Cubs offseason chit chat...

[Transmogrified Tiger]

2 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

And there was no inclination Madrigal could play 3rd either, until he did. In the end, Morel may not be able to do it. Maybe they do know it already. But if they are not certain giving him this off season to work in it doesn’t hurt anything. It could only increase his stock. If he can’t do it, IMO, he will be traded. And that is ok too. I think fans and posters are way to quick on making opinions on players. We don’t know why he didn’t play there. We don’t know why the Cubs seemed to want him as a super utility guy. We all just speculate. How many people were wrong in Masrigal? How many felt it was a stunt by the cubs to see if they can raise his value. How many are surprised at how elk he did? Since Morel has played some third why is it so silly an idea to think that if the Cubs worked with him exclusively at 3rd he could turn into an average, playable 3rd baseman? I don’t even know what mental gymnastics are, but I don’t feel that is a requirement to at least believe he might be able to do it. 

...at the expense of Morel!  Look I don't want to deal in absolutes, maybe they'll get an elite player who occupies DH without trading Morel and they'll force him at 3B one way or another.  There's a lot more fun paths to the offseason if Morel is occupying 3B and isn't a defensive liability. But I also don't think we need to try to retrofit the org's behavior as if that's what their intent is likely to be.  Across 2 seasons, there have been nothing but journeymen and other positional converts at 3B, the door has been wide open for Morel(who has played lots of minor league 3B at a very poor level) to get run there in both low stakes and competitive environments.  Instead they had him play actual new positions(CF) and primarily DH.  The most likely outcome is that the guy who played a lot of MiLB 3B very poorly and then wasn't given that chance at the MLB level is that the org doesn't think he can do it.  There's a distinction between that behavior and trying to give a decent/good defensive 2B that chance in Madrigal(which again, came at Morel's expense).

[Stratos]

6 hours ago, thawv said:

Morel has played about 1500 innings at 3B.  He could have played there last year.  But the Cubs chose to put a guy who's never played the position in his life there over Morel.  I think the Cubs know that he's pretty much a DH for the most part. 

There's no way a guy with Morel's athleticism and arm should be a DH.  He might not be a 3B, but he can at least be an average-ish fielder somewhere i'd think.  They need to completely abandon the super utility experiment, keep him at one position they feel is his best, and if that's the middle infield then trade him.  If he ends up being a career DH or bad-fielding utility guy then they nerfed his development.  You need skills and not just tools to be decent at several positions in INF & OF, and that starts a long time before even signing a pro contract.  I don't think he's that bad a fielder, it's just that Madrigal was playing like a gold glover last year and he was stuck behind a lot of MLB regulars who are pretty good fielders.

It was a stupid idea to try to turn him into a super utility because it's very apparent he doesn't have high skills (as opposed to raw athleticism) at anything baseball-wise and he was never going to reach his potential as a defender if he's not getting enough games in at any position to develop the instincts needed to play it well.

Morel hasn't played more than a couple dozen games at 3B in any season since 2019.  If that's because he wasn't good at it then they need to give up on the idea. 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Some good notes from Mooney/Sharma this morning: https://theathletic.com/5030992/2023/11/05/cubs-offseason-rumors-gm-meetings/

 

Cliff notes:

• Bellinger may have a preference for a big market
• Trading for an established reliever to avoid a bigger/longer guaranteed commitment could happen, possibly a smaller market option in arb
• Hoyer not likely to shy away from Soto or Alonso just because they have 1 year left, it means their cost is lower and the team's books retain flexibility
• Teams are doing their homework on Morel

[Bertz]

The Alonso bit was interesting 

Quote

The New York Mets seem focused on adding young pitching, so a trade for Alonso could cost a young arm, but the Cubs seem to be relatively deep there and the cost may not be incredibly high.

So one of Assad/Brown/Wicks and probably not much on top of that?

Edited November 5, 2023 by Bertz

[Rcal10]

18 minutes ago, Bertz said:

The Alonso bit was interesting 

So one of Assad/Brown/Wicks and probably not much on top of that?

As long as it isn’t Horton I am fine with that. Even if just one year. But, if it is just one year there is no reason not to go over the 1st LT level if they know they will be below it the next year. They can also trade for Glasnow using that same thought process. If they know they won’t keep either past 24’ and they know the replacement for each of them will be someone in the minors, they can go higher with the payroll in 24’ and basically go for it. 

[thawv]

16 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t. I think the Cubs wanted to groom Morel to be a guy for multiple positions. So they put Madrigal at 3rd to build up his stock a little. Then when they brought Morel up he hadn’t worked at 3rd base. They wanted his bat and didn’t want to mess with him learning 3rd base on the fly. Learning during the season which could have affected his hitting. So now this off season they need for him to just play 3rd and work with coaches specifically on playing 3rd. Maybe he can’t do it. But I think they are going to give him every opportunity to prove he either can or can’t. What decision they made last year, IMO, has no bearing on what they do this year. 

I hope they DO work on his 3B play.  So far, it hasn't worked.  It would be great if they can fill that black hole internally for minimum salary!  Even if it's just until Shaw comes up.

[Tim]

1 hour ago, Bertz said:

The Alonso bit was interesting 

So one of Assad/Brown/Wicks and probably not much on top of that?

They can have Killian and like it.

 

(no way I'm trading six years of Wicks for one year of Alonso)

[Transmogrified Tiger]

1 hour ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Do we….see Jordan Wicks as interchangeable with Assad and Brown? I’ve seen them lumped together more than once. He’s, by far, the most valuable of the three. I’m all for Alonso but the Cubs aren’t moving Jordan Wicks for him or probably anyone available 

I think they're different pitchers who will get to value in different ways, but I think putting Wicks and Brown in the same tier is fair.  BBTV has Brown with significantly more value, which I don't really get.  Assad, no, I don't think he's gonna be a lifelong dramatic FIP-beater.  I also agree that I don't think Wicks is going for Alonso, though I wouldn't be shocked to see it for Brown.

[WhyCantWeWin]

2 hours ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

Some good notes from Mooney/Sharma this morning: https://theathletic.com/5030992/2023/11/05/cubs-offseason-rumors-gm-meetings/

 

Cliff notes:

• Bellinger may have a preference for a big market
• Trading for an established reliever to avoid a bigger/longer guaranteed commitment could happen, possibly a smaller market option in arb
• Hoyer not likely to shy away from Soto or Alonso just because they have 1 year left, it means their cost is lower and the team's books retain flexibility
• Teams are doing their homework on Morel

So basically hoyer is still afraid of long term contracts. 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

no, that remains a thing that is made up in your head

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Do we….see Jordan Wicks as interchangeable with Assad and Brown? I’ve seen them lumped together more than once. He’s, by far, the most valuable of the three. I’m all for Alonso but the Cubs aren’t moving Jordan Wicks for him or probably anyone available 

He wouldn’t be my choice either. You can add Wesnecki to that list and take Wicks out. Maybe you give them one of them and then a lowere level guy.

Also, if you are correct and the Cubs have no thoughts of Morel at 3rd what would a  Morel for Burger trade look like? Both have a lot of control left. Burger is not exactly a good fielder, but he does play 3rd. He is older than Morel but they both come with a lot of control time. What would need to be added from either team to make this work? Miami seems to be a team that acquires guys and then fits them into positions. Plus they are losing Soler. Could make some sense for the Cubs. Just not sure about Miami. 
 

Edit: after looking over Miami’s roster they really don’t have a place for Morel. So I don’t see that happening. 

Edited November 5, 2023 by Rcal10

[WhyCantWeWin]

3 hours ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

Some good notes from Mooney/Sharma this morning: https://theathletic.com/5030992/2023/11/05/cubs-offseason-rumors-gm-meetings/

 

Cliff notes:

• Bellinger may have a preference for a big market
• Trading for an established reliever to avoid a bigger/longer guaranteed commitment could happen, possibly a smaller market option in arb
• Hoyer not likely to shy away from Soto or Alonso just because they have 1 year left, it means their cost is lower and the team's books retain flexibility

Yeah just in my head 

[Tim]

27 minutes ago, WhyCantWeWin said:

Yeah just in my head 

Hoyer's not afraid of all long term deals, which seems to be what you're implying.

Hoyer does seem to be very choosy about which long-term deals he selects, which is very different. In terms of the specific example there of avoiding long-term deals with relievers...I'm on Jed's side.

[Rcal10]

4 minutes ago, Tim said:

Hoyer's not afraid of all long term deals, which seems to be what you're implying.

Hoyer does seem to be very choosy about which long-term deals he selects, which is very different. In terms of the specific example there of avoiding long-term deals with relievers...I'm on Jed's side.

To be fair, Jed has never offered the 10+ year deals the elite free agents require. Now you agree or disagree with that way of running the team but you can’t disagree with someone who says they haven’t made those offers. If the Cubs are going to get Ohtani or trade for and extend Soto, they are going to have to go 10+ on the contract. And WCWW isn’t wrong to point out that Jed hasn’t done that as of yet. 

[Tim]

2 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

To be fair, Jed has never offered the 10+ year deals the elite free agents require. Now you agree or disagree with that way of running the team but you can’t disagree with someone who says they haven’t made those offers. If the Cubs are going to get Ohtani or trade for and extend Soto, they are going to have to go 10+ on the contract. And WCWW isn’t wrong to point out that Jed hasn’t done that as of yet. 

There's a vast difference between a blanket statement of "Hoyer's still afraid of long-term contracts" and "he has never offered the 10+ year deals"

[chibears55]

Reds declined Votto option, if he doesn't retire, i know he 40 but any interest in grabbing him on a 1 yr deal to be the LH DH, but mostly grab him to be in the dugout/clubhouse with the young players.

Also wouldn't mind having a guy like him as a hitting coach or bench coach if he's interested in doing that 

[Bertz]

2 hours ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Do we….see Jordan Wicks as interchangeable with Assad and Brown? I’ve seen them lumped together more than once. He’s, by far, the most valuable of the three. I’m all for Alonso but the Cubs aren’t moving Jordan Wicks for him or probably anyone available 

I mean more or less yeah I do see them as interchangeable.  I think most would agree that Wicks would rank first and Assad last, but it's not much daylight between them.

- Assad has 150 pretty successful MLB innings under his belt.  The stuff I pretty pedestrian, limiting the upside, but a trade partner *knows* he's a quality contributor, and can be cautiously optimistic he can do it as a starter

- Brown clearly has the best stuff, but with his injuries, occasional walk issues, and the fact that he hasn't thrown an MLB pitch yet clearly has the highest risk

- Wicks had a great cup of coffee, but 34 innings is not enough to consider him established.  The Stuff+ metrics are not super kind to him, though the ones on Fangraphs are terrible at handling changeups so he's probably closer to average in that regard

There's real pros/cons to each, and maybe you weight those differently than I do, but making one of these guys an untouchable over the others would be pretty silly IMO.

[Rcal10]

15 minutes ago, Tim said:

There's a vast difference between a blanket statement of "Hoyer's still afraid of long-term contracts" and "he has never offered the 10+ year deals"

I think a lot of posts come with some hyperbole. In this case WCWW is at least basing his statement on precedence. Up until now the Cubs have not make that mega year deal. I am sure you and everyone else knows he isn’t talking about 6 to 8 year deals. He is talking about the 10+ deals needed to get the elite free agent. While I wouldn’t put this squarely in Hoyer, I still do agree with him they the Cubs haven’t shown that sort of deal is what they will do. 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

1 hour ago, WhyCantWeWin said:

Yeah just in my head 

Yes, correct.  Hoyer (or any GM) being mindful of long term and/or post-prime commitments because like any front office they have limits to their resources is not the same as the caricature you've created of them being terrified of long term deals and preferring to sign terrible players to 1 year deals to avoid multi-year commitments.

[Tim]

51 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I think a lot of posts come with some hyperbole. In this case WCWW is at least basing his statement on precedence. Up until now the Cubs have not make that mega year deal. I am sure you and everyone else knows he isn’t talking about 6 to 8 year deals. He is talking about the 10+ deals needed to get the elite free agent. While I wouldn’t put this squarely in Hoyer, I still do agree with him they the Cubs haven’t shown that sort of deal is what they will do. 

He specifically called out a multi-year deal for a reliever in one of his posts there. I don't think he's limiting it to the 10+ year deals.

[Rcal10]

22 minutes ago, Tim said:

He specifically called out a multi-year deal for a reliever in one of his posts there. I don't think he's limiting it to the 10+ year deals.

That, I did not see. But for that I would agree with the FO. No reason to do a long term deal for a pen arm. I don’t blame Jed or ownership for not wanting to spend big money and/or long years for a pen arm. 

[Tim]

7 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

That, I did not see. But for that I would agree with the FO. No reason to do a long term deal for a pen arm. I don’t blame Jed or ownership for not wanting to spend big money and/or long years for a pen arm. 

I think the only 10-12 year deals that have been signed since Jed took over are basically the shortstops from the past few years. I think Jed signed the one he liked the best out of that whole group. Judge was nine years, but he was always going back to the Yankees. Cole got the nine year deal, too, but I agree with not signing any aging pitcher to a nine year contract.

All the other 10+ year deals that have been signed have been extensions where the player wasn't a FA.

We really don't have much in the way of saying whether Jed would go 10+ for a guy like Soto.

[Rcal10]

36 minutes ago, Tim said:

I think the only 10-12 year deals that have been signed since Jed took over are basically the shortstops from the past few years. I think Jed signed the one he liked the best out of that whole group. Judge was nine years, but he was always going back to the Yankees. Cole got the nine year deal, too, but I agree with not signing any aging pitcher to a nine year contract.

All the other 10+ year deals that have been signed have been extensions where the player wasn't a FA.

We really don't have much in the way of saying whether Jed would go 10+ for a guy like Soto.

That is why I don’t think it is all on Jed. I think it is more on the ownership. If you put it on them you can add guys  like Harper and Machado to the list of long term contracts the Cubs didn’t get involved with. I think Jed is there because he agrees with ownership and is ok with not going 10+ years. But if you take away who is to blame it still comes down to the Cubs not showing a desire to go 10+ on guys, which is needed if they want to extend Soto, if they trade for him, or sign Ohtani. And I think we have enough examples to make the statement the Cubs are not comfortable doing that long of deals. TBH, I get the thought process. I am not comfortable with those sort of deals either. But if you want the elite talent you have to do it. 

[Tim]

4 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

That is why I don’t think it is all on Jed. I think it is more on the ownership. If you put it on them you can add guys  like Harper and Machado to the list of long term contracts the Cubs didn’t get involved with. I think Jed is there because he agrees with ownership and is ok with not going 10+ years. But if you take away who is to blame it still comes down to the Cubs not showing a desire to go 10+ on guys, which is needed if they want to extend Soto, if they trade for him, or sign Ohtani. And I think we have enough examples to make the statement the Cubs are not comfortable doing that long of deals. TBH, I get the thought process. I am not comfortable with those sort of deals either. But if you want the elite talent you have to do it. 

I think the *only* other players that get added if you make it an all-time list are Harper, Machado & ARod. There just aren't a ton of data points there to draw conclusions.

[CubinNY]

2 hours ago, chibears55 said:

Reds declined Votto option, if he doesn't retire, i know he 40 but any interest in grabbing him on a 1 yr deal to be the LH DH, but mostly grab him to be in the dugout/clubhouse with the young players.

Also wouldn't mind having a guy like him as a hitting coach or bench coach if he's interested in doing that 

 Votto may not retire but he has made many statements that when he does he’s going to disappear. I don’t know if he’s just saying stuff, but I think the last quote I read was something like “I’m ready to delete all my social media and go away”. 
 

I doubt he’s interested in coaching, not sure about the booth though.