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

[Bertz]

I really wanted Graveman at this time last year. His 2018 was a disaster and then obviously the surgery but there's some real talent there. And all it costs is a 40 man spot.

[Bull]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

Well for $3 I guess we could take a chance in 2020.

Regular price, 3 bucks, 3 bucks, 3 bucks.

[champaignchris]

Ok. Sure. Why not.

[Cubswin11]

I like Graverman and his sinker is pretty damn good when healthy (95-98 MPH), seems like a low risk move and he could be a good swingman type in a year and maybe can be back at the end of the year (like Smyly almost was). Seems like a type of move we should be making every year in adding a guy like him and Smyly since the cost and risk are minimal and our pitching depth isn’t the greatest (though hopefully improving some as there are some arms, though not great TOR ones, starting to move through the system).

[Bluescale]

Seems like a type of move we should be making every year in adding a guy like him and Smyly since the cost and risk are minimal and our pitching depth isn’t the greatest (though hopefully improving some as there are some arms, though not great TOR ones, starting to move through the system).

 

Why trade Smyly for Smyly 2.0?

[Cubswin11]

Seems like a type of move we should be making every year in adding a guy like him and Smyly since the cost and risk are minimal and our pitching depth isn’t the greatest (though hopefully improving some as there are some arms, though not great TOR ones, starting to move through the system).

 

Why trade Smyly for Smyly 2.0?

Maybe they just didn’t feel they could give Smyly a role this year/didn’t like him for the role that he’d have or were still worried about health? Smyly also makes more this year than the whole deal is worth for Graveman. So we save some money/Smyly helped minimize Hamel’s cost (looking at that option exercise and trade of Smyly as a deal in a vacuum).

[17 Seconds]

peter berg and mark wahlberg are going to make a movie about this cubs offseason

[PackLandVA]

peter berg and mark wahlberg are going to make a movie about this cubs offseason

 

“The Chicago Cubs Last Seduction of Bryce: All the Money in the World, yet Fear”

 

Coming to a theater this Spring.

[SouthSideRyan]

Seems like a type of move we should be making every year in adding a guy like him and Smyly since the cost and risk are minimal and our pitching depth isn’t the greatest (though hopefully improving some as there are some arms, though not great TOR ones, starting to move through the system).

 

Why trade Smyly for Smyly 2.0?

 

The finger thing means the taxes

[JennieGarthAlgar]

Unless you want to win World Series. Then it makes sense.

Spending the most money does not automatically turn into winning the WS. In fact, trying to spend your way out of a mess typically leads to a bigger mess.

 

No one ever said it automatically turns into anything. But we won the World Series the year after we spent the most money on a "horrendously bad contract" so if you ask me, it was worth it. That said, we haven't been back in the past 2 years, so its not working anymore. If we can get creative to get out from Heyward's deal in order to get a younger guy with higher productivity and potential that will undoubtedly improve our World Series chances? Do it. Aint my money.

[David]

Never ceases to amaze me how people can think stuff like the Cubs pocketing more money instead of spending it on players is ACTUALLY quite good and will lead to more wins

[jersey cubs fan]

I guess we'll see

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[Tim]

I guess we'll see

I wonder what the Giants have to give up for Belt.

[Banedon]

I guess we'll see

I wonder what the Giants have to give up for Belt.

 

[tweet]https://twitter.com/WTraymor/status/1076243829181857793[/tweet]

[Cubswin11]

Something more like Belt, Melancon and maybe some prospects to the D’backs, Heyward and prospects to Giants and Tomas to us makes some sense.

[jersey cubs fan]

I for one think it is fun and good that treymon's made up rumors are getting play

[Tim]

Something more like Belt, Melancon and maybe some prospects to the D’backs, Heyward and prospects to Giants and Tomas to us makes some sense.

AZ is tearing down. They want to shed salary and get prospects

[UMFan83]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

FWIW

[Cubswin11]

Something more like Belt, Melancon and maybe some prospects to the D’backs, Heyward and prospects to Giants and Tomas to us makes some sense.

AZ is tearing down. They want to shed salary and get prospects

They still shed Tomas’s money (him and Melancon are owed about the same over the next 2 years). And I’d be fine giving them Amaya in this scenario and some Short type prospects. I also don’t know if they’re trying to entirely tear it down. They did re-sign Escobar, they might wind up thinking this lets them try and win this year and accomplish goals of getting prospects. Getting Tomas would be big for us given the LT loophole. Giants also only take on about $30 mil more overall in this deal and lower their LT hit the next two years.

[Rynomites23]

Never ceases to amaze me how people can think stuff like the Cubs pocketing more money instead of spending it on players is ACTUALLY quite good and will lead to more wins

I think it’s simply part of thinking like you are supposed to when you reach adulthood (maturity). Losing draft position and throwing money out the window somehow doesn’t seem write or sit well with me. I guess it’s my opinion at least. Nearly all teams stay under the tax annually so it is a prevailing opinion. If my team can’t get it done within the rules, I guess I don’t feel they deserve to win

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Never ceases to amaze me how people can think stuff like the Cubs pocketing more money instead of spending it on players is ACTUALLY quite good and will lead to more wins

I think it’s simply part of thinking like you are supposed to when you reach adulthood (maturity). Losing draft position and throwing money out the window somehow doesn’t seem write or sit well with me. I guess it’s my opinion at least. Nearly all teams stay under the tax annually so it is a prevailing opinion. If my team can’t get it done within the rules, I guess I don’t feel they deserve to win

 

Yeah, I don’t think you meant it this way, but that covers why people think this way. It’s about some sort of folk morality rather than what works.

[jersey cubs fan]

Never ceases to amaze me how people can think stuff like the Cubs pocketing more money instead of spending it on players is ACTUALLY quite good and will lead to more wins

I think it’s simply part of thinking like you are supposed to when you reach adulthood (maturity). Losing draft position and throwing money out the window somehow doesn’t seem write or sit well with me. I guess it’s my opinion at least. Nearly all teams stay under the tax annually so it is a prevailing opinion. If my team can’t get it done within the rules, I guess I don’t feel they deserve to win

That's incredibly stupid nonsense.

Rules? Maturity?

[CubinNY]

The rules that the richer guys make so they don’t have to pay the merely rich guys who are the reason the richer guys stay richer.

 

Makes sense.

[Rynomites23]

Never ceases to amaze me how people can think stuff like the Cubs pocketing more money instead of spending it on players is ACTUALLY quite good and will lead to more wins

I think it’s simply part of thinking like you are supposed to when you reach adulthood (maturity). Losing draft position and throwing money out the window somehow doesn’t seem write or sit well with me. I guess it’s my opinion at least. Nearly all teams stay under the tax annually so it is a prevailing opinion. If my team can’t get it done within the rules, I guess I don’t feel they deserve to win

That's incredibly stupid nonsense.

Rules? Maturity?

That is your opinion and I have mine.

[JudasIscariotTheBird]