Should the Cubs look to lock Bryant up this offseason

[CubinNY]

I know all the caveats about prospects. And I know Boras is Bryant's agent, but if the only thing keeping him down at the start of the season is "team control", couldn't and shouldn't the Cubs take control of the situation by offering to buy out his arbitration years plus a couple of years into free agency?

 

I don't really see the purpose of keeping him down when they are going to have to pay a premium to keep him anyway. It just seems penny wise and pound foolish to me.

 

Flame on

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Not unless he is willing to sign something absurdly team friendly. Having 6.9 non-guaranteed, severely depressed years is awesome.

[davell]

To me, the answer is a resounding "yes". But I doubt it's likely, for the factors already mentioned. I'd personally look to do the same for Alcantara and Javy as well, with the "team friendly" part being very important.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

To me, the answer is a resounding "yes". But I doubt it's likely, for the factors already mentioned. I'd personally look to do the same for Alcantara and Javy as well, with the "team friendly" part being very important.

 

Would this be team-friendly enough:

 

year 1: team option 500k (must play less than full season)

year 2: team option 500k

year 3: team option 500k

year 4: team option 500k

year 5: team option 15% of market value

year 6: team option 25% of market value

year 7: team option 40% of market value

[KaiserCesar]

Does an extension actually add any value? I thought Theo recently reinforced the idea that the TV money would be what allows the Cubs to keep their star players in 2019 and beyond. If anything, I'd want to keep salary off the payroll over the next 3-4 years rather than saving it in 2020 - 2023.

[Guest]

Does an extension actually add any value? I thought Theo recently reinforced the idea that the TV money would be what allows the Cubs to keep their star players in 2019 and beyond. If anything, I'd want to keep salary off the payroll over the next 3-4 years rather than saving it in 2020 - 2023.

I understand all that, I just want them to start the process of winning as soon as possible. The Cubs have plenty, plenty money they are choosing not to spend. I would think a fair extension for both sides would add tremendous value for winning and the bottom line. Then again, I'm a pretty impatient person.

Edited September 1, 2014 by CubinNY

[KaiserCesar]

Does an extension actually add any value? I thought Theo recently reinforced the idea that the TV money would be what allows the Cubs to keep their star players in 2019 and beyond. If anything, I'd want to keep salary off the payroll over the next 3-4 years rather than saving it in 2020 - 2023.

I understand all that, I just want them to start the process of winning as soon as possible. The Cubs have plenty, plenty money they are choosing not to spend it. I would think a fair extension for both sides would add tremendous value for winning and the bottom line. Then again, I'm a pretty impatient person.

 

I think they can start the process of winning sooner by not committing extra money over the next few years to Bryant. Pay him in 5-6 years and make the big FA moves in the next 2 offseasons.

 

The payroll limitations are real, mostly due to the debt servicing obligations per Brett's piece at BN.

[Guest]

The reason you give him an extension now is to get more than 6.9 years of control. If you wait until a year before FA, he is likely to wait and test the market if he is as good as we hope.

 

That said, don't do it unless the overall deal looks better than:

 

year 1: team option 500k (must play less than full season)

year 2: team option 500k

year 3: team option 500k

year 4: team option 500k

year 5: team option 15% of market value

year 6: team option 25% of market value

year 7: team option 40% of market value

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The reason you give him an extension now is to get more than 6.9 years of control. If you wait until a year before FA, he is likely to wait and test the market if he is as good as we hope.

 

I don't think there's ever been a baseball player where 6.9 years of control wasn't plenty from the team's POV. Nobody's just dying to lock in guaranteed money eight years down the road.

[Burt Macklin, FBI]

I know all the caveats about prospects. And I know Boras is Bryant's agent, but if the only thing keeping him down at the start of the season is "team control", couldn't and shouldn't the Cubs take control of the situation by offering to buy out his arbitration years plus a couple of years into free agency?

 

I don't really see the purpose of keeping him down when they are going to have to pay a premium to keep him anyway. It just seems penny wise and pound foolish to me.

 

Flame on

 

Of the reasons to extend Bryant now, getting him a couple extra weeks in the majors next April should be near the bottom of the list. The only reason to extend him right now, as others have said, would be if he takes something absurdly below market.

[Guest]

I know all the caveats about prospects. And I know Boras is Bryant's agent, but if the only thing keeping him down at the start of the season is "team control", couldn't and shouldn't the Cubs take control of the situation by offering to buy out his arbitration years plus a couple of years into free agency?

 

I don't really see the purpose of keeping him down when they are going to have to pay a premium to keep him anyway. It just seems penny wise and pound foolish to me.

 

Flame on

 

Of the reasons to extend Bryant now, getting him a couple extra weeks in the majors next April should be near the bottom of the list. The only reason to extend him right now, as others have said, would be if he takes something absurdly below market.

 

Pretty much this.

[Guest]

I know all the caveats about prospects. And I know Boras is Bryant's agent, but if the only thing keeping him down at the start of the season is "team control", couldn't and shouldn't the Cubs take control of the situation by offering to buy out his arbitration years plus a couple of years into free agency?

 

I don't really see the purpose of keeping him down when they are going to have to pay a premium to keep him anyway. It just seems penny wise and pound foolish to me.

 

Flame on

 

Of the reasons to extend Bryant now, getting him a couple extra weeks in the majors next April should be near the bottom of the list. The only reason to extend him right now, as others have said, would be if he takes something absurdly below market.

 

Pretty much this.

My point wasn't that, but whatever.

 

I just don't like playing games with talent. It's stupid and too cute by half, besides the fact that it wastes a month of "ever season is precious " time. My point is basically, what is that extra year of team control worth if he bolts for free agency right after?

 

He's already lost a half year of development time for reasons that have nothing to do with winning baseball games. I understand if the Cubs offer him a reasonable extension and buyout and he turns it down. Why does it have to be absurdly below market value?

 

If I'm the Ricketts and I really want to build a consistent winner, I'm not dicking around with talent.

[Guest]

My point is basically, what is that extra year of team control worth if he bolts for free agency right after?

 

Uh, tens of millions of dollars in value?

 

There'd be more reason to worry about this if the alternatives simply were in the Watkins/Lillibridge family of players, but that's not the case. Between Valbuena and a platoon of Coghlan/Sweeney/Ruggiano, regardless of what position Bryant inherits, he's displacing somebody that's actually contributing. As such, even the most optimistic view of Bryant's 2015 is only a hair better over the 20-25 games he misses by staying down. I'd personally have enough confidence in him to offer him a long term deal, but satisfying my own impatience is not at the top of the list for reasons why I'd do that.

[Burt Macklin, FBI]

 

I just don't like playing games with talent. It's stupid and too cute by half, besides the fact that it wastes a month of "ever season is precious " time. My point is basically, what is that extra year of team control worth if he bolts for free agency right after?

 

He's already lost a half year of development time for reasons that have nothing to do with winning baseball games. I understand if the Cubs offer him a reasonable extension and buyout and he turns it down. Why does it have to be absurdly below market value?

 

 

Bryant is not going to base his decision to sign an extension based on whether the Cubs promoted him in early or late April six years earlier. That's just silly.

 

He's already lost a half year of development time for reasons that have nothing to do with winning baseball games.

 

If the front office thought he was ready in May or June they would have called him up then and used his "extra" year this year a la Baez. He's not just wasting away in AAA because they want to get an extra two weeks of MLB control.

[Guest]

 

I just don't like playing games with talent. It's stupid and too cute by half, besides the fact that it wastes a month of "ever season is precious " time. My point is basically, what is that extra year of team control worth if he bolts for free agency right after?

 

He's already lost a half year of development time for reasons that have nothing to do with winning baseball games. I understand if the Cubs offer him a reasonable extension and buyout and he turns it down. Why does it have to be absurdly below market value?

 

 

Bryant is not going to base his decision to sign an extension based on whether the Cubs promoted him in early or late April six years earlier. That's just silly.

 

He's already lost a half year of development time for reasons that have nothing to do with winning baseball games.

 

If the front office thought he was ready in May or June they would have called him up then and used his "extra" year this year a la Baez. He's not just wasting away in AAA because they want to get an extra two weeks of MLB control.

The front office and everyone else in baseball knew he was ready in late June. To insist otherwise is silly.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Binary "ready/not ready" is silly. He could probably be fine in MLB right now, but that doesn't mean there's nothing he could possibly gain from being down there.

[dawson1989]

You don't pay a good chunk of money while guaranteeing much more over 7 years to get an extra month. Just because we don't have much on the books now, we shouldn't go spending extra on players we already control for the foreseeable future. That is a very nearsighted view and one a good GM wouldn't see.

[Burt Macklin, FBI]

 

The front office and everyone else in baseball knew he was ready in late June. To insist otherwise is silly.

 

What the what? I love Bryant as much as everyone and I definitely think that he could have come up and had success, but to say that he was completely ready, and moreover that everyone knew it, is just wrong. He had, and has, things he still needs to improve (most notably, defense and a high strikeout rate). Things which minor league development time is very valuable for.

 

It's important to remember that as of late June, he'd been a professional baseball player for less than a year. It's not some grand control time conspiracy to keep him down in the minors. Keeping him down this year and bringing him up next April is a very reasonable development path.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Hmm, Bryant was still struggling with Ks despite his uberOPS back then. I wonder if we have any examples of how those types translate to the majors.

[Guest]

Hmm, Bryant was still struggling with Ks despite his uberOPS back then. I wonder if we have any examples of how those types translate to the majors.

 

Have his contact numbers gotten any better?

[Felix Leiter]

Theo and Jed are going to let him come up and prove himself at least for a couple years before even thinking about any new contract. Here's just a partial list of 'can't miss prospects' that never made it big. How foolish it would have been to have a multi-year contract hanging around their necks.

 

Delmon Young, Brandon Wood, Brien Taylor, Sean Burroughs, Dallas McPherson, Lastings Milledge, Andy Marte, Drew Henson, Ben Grieve and of course our Corey Patterson, Felix Pie, Ryan Harvey..etc..

[sneakypower]

Hmm, Bryant was still struggling with Ks despite his uberOPS back then. I wonder if we have any examples of how those types translate to the majors.

 

Have his contact numbers gotten any better?

no, not really (58%, 67%, 64% last three months)

[Guest]

Hmm, Bryant was still struggling with Ks despite his uberOPS back then. I wonder if we have any examples of how those types translate to the majors.

 

Have his contact numbers gotten any better?

no, not really (58%, 67%, 64% last three months)

 

eww

[illiniguy]

Theo and Jed are going to let him come up and prove himself at least for a couple years before even thinking about any new contract. Here's just a partial list of 'can't miss prospects' that never made it big. How foolish it would have been to have a multi-year contract hanging around their necks.

 

Delmon Young, Brandon Wood, Brien Taylor, Sean Burroughs, Dallas McPherson, Lastings Milledge, Andy Marte, Drew Henson, Ben Grieve and of course our Corey Patterson, Felix Pie, Ryan Harvey..etc..

Lol, how many guys on your list had an ops near 1.100 at AAA? Definitely not the three cubs' prospects. Maybe, McPherson did. Maybe.

 

Ryan Harvey? Jesus man, Ryan Harvey sucked at Peoria.

[biittner77]

Bryant spends 2-3 weeks at Iowa learning to play LF in case they need him there. That won't hurt his ability to go back to 3rd but it would be better than having to send him down later to learn a new position. What it really comes down to is, who would you rather have Bryant replace, Valbuena or whomever is playing LF? A case can be made either way. When Russell comes up, someone will have to move to the OF anyway unless one of the infielders gets traded for Stanton.