Article: What Did Jed Hoyer Mean By That?

[Josh Illes]

Cubs President of Baseball Operations Jed Hoyer let loose--kind of. During Cubs Convention, Hoyer had some interesting things to say about the current state of the ballclub. One remark really stood out to me, and I figured, why not get to the bottom of it?

Image courtesy of © Charles LeClaire-USA TODAY Sports

Call him Chef Hoyer-dee, because he is cooking. Wait... no, don’t actually call him that. It’s weird. Just let him cook. After a bevy of activity (by Cubs standards anyway) over the past week, Hoyer admitted during Cubs Convention on Friday night that the team is “in the fourth or fifth inning of our offseason.” It’s a good line, and if it came from anyone other than the very secretive Hoyer, I might be willing to dismiss it as just that--a fun thing to say at a fun event. But when it comes to putting information out there, Hoyer rarely admits anything publicly that he doesn’t want out there. Add in the fact that Craig Counsell referenced that line during his stage time at the convention on Saturday, and I think we should look at it as something of a reference point, and try to figure out what it means.

First of all, there is a pretty big difference between being in the fourth inning or being in the fifth inning. Being in the fourth means that we’ve only completed a third of the game, whereas being in the fifth means that the argument could be made that the game is half over. Big difference, right? This is part of the reason why I believe that Hoyer used this exact phrase: it leaves some leeway if some things don’t go the way he hopes they might go. If he only makes, say, one more signing and one or two more minor trades, he could argue that’s enough to constitute finishing the analogous nine innings. My guess is that he’s wanting to do more than that, though, and therein lies the disparity.

The First Three (or Four) Innings
I think we should approach this quite literally, and try to do so by looking at it from Hoyer’s point of view. What do we think he considers to be the moves made so far--inning by inning, as it were?

1st inning: The firing of David Ross and the hiring of Craig Counsell
The first move was not player-related. Some would argue it was bigger than that. I may or may not have argued that before Saturday, but I think I would definitely argue it now, after hearing Counsell field a question about bunting and answer it expertly, saying that history shows that he doesn't like to bunt, mainly because bunting is harder than people think. “We love the word 'sacrifice' and we all want to sacrifice for the team, that’s true, but if the sacrifice isn’t successful, it doesn’t help the team,” Counsell explained. He went on to note that one possible exception for this year’s team may come in the form of Pete Crow-Armstrong, explaining that he is fast and left-handed, two key priorities for even being considered to lay down a bunt. Honestly, my favorite part of that little tidbit is that it shows that Counsell has been thinking about how to properly use PCA, so he’s already done more with him than Ross ever did. But I digress…

2nd inning: The Signing of Shota Imanaga
The arrival of The Pitching Philosopher. If you missed his introduction, you should check it out. Imanaga is already a fan favorite after this epic start to his Cubs career:

 

To read up some more on Imanaga, check out some of the great work done by Matt Trueblood right here on North Side Baseball:

NEWS: Cubs Sign Starting Pitcher Shota Imanaga - Cubs - North Side Baseball

Shota Imanaga Cubs Deal Will Include Club Options, Opt-Outs, Incentives - Cubs - North Side Baseball

Bottom line, I think we are all very excited to see how Imanaga will use his imaginative approach to pitching to benefit the Cubs rotation. Whether he fits in as the second or third arm there, he makes the unit better, overall.

3rd inning: The Trade with the Dodgers for Michael Busch and Yency Almonte
If we want to read Jed’s comment extremely literally, we may say that this move involves acquiring two players, and therefore, each one represents a separate inning. But maybe the deal itself represents one inning. Maybe Jed isn’t sure, and that’s why he doesn’t know if he’s in the fourth inning or the fifth. It remains a mystery. The trade itself, though, is less mysterious. The Cubs traded away two promising 19-year-olds, in Jackson Ferris and Zyhir Hope, for two major league-ready players in Busch and Almonte. This trade makes perfect sense for both teams, as the Dodgers needed to make room on their 40-man roster, and the Cubs needed to add better players to their 40-man roster.

The acquisition of Busch is one of the more intriguing trades that the Cubs have made in years. He just isn’t the type of player that is typically available: a major league-ready talent who has somewhat aged out in the minor leagues, because there was simply nowhere for the Dodgers to play him. That scenario doesn’t occur very often, if ever. One other thing of note when it comes to Busch is that my belief is that his addition precludes the Cubs from signing Rhys Hoskins at this point. I think there was a need for a first baseman or designated hitter type that Hoskins would have filled, but they filled that need with Busch, instead. 

For more on Busch, I would again invite you to read some of the great work done on this site in recent days.

This piece by Randy Holt, on Busch’s defensive value and limitations, is excellent: 

The Defensive Past, Present, and Future of Michael Busch - Cubs - North Side Baseball

And this article by Jason Ross really gets down to the nitty-gritty on what makes Busch such a good hitter:

What to Expect from Michael Busch at the Plate - Cubs - North Side Baseball

Almonte is a nice addition to the bullpen, a 29-year-old righty with over 200 innings of big-league work, including some postseason experience in 2022. The Cubs needed some bullpen depth, and Almonte fits the bill nicely.

4th-9th Innings: What Should We Expect?
Technically, again, we may be in the fifth inning, but I don’t want to seem tedious so I won't go there again. Let’s explore what the Cubs could do from here on out.

Sign Cody Bellinger
It remains priority one. He was arguably the biggest topic of conversation at Cubs Con, being referenced by Hoyer, Dansby Swanson, Bruce Levine, and roughly a billion or so convention-goers. At this point, it would be shocking to me if the Cubs were to allow Bellinger to sign elsewhere. It reminds me a lot of early 2016, when Cubs fans were clamoring for Dexter Fowler to be re-signed. Ultimately, the team agreed, and a one-year deal got done. The big difference with Bellinger is that this will not be a one-year deal.

Signing Bellinger gets us to the fifth inning, with a really good idea of what the Cubs still need. They would have added two left-handed bats to the lineup in him and Busch--something they desperately needed to do. Both of them can also play first base, another need. Busch is also potentially a third baseman, while Bellinger is also a center fielder, two more positions where they entered the offseason with huge uncertainty. A lot of needs met, basically, but also a decent amount of remaining doubt. We don’t know if Busch can thrive at the major-league level. We don’t know if Christopher Morel or Busch can play the hot corner well enough to stick there. We don’t know if PCA will be ready. On the pitching side, we don’t know if Justin Steele is a true ace. We don’t know who the fifth (and/or sixth) starter will be. We don’t know if Adbert Alzolay is a lockdown closer. Even if he is, we don’t know if anyone else can step up to fill the eighth-inning role.

Let’s look at these last four (or five) moves through two different lenses. In the first case, let’s pretend the Cubs stay pretty conservative, and just do what they need to do to get to spring training. In the second, let’s get a little wild and dream a bit about what they could do if they decide it’s time to throw caution to the wind.

Conservative Approach

• Sign an affordable free-agent left-handed reliever
• Sign or trade for an experienced third baseman/utility player
• Sign or trade for an under-the-radar high-end reliever
• Trade some prospect depth for a quality swing starter

While this isn’t necessarily the bare minimum, it’s pretty close. If they were to do all of these moves, including Bellinger, they’d go into 2024 in much better shape than they left 2023. At the end of the day, that is important.

WILD Approach

• Sign Josh Hader
• Trade for Pete Alonso
• Trade for Dylan Cease
• Sign Matt Chapman
• Trade for Shane Bieber and Emmanuel Clase

What? I made it very clear I was going to throw caution to the wind. To be very, very clear though, I do not think the Cubs should do all of this. I don’t think anyone reading this thinks they should, either. But it’s interesting to realize that they probably could do this, if they wanted to completely gut their farm system and just go for it. They can afford Hader. They can afford Chapman. Those are the easy parts of this crazy scenario. The more difficult thing would be the trades. Alonso and Bieber are entering their walk years. Cease and Clase have been mentioned in plenty of trade rumors. They are all technically available, but at what cost? In no particular order, it would probably mean parting with most of the following players: PCA, Morel, Cade Horton, Owen Caissie, and Kevin Alcantara. I’m sorry but… no. 

So what do I think will happen? I think it will be something closer to the conservative approach, but with some caution thrown in. I don’t think they will trade for Cease, but I think they may trade for Bieber. If they think the price tag for Bieber is too high, they may choose to wait until closer to the trade deadline and add a starter then. I’ve also noticed the rumors surrounding the Cubs and Jordan Montgomery haven't really abated since the signing of Imanaga, so there may be some smoke there. I don’t think they will sign Chapman, for reasons I’ve outlined in the past. The potential of Morel, Shaw, and now Busch are high enough that adding someone to block all three of them just doesn’t make sense to me. I still think there is a chance they sign Hader, just due to Counsell’s familiarity with him. The interesting thing left here is the potential to trade for Alonso. To me, that’s the “all-in” move that actually makes sense. It would cost a lot to get him: maybe Alcantara, maybe Caissie, maybe more than either of them alone. That price is obviously steep for a one-year rental, but Alonso in this lineup really works. He would bring more power to a lineup that desperately needs more power. It would allow Bellinger to play center field until PCA is ready. It would give them a very robust batting order that would look something like this:

1. Nico Hoerner, 2B (R)
2. Ian Happ, LF (S)
3. Cody Bellinger, CF (L)
4. Pete Alonso, 1B (R)
5. Seiya Suzuki, RF (R)
6. Dansby Swanson, SS (R)
7. Christopher Morel, 3B (R)
8. Michael Busch, DH (L)
9. Yan Gomes, C (R)

Not bad, right? I could definitely talk myself into that lineup (with a strong pitching staff) being a contender this season. But I could also talk myself into holding onto most of these prospects until the team is slightly closer to contention for a World Series. Either way, I look forward to the next four or five innings of the offseason, and I also look forward to myself remaining as tedious as ever.

What do you think, though? How would you like to see Jed finish out this offseason?

View full article

[Bertz]

I expect something close to the conservative approach you laid out.  I do think there's maybe a chance of that 2nd non-Bellinger bat being more exciting than we expect?

I also think, aside from that high end reliever, any addition pitching reinforcements are going to have to be minor league optionable.  Like there's a certain point where the roster spot is more valuable than the player, and I think after that high end guy we're there on the pitching staff.  Like do we really need another dedicated veteran swingman when we have Smyly and Assad already ticketed for the pen?  Would a LOOGY like e.g. Brad Hand really be worth the roster spot, or would he just be in the way like Brad Boxberger was last year? 

[Rcal10]

If they went lefty in the pen, besides Hader there is Chapman and Moore. Would either of those be a good edition? I know Chapman isn’t what he used to be but he was still throwing 99 last year. Moore is just pretty solid all the way around. Is Hand available? 

[Maddux31]

I think pitching is still the priority. If you look at the Fangraphs projections, they are not high on the Cubs staff. So I would like to see them go out of their comfort zone and sign Montgomery.

In addition to that, I think they can trade for a quality reliever without doing significant damage to the farm system, though the longer you hold on to guys who are mostly blocked anyway, the less sense it makes to me.

The Cubs are 6-7 WAR behind the Cardinals, so I think those moves would put them on a par with St. Louis. This also leaves plenty of flexibility for in-season moves and puts them in good position to add a huge bat next offseason.

Bellinger is a huge risk, but if his price falls to the point where he could be had for 5/120 or something like that, I would pull the trigger on that. But buyer beware.

[Rcal10]

16 minutes ago, Maddux31 said:

I think pitching is still the priority. If you look at the Fangraphs projections, they are not high on the Cubs staff. So I would like to see them go out of their comfort zone and sign Montgomery.

In addition to that, I think they can trade for a quality reliever without doing significant damage to the farm system, though the longer you hold on to guys who are mostly blocked anyway, the less sense it makes to me.

The Cubs are 6-7 WAR behind the Cardinals, so I think those moves would put them on a par with St. Louis. This also leaves plenty of flexibility for in-season moves and puts them in good position to add a huge bat next offseason.

Bellinger is a huge risk, but if his price falls to the point where he could be had for 5/120 or something like that, I would pull the trigger on that. But buyer beware.

I don’t think the Cubs are 6-7 WAR behind the Cardinals. I wouldn’t mind another starter, but they have pretty much said that isn’t happening. I expect a couple bats and a pen arm and wrap up the off season. 

[Guest234]

Please show your work that the Cardinals are 6-7 WAR ahead of the Cubs.

[Stratos]

I'd like a solid lefty and righty in the pen that can handle late inning work, another corner INF LHB, a run at Bellinger (they can load it with opt outs), and invite some relievers to ST on minor league deals.  I don't expect much else.

[Rcal10]

6 hours ago, Stratos said:

I'd like a solid lefty and righty in the pen that can handle late inning work, another corner INF LHB, a run at Bellinger (they can load it with opt outs), and invite some relievers to ST on minor league deals.  I don't expect much else.

Aside from that second pen arm you want, you pretty much summed up what I want and expect the Cubs will have. 

[Joj]

I think you're reading too much into that comment.  He was simply trying to excuse their inactivity and avoid scrutiny during a fan event.

 

That said, Bellinger is required.  Everyone knows it.  And it won't even be that big of a deal, honestly, because that merely gets them back to last year's offense.  Which already needed improvement.

 

They need to sign Josh Hader.  That will actually start moving the needle.

 

Morel isn't a quality starter.  Until he actually does it, Busch isn't either.  Mervis has just as good of a shot, similar numbers.

[squally1313]

20 hours ago, Joj said:

I think you're reading too much into that comment.  He was simply trying to excuse their inactivity and avoid scrutiny during a fan event.

 

That said, Bellinger is required.  Everyone knows it.  And it won't even be that big of a deal, honestly, because that merely gets them back to last year's offense.  Which already needed improvement.

 

They need to sign Josh Hader.  That will actually start moving the needle.

 

Morel isn't a quality starter.  Until he actually does it, Busch isn't either.  Mervis has just as good of a shot, similar numbers.

There are a lot of ways to figure out improvement, and the idea that nothing matters until we get to this 'baseline' of last season is a flawed way of thinking. First off, we were 9th in offensive fWAR last year. We won 83 games and underperformed according to most metrics. Second, there's built in improvement just by not giving Mancini, Hosmer, and 2023 Mervis like 400 PAs at a premium offensive position. The theoretical step down from Bellinger to PCA isn't 'whatever Bellinger did last year'. Etc etc

A single bullpen pitcher, all 50-60 innings of him, does not move any needle significantly.

Mervis and Busch threw up pretty much identical MLB lines in 80-100 PAs last year. However, in 440-460 AAA PAs:

• AAA Busch: .323/.431/.618, 13.9% BB, 18.8% K
• AAA Mervis: .282/.399/.533, 15.2% BB, 22.7% K

Those are not the same hitters. Busch might be an even better AAAA guy, and I'm not super thrilled about the idea of just handing him the first base job when someone like Hoskins is sitting out there. But there's more support for Busch being a better hitter than Mervis. 

[Joj]

3 hours ago, squally1313 said:

we were 9th in offensive fWAR last year. We won 83 games and underperformed according to most metrics. Second, there's built in improvement just by not giving Mancini, Hosmer, and 2023 Mervis like 400 PAs at a premium offensive position.

Sure, for this to work you'd have to bank on their 2024 replacement(s) to be good.  Will Busch be good?  PCA?  Belli?  Probably.  Maybe.  But so were those 3 last season.  These theoretical steps cut all ways.

Last year's team was certainly an overperformer.  At this time last year there weren't great expectations.  The offense definitely surprised many in the first half of the season but there were obvious improvements to be made.  It was a young team who started showing enough promise to force a GM into action.  For which, we're still waiting (sorry, Jeimer).  And that was with a resurgent, absolute monster Bellinger performance that almost nobody was predicting.  This was never really a, "yeah, we're ready, let's go with it" situation.  UPGRADES are needed.  And meaningful ones.  We've always known this.

 

Quote

A single bullpen pitcher, all 50-60 innings of him, does not move any needle significantly.

Just to be clear, we're talking about Josh Hader.  A single BP pitcher?  Or one of the best CP in the game.  Argue honestly.  Josh Hader moves the needle.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/haderjo01.shtml

 

Quote

Mervis and Busch threw up pretty much identical MLB lines in 80-100 PAs last year.

Yep.

 

2023 MLB
Busch  - 81 PA,  9-2-7,    .167/.247/.292
Mervis - 99 PA, 8-3-11,   .167/.242/.289

2023 Minors
Busch  - 469 PA, 85-27-90,  .323/.431/.618  (.274 in 2022)
Mervis - 441 PA, 77-22-78,  .282/.399/.533  (.309 in 2022)

 

Busch had the better overall year but the ratios are very similar.  Increase Mervis' overall production slightly and everything is a carbon copy.  By the way, Busch's .323 is the highest of his career.  He hit .270 over the previous 2 seasons.

The more you dig in, the comparison is actually kind of amazing...

Career Minors
Busch  - 1640 PA, 292-79-267, .283/.390/.529 (4 seasons)
Mervis - 1322 PA, 209-67-241, .277/.370/.528 (3 seasons)

 

Pretty dang close.  Eerily similar approach and production.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=mervis000mat

https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=busch-002mic

[pitchcs]

I think all that matters is the Cubs don't think Mervis and Busch are all that close

[Joj]

4 minutes ago, pitchcs said:

I think all that matters is the Cubs don't think Mervis and Busch are all that close

How do you know that?

[mul21]

3 minutes ago, Joj said:

How do you know that?

Because they just traded for one and called up Jared Young instead of the other late last season.  They've made it fairly obvious.

[Joj]

Just now, mul21 said:

Because they just traded for one and called up Jared Young instead of the other late last season.  They've made it fairly obvious.

Whatever.  He got a shot and they sent him back down.  Busch did the same thing last season.  Almost every player does.

What's more likely is that they haven't completely given up on Mervis based on 90 PA's and instead are bolstering an inherently unpredictable situation.  While saving money by not adding an actual, established major leaguer.  2 are better than one.  etc.

[mul21]

Just now, Joj said:

Whatever.  He got a shot and they sent him back down.  Busch did the same thing last season.  Almost every player does.

What's more likely is that they haven't completely given up on Mervis based on 90 PA's and instead are bolstering an inherently unpredictable situation.  While saving money by not adding an actual, established major leaguer.  2 are better than one.  etc.

That's not what happened at all and the only reason Busch is here is because he's blocked by proven ML guys at every position with the Dodgers and is clearly being assigned 1B by Hoyer as he stated at the convention last weekend.  If you don't see it, you're intentionally ignoring the signs.

[Joj]

Just now, mul21 said:

That's not what happened at all and the only reason Busch is here is because he's blocked by proven ML guys at every position with the Dodgers and is clearly being assigned 1B by Hoyer as he stated at the convention last weekend.  If you don't see it, you're intentionally ignoring the signs.

Oh, it's exactly what happened.  Prospects get shots.  They usually fail and get another shot later.  With prospects, more equals better odds.  Just look at the minor league numbers.  Busch and Mervis are basically the same guy.

[Bertz]

Why would they trade a guy they gave 1st round money to and had a phenomenal first season in the minors for Busch if they thought him and Mervis were more or less equivalent?

Like people outside the org can make that argument sure, and maybe it's even correct, but it's completely clear the Cubs don't feel that way.

[Jason Ross]

51 minutes ago, Joj said:

Sure, for this to work you'd have to bank on their 2024 replacement(s) to be good.  Will Busch be good?  PCA?  Belli?  Probably.  Maybe.  But so were those 3 last season.  These theoretical steps cut all ways.

Last year's team was certainly an overperformer.  At this time last year there weren't great expectations.  The offense definitely surprised many in the first half of the season but there were obvious improvements to be made.  It was a young team who started showing enough promise to force a GM into action.  For which, we're still waiting (sorry, Jeimer).  And that was with a resurgent, absolute monster Bellinger performance that almost nobody was predicting.  This was never really a, "yeah, we're ready, let's go with it" situation.  UPGRADES are needed.  And meaningful ones.  We've always known this.

 

Just to be clear, we're talking about Josh Hader.  A single BP pitcher?  Or one of the best CP in the game.  Argue honestly.  Josh Hader moves the needle.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/haderjo01.shtml

 

Yep.

 

2023 MLB
Busch  - 81 PA,  9-2-7,    .167/.247/.292
Mervis - 99 PA, 8-3-11,   .167/.242/.289

2023 Minors
Busch  - 469 PA, 85-27-90,  .323/.431/.618  (.274 in 2022)
Mervis - 441 PA, 77-22-78,  .282/.399/.533  (.309 in 2022)

 

Busch had the better overall year but the ratios are very similar.  Increase Mervis' overall production slightly and everything is a carbon copy.  By the way, Busch's .323 is the highest of his career.  He hit .270 over the previous 2 seasons.

The more you dig in, the comparison is actually kind of amazing...

Career Minors
Busch  - 1640 PA, 292-79-267, .283/.390/.529 (4 seasons)
Mervis - 1322 PA, 209-67-241, .277/.370/.528 (3 seasons)

 

Pretty dang close.  Eerily similar approach and production.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=mervis000mat

https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=busch-002mic

The ratios are similar. The players are not. 

Mervis had 66% contact rate over his last three months of Triple-A last season. Michael Busch had an 80% contact rate. Mervis's contact rate is directly tied to whatever "mechanical change" he made and even before, when he was making roughly 75% contact, he was only doing damage on pitches middle-middle. Busch still topped that by 5%, while making far better contact across the plate. 

What correlates to MLB higher than any other data point? Contact%. Mervis was bottom 10 in Triple-A with the mid 60's. Busch was nearly the tops. 

They're not that similar. Full season lines hide processes. The process by which Busch goes about things is much better than the process by which Mervis does. It is likely why one player is a top-75 prospect by multiple agencies and was worth Jackson Ferris and the other...well isn't. 

[Josh Illes]

On 1/14/2024 at 1:00 PM, Rcal10 said:

If they went lefty in the pen, besides Hader there is Chapman and Moore. Would either of those be a good edition? I know Chapman isn’t what he used to be but he was still throwing 99 last year. Moore is just pretty solid all the way around. Is Hand available? 

I would think Moore has the edge here due to his low walk rate in 2023, but if the Cubs do not believe that walk rate is sustainable then I'm not sure they would sign either Moore or Chapman unless the price dropped to a certain point, which it might at this point.

[Joj]

On 1/17/2024 at 12:58 PM, Bertz said:

Why would they trade a guy they gave 1st round money to and had a phenomenal first season in the minors for Busch if they thought him and Mervis were more or less equivalent?

Why do teams stockpile as many good prospects as possible?  Because it increases their odds of one of these guys actually working out.