Winning in 2023

[Bertz]

Didn't watch, just going from Brett's writeup, I think these stood out:

 

Offensively, we didn’t score enough. At times we were banged up, but that just exposed a lack of depth. A clear area of focus will be making sure run-scoring takes a step forward. Even when we were playing well at the end of the year, the run-scoring lagged.

 

We have to be a quicker-strike offense than we were. I like the idea of having more contact, and grinding at bats. But we lacked the ability to pull away in games (i.e., limited power). So the close games create more randomness, and also tax the bullpen.

 

I had been assuming that on offense it was going to be a shortstop and then complimentary pieces. This makes me think a second hitter of substance will be added to the lineup.

 

Also interesting to see the effusiveness about the power>hit philosophy. Would not be looking to buy real estate in Chicago this winter if I was Nick Madrigal.

 

I think it’s important that we add quality innings (but Hoyer didn’t want to define “top of the rotation” when asked if the Cubs are going to seek that type.)

 

I think the pitching development is something we take great pride in. You go back to the fall of 2019, when we brought in Craig Breslow and he and Kyle Evans really rethought things, and we made a commitment to remake all of it. The process started then, but got delayed by a year because of the pandemic, but the success we are seeing throughout the system now are the fruits of seeds that were planted years ago. We’re really proud of the pitching infrastructure. But I know there’s no finish line there – you can never have enough.

 

Sounds like quantity over quality on the pitching staff, as he *really* trusts Breslow and Hottovy. I'd expect two guys in the Heaney/Eflin/Manaea tier of FA rather than one guy in the Rodon/deGrom/Verlander tier.

 

We have total confidence in Nico’s ability to play shortstop, but the game is going to trend more athletic because of the new rules, so we will look at adding more athleticism (was hard to hear the question, I think it was about wanting to add more in the middle infield, regardless of where Nico plays).

 

Hard to imagine a young player more focused on “the team” than Nico Hoerner. He wants to talk about the team, the winning, and the culture, so it’s pretty easy to talk to him about whatever additions might impact him.

 

Feels like a near certainty Nico's getting extended, to the point they might already be close.

[JeffH]

I had been assuming that on offense it was going to be a shortstop and then complimentary pieces. This makes me think a second hitter of substance will be added to the lineup.

 

It sure seems like DH is where you could add a significant amount of power with a shorter term deal. Jose Abreu. J.D. Martinez.

 

Add one of the shortstops.

 

Trade for Danny Jansen.

 

Slowly fold Mervis and Davis in.

 

Big influx of power, even subtracting Contreras.

[Bertz]

I had been assuming that on offense it was going to be a shortstop and then complimentary pieces. This makes me think a second hitter of substance will be added to the lineup.

 

It sure seems like DH is where you could add a significant amount of power with a shorter term deal. Jose Abreu. J.D. Martinez.

 

Add one of the shortstops.

 

Trade for Danny Jansen.

 

Slowly fold Mervis and Davis in.

 

Big influx of power, even subtracting Contreras.

 

Yeah I think a full time or semi-full time 1B/DH looks a lot more likely to me than it did this morning. We could also revisit the Bellinger or Gallo idea that was thrown around on here a little while back, though both guys were quite bad this year at the plate. I'd think despite the perfect positional fit either would have to be bat #3, e.g. after Correa and Jansen.

 

There's also some obvious dot connecting you could do there with retaining Willson too, but Jed also said this:

 

To me, intelligent spending involves making decisions that make sense for 2023, but also aren’t going to hinder what we’re trying to build in the longer-term. The nature of baseball contracts is challenging in that way. We’ve all seen contracts of certain lengths that can really bog a team down. It’s easy to talk about the player you’re acquiring, but if that contract ends up hindering the ultimate goal, then it wasn’t a successful transaction.

 

I think that non SS bat(s) of substance will be on a short term deals, so I don't think Willson returns unless it's on the QO contract.

[Bertz]

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/10/mlb-projected-arbitration-salaries-2023.html

[Transmogrified Tiger]

To me, intelligent spending involves making decisions that make sense for 2023, but also aren’t going to hinder what we’re trying to build in the longer-term. The nature of baseball contracts is challenging in that way. We’ve all seen contracts of certain lengths that can really bog a team down. It’s easy to talk about the player you’re acquiring, but if that contract ends up hindering the ultimate goal, then it wasn’t a successful transaction. (From Brett: this is what I have heard for a long time behind the scenes, and Jed is really emphasizing it: he doesn’t like super long-term deals. The money is one thing, but it’s the length he wants to avoid.)

 

This is a similar thought I've had since last offseason and how the team spent when it did spend. I'd modify this to say it's not simply length, but length relative to age. I think Jed is *very* sensitive to how many post-prime seasons get guaranteed in long term deals. It's the only thing keeping me from saying it's a lock that they sign one of the SS.

 

I also don't want to ascribe too much meaning to his comments, others on Twitter have pointed out that Jed holds his cards very tight and there's not a bunch of easter eggs hiding in his phrasing. That said, I think I would generalize to this:

 

- They're going to add more position players than some folks seem to think. Some might logically take away that they won't need the next version of Villar, Simmons, Frazier(or at least all of them) with the depth that's popped up, but I'd say the minimum is 4 new position players and possibly more depending on who may be outgoing(Madrigal, Happ, prospect depth) and/or out of favor(McKinstry, Reyes, Ortega).

 

- They're going to use more resources on position players than pitchers because they think the pitchers are further along as a group, and they trust their ability to get more out of less with pitcher acquisitions. We've gone over this very recently, but that could take the form of signing a 1 million pitcher(or equivalent trade target) instead of a 5 million pitcher, or signing a 15 million dollar pitcher because they think they can make him a 25 million dollar pitcher. I think the 'quality innings' bit points towards it not just being pure volume in terms of additions, but I wouldn't bet my house on that interpretation.

[JeffH]

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/10/mlb-projected-arbitration-salaries-2023.html

 

Easy five non-tenders for me in that list. Maybe a sixth.

[Gilby]

It's not useful to read too much into his comments, but after listening to the entire thing, that did not sound like a guy planning on spending 250M on a single player. Like at all.

[UMFan83]

It's not useful to read too much into his comments, but after listening to the entire thing, that did not sound like a guy planning on spending 250M on a single player. Like at all.

 

I agree. And that’s fine I guess. The more we see Jed in action the more we see where he is different. The Athletic article I posted had a line about how Theo was more of a gunslinger. Jed is more analytical and careful. Jed removes emotion from the equation. He’ll extend someone like Nico who is young and has productive years ahead of him but won’t touch a 30 year old catcher who was one of the heart and souls of this team for the last several years. He’s not going to go out throw $300 million over 10 years for Judge just because he needs a big bat. On the surface I get where he’s coming from but I also wish we could occasionally take a big swing being the large market club that we are

[Bertz]

It's not useful to read too much into his comments, but after listening to the entire thing, that did not sound like a guy planning on spending 250M on a single player. Like at all.

 

That's interesting. He also pretty implicitly called out adding a shortstop with this remark

 

We have total confidence in Nico’s ability to play shortstop, but the game is going to trend more athletic because of the new rules, so we will look at adding more athleticism

 

He said something similar when he was in the booth that last weekend of the season, and combined with the power remarks it really does seem like he wants one of the star shortstops. I wonder if the thought is getting Correa/Turner to take something more like 7/250 instead of 10/300, or if he's got his sites set more on Swanson/Bogaerts, who inherently are looking at sub $200M contracts.

[CubinNY]

It's not useful to read too much into his comments, but after listening to the entire thing, that did not sound like a guy planning on spending 250M on a single player. Like at all.

 

That's interesting. He also pretty implicitly called out adding a shortstop with this remark

 

We have total confidence in Nico’s ability to play shortstop, but the game is going to trend more athletic because of the new rules, so we will look at adding more athleticism

 

He said something similar when he was in the booth that last weekend of the season, and combined with the power remarks it really does seem like he wants one of the star shortstops. I wonder if the thought is getting Correa/Turner to take something more like 7/250 instead of 10/300, or if he's got his sites set more on Swanson/Bogaerts, who inherently are looking at sub $200M contracts.

They've already shown that they will look for a glove-first SS on the cheap.

[CubinNY]

I keep coming back to PTR whose mantra is "you can't buy championships". He wants to keep the payroll low and exploit cheap labor like a good capitalist.

[Tim]

I keep coming back to PTR whose mantra is "you can't buy championships". He wants to keep the payroll low and exploit cheap labor like a good capitalist.

Set the over/under and let's make a bet. Please keep your line consistent with your statement.

[CubinNY]

I keep coming back to PTR whose mantra is "you can't buy championships". He wants to keep the payroll low and exploit cheap labor like a good capitalist.

Set the over/under and let's make a bet. Please keep your line consistent with your statement.

They won't have a top 5 payroll, wherever that line is.

 

They won't sign anyone longer than 5 years.

[PackLandVA]

I keep coming back to PTR whose mantra is "you can't buy championships". He wants to keep the payroll low and exploit cheap labor like a good capitalist.

Set the over/under and let's make a bet. Please keep your line consistent with your statement.

They won't have a top 5 payroll, wherever that line is.

 

They won't sign anyone longer than 5 years.

 

 

They don't control if they have a Top 5 payroll.

[CubinNY]

Set the over/under and let's make a bet. Please keep your line consistent with your statement.

They won't have a top 5 payroll, wherever that line is.

 

They won't sign anyone longer than 5 years.

 

 

They don't control if they have a Top 5 payroll.

They don't? Everything is relative.

[PackLandVA]

They won't have a top 5 payroll, wherever that line is.

 

They won't sign anyone longer than 5 years.

 

 

They don't control if they have a Top 5 payroll.

They don't?

 

 

No, they don't. Regardless of what the spend, any number of teams can spend more. They could have a payroll with a luxury tax and, theoretically, a dozen teams or more could still spend more than them. I get your point, as being in the neighborhood of Top 5 means their payroll will be high. They just don't control the place standing. Maybe stating a percentage of the salary cap would be a better measure.

[Bertz]

 

Always love these from Bryan, even he does tend to have a few things that are silly (Adrian Sampson is not going to be in the horsefeathering bullpen). It does a great job of visualizing the depth (or lack thereof) in the org.

 

I think specific to this thread rather than the minor league forum is how horsefeathering loaded the outfields and rotations are for both Iowa and Tenn. If you're looking at areas with surplus to trade from, you've got them. They're also places to keep in mind with Jed's remarks about moves that make sense for 2023 but maybe less so beyond. For example, it's pretty obvious that CFer is going to be on a 1 or 2 year deal rather than someone like Brandon Nimmo.

[CubinNY]

BTW - 9 of the top 12 payroll teams made the playoffs this year. Only the Rays, Guardians, and Mariners were not in the top 12. So contrary to PTR, it appears that money is a strong factor in having a championship caliber team.

 

To get into the top 10 they need to add about 20 million

Top 5 they need to add 67 million.

[Derwood]

BTW - 9 of the top 12 payroll teams made the playoffs this year. Only the Rays, Guardians, and Mariners were not in the top 12. So contrary to PTR, it appears that money is a strong factor in having a championship caliber team.

 

To get into the top 10 they need to add about 20 million

Top 5 they need to add 67 million.

 

PTR looks at the Red Sox, White Sox and Angels and says "SEE!!!"

[Bertz]

 

The "we'd love to have Wade Miley back" talk felt like platitudes but this combined with a lot of comments from both sides the last two months seems pretty real.

 

I wonder if they'd do something like 2/$14M rather than 1/$10M. Smyly gets significantly more guaranteed money, the Cubs lower the cap hit and ensure they will still have an adult in the room in '24 (Hendricks and Stroman both have options rather than guarantees for '24).

[Cubswin11]

 

The "we'd love to have Wade Miley back" talk felt like platitudes but this combined with a lot of comments from both sides the last two months seems pretty real.

 

I wonder if they'd do something like 2/$14M rather than 1/$10M. Smyly gets significantly more guaranteed money, the Cubs lower the cap hit and ensure they will still have an adult in the room in '24 (Hendricks and Stroman both have options rather than guarantees for '24).

Yeah I really like the idea of bringing Smyly back and something like that 2 year deal makes sense with maybe a 3rd year option for $8-10 mil again with like a $2 mil buyout.

[Tim]

I keep coming back to PTR whose mantra is "you can't buy championships". He wants to keep the payroll low and exploit cheap labor like a good capitalist.

Set the over/under and let's make a bet. Please keep your line consistent with your statement.

They won't have a top 5 payroll, wherever that line is.

 

They won't sign anyone longer than 5 years.

Pick a dollar figure that represents "Low Payroll".

 

Also, avoiding contracts longer than 5 years is generally a good thing as long as you can still get the players.

[CubinNY]

Set the over/under and let's make a bet. Please keep your line consistent with your statement.

They won't have a top 5 payroll, wherever that line is.

 

They won't sign anyone longer than 5 years.

Pick a dollar figure that represents "Low Payroll".

 

Also, avoiding contracts longer than 5 years is generally a good thing as long as you can still get the players.

Less than a top 5 payroll. Last year are 220 million.

[Tim]

They won't have a top 5 payroll, wherever that line is.

 

They won't sign anyone longer than 5 years.

Pick a dollar figure that represents "Low Payroll".

 

Also, avoiding contracts longer than 5 years is generally a good thing as long as you can still get the players.

Less than a top 5 payroll. Last year are 220 million.

I know where you're going to go with your response, but the 6th highest payroll is not a "low payroll" taking advantage of labor.

[CubinNY]

Pick a dollar figure that represents "Low Payroll".

 

Also, avoiding contracts longer than 5 years is generally a good thing as long as you can still get the players.

Less than a top 5 payroll. Last year are 220 million.

I know where you're going to go with your response, but the 6th highest payroll is not a "low payroll" taking advantage of labor.

What do you want? Some kind of [expletive] number where they look like their trying? They were 14 last year. They have the 2nd highest ticket prices, the highest food prices, and were 9th in attendance this year, with a horsefeathers team for half the season. They have concerts, a hotel, apartments, and a TV network, and soon part owners of a betting house. What do you expect them to pay for a competitive team? Anything less than a top 5 payroll is low.