Cubs offseason chit chat...

[Backtobanks]

16 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

Agreed. But until they lose out on Bellinger , I am still optimistic. And, for that matter, I would be ok if they didn’t sign Bellinger if they did make some other deal for an everyday solid middle of the line up bat. And they might. I still like Naylor, tbh. I think the team sets up nicely if they signed Bellinger and traded for Naylor. Either Busch or Morel play 3rd and the other is the DH. Bring Madrigal in the game late, for defense. If they discover neither could handle it during spring training they have to trade Morel. Either get someone who can play 3rd or just put Madrigal there and get the best young pitcher you can for Morel. Sign a pen arm and go into the season. 

There are other options like you mentioned, but Jed apparently doesn't want to trade and the Guardians probably won't trade a big part of their offense.

[We Got The Whole 9]

10 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I am beginning to think a short deal like the original Correa deal might be in play for Bellinger. Maybe 3/$80M with opt outs. Let him test the market again next year if he does well. But, couldn’t they do something like they did with Imanaga? Maybe $27M years 1-2 with them having the ability to turn it into a 7/$182 after year 2 and 3. Maybe if they don’t do that it goes to a 7/$161 automatically but Bellinger could opt out after year 2 and 3. Isn’t that similar to Imanaga? Unless Bellinger falls flat he gets 2 years and $54M and can reenter the FA pool at 30 without a QO attached. Worst case scenario for him is 7/$161. 

Based on what?

[CubinNY]

13 minutes ago, mul21 said:

I think there are entirely too many variables to render any kind of accurate opinion on that at this point.  Health (Stro vs Imanaga IP for instance), Steele coming off a career high IP, will Suzuki be the guy he was in the 2nd half all season, is Busch the vast improvement over the 1B amalgam we had last year, does Morel develop more, is Taillon more in line with expectations of when he signed.  I think that's a process you can go through at the end of the season and given a similar set of circumstances, I'll be surprised if this team (assuming a Bellinger signing happens) isn't 4-8 games better than last year.

I agree. It is an interesting issue though.

[Rcal10]

31 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

Based on what?

Based on Boras doing one of those in the past. Based on the apparent lack of interest at what Bellinger and Boras has set as what they want. Based on Bellinger is 28, so something similar to Correa’s first deal would make sense. Based on earlier mentions of this idea a few weeks back. FYI, I am fine if you don’t agree. As I stated, I am starting to think that way.. 

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, Rcal10 said:

I am beginning to think a short deal like the original Correa deal might be in play for Bellinger. Maybe 3/$80M with opt outs. Let him test the market again next year if he does well. But, couldn’t they do something like they did with Imanaga? Maybe $27M years 1-2 with them having the ability to turn it into a 7/$182 after year 2 and 3. Maybe if they don’t do that it goes to a 7/$161 automatically but Bellinger could opt out after year 2 and 3. Isn’t that similar to Imanaga? Unless Bellinger falls flat he gets 2 years and $54M and can reenter the FA pool at 30 without a QO attached. Worst case scenario for him is 7/$161. 

I feel like the guarantee will be lengthy enough like 6 years but with some opt outs.  Depends how confident Belli is I guess.

If I were a GM I'd like opt outs for longterm deals, it gives the players incentives to keep putting in max effort as opposed to possibly starting to coast a bit.

[Derwood]

With Hoskins off the table, all the Bellinger leverage goes to Boras/Belli, since it's pretty clear the Cubs need his bat

[Rob]

3 minutes ago, Derwood said:

With Hoskins off the table, all the Bellinger leverage goes to Boras/Belli, since it's pretty clear the Cubs need his bat

It's pretty clear the Cubs need a bat. It's less clear that Bellinger has one.

[Bertz]

6 minutes ago, Derwood said:

With Hoskins off the table, all the Bellinger leverage goes to Boras/Belli, since it's pretty clear the Cubs need his bat

Leverage is ultimately about alternatives.  Who are Bellinger's alternatives?

[We Got The Whole 9]

34 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Based on Boras doing one of those in the past. Based on the apparent lack of interest at what Bellinger and Boras has set as what they want. Based on Bellinger is 28, so something similar to Correa’s first deal would make sense. Based on earlier mentions of this idea a few weeks back. FYI, I am fine if you don’t agree. As I stated, I am starting to think that way.. 

Boras did that for a client that had 2 teams back out of 10 year deals due to health concerns, right? There's a lack of interest in giving him 8 years but it appears that he might have multiple 5-6 year offers. Reading the tea leaves - 6/150 is about the max teams are willing to go. I've gotten the impression that he has multiple offers in that range. i think if he had posted some 5-6 win seasons recently teams might capitulate with a short-term, high AAV, but even credited as a 4 win season, I'm not sure his case merits that, 

 

10 minutes ago, Derwood said:

With Hoskins off the table, all the Bellinger leverage goes to Boras/Belli, since it's pretty clear the Cubs need his bat

Hoskins was effectively off the table when they traded for Busch

[Rcal10]

30 minutes ago, Stratos said:

I feel like the guarantee will be lengthy enough like 6 years but with some opt outs.  Depends how confident Belli is I guess.

If I were a GM I'd like opt outs for longterm deals, it gives the players incentives to keep putting in max effort as opposed to possibly starting to coast a bit.

Aren’t most opt out player options? Why would a player agree to a team opt out option? Can you give an example of a contract that is long term that a team can opt out of? 

[Rcal10]

Just now, We Got The Whole 9 said:

Boras did that for a client that had 2 teams back out of 10 year deals due to health concerns, right? There's a lack of interest in giving him 8 years but it appears that he might have multiple 5-6 year offers. Reading the tea leaves - 6/150 is about the max teams are willing to go. I've gotten the impression that he has multiple offers in that range. i think if he had posted some 5-6 win seasons recently teams might capitulate with a short-term, high AAV, but even credited as a 4 win season, I'm not sure his case merits that, 

 

Hoskins was effectively off the table when they traded for Busch

Corre’a first contract, before the 22’ season was a 3 year deal with the Twins that he could opt out of in year 1 and 2. That is what a referencing. 

[Derwood]

6 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Leverage is ultimately about alternatives.  Who are Bellinger's alternatives?

Good question. Guess we'll see who blinks first

[CubinNY]

This will be like Dexter sneaking into Sloan Field on February 8th.

[Bertz]

Get comfortable 

 

[ToolDRT]

12 hours ago, Stratos said:

Jed's choice is to wait or give Boras exactly what he wants, which is almost certainly a pretty stupid contract.  Or sign a guy like Keirmeyer or Bader and just not try to get one of these Boras guys?  Which do you prefer? 

I prefer he doesn’t back himself into a corner where he’s down to Boras clients only. He needs to be proactive in trades, and needed to do a better job knocking items off his wishlist before he’s down to options 3 & 4.

[CubinNY]

9 minutes ago, ToolDRT said:

I prefer he doesn’t back himself into a corner where he’s down to Boras clients only. 

I don't understand, please explain?

[Tryptamine]

What are the realistic impact bat options at this point? Bellinger, JDM and who? Belt is a platoon guy and even JDM doesn't really make sense on this roster with Morel as DH>

[CubinNY]

12 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

What are the realistic impact bat options at this point? Bellinger, JDM and who? Belt is a platoon guy and even JDM doesn't really make sense on this roster with Morel as DH>

Trades. But I don't know if they fall into the realm of reality or wishcasting. 

[Rcal10]

33 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

What are the realistic impact bat options at this point? Bellinger, JDM and who? Belt is a platoon guy and even JDM doesn't really make sense on this roster with Morel as DH>

I would love to see JD Martinez in this team. He can still hit. But what do they do with Morel? Are there realistic 3rd base options worth trading him for? Is Burger a third baseman? Is that a fair trade with maybe something else added either way? How about Lowe? But can he even play 3rd base? Polanco is another guy, but can he play 3rd and the Twins would have to add more. There probably are a few others, but might get complicated. I feel Morel for Burger is the closest in fair value and team control. The issue is can Burger even play 3rd? I think Morel is the type of guy the Marlins seem to like. And maybe he can get an everyday job at 2nd for them. Things sure would  be simpler of Morel could play 3rd, but I am even out of hope on that idea. 

[Rcal10]

13 hours ago, Stratos said:

A good thing is that with just under 40m to spend we can be pretty darn confident that Jed at least wants one of the top 4 Boras players left, and probably Bellinger.  But we don't know if he'll get him.  Jed should be happy to get just market value for Bellinger from Boras, if he's looking for good value signing it's probably not happening.

If we are going to stick with the idea they won’t go over the first LT line they have closer to $32M to spend. They want to keep some for the trade deadline. I know you are still suggesting they won’t go over. But if they don’t they really don’t have much left to spend. 

[ToolDRT]

1 hour ago, CubinNY said:

I don't understand, please explain?

Sorry. What I meant was most people’s impression seems to be his remaining acquisitions will be Boras clients. And that Jed is playing this elaborate game of chicken with Scott Boras. Which, in my opinion, is an awful way to try and finish off your offseason. 

[Rcal10]

34 minutes ago, ToolDRT said:

Sorry. What I meant was most people’s impression seems to be his remaining acquisitions will be Boras clients. And that Jed is playing this elaborate game of chicken with Scott Boras. Which, in my opinion, is an awful way to try and finish off your offseason. 

But what should he do? Give in? Give Bellinger $250  for 10 years? We don’t really know if he is working on trades. But trades take a second team. So he might be waiting on Boras with Bellinger or even  Chapman, but in the meantime also trying to see if he can made a deal that will help the team. I doubt he is just sitting around waiting to hear back from Boras. In fact, I would guess one deal he did make, for Busch, eliminated any offer or thought of Hoskins. If Boras sticks to these numbers he is asking, there is literally nothing Jed can do to sign Bellinger or Chapman, except give in. And I wouldn’t want that. 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

If there's gonna be an FA reliever added that's not at the bottom of the pay scale, Stanek feels like the leader in the clubhouse.

[Tryptamine]

18 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

If there's gonna be an FA reliever added that's not at the bottom of the pay scale, Stanek feels like the leader in the clubhouse.

The problem is that he's not very good. 2022 was a complete mirage thanks to a 91.9 LOB%. 2023 was very mediocre, 2021 was solid and 2020 was a disaster. 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

1 minute ago, Tryptamine said:

The problem is that he's not very good. 2022 was a complete mirage thanks to a 91.9 LOB%. 2023 was very mediocre, 2021 was solid and 2020 was a disaster. 

He has a career 3.45 ERA in almost 350 IP as a reliever spread across a bunch of seasons.  He throws very hard and doesn't give up much hard contact, which explains him being a FIP-beater over his career.  He has not had the career of the late inning reliever of your dreams, but calling him not very good and finding the most pessimistic nit to pick at each season isn't telling the tale.  As with any reliever south of the top 5 or so RP in the game, they are unpredictable, prone to randomness, and what's most important is simply making sure you ultimately get it right.  Stanek has the components(and some precedent) to be a capable late inning option.