Cubs offseason chit chat...

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, gocubs218 said:

This account broke the Middleton signing before anyone else.

Do we know Chicago means the Cubs? Couldn’t it be the white Sox, if it is even true?

[muntjack]

Luzardo pls and ty.

[Post Count Padder]

This probably ends up being a minor trade but god I want Luzardo and Puk bad.

Here's a random thought, would Jed trade PCA as a result of signing Bellinger?

[Bobson Dugnutt]

17 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Do we know Chicago means the Cubs? Couldn’t it be the white Sox, if it is even true?

The tweet you quoted says Cubs.

[Backtobanks]

1 hour ago, Bertz said:

Yeah one of the Marlins lefty relievers, with Scott being the most likely, should probably be the assumption.

3 random trade proposals from MLBTV today:

Scott for Madrigal + Mervis

Scott + Meyer for Morel

Luzardo for Morel + Wesneski + Ballesteros + Mervis

[Rcal10]

4 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

3 random trade proposals from MLBTV today:

Scott for Madrigal + Mervis

Scott + Meyer for Morel

Luzardo for Morel + Wesneski + Ballesteros + Mervis

Not a fan of trading Morel without a bat coming back. But if they sign Bellinger and JD Martinez, I guess that would be work. I really doubt Luzardo. 

[Bertz]

If Jed adds Scott (or Puk), the bullpen is suddenly a real impact unit.

- You've got four guys you could comfortably ask to close a game on day one of the season in Adbert, Merryweather, Neris, and Scott.

- Strong matchup options against lefties (Leiter) and righties (Almonte)

- Righty (Assad) and lefty (Smyly) long relief options

- Two "stuff monsters" from each side down at Iowa (Palencia, Little)

- Two strong matchup options down at Iowa (Horn, Cuas)

- A fringe top 100 SP prospect who most people expect to end up an impact reliever, also at Iowa (Brown)

- The Manager generally considered to be the best in baseball at managing a pen

It's lacking a fire-breathing Hader/Diaz level super reliever (though Scott pitched like one last year) but otherwise that would be an extremely exciting group.

[Backtobanks]

2 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Not a fan of trading Morel without a bat coming back. But if they sign Bellinger and JD Martinez, I guess that would be work. I really doubt Luzardo. 

Yeah as reluctant as Jed has been about trading prospects, the third proposal is certainly the least likely to happen.  I would still like to swing a deal for Bell and Scott (and maybe Cabrera) using non-Morel prospects.

[Stratos]

How about prospect + Almonte for Nardi?

[SOFNR]

I wonder what Scott would cost. FA in 2025. Never was an elite reliever until last year. But elite he was. I'd be pretty excited about that bullpen if they can nab him.

[Irrelevant Dude]

4 hours ago, gocubs218 said:

Tanner Scott? 

I'm not buying it.  Why would they be talking "exclusively"? There is no reason at this point on the off-season for any one team to be talking exclusively with one other team.  That just doesn't make sense.

[LBiittner]

2 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

Not a fan of trading Morel without a bat coming back. But if they sign Bellinger and JD Martinez, I guess that would be work. I really doubt Luzardo. 

I want to dream big time. Is Morel/Wicks an over pay for Luzardo?

[ILMindState]

1 hour ago, Irrelevant Dude said:

I'm not buying it.  Why would they be talking "exclusively"? There is no reason at this point on the off-season for any one team to be talking exclusively with one other team.  That just doesn't make sense.

You don’t believe a Cardinals fan page has any inside Cubs info? The same team that hasn’t had any of their moves leaked all offseason? Why not???

[Backtobanks]

11 hours ago, LBiittner said:

I want to dream big time. Is Morel/Wicks an over pay for Luzardo?

Not even close according to MLBTV.  Morel/ Wicks gets you about 2/3 of the way to Luzardo.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

This is somewhat new from Hawkins, and I think it lends credence to the idea that 3B is going to be a matchup by committee.  Take this chart more seriously than literally, because I'm taking some shortcuts by dividing opposing P into velo or not(when there's nuance based on pitch type and where they work in the zone), but I think it's illustrative of how frequently there may be different faces at the position.

[thawv]

21 hours ago, Derwood said:

If Bellinger picks Anaheim over Chicago, it's purely a money move, not a "ready to win" move.

Anaheim is in perennial 78-win-purgatory

When he hired Boras, it was purley money

[Rob]

14 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

This is somewhat new from Hawkins, and I think it lends credence to the idea that 3B is going to be a matchup by committee.  Take this chart more seriously than literally, because I'm taking some shortcuts by dividing opposing P into velo or not(when there's nuance based on pitch type and where they work in the zone), but I think it's illustrative of how frequently there may be different faces at the position.

Yeah, I think we're likely to see a lot of different permutations and combinations. If done well, it could actually be a strength -- to the point that I've soured a bit on spending the money on Chapman (despite being higher on him than most around here).

[Backtobanks]

2 hours ago, thawv said:

When he hired Boras, it was purely money

You make that sound like a bad thing.  Why wouldn't a good player hire Boras with his track record.  You have a limited number of playing years in your career and you might as well get the most money you can.

[Irrelevant Dude]

22 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

You have a limited number of playing years in your career and you might as well get the most money you can.

I get that argument, but there's also how do want to spend your prime years?  Do you want to waste your talent while cashing a paycheck, or put yourself in a position to get the most enjoyment and satisfaction out of your career (while cashing a slightly smaller paycheck).  Ideally a player can have both, but that isn't always the case and I don't think maximizing money is the only factor.

[CubinNY]

21 minutes ago, Irrelevant Dude said:

I get that argument, but there's also how do want to spend your prime years?  Do you want to waste your talent while cashing a paycheck, or put yourself in a position to get the most enjoyment and satisfaction out of your career (while cashing a slightly smaller paycheck).  Ideally a player can have both, but that isn't always the case and I don't think maximizing money is the only factor.

Baseball is an individual sport played by multiple people at the same time. Although these guys are usually type A super competitive, they also want to make as much as they can for as long as they can. Most are not qualified to do anything else and know once their playing days are over, life begins. They all want to win, but it’s a job first. 

Edited February 3, 2024 by CubinNY

[Stratos]

22 minutes ago, Irrelevant Dude said:

I get that argument, but there's also how do want to spend your prime years?  Do you want to waste your talent while cashing a paycheck, or put yourself in a position to get the most enjoyment and satisfaction out of your career (while cashing a slightly smaller paycheck).  Ideally a player can have both, but that isn't always the case and I don't think maximizing money is the only factor.

And then there's Bryant and Baez playing on bad teams for the money.   How much you pay to be on a winning team?  Would you give up millions of dollars for it?

[Rob]

15 minutes ago, Stratos said:

And then there's Bryant and Baez playing on bad teams for the money.   How much you pay to be on a winning team?  Would you give up millions of dollars for it?

Maybe I just feel this way because I'm boring, but I can't imagine that I'd ever feel the difference between a $100M contract and a $105M contract.

I mean, sure, it's five million dollaredoos. But at a certain point, we've already eclipsed more money than I would ever spend in a lifetime. So I would definitely consider the smaller contract if it greatly increased my quality of life over the duration of the contract.

[Jfoley89]

38 minutes ago, Stratos said:

And then there's Bryant and Baez playing on bad teams for the money.   How much you pay to be on a winning team?  Would you give up millions of dollars for it?

I own a company that makes me a lot of money. There are absolutely contracts I turn down regularly for quality of life reasons, and I'm being paid closer to an arb player than a star.  

[ILMindState]

1 hour ago, Irrelevant Dude said:

I get that argument, but there's also how do want to spend your prime years?  Do you want to waste your talent while cashing a paycheck, or put yourself in a position to get the most enjoyment and satisfaction out of your career (while cashing a slightly smaller paycheck).  Ideally a player can have both, but that isn't always the case and I don't think maximizing money is the only factor.

He's already won every major award and a World Series. It's his chance at a huge pay day. Taking the most money at this stage in his career makes complete sense. If he signs with the Angels he can always sign on with a contender for another run at a WS once his contract ends. 

[Jason Ross]

1 hour ago, Rob said:

Maybe I just feel this way because I'm boring, but I can't imagine that I'd ever feel the difference between a $100M contract and a $105M contract.

I mean, sure, it's five million dollaredoos. But at a certain point, we've already eclipsed more money than I would ever spend in a lifetime. So I would definitely consider the smaller contract if it greatly increased my quality of life over the duration of the contract.

I think it has less to do with spending, or security, at a certain point and it becomes something else. I think Logan Paul is an absolute trash human being, but I caught a quote of his that I think speaks to the mindset. Basically, it was that money was a scoreboard for him. And I think that probably is a way that many athletes look at it, too. They're competitive. The $100m vs $110m? It's keeping score. It's winning. 

It helps me make sense as to why someone would be cool playing for a losing team. Because, maybe in their head,  they're not winning games but they're winning contracts over others. It's just a new game to win.