2020 Offseason Thread

[Backtobanks]

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2020/11/offseason-outlook-chicago-cubs-11.html

 

I think we know the drill by now...Super scary, payroll, budget, future, unrealistic suggestions (cutting Bryant, cut Schwarber crying poor to then go pay Michael Brantley, trading Darvish), more same interpretations of Epstein quotes no matter what's said:

 

On the other hand, Epstein spoke about “thread[ing] the needle and improv[ing] in 2021 while also setting ourselves up for the long-term future,” which suggests he’d like prefer to swap contract year players for ones with multiple years of control.

 

Of course the Cubs' "most reliable reliever" is the guy who got the oblique injury at the end and not the guy who was in the midst of building a HoF resume notsolongago and closed his season in a dominant fashion. I get why, whathaveyoudoneformelately is very flexible and effective, but still. Despite the multi-year multi-pitcher run under Hottovy we must still question the Cubs' ability to get quality results out of castoffs. This is said after calling former castoff Wick the most reliable...Finishes that one thing we can know for sure is that Theo Epstein "faces one of his greatest challenges" (a real thing said!!) trying to put together one more badass baseball team with a roster that already has Yu Darvish, Kyle Hendricks, Javier Baez, Kris Bryant, Willson Contreras, Anthony Rizzo, Kyle Schwarber, Craig Kimbrel, Ian Happ, Jason Heyward....Very scary stuff, boogity boogity

 

Going back to your post about Cohen and the Mets, if he's going to spend crazily to make an impression, we ought to try to take advantage of that.

[Brian]

I don't know where to put this but it looks like the next Red Sox manager will be Cora again or old friend Sam Fuld.

[Backtobanks]

Going back to your post about Cohen and the Mets, if he's going to spend crazily to make an impression, we ought to try to take advantage of that.

 

How? I don't get why this guy having money and being willing to spend money on FAs when no one else is opens the door to him spending prospects, especially for a team only now bouncing back their MiLs after trading Kelenic

 

If he misses out on the FAs he wants or decides KB is worth a shot, he might be willing to make a deal. There aren't any guarantees, but a bounce-back season by KB for a team wanting to contend would be a bargain.

[sweetpeteman]

Politics politics politics red sox rehire Cora politics politics politics

[Bertz]

 

Good piece, though it's striking to me that Brett is quickly transitioning from absurdly optimistic to be much more on the dour end of things.

 

I think he underrates how good of shape the pitching is in. The team desperately needs a mid-rotation starter, but this is not a bad offseason to need a short term patch for the middle of your rotation. This pitching staff is good enough, and this division is bad enough, that you can probably slide a Mike Minor into the rotation and be decent favorites next year even after losing some real talent on offense. IMO that's how you "thread the needle."

 

I know it's not this simple, but it seems to me like the obvious path forward is to trade KB and Willson. KB to net the $ for other moves, and Willson to get you that real infusion of talent for 2022+. It also works out that we have solid in-house replacements for both, so you can allocate your resources to the best available players rather than being locked in to specific positions of need.

 

The exception is if there's a mandate to cut additional payroll. The ~$25M that trading KB and Willson would save is enough have an adequate offseason in this market. But if PTR says you need to cut like 10+ before you can begin reinvesting anything, then salvaging this offseason quickly becomes untenable. Go full bore, trade Yu and Kyle who will each bring back massive Quintana-esque returns.

[Bull]

The exception is if there's a mandate to cut additional payroll. The ~$25M that trading KB and Willson would save is enough have an adequate offseason in this market. But if PTR says you need to cut like 10+ before you can begin reinvesting anything, then salvaging this offseason quickly becomes untenable. Go full bore, trade Yu and Kyle who will each bring back massive Quintana-esque returns.

 

Sadly, I don’t think they do in this market. True or false, the owner will all be PTR this year.

[Bertz]

The exception is if there's a mandate to cut additional payroll. The ~$25M that trading KB and Willson would save is enough have an adequate offseason in this market. But if PTR says you need to cut like 10+ before you can begin reinvesting anything, then salvaging this offseason quickly becomes untenable. Go full bore, trade Yu and Kyle who will each bring back massive Quintana-esque returns.

 

Sadly, I don’t think they do in this market. True or false, the owner will all be PTR this year.

 

Most of the insider types have indicated that they expect the stars are still going to get paid, and it'll be the middle class of players that are going to get worked over. Darvish is only owed 3/59, and Kyle 3/43.5 with a club option. Those are ludicrously team-friendly contracts against the backdrop of Trevor Bauer being expected to get 4-5 years at 30+ million per.

[Post Count Padder]

An old friend on the move

 

The Giants agreed to terms with third baseman Jason Vosler on a Major League contract, the team announced. Their 40-man roster now has two open spots.

 

That trade looks even better for us. I was bummed we dealt Vosler at the time but Wick is our best reliever.

[Cubswin11]

Stroman and Gausman both accept their QO’s.

[Post Count Padder]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[Derwood]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

Every trade agreement should have a clause that states "We agree to send you this player for that player......unless said player never gets a hit for us, then horsefeathers you"

[Backtobanks]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

From MLBTR:

 

"As for the Rays, they picked up the younger, 19-year-old Martinez who now ranks as their No. 21 prospect at MLB.com and Baseball America as well as their No. 31 prospect at FanGraphs. The lack of a minor league season makes it impossible to really evaluate the younger Martinez’s 2020 season. That said, he posted a .311/.388/.437 slash through 233 plate appearances back in 2019 and adds some depth to the lower levels of one of MLB’s best farms."

 

If he ranks #21 or #31 in the Rays system, he would probably be close to the top 10 in our system.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

From MLBTR:

 

"As for the Rays, they picked up the younger, 19-year-old Martinez who now ranks as their No. 21 prospect at MLB.com and Baseball America as well as their No. 31 prospect at FanGraphs. The lack of a minor league season makes it impossible to really evaluate the younger Martinez’s 2020 season. That said, he posted a .311/.388/.437 slash through 233 plate appearances back in 2019 and adds some depth to the lower levels of one of MLB’s best farms."

 

If he ranks #21 or #31 in the Rays system, he would probably be close to the top 10 in our system.

 

He was 19 in BA, 28 on MLB Pipeline (this is probably an obsolete ranking if he's 21 for the Rays), 22 on Fangraphs.

[Cubswin11]

Being me some chaos and trades. Somewhat encouraging it mentions turnover and not pure selling off. Meaning outgoing talent could be replaced with equal/different talent and they’ll still try and compete.

 

[Backtobanks]

Being me some chaos and trades. Somewhat encouraging it mentions turnover and not pure selling off. Meaning outgoing talent could be replaced with equal/different talent and they’ll still try and compete.

 

 

I have trouble believing that trading off our veterans in the age of COVID is going to get "equal" talent. Obviously, all of the owners are tightening the purse strings and are reluctant to give up good young players/prospects. It's going to be interesting to see what Theo can do in his last year. I don't think he wants to go out with a mediocre team.

[SaorsaDaonnan]

I’m predicting a 2021 payroll of around 150, including trade deadline allotment, and then a series of outyear payrolls in the 125-150 range for a while, well into the new CBA after next year.

 

Ricketts said in....I think late 2018 that the org was about 500m over budget on its construction projects, though it was unclear whether that was from expanded ambition or literal overruns. As everybody probably remembers, he originally had a four step plan for the payroll: 1) spend very little while tanking; 2) spend significantly more as the team improves; 3) temporarily spike payroll to a very high level as the team contends and the TV contract arrives; 4) reduce payroll from the spike to a big market level but not an astronomical level. Ricketts’ comments in 2016 suggested he thought they had blown by #2 already during our World Series year....and then his comments in the 2017-2018 offseason sounded like he thought he had approved an early-ish attainment of the peak of that spike. By the following offseason, his comments again sounded like a four-part thought: a) that the peak was not going to last for long; b) that the team would soon retreat to a below-LT level and call that a high payroll a la 4); c) that the 500m was a problem that would probably be addressed in the early 20s by dipping BELOW the about-to-be new normal, baseline of 200ish; and d) that his conclusion from year one of the Darvish contract and the first few years of the Heyward contract was that analytics and the judgment of the best experts are not reliable enough to justify large contracts in the future.

 

In other words, Ricketts was signaling long before the pandemic that almost none of the core would be resigned, that few or no other major talents would be signed in the forseeable future, and that for about the first half of the decade, despite the new TV contract, the new “core” would be players like Bote, Happ, Caratini, Mills, etc. Of course not necessarily one particular player rather than another, but the general idea of cheap and mediocre as a foundational asset and really the team’s new identity. Based on Ricketts’ comments, the question wasn’t so much how much of the 2015-2021 core would be kept into the future as whether that future would involve any franchise players at all, outside of potential miracles from the minors like Brennen Davis or Marquez. Based on his statements, we would be lucky to keep even one of Bryant/Baez/Contreras or sign even one premium FA in the first half of the 2020s, though we might keep Rizzo or something.

 

And that was BEFORE the pandemic and BEFORE the probably scary-to-fatcats loss of the abuser in chief. So IMO there is every reason to think that we’re looking at a future where Ricketts cuts the payroll to get down to 200 or so, then immediately cuts it again for construction debt repayment, then cuts it a third time to cover pandemic revenue loss and any Biden administration costs...and then leaves it down there certainly through the labor negotiations next year, before (at the earliest) moving gradually back toward the eventual of 200..maybe by way of 10m/year increments as debt is paid off and revenue losses are replenished. So, like, maybe 150, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180, 190, 200, 200 over the rest of the decade.

 

If somebody thinks I’m wrong, I’d love to hear why...but don’t just give me “it’s all speculation until we actually find out.” We all know that already; the question is where the evidence points. But otherwise, I think we should all be expecting crap like “we traded Kimbrel and 10m for a short season A baller with two TJ surgeries under his belt and recent triceps problems, basically just to save 4-5m”, “we non-tendered Schwarber after failing to find a trade partner,” and “we traded Darvish and Bryant for a controllable #5 and a utility IF with four years of control and nothing else, having specifically informed the other teams that we wanted salary relief rather than value in return. And no, this cash will not be plowed back into the payroll, but will be used to cover fixed expenses from the remaining 2021 payroll and to patch up shortfalls in 2020 revenue.”

 

“Also, the Chicago Cubs are pleased to announce that all future home games will be played on the Terminex Playing Surface at Wrigley Field, part of the Cialis Sporting Complex at Addison. Round the bases with Cialis!”

 

“Get past second base with Cialis!”

 

“Hit a home run with Cialis!”

[Bertz]

A few less talked about teams that I think make sense for Kris Bryant:

 

Mets - JD Davis is about as much of a 3B as Ryan Braun was. Jeff McNeil can play it but I think they like moving him around a la Ben Zobrist. Acquiring KB for primarily $ and keeping the farm intact is exactly the type of move they've said they're looking to make

 

Giants - Longoria is still fine so it wouldn't necessarily be for 3B. They're looking to add but might be a year early, so getting KB on a 1 year deal for mostly money improves them while keeping the powder dry for next winter

 

Tigers - Same exact deal as the Giants

 

Padres - This is admittedly a long shot, as it would require Wil Myers coming back our way to make the money work for them. You'd lose the ability to reinvest KB's salary in the FA market, but you'd actually be getting a good prospect return back for taking on the rest of Myers' deal. This sort of buying prospects move deprioritizes 2021 more than I think we expect the FO to

[NewUserName]

A few less talked about teams that I think make sense for Kris Bryant:

 

Mets - JD Davis is about as much of a 3B as Ryan Braun was. Jeff McNeil can play it but I think they like moving him around a la Ben Zobrist. Acquiring KB for primarily $ and keeping the farm intact is exactly the type of move they've said they're looking to make

 

Giants - Longoria is still fine so it wouldn't necessarily be for 3B. They're looking to add but might be a year early, so getting KB on a 1 year deal for mostly money improves them while keeping the powder dry for next winter

 

Tigers - Same exact deal as the Giants

 

Padres - This is admittedly a long shot, as it would require Wil Myers coming back our way to make the money work for them. You'd lose the ability to reinvest KB's salary in the FA market, but you'd actually be getting a good prospect return back for taking on the rest of Myers' deal. This sort of buying prospects move deprioritizes 2021 more than I think we expect the FO to

 

If we got a decent prospect I wouldnt be opposed to taking on Wil Myers.

[bearjuice]

I’m predicting a 2021 payroll of around 150, including trade deadline allotment, and then a series of outyear payrolls in the 125-150 range for a while, well into the new CBA after next year.

 

Ricketts said in....I think late 2018 that the org was about 500m over budget on its construction projects, though it was unclear whether that was from expanded ambition or literal overruns. As everybody probably remembers, he originally had a four step plan for the payroll: 1) spend very little while tanking; 2) spend significantly more as the team improves; 3) temporarily spike payroll to a very high level as the team contends and the TV contract arrives; 4) reduce payroll from the spike to a big market level but not an astronomical level. Ricketts’ comments in 2016 suggested he thought they had blown by #2 already during our World Series year....and then his comments in the 2017-2018 offseason sounded like he thought he had approved an early-ish attainment of the peak of that spike. By the following offseason, his comments again sounded like a four-part thought: a) that the peak was not going to last for long; b) that the team would soon retreat to a below-LT level and call that a high payroll a la 4); c) that the 500m was a problem that would probably be addressed in the early 20s by dipping BELOW the about-to-be new normal, baseline of 200ish; and d) that his conclusion from year one of the Darvish contract and the first few years of the Heyward contract was that analytics and the judgment of the best experts are not reliable enough to justify large contracts in the future.

 

In other words, Ricketts was signaling long before the pandemic that almost none of the core would be resigned, that few or no other major talents would be signed in the forseeable future, and that for about the first half of the decade, despite the new TV contract, the new “core” would be players like Bote, Happ, Caratini, Mills, etc. Of course not necessarily one particular player rather than another, but the general idea of cheap and mediocre as a foundational asset and really the team’s new identity. Based on Ricketts’ comments, the question wasn’t so much how much of the 2015-2021 core would be kept into the future as whether that future would involve any franchise players at all, outside of potential miracles from the minors like Brennen Davis or Marquez. Based on his statements, we would be lucky to keep even one of Bryant/Baez/Contreras or sign even one premium FA in the first half of the 2020s, though we might keep Rizzo or something.

 

And that was BEFORE the pandemic and BEFORE the probably scary-to-fatcats loss of the abuser in chief. So IMO there is every reason to think that we’re looking at a future where Ricketts cuts the payroll to get down to 200 or so, then immediately cuts it again for construction debt repayment, then cuts it a third time to cover pandemic revenue loss and any Biden administration costs...and then leaves it down there certainly through the labor negotiations next year, before (at the earliest) moving gradually back toward the eventual of 200..maybe by way of 10m/year increments as debt is paid off and revenue losses are replenished. So, like, maybe 150, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180, 190, 200, 200 over the rest of the decade.

 

If somebody thinks I’m wrong, I’d love to hear why...but don’t just give me “it’s all speculation until we actually find out.” We all know that already; the question is where the evidence points. But otherwise, I think we should all be expecting crap like “we traded Kimbrel and 10m for a short season A baller with two TJ surgeries under his belt and recent triceps problems, basically just to save 4-5m”, “we non-tendered Schwarber after failing to find a trade partner,” and “we traded Darvish and Bryant for a controllable #5 and a utility IF with four years of control and nothing else, having specifically informed the other teams that we wanted salary relief rather than value in return. And no, this cash will not be plowed back into the payroll, but will be used to cover fixed expenses from the remaining 2021 payroll and to patch up shortfalls in 2020 revenue.”

 

“Also, the Chicago Cubs are pleased to announce that all future home games will be played on the Terminex Playing Surface at Wrigley Field, part of the Cialis Sporting Complex at Addison. Round the bases with Cialis!”

 

“Get past second base with Cialis!”

 

“Hit a home run with Cialis!”

 

This is spot on. I'm surprised that many on this board are recalcitrant to agree that this team should have/will have significant turnover this offseason.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

The time to retool was last offseason -- including trading KB -- and they failed to do it. Too late now.

[Cubswin11]

Being me some chaos and trades. Somewhat encouraging it mentions turnover and not pure selling off. Meaning outgoing talent could be replaced with equal/different talent and they’ll still try and compete.

 

 

I have trouble believing that trading off our veterans in the age of COVID is going to get "equal" talent. Obviously, all of the owners are tightening the purse strings and are reluctant to give up good young players/prospects. It's going to be interesting to see what Theo can do in his last year. I don't think he wants to go out with a mediocre team.

I wasn’t meaning that we’re going to get appropriate value back for Kb or Javy or whatever. Moving any non Willy, Happ, Yu, and Hendricks guys will probably be at a discount. But the savings in the money by moving them, if they’re still willing to spend (the turnover comment) they can go replace the talent in FA plus have whatever trade return.

 

As an example, trade KB for Kieboom and NT Schwarbs and then the money savings let you go get 2-3 of DJ, Eaton, Wong or Brantley, any non Bauer FA SP, etc for the rough money they take this year.

[Cubswin11]

As an example, trade KB for Kieboom and NT Schwarbs and then the money savings let you go get 2-3 of DJ, Eaton, Wong or Brantley, any non Bauer FA SP, etc for the rough money they take this year.

 

I still do not get the thinking, BN's writers like to do this too, that the Cubs will dump their current starters because budgetz to then go pay more money in FA for older starters. How does that work? Are they looking to be competitive in 2021 by signing those guys?

The budget is keeping them from adding to a team that clearly has some flaws, shortcomings, redundancies, etc. The only way to change that and still try and win without bottoming out is to move on from one of the better/more expensive players and use that money/trade capital to deepen the roster. Not saying I like it, but I get it. Moving KB for Kieboom (or whatever prospect(s) you want to consider) and NT'ing Schwarbs free's up about $30 mil, it also gives you a player(s) for KB who you presumably control longer. I think there's a decent argument that whatever KB returns + 2-3 of DJ, Eaton, Wong, Brantley, other NT/FA position players and a non Bauer FA SP for that ~$30 mil can give us a more competitive team in 2021 vs just running it back with the core and a few Kipnis level FA adds on the margins.

[Backtobanks]

 

I still do not get the thinking, BN's writers like to do this too, that the Cubs will dump their current starters because budgetz to then go pay more money in FA for older starters. How does that work? Are they looking to be competitive in 2021 by signing those guys?

The budget is keeping them from adding to a team that clearly has some flaws, shortcomings, redundancies, etc. The only way to change that and still try and win without bottoming out is to move on from one of the better/more expensive players and use that money/trade capital to deepen the roster. Not saying I like it, but I get it. Moving KB for Kieboom (or whatever prospect(s) you want to consider) and NT'ing Schwarbs free's up about $30 mil, it also gives you a player(s) for KB who you presumably control longer. I think there's a decent argument that whatever KB returns + 2-3 of DJ, Eaton, Wong, Brantley, other NT/FA position players and a non Bauer FA SP for that ~$30 mil can give us a more competitive team in 2021 vs just running it back with the core and a few Kipnis level FA adds on the margins.

 

But everything I have read sounds like PTR wants to cut payroll and not trade $30 million to spend the same money on 2-3 other players. They will have a competitive team (in a lousy division) for 2021 without making any changes.

[Cubswin11]

The budget is keeping them from adding to a team that clearly has some flaws, shortcomings, redundancies, etc. The only way to change that and still try and win without bottoming out is to move on from one of the better/more expensive players and use that money/trade capital to deepen the roster. Not saying I like it, but I get it. Moving KB for Kieboom (or whatever prospect(s) you want to consider) and NT'ing Schwarbs free's up about $30 mil, it also gives you a player(s) for KB who you presumably control longer. I think there's a decent argument that whatever KB returns + 2-3 of DJ, Eaton, Wong, Brantley, other NT/FA position players and a non Bauer FA SP for that ~$30 mil can give us a more competitive team in 2021 vs just running it back with the core and a few Kipnis level FA adds on the margins.

 

I guess what I don't get is how opening up jobs and spending more money to fill those jobs on older players they woulda coulda shoulda signed two years lines up with the crying about budgets/being poor *and* keeps this team competitive both in 2021 and beyond? Like we're not talking a little older and more expensive - Brantley and LeMahieu are top of the market FAs, one tied to draft picks, and they're a half decade+ older than the guys they'd be replacing (Brantley closer to a decade!!)

 

Just seems like a mixed message that is wildly different from what we've been told the situation is, and instead is being presented as one of the three possible ways this offseason can go (this route, another multi-year rebuild, or Kipnis) despite...I mean if you just say this plan out loud, it seems absurd and contradictory and alot of work to get to, if we're lucky, the same place with an older and more expensive 2021+ roster

You don’t lose draft picks for signing QO’d players. They changed that rule with everything going on. Brantley and DJ are only 2-4 years older than KB. It’s not spending more/having a more expensive team if you’re shedding guys to get there (DJ and Brantley probably won’t hit KB’s AAV this year).

 

I think we all agree this team needs changes. There really isn’t a way to improve if you just bring everyone back because of the unwillingness to spend to add above the existing core. So this is one of the only routes I can see to change things and stay as good and even get a little better potentially without really adding money and it leaves us in fine shape for next offseason’s big FA class.

 

This team (especially the offense) needs a profile makeover, imo, and this is a way to do it.

[Bertz]

 

I still do not get the thinking, BN's writers like to do this too, that the Cubs will dump their current starters because budgetz to then go pay more money in FA for older starters. How does that work? Are they looking to be competitive in 2021 by signing those guys?

The budget is keeping them from adding to a team that clearly has some flaws, shortcomings, redundancies, etc. The only way to change that and still try and win without bottoming out is to move on from one of the better/more expensive players and use that money/trade capital to deepen the roster. Not saying I like it, but I get it. Moving KB for Kieboom (or whatever prospect(s) you want to consider) and NT'ing Schwarbs free's up about $30 mil, it also gives you a player(s) for KB who you presumably control longer. I think there's a decent argument that whatever KB returns + 2-3 of DJ, Eaton, Wong, Brantley, other NT/FA position players and a non Bauer FA SP for that ~$30 mil can give us a more competitive team in 2021 vs just running it back with the core and a few Kipnis level FA adds on the margins.

 

But everything I have read sounds like PTR wants to cut payroll and not trade $30 million to spend the same money on 2-3 other players. They will have a competitive team (in a lousy division) for 2021 without making any changes.

 

The problem is we have no idea how much payroll is getting cut by. Right now it's ~$45M less than last year with just guys hitting FA. That's about a 20% drop. We know there's not that full $45M available to Theo to spend, but is there $15M? Or is it so bad he still needs to cut another $10M? Has the good news on vaccines moved the number up, making some of the more dour reports from the last few weeks excessive? We just have no idea, and so it's hard to be too attached to any specifics.

 

I tend to think it's explicitly because of that lousy division you have to make some moves. That's the one specific I will latch onto. There will be no better opportunity to start guys like Bote and Caratini and not have it cost you a playoff spot. Make a few trades to improve the long term outlook (I vote KB and Willson, but I'd listen to other ideas), and use the limited funds and the huge market of mid-tier players to patch the holes with cromulent veterans.