Offseason Rumors & Transactions Thread

[Guest]

How many above average starters who have seen free agency don't make $15M a year?

[rawaction]

How many above average starters who have seen free agency don't make $15M a year?

 

Probably not many. But him making that 4 years from now is probably going to be a big overpay, considering his age and position. Adding another year on that scares me, especially if he goes back to 2011-2013 production levels.

[abuck1220]

How many above average starters who have seen free agency don't make $15M a year?

 

who cares. that doesn't mean you have to give russell martin $75 mil.

[Guest]

How many above average starters who have seen free agency don't make $15M a year?

 

Probably not many. But him making that 4 years from now is probably going to be a big overpay, considering his age and position. Adding another year on that scares me, especially if he goes back to 2011-2013 production levels.

 

You're really paying for the first couple years, though. You also have a good chance at getting surplus value in those years. Ideally, toward the back half of the deal, he's splitting time with Schwarber (though you don't just assume that will happen obviously - it's just a potential good outcome that you take into account), especially if his production is tapering off. And $15M a year for two years isn't a horrible bullet to bite, especially not if you got surplus production out of the first couple. There's too much cheap surplus value that we project to have in the coming years to worry too much about overspending by a few million on the one really open position we have. That's not to say that all the prospects will produce, but barring trades, they all need to play and C is the one opening where there isn't such a guy.

 

I definitely have reservations about the 5th year, but if they have to go 5 years but can get it at a lower AAV, I'm open to it.

[Guest]

The value of a win is going to be like 7 million this offseason. Even if you regress Martin to a 3 win player(he's been worth 9+ the last 2 years before you get into framing), he's still worth it at 5/75, especially when you consider that he very easily could put up another 4 win season, framing gives him another bump, etc. The dollars/production thing is pretty much a non-issue, and that's thanks to his age suppressing his contract in actuality.

 

My problem with Martin is that I'm not convinced he's going to actually be all that good. I don't have much besides intuition and a deep prejudice against older players to base that off so I'm not going to tell anyone who loves Martin that he's a terrible sign, but given that we already have a league averageish guy there now, I'd rather make a splash at a different spot if we're spending significant dollars on the offense. Put another way, I'm sure Martin wouldn't be an anchor on the team, but I'm skeptical that he's actually a big improvement over Castillo(or Castillo with a better backup) moving forward.

[Guest]

How many above average starters who have seen free agency don't make $15M a year?

 

who cares. that doesn't mean you have to give russell martin $75 mil.

 

Nothing means you have to give anybody anything.

 

But you shouldn't be worrying about how many players make $15M a year. You should be worrying about what free agents cost, because that's what he is. If it's worth doing given our needs, our openings, our available money, and other available options, it's worth doing, regardless of whether you perceive him to be making too much money or not.

[jersey cubs fan]

My problem with Martin is that I'm not convinced he's going to actually be all that good. I don't have much besides intuition and a deep prejudice against older players to base that off so I'm not going to tell anyone who loves Martin that he's a terrible sign, but given that we already have a league averageish guy there now, I'd rather make a splash at a different spot if we're spending significant dollars on the offense. Put another way, I'm sure Martin wouldn't be an anchor on the team, but I'm skeptical that he's actually a big improvement over Castillo(or Castillo with a better backup) moving forward.

 

That's my main concern. I don't see enough of a notable upgrade with Martin. A stud pitcher is going to make a huge difference over whatever 5th starter gets tossed off. An impact OF is going to eliminate some crappy guy from dragging down the team. Martin is going to be better than Welington, but I do not see it being by a wide margin.

[SouthSideRyan]

@670TheScore: #Cubs are moving aggressively, already speaking w/ agents for Jon Lester and Jason Hammel, reports @MLBBruceLevine: http://t.co/u7BAJxDZHA

 

What does he mean "already"?

 

Well, relative to last year.

[Guest]

BTW, I think I heard on the radio today (was sort of absentmindedly listening) that Martin has a 5 year $70M offer from Toronto. They were talking about the taxes in Canada being a lot higher and stuff. Edited November 11, 2014 by David

[SouthSideRyan]

My problem with Martin is that I'm not convinced he's going to actually be all that good. I don't have much besides intuition and a deep prejudice against older players to base that off so I'm not going to tell anyone who loves Martin that he's a terrible sign, but given that we already have a league averageish guy there now, I'd rather make a splash at a different spot if we're spending significant dollars on the offense. Put another way, I'm sure Martin wouldn't be an anchor on the team, but I'm skeptical that he's actually a big improvement over Castillo(or Castillo with a better backup) moving forward.

 

That's my main concern. I don't see enough of a notable upgrade with Martin. A stud pitcher is going to make a huge difference over whatever 5th starter gets tossed off. An impact OF is going to eliminate some crappy guy from dragging down the team. Martin is going to be better than Welington, but I do not see it being by a wide margin.

 

Right, replacing Felix Doubront is a lot more important than replacing Welington Castillo

[abuck1220]

 

My problem with Martin is that I'm not convinced he's going to actually be all that good.

 

yes, that's obviously my concern. he was pretty blah from ages 26-29, and the concern is he'll be even blah-er from ages 32-36. which isn't some crazy leap to make.

[Guest]

My problem with Martin is that I'm not convinced he's going to actually be all that good. I don't have much besides intuition and a deep prejudice against older players to base that off so I'm not going to tell anyone who loves Martin that he's a terrible sign, but given that we already have a league averageish guy there now, I'd rather make a splash at a different spot if we're spending significant dollars on the offense. Put another way, I'm sure Martin wouldn't be an anchor on the team, but I'm skeptical that he's actually a big improvement over Castillo(or Castillo with a better backup) moving forward.

 

That's my main concern. I don't see enough of a notable upgrade with Martin. A stud pitcher is going to make a huge difference over whatever 5th starter gets tossed off. An impact OF is going to eliminate some crappy guy from dragging down the team. Martin is going to be better than Welington, but I do not see it being by a wide margin.

 

Right, replacing Felix Doubront is a lot more important than replacing Welington Castillo

 

competent replacements for felix doubront are a lot easier to find than plus position players who have a positive impact on the entire pitching staff (especially compared to the guy being replaced).

 

i think this conversation is kind of moot because I don't think we're after martin at the expense of anything we want to do pitching wise.

 

if i did, i'd understand the concern a lot more, though. so i get it.

[UK1679666180]

I'd rather see that money allocated towards Tomas rather than Martin.

[Guest]

I'd rather see that money allocated towards Tomas rather than Martin.

 

you like whatever you've seen of him from a scouting perspective?

[SouthSideRyan]

My problem with Martin is that I'm not convinced he's going to actually be all that good. I don't have much besides intuition and a deep prejudice against older players to base that off so I'm not going to tell anyone who loves Martin that he's a terrible sign, but given that we already have a league averageish guy there now, I'd rather make a splash at a different spot if we're spending significant dollars on the offense. Put another way, I'm sure Martin wouldn't be an anchor on the team, but I'm skeptical that he's actually a big improvement over Castillo(or Castillo with a better backup) moving forward.

 

That's my main concern. I don't see enough of a notable upgrade with Martin. A stud pitcher is going to make a huge difference over whatever 5th starter gets tossed off. An impact OF is going to eliminate some crappy guy from dragging down the team. Martin is going to be better than Welington, but I do not see it being by a wide margin.

 

Right, replacing Felix Doubront is a lot more important than replacing Welington Castillo

 

competent replacements for felix doubront are a lot easier to find than plus position players who have a positive impact on the entire pitching staff (especially compared to the guy being replaced).

 

Isn't that begging the question?

[UK1679666180]

I'd rather see that money allocated towards Tomas rather than Martin.

 

you like whatever you've seen of him from a scouting perspective?

 

He has plus bat speed with a short compact swing. He's younger than most Cuban defectors. He's not as polished as Abreu or Soler but that power is worth the risk.

[sneakypower]

The value of a win is going to be like 7 million this offseason. Even if you regress Martin to a 3 win player(he's been worth 9+ the last 2 years before you get into framing), he's still worth it at 5/75, especially when you consider that he very easily could put up another 4 win season, framing gives him another bump, etc. The dollars/production thing is pretty much a non-issue, and that's thanks to his age suppressing his contract in actuality.

 

My problem with Martin is that I'm not convinced he's going to actually be all that good. I don't have much besides intuition and a deep prejudice against older players to base that off so I'm not going to tell anyone who loves Martin that he's a terrible sign, but given that we already have a league averageish guy there now, I'd rather make a splash at a different spot if we're spending significant dollars on the offense. Put another way, I'm sure Martin wouldn't be an anchor on the team, but I'm skeptical that he's actually a big improvement over Castillo (or Castillo with a better backup) moving forward.

to actually say this, you have to be:

a) a complete skeptic of the effect pitch framing can have

b) totally unaware at the discrepancy which exists between the two players

statcorner:
          2014  2013  2012  total
Martin		+11	+17	+24	52
Castillo	 -24	-17	-5	-46

Baseball Prospectus:
          2014  2013  2012  total
Martin		+19	+15	+23	57	
Castillo	 -10	-16	-3	-29

source:

http://www.statcorner.com/CatcherReport.php

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1667331

 

so, i'm really curious to hear which it is...because it's not unfathomable (to me) to believe that an event on which they have influence about 7,000-10,000 times could really add up to a significant effect, especially when scouting sources universally agree they're at opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of ability

 

it's simply impossible for me to hand-wave a factor that could alone likely amount to a 2-3 win difference

[jersey cubs fan]

Looks like Martin magically took a step back from framing phantom strikes when moving from the Yankees to the Pirates.

[abuck1220]

The value of a win is going to be like 7 million this offseason. Even if you regress Martin to a 3 win player(he's been worth 9+ the last 2 years before you get into framing), he's still worth it at 5/75, especially when you consider that he very easily could put up another 4 win season, framing gives him another bump, etc. The dollars/production thing is pretty much a non-issue, and that's thanks to his age suppressing his contract in actuality.

 

My problem with Martin is that I'm not convinced he's going to actually be all that good. I don't have much besides intuition and a deep prejudice against older players to base that off so I'm not going to tell anyone who loves Martin that he's a terrible sign, but given that we already have a league averageish guy there now, I'd rather make a splash at a different spot if we're spending significant dollars on the offense. Put another way, I'm sure Martin wouldn't be an anchor on the team, but I'm skeptical that he's actually a big improvement over Castillo (or Castillo with a better backup) moving forward.

to actually say this, you have to be:

a) a complete skeptic of the effect pitch framing can have

b) totally unaware at the discrepancy which exists between the two players

statcorner:
          2014  2013  2012  total
Martin		+11	+17	+24	52
Castillo	 -24	-17	-5	-46

Baseball Prospectus:
          2014  2013  2012  total
Martin		+19	+15	+23	57	
Castillo	 -10	-16	-3	-29

source:

http://www.statcorner.com/CatcherReport.php

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1667331

 

so, i'm really curious to hear which it is...because it's not unfathomable (to me) to believe that an event on which they have influence about 7,000-10,000 times could really add up to a significant effect, especially when scouting sources universally agree they're at opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of ability

 

it's simply impossible for me to hand-wave a factor that could alone likely amount to a 2-3 win difference

 

and it's impossible for me to just accept that pitch framing alone amounts to a 2-3 win difference.

[Sammy Sofa]

Makes sense to me. Umpires are horrible jerks who need to be coddled like fat babies.

[RynoRules]

Looks like Martin magically took a step back from framing phantom strikes when moving from the Yankees to the Pirates.

 

Yeah, that was noticeable. Could it have to do with the pitchers he was working with and their reps rather than a simple Yankee bias?

 

I'm with TT and company here re Martin. If its a choice between him and getting one of Lester / Scherzer, I choose the later and an OF upgrade.

[chopsx9]

The value of a win is going to be like 7 million this offseason. Even if you regress Martin to a 3 win player(he's been worth 9+ the last 2 years before you get into framing), he's still worth it at 5/75, especially when you consider that he very easily could put up another 4 win season, framing gives him another bump, etc. The dollars/production thing is pretty much a non-issue, and that's thanks to his age suppressing his contract in actuality.

 

My problem with Martin is that I'm not convinced he's going to actually be all that good. I don't have much besides intuition and a deep prejudice against older players to base that off so I'm not going to tell anyone who loves Martin that he's a terrible sign, but given that we already have a league averageish guy there now, I'd rather make a splash at a different spot if we're spending significant dollars on the offense. Put another way, I'm sure Martin wouldn't be an anchor on the team, but I'm skeptical that he's actually a big improvement over Castillo (or Castillo with a better backup) moving forward.

to actually say this, you have to be:

a) a complete skeptic of the effect pitch framing can have

b) totally unaware at the discrepancy which exists between the two players

statcorner:
          2014  2013  2012  total
Martin		+11	+17	+24	52
Castillo	 -24	-17	-5	-46

Baseball Prospectus:
          2014  2013  2012  total
Martin		+19	+15	+23	57	
Castillo	 -10	-16	-3	-29

source:

http://www.statcorner.com/CatcherReport.php

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1667331

 

so, i'm really curious to hear which it is...because it's not unfathomable (to me) to believe that an event on which they have influence about 7,000-10,000 times could really add up to a significant effect, especially when scouting sources universally agree they're at opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of ability

 

it's simply impossible for me to hand-wave a factor that could alone likely amount to a 2-3 win difference

 

Of course extrapolating the trend Castillo should be solidly positive next year :-)

[Guest]

The value of a win is going to be like 7 million this offseason. Even if you regress Martin to a 3 win player(he's been worth 9+ the last 2 years before you get into framing), he's still worth it at 5/75, especially when you consider that he very easily could put up another 4 win season, framing gives him another bump, etc. The dollars/production thing is pretty much a non-issue, and that's thanks to his age suppressing his contract in actuality.

 

My problem with Martin is that I'm not convinced he's going to actually be all that good. I don't have much besides intuition and a deep prejudice against older players to base that off so I'm not going to tell anyone who loves Martin that he's a terrible sign, but given that we already have a league averageish guy there now, I'd rather make a splash at a different spot if we're spending significant dollars on the offense. Put another way, I'm sure Martin wouldn't be an anchor on the team, but I'm skeptical that he's actually a big improvement over Castillo (or Castillo with a better backup) moving forward.

to actually say this, you have to be:

a) a complete skeptic of the effect pitch framing can have

b) totally unaware at the discrepancy which exists between the two players

statcorner:
          2014  2013  2012  total
Martin		+11	+17	+24	52
Castillo	 -24	-17	-5	-46

Baseball Prospectus:
          2014  2013  2012  total
Martin		+19	+15	+23	57	
Castillo	 -10	-16	-3	-29

source:

http://www.statcorner.com/CatcherReport.php

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1667331

 

so, i'm really curious to hear which it is...because it's not unfathomable (to me) to believe that an event on which they have influence about 7,000-10,000 times could really add up to a significant effect, especially when scouting sources universally agree they're at opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of ability

 

it's simply impossible for me to hand-wave a factor that could alone likely amount to a 2-3 win difference

 

and it's impossible for me to just accept that pitch framing alone amounts to a 2-3 win difference.

It's not a real win, it's a statistical win. Anyway, the more I look at framing the more I think it has to do with unknowns than I do the actually ability to catch a ball and get a borderline strike.

 

I would love to see some one with a lot of time to do multiple regressions by umpire, pitcher, runs, (a head or behind), real wins (although there is a confound). Nevertheless, defensive metrics have improved but they are still unreliable and should not be relied upon to make definitive judgements.

 

I think Martin is going to get a lot of money in part for an attribute that he may or may not be able to control. I love the OBP and I think he's an upgrade of Wellington, I don't think the value is high enough given age, etc.,

Edited November 11, 2014 by CubinNY

[Sammy Sofa]

statcorner:
          2014  2013  2012  total
Martin		+11	+17	+24	52
Castillo	 -24	-17	-5	-46

Baseball Prospectus:
          2014  2013  2012  total
Martin		+19	+15	+23	57	
Castillo	 -10	-16	-3	-29

source:

http://www.statcorner.com/CatcherReport.php

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1667331

 

so, i'm really curious to hear which it is...because it's not unfathomable (to me) to believe that an event on which they have influence about 7,000-10,000 times could really add up to a significant effect, especially when scouting sources universally agree they're at opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of ability

 

it's simply impossible for me to hand-wave a factor that could alone likely amount to a 2-3 win difference

 

Of course extrapolating the trend Castillo should be solidly positive next year :-)

 

http://img.pandawhale.com/post-19430-Wonka-gif--Wait-a-minute-strik-Fe67.gif

[Guest]

Sources have informed FOX Sports MLB Insider Ken Rosenthal that new Dodgers president of baseball operations Andrew Friedman and the L.A. brain trust are aggressively trying to move an outfielder, and that nearly all are in play.

 

 

speculate away

 

I off-handedly mentioned it earlier, but the more I think about it, the more curious I am how much of Crawford's contract they'd eat. It's only 3 years and he's a pretty nice fit if you believe he can be passable in CF(honestly, I kinda think he and Alcantara are comparable there).

 

Oh, yeah, almost forgot... Levine mentioned on the Score this morning that the talk in the hotel bars last night were that the Cubs might be talking to LA about Crawford with LA obv eating some salary.