindset, and I think Epstein would take a special pride in holding the line. He doesn't make moves just for the sake of making them.

[Guest]

Yeah, I read that and was pretty sure the quotes were all pretty old.

[Guest]

- I tend to agree that they won't try to trade prospects for an MLB player, but also think that a) there's a Giancarlo-sized exception depending on the price and b) there's opportunities in the trade market that only have a marginal prospect cost that they'll explore.

 

- I think the QO takes them out for guys like Ubaldo and Choo. I could maybe see it for Salty if the QO dropped his price enough, and like you mentioned, Ellsbury's commitment is big enough and his age good enough that they'd see it as part of the investment.

 

- I imagine they'll be heavily in on Tanaka. Because his ceiling isn't as high as Darvish I imagine there will be a point where some teams would prefer just to spend the money on the Ubaldos and Garzas of the world so I don't know if the posting fee will get as stupid high as some think, but who knows what uniform he's wearing. Even an optimistic guy would have to take the field over the Cubs though.

 

- As counter-intuitive as it might seem, if they don't get Tanaka I think it's more likely Shark gets dealt, although I could see them playing it like they did with Garza too. For all the tweets spilled on him they still did pretty well there, all things considered.

 

- Kazmir seems like a very likely target. Murphy seems like a decent bet as well, but I wonder if they don't trade Schierholtz if they add him. The OF seems like a good spot to find another Schierholtz, maybe even with more years of team control this time.

 

- If they trade Barney I can see them adding a placeholder 2B, but otherwise I bet they'll be fine with Rizzo/Barney/Castro/Valbuena/Olt/Watkins in the infield. The backup catcher will be the best they think can find, like most backup catchers are.

[sneakypower]

i'll lose my [expletive] if we sign Salty

[SouthSideRyan]

 

- I think the QO takes them out for guys like Ubaldo and Choo. I could maybe see it for Salty if the QO dropped his price enough, and like you mentioned, Ellsbury's commitment is big enough and his age good enough that they'd see it as part of the investment.

 

- I imagine they'll be heavily in on Tanaka. Because his ceiling isn't as high as Darvish I imagine there will be a point where some teams would prefer just to spend the money on the Ubaldos and Garzas of the world so I don't know if the posting fee will get as stupid high as some think, but who knows what uniform he's wearing. Even an optimistic guy would have to take the field over the Cubs though.

 

 

Not wanting to give up a 2nd rounder for a position of need while using it to sign a guy who may be a minor upgrade on the guy we have who is still pre-arb would really make me question the front office.

 

Regarding Tanaka, I know you're not interested in debating finances, but until I see something stating otherwise, I have little reason to believe we can make a competitive bid on Tanaka.

[Guest]

i'll lose my [expletive] if we sign Salty

 

You're the one saying that Castillo would have to be the lead piece for Stanton, right? What if Giancarlo were coming with Salty?