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

[Splendid Splinter]

 

what is rule v

The Rule 5 Draft. It's tomorrow.

no i asked what rule v is

 

01010010 01110101 01101100 01100101 00100000 01110110

[Bryants Disco Ball]

no i asked what rule v is

 

Do you ever get exhausted?

 

of sympathizing with billionaire sports owners? nah wrong guy

 

I'm sure I'm wrong because I am about everything, but......

 

You just seem like the guy who everyone around the table respects for being intelligent and successful, but who also just want to horsefeathering punch you in the face all the time.

[imb]

i believe you mean civ V the video game

[David]

 

Do you ever get exhausted?

 

of sympathizing with billionaire sports owners? nah wrong guy

 

I'm sure I'm wrong because I am about everything, but......

 

You just seem like the guy who everyone around the table respects for being intelligent and successful, but who also just want to horsefeathering punch you in the face all the time.

 

got'em

[David]

The Rule 5 Draft. It's tomorrow.

no i asked what rule v is

 

01010010 01110101 01101100 01100101 00100000 01110110

 

 

are you the porn star blowie at the christmas party guy? bree olsen iirc?

 

i honestly have no clue what kind of thread that story would've been posted in but it just popped in my head lmao

[Post Count Padder]

I'm putting zero stock into these rumors, and at the same time, inject them all into my veins.

[Splendid Splinter]

no i asked what rule v is

 

01010010 01110101 01101100 01100101 00100000 01110110

 

 

are you the porn star blowie at the christmas party guy? bree olsen iirc?

 

i honestly have no clue what kind of thread that story would've been posted in but it just popped in my head lmao

 

Yep and proud of it!

[Derwood]

Rule V is tmrrw at noon. If it stays quiet into the evening then I’m guessing some horsefeathers goes down in that 12-5 window tmrrw afternoon

 

what is rule v

 

Hey, look everybody! It's that joke that's never been funny!

[Cubswin11]

 

[Tim]

These winter meetings are boring. I'm bored.

 

Just sign Harper, Lowrie and a bunch of relievers already.

[Post Count Padder]

I know last offseason was terrible, but this seems like an awfully boring/slow Winter Meetings this year. I used to always look forward to all the trades and signings that come out of these.

[SaorsaDaonnan]

I'm not done with the sign-a-starting-catcher plan. While having Contreras focus on catching made great sense in 2017, I'm not sure it does now.

 

Under my proposal (which again is only for non-Harper scenarios) Willson would get about 200 plate appearances in left, about the same in right, and a further 200 or so as the backup catcher. As others have pointed out, this would mean making him re-familiarize himself with the outfield while also trying to rekindle his bat, which admittedly would not be easy, but also wouldn't be utterly unfamilar. He's been in the corners before, and he's been a good hitter before, and Iapoce should already really help with restoring his swing & his approach. He just needs to put it all together again, as he has done before.

 

Here's my case: Willson is an offensive asset that we control inexpensively for a long time, who also somewhat plays catcher. Ordinarily we think that playing the scarcest defensive position is the best way to maximize player value, at least unless they are a true butcher, which Willson isn't, or unless you have massively better alternatives already on your team, which we don't. But since Willson is actually a gifted athlete, even by mlb standards, I would argue that his case is more complicated.

 

With at least average speed, good reaction times, a strong arm, and an intense attitude, I think Willson has the ability to become an at-least average corner outfielder in terms of defense. If you disagree with that, then you'll likely dismiss my whole argument. But if you agree, consider this: catcher is a physically punishing position. If an ordinary player declines at rate X per year, a catcher declines at a rate maybe more like 2x/year. (Or whatever -- the point isn't the exact value of the multiplier, just the idea that it's nontrivially greater than 1.) With most catchers, that's not something you can do anything about, because most are so defensively limited that there aren't many alternatives. But with a highly athletic catcher like Willson, or Biggio a couple decades back, there ARE alternatives --- ones that offer the chance of extending the value of his main asset much further into the future. So, while normally you calculate the value of moving along the defensive spectrum by subtracting the defensive penalty from the value of having a good bat at that position, in Willson's case there is more to consider. Rather than being a simple case of scarcity advantage minus defensive penalty, in his case it's scarcity advantage MINUS defensive penalty MINUS accelerated asset depreciation as compared to how he'd age as a corner OF...and if you buy the idea that, with some practice, he could become not just a replacement level defender but an ML-average one, that would be another thing you're giving up, and another thing to subtract as well.

 

Since we control Willson's rights for another four years, and may wish to sign him beyond that, I'd say there's plenty of reason to worry about his future, even for those who (unethically, in my opinion) think that organizations have no general responsibility to look out for their player's futures beyond organizational self interest, MLB policy, or the law. And on top of this, Willson has been overplayed in the last couple years, quite significantly if you ask me. By giving him such a tremendous workload, Joe has not only artificially aged him beyond his actual age and number of years behind the plate, but has also reduced his productivity in the short term through excess fatigue. Of course it's impossible for fans to definitely sort out whether his down year was the result of last year's hitting philosophy, a hidden injury, or just burnout from overuse, but the point is that the last of these is a very important factor all on it's own -- overplaying anyone, but especially pitchers and catchers, messes them up, both short term and long. And Joe has done this, and likely will continue to, and future managers might as well.

 

So, my proposal is 1) that the reduction in fatigue and wear & tear that playing more time in the OF would bring AT LEAST balances out the risk of a slower return to offensive form, 2) that keeping Willson healthier and, if you will, younger over the next four years will be very helpful, and 3) that the defensive productivity uptick that we might see from Willson as he settles into a primarily OF role might be a nice cherry on top, while also making it easier to do platoon matchups in the OF and expanding depth. In fact, I'd rather see him as an OF-only player at this point, garnering 300 or so PAs in each corner, than remaining exclusively a catcher. But best of all, I think, would be a mix, where he's both a frequent OF-er AND our backup catcher...except that our backup catcher would then a plus offensive contributor still capable of playing a whole season as the main catcher in the event of injury. And, with your "backup catcher" already in the OF in the event of an injury, you'd have a great deal more flexibility in terms of pinch hitting and defensive substitutions as well.

 

I'm not saying that this is better than Harper. But I am saying it seems worth thinking about if we don't go that way, and like it might be better than the Brantleys or McCutchens of the world. An FA catcher like Grandal or Ramos would be a pretty manageable risk on a four year-ish deal, and then we'd have an improvement in offensive (by replacing an OF with Contreras) and defensive output, as well as greater depth at a key position.

 

Plus, an upgrade in pitch framing and game calling would have the potential to really help our staff...

 

:flythew:

[Cubswin11]

That could be something I could get behind in the more likely looking no Bryce offseason. The ideas and reasoning behind it certainly makes sense.

[weis21]

I just love that post for “artificially aged”. I’m going to start using that one when people at work tell me I look tired.

 

Them: you look tired. You ok?

 

Me: yeah, I’m ok. Think life just has artificially aged me a bit today.

[Sammy Sofa]

That Willson idea seems very unlikely to be something they'd be willing to do....but seeing it spelled out like that I really, really like it.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

That could be something I could get behind in the more likely looking no Bryce offseason. The ideas and reasoning behind it certainly makes sense.

 

Fun thing is they aren’t really mutually exclusive.

 

Out

 

Russell for anything

Happ and Chatwood for the best reliever you can get

Zobrist for the best reliever you can get

 

In

 

Harper

Grandal

Descalso

Tulo

 

It would depend on the exact AAV for Grandal/Harper and the contracts of the relievers(who aren’t specified but can’t be an afterthought), but that most likely fits under 246.

[Bertz]

I think my no Harper offseason at this point would be:

 

- Sign Tulo, catapult Russell out of town

- Chatwood for Russell Martin

- Sign Descalso for what Kinsler just got (2/8)

- Grab Puig from the Dodgers

- Use Almora and second tier prospects to bring in a high leverage reliever (lets say Kirby Yates) and dump Kintzler + Duensing. This is probably two separate deals

 

That gives us:

 

Zobrist

KB

Baez

Rizzo

Puig

Schwarber

Conteras

Heyward

 

BN: Descalso, Happ, Martin, Tulo, and sometimes Bote

SP: Yu, Cole, Kyle, Lester, Q

RP: Morrow, Yates, Strop, Carl, Cishek, Montgomery, and the Iowa Shuttle (which should actually be kinda fun this year)

 

Payroll should be in the $235-240 range, so there's room to sign another reliever in February (or hold onto Duensing) and still have money for the trade deadline. And everyone besides Descalso and Yates is gone after this year, so next offseason there's a decent amount of financial flexibility next offseason. Roughly $50 or $60 million, depending on if we want to hold on to Morrow.

[Bear Cub]

I can not see sticking the starting NL catcher in the OF for most of the season.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

[Neuby]

https://www.cubsinsider.com/2018/12/16/cubs-trade-rumors-jason-heyward-once-again-subject-of-speculation-involving-giants/

 

The headline made it seem like they had a new rumor making the rounds but he didn't reference anything in the post. I thought Heyward had a full no trade interesting to see it's only twelve teams.

[Cubswin11]

https://www.cubsinsider.com/2018/12/16/cubs-trade-rumors-jason-heyward-once-again-subject-of-speculation-involving-giants/

 

The headline made it seem like they had a new rumor making the rounds but he didn't reference anything in the post. I thought Heyward had a full no trade interesting to see it's only twelve teams.

Because of the opt outs for him the next two years he only gets a partial no trade list. And yeah I had the same reaction to that article, the tweet and headline made it seem like a new rumor but it seemed to just rehash the rumor from last year.

[Bertz]

You have to be real sure Baseball Prospectus is measuring framing correctly to want Grandal over Contreras. Grandal is kind of a mess at all the other parts of catcher defense and if you think Contreras is streaky at the plate wait til you watch Grandal for a season.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

You have to be real sure Baseball Prospectus is measuring framing correctly to want Grandal over Contreras. Grandal is kind of a mess at all the other parts of catcher defense and if you think Contreras is streaky at the plate wait til you watch Grandal for a season.

 

FWIW it's not just BP that thinks they're at opposite ends of the framing spectrum: http://statcorner.com/CatcherReport.php

 

I'm not going to claim hands-on knowledge of Grandal, but he had a league-average CS%(28% to 34% for Willson), and from a WP/PB perspective Grandal looks at worst similar. Yes, you'll lose Willson's arm keeping runners honest, which isn't insignificant in a rotation with Lester and Darvish, but in this scenario you still want Contreras catching 40 games or so, and you can time them up to minimize that risk.

[Southpaw19]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[Post Count Padder]

Only on board with this if it means we're dealing Russell away