2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

[CoolHandLuke]

It could be groupthink, or it could be that a lot of people are independently coming to the same conclusion.

 

Considering how often conversations happen in which people that generally agree with each other devolve into multi-paragraph, multi-page, neverending back-and-forth arguments over minutia, I'd vote for the former.

 

Feel free to disagree though!

[CubsWin]

It could be groupthink, or it could be that a lot of people are independently coming to the same conclusion.

 

Considering how often conversations happen in which people that generally agree with each other devolve into multi-paragraph, multi-page, neverending back-and-forth arguments over minutia, I'd vote for the former.

 

Feel free to disagree though!

Yeah, all group think is is enough people vociferously agreeing with each other that posters feel emboldened to jump on anyone who dares to challenge the prevailing opinion with posts that disparage them or dismiss their post out of hand.

 

If the shoe fits...

[Backtobanks]

I'll be really disappointed if the Cubs trade Bryant and the return isn't worth it. But I'm already disappointed by the knee-jerk, closed-minded thread the possibility has spurred. You guys really can't see why a trade of Bryant could realistically work out helping the Cubs? It's not that hard. It doesn't take much imagination. The Cubs just can't get an average return, and the players have to fill certain positions.

 

Man, it's like the old days on this board. Group think has run amok on this issue.

 

 

It is hard to imagine how trading Bryant is going to help the Cubs this year or next, but if you're talking about 3-4 years down the road it is possible.

Getting Robles from the Nationals and then making some smart additional moves might work, but many posters have doubted that Robles would be included in the deal. If you're saying it doesn't take much Imagination, then throw some realistic names out there that we could acquire.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

You guys really can't see why a trade of Bryant could realistically work out helping the Cubs? It's not that hard. It doesn't take much imagination.

 

Might have to just make this my signature: viewtopic.php?p=384016#p384016

 

Bryant trades that:

 

Make the Cubs better in the short term: almost literally impossible

Make the Cubs better in the long term but worse in the short term: incredibly stupid given the roster, functionally punts the season

Make the Cubs better in the long term and comparable in the short term: basically impossible given how his salary and team control limit suitors/willingness to give a mega package

 

Is it possible to imagine a combination of players from a single organization in return for Bryant that would make the team better? Of course, that's true for every player in the league save for maybe Trout. But when you layer in the constraint of what teams are willing to pay for 2 years of Bryant at arbitration prices, it becomes impossible very quickly.

[CubsWin]

You guys really can't see why a trade of Bryant could realistically work out helping the Cubs? It's not that hard. It doesn't take much imagination.

 

Might have to just make this my signature: https://www.northsidebaseball.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=384016#p384016

 

Bryant trades that:

 

Make the Cubs better in the short term: almost literally impossible

Make the Cubs better in the long term but worse in the short term: incredibly stupid given the roster, functionally punts the season

Make the Cubs better in the long term and comparable in the short term: basically impossible given how his salary and team control limit suitors/willingness to give a mega package

 

Is it possible to imagine a combination of players from a single organization in return for Bryant that would make the team better? Of course, that's true for every player in the league save for maybe Trout. But when you layer in the constraint of what teams are willing to pay for 2 years of Bryant at arbitration prices, it becomes impossible very quickly.

So then you don't trade him. Simple, right?

 

Have there been reports I've missed that said the Cubs were dead set on moving Bryant no matter the return? The only ones I've seen have said other teams are currently balking because the price is very high.

 

Generally speaking GMs don't trade their star players (or any players really) for a return they're not happy with unless it's a salary dump (and even then the GM is happy to rid the team of a player not worth his salary). This is clearly not a salary dump situation, so I don't see why we should assume that any potential return wouldn't help the Cubs. It may result in hurting the team's chances in 2020, but there's no reason to think Theo and company would pull the trigger on a deal that wouldn't position the team for success in 2021 and beyond.

 

I also imagine that trading Bryant wouldn't be the only move made, so while the return for Bryant might leave holes in the roster, assuming you're okay with backfilling Caratini for Contreras, those holes might be filled soon thereafter. Or a free agent signing could follow. There are a few possible situations I could see working as a quick "Cashman-esque" retool. Are they realistic? Under the right circumstances (teams have to be properly motivated), I'd say so. Currently, the Braves, Padres and Angels seem to be situated for such motivation. Should the Cubs trade Bryant no matter what? Of course not, no one is advocating for that.

 

An honest argument can be made that you don't want to risk hurting the Cubs chances next year and just want to ride out this window. An honest argument can be made that ownership should just pony up and extend Bryant, Contreras, Rizzo, etc. and keep this current group together for as long as possible. But, for the most part, I'm not reading reasoned arguments along those lines. I'm mostly reading out of hand dismissal of the idea of trading Bryant altogether, and that anyone who thinks it's even remotely possible that it could work out well for the Cubs is off their rocker.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Is it possible to imagine a combination of players from a single organization in return for Bryant that would make the team better? Of course, that's true for every player in the league save for maybe Trout. But when you layer in the constraint of what teams are willing to pay for 2 years of Bryant at arbitration prices, it becomes impossible very quickly.

So then you don't trade him. Simple, right?

 

You would think! And yet, the idea of trading Bryant persists.

 

Have there been reports I've missed that said the Cubs were dead set on moving Bryant no matter the return? The only ones I've seen have said other teams are currently balking because the price is very high.

 

Generally speaking GMs don't trade their star players (or any players really) for a return they're not happy with unless it's a salary dump (and even then the GM is happy to rid the team of a player not worth his salary). This is clearly not a salary dump situation, so I don't see why we should assume that any potential return wouldn't help the Cubs. It may result in hurting the team's chances in 2020, but there's no reason to think Theo and company would pull the trigger on a deal that wouldn't position the team for success in 2021 and beyond.

 

Trading your best player is an inexplicable idea for this Cubs team, that's what my post above illustrates. The continued presence of Bryant rumors since the start of the offseason, with basically no rumors that come close to being a deal that improves the Cubs or comes close to the hypothetical 'worth it' haul that you're alluding to, is why folks are at best confused and at worst very upset at the prospect of trading Bryant. Because there are no logical positive outcomes.

 

 

An honest argument can be made that you don't want to risk hurting the Cubs chances next year and just want to ride out this window. An honest argument can be made that ownership should just pony up and extend Bryant, Contreras, Rizzo, etc. and keep this current group together for as long as possible. But, for the most part, I'm not reading reasoned arguments along those lines. I'm mostly reading out of hand dismissal of the idea of trading Bryant altogether, and that anyone who thinks it's even remotely possible that it could work out well for the Cubs is off their rocker.

 

The point here is that 'what if this inexplicable decision ends up being positive' is an opinion you're entitled to, but also not one anyone should feel is at all likely, because it's not! And even if Bryant doesn't go anywhere, the fact that this is clearly being seriously entertained means it carries an opportunity cost compared to other moves that are not inexplicable.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

What strikes me in all these diatribes preemptively condemning a Bryant trade is the lack of an alternative plan. Staying with a failing core that will bail en masse in two years doesn’t sound like a winner to me. Contrary to Theo’s shilling, status quo is a very, very bad option.

 

Come on, there are literally dozens of hypothetical offseasons that have been thrown around in this forum, across a number of different theoretical constraints. If you think trading Bryant is better than any of them feel free, but 'I don't see anyone with other ideas' is nonsense. As for me, the basic framework is:

 

- Trade Contreras, embrace the additive improvements from improving framing across the board while getting strong value in trade

- Of the young position players(Happ, Bote, Hoerner), pick 1-2 that you think will pan out best, and pave the way for them to get opportunity while providing guardrails in the form of positional player depth. Trade the others if needed.

- In those trades, embrace the variance that comes from controllable arms, that makes it possible to take leaps forward and also prepares you for the coming rotationpocalypse. Trade Quintana as needed to fit into whatever constraints the front office has to work with, to further embrace this idea.

 

You can fill in the blanks here a bunch of different ways, but you're getting improvement by better productivity balance out of catcher, playing time for young positional players ready for more, and getting more talented arms in the fold to take advantage of that catching improvement and supposedly improved pitching infrastructure. Better positional player depth by not running out Descalso, Almora, and Russell for 800 PA helps on the margins too.

[CubsWin]

Is it possible to imagine a combination of players from a single organization in return for Bryant that would make the team better? Of course, that's true for every player in the league save for maybe Trout. But when you layer in the constraint of what teams are willing to pay for 2 years of Bryant at arbitration prices, it becomes impossible very quickly.

So then you don't trade him. Simple, right?

 

You would think! And yet, the idea of trading Bryant persists.

Why do you imagine that is? Is our front office filled with thoughtless idiots? Why would they consider trading Bryant? No one seems to even take a stab it. You only trade him if you can reset your team in a way that you like, right? If they don't get that type of offer, they won't (better not) trade him. The problem with this thread is that hardly anyone is open to the possibility of such an offer. To me, that's just a lack of imagination.

 

Trading your best player is an inexplicable idea for this Cubs team, that's what my post above illustrates.

I apologize if I missed it (not sarcastic), but I don't think your post illustrated anything. To me, it was just a reiteration of your previously stated opinion. You are simply saying the possibility of a trade working out is so remote, you can't see it. Not to get too philosophical, but a closed mind will find it hard to consider any possibilities period.

 

The point here is that 'what if this inexplicable decision ends up being positive' is an opinion you're entitled to, but also not one anyone should feel is at all likely, because it's not! And even if Bryant doesn't go anywhere, the fact that this is clearly being seriously entertained means it carries an opportunity cost compared to other moves that are not inexplicable.

I see certain possibilities for a Bryant trade (along with other moves) working out. I don't have any inside knowledge as to how possible they are, but these scenarios don't seem unreasonable (way out of the realm of possibility) to me.

 

And yet, I haven't advocated for trading Bryant. I merely have stated I think the prevailing opinion in this thread is largely close-minded and that the idea of a trade is dismissed out of hand without so much as examining the possibilities out there. Perhaps you don't see any. That's cool. I do. But there appears to be no room for a level-headed discussion. Again, that's cool. I just find that disappointing.

[CubsWin]

What strikes me in all these diatribes preemptively condemning a Bryant trade is the lack of an alternative plan. Staying with a failing core that will bail en masse in two years doesn’t sound like a winner to me. Contrary to Theo’s shilling, status quo is a very, very bad option.

 

Come on, there are literally dozens of hypothetical offseasons that have been thrown around in this forum, across a number of different theoretical constraints. If you think trading Bryant is better than any of them feel free, but 'I don't see anyone with other ideas' is nonsense. As for me, the basic framework is:

 

- Trade Contreras, embrace the additive improvements from improving framing across the board while getting strong value in trade

- Of the young position players(Happ, Bote, Hoerner), pick 1-2 that you think will pan out best, and pave the way for them to get opportunity while providing guardrails in the form of positional player depth. Trade the others if needed.

- In those trades, embrace the variance that comes from controllable arms, that makes it possible to take leaps forward and also prepares you for the coming rotationpocalypse. Trade Quintana as needed to fit into whatever constraints the front office has to work with, to further embrace this idea.

 

You can fill in the blanks here a bunch of different ways, but you're getting improvement by better productivity balance out of catcher, playing time for young positional players ready for more, and getting more talented arms in the fold to take advantage of that catching improvement and supposedly improved pitching infrastructure. Better positional player depth by not running out Descalso, Almora, and Russell for 800 PA helps on the margins too.

I'd be fine with that off season. No need to trade Bryant to improve, albeit at the margins.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

The point here is that 'what if this inexplicable decision ends up being positive' is an opinion you're entitled to, but also not one anyone should feel is at all likely, because it's not! And even if Bryant doesn't go anywhere, the fact that this is clearly being seriously entertained means it carries an opportunity cost compared to other moves that are not inexplicable.

I see certain possibilities for a Bryant trade (along with other moves) working out. I don't have any inside knowledge as to how possible they are, but these scenarios don't seem unreasonable (way out of the realm of possibility) to me.

 

And yet, I haven't advocated for trading Bryant. I merely have stated I think the prevailing opinion in this thread is largely close-minded and that the idea of a trade is dismissed out of hand without so much as examining the possibilities out there. Perhaps you don't see any. That's cool. I do. But there appears to be no room for a level-headed discussion. Again, that's cool. I just find that disappointing.

 

Show your work then, what's a Bryant deal that helps the Cubs be better in 2020, or equivalent in 2020 and better in 2021 and beyond? Bryant is already the rarest commodity, a consistent 5+ win star. That's the type of player that is a moat between competitive and non-competitive teams. Voluntarily getting rid of him puts you in such a huge hole, that you're looking at a much worse outcome unless you get an insane return, which no team is going to reasonably give for 2 years of Bryant at arb prices.

[Deeg]

For all the whining about the front office, reading posts like these is a compelling reminder that it would be a lot worse if fans were making the decisions.

[squally1313]

So is your argument here that this thread, 553 posts deep at the moment, along with the 2020 roster thread, 934 posts deep, just a bunch of group think morons chanting "No good Bryant trades"? Or is it possible that somewhere in those threads, apparently very difficult to find, are literally hundreds of other hypothetical offseason plans that people think would improve an 84 win team (90 by pythag) without trading our best player?

 

Somehow we are the closed minded people not 'showing our work' here. On your side of the argument, I see two different options of what you are thinking. One, that there are baseball players that currently exist in the world where if you put them on our roster instead of Kris Bryant, the Cubs are a better team. Bryant for Mookie Betts makes our team better. Bryant for Trout and Ohtani makes our team way better. Fun! Also, completely useless in terms of productive conversation. Or there's the option that uses the rumored Kris Bryant trades that are out there, of which there are many, and sees an option or options in there that improve our team in the short term and/or the long term. If that's the option you're taking, please, as TT said, show your work, because I think that's where we fundamentally disagree on how to construct a successful Cubs roster.

 

As a short aside, burying your head in the sand about pretty much every message Ricketts has sent regarding their willingness to spend money and sticking with the 'oh you think Theo is an idiot huh' argument is really dumb. There are clearly other factors at play, things none of us are happy with.

Edited December 16, 2019 by squally1313

[jersey cubs fan]

I really want to see the Cubs trade their home grown, rookie of the year, MVP, world series winning, future hall of fame, young third baseman because that would be good and cool, but everybody on this board keeps saying that would be a bad thing and I'm afraid they'll jump down my throat so I just pretend that I want him to stay.

[Regular Show]

For all the whining about the front office, reading posts like these is a compelling reminder that it would be a lot worse if some fans were making the decisions.

 

I changed it for you and I agree. It's damn hard running a team and making these decisions, but I trust Theo (for the most part). I don't trust the scouts and people under him making the right decisions, but I guess they're rectifying that by changing personnel pretty heavily throughout the organization.

 

The majority of fans would make terrible decisions and trades and draft picks, but I'm sure a very small quantity of fans would actually do pretty well if given the chance. This is true for all walks of life and not just sports.

 

I have a friend that just got into the candle making business and created a small company and sold $1400 worth of custom made candles in a single day. They're high quality and look really nice. I had no idea he had a passion for making high-quality candles, but good for him. I knew he was a fan of candles, but I never thought he would start a business selling them...

 

This kid is in Med School also, which I find hilarious. I don't know where he finds the time lol.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

This post is only being written for myself so I have somewhere to look back and see how wrong I was. Just pretend I'm talking to myself here.

 

I'd trade Bryant to the Braves for a package that includes Max Fried. I like his ability and pedigree and having him locked up for the next five seasons. A Q type trade in which you have a cost controlled guy at a position that is both expensive and dangerous in the free agent market.

 

I also think KB's body is going continue to break down so I'm not as excited about him moving forward. I'd like them to then use the $17 million to sign some players to short-term contracts.

[ConstableRabbit]

For all the whining about the front office, reading posts like these is a compelling reminder that it would be a lot worse if some fans were making the decisions.

 

I changed it for you and I agree. It's damn hard running a team and making these decisions, but I trust Theo (for the most part). I don't trust the scouts and people under him making the right decisions, but I guess they're rectifying that by changing personnel pretty heavily throughout the organization.

 

The majority of fans would make terrible decisions and trades and draft picks, but I'm sure a very small quantity of fans would actually do pretty well if given the chance. This is true for all walks of life and not just sports.

 

I have a friend that just got into the candle making business and created a small company and sold $1400 worth of custom made candles in a single day. They're high quality and look really nice. I had no idea he had a passion for making high-quality candles, but good for him. I knew he was a fan of candles, but I never thought he would start a business selling them...

 

This kid is in Med School also, which I find hilarious. I don't know where he finds the time lol.

I'm assuming that you aren't comparing someone's ability to pull off a modest direct to consumer side hustle to someone casually able to run an MLB front office.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that absolutely no one who posts on NSBB could run the Cubs, let alone better than the current FO. If anyone reading this has the chops, for the love of God, log off and get into baseball.

[Regular Show]

For all the whining about the front office, reading posts like these is a compelling reminder that it would be a lot worse if some fans were making the decisions.

 

I changed it for you and I agree. It's damn hard running a team and making these decisions, but I trust Theo (for the most part). I don't trust the scouts and people under him making the right decisions, but I guess they're rectifying that by changing personnel pretty heavily throughout the organization.

 

The majority of fans would make terrible decisions and trades and draft picks, but I'm sure a very small quantity of fans would actually do pretty well if given the chance. This is true for all walks of life and not just sports.

 

I have a friend that just got into the candle making business and created a small company and sold $1400 worth of custom made candles in a single day. They're high quality and look really nice. I had no idea he had a passion for making high-quality candles, but good for him. I knew he was a fan of candles, but I never thought he would start a business selling them...

 

This kid is in Med School also, which I find hilarious. I don't know where he finds the time lol.

I'm assuming that you aren't comparing someone's ability to pull off a modest direct to consumer side hustle to someone casually able to run an MLB front office.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that absolutely no one who posts on NSBB could run the Cubs, let alone better than the current FO. If anyone reading this has the chops, for the love of God, log off and get into baseball.

 

No, not run the Cubs. I will say Duke Silver was pretty smart and I wonder how good he could be as an analyst inside baseball Ops for an MLB team...

 

No, I wasn't trying to make a comparison between running the Cubs and creating a small business selling custom made candles; just trying to point out how a fan can turn a passion into a profession in time with enough dedication and hard work. It's obviously so much harder and entails so much more running a team or any large corporation for that matter. I wasn't trying to make any suggestion that making candles and running the Cubs is the same in any possible way.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

 

I changed it for you and I agree. It's damn hard running a team and making these decisions, but I trust Theo (for the most part). I don't trust the scouts and people under him making the right decisions, but I guess they're rectifying that by changing personnel pretty heavily throughout the organization.

 

The majority of fans would make terrible decisions and trades and draft picks, but I'm sure a very small quantity of fans would actually do pretty well if given the chance. This is true for all walks of life and not just sports.

 

I have a friend that just got into the candle making business and created a small company and sold $1400 worth of custom made candles in a single day. They're high quality and look really nice. I had no idea he had a passion for making high-quality candles, but good for him. I knew he was a fan of candles, but I never thought he would start a business selling them...

 

This kid is in Med School also, which I find hilarious. I don't know where he finds the time lol.

I'm assuming that you aren't comparing someone's ability to pull off a modest direct to consumer side hustle to someone casually able to run an MLB front office.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that absolutely no one who posts on NSBB could run the Cubs, let alone better than the current FO. If anyone reading this has the chops, for the love of God, log off and get into baseball.

 

No, not run the Cubs. I will say Duke Silver was pretty smart and I wonder how good he could be as an analyst inside baseball Ops for an MLB team...

 

No, I wasn't trying to make a comparison between running the Cubs and creating a small business selling custom made candles; just trying to point out how a fan can turn a passion into a profession in time with enough dedication and hard work. It's obviously so much harder and entails so much more running a team or any large corporation for that matter. I wasn't trying to make any suggestion that making candles and running the Cubs is the same in any possible way.

 

Not sure Duke would be able to last. When the going got rough and he ended up being wrong, he sort of flamed out.

[Backtobanks]

The problem isn't necessarily the FO, it's more on ownership.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

The problem isn't necessarily the FO, it's more on ownership.

 

That sucks and they are a huge part of the problem, but also this is too weak. I don't want excuses. They have to do better.

[squally1313]

At the risk of oversimplifying this...I don't think there's a single person on this board who has anywhere close to the expertise required to work in a front office and effectively handle the breadth of job requirements that come with that type of position. Having said that, I don't think you necessarily need to have Theo's intelligence/experience/etc to look at Kris Bryant, and then look at the hypothetical packages offered for Kris Bryant, and decide which one is better in terms of putting the best baseball team on the field going forward. Theo almost definitely has insight into other factors (health, money, other potential transactions) that we don't, but boiling it down simply to 'well if we make a trade it's because Theo thinks it's good and so therefore it is good'....I mean, at that point just shut down the ability to comment in the 'Transactions' section, and just make announcements when things we happen that we can just believe are for the best.

[Regular Show]

I'm assuming that you aren't comparing someone's ability to pull off a modest direct to consumer side hustle to someone casually able to run an MLB front office.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that absolutely no one who posts on NSBB could run the Cubs, let alone better than the current FO. If anyone reading this has the chops, for the love of God, log off and get into baseball.

 

No, not run the Cubs. I will say Duke Silver was pretty smart and I wonder how good he could be as an analyst inside baseball Ops for an MLB team...

 

No, I wasn't trying to make a comparison between running the Cubs and creating a small business selling custom made candles; just trying to point out how a fan can turn a passion into a profession in time with enough dedication and hard work. It's obviously so much harder and entails so much more running a team or any large corporation for that matter. I wasn't trying to make any suggestion that making candles and running the Cubs is the same in any possible way.

 

Not sure Duke would be able to last. When the going got rough and he ended up being wrong, he sort of flamed out.

 

That's not why he left... I spoke to him privately and Aaron is a good dude and very smart. I seriously doubt he cared about being wrong or cared enough to quit the board altogether.

 

He was really disgusted with ownership and the Cubs bringing Addison Russell back. Just the general conduct of the team and management, and I totally get it. If the Ricketts ever sold the Cubs I could see Aaron coming back and posting again.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

 

No, not run the Cubs. I will say Duke Silver was pretty smart and I wonder how good he could be as an analyst inside baseball Ops for an MLB team...

 

No, I wasn't trying to make a comparison between running the Cubs and creating a small business selling custom made candles; just trying to point out how a fan can turn a passion into a profession in time with enough dedication and hard work. It's obviously so much harder and entails so much more running a team or any large corporation for that matter. I wasn't trying to make any suggestion that making candles and running the Cubs is the same in any possible way.

 

Not sure Duke would be able to last. When the going got rough and he ended up being wrong, he sort of flamed out.

 

That's not why he left... I spoke to him privately and Aaron is a good dude and very smart. I seriously doubt he cared about being wrong or cared enough to quit the board altogether.

 

He was really disgusted with ownership and the Cubs bringing Addison Russell back. Just the general conduct of the team and management, and I totally get it. If the Ricketts ever sold the Cubs I could see Aaron coming back and posting again.

 

That's awesome of him, and I respect that. But he couldn't work in pro sports then.

[Backtobanks]

The problem isn't necessarily the FO, it's more on ownership.

 

That sucks and they are a huge part of the problem, but also this is too weak. I don't want excuses. They have to do better.

 

That's true Theo has made more than a few mistakes with personnel and payroll, but PTR's refusing to raise payroll at this point looks to be the downfall of this team as we know it. As most of us have posted, trading KB probably closes the window for 2-3 more years.

[ConstableRabbit]

At the risk of oversimplifying this...I don't think there's a single person on this board who has anywhere close to the expertise required to work in a front office and effectively handle the breadth of job requirements that come with that type of position. Having said that, I don't think you necessarily need to have Theo's intelligence/experience/etc to look at Kris Bryant, and then look at the hypothetical packages offered for Kris Bryant, and decide which one is better in terms of putting the best baseball team on the field going forward. Theo almost definitely has insight into other factors (health, money, other potential transactions) that we don't, but boiling it down simply to 'well if we make a trade it's because Theo thinks it's good and so therefore it is good'....I mean, at that point just shut down the ability to comment in the 'Transactions' section, and just make announcements when things we happen that we can just believe are for the best.

There's no need to shut down the section, but if the Cubs FO is considering doing something that you think is completely stupid and baffling, chances are that you don't have all of the facts, not that the FO is dumb. The list of reasons why the Cubs would consider trading Bryant isn't limited to "they want to save money" -- they could think his best years are behind him.