2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

[Tim]

Out of today's non-tenders, I'd be interested in:

 

Taijuan Walker \

Kevin Gausman - Any of them that will sign a one year pillow contract (or friendly contract) to re-establish value

Blake Treinen /

 

Cesar Hernandez - compete for the second base job / play solid bench role

 

James Hoyt - I think he'd be a great minor league signing. He's old but has been pretty reliable when given chances

 

Ryan Buchter - a solid lefty option for the pen

 

Jimmy Nelson - he sucked when he came back last year, but could be worth a spot

 

Steven Souza - sure, why not

Kevin Pillar - probably not with Almora still around

[Derwood]

The fact that you are all drooling over kitchen scraps means the Ricketts are winning

 

Can you go like a day without this unique brand of insufferable hot takery, or is “post through it” on your family crest or something

He can’t. He’s miserable.

 

Nah, just having trouble getting excited about other teams' cast offs. If you're excited about an off season that may include trading our star third baseman and signing some reclamation projects, go nuts

[Transmogrified Tiger]

 

Can you go like a day without this unique brand of insufferable hot takery, or is “post through it” on your family crest or something

He can’t. He’s miserable.

 

Nah, just having trouble getting excited about other teams' cast offs. If you're excited about an off season that may include trading our star third baseman and signing some reclamation projects, go nuts

 

 

No one asked you to. No one is trying to say Kevin Gausman is better than signing Gerrit Cole, we don’t need a reverse

every time the transaction forum discusses moves that take into account likely reality. We especially don’t need the implication that people are suckers for discussing the news of the day.

[Derwood]

We also don't need 200 posts a day from Tom, live-posting his every thought on every player in the league every 2 minutes, but here we are

[Transmogrified Tiger]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

Gregorius would solve a lot of problems at once. LH second base option that is good enough to start and can be platooned if not, makes decent contact, serves as the backup SS. Only thing missing is that he doesn’t get on base enough to hit at the top of the order, even against RHP. Fangraphs crowdsources his contract at 4/60, which seems crazy given his 2019, but with Moustakas getting 4/64 it’s hard to argue he’s that much worse a value, and that price could be prohibitive.

[Cubswin11]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

Gregorius would solve a lot of problems at once. LH second base option that is good enough to start and can be platooned if not, makes decent contact, serves as the backup SS. Only thing missing is that he doesn’t get on base enough to hit at the top of the order, even against RHP. Fangraphs crowdsources his contract at 4/60, which seems crazy given his 2019, but with Moustakas getting 4/64 it’s hard to argue he’s that much worse a value, and that price could be prohibitive.

I like the fit, in theory, but yeah at around the Moustakas contract there’s probably better ways to build out the team with the money it will take (sounds like enough teams are in on him he very well could exceed Moustakas money). The $17-20 aav gets you Akiyama and Cesar, and maybe even an RP for example. Or some other combination of 2-3 guys who project to probably be around as good (steamer has Didi at 2.5 WAR for next year).

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

He can’t. He’s miserable.

 

Nah, just having trouble getting excited about other teams' cast offs. If you're excited about an off season that may include trading our star third baseman and signing some reclamation projects, go nuts

 

 

No one asked you to. No one is trying to say Kevin Gausman is better than signing Gerrit Cole, we don’t need a reverse

every time the transaction forum discusses moves that take into account likely reality. We especially don’t need the implication that people are suckers for discussing the news of the day.

[Bertz]

The team could probably do:

 

- Willson traded for a few young live ML arms

- Willson backfilled via FA (Castro/Avila)

- Didi at 2B

- A RH bench OF (Souza/Pillar)

- A FA reliever (Treinen/Harris)

 

For less than $30M. I could get behind that offseason, especially if they managed a Javy extension in there as well. CF is left unsettled, but with 2B very settled you can throw both Nico and Happ at the position, and I would feel very good about one of them managing to run with it.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

TIL Souza bats right handed, if you had given me 3 guesses my first 2 would’ve been that he was a lefty.

 

Speaking of RH OF, the more I look around at the options, the more I really want them to pry Margot away from SD. Upside, defense, fits well with LH OF already here, and paves the way to punt Almora to the moon.

[CubsWin]

TIL Souza bats right handed, if you had given me 3 guesses my first 2 would’ve been that he was a lefty.

 

Speaking of RH OF, the more I look around at the options, the more I really want them to pry Margot away from SD. Upside, defense, fits well with LH OF already here, and paves the way to punt Almora to the moon.

What do you think it would take to get him, TT?

[Cubswin11]

TIL Souza bats right handed, if you had given me 3 guesses my first 2 would’ve been that he was a lefty.

 

Speaking of RH OF, the more I look around at the options, the more I really want them to pry Margot away from SD. Upside, defense, fits well with LH OF already here, and paves the way to punt Almora to the moon.

Margot has always been on the top of the list for me for CF targets this offseason. Morosi or Heyman or one of the national guys said the Padres would be interested in Pillar. So if they get him you’d think Margot is available. Their infield is a little thin, something around Bote could make sense. Then bring in a Cesar, Holt, etc as a MIF and could still potentially bring in Akiyama.

 

Edit:

 

[Cubswin11]

The Chicago Cubs have been, according to various executives, "aggressive," "manic," "motivated" and "obvious" in their desire to trade someone. Or someones. The Cubs are going to make a move. They're just not sure what yet.

 

[Bertz]

Passan's last line is interesting too:

 

The Cubs know they need to be creative. They also know the first move they make is perhaps the most important and will set the tone for their winter.

 

I think it has always made sense logically, but also good to know that the big trade is going to kick off the winter. Probably means we'll see it before the end of the Winter Meetings next week.

[UMFan83]

Manic is not really a word I'd like being tossed around about the Cubs FO.

 

I have believed that we should probably shake up the core a bit this offseason, but I also don't want to do it just for the sake of doing it. I just believed that this is where we could get the most value back to hopefully improve the team.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

TIL Souza bats right handed, if you had given me 3 guesses my first 2 would’ve been that he was a lefty.

 

Speaking of RH OF, the more I look around at the options, the more I really want them to pry Margot away from SD. Upside, defense, fits well with LH OF already here, and paves the way to punt Almora to the moon.

What do you think it would take to get him, TT?

 

I don't have a great feel for it. If you want to be optimistic, Margot has now had 3 full seasons without getting all the way across the line to 2 fWAR, so it's easy to envision the Padres seeing this as his level and being ready to move on. They also have a zillion outfielders so they aren't really creating a huge hole by doing so. On the other hand, a functional position player with 3 years of control and entering prime years isn't nothing, and the Padres are shifting to a competitive stage so any trade will have to 'hurt' in terms of taking players from the MLB team's orbit.

 

The one I've been coming back to the last couple days is the basic framework of Quintana for Margot. On the Cubs end, it fits a lot of what the outward narrative has been about their intent. It's a shake up as it creates more innings to be filled without an immediate solution on the roster, which will force them to rely more on the revamped pitching infrastructure to fill those innings since they aren't going to be bringing in Cole/Strasburg. Margot himself and the pitchers they get to replace Quintana increase the years of control they'll have on the roster, hopefully extending the window. Margot also makes a bit more contact than lots of the roster, although he's no Altuve. From the Padres perspective, Quintana adds durability and stability to a rotation that already has youth(Paddock, Lucchesi) and upside(Richards, Lamet) options. Maybe he's a bit redundant with Davies or they want to aim higher if they add another SP, but it's not a huge stretch to see Quintana as a good fit. Margot isn't so high a price to pay and Quintana not so expensive that it ruins the rest of their offseason plans either.

[Sammy Sofa]

Manic is not really a word I'd like being tossed around about the Cubs FO.

 

Bringing back greenies is the new market inefficiency.

[Bertz]

TIL Souza bats right handed, if you had given me 3 guesses my first 2 would’ve been that he was a lefty.

 

Speaking of RH OF, the more I look around at the options, the more I really want them to pry Margot away from SD. Upside, defense, fits well with LH OF already here, and paves the way to punt Almora to the moon.

What do you think it would take to get him, TT?

 

I don't have a great feel for it. If you want to be optimistic, Margot has now had 3 full seasons without getting all the way across the line to 2 fWAR, so it's easy to envision the Padres seeing this as his level and being ready to move on. They also have a zillion outfielders so they aren't really creating a huge hole by doing so. On the other hand, a functional position player with 3 years of control and entering prime years isn't nothing, and the Padres are shifting to a competitive stage so any trade will have to 'hurt' in terms of taking players from the MLB team's orbit.

 

The one I've been coming back to the last couple days is the basic framework of Quintana for Margot. On the Cubs end, it fits a lot of what the outward narrative has been about their intent. It's a shake up as it creates more innings to be filled without an immediate solution on the roster, which will force them to rely more on the revamped pitching infrastructure to fill those innings since they aren't going to be bringing in Cole/Strasburg. Margot himself and the pitchers they get to replace Quintana increase the years of control they'll have on the roster, hopefully extending the window. Margot also makes a bit more contact than lots of the roster, although he's no Altuve. From the Padres perspective, Quintana adds durability and stability to a rotation that already has youth(Paddock, Lucchesi) and upside(Richards, Lamet) options. Maybe he's a bit redundant with Davies or they want to aim higher if they add another SP, but it's not a huge stretch to see Quintana as a good fit. Margot isn't so high a price to pay and Quintana not so expensive that it ruins the rest of their offseason plans either.

 

The Padres in general are a very good fit this winter, and I would be surprised if our offseason doesn't run through them at least briefly. They're generally a very good fit for Q, Willson, or Happ, and we're likewise a very good fit for Margot, young pitching, and (likely) one of their catchers.

 

The pitching is the most exciting part. If any team has young pitching they could consider "expendable," it's them. They could give up a Quantrill or a Morejon and still have 6-7 guys they'd happily feature in their rotation. They could give up a Munoz or a Strahm and still have 3-4 high leverage relievers. And they have guys up and down the quality spectrum too, so it could be a small Bote deal just as easy as a larger Contreras deal.

[Bertz]

 

I really liked Nick, though I question the dominoes that would need to fall for his fit on the team to not be very awkward

[Derwood]

 

I really liked Nick, though I question the dominoes that would need to fall for his fit on the team to not be very awkward

 

For all the talk of how bad his defense is, can anyone remember games/moments where the Cubs were really hurt by it? I know that there were balls he didn't get to that other OF's may have, but I don't recall embarrassing levels of play from him

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Manic is exactly what I want to hear. Trades just for the sake of making trades. Stop being boring. Gut that roster.

 

http://swansonquotes.com/wp-content/uploads/s02-ep24-slashit4-1000x500.jpg

[Bertz]

 

I really liked Nick, though I question the dominoes that would need to fall for his fit on the team to not be very awkward

 

For all the talk of how bad his defense is, can anyone remember games/moments where the Cubs were really hurt by it? I know that there were balls he didn't get to that other OF's may have, but I don't recall embarrassing levels of play from him

 

For me it's less about Nick's defense, which I think is below average but ultimately fine, and more the cumulative effect on the outfield. Schwarber in left, Heyward in center, and Nick in right are each individually okay, but cumulatively it could lead to some real problems. Not to mention Happ as the primary backup.

[Cubswin11]

 

I really liked Nick, though I question the dominoes that would need to fall for his fit on the team to not be very awkward

 

For all the talk of how bad his defense is, can anyone remember games/moments where the Cubs were really hurt by it? I know that there were balls he didn't get to that other OF's may have, but I don't recall embarrassing levels of play from him

 

For me it's less about Nick's defense, which I think is below average but ultimately fine, and more the cumulative effect on the outfield. Schwarber in left, Heyward in center, and Nick in right are each individually okay, but cumulatively it could lead to some real problems. Not to mention Happ as the primary backup.

Yup. The sum of the parts could be quite ugly, I think you could still make a Schwarbs/Heyward/Nick OF work to the point of it not killing you but we’d have to bring in a Billy Hamilton type to throw in to CF like every game we got a lead in the 6/7 innings and we’d also have to get back to shifting a lot and be good at it.

 

There’s also the part where Nick very well may take up almost all the available money we have to spend this offseason and there’s plenty more holes to fill. It was discussed yesterday, but Souza could be a nice alternative to Nick if he’s healthy and he’s probably only going to cost $3-6 mil for 1 year to re-establish his value.

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

 

For all the talk of how bad his defense is, can anyone remember games/moments where the Cubs were really hurt by it? I know that there were balls he didn't get to that other OF's may have, but I don't recall embarrassing levels of play from him

 

For me it's less about Nick's defense, which I think is below average but ultimately fine, and more the cumulative effect on the outfield. Schwarber in left, Heyward in center, and Nick in right are each individually okay, but cumulatively it could lead to some real problems. Not to mention Happ as the primary backup.

Yup. The sum of the parts could be quite ugly, I think you could still make a Schwarbs/Heyward/Nick OF work to the point of it not killing you but we’d have to bring in a Billy Hamilton type to throw in to CF like every game we got a lead in the 6/7 innings and we’d also have to get back to shifting a lot and be good at it.

 

There’s also the part where Nick very well may take up almost all the available money we have to spend this offseason and there’s plenty more holes to fill. It was discussed yesterday, but Souza could be a nice alternative to Nick if he’s healthy and he’s probably only going to cost $3-6 mil for 1 year to re-establish his value.

I can imagine in my head that having three poor-range defenders in the OF can cause cascading defensive problems, but isn’t it also true that having a lot of high OBP guys in the same line up has a similar, positive cascading effect for runs scored? Do we still have a heavily GB-producing pitching staff? Can we trust Theo to have models of this kind of stuff?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

 

For me it's less about Nick's defense, which I think is below average but ultimately fine, and more the cumulative effect on the outfield. Schwarber in left, Heyward in center, and Nick in right are each individually okay, but cumulatively it could lead to some real problems. Not to mention Happ as the primary backup.

Yup. The sum of the parts could be quite ugly, I think you could still make a Schwarbs/Heyward/Nick OF work to the point of it not killing you but we’d have to bring in a Billy Hamilton type to throw in to CF like every game we got a lead in the 6/7 innings and we’d also have to get back to shifting a lot and be good at it.

 

There’s also the part where Nick very well may take up almost all the available money we have to spend this offseason and there’s plenty more holes to fill. It was discussed yesterday, but Souza could be a nice alternative to Nick if he’s healthy and he’s probably only going to cost $3-6 mil for 1 year to re-establish his value.

I can imagine in my head that having three poor-range defenders in the OF can cause cascading defensive problems, but isn’t it also true that having a lot of high OBP guys in the same line up has a similar, positive cascading effect for runs scored? Do we still have a heavily GB-producing pitching staff? Can we trust Theo to have models of this kind of stuff?

 

You can definitely model it, and to a certain degree (in the value sense) a run is a run. However, we've seen the consequences of a team that has imbalances in building the roster this way, you get uneven performances, underperform pythag, etc. Given the outward messaging being around balance when it comes to the offense, I'd be surprised if they sought out an extreme in the form of 3 sketchy defensive OF being starters.

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

Yup. The sum of the parts could be quite ugly, I think you could still make a Schwarbs/Heyward/Nick OF work to the point of it not killing you but we’d have to bring in a Billy Hamilton type to throw in to CF like every game we got a lead in the 6/7 innings and we’d also have to get back to shifting a lot and be good at it.

 

There’s also the part where Nick very well may take up almost all the available money we have to spend this offseason and there’s plenty more holes to fill. It was discussed yesterday, but Souza could be a nice alternative to Nick if he’s healthy and he’s probably only going to cost $3-6 mil for 1 year to re-establish his value.

I can imagine in my head that having three poor-range defenders in the OF can cause cascading defensive problems, but isn’t it also true that having a lot of high OBP guys in the same line up has a similar, positive cascading effect for runs scored? Do we still have a heavily GB-producing pitching staff? Can we trust Theo to have models of this kind of stuff?

 

You can definitely model it, and to a certain degree (in the value sense) a run is a run. However, we've seen the consequences of a team that has imbalances in building the roster this way, you get uneven performances, underperform pythag, etc. Given the outward messaging being around balance when it comes to the offense, I'd be surprised if they sought out an extreme in the form of 3 sketchy defensive OF being starters.

I can understand why a team like this could have more variance, but why would it be any more likely to underperform Pythag than overpreform?