2021 Offseason Thread

[Bertz]

Might as well get this started

 

[Bertz]

 

I can't find the article, but I believe I saw that the A's are pretty open for business as well

[champaignchris]

Assuming the Mets decline Betance’s and Pillar’s options, they’ll be below the tax, but only have about $10MM to spend. The Phillies and Padres will be hard up against the tax. The White Sox and Brewers will be a year away from being in the same boat.

 

Assuming after whatever form the CBA ends up being, baseball goes forward with a system roughly the same as they have now, all those teams could be looking to slash salary.

[Bertz]

Assuming the Mets decline Betance’s and Pillar’s options, they’ll be below the tax, but only have about $10MM to spend. The Phillies and Padres will be hard up against the tax. The White Sox and Brewers will be a year away from being in the same boat.

 

Assuming after whatever form the CBA ends up being, baseball goes forward with a system roughly the same as they have now, all those teams could be looking to slash salary.

 

I think we see the LT level get a pretty big bump in the new system, but regardless you're right that these teams are going to be feeling the pressure. They'll be wanting to make multiple moves and only have room for 1-2 (assuming everyone still treats the LT as a hard line).

 

From the Mets specifically, I'd love to trade for Carlos Carrasco as our "other" SP addition. He had a bit of a disastrous season, but the velo was fine and the track record is long and fantastic. That's about as strong a bet for a bounce back candidate as you can get.

[UMFan83]

I don't expect to build a contender on the back of FA in one winter but please for the love of god use your financial leverage to make this team better. Take on a Hosmer and/or Myers if it means getting some high value prospects/cost controlled players back. Find an Arenado like trade where you can get a cornerstone without giving up a top prospect. All the teams are crying about this artificial spending cap, act like a big market team and take advantage dammit.*

 

 

* - assuming dramatic changes arent made in the new CBA

[Outshined_One]

Where does everyone fall in terms of the viability of Alzolay, Steele, and Thompson in next season's rotation? I figure Hendricks and Mills are both locks (for better and worse), but I'm kind of squishy on everyone else, especially since we'll likely see something like a 150 IP limit for Alzolay and 120 IP for Steele and/or Thompson based on their usage and development.

 

I'd love to see the Cubs get at least two starters, preferably one ace and one mid-level guy, in the offseason, but I'm wondering if the front office will be irrationally optimistic about those three guys.

[squally1313]

Where does everyone fall in terms of the viability of Alzolay, Steele, and Thompson in next season's rotation? I figure Hendricks and Mills are both locks (for better and worse), but I'm kind of squishy on everyone else, especially since we'll likely see something like a 150 IP limit for Alzolay and 120 IP for Steele and/or Thompson based on their usage and development.

 

I'd love to see the Cubs get at least two starters, preferably one ace and one mid-level guy, in the offseason, but I'm wondering if the front office will be irrationally optimistic about those three guys.

I wouldn't let them stand in the way of any potential signings, especially with money to spend and their relatively recent success in flipping short term veteran starters for prospects if the team doesn't pan out. I don't really see anyone on the FA list, pitching wise, you want to sign to some huge deal (Gausman and Stroman would be at the top of the list I guess?), so focus on the B and C list and save the long term money for the offensive side of the ball.

[champaignchris]

Where does everyone fall in terms of the viability of Alzolay, Steele, and Thompson in next season's rotation? I figure Hendricks and Mills are both locks (for better and worse), but I'm kind of squishy on everyone else, especially since we'll likely see something like a 150 IP limit for Alzolay and 120 IP for Steele and/or Thompson based on their usage and development.

 

I'd love to see the Cubs get at least two starters, preferably one ace and one mid-level guy, in the offseason, but I'm wondering if the front office will be irrationally optimistic about those three guys.

 

Starting pitcher is a position where the Cubs have a chance to sign someone in ‘22 who’ll be a big part of an eventually competitive team in ‘23, ‘24 and later.

 

I know the Edwin Jackson signing in ‘13 didn’t work out, but the basic premise behind it - sign someone who can eat some inning now, who can be a piece on a winner in a few years - was sound. And there are a ton of guys who’d qualify for that this off-season. Gauseman, Ray, Stroman, Syndergaard, Rodon, Desclafani, John Gray, Eduardo Rodriguez, Bundy. I’m sure I’m forgetting someone. No reason why the Cubs can’t sign two of those.

[Bertz]

Where does everyone fall in terms of the viability of Alzolay, Steele, and Thompson in next season's rotation? I figure Hendricks and Mills are both locks (for better and worse), but I'm kind of squishy on everyone else, especially since we'll likely see something like a 150 IP limit for Alzolay and 120 IP for Steele and/or Thompson based on their usage and development.

 

I'd love to see the Cubs get at least two starters, preferably one ace and one mid-level guy, in the offseason, but I'm wondering if the front office will be irrationally optimistic about those three guys.

 

I think you leave one spot for those three to fight over, and fill the other two with vets. I hate what seems to be already crystalizing as the conventional wisdom that we need 3 vet SPs. I don't want to hear any more whining about not developing starters if we're not going to give any starters an actual opportunity to develop.

 

Alzolay's dong problem is probably a fluke, while Steel (prior to yesterday) and Thompson haven't really looked like viable starters. I think you go into ST expecting Adbert in the rotation but keep an open mind.

[squally1313]

Where does everyone fall in terms of the viability of Alzolay, Steele, and Thompson in next season's rotation? I figure Hendricks and Mills are both locks (for better and worse), but I'm kind of squishy on everyone else, especially since we'll likely see something like a 150 IP limit for Alzolay and 120 IP for Steele and/or Thompson based on their usage and development.

 

I'd love to see the Cubs get at least two starters, preferably one ace and one mid-level guy, in the offseason, but I'm wondering if the front office will be irrationally optimistic about those three guys.

 

I think you leave one spot for those three to fight over, and fill the other two with vets. I hate what seems to be already crystalizing as the conventional wisdom that we need 3 vet SPs. I don't want to hear any more whining about not developing starters if we're not going to give any starters an actual opportunity to develop.

 

Alzolay's dong problem is probably a fluke, while Steel (prior to yesterday) and Thompson haven't really looked like viable starters. I think you go into ST expecting Adbert in the rotation but keep an open mind.

Steele and Thompson are both already 26, Thompson will be 27 by opening day next year. Neither of them were top 100 draft picks, or have really shown anything in the upper levels of the minors that would lead you to believe they can turn into quality starters. Maybe if they had a full year last year to show something, but they didn't. Alzolay will also be 27 by opening day next year, has shown some success, but still holds a FIP and xFIP above 4 as a starter (FIP above 5) and continues to not be able to get lefties out. Finding three MLB quality starters to sign with us is pretty difficult, so I'm sure someone is going to get a chance, but these are not guys to build around.

[Tim]

I think it all depends on the goals for next year. If it's more of a bridge year, then yeah, let the young guys compete for a spot in the rotation. If you're going to gear up to make a playoff push, then I think you need three more starters.

 

Let the young guys take away Mills' spot in the rotation if they show something.

[squally1313]

I think it all depends on the goals for next year. If it's more of a bridge year, then yeah, let the young guys compete for a spot in the rotation. If you're going to gear up to make a playoff push, then I think you need three more starters.

 

Let the young guys take away Mills' spot in the rotation if they show something.

 

Definitely agreed on the last part. Should have included this above, but Thompson and Steele have a combined 41 innings in AAA. In an ideal world, let them go out there every 5 innings and see if one of them dominates. Give Alzolay the 5th spot and tell him it's a short leash and he probably ends up in the pen. Of course, this roster is far from an 'ideal world', so I guess we'll see all of them making a few starts next year.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Where does everyone fall in terms of the viability of Alzolay, Steele, and Thompson in next season's rotation? I figure Hendricks and Mills are both locks (for better and worse), but I'm kind of squishy on everyone else, especially since we'll likely see something like a 150 IP limit for Alzolay and 120 IP for Steele and/or Thompson based on their usage and development.

 

I'd love to see the Cubs get at least two starters, preferably one ace and one mid-level guy, in the offseason, but I'm wondering if the front office will be irrationally optimistic about those three guys.

 

I think you leave one spot for those three to fight over, and fill the other two with vets. I hate what seems to be already crystalizing as the conventional wisdom that we need 3 vet SPs. I don't want to hear any more whining about not developing starters if we're not going to give any starters an actual opportunity to develop.

 

Alzolay's dong problem is probably a fluke, while Steel (prior to yesterday) and Thompson haven't really looked like viable starters. I think you go into ST expecting Adbert in the rotation but keep an open mind.

Steele and Thompson are both already 26, Thompson will be 27 by opening day next year. Neither of them were top 100 draft picks, or have really shown anything in the upper levels of the minors that would lead you to believe they can turn into quality starters. Maybe if they had a full year last year to show something, but they didn't. Alzolay will also be 27 by opening day next year, has shown some success, but still holds a FIP and xFIP above 4 as a starter (FIP above 5) and continues to not be able to get lefties out. Finding three MLB quality starters to sign with us is pretty difficult, so I'm sure someone is going to get a chance, but these are not guys to build around.

 

I don't disagree that the odds are not in the favor of any of those guys individually, but at the same time I think they're fine enough candidates. Yes, Thompson and Steele weren't Top 100 picks, but Thompson was a slot pick at 105, and Steele was a 5th rounder who got a 2nd round-caliber bonus. They aren't absent of pedigree. And yes, all 3 are not young or what we think of when we think of traditional prospects breaking into an MLB rotation, but the improvements to player development across the league means none of them are a long shot based on age alone. They aren't a Schwindel/Ortega type either where you have to be very worried about imminent decline eating at their development in the next few years. If the roster and rotation were in a different place I might be more aggressive coming over the top of them, but given the current state of things I think those 3 are a perfectly viable approach to the 5th SP spot.

[squally1313]

 

I think you leave one spot for those three to fight over, and fill the other two with vets. I hate what seems to be already crystalizing as the conventional wisdom that we need 3 vet SPs. I don't want to hear any more whining about not developing starters if we're not going to give any starters an actual opportunity to develop.

 

Alzolay's dong problem is probably a fluke, while Steel (prior to yesterday) and Thompson haven't really looked like viable starters. I think you go into ST expecting Adbert in the rotation but keep an open mind.

Steele and Thompson are both already 26, Thompson will be 27 by opening day next year. Neither of them were top 100 draft picks, or have really shown anything in the upper levels of the minors that would lead you to believe they can turn into quality starters. Maybe if they had a full year last year to show something, but they didn't. Alzolay will also be 27 by opening day next year, has shown some success, but still holds a FIP and xFIP above 4 as a starter (FIP above 5) and continues to not be able to get lefties out. Finding three MLB quality starters to sign with us is pretty difficult, so I'm sure someone is going to get a chance, but these are not guys to build around.

 

I don't disagree that the odds are not in the favor of any of those guys individually, but at the same time I think they're fine enough candidates. Yes, Thompson and Steele weren't Top 100 picks, but Thompson was a slot pick at 105, and Steele was a 5th rounder who got a 2nd round-caliber bonus. They aren't absent of pedigree. And yes, all 3 are not young or what we think of when we think of traditional prospects breaking into an MLB rotation, but the improvements to player development across the league means none of them are a long shot based on age alone. They aren't a Schwindel/Ortega type either where you have to be very worried about imminent decline eating at their development in the next few years. If the roster and rotation were in a different place I might be more aggressive coming over the top of them, but given the current state of things I think those 3 are a perfectly viable approach to the 5th SP spot.

Yeah I think we all took different routes to the same conclusion. Hendricks, Mills, 2 vet starters, and (for me) the better of Thompson/Steele, with Alzolay trying to be a poor mans version of Kopech. Tell whoever ends up in AAA they can take Mills' spot whenever they earn it, and realistically they'll end up in Chicago come July anyways after we get whatever we can for the veteran starters (or cut bait).

[Bertz]

Where does everyone fall in terms of the viability of Alzolay, Steele, and Thompson in next season's rotation? I figure Hendricks and Mills are both locks (for better and worse), but I'm kind of squishy on everyone else, especially since we'll likely see something like a 150 IP limit for Alzolay and 120 IP for Steele and/or Thompson based on their usage and development.

 

I'd love to see the Cubs get at least two starters, preferably one ace and one mid-level guy, in the offseason, but I'm wondering if the front office will be irrationally optimistic about those three guys.

 

I think you leave one spot for those three to fight over, and fill the other two with vets. I hate what seems to be already crystalizing as the conventional wisdom that we need 3 vet SPs. I don't want to hear any more whining about not developing starters if we're not going to give any starters an actual opportunity to develop.

 

Alzolay's dong problem is probably a fluke, while Steel (prior to yesterday) and Thompson haven't really looked like viable starters. I think you go into ST expecting Adbert in the rotation but keep an open mind.

Steele and Thompson are both already 26, Thompson will be 27 by opening day next year. Neither of them were top 100 draft picks, or have really shown anything in the upper levels of the minors that would lead you to believe they can turn into quality starters. Maybe if they had a full year last year to show something, but they didn't. Alzolay will also be 27 by opening day next year, has shown some success, but still holds a FIP and xFIP above 4 as a starter (FIP above 5) and continues to not be able to get lefties out. Finding three MLB quality starters to sign with us is pretty difficult, so I'm sure someone is going to get a chance, but these are not guys to build around.

 

Assuming between 3 guys they can competently fill one spot is hardly "building around" them.

 

Though I'll say Alzolay is probably worth building around. Among pitchers in baseball this year with 100+ innings, Alzolay is tied for 28th in xFIP with Walker Beuhler and Luis Castillo. Honestly, if he wasn't ours I think he'd be the most obvious buy-low candidate in the league. Dong problems are rarely sticky year to year, hell look at Corbin Burnes or Yu Darvish in 2019 and since for super extreme examples. But I can bet you other canvases are looking at Adbert the same way we looked at Kevin Gausman and Jon Gray for years. "I hope they're stupid enough to let him go."

 

The Cubs need two guys you'd feel comfortable starting a playoff game. But the back of the rotation? We've got enough guys in house to cover it.

[Bertz]

 

People are dunking on this, but Senzatella has been really good since the start of last year?

[Cubswin11]

They controlled him for 2 more years and his underlying numbers aren’t anything special but he’s only 26 and it’s not a deal that’s gonna cripple payroll. Plus it’s hard to attract SPs there, seems reasonable enough to keep him, both sides seem to come out fine. He never was going to get a mega deal but $50 mil is generational money and the Rockies get some rotation stability/trade asset at some point maybe.

 

Plus he made $3 mil this year in Arb. Next two years in Arb figure he would’ve gotten ~$15 mil total. So it really could be looked at as a 3 year, ~$35 mil extension.

[Bertz]

[UMFan83]

Jed's giving his EOY press conference:

 

 

Wow getting rid of Borzello?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 6, 2021 by UMFan83

[Tryptamine]

I'd have a hard time making a deal with Detroit. Torkelson and Green wont be available. Manning, Mize and Skubal are all part of the MLB squad and There's a fairly significant drop off after those guys. I could get behind Cristian Santana, but he is many years away and I wouldn't want him as lead piece.

[squally1313]

 

The most promising in the bunch. I think this is both right and such a relatively easy fix. I can’t say I EXPeCT the pitching to take off but with a few smart moves the staff as a whole should be a strength

 

Agree with the overall goal, but 'taking pressure off the defense' is such a dumb, old school baseball-y way of saying it. And the rest of his quotes above are also not very promising at all.

[Backtobanks]

I think the Cubs ought to use some of their upper level prospects to get some pitching. It might be worth it to "overpay" for Marquez, Means, Gallen, etc., if their teams want quantity as they rebuild.

[Bertz]

I frankly love this idea

 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Since it’s nigh impossible to know exactly how good someone would be in the role, my enthusiasm is mainly around how much the hire would diversify the backgrounds in the front office. Harris and Rodriguez are clear winners on that axis, Zoll is pretty meh, and Hawkins’ “Vanderbilt to intern and on up” path would be the worst of the 4.

[Bertz]

Since it’s nigh impossible to know exactly how good someone would be in the role, my enthusiasm is mainly around how much the hire would diversify the backgrounds in the front office. Harris and Rodriguez are clear winners on that axis, Zoll is pretty meh, and Hawkins’ “Vanderbilt to intern and on up” path would be the worst of the 4.

 

Yeah, I think this is where I'm at, with the added bit that with how much brain drain has happened in Tampa the last few years I'd be a bit more comfortable we're truly getting the best and brightest out of Cleveland.

 

So come on down James Harris!