Article: Chicago Cubs Free Agent Target: Spencer Turnbull

[Matthew Trueblood]

One way or another, the Cubs are likely to add at least one starting pitcher before spring training. It would be best to add two, with one of them being an expensive but high-value addition to the front end and one being a depth option. Let's talk about one especially intriguing depth option.

Things did not end well between the Tigers and Spencer Turnbull. The 2014 second-rounder out of Alabama climbed through the Detroit farm system over the next few years, and was occasionally impressive for his first few years in MLB. Early in 2021, though, he seemed to have turned a corner. That May, he threw a no-hitter. He was emerging as a star. Then, Tommy John surgery ruined everything.

Turnbull missed the final four months of 2021 and all of 2022. In 2023, he made his return, but he was nowhere near as exciting or even as consistent as he had been before the injury. The team optioned him to the minors even though he claimed to be battling injuries to his neck and foot. After the season, Turnbull was vindicated, as the Tigers agreed to give him a full year of services time for 2023 despite having used the options to send him down. 

That was just a parting gift from Detroit, though. They non-tendered Turnbull, who is now a free agent a year (or two, had the service time not been restored to him) earlier than expected. Free agency won't be a lucrative exercise for him, at least this time, but he's on the market. The Cubs could swoop down and scoop him up as a swingman or sixth starter, and give him the season to rehabilitate his value. 

Obviously, if his sole interest is rebuilding that value and trying to hit free agency next year as a much-sought-after star with multi-year offers, Turnbull might prefer a team with less pitching depth than the Cubs have. If the Cubs can sell him on the value of their pitching instruction and development group, though, they might gain a leg up. There's plenty with which to work, and Turnbull does have untapped upside if someone can help him sort some things out.

What Turnbull's arsenal looks like depends a little on whom you ask. Both Baseball Savant and Brooks Baseball show him making use of a slider, a sinker, a changeup, and a curveball, but his most-used pitch is listed as a four-seam fastball at Savant and as a cutter at Brooks. That's an important distinction, not only to projecting his performance but to understanding his recent struggles.

Whatever you call that 93-mile-per-hour offering that fronts Turnbull's repertoire, he throws it with extreme cutting action (it would be 96th-percentile cut) and extremely heavy vertical movement (97th percentile) for a four-seamer. For a cutter, though, it's extreme in its lack of glove-side movement, and has more rising action than the average. Here's what his overall movement profile looked like in 2023.

Turnbull's big problem is that, coming from a relatively low arm slot but opening up to an extreme extent with his stride toward the plate, he leaves the ball on the wrong side of the plate for his stuff on far too regular a basis. His primary offering really makes more sense as a cutter, especially in tandem with the rest of his stuff, but it ends up on the arm side of the plate as often as not.

One reading of that location map could be, "Well, that's a four-seamer, then. It's just a four-seamer he throws at the top of the zone to chase whiffs." That almost works, but here are the locations of his slider in 2023.

Again, this is largely a mechanical problem. Turnbull's open stride and arm slot combine to cause a lot of pitches released a hair too soon, missing arm-side. That's true for all his stuff, but especially the stuff that needs to be moving to the glove side instead. At this stage of a player's career, it's not as simple as pointing that out to him and expecting an instantaneous, effective change, but the fix here is not overwhelmingly complex.

If Turnbull does make that fairly major adjustment, everything else might fall into place. If he could command the cutter to the glove side, his heavy sinker would become much more of a weapon, and he'd still be able to change eye levels against right-handed batters thanks to the depth on his slider.

Against lefties, he was very reliant on the cutter/fastball in 2023, because his breaking stuff didn't work at all against them with the locations of his various offerings. A tweak to his delivery or position on the mound could effect a huge change against opposite-handed hitters. 

He'd probably only be interested in a one-year deal, because his value is pretty low at the moment. If the Cubs worked out such a pact with him, though, Turnbull could be a compelling complement to Hayden Wesneski and Javier Assad--or, should either of them be traded this winter as the team addresses other needs, a smart replacement for them.

What do you think of Turnbull as an under-the-radar target for the Cubs? Who else are you keeping an eye on as a low-risk, high-reward guy?

View full article

[Bertz]

Is he optionable?  I get fuzzy on how that works with guys who've been non-tendered.  I think they can refuse the assignment?  And while he was bad last year he's probably too good for a minor league deal?

Mostly I see no reason to shop in this end of the market.  If we acquire a SP it needs to be someone you'd prefer to Assad/Wesneski and if we acquire a RP it needs to be someone you prefer to Little/Palencia. 

A deal that really guts our MLB-ready depth could change the calculus, but with Soto off the table not sure I foresee one of those.  Cleveland and Seattle would primarily want bats from us.  Glasnow would probably cost an MLB arm but not multiple.  Maybe over the course of multiple deals we get there.

IMO the worst thing Jed could do this winter is acquire dudes who are just sort of there (e.g. Brad Boxberger).  I want pitchers who we have a high degree of confidence in on a per-inning basis or guys who can be stashed at Iowa.  Injury risks are fine.  I love Glasnow, I'm down with James Paxton, etc.  They're either producing or not on the roster.  

[Matthew Trueblood]

31 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Is he optionable?  I get fuzzy on how that works with guys who've been non-tendered.  I think they can refuse the assignment?  And while he was bad last year he's probably too good for a minor league deal?

Mostly I see no reason to shop in this end of the market.  If we acquire a SP it needs to be someone you'd prefer to Assad/Wesneski and if we acquire a RP it needs to be someone you prefer to Little/Palencia. 

A deal that really guts our MLB-ready depth could change the calculus, but with Soto off the table not sure I foresee one of those.  Cleveland and Seattle would primarily want bats from us.  Glasnow would probably cost an MLB arm but not multiple.  Maybe over the course of multiple deals we get there.

IMO the worst thing Jed could do this winter is acquire dudes who are just sort of there (e.g. Brad Boxberger).  I want pitchers who we have a high degree of confidence in on a per-inning basis or guys who can be stashed at Iowa.  Injury risks are fine.  I love Glasnow, I'm down with James Paxton, etc.  They're either producing or not on the roster.  

I hear you on that, but I don't think a move like this one would come with much financial or opportunity cost. He's not optionable, though, to answer that question. Once Detroit agreed to grant that full year of ST, he rose above 5 years, which automatically removes options. (For future reference, yes, non-tendered players still carry their options to new destinations. If they still have them, they can be optioned after signing with a new team. Obviously, it's relatively rare that a non-tendered player still has options, but in cases where they do, that action doesn't pulverize them.)

[Jason Ross]

I don't think the Spencer Turnbulls of the world are bad, but I don't think the Cubs have much to offer someone like Turnbull, either. If you're Spencer Turnbull, you're likely looking for an MLB opportunity to rebuild your career. You're might not get a guarantee to start, but you'd like a pathway. The Cubs don't need to be giving Turnbull's a chance at this stage. We're past the "maybe if we can fix this guy, we can use this guy" stage, IMO. This is a team who, after missing out on Ohtani, will likely still need to win on the margins. Not desperately, but it's not going to be a juggernaut. We have multiple arms I'd far rather see start games. We have other arms who will be useful in the bullpen. It's time to leave the rebuild well in the past and make sure innings are going to arms you trust more.

In 2021, I'd say that the Cubs would be a decent bet to take a Turnbull, find something there, and flip him at the deadline as a useful bottom rotational arm for a contending team who was wracked with injuries. Maybe a Washington National type team does that for Turnbull and in July, the Cubs are wracked with injury and we'd like him then. But as of now, while I don't think he'd be an awful player to gamble on for a team, I just don't see the Cubs being able to offer him anything. He's the kind of guy who can probably offer some rebuilding team something, but as a contending team who's less than a juggernaut, probably is too much of a risk to give him much of a chance.

Edited December 11, 2023 by 1908_Cubs

[Matthew Trueblood]

54 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I don't think the Spencer Turnbulls of the world are bad, but I don't think the Cubs have much to offer someone like Turnbull, either. If you're Spencer Turnbull, you're likely looking for an MLB opportunity to rebuild your career. You're might not get a guarantee to start, but you'd like a pathway. The Cubs don't need to be giving Turnbull's a chance at this stage. We're past the "maybe if we can fix this guy, we can use this guy" stage, IMO. This is a team who, after missing out on Ohtani, will likely still need to win on the margins. Not desperately, but it's not going to be a juggernaut. We have multiple arms I'd far rather see start games. We have other arms who will be useful in the bullpen. It's time to leave the rebuild well in the past and make sure innings are going to arms you trust more.

In 2021, I'd say that the Cubs would be a decent bet to take a Turnbull, find something there, and flip him at the deadline as a useful bottom rotational arm for a contending team who was wracked with injuries. Maybe a Washington National type team does that for Turnbull and in July, the Cubs are wracked with injury and we'd like him then. But as of now, while I don't think he'd be an awful player to gamble on for a team, I just don't see the Cubs being able to offer him anything. He's the kind of guy who can probably offer some rebuilding team something, but as a contending team who's less than a juggernaut, probably is too much of a risk to give him much of a chance.

This is a widely-held opinion, and it comes from the right mental place. But I would counter with: you're *never* out of the "find a guy and fix him" business, if you're a smart team. The Dodgers and Rays and Astros still find and fix guys just about every year. It's the kind of thing you keep doing even while also spending big to upgrade the top of the roster.

Your other point--that there might not be much opportunity for Turnbull with the Cubs--is a good one, but it depends, right? A trade could change that. Using a six-man rotation could change that. 

[Jason Ross]

20 minutes ago, Matt Trueblood said:

This is a widely-held opinion, and it comes from the right mental place. But I would counter with: you're *never* out of the "find a guy and fix him" business, if you're a smart team. The Dodgers and Rays and Astros still find and fix guys just about every year. It's the kind of thing you keep doing even while also spending big to upgrade the top of the roster.

Your other point--that there might not be much opportunity for Turnbull with the Cubs--is a good one, but it depends, right? A trade could change that. Using a six-man rotation could change that. 

To counterpoint the first end: teams like the Dodgers and the Astros do so because they're not attempting to win on the margins. The Dodgers can try an Andrew Heaney or an Alex Wood every year because even with those players, they're going to win 93-95 games. Come the playoff time, they bin these guys if they suck, or replace them mid-season with a purchase. Teams like the Rays do so out of pure necessity; they can't not try to fix people. The Cubs are in a goldlilocks zone right now of not being good enough to throw innings or PA's away while not being so incapable of spending that they have an excuse not to find better. If the Cubs were a hands down 90+ win team, I'd be far more amenable to the Cubs playing and tinkering with guys who offer useful profiles if they can work magic. Currently, the Cubs look like they'll probably enter next season in that 85-88 win territory. Good enough to be paper divisional champions, but not so good they have innings to just throw away.

While I think a trade could change the equation, I'm not sure they're going to ever to a stage where it's so drastic they have innings for Turnbull. Currently, the Cubs have: Steele, Hendricks, Taillon, Wicks, Smyly, Asad and Wesneski who are likely to make starts in 2024. They'll likely add at least one SP, and maybe two raising that number to 8 or 9. It's a forgone conclusion barring injury that Cade Horton will likely vault into that group by June. Even with a trade where the Cubs lose two of those, Spencer Turnbull is, what, 8th or 9th in line? For someone who wants to resurrect his career, that's not good odds when someone like, Oakland will probably put you 6th in line or so. For the Cubs, you still remain in a situation where you're so very unlikely to use him. 

Another year, another Cubs team and I think Spencer Turnbull, as explained by yourself, offers an interesting amount of data that suggests with work, tweaks, and changes (don't want to discount that. This is good stuff, Matt!), there's a useful MLB arm. I just think the Cubs aren't either bad or good enough for this to be the best place for him to do that. So really all I disagree with is the "Cub" part. 

Edited December 11, 2023 by 1908_Cubs

[CubinNY]

8 minutes ago, Matt Trueblood said:

This is a widely-held opinion, and it comes from the right mental place. But I would counter with: you're *never* out of the "find a guy and fix him" business, if you're a smart team. The Dodgers and Rays and Astros still find and fix guys just about every year. It's the kind of thing you keep doing even while also spending big to upgrade the top of the roster.

Your other point--that there might not be much opportunity for Turnbull with the Cubs--is a good one, but it depends, right? A trade could change that. Using a six-man rotation could change that. 

what guys have the Dodges, Rays, or Astros found and fixed? lol

[Matthew Trueblood]

50 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

what guys have the Dodges, Rays, or Astros found and fixed? lol

Not sure if you're serious. I think not? But to be safe, let's rattle off a non-exhaustive list, so everyone has a sense of just how big a payoff there is for speculating in this kind of market when you have a good dev staff in place.

Jeffrey Springs.

Robert Stephenson.

Evan Phillips.

Max Muncy.

Isaac Paredes.

Tyler Glasnow.

Chris Taylor.

Ryan Pressly.

Marwin Gonzalez.

Tyler Anderson.

Randy Arozarena.

[CubinNY]

14 minutes ago, Matt Trueblood said:

Not sure if you're serious. I think not? But to be safe, let's rattle off a non-exhaustive list, so everyone has a sense of just how big a payoff there is for speculating in this kind of market when you have a good dev staff in place.

Jeffrey Springs.

Robert Stephenson.

Evan Phillips.

Max Muncy.

Isaac Paredes.

Tyler Glasnow.

Chris Taylor.

Ryan Pressly.

Marwin Gonzalez.

Tyler Anderson.

Randy Arozarena.

None of those names were reclamation projects. Maybe Muncy. But some guys figure it out later. The point is that stacked teams can take a gamble. Lol, Arozarena was one of the top prospects with the Cardinals before he was traded for one of the top pitching prospects in the minors at the time. Were any of those guys Rule 5 pickups? 

The idea that smart organizations find diamonds in the rough and are able to develop them is not born out by the facts. 

Edited December 11, 2023 by CubinNY

[mul21]

Justin Turner

[Bertz]

41 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

The idea that smart organizations find diamonds in the rough and are able to develop them is not born out by the facts.

lol.  Lmao even

[Transmogrified Tiger]

To go back to Turnbull, I would categorize him as such:

• You will always  need more pitching than you think, so even without a super clear path I don't have a viscerally negative reaction to Turnbull
• To steal Bertz's framing, I don't think he jumps in ahead of Assad/Wesneski in the pecking order, so he can't be considered one of the primary offseason additions
• Because of that though, to steal 1908's framing I'm not sure the Cubs can win the race for Turnbull's services without coming in over the top financially
• And if paying Turnbull real money is a necessity for him being that depth, I don't think he's worth that expense if it jeopardizes more immediate needs.  And if I were paying real money to that type of depth option, I think I'd probably go the extra step up and try for a rehabbing SP with more promise(Woodruff, Mahle, etc)

[Matthew Trueblood]

4 hours ago, CubinNY said:

None of those names were reclamation projects. Maybe Muncy. But some guys figure it out later. The point is that stacked teams can take a gamble. Lol, Arozarena was one of the top prospects with the Cardinals before he was traded for one of the top pitching prospects in the minors at the time. Were any of those guys Rule 5 pickups? 

The idea that smart organizations find diamonds in the rough and are able to develop them is not born out by the facts. 

Dude.