Spring Training Chit Chats

[chibears55]

Cubs look to have OD lineup tonight outside of Hendricks on the mound.

I hope Suzuki carries this hot hitting into the start of season, another double in first AB 

[LBiittner]

Could someone explain snells deal for 2024? $17m deferred to jan1 2025. This means 17m applied to 2025 LT? 

If ive read right, cubs have a lot of money coming off after 24? Why wouldn’t jed do something like this with a free agent? Martinez or montgomery? 

[Stratos]

6 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

I get the messiness issue with the 40 man. But if Wissom and Madrigal start on the IL, they might take Smith if he says he will opt out if he doesn’t make the OD roster. I just think he may be worth the longer look to see if he is healthy and if the last two years his hand was the reason for his less than average offense. If he agrees to go to Iowa a bit that would be ideal. Then I agree Canario gets the last slot. But if not, they may need to take him north.  The issue with the 40 man is, right now, there is only 1 space. And they may have to do that for Edwards too.  So that would be 3 spots. 
 

Cooper would be in for Wisdom I assume unless they think Smith can hit vs LHP for Cooper, Hawkins said they envision Busch platooning to start.  Mastro is in for Madrigal unless Mastro is already their 5th bench guy choice, then I guess Bote might replace Madrigal?

If Happ starts on the DL to get a few more PA's then Canario is definitely on the team and very likely Smith is on the team too.  If Happ is healthy Canario could still make the team, it would be between Canario and Smith for the last bench spot, but I think they probably need a RH bat for DH over a LH bat like Smith since they have Tauchman who can DH vs LHP and for RHP all they'd have is Gomes/Amaya and Mastro.

At this point if everyone is healthy it looks like 8 guys vying for 5 bench spots.

[Rcal10]

8 hours ago, Stratos said:

Cooper would be in for Wisdom I assume unless they think Smith can hit vs LHP for Cooper, Hawkins said they envision Busch platooning to start.  Mastro is in for Madrigal unless Mastro is already their 5th bench guy choice, then I guess Bote might replace Madrigal?

If Happ starts on the DL to get a few more PA's then Canario is definitely on the team and very likely Smith is on the team too.  If Happ is healthy Canario could still make the team, it would be between Canario and Smith for the last bench spot, but I think they probably need a RH bat for DH over a LH bat like Smith since they have Tauchman who can DH vs LHP and for RHP all they'd have is Gomes/Amaya and Mastro.

At this point if everyone is healthy it looks like 8 guys vying for 5 bench spots.

I don’t see them opening up a 40 man spot for Bote. I kind of see the last 3 spots breaking down to Wisdom,one of Madrigal or Mastro, and then one of Cooper, Smith, Peralta, Canario. This is assuming all healthy. So this will not be the OD roster. I think if Mastro is on the team a guy like Cooper or Canario has a better chance to be on the team then the left handed bats. But when Madrigal is up, I can see a place for Smith/Peralta. With the probability of both Wisdom and Madrigal starting in the IL, Cooper looks likely to make the team. Then it comes down to the last spot. Do they want a 3rd lefty bat or a 3rd righty bat. The advantage for Canario is they don’t have to fool around with the 40 man. But I would like them to keep Smith around some way. Maybe he will go to Iowa for a bit to prove he is the guy he was before the bad hand.

[Post Count Padder]

Reds are falling apart early. First Friedl and now McLain. I'd be more bummed if they were in another division. They seem like a fun team. They're probably glad they held onto India. I don't root for injuries but hoping we can take advantage early in the season.

Edited March 20, 2024 by Post Count Padder

[chibears55]

I know ST numbers isn't something to be concerned about, but with a week to go only Gomes, Morel, and Suzuki are hitting well so far.  Hopefully in the final few games left, the others get going and have some positive momentum heading into the season. 

[Stratos]

8 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t see them opening up a 40 man spot for Bote. I kind of see the last 3 spots breaking down to Wisdom,one of Madrigal or Mastro, and then one of Cooper, Smith, Peralta, Canario. This is assuming all healthy.

Yeah that's if everyone's healthy.  And as you say comes down to whether they want RHB or LHB.  As a bat they might like Cooper/Smith over Canario at the moment, but Canario plays OF and they don't really need 4 1B (if including Bellinger).

For the 40-man stuff, they'd probably rather trade a 40-man guy like Hodge for a non-40 prospect like they did Horn to make room for a guy they want to keep on the 40 and can be useful on the MLB team now or in the next few months.  I think if they really want to keep Cooper, Smith, Peralta, and some interesting non-roster relievers they think can help them this year and those players want to stay, the Cubs will try to find a way.

Edited March 20, 2024 by Stratos

[squally1313]

3 hours ago, Stratos said:

Yeah that's if everyone's healthy.  And as you say comes down to whether they want RHB or LHB.  As a bat they might like Cooper/Smith over Canario at the moment, but Canario plays OF and they don't really need 4 1B (if including Bellinger).

For the 40-man stuff, they'd probably rather trade a 40-man guy like Hodge for a non-40 prospect like they did Horn to make room for a guy they want to keep on the 40 and can be useful on the MLB team now or in the next few months.  I think if they really want to keep Cooper, Smith, Peralta, and some interesting non-roster relievers they think can help them this year and those players want to stay, the Cubs will try to find a way.

I was under the impression that with guys like Cooper and Peralta (and possibly Smith), these NRI contracts come with a date that's either like, the end of spring training or May 1 or whatever, that lets them opt out. All of which to say I can't imagine they'd do a whole bunch of 40 man machinations to clear room for veterans who they didn't deem worthy to make the opening day roster and can also unilaterally opt out in the near future.

[Stratos]

41 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

I was under the impression that with guys like Cooper and Peralta (and possibly Smith), these NRI contracts come with a date that's either like, the end of spring training or May 1 or whatever, that lets them opt out. All of which to say I can't imagine they'd do a whole bunch of 40 man machinations to clear room for veterans who they didn't deem worthy to make the opening day roster and can also unilaterally opt out in the near future.

Yes that's true, that's why I added "if those players want to stay".  But I assume since they're NRI contracts, if some have to go down to Iowa I assume those guys don't go on the 40-man so no big issue there, just the roster crunch in Iowa which I imagine is also an issue, including playing time.  If Mervis, McGeary, BJ Murray, and one of Smith/Cooper is down in AAA there's a playing time crunch at 1B/DH.  Murray can play 3B but Slaughter is there too, plus Bote fitting in.  They have no shortage of position depth, which is great.

If I were Smith and Cooper and I weren't on the MLB roster i'd opt out if there's any other market for them.  Looks like Belt and Martinez have overvalued themselves.  With the tv deals hurting revenue for a bunch of teams plus the disappointing results put up by most FA's signed last year and the general trend of younger players being more valued including more team money going to extensions and therefore less to FA I think all these solid FA's still left on the market have overvalued themselves.

[Stratos]

On 3/19/2024 at 8:05 AM, 1908_Cubs said:

If we are going to use "good faith" then lets stick to the statistic set I used, which is K%, not K/9 and the sentence I took issue with, which dealt only with the idea that his "k-rate" was below average "at every stint" past Double-A. The reason why is because K/9 is significantly worse at showing what we're talking about. You don't have to take my word for it: you can do some reading on it! And I'll provide a second,. as well! But if you're wanting a quicker anecdote, I'll provide a short one below:
Pitcher A: 5  IP, 5 K, 1 BB, 2H 
Pitcher B: 5 IP, 6K, 4 BB, 3H

We're going to assume, for anecdote's sake, neither pitcher has any errors occur in the game, nor any double plays. In the above scenario, Pitcher B has 6 strikeouts compared to Pitcher A over the same amount of innings. Using K/9, this means that Pitcher B would look like the better strikeout pitcher, because over 9 innings, he'd strikeout more hitters as his K/9 would be 10.8 compared to the 9 pitcher A provided. But here's the thing: pitcher B isn't a better strikeout pitcher, because K/9 gives preferential to pitchers who walk a lot of hitters and give up more hits because they face more batters. Pitcher B faced four more hitters, so the two pitchers actually have virtually the same K%: around 27%. K% is a far better indicator of how often a pitcher strikes a batter out.

Point is: Jordan Wicks K./9 might not be league average, but it's not the right statistic to be using. His K% is 22.2% in Triple-A where as the league average of Triple-A was 22.4%. It's .2% below which is less than a single hitter faced. Jordan Wicks barely threw in Triple-A, racking up just 33 innings. It's not worth it to consider this "below" average considering the sample size and the difference between average and "below". So he was,. virtually, a league average K% pitcher. As well, he generated more whiffs than league average. If we want to accurately describe Jordan Wicks' time in Triple-A when it comes to swings and misses, and strikeouts, this is a far more accurate statement than your original which was "he was below average in every stint above Double-A". So, yes, you're wrong. I've already written about this in an article here on NSBB, I'd recommend checking it out if you haven't.

Of course his K/9 over his last 80 IP looks bad: his MLB numbers were really low! But he's on record explaining why that may be. Funnily enough, I came to the same conclusion in that article before he said anything; he was being especially cautious. The point is we can't just combine Triple-A and MLB data, and we can't ignore context. He was perfectly fine in his 33 innings at Triple-A. I've cherry picked...literally nothing. I used a better statistic at one of his two levels to show, your statement was not factual.

In the overall concept of what you think Jordan WIcks is, I don't disagree. But that wasn't what I took issue with ever. I do think he's got some work to do at the MLB level in terms of generating swings and misses, but as stated, context suggests he changed himself to limit damage as a rookie. Where I disagreed was your characterization of his time in Triple-A. I still fully do. 

To this assumption; you are incorrect. The article I linked you was written in 2016 and Fangraphs has written about this concept many times over the last decade plus as well. K% is the better number. K/9 has been more readily available, but has added flaws by giving benefit to high walk pitchers, especially. Look around the industry at the best at covering the sport, such as Dan Szymborski, Lance Browdowski, Jeff Seidler, Craig Goldstein...they're going to default to K% for this reason. We should all be using K% when we can because it is a far better measurement. 

K% also skews based on walks.  K% is calculated by K's divided by plate appearances.  That means the K% of a pitcher with a line of 7 IP, 5H, 5 BB, 6K is significantly different than a line of 7 IP, 5H, 1 BB, 6K.

Anyways, let's even assume that K% is the better stat, the difference isn't significant and it still doesn't change the argument much.  Bottom line is that in AAA, Wicks had a below average K/9 and an average K%, in the MLB he had both a well-below average K/9 and K%, and so far in ST he has a well below average K/9 and I'm not sure what the ST K% is but I assume it's below average.  That can always improve, but pretty much every indication so far is that overall he's been throwing below-average stuff.  Coupled with average BB/9, HR/9, and ERA/FIP/xFIP and the results or projections haven't exactly been exciting thus far.  But let's hope he can improve.

As for the "pitch to contact" thing, well that's what guys who throw changeups more than any other pitch and fastballs that don't generate whiffs are supposed to do anyways.

I don't expect the K/9 to stay in the 6's, he's projected by all outlets on FG to have a K/9 in the mid-7's.  Maybe he does better who knows.  Whatever it is, along with all of his other average stats in the small samples thus far, it's another unknown for another SP in this rotation with real potential for average to below average overall results (e.g. ERA) to continue.

Let's hope he surpasses the projections.  His 4-seamer was crushed last year, which is where most of the HR seem to come from (similar to guys like Taillon and Wesneski) but his sinker had much better results.  If that continues maybe he can make an adjustment and start using the sinker more, but I also assume the 4-seamer helps play up his change-up which may pose an issue, unless he can get the change to sink like Hendricks does.

I still like the guy but I don't see much more than a solid average pitcher in the short or longterm unless the fastball, control, and/or GB% improve.  He has potential to eat some innings though.

Edited March 21, 2024 by Stratos

[Bertz]

 

 

Sometimes these guys have a separate opt out in like May, but generally the team needs to make some decisions on Carl, Cooper, Smith, and Peralta this weekend.  And those decisions should give us a pretty complete picture on the bench and bullpen.

 

[squally1313]

34 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Sometimes these guys have a separate opt out in like May, but generally the team needs to make some decisions on Carl, Cooper, Smith, and Peralta this weekend.  And those decisions should give us a pretty complete picture on the bench and bullpen.

Smith isn't on that list unless I'm going blind, but otherwise that's good info. 

[Bertz]

20 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Smith isn't on that list unless I'm going blind, but otherwise that's good info. 

Oh good catch he might not be that same level of FA.  He does have less service time than the others.

[UMFan83]

Sounds like we have our rotation:  Steele, Imanaga, Hendricks, Assad, Wicks.  We'll see who gets bumped when Taillon is back

 

Edited March 21, 2024 by UMFan83

[WhyCantWeWin]

48 minutes ago, UMFan83 said:

Sounds like we have our rotation:  Steele, Imanaga, Hendricks, Assad, Wicks.  We'll see who gets bumped when Taillon is back

 

Smart and good rotation by Counsell, I keep forgetting Ross isn't manager anymore and he definitely would have gone with four lefties in the rotation just because he loves Smyly. 

 

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, UMFan83 said:

Sounds like we have our rotation:  Steele, Imanaga, Hendricks, Assad, Wicks.  We'll see who gets bumped when Taillon is back

 

If that is the order they go lefties in a row.  Normally it wouldn’t be all in the same series but I don’t really like 3 lefties in a row. I think Assad gets dropped when Taillon comes back.

[Derwood]

[Rcal10]

14 minutes ago, Derwood said:

Would have liked him that price. 

[chibears55]

2 hours ago, Derwood said:

Damn, I was hoping with noone really stepping up to take the DH spot that they would get him or another available bat

[morrisjon]

Zips is not a fan of JD Martinez, they have him at .7 FWAR this season. 

Can someone explain to me how Martinez had a -1.3 dWAR in 2022 when it appears he was only used as a DH?

[Rcal10]

13 hours ago, chibears55 said:

Damn, I was hoping with noone really stepping up to take the DH spot that they would get him or another available bat

I agree with this. As I said in my post before you posted, I wish the Cubs signed him. But the fact they didn’t and they probably are not going to sign Belt either, kind of indicates they may not be totally sold on Morel at third, or they expect a young guy to come up soon”ish”. Either Shaw to play 3rd, and Morel does DH, PCA to play center and in that case Morel stays at 3rd and DH split between other outfielders and Busch, or a bat like Canario, Cassie or someone we don’t expect,performs well at Iowa and he is brought up to DH. He would have been nice and much more a sure bat, but I do understand why they didn’t do it. 

[Rob]

5 minutes ago, morrisjon said:

Zips is not a fan of JD Martinez, they have him at .7 FWAR this season. 

Can someone explain to me how Martinez had a -1.3 dWAR in 2022 when it appears he was only used as a DH?

Purely the positional adjustment.

It's difficult to compare defensive value. If I've got a SS who is 5 runs above average at SS, we don't think he's got the same defensive value as a 1B who is 5 runs above average at 1B. SS is the harder position, so the defense is more valuable there.

So about 20 years ago, Tom Tango came up with the notion of the positional adjustment, to give an idea of how valuable each position is. A bunch of math went into it. And people continue to debate just how accurate that is.

But generally speaking, Catchers get the biggest innate dWAR bonus. SS also get a substantial bump. 2B/3B/CF get a little bump. LF/RF take a substantial hit to their defensive value. And 1B/DH get a bunch of value deducted.

Those are just the starting values. The remainder of the dWAR calculation comes from comparison to their peers at the position, which isn't really applicable for full-time DHs.

[CubinNY]

12 minutes ago, Rob said:

Purely the positional adjustment.

It's difficult to compare defensive value. If I've got a SS who is 5 runs above average at SS, we don't think he's got the same defensive value as a 1B who is 5 runs above average at 1B. SS is the harder position, so the defense is more valuable there.

So about 20 years ago, Tom Tango came up with the notion of the positional adjustment, to give an idea of how valuable each position is. A bunch of math went into it. And people continue to debate just how accurate that is.

But generally speaking, Catchers get the biggest innate dWAR bonus. SS also get a substantial bump. 2B/3B/CF get a little bump. LF/RF take a substantial hit to their defensive value. And 1B/DH get a bunch of value deducted.

Those are just the starting values. The remainder of the dWAR calculation comes from comparison to their peers at the position, which isn't really applicable for full-time DHs.

The simple answer is that a DH has negative value to a team if he is only a DH. I have never liked any of the advanced defensive metrics or WAR based inflation by position. I get the argument, I don't buy it. If you want to say SS is the most valuable position, fine, but you still need 8 others, and not every ball is going to be hit there. Obviously, not everyone can play SS. Nonetheless, the position (not the player) is one of eight and a ****** defensive SS (the player, not the position) shouldn't be inherently more valuable than a good defensive 1st baseman who can dig out bad throws from the ****** SS. 

[Rob]

4 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

The simple answer is that a DH has negative value to a team if he is only a DH. I have never liked any of the advanced defensive metrics or WAR based inflation by position. I get the argument, I don't buy it. If you want to say SS is the most valuable position, fine, but you still need 8 others, and not every ball is going to be hit there. Obviously, not everyone can play SS. Nonetheless, the position (not the player) is one of eight and a ****** defensive SS (the player, not the position) shouldn't be inherently more valuable than a good defensive 1st baseman who can dig out bad throws from the ****** SS. 

While it's not strictly true, the notion is that one can generally move down the defensive spectrum and be roughly that much more valuable.

For instance, an average fielding SS is usually an above-average 2B/3B/CF. An average CF is usually above average at LF/RF. Etc... There can be issues with this -- Nick Madrigal is a fine 2B/3B, but he's too short to play 1B. But outside of physical outliers, this tends to be the case.

That's largely why they're valued differently. But there's also just an element of the frequency and difficulty of plays.

[CubinNY]

8 minutes ago, Rob said:

While it's not strictly true, the notion is that one can generally move down the defensive spectrum and be roughly that much more valuable.

For instance, an average fielding SS is usually an above-average 2B/3B/CF. An average CF is usually above average at LF/RF. Etc... There can be issues with this -- Nick Madrigal is a fine 2B/3B, but he's too short to play 1B. But outside of physical outliers, this tends to be the case.

That's largely why they're valued differently. But there's also just an element of the frequency and difficulty of plays.

For instance, an average fielding SS is usually an above-average 2B/3B/CF. Yeah, that's not true, it's an assumption. But like I said, I get the argument, I don't buy it. You're not going to convince me. 

WAR should be normalized by position so you are comparing apples to apples, not apples to pizza. 

Edited March 22, 2024 by CubinNY