Cubs offseason chit chat...

[Rcal10]

40 minutes ago, CubbyBlue2008 said:

Yeah let’s hope Bellinger falls into the Cubs price range. It definitely seems like a Hoskins/Bellinger combo has the cleanest fit in Chicago.

Add a trade of PCA+ for Luzardo and a FA pen arm and that is not a bad off season. Maybe even enough money to get Giolito on a 2 or 3 year deal. 3rd and DH filled by what they have already (Morel and ?)

Another trade option is PCA+ for Clase, Bieber, Naylor. But for that to work the Cubs need to know Morel can play 3rd. And I don’t think they know that. 
 

Edited December 26, 2023 by Rcal10

[Bertz]

32 minutes ago, CubbyBlue2008 said:

Yeah let’s hope Bellinger falls into the Cubs price range. It definitely seems like a Hoskins/Bellinger combo has the cleanest fit in Chicago.

I remember seeing earlier in the offseason someone (one of the BN guys?) suggested something like the first Carlos Correa deal for Bellinger.  I didn't think that made sense from Bellinger's perspective at the time, but now it might be the most mutually beneficial move for both him and Jed?

- If Bellinger hits like last year, he probably pulls down $300M next winter

- If Bellinger hits more good than great (~110 wRC+), I think he still gets nearly $200M because there will be little concern about any recurrence of his '21-'22 awfulness and also there should be a different mix of teams on the market

- If he does turn into a pumpkin he still locked in his low 9 figure deal.  

From Jed's perspective it's probably just a one year deal and even if it does go south it's only three.

I once again find myself wondering what the plan is at 3B if not Chapman.  Because like you say Bellinger/Hoskins makes for a potent pair, and makes for quite the top-to-bottom lineup if we're not resigning ourselves to Madrigal/Mastrobuoni at 3B.

[CubbyBlue2008]

2 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Add a trade of PCA+ for Luzardo and a FA pen arm and that is not a bad off season. Maybe even enough money to get Giolito on a 2 or 3 year deal. 3rd and DH filled by what they have already (Morel and ?)

Yep. You add two plus bats, a young/controlled TORP, a great pen arm, and a depth SP with some upside. 

Maybe try and tread water in that 3B spot with Madrigal/Morel until the deadline. DH I’m not too worried about. Hoskins, Bellinger, Suzuki, Happ, Morel, and maybe Canario can all rotate at that spot depending on the lineup.

Hopefully Horton comes up at some point and you have a rotation of Steele, Luzardo, Giolito, and Horton going into the postseason. Have Horton piggyback with Taillon or Hendricks or something throughout the season.

I’ll take that team.

[CubbyBlue2008]

6 minutes ago, Bertz said:

I remember seeing earlier in the offseason someone (one of the BN guys?) suggested something like the first Carlos Correa deal for Bellinger.  I didn't think that made sense from Bellinger's perspective at the time, but now it might be the most mutually beneficial move for both him and Jed?

- If Bellinger hits like last year, he probably pulls down $300M next winter

- If Bellinger hits more good than great (~110 wRC+), I think he still gets nearly $200M because there will be little concern about any recurrence of his '21-'22 awfulness and also there should be a different mix of teams on the market

- If he does turn into a pumpkin he still locked in his low 9 figure deal.  

From Jed's perspective it's probably just a one year deal and even if it does go south it's only three.

I once again find myself wondering what the plan is at 3B if not Chapman.  Because like you say Bellinger/Hoskins makes for a potent pair, and makes for quite the top-to-bottom lineup if we're not resigning ourselves to Madrigal/Mastrobuoni at 3B.

It feels like, no matter what, we are gonna have a hole somewhere going into the season. I think 3B will end up being that spot. I’m cool with it though. That lineup is pretty good, especially if we get the second half version of Suzuki going forward.

[We Got The Whole 9]

I think they should move on from Bellinger and here's my reasoning: It took a lot to even get him to 4 war and more realistically I think we can say he played more like a 3 given the xstats. He's decent at CF but what does he look like in 3 years? If he moves to a corner or 1B, how much value above what can easily be filled in FA at those positions does he provide? How much value above PCA will he provide over the next few years at CF? Is it worth paying him a Swanson deal? I don't think so. Even if you account for the injury and say he played more like a 4 vs the 5 he may have provided with that offense. I think this is Jed's thinking as well. He'd be content with Tauchman bridging to PCA, who has a real nice floor. Bellinger at 1B for the remaining 4/100 of his deal seems like a bad use of resources.  

[Tryptamine]

29 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

I think they should move on from Bellinger and here's my reasoning: It took a lot to even get him to 4 war and more realistically I think we can say he played more like a 3 given the xstats. He's decent at CF but what does he look like in 3 years? If he moves to a corner or 1B, how much value above what can easily be filled in FA at those positions does he provide? How much value above PCA will he provide over the next few years at CF? Is it worth paying him a Swanson deal? I don't think so. Even if you account for the injury and say he played more like a 4 vs the 5 he may have provided with that offense. I think this is Jed's thinking as well. He'd be content with Tauchman bridging to PCA, who has a real nice floor. Bellinger at 1B for the remaining 4/100 of his deal seems like a bad use of resources.  

Remember he missed 32 games though. he played at 5.1 fWAR/162 pace.

[Rcal10]

40 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

I think they should move on from Bellinger and here's my reasoning: It took a lot to even get him to 4 war and more realistically I think we can say he played more like a 3 given the xstats. He's decent at CF but what does he look like in 3 years? If he moves to a corner or 1B, how much value above what can easily be filled in FA at those positions does he provide? How much value above PCA will he provide over the next few years at CF? Is it worth paying him a Swanson deal? I don't think so. Even if you account for the injury and say he played more like a 4 vs the 5 he may have provided with that offense. I think this is Jed's thinking as well. He'd be content with Tauchman bridging to PCA, who has a real nice floor. Bellinger at 1B for the remaining 4/100 of his deal seems like a bad use of resources.  

I understand being unsure of Bellinger. But why can’t he play center field until he is 35? Didn’t Nimmo sign an 8 year deal at 30? Where is he going to play? Again, concerns about his bat, I do understand. But I don’t know why he can’t stay in center once he hits early to mid 30’s. 

[CubbyBlue2008]

I know Bellinger is a risk, but we are at the point of the offseason where all we have are risks.
 

Unless we are going to dip heavily into our prospect pool and get some bats via trade. But when have we ever done that?

[gocubs218]

Kiermaier just won a gold glove at his age 33 season. 

[We Got The Whole 9]

3 minutes ago, gocubs218 said:

Kiermaier just won a gold glove at his age 33 season. 

Literally one of the greatest defensive CF of the analytical era. Bellinger is nowhere near his caliber. 

 

Bellinger could play CF throughout the contract, but will he actually provide quality defense there?

[Jason Ross]

I would say it's fair to question Bellinger long term in CF. He's 28, and we know defense does tend to fall off around the early 30s traditionally. It doesn't mean he will, but anyone questioning how long he will last there is pretty fair. It isn't like Bellinger hasn't had his fair share of injuries, even if they haven't been leg injuries, which likely adds questions here on his durability. 

[Rcal10]

20 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I would say it's fair to question Bellinger long term in CF. He's 28, and we know defense does tend to fall off around the early 30s traditionally. It doesn't mean he will, but anyone questioning how long he will last there is pretty fair. It isn't like Bellinger hasn't had his fair share of injuries, even if they haven't been leg injuries, which likely adds questions here on his durability. 

.Sure, that’s possible. But doesn’t risk come with every long term contract? If you don’t take a few iffy years you don’t get the top guys. As I said, if you don’t think Bellinger is worth it bexsuee of questioning his bat, that is a different story. That I do understand. But I am less worried about him playing center. 

[Tryptamine]

Say he's at least a neutral defense CF through the first 4 years of a 7 year deal. I'm pretty ok with him spending the last 3 in either a COF or 1B spot.

[SOFNR]

33 minutes ago, CubbyBlue2008 said:

I know Bellinger is a risk, but we are at the point of the offseason where all we have are risks.
 

Unless we are going to dip heavily into our prospect pool and get some bats via trade. But when have we ever done that?

Pretty much where i'm at too. You already missed out on the tippy top of the market. There just aren't a lot of impact bats in FA and they all come with risks. I'd rather risk money on Bellinger then try to spread the same around on tier C guys. Plus it makes a trade for top pitching a lot easier to pull. Bring back your best bat from last year and move PCA for some pitching. Ideally they could negotiate a higher AAV, shorter term, multiple opt out deal for Bellinger. But I think you gotta take a risk on Chapman or Bellinger and i lean towards the latter.

[Jason Ross]

13 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

.Sure, that’s possible. But doesn’t risk come with every long term contract? If you don’t take a few iffy years you don’t get the top guys. As I said, if you don’t think Bellinger is worth it bexsuee of questioning his bat, that is a different story. That I do understand. But I am less worried about him playing center. 

Of course there's risk with any contract. With Bellinger him playing CF though is a primary reason you'd be interested in him for 8 years. His bat at 1b is iffy with his batted ball. So you're either talking the risk of him sticking at a premium position or the risk with his batted ball data and offense at a less premium position. It doesnt mean you dont sign him, but it does mean people are going to rightly point our these factors, too.

[Tryptamine]

You take the risk, you just have to accept in your calculations that you likely aren't getting a season as good as last year. So even after adding Bellinger back it doesn't cover what you lost in losing 2023 Bellinger performance and additions need to be made taking this into account.

[Rcal10]

4 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Of course there's risk with any contract. With Bellinger him playing CF though is a primary reason you'd be interested in him for 8 years. His bat at 1b is iffy with his batted ball. So you're either talking the risk of him sticking at a premium position or the risk with his batted ball data and offense at a less premium position. It doesnt mean you dont sign him, but it does mean people are going to rightly point our these factors, too.

Fine, people can worry about whatever they want to worry about. I am not nearly as concerned about him playing centerfield at 33 or 34 than I am him actually continuing to be a productive hitter the next 5 to 7 years. If anything, the fact that he can, if he has to, move to first at 33 makes his signing less risky IMO. I am more concerned with “will he hit,” 

To me it comes down to what is the better option? Sign Bellinger for 7 years and trade PCA+ for Luzardo or stick with PCA in center and use the money you would spend on Bellinger to sign Montgomery for 6 years. Which is the better team in 24’ and which is the better team years after 24?

Whichever way they go, they still need more. Someone like Hoskins and/or Chapman as a free agent and/or guys like Bieber and Naylor in a trade. 

[Petrey10]

1 hour ago, Tryptamine said:

Remember he missed 32 games though. he played at 5.1 fWAR/162 pace.

You missed the negative in that sentence

[Jason Ross]

14 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Fine, people can worry about whatever they want to worry about. I am not nearly as concerned about him playing centerfield at 33 or 34 than I am him actually continuing to be a productive hitter the next 5 to 7 years. If anything, the fact that he can, if he has to, move to first at 33 makes his signing less risky IMO. I am more concerned with “will he hit,” 

To me it comes down to what is the better option? Sign Bellinger for 7 years and trade PCA+ for Luzardo or stick with PCA in center and use the money you would spend on Bellinger to sign Montgomery for 6 years. Which is the better team in 24’ and which is the better team years after 24?

Whichever way they go, they still need more. Someone like Hoskins and/or Chapman as a free agent and/or guys like Bieber and Naylor in a trade. 

I think it's pretty unlikely the Cubs will trade PCA regardless of what they do with Bellinger. We'll see, but there hasn't been a single rumor concerning the Cubs moving PCA. Maybe it's something really have kept quiet, but there doesn't seem to be much out there to make you think they'll deal them. This is a team who talks consistently about not blocking prospects, loves defense (especially at premium positions) and loves players who run the bases well. I don't want to make it seem impossible, but it seems like a false equivilency to say that the options are "sign Bellinger and trade PCA" or "sign Montgomery". I think the Cubs are far more likely to sign Bellinger and keep PCA by having Bellinger take CF for 1-3 months and then moving him to 1b than trading PCA for an arm. 

We'll see what they do. I have no idea what they're going to do.  And that's not saying it's not a valid option or the Cubs shouldn't consider trading him, only that I think the Cubs are very unlikely to do so. But I think there are more options than the ones you laid out, and why people are concerned about Bellinger, his position and his batted ball. 

[UMFan83]

this account is followed by media people. Take it with a huge grain of salt. The only reason I’m even posting this is to laugh at the thought about us discussing whether we’d rather trade for Glasnow or a Bieber/Clase package and the Dodgers saying “horsefeathers you we’ll trade for both, and sign the 2 biggest FAs to unprecedented contracts to add to our team that won 100 games last year”

 

 

[We Got The Whole 9]

2 minutes ago, UMFan83 said:

this account is followed by media people. Take it with a huge grain of salt. The only reason I’m even posting this is to laugh at the thought about us discussing whether we’d rather trade for Glasnow or a Bieber/Clase package and the Dodgers saying “horsefeathers you we’ll trade for both, and sign the 2 biggest FAs to unprecedented contracts to add to our team that won 100 games last year”

 

 

It helps to have Will Smith already and 2 other expendable catchers in the top 100 along with like 5-8 other highly regarded prospects. 

 

Also a GM that is willing and blank checks from owners. 

 

Jealous AF if it happens. Friedman putting together the best offseason anyone has ever seen.

[Jason Ross]

3 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

It helps to have Will Smith already and 2 other expendable catchers in the top 100 along with like 5-8 other highly regarded prospects. 

 

Also a GM that is willing and blank checks from owners. 

 

Jealous AF if it happens. Friedman putting together the best offseason anyone has ever seen.

The one thing I'd be jealous of is having the infrastructure of being capable of trading for luxury (and it's not that the Dodgers can't use Clase, only that trading for a closer like Clase feels like luxury). I really don't want the Cubs to spend on Clase because they have other things to fix. And I think Bieber is an interesting data point for next season, but I won't miss him either. It's that ability to send a few good prospects for Clase and say "Yeah, we have everything else, and we have the capital, so let's go get this closer". 

[Rcal10]

1 minute ago, 1908_Cubs said:

The one thing I'd be jealous of is having the infrastructure of being capable of trading for luxury (and it's not that the Dodgers can't use Clase, only that trading for a closer like Clase feels like luxury). I really don't want the Cubs to spend on Clase because they have other things to fix. And I think Bieber is an interesting data point for next season, but I won't miss him either. It's that ability to send a few good prospects for Clase and say "Yeah, we have everything else, and we have the capital, so let's go get this closer". 

Honestly I am more unhappy about the idea of Bieber being traded to the Dodger. I kind of liked the Bieber/Naylor idea for the Cubs. As you said, Clase is more a luxury for a sure playoff team. 

[Rcal10]

34 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I think it's pretty unlikely the Cubs will trade PCA regardless of what they do with Bellinger. We'll see, but there hasn't been a single rumor concerning the Cubs moving PCA. Maybe it's something really have kept quiet, but there doesn't seem to be much out there to make you think they'll deal them. This is a team who talks consistently about not blocking prospects, loves defense (especially at premium positions) and loves players who run the bases well. I don't want to make it seem impossible, but it seems like a false equivilency to say that the options are "sign Bellinger and trade PCA" or "sign Montgomery". I think the Cubs are far more likely to sign Bellinger and keep PCA by having Bellinger take CF for 1-3 months and then moving him to 1b than trading PCA for an arm. 

We'll see what they do. I have no idea what they're going to do.  And that's not saying it's not a valid option or the Cubs shouldn't consider trading him, only that I think the Cubs are very unlikely to do so. But I think there are more options than the ones you laid out, and why people are concerned about Bellinger, his position and his batted ball. 

Unless Morel can play 3rd (and most feel he can’t) I don’t really like the fit of Bellinger with PCA. If/when PCA came in the team one of the outfielders would have to DH daily or Bellinger would have to move to first. I don’t like that either. I want either Hoskins or a trade for Naylor to occupy 1st. I totally understand your logic. And I agree it doesn’t appear the Cubs would deal PCA. But if they are not, I would rather them just pass on Bellinger. (Unless Morel is the 3rd baseman). 

[Jason Ross]

1 minute ago, Rcal10 said:

Unless Morel can play 3rd (and most feel he can’t) I don’t really like the fit of Bellinger with PCA. If/when PCA came in the team one of the outfielders would have to DH daily or Bellinger would have to move to first. I don’t like that either. I want either Hoskins or a trade for Naylor to occupy 1st. I totally understand your logic. And I agree it doesn’t appear the Cubs would deal PCA. But if they are not, I would rather them just pass on Bellinger. (Unless Morel is the 3rd baseman). 

Right. The point I'm not making is what I'd like to see, but going back to my original comment of why people are concerned with his ability to play CF long term and his batted ball data. People have concerns about fit, about Bellinger and the like. It isn't to say these will happen, only that those fears/worries aren't unwarrented. As you said, no contract is without risk. I think people are just pointing out the risk. 

On Bieber, the Cubs can still get Naylor without Bieber, so I'm not super worried even if he goes to LAD. They can still grab Imanaga, Snell, Montgomery...etc. I like him as a bit of a bounceback, But I'm not so desperate for him that I'd be too bummed to see him head elsewhere. With that said, it is just another option off the board that the Cubs let go. At some point the Cubs do need to get someone in.