2022-23 Offseason Thread (Cubs)

[CubinNY]

The price of poker just went up, gentleman.

[17 Seconds]

can the cubs realistically get to even 81 projected wins without swanson?

[Cubswin11]

can the cubs realistically get to even 81 projected wins without swanson?

Probably, but it would take like 4-6 signings/trade additions. Which are out there and also largely due to the division horsefeathering sucking.

[JeffH]

Why would the Red Sox give Swanson more than they were reportedly willing to give franchise icon Bogaerts?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Anyone with Swanson contract predictions? Is there any reason he’d settle for something other than a little less than what Bogaerts got? Like, 9 years, $200 million. Any reason to believe the Cubs would be the one making that offer?

 

You can read this as coping, but Swanson is a clear level below the others so the appetite for super long term deals is probably not nearly as high even before setting aside that 3 of the teams willing to do so already found their man. As an example, Swanson just had a career high wRC+ that was worse than the career average of each of the other three. I wouldn't be surprised if it was more of a 6/160 or 7/175 type of deal. This market tends to make most guesses look foolish, though now I feel pretty good about my 12/360 anchor point for Correa from Sunday.

 

Quoting myself here, but reading this Fangraphs article made me update my priors a little bit: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/why-are-teams-issuing-extremely-long-contracts/

 

TL;DR because interest rates are so high it's more in teams' interest to stretch contracts over more years on top of luxury tax implications. If that held then maybe it wouldn't be surprising to see a 9/190-200 type deal for Swanson, but I do still think on an AAV basis it'll be a clear step down from the other 3, and maybe even if it's not 8+ years too.

[champaignchris]

can the cubs realistically get to even 81 projected wins without swanson?

Probably, but it would take like 4-6 signings/trade additions. Which are out there and also largely due to the division horsefeathering sucking.

 

 

Right. If they did something like Turner, Segura, Narvaez, Smyly, Britton, they might be looking at 80-something wins assuming relatively good health.

[Bertz]

can the cubs realistically get to even 81 projected wins without swanson?

 

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-absurdly-preliminary-2023-zips-projected-standings/

 

Based on this article, 74 was the number at the outset of the offseason (I think maybe the Hunter Renfroe trade had happened but that's it). Adding Taillon, Bellinger, and Boxberger, they're probably at like 78. So getting to 81 is easy. I think even if Jed limited himself to boring 1 year deals from here out he'd hit 82-83.

 

The thing about Swanson is that, setting aside Rodon or a trade for a superstar (either of which would be very silly after passing on Correa/Turner), almost all of the paths to 85+ wins from here flow through him.

[UMFan83]

Cubs are $56 million under the luxury tax threshold right? Are we going to have to hear all season about how Jed left money on the table again?

[JeffH]

Cubs are $56 million under the luxury tax threshold right? Are we going to have to hear all season about how Jed left money on the table again?

 

Even without Swanson, that $56 is going to vanish pretty quickly.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

By my count(and there isn't a true answer because of arb estimates and exactly how you count various benefits and such), it's somewhere between 65 and 70 million under.

[JeffH]

By my count(and there isn't a true answer because of arb estimates and exactly how you count various benefits and such), it's somewhere between 65 and 70 million under.

 

Considerably less than that. I've got right around $56.

[UMFan83]

By my count(and there isn't a true answer because of arb estimates and exactly how you count various benefits and such), it's somewhere between 65 and 70 million under.

 

Considerably less than that. I've got right around $56.

 

Yeah I got $56m from Sportrac which has their estimated luxury tax number at $176.8m compared to the $233m luxury tax threshold.

 

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/chicago-cubs/payroll/

 

To answer your first reply, how do you see $56m vanishing quickly without Swanson?

[JeffH]

By my count(and there isn't a true answer because of arb estimates and exactly how you count various benefits and such), it's somewhere between 65 and 70 million under.

 

Considerably less than that. I've got right around $56.

 

Yeah I got $56m from Sportrac which has their estimated luxury tax number at $176.8m compared to the $233m luxury tax threshold.

 

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/chicago-cubs/payroll/

 

To answer your first reply, how do you see $56m vanishing quickly without Swanson?

 

$15 - DH/1B type

$12 - 2nd SP

$4 - C

$4 - RP

 

That's $35. Without Swanson, I can see another $10-ish position player beyond that (Drury?).

[Transmogrified Tiger]

By my count(and there isn't a true answer because of arb estimates and exactly how you count various benefits and such), it's somewhere between 65 and 70 million under.

 

Considerably less than that. I've got right around $56.

 

Yeah I got $56m from Sportrac which has their estimated luxury tax number at $176.8m compared to the $233m luxury tax threshold.

 

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/chicago-cubs/payroll/

 

To answer your first reply, how do you see $56m vanishing quickly without Swanson?

 

Yeah Fangraphs has right around 55 too, I guess the disconnect that I can see is they have 14 million for pre-arb contracts(not including 40-man minor leaguers) and I'm not sure how they come to that considering they have 7 players in that bucket. Even doubling it for the likelihood of Estrada, Wesneski, Mastrobuoni, etc being major leaguers, there's only so many slots considering those minor leaguers + guaranteed + arb salaries.

[JeffH]

 

Considerably less than that. I've got right around $56.

 

Yeah I got $56m from Sportrac which has their estimated luxury tax number at $176.8m compared to the $233m luxury tax threshold.

 

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/chicago-cubs/payroll/

 

To answer your first reply, how do you see $56m vanishing quickly without Swanson?

 

Yeah Fangraphs has right around 55 too, I guess the disconnect that I can see is they have 14 million for pre-arb contracts(not including 40-man minor leaguers) and I'm not sure how they come to that considering they have 7 players in that bucket. Even doubling it for the likelihood of Estrada, Wesneski, Mastrobuoni, etc being major leaguers, there's only so many slots considering those minor leaguers + guaranteed + arb salaries.

 

One other thing to consider is the major league IL. If a big leaguer is on the IL and replaced by a minor leaguer, you're paying an extra $800k.

[jersey cubs fan]

 

Yeah I got $56m from Sportrac which has their estimated luxury tax number at $176.8m compared to the $233m luxury tax threshold.

 

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/chicago-cubs/payroll/

 

To answer your first reply, how do you see $56m vanishing quickly without Swanson?

 

Yeah Fangraphs has right around 55 too, I guess the disconnect that I can see is they have 14 million for pre-arb contracts(not including 40-man minor leaguers) and I'm not sure how they come to that considering they have 7 players in that bucket. Even doubling it for the likelihood of Estrada, Wesneski, Mastrobuoni, etc being major leaguers, there's only so many slots considering those minor leaguers + guaranteed + arb salaries.

 

One other thing to consider is the major league IL. If a big leaguer is on the IL and replaced by a minor leaguer, you're paying an extra $800k.

I thought the tax took into account the 40 man, wouldn’t that amount just be prorated for the time on the roster? A relative pittance

[JeffH]

 

Yeah Fangraphs has right around 55 too, I guess the disconnect that I can see is they have 14 million for pre-arb contracts(not including 40-man minor leaguers) and I'm not sure how they come to that considering they have 7 players in that bucket. Even doubling it for the likelihood of Estrada, Wesneski, Mastrobuoni, etc being major leaguers, there's only so many slots considering those minor leaguers + guaranteed + arb salaries.

 

One other thing to consider is the major league IL. If a big leaguer is on the IL and replaced by a minor leaguer, you're paying an extra $800k.

I thought the tax took into account the 40 man, wouldn’t that amount just be prorated for the time on the roster? A relative pittance

 

One of the salary tracking websites figures that, based on historical data, you will need an equivalent of 33 "full time equivalents" due to IL time (10, 15, and 60) on the 26-man roster over the course of the season. The delta of (33-26) is priced at the major league minimum.

[JeffH]

 

Yeah Fangraphs has right around 55 too, I guess the disconnect that I can see is they have 14 million for pre-arb contracts(not including 40-man minor leaguers) and I'm not sure how they come to that considering they have 7 players in that bucket. Even doubling it for the likelihood of Estrada, Wesneski, Mastrobuoni, etc being major leaguers, there's only so many slots considering those minor leaguers + guaranteed + arb salaries.

 

One other thing to consider is the major league IL. If a big leaguer is on the IL and replaced by a minor leaguer, you're paying an extra $800k.

I thought the tax took into account the 40 man, wouldn’t that amount just be prorated for the time on the roster? A relative pittance

 

One of the salary tracking websites figures that, based on historical data, you will need an equivalent of 33 "full time equivalents" due to IL time (10, 15, and 60) on the 26-man roster over the course of the season. The delta of (33-26) is priced at the major league minimum.

[UMFan83]

[UMFan83]

 

**caveat, this is not a list by most recently followed, but interesting that he's following Swanson and his wife.

 

Edit: Yes we're gotten to "someone followed someone on social media" part of the rumor mill. whatever

[We Got The Whole 9]

Im not a Twitter guy so forgive me for the naivete but how does horsefeathers like that even get discovered?

[The SABR Gamer]

Im not a Twitter guy so forgive me for the naivete but how does horsefeathers like that even get discovered?

 

Well, to start, as that post clearly says, it's Instagram, not Twitter.

 

To answer your question, if a profile is set to public and not private, you can see all of their follows and followers without following them.

[BigbadB]

Im not a Twitter guy so forgive me for the naivete but how does horsefeathers like that even get discovered?

 

Well, to start, as that post clearly says, it's Instagram, not Twitter.

 

To answer your question, if a profile is set to public and not private, you can see all of their follows and followers without following them.

 

To me, Instagram is Twitter since I don't have either.

[jersey cubs fan]

Im not a Twitter guy so forgive me for the naivete but how does horsefeathers like that even get discovered?

 

Well, to start, as that post clearly says, it's Instagram, not Twitter.

 

To answer your question, if a profile is set to public and not private, you can see all of their follows and followers without following them.

 

To me, Instagram is Twitter since I don't have either.

You can’t compare the two. It’s apples and oranges. Twitter is more like a rotten crabapple and Instagram is the plastic orange you put out for display purposes only

[BigbadB]

 

Well, to start, as that post clearly says, it's Instagram, not Twitter.

 

To answer your question, if a profile is set to public and not private, you can see all of their follows and followers without following them.

 

To me, Instagram is Twitter since I don't have either.

You can’t compare the two. It’s apples and oranges. Twitter is more like a rotten crabapple and Instagram is the plastic orange you put out for display purposes only

 

And what's Tik Tok? I do have a Facebook account, so I'm not completely prehistoric. LOL.