The 2018-2019 Cubs Offseason Rumors & Discussion Thread AKA The Rickettssss take a dump on EVERYTHING

[David]

I’m sure Bryce would sign a deal with no opt outs if he was given ~$100 million more than the highest offer and a full NTC because those are the type of trade offs you’d have to give for him not having opt outs. Whether or not you think opt outs are good or bad or like them or not doesn’t matter. They’re a reality you have to deal with and accept that you likely have to offer them when going after the upper end FAs and if you aren’t willing to include them you aren’t getting a guy most of the time.

 

yeah, i mean, opt-outs are just another way of providing value, no different than money or whatever the hell else. you can try to not give them out, but you better be offering a lot more money in exchange.

[Cubswin11]

I’m sure Bryce would sign a deal with no opt outs if he was given ~$100 million more than the highest offer and a full NTC because those are the type of trade offs you’d have to give for him not having opt outs. Whether or not you think opt outs are good or bad or like them or not doesn’t matter. They’re a reality you have to deal with and accept that you likely have to offer them when going after the upper end FAs and if you aren’t willing to include them you aren’t getting a guy most of the time.

 

yeah, i mean, opt-outs are just another way of providing value, no different than money or whatever the hell else. you can try to not give them out, but you better be offering a lot more money in exchange.

Right and in exchange for Opt Outs players (in theory) give you a little bit of a discount or agree to an extra year or two overall for AAV purposes if that's what a team feels is important.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

 

we're all aware of your wrong opinion of how opt-outs work, you don't need to bring it up every time it's mentioned

 

Wonder who Jason Heyward is signing with this off-season.

 

Yeah that’s not the point though. Players who already have leverage (due to age positional scarcity or whatever) will always ask for opt outs. Once one team is willing to kick in, they all have to. You might as well be complaining about the per year dollar figure. “But why do we have to pay him $30 million?????”

 

Because he asked for it and he could get it from someone else if not us. If you don’t want to do it, don’t, but you aren’t getting the player.

 

Consider the absurdity of wanting Harper but griping about his opt outs. It’s the price of doing business baby

 

That's fine, but if he wants the opt-outs, you better be getting a discount on the total money over what he would be getting from an opt-outless deal.

 

If you're willing to pay him $30m with opt-outs, he better bet worth $50m without them.

 

"Opt-outs are a way of giving more value" is a very different story from "Lol, who even cares about the total value because the opt-outs will invalidate it."

[imb]

 

Wonder who Jason Heyward is signing with this off-season.

 

Yeah that’s not the point though. Players who already have leverage (due to age positional scarcity or whatever) will always ask for opt outs. Once one team is willing to kick in, they all have to. You might as well be complaining about the per year dollar figure. “But why do we have to pay him $30 million?????”

 

Because he asked for it and he could get it from someone else if not us. If you don’t want to do it, don’t, but you aren’t getting the player.

 

Consider the absurdity of wanting Harper but griping about his opt outs. It’s the price of doing business baby

 

That's fine, but if he wants the opt-outs, you better be getting a discount on the total money over what he would be getting from an opt-outless deal.

 

If you're willing to pay him $30m with opt-outs, he better bet worth $50m without them.

 

"Opt-outs are a way of giving more value" is a very different story from "Lol, who even cares about the total value because the opt-outs will invalidate it."

 

it's all a part of the same discussion. every time it comes up you talk about how bad opt outs are for the team, and it's true, they are, in the same way that giving more money to a player is worse for the team than giving less money.

 

What I was talking about above was how nutty it is to talk about giving a player a 14-year deal. Sure, it's crazy, but only someone with harper's leverage can even begin to talk about a contract like that, and he can only do that because the team giving him the deal knows there are opt outs that he's likely to take. And if he's not good enough to opt out, you lose (like we did with jason heyward) but everyone knows that before they make the contract offer.

 

either way, your stance on opt-outs is either just plain wrong or intentionally wrong.

[Cubswin11]

This is good to hear. Vic can go away

 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Yes, I understand that giving a player is an opt-out is the same as giving him value in other ways.

 

My stance is simply that fans *wildly* underestimate how much value that is when discussing it.

 

If you need to give Bryce Harper an elite salary *and* 10+ years of commitment *and* opt-outs, it's probably time to walk away, no matter how badly this team needs his swagger.

[davell]

Honestly, I'd LOVE to give him a 15 year contract, with an old out EVERY year during years 6-15.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Honestly, I'd LOVE to give him a 15 year contract, with an old out EVERY year during years 6-15.

 

OK, this is exactly what I'm talking about, but whatever I'm not gonna spend all offseason having this argument.

 

We need Bryce Harper because he's awesome and figuring out what he's worth or how we get him is for the nerds to deal with.

[davell]

Honestly, I'd LOVE to give him a 15 year contract, with an old out EVERY year during years 6-15.

 

OK, this is exactly what I'm talking about, but whatever I'm not gonna spend all offseason having this argument.

 

We need Bryce Harper because he's awesome and figuring out what he's worth or how we get him is for the nerds to deal with.

 

I know we or anyone else isn't structuring a deal that way. Realistically, he'd probably want one at the same time we've got everyone else as a FA. And depending on how the monetary outlay goes, he may want one in the middle, if the contract is frontloaded.

 

They do have some value, but the key is getting him. Personally, I don't care at what cost, as long as the AAV works to where we can fit him in and also address the pen and anything else we think is necessary.

[Backtobanks]

Too many players involved to happen, but here goes:

 

Cubs get Leake, Gordon, and Elias plus $3 million in 2019 and $12 million in 2020

Mariners get Happ, Chatwood, Duensing, Kintzler

 

Money is basically even in 2019 & 2020.

2021 Cubs have $5 million buyout on Leake and $1 million buyout on Gordon, Elias & Happ are both in arbitration.

[Sammy Sofa]

Too many players involved to happen, but here goes:

 

Cubs get Leake, Gordon, and Elias plus $3 million in 2019 and $12 million in 2020

Mariners get Happ, Chatwood, Duensing, Kintzler

 

Money is basically even in 2019 & 2020.

2021 Cubs have $5 million buyout on Leake and $1 million buyout on Gordon, Elias & Happ are both in arbitration.

 

[Bertz]

This is good to hear. Vic can go away

 

 

I swear if they spend any more than like a million on a backup C and this "we've got no money!" nonsense ends up being true I'm going to have an aneurysm

[toonsterwu]

I suspect, though, it's all talk at this juncture, with the hopes that some of the top end numbers get dragged down a bit. Akin to how they went about Darvish last year, sorta.

 

I too hope that this year's baller FA class is inexplicably dragged down in cost like last year's FA class was dragged down because it sucked, and because teams didn't want to spend too much in the face of the baller FA class that is happening RIGHT NOW.

 

To be real clear, I'm not saying I think any of the elite guys in this class are going to get lower than expected contracts. I'm just saying that my guess would be that all the talk and rumors are just that right now - talk and rumors, and that the Cubs will try to fortify their other areas of need while potentially pursuing big fish, and hope said big fish's numbers come down a bit. I don't think that is all that controversial ... almost all the teams will play that same game - my point was I don't read too much into anything being said or leaked right now, which was the original point of the post I replied to.

[toonsterwu]

It feels like Boras is setting the starting point at 14 years/500 million, with all the talk of playing till 40 and Zack Greinke's AAV. If that's the case, I really only see one team jumping anywhere near that, and that's Philadelphia.

 

It doesn't matter what it's "set at." It could be 25/900. The thing is going to have so many opt outs that the length of the contract is meaningless.

 

I've said repeatedly I think the money pre-opt out might end up being what gets a deal done (I still wonder about a team like Philly coming in and plopping down something insane over the first three years or so), but I would argue that length and size of contract isn't exactly meaningless. I think Boras wants to make a point and have big target numbers in mind. Doesn't mean that he definitively has to get them or will get them, but I think he'd like to make a point. Get the longest contract, get the biggest overall contract, highest AAV, and so forth.

 

I actually don't suspect that many "opt-outs". At best, 2. One relatively early in the deal, and one maybe half-way through the deal or so, giving his client, Harper, in this case, options in case things go off-kilter.

[davell]

Maybe it's delusion, but the more I think about this(TT's post seriously helped), I just can't see us not being seriously involved. There's obviously no guarantee we get him......

 

But yeah, I can absolutely see us acting like we need to pare payroll some. If we tried to dump Duensing, Kintzler, Chatwood, or whoever..... And everyone knew we were after Bryce, they'd have leverage and could conceivably ask for more...... The Dodgers story about them needing to stay completely under the tax running today just put this in perspective........

 

Bryce is 26. There's not another talent like him hitting FA anytime soon. The Cubs(and Dodgers) aren't going to let this guy go without giving it their best shot. Not happening. This is just poker and Boras may even play along, because he needs both those teams to have as widely opened pocket books as they can....... Because I honestly can't see Bryce wanting to play elsewhere(assuming the Yankees truly ARE out, due to their current guys).

[Bull]

Honestly, I'd LOVE to give him a 15 year contract, with an old out EVERY year during years 6-15.

 

OK, this is exactly what I'm talking about, but whatever I'm not gonna spend all offseason having this argument.

 

We need Bryce Harper because he's awesome and figuring out what he's worth or how we get him is for the nerds to deal with.

I thought we were the nerds?

[Bull]

Too many players involved to happen, but here goes:

 

Cubs get Leake, Gordon, and Elias plus $3 million in 2019 and $12 million in 2020

Mariners get Happ, Chatwood, Duensing, Kintzler

 

Money is basically even in 2019 & 2020.

2021 Cubs have $5 million buyout on Leake and $1 million buyout on Gordon, Elias & Happ are both in arbitration.

Not too many players, just too few teams.

[Backtobanks]

Too many players involved to happen, but here goes:

 

Cubs get Leake, Gordon, and Elias plus $3 million in 2019 and $12 million in 2020

Mariners get Happ, Chatwood, Duensing, Kintzler

 

Money is basically even in 2019 & 2020.

2021 Cubs have $5 million buyout on Leake and $1 million buyout on Gordon, Elias & Happ are both in arbitration.

Not too many players, just too few teams.

 

 

Why complicate matters when we can get rid of Chatwood, Duensing, and Kintzler in one trade while picking up a #5 starter, a solid lefty, and a speedy utility guy without spending any more of PTR money.

[JennieGarthAlgar]

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/25226392/chicago-cubs-open-trading-3b-kris-bryant

 

Open to trading KB? What the actual horsefeathers is happening

[Agony and Ivy]

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/25226392/chicago-cubs-open-trading-3b-kris-bryant

 

Open to trading KB? What the actual horsefeathers is happening

 

Nothing. Theo has always said nobody is untouchable and this is fake news. Someone should take Olney's Wrigley hard pass away.

[Cubswin11]

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/25226392/chicago-cubs-open-trading-3b-kris-bryant

 

Open to trading KB? What the actual horsefeathers is happening

Yeah I’m calling BS on that. Didn’t Theo basically shut down the same report from Kaplan or one of the other local idiots a month ago?

[Bull]

Too many players involved to happen, but here goes:

 

Cubs get Leake, Gordon, and Elias plus $3 million in 2019 and $12 million in 2020

Mariners get Happ, Chatwood, Duensing, Kintzler

 

Money is basically even in 2019 & 2020.

2021 Cubs have $5 million buyout on Leake and $1 million buyout on Gordon, Elias & Happ are both in arbitration.

Not too many players, just too few teams.

 

 

Why complicate matters when we can get rid of Chatwood, Duensing, and Kintzler in one trade while picking up a #5 starter, a solid lefty, and a speedy utility guy without spending any more of PTR money.

 

Just a bow to your legendary three team trade proposals of yesteryear.

[Brian707]

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/25226392/chicago-cubs-open-trading-3b-kris-bryant

 

Open to trading KB? What the actual horsefeathers is happening

 

 

KB and Bryce will be playing together in Philly. :lol:

[CyHawk_Cub]

I decided I won't believe the Cubs austerity rumors unless/until Boras starts ripping ownership publicly for failing to "act like a big market team."

[Bertz]

This is almost surely nonsense. The only two ways it makes sense to trade Bryant are if the team believes his shoulder is borked, but in a way that would not show up in a post trade physical, or if his lack of clutch is a real thing and not just dumb noise. Both things are exceedingly unlikely.

 

It would make the offseason really interesting though in a nerdy baseball mogul kind of sense. Freeing his salary would probably let you afford Harper/Machado even if we're poor. On top of that you could get back essentially anything you wanted in exchange, so you can address the cracks in the roster in a much more targeted way than FA typically allows. And Epstein is maybe the only guy in the league with the cachet that an owner would allow him to do something like this.