Cubs sign Tyler Chatwood for 3/$38M

[Cubswin11]

 

Why is that a hot take?

 

Because there's nothing the slightest bit puzzling about it. You can not like Chatwood, but this move replaces Lackey with a younger, cheaper pitcher who was twice as valuable as Lackey last year.

 

I don't want to be arguing against this because I don't hate it, but a WS contender giving 3 year commitment to a guy that hasn't been very good who has had 2 tommy John surgerys can be puzzling. John Lackey being trash doesn't have anything to do with the 2018 rotation.

This describes like 80% of the Dodgers rotation the last 2-3 years (Hill, Wood, Kazmir, McCarthy, Ryu, Maeda, etc) and they've done just fine and the Astros did it with Morton. This is a perfectly fine move and way to build a rotation for a WS contender (especially when you have anchors like Lester, Q, Hendricks, Kershaw, Kuechel, Verlander, etc.)

Edited December 7, 2017 by Cubswin11

[CP_414]

 

The headline is a super hot take. The article is fine and reasonable.

 

It's not hard to argue this is puzzling. I personally don't feel that way, but Chatwood has not had good results. He hasn't been healthy. He got $40 million and he'll get 25+ starts next year if healthy. You can argue that a WS contender giving $40 million over 3 years and a rotation spot to a change of scenery pitcher is puzzling.

 

It doesn't matter. I just don't think it's a hot take. I think it's an opinion that he disagrees with.

If you did not know what Coors was, then this is puzzling. The guy in the article says just about everything we have already said in this thread, but for unexplained reasons dislikes the deal. When you compare Chatwood's adjusted stats to the price of FA pitching, there is absolutely nothing to puzzle about, for ALL OF THE REASONS HE MENTIONED IN HIS OWN ARTICLE.

 

If it's all Coors then why are his peripherals not better on the road? That's all the guy is saying. You can't just look at his road ERA and say this is great. He's still not getting lots of Ks on the road. He's still walking a ton on the road. He still has the same injury history.

 

The Cubs need to add a ton of pitching, so this is fine. I prefer this to signing Cobb, so I'm ok with the risk. Let's just not act like we know that he is going to pitch well moving forward.

[David]

Heavy ground ball guys also tend to have not-great looking peripherals.

 

That said, I would obviously have liked to have seen a lot fewer walks on the road.

[Derwood]

Is Chatwood a guy who might be groomed as a closer later in his career?

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

 

It's not hard to argue this is puzzling. I personally don't feel that way, but Chatwood has not had good results. He hasn't been healthy. He got $40 million and he'll get 25+ starts next year if healthy. You can argue that a WS contender giving $40 million over 3 years and a rotation spot to a change of scenery pitcher is puzzling.

 

It doesn't matter. I just don't think it's a hot take. I think it's an opinion that he disagrees with.

If you did not know what Coors was, then this is puzzling. The guy in the article says just about everything we have already said in this thread, but for unexplained reasons dislikes the deal. When you compare Chatwood's adjusted stats to the price of FA pitching, there is absolutely nothing to puzzle about, for ALL OF THE REASONS HE MENTIONED IN HIS OWN ARTICLE.

 

If it's all Coors then why are his peripherals not better on the road? That's all the guy is saying. You can't just look at his road ERA and say this is great. He's still not getting lots of Ks on the road. He's still walking a ton on the road. He still has the same injury history.

 

The Cubs need to add a ton of pitching, so this is fine. I prefer this to signing Cobb, so I'm ok with the risk. Let's just not act like we know that he is going to pitch well moving forward.

It is true that the future is unknowable, especially pitcher health. Apart from that...

[Cubswin11]

it's weird to me that people can't see the argument for this signing being puzzling, or not all that intriguing.

There's certainly downside/risk but it's not a ton of money or years and there's a ton to like especially for a guy who is going to end up our 4th or 5th starter (with upside) and it's not going to be our only move.

[CP_414]

 

Because there's nothing the slightest bit puzzling about it. You can not like Chatwood, but this move replaces Lackey with a younger, cheaper pitcher who was twice as valuable as Lackey last year.

 

I don't want to be arguing against this because I don't hate it, but a WS contender giving 3 year commitment to a guy that hasn't been very good who has had 2 tommy John surgerys can be puzzling. John Lackey being trash doesn't have anything to do with the 2018 rotation.

This describes like 80% of the Dodgers rotation the last 2-3 years (Hill, Wood, Kamir, McCarthy, Ryu, Maeda,etc) and they've done just fine and the Astros did it with Morton. This is a perfectly fine move and way to build a rotation for a WS contender (especially when you have anchors like Lester, Q, Hendricks, Kershaw, Kuechel, Verlander, etc.)

 

Wasn't morton's contract $12 million over 2 years? The only dodger pitcher that sort of compares to this is McCarthy and I don't think that worked out great. Hill and Kazmir were much better pitchers than Chatwood has been. Ryu and Maeda hadn't pitched in MLB. Didn't they get Wood basically for free in a trade?

 

If the Cubs gave Chatwood the contract Morton signed nobody says a word. It's only "puzzling" to some because he got 3 years at decent money after being a combination of bad and injured most of his career.

[imb]

I'm not concerned about the TJ because it's just a three-year deal.

 

The walks concern me but what can you do when you're talking about a 5th or 6th starter.

[champaignchris]

5.7 WAR and a 115 ERA+ over the last two years for a contract that's at the mid-point between what Rich Hill and Ivan Nova got last year. Or basically Edinson Volquez's contract plus one year to a player 6 years younger than Volquez.

 

Seems pretty reasonable to me.

[jersey cubs fan]

This describes like 80% of the Dodgers rotation the last 2-3 years (Hill, Wood, Kazmir, McCarthy, Ryu, Maeda, etc) and they've done just fine and the Astros did it with Morton. This is a perfectly fine move and way to build a rotation for a WS contender (especially when you have anchors like Lester, Q, Hendricks, Kershaw, Kuechel, Verlander, etc.)

But the Dodgers do it with 10 guys at a time and spend $250 on payroll. The Cubs don't have a 10 man rotation and don't look to be building one either. They actually need their starting pitching to start lots of games and pitch lots of inning.

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

It's only "puzzling" to some because he got 3 years at decent money after being a combination of bad and injured most of his career.

[jersey cubs fan]

Is Chatwood a guy who might be groomed as a closer later in his career?

without being able to strike anybody out and with a lot of walks? I doubt it.

[Cubswin11]

 

I don't want to be arguing against this because I don't hate it, but a WS contender giving 3 year commitment to a guy that hasn't been very good who has had 2 tommy John surgerys can be puzzling. John Lackey being trash doesn't have anything to do with the 2018 rotation.

This describes like 80% of the Dodgers rotation the last 2-3 years (Hill, Wood, Kamir, McCarthy, Ryu, Maeda,etc) and they've done just fine and the Astros did it with Morton. This is a perfectly fine move and way to build a rotation for a WS contender (especially when you have anchors like Lester, Q, Hendricks, Kershaw, Kuechel, Verlander, etc.)

 

Wasn't morton's contract $12 million over 2 years? The only dodger pitcher that sort of compares to this is McCarthy and I don't think that worked out great. Hill and Kazmir were much better pitchers than Chatwood has been. Ryu and Maeda hadn't pitched in MLB. Didn't they get Wood basically for free in a trade?

 

If the Cubs gave Chatwood the contract Morton signed nobody says a word. It's only "puzzling" to some because he got 3 years at decent money after being a combination of bad and injured most of his career.

All those guys have similar risk profiles though. Morton was 2/14 with some incentives with IP/GS, Hill is 10 years older than Chatwood and got $10 million more plus an additional year and has pitched ~60 less innings the last 2 years, Kazmir was signed coming off of 2 really nice years but he was 31 when he signed and there were plenty of red flags and got 3/48, Wood is cheap and gotten for cheap but carries a injury risk and they depend on him more than the Cubs will likely depend on Chatwood this year, and Ryu/Maeda were risks coming over with not huge profiles of being more than back of the rotation guys (Maeda a little more hype than Ryu). They all are pitchers that carry risk is what my main point is and the Dodgers have a lot more than we do and it's a fine way to build your middl-end of the rotation if you don't have minor leaguers coming up/ability to give out multiple Lester type deals.

[CP_414]

5.7 WAR and a 115 ERA+ over the last two years for a contract that's at the mid-point between what Rich Hill and Ivan Nova got last year. Or basically Edinson Volquez's contract plus one year to a player 6 years younger than Volquez.

 

Seems pretty reasonable to me.

 

He hasn't had 5.7 fWAR in his career let alone the last 2 years.

[champaignchris]

5.7 WAR and a 115 ERA+ over the last two years for a contract that's at the mid-point between what Rich Hill and Ivan Nova got last year. Or basically Edinson Volquez's contract plus one year to a player 6 years younger than Volquez.

 

Seems pretty reasonable to me.

 

He hasn't had 5.7 fWAR in his career let alone the last 2 years.

 

BR has his WAR at 3.6 in 2016 and 2.2 in 2017. Don't like BR? That's fine. But that's what BR says.

[CP_414]

It's only "puzzling" to some because he got 3 years at decent money after being a combination of bad and injured most of his career.

 

The guy with a 4.6 career FIP with less than 1 WAR per season and a career 15.6% k rate and 10.7% BB rate.

 

Being on the Cubs might help him perform well, but that's not the same as saying that he has performed well. He has not.

[sneakypower]

Is Chatwood a guy who might be groomed as a closer later in his career?

short answer: no

 

long answer: still just no

[CP_414]

This describes like 80% of the Dodgers rotation the last 2-3 years (Hill, Wood, Kamir, McCarthy, Ryu, Maeda,etc) and they've done just fine and the Astros did it with Morton. This is a perfectly fine move and way to build a rotation for a WS contender (especially when you have anchors like Lester, Q, Hendricks, Kershaw, Kuechel, Verlander, etc.)

 

Wasn't morton's contract $12 million over 2 years? The only dodger pitcher that sort of compares to this is McCarthy and I don't think that worked out great. Hill and Kazmir were much better pitchers than Chatwood has been. Ryu and Maeda hadn't pitched in MLB. Didn't they get Wood basically for free in a trade?

 

If the Cubs gave Chatwood the contract Morton signed nobody says a word. It's only "puzzling" to some because he got 3 years at decent money after being a combination of bad and injured most of his career.

All those guys have similar risk profiles though. Morton was 2/14 with some incentives with IP/GS, Hill is 10 years older than Chatwood and got $10 million more plus an additional year and has pitched ~60 less innings the last 2 years, Kazmir was signed coming off of 2 really nice years but he was 31 when he signed and there were plenty of red flags and got 3/48, Wood is cheap and gotten for cheap but carries a injury risk and they depend on him more than the Cubs will likely depend on Chatwood this year, and Ryu/Maeda were risks coming over with not huge profiles of being more than back of the rotation guys (Maeda a little more hype than Ryu). They all are pitchers that carry risk is what my main point is and the Dodgers have a lot more than we do and it's a fine way to build your middl-end of the rotation if you don't have minor leaguers coming up/ability to give out multiple Lester type deals.

 

I think it's a stretch to compare him to most of those guys. Hill was very good before he signed there. Kazmir was coming off 3 good years. All better than anything Chatwood has done yet. McCarthy was the most similar but he still had much more success prior to the trade. Wood made little money and they got him for nothing. The Japanese players had no history good or bad.

 

Again, i personally am not opposed to this deal. I just don't think it's a hot take to be puzzled by this. A reasonable person can look at this and say that it's not a good idea. That doesn't mean they are correct. It just means it's a fair take.

[ScrubMD]

less than 1 WAR per season

 

Where are you getting this?

[CP_414]

less than 1 WAR per season

 

Where are you getting this?

 

Fangraphs. He has participed in 6 seasons and has 5.1 career WAR. If you want to be kind and exclude 2014 then he's at 1 WAR per season.

[David]

less than 1 WAR per season

 

Where are you getting this?

 

5.1 fWAR in 6 "seasons"

 

but fWAR doesn't like GB guys who don't strike many out.

[Cubswin11]

 

Again, i personally am not opposed to this deal. I just don't think it's a hot take to be puzzled by this. A reasonable person can look at this and say that it's not a good idea. That doesn't mean they are correct. It just means it's a fair take.

Will you think this isn't a good deal if we sign Ohtani then bring in 1 or 2 AAAA filler types (Garza, Gee, Buchholz, etc)? Or if the 6-man rotation has some legs and we add Cobb and Ohtani? Or if we trade for a SP of a Cobb level? If you think this is our only significant SP add of the offseason then I get the hate/worry but I highly doubt it is and very well could be the "worst" pitcher we add.

[ScrubMD]

less than 1 WAR per season

 

Where are you getting this?

 

5.1 fWAR in 6 "seasons"

 

but fWAR doesn't like GB guys who don't strike many out.

 

Got it. Didn't realize there was that big a difference from BR.

[David]

 

Where are you getting this?

 

5.1 fWAR in 6 "seasons"

 

but fWAR doesn't like GB guys who don't strike many out.

 

Got it. Didn't realize there was that big a difference from BR.

 

fWAR is more peripherals/FIP based, bWAR is based on actual outcomes

[weis21]

Is Chatwood a guy who might be groomed as a closer later in his career?

without being able to strike anybody out and with a lot of walks? I doubt it.

counterargument: who cares bc he's 31 when this deal ends.