Cubs Sign C Yan Gomes

[Transmogrified Tiger]

There's multiple posts saying this....When did the/a backup catcher job become designated as the last piece on a contender? Yan Gomes or a similar catcher would be the One Man a contender calls upon in it's darkest hour? Really? I have doubts!

 

If you can got into to two-three RBs in the NFL, you're already ready for The Future of catching probably

You'll forgive us for being a little skeptical and disappointed that this is the biggest offensive free agent pickup since Jason Heyward, especially considering it either pushes Contreras to the (still theoretical!) DH spot, which makes yesterday's other signing more of a mystery, or it makes it more likely that they are going to trade our best offensive player. But go ahead, get pumped over a mid 30s catcher signing a multiple year deal I guess.

 

I don't understand the binary here. Do you think Gomes is going to catch 120 games whether Contreras is on the roster or not? If they had paid Gomes 2/7 and the same news came out about playing time would that give you the same reaction? It's strange to me that the Cubs paying a slight premium(if that, Roberto Perez is clearly worse and got 5 mil) to get the only worthwhile FA C before the lockout when they have a need regardless of Contreras's future or role is something that can only portend negative things.

[squally1313]

There's multiple posts saying this....When did the/a backup catcher job become designated as the last piece on a contender? Yan Gomes or a similar catcher would be the One Man a contender calls upon in it's darkest hour? Really? I have doubts!

 

If you can got into to two-three RBs in the NFL, you're already ready for The Future of catching probably

You'll forgive us for being a little skeptical and disappointed that this is the biggest offensive free agent pickup since Jason Heyward, especially considering it either pushes Contreras to the (still theoretical!) DH spot, which makes yesterday's other signing more of a mystery, or it makes it more likely that they are going to trade our best offensive player. But go ahead, get pumped over a mid 30s catcher signing a multiple year deal I guess.

 

I don't understand the binary here. Do you think Gomes is going to catch 120 games whether Contreras is on the roster or not? If they had paid Gomes 2/7 and the same news came out about playing time would that give you the same reaction? It's strange to me that the Cubs paying a slight premium(if that, Roberto Perez is clearly worse and got 5 mil) to get the only worthwhile FA C before the lockout when they have a need regardless of Contreras's future or role is something that can only portend negative things.

 

I'm just not going to get excited for a catcher in their mid 30s on a two year deal when our timeline is increasingly looking like two years of rebuilding, especially when this deal makes it more likely we trade Contreras and fully commit to the rebuild. Yeah, we have a backup catcher need, we also have about 37 other needs and most of them are more pressing. Maybe some big moves are coming! Probably not! But at least with a Miley you can hope he goes on a BABIP streak and turns into a higher end prospect. This is just the guy they can point to and say 'we were able to deal from a position of depth' when Contreras gets turned into two double A prospects, only for Gomes himself to get traded for some rookie ball pitcher in 2023.

[squally1313]

Was going to just edit the above but this is a unique enough point I guess, which is that I'm starting to be a little bit over the whole 'well if only we could find the perfect workload for Contreras, he'd really blossom into a star'. He OPSed 40 points higher in the second half than the first half last year, and ended up with all of 10 more PAs than 49 year old Yadi. If he's really an elite catcher, his playing time (935 innings) should be right in line with the Sal Perez' (1002 innings), JT Realmuto's (973 innings), Will Smith's (1004 innings), Christian Vasquez' (1051 innings), and Sean Murphy's (923 innings) of the world right? If he's already broken from past overuse, then maybe the ship has sailed, and you turn him into someone who DHs half the year, which leads you to question the Frazier signing.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I'm just not going to get excited for a catcher in their mid 30s on a two year deal when our timeline is increasingly looking like two years of rebuilding, especially when this deal makes it more likely we trade Contreras and fully commit to the rebuild.

 

This is the heart of it, why does that make it more likely? Because he's not horrible? Because he's making 2 million more than we may have mentally earmarked for a backup? If they're committing to trading Contreras and fully committing to teardown then why would they care about the marginal improvement and expense of Gomes over a different FA or some waiver pickup who would have a longer term future?

[squally1313]

I'm just not going to get excited for a catcher in their mid 30s on a two year deal when our timeline is increasingly looking like two years of rebuilding, especially when this deal makes it more likely we trade Contreras and fully commit to the rebuild.

 

This is the heart of it, why does that make it more likely? Because he's not horrible? Because he's making 2 million more than we may have mentally earmarked for a backup? If they're committing to trading Contreras and fully committing to teardown then why would they care about the marginal improvement and expense of Gomes over a different FA or some waiver pickup who would have a longer term future?

 

For the same reason they signed Wade Miley? Because they know they can't walk into opening day next year with an $80m payroll, so signing dudes like these that can soak up innings and PAs either until the trade deadline or through the meaningless games of August/September while keeping their books clear long term seems like the easiest way to do that? You're right, Jed hasn't come out and said they're shopping Willson. But when you see, at a minimum, 3 opening spots in the rotation, two second basemen but no shortstop, two career minor leaguers riding a combined 5 months of success at the corners, etc etc etc, and this is the second move they make, it seems pretty rational to be a little....disappointed? expecting the worst?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Was going to just edit the above but this is a unique enough point I guess, which is that I'm starting to be a little bit over the whole 'well if only we could find the perfect workload for Contreras, he'd really blossom into a star'. He OPSed 40 points higher in the second half than the first half last year, and ended up with all of 10 more PAs than 49 year old Yadi. If he's really an elite catcher, his playing time (935 innings) should be right in line with the Sal Perez' (1002 innings), JT Realmuto's (973 innings), Will Smith's (1004 innings), Christian Vasquez' (1051 innings), and Sean Murphy's (923 innings) of the world right? If he's already broken from past overuse, then maybe the ship has sailed, and you turn him into someone who DHs half the year, which leads you to question the Frazier signing.

 

I do think it's important to not oversell the upside of not wearing him out, there's no 6 win season waiting if only his playing time was optimized. At the same time, there's been a fairly clear correlation with his catching workload and his offensive production, and the presence of a solid backup and a few dozen games at DH could help you get the rate stats of rested Willson with the PA of worn out Willson. This past year in particular I think proves the point. When Chirinos arrived Willson was on pace for even more innings than he had in 2018(just under 1200 if my napkin math is right). Afterwards he had a proper amount of rest and he had a significant improvement with the bat.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I'm just not going to get excited for a catcher in their mid 30s on a two year deal when our timeline is increasingly looking like two years of rebuilding, especially when this deal makes it more likely we trade Contreras and fully commit to the rebuild.

 

This is the heart of it, why does that make it more likely? Because he's not horrible? Because he's making 2 million more than we may have mentally earmarked for a backup? If they're committing to trading Contreras and fully committing to teardown then why would they care about the marginal improvement and expense of Gomes over a different FA or some waiver pickup who would have a longer term future?

 

For the same reason they signed Wade Miley? Because they know they can't walk into opening day next year with an $80m payroll, so signing dudes like these that can soak up innings and PAs either until the trade deadline or through the meaningless games of August/September while keeping their books clear long term seems like the easiest way to do that? You're right, Jed hasn't come out and said they're shopping Willson. But when you see, at a minimum, 3 opening spots in the rotation, two second basemen but no shortstop, two career minor leaguers riding a combined 5 months of success at the corners, etc etc etc, and this is the second move they make, it seems pretty rational to be a little....disappointed? expecting the worst?

 

Is the same not true if they had given Roberto Perez 1/5 or Wilson Ramos 2/7? I'm not trying to be dense, I get why it can feel underwhelming that there aren't other moves of significance to go with Gomes yet, and I'm annoyed they haven't been more decisive with SP and/or SS. But I don't think signing a particular catcher to a team that really needs some type of catcher is any type of additional signal in any direction.

[squally1313]

 

This is the heart of it, why does that make it more likely? Because he's not horrible? Because he's making 2 million more than we may have mentally earmarked for a backup? If they're committing to trading Contreras and fully committing to teardown then why would they care about the marginal improvement and expense of Gomes over a different FA or some waiver pickup who would have a longer term future?

 

For the same reason they signed Wade Miley? Because they know they can't walk into opening day next year with an $80m payroll, so signing dudes like these that can soak up innings and PAs either until the trade deadline or through the meaningless games of August/September while keeping their books clear long term seems like the easiest way to do that? You're right, Jed hasn't come out and said they're shopping Willson. But when you see, at a minimum, 3 opening spots in the rotation, two second basemen but no shortstop, two career minor leaguers riding a combined 5 months of success at the corners, etc etc etc, and this is the second move they make, it seems pretty rational to be a little....disappointed? expecting the worst?

 

Is the same not true if they had given Roberto Perez 1/5 or Wilson Ramos 2/7? I'm not trying to be dense, I get why it can feel underwhelming that there aren't other moves of significance to go with Gomes yet, and I'm annoyed they haven't been more decisive with SP and/or SS. But I don't think signing a particular catcher to a team that really needs some type of catcher is any type of additional signal in any direction.

 

You're right in that it's unfair to comment on the whole plan without seeing the whole offseason. But kicking off the offensive offseason, alliteration aside, with a catcher who has played in at least half the games for the last 5 years and is coming off a fairly productive campaign just worries and discourages me. Why did he sign here? What was promised to him? We're going to pay you a premium to play significantly less games than in the past?

 

With the amount of money we have, there was a way to be NL Central relevant for a couple years while building up the next league wide contender. We've done pretty much nothing to show we are considering that route, and this move leads a lot of people (potentially even Contreras himself) to believe we're going with 'blow it up and see you in 2024, maybe'. Maybe we're still going with Plan A, but this move doesn't show it.

[CubinNY]

Why did he sign here? What was promised to him?

 

A lot of horsefeathering money for multiple years for his skillset. I mean, there is no subtext to this signing. He got a really, really good deal. The end.

[Tim]

I chuckle every time I see it described as "multiple" years. Sure, two is more than one. But it's just being dramatic to describe it as a "multiple" year commitment.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

You're right in that it's unfair to comment on the whole plan without seeing the whole offseason. But kicking off the offensive offseason, alliteration aside, with a catcher who has played in at least half the games for the last 5 years and is coming off a fairly productive campaign just worries and discourages me. Why did he sign here? What was promised to him? We're going to pay you a premium to play significantly less games than in the past?

 

This is the closest we have to an answer to that question, from Mooney:

 

Though the Cubs trading Contreras is an obvious possibility at some point in the future, the team offered Gomes an opportunity to share the workload with Contreras in a role that would be more than a traditional backup catcher, according to sources familiar with the negotiations.

 

I don't want to parse the wording too much, but I think the middle of the road interpretation is short of 'we're gonna trade Willson and start you 120 times'. As for why Gomes would take that deal, teams offering more playing time than that are likelier to be non-competitive and probably offering less, and a 2nd year might've been too much for competitive/rich teams looking for backups. Or maybe Gomes looked around and said 'I'm 34 and only have so much earning potential, I'm gonna get paid before the lockout' and the Cubs were fastest on the draw. Or maybe the Cubs actually said we're gonna start you 120 times after we trade Willson, there's lots of reasonable possibilities.

 

Bottom line, the skepticism here seems to be suspicious that the Cubs did too well in filling a current hole, so that must mean they're going to trade away talent to justify it instead of just wanting a better roster. It's a reflection of the assumptions and predispositions people had before the signing, and that's why I don't think it means much in one direction or another.

[squally1313]

You're right in that it's unfair to comment on the whole plan without seeing the whole offseason. But kicking off the offensive offseason, alliteration aside, with a catcher who has played in at least half the games for the last 5 years and is coming off a fairly productive campaign just worries and discourages me. Why did he sign here? What was promised to him? We're going to pay you a premium to play significantly less games than in the past?

 

This is the closest we have to an answer to that question, from Mooney:

 

Though the Cubs trading Contreras is an obvious possibility at some point in the future, the team offered Gomes an opportunity to share the workload with Contreras in a role that would be more than a traditional backup catcher, according to sources familiar with the negotiations.

 

I don't want to parse the wording too much, but I think the middle of the road interpretation is short of 'we're gonna trade Willson and start you 120 times'. As for why Gomes would take that deal, teams offering more playing time than that are likelier to be non-competitive and probably offering less, and a 2nd year might've been too much for competitive/rich teams looking for backups. Or maybe Gomes looked around and said 'I'm 34 and only have so much earning potential, I'm gonna get paid before the lockout' and the Cubs were fastest on the draw. Or maybe the Cubs actually said we're gonna start you 120 times after we trade Willson, there's lots of reasonable possibilities.

 

Bottom line, the skepticism here seems to be suspicious that the Cubs did too well in filling a current hole, so that must mean they're going to trade away talent to justify it instead of just wanting a better roster. It's a reflection of the assumptions and predispositions people had before the signing, and that's why I don't think it means much in one direction or another.

 

But the other 'middle of the road' interpretation, even setting aside 'will we trade Contreras', is 'we are going to play our best player less' right? Or we're assuming there's going to be a DH and then it makes you question the Frazier signing where he's just the 5th or 6th dude projected to throw up an OPS in the low to mid 700s, only he can't play anywhere in the field.

 

The skepticism isn't 'the Cubs did too well'. It's that the Cubs signed a dude who is used to getting the majority of the catching innings. Just as I'm guilty of not looking at the full picture, this absolutely makes a Contreras trade less surprising. They don't have to make the trade first and then fill the position. Right now we have an objectively terrible lineup where 5 starters are going to make easily under $5m, and we just dropped $6m on a 'backup' catcher.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

But the other 'middle of the road' interpretation, even setting aside 'will we trade Contreras', is 'we are going to play our best player less' right? Or we're assuming there's going to be a DH and then it makes you question the Frazier signing where he's just the 5th or 6th dude projected to throw up an OPS in the low to mid 700s, only he can't play anywhere in the field.

 

I don't think so, because I do think the DH is a certainty in some form. Gomes can start 60-80 games and get more PT than the average backup, Willson can start 80 and DH another ~50 times to give him 500 PA, and you still have lots of DH at bats that need to be taken by someone. Plus Frazier is a 1 year/1.5 million dollar upside pickup, his utility doesn't live or die with him getting a full time workload. Also, best laid plans always go awry, someone will get hurt or be surprisingly good/bad, this level of redundancy is far from overkill with as much as is still to be sorted out on the position player side.

 

Also, maybe they'll trade Willson! That possibility existed before Gomes and still exists now. I just don't think it clearly points the arrow in that direction(or the opposite).

[Rob]

But the other 'middle of the road' interpretation, even setting aside 'will we trade Contreras', is 'we are going to play our best player less' right? Or we're assuming there's going to be a DH and then it makes you question the Frazier signing where he's just the 5th or 6th dude projected to throw up an OPS in the low to mid 700s, only he can't play anywhere in the field.

 

I don't think so, because I do think the DH is a certainty in some form. Gomes can start 60-80 games and get more PT than the average backup, Willson can start 80 and DH another ~50 times to give him 500 PA, and you still have lots of DH at bats that need to be taken by someone. Plus Frazier is a 1 year/1.5 million dollar upside pickup, his utility doesn't live or die with him getting a full time workload. Also, best laid plans always go awry, someone will get hurt or be surprisingly good/bad, this level of redundancy is far from overkill with as much as is still to be sorted out on the position player side.

 

Also, maybe they'll trade Willson! That possibility existed before Gomes and still exists now. I just don't think it clearly points the arrow in that direction(or the opposite).

 

I think it shifted the needle slightly simply because they marginally increased Willson's value by taking the best remaining FA option off the board. Trading for Willson is doubtlessly more appetizing when you're staring at the spectre of Robinson Chirinos being possibly your next best bet as a starting catcher next season.

 

That said, I agree with your assessment that on this team, as currently constructed, there's certainly room for both. So this move doesn't exert a lot of pressure for subsequent moves.