Spring Training Chit Chats

[Stratos]

3 hours ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Dom Smith sucks. He's not breaking camp with the team. His incentives kick up to a mere $3.5m. The Cubs know this and his contract reflects it.

Smith is here as "break in case of emegency". Maybe they think there's a thing they can do with his swing in Iowa. But he won't be the left handed bat. He's just depth.

Let's hope, because yes he sucks.  At least Peralta you can legitimize giving a roster spot at Iowa for.  It's already crowded in Iowa this year, and they have Mervis, BJ Murray, and potentially McGeary at 1B in Iowa unless Mervis makes the MLB roster.  I'm hoping Dom Smith is behind Mervis in the depth charts at 1B.   If Busch gets injured or they need a lefty at DH i hope they try Mervis first before Smith.

This is not the best news in the appearance of confidence of the Cubs landing Bellinger at the moment.  It's a minor league deal so the risk is zero and it's probably just insurance in case Bellinger isn't signed and/or an injury at 1B happens.  Peralta and Smith are lefty depth bats.

I believe this guy was one of the first to break the story, and it looks like the Cubs want him as a 4th OF?:

https://fansided.com/posts/mlb-insider-cubs-add-former-silver-slugger-winner-david-peralta-outfield-mix-01hq1jy2vnft

"Peralta signed a minor-league contract and the expectation is that once he is fully recovered from offseason forearm surgery to repair a torn flexor tendon, he’ll quickly be added to the major-league roster."

 

[UMFan83]

31 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

For a certain percentage of people all news and rumors gets viewed through the lens that it is confirming their worst fears about the team.

lol that is so damn on point and well said

[Stratos]

3 hours ago, Tryptamine said:

I expect Mervis to be traded any moment now.

Hard to see that happening unless they get another LH power bat.  They need that pretty badly right now.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

David Peralta is 36, can not play CF(and shouldn't play RF either), hasn't been better than 2023 Tauchman since 2018, has been a below average hitter 2 of 3 years including a worse-than-Madrigal 82 wRC+ in 2023, and ZiPS does not like him to be a materially better hitter in 2024 than Busch, Tauchman, PCA, or Mastrobuoni.  Oh, and he's coming off hand/finger surgery in October.  Which is all to say that while I don't have any issue with him on a MiLB deal, I am extremely skeptical that he has a fast-track to the MLB roster even if they don't add Bellinger.

[Stratos]

51 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

For a certain percentage of people all news and rumors gets viewed through the lens that it is confirming their worst fears about the team.

Yeah and it makes discussing the team often unbearable throughout the offseason.

[Irrelevant Dude]

15 minutes ago, Stratos said:

Hard to see that happening unless they get another LH power bat.  They need that pretty badly right now.

And you think that power bat, as things stand, is going to be Mervis?  Everything the Cubs are telling us (without telling us) is that they have no intention of Mervis being a part of their roster.

[Tim]

5 minutes ago, Irrelevant Dude said:

And you think that power bat, as things stand, is going to be Mervis?  Everything the Cubs are telling us (without telling us) is that they have no intention of Mervis being a part of their roster.

I think Mervis has a chance to win that last roster spot, but odds are against him. His only advantage is that he's a lefty power hitter. But he's 1B/DH only, which is really limiting compared to his competition for the spot.

Plus all the reasons you're implying in your post.

[Stratos]

1 minute ago, Irrelevant Dude said:

And you think that power bat, as things stand, is going to be Mervis?  Everything the Cubs are telling us (without telling us) is that they have no intention of Mervis being a part of their roster.

The Cubs both don't have a DH, have a total unknown at 1B, and have a lack of LHB power bats in the lineup.  There's definitely a scenario where Busch and Mervis end up in the same lineup this year.  There's also the possibility that Busch gets hurt or doesn't hit well, and Mervis is backup for that, as is Dom Smith.  Smith will probably not be ready for OD either, and if Busch gets hurt and Mervis is dealt who would be the 1B (or DH) vs RHP?  The Cubs value depth.

Mervis could very well end up being traded at some point, I just don't see it happening before OD unless they acquire another power LHB who could play 1B, like Bellinger, and even then they would probably prefer to wait until the trade deadline or next offseason to deal him.  It just doesn't make a ton of sense to me for them to deal from 2 positions that's already one of the weakest on the team (1B and DH).  So far the prospects Jed has dealt has been from positions of strength and overabundance, like lefty SP.  By next offseason we'll see how Busch handles MLB pitching and should have more prospects who can potentially start at DH on Opening Day like Cassie (LHB), McGeary, Murray (switch hitter) etc.

[LBiittner]

We are in year 4 of a complete tear-down rebuild. 

And we're projected to reach a lofty 80 win season in 2024.

 

 

[LBiittner]

4 hours ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Dom Smith sucks. He's not breaking camp with the team. His incentives kick up to a mere $3.5m. The Cubs know this and his contract reflects it.

Smith is here as "break in case of emegency". Maybe they think there's a thing they can do with his swing in Iowa. But he won't be the left handed bat. He's just depth.

Dom Smith is recovering from surgery in January for a broken hamate bone. There's a good chance he won't be ready for opening day. 

[SOFNR]

6 minutes ago, LBiittner said:

We are in year 4 of a complete tear-down rebuild. 

And we're projected to reach a lofty 80 win season in 2024.

 

 

To me the rebuild/retool started the minute ownership/front office decided to stop signing any free agents, when it was pretty clear the core needed help to continue to be competitive. You could probably argue 2019.  I definitely start it in atleast 2020.  I've never believed that 2020 team makes the playoffs in a full season. I think they would have been happy to sell off in 2020 but covid messed up the plan.  So i count us on year 5. And yes, selling the core when they did, a year later,  was the right decision. Probably would have been better in 2020. But they could've dropped another 20 mil on some one year deals, especially bullpen, in either year, and potentially changed the outcome for the end of that group. Theo definitely deserves a lot of blame for not having a development system that could replace small parts on a team that expensive. But It's not like holding back from that spending prevented us from a rebuild, or helped us to a quicker one. No money saved rolled over. We just ignored glaring holes and put all the pressure on a group getting more expensive but mostly regressing.  They stopped being willing to spend to improve and we're still waiting for the "right time" to act like a top 5 market again.  Each new revenue stream eventually gets ignored as Ricketts demands "more revenue" for higher payroll. I really  have no doubt that Hoyer's improved development and spending strategies will eventually lead to a team that maintains success easier on a smaller budget. As long as he develops a star or two. That is more likely to lead to sustained success. But there was always enough revenue to fill out clear roster flaws if they wanted. They just didn't feel a need to when the park was full either way. That's why Theo left. Now we wait for the next great revenue stream idea before we can hit that scary lux tax as we enter Year 5.

[LBiittner]

11 minutes ago, SOFNR said:

To me the rebuild/retool started the minute ownership/front office decided to stop signing any free agents, when it was pretty clear the core needed help to continue to be competitive. You could probably argue 2019.  I definitely start it in atleast 2020.  I've never believed that 2020 team makes the playoffs in a full season. I think they would have been happy to sell off in 2020 but covid messed up the plan.  So i count us on year 5. And yes, selling the core when they did, a year later,  was the right decision. Probably would have been better in 2020. But they could've dropped another 20 mil on some one year deals, especially bullpen, in either year, and potentially changed the outcome for the end of that group. Theo definitely deserves a lot of blame for not having a development system that could replace small parts on a team that expensive. But It's not like holding back from that spending prevented us from a rebuild, or helped us to a quicker one. No money saved rolled over. We just ignored glaring holes and put all the pressure on a group getting more expensive but mostly regressing.  They stopped being willing to spend to improve and we're still waiting for the "right time" to act like a top 5 market again.  Each new revenue stream eventually gets ignored as Ricketts demands "more revenue" for higher payroll. I really  have no doubt that Hoyer's improved development and spending strategies will eventually lead to a team that maintains success easier on a smaller budget. As long as he develops a star or two. That is more likely to lead to sustained success. But there was always enough revenue to fill out clear roster flaws if they wanted. They just didn't feel a need to when the park was full either way. That's why Theo left. Now we wait for the next great revenue stream idea before we can hit that scary lux tax as we enter Year 5.

I like to spew drivel to spark conversation and you, more times than not, post very articulate well thought out evidence based replies. Thank you so much for your input. much appreciated

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, LBiittner said:

We are in year 4 of a complete tear-down rebuild. 

And we're projected to reach a lofty 80 win season in 2024.

 

 

Theo's teardown got us to 97 wins and the NLCS in year 4.  Hopefully Jed is just a year behind, though 2021 was only a half teardown until the deadline.

[Thusly Boned]

I think what we're seeing from the Cubs is sadly becoming more common: simply shooting for a .540ish winning percentage and just doing enough to get in. Using a slice of their saving to patch holes along the way. Outside of a small handful of teams, I think this is going to become a widespread approach. We're not the only fanbase having this conversation.

It's easy to see why greedy types would go this route, as recent history shows it's just as effective hurling truckloads of cash at the roster. And odds are that the team that comes out on top in 2024 isn't going to be the one that spent the most money, again. And that'll just validate all the other owners who want to go the same way. Almost everyone wants to be the Rays, not because they have to, but because they're stingy.

As a fan, this sucks, because the product just isn't as entertaining as it could be, and it's riskier than loading your roster. The fact your FO is making the choice not to field the best product they can reasonably afford is galling. The most popular team in the third largest market in the country should absolutely be mitigating risk by throwing money at their problems.

 

[CubinNY]

7 hours ago, Rex Buckingham said:

What are you suggesting? I genuinely have no idea what you mean by this

America, love it or leave it. 3rd grade logic. 

[Thusly Boned]

3 hours ago, The20thK said:

To each their own. But I don’t see bad business practices as something to be rewarded. and I’m also not saying that one cannot have disagreements with ownership. But there are people on here who straight up HATE the Ricketts. My suspicion is it’s more politic-leaning driven but whatever. 
 

Also, I know what you’re saying about “allegiance” and I used to feel that way as a younger man. But now I realize that this is just a game… “Cubs fan” is not who I am.

 

I enjoy the Cubs, been rooting for them for over 30 years now. I don’t foresee anything that is gonna change that.

 

Sports fandom isn't the same as choosing what other businesses you want to give your money to. Being a heavily invested sports fan is irrational at its very core. Obviously very. very few people have the luxury of being able to financially exercise their praxis in every facet of their lives. The best most of us can do is pick an choose what we feel the most strongly about and kind of stomach the rest. For me, it's a spectrum; there are a handful of businesses I simply will not give my money to, others I prefer not to, and many whose sins I just try not to think about too much.

But the I came to the Cubs (and my other teams) through indoctrination, as most of us did. And as much as I'd like to be above it, it becomes kind of a ridiculous tribal identity thing. It's fanatical. choosing another team after 30+ years is not like choosing a different box store because I don't like the owner.

If I could just not, I wouldn't. Sports fandom is objectively stupid. I can exercise extreme discipline in most of my financial affairs when we are trying to be thrifty, but then go out and buy like four stupid Cubs hats in a week (I actually just did this). It's just different, and most days I kind of hate it.

[Thusly Boned]

7 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

Why? If you are a fan of the team and grew up a fan of the team why wouldn’t you still support the team? I don’t like a lot of people who own corporations. But I still use products from that corporation. If I only frequented places owned by people I like I wouldn’t get out much. Anyone who is a fan of the Cubs, enjoys seeing baseball live and has the ability to go to games shouldn’t stay away from the game just because of the owner. You don’t just switch allegiance of a baseball team like you do a coffee shop because you don’t like the owner. Those who do, that is fine for them. But for those who don’t that is ok too. It is fine to spend money on the team and not like the CEO. 

Yeah, most of us have lived through worse than the Rickettses (at least in terms of running the team), if bailing due to bad ownership was something we'd do, it'd have already been done.

[Brian707]

56 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

America, love it or leave it. 3rd grade logic. 

Yup those are thoughts from a simpleton.  Also adding how long you have been a fan to tell others you are superior is laughable.  

[Jason Ross]

10 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

I didn’t say I liked it. But I think he will be that 2nd left handed bat. Hosmer 2024. 

You're being well too pessimistic and cynical. The Cubs did not sign Dom Smith and his 85 wRC+ over the last 1200 PA's on a max $3.5m dea (it's an MiLB deal at it's core with escalators in case he produces), to be the DH against RHP. Maybe he'll get MLB time if an injury happens, but as it stands, his path to being on the MLB roster as a 1b/DH only with that line is very bumpy and requires, likely, multiple injuries to players. 

Regardless of what they are currently saying about Morel being given a chance to play 3rd this spring training, it's most likely that he's going to be the DH most days with others playing 3b. I wouldn't even write his name in pencil at the top of the 3b depth chart as it stands. Perhaps a month of good play there makes that the case, but the Cubs have a lot of data over him at 3b internally, and this feels more like a "let's hope this works" instead of "we are going to brute force this to work". 

Point is, Smith is very unlikely to break camp with the Cubs. 

[Rcal10]

21 minutes ago, The20thK said:

Probably the most honest take on this topic. 
 

But at this point in my life, if I hated the Cubs ownership the way some of these guys do, I just walk away. Maybe that’s age, maybe I’m not as “committed” to the Cubs as some of you are. 
 

But there are better things in life than sports, and if it makes them that miserable, moving on would probably be one of the healthiest things they could do. 

If fans didn’t go to games because they didn’t like the ownership of the team or how the team was run there would be very few fans at any sporting events. Just look at Chicago as an example. The Bears have McCaskey, the Hawks have Wirtz, the Bulls and Sox have Reinsdorf. Most fans of those teams will tell you the ownership sucks. I grew up a Cubs fan during the Wrigley ownership. Went through the tribune and Zell onto Ricketts. Honestly, I don’t care. Yes, the way he runs the team frustrates me, but so did every other owner. I think ownership will never be liked by 80% of sports fans. Others, like you, will have issues with what the players are being paid. Which would be another reason not to go. Bottom line is anyone who wants to look past all that and go to games because they love live baseball and love the team they grew up watching, and has the means to go to games is going to go. And there is nothing wrong with that, even while they complain about the ownership. 

[Rcal10]

20 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

You're being well too pessimistic and cynical. The Cubs did not sign Dom Smith and his 85 wRC+ over the last 1200 PA's on a max $3.5m dea (it's an MiLB deal at it's core with escalators in case he produces), to be the DH against RHP. Maybe he'll get MLB time if an injury happens, but as it stands, his path to being on the MLB roster as a 1b/DH only with that line is very bumpy and requires, likely, multiple injuries to players. 

Regardless of what they are currently saying about Morel being given a chance to play 3rd this spring training, it's most likely that he's going to be the DH most days with others playing 3b. I wouldn't even write his name in pencil at the top of the 3b depth chart as it stands. Perhaps a month of good play there makes that the case, but the Cubs have a lot of data over him at 3b internally, and this feels more like a "let's hope this works" instead of "we are going to brute force this to work". 

Point is, Smith is very unlikely to break camp with the Cubs. 

We will see 1908. And maybe it won’t be Smith. Maybe Peralta. But I would be surprised if once healthy, one of these two was not on the roster for a decent portion of the season. They still may get Bellinger. And spending less on the last bat added might allow them to get another pen arm. I am not sure why suggesting one of these guys would be the last bat is viewed pessimistic or cynical. Didn’t they sign Hosmer and Mancini just last year in a similar fashion? If it sounded like I was suggesting this is it, this is there last signing, it was not. I just think one of these guys will be in the roster when he is healthy. I still hope for Bellinger of Chapman. And still do think they get one of them. 

[Michael Busch Light]

11 hours ago, Tim said:

AAA time at 1B/DH is going to be tough. OF, too, for that matter. 

That’s how you win central division titles.

-Poor Tom Ricketts 

[Sammy Sofa]

1 hour ago, The20thK said:

Probably the most honest take on this topic. 

As opposed to the other takes being...what?

[Sammy Sofa]

Ricketts is a spineless, feckless disaster capitalism uber alles worm. Here's my take:

And yeah, he's hardly the only owner like this; that's the problem. Sports ownership has always been a business, but it mutated in the last few decades from being weird vanity project businesses to most of the owners across all major sports trying to run teams as "regular businesses" first and then MAYBE like a sports team that they actually want to win anything a VERY distant second.

Edited February 20, 2024 by Sammy Sofa

[ToolDRT]

2 hours ago, XZero77 said:

I think what we're seeing from the Cubs is sadly becoming more common: simply shooting for a .540ish winning percentage and just doing enough to get in. Using a slice of their saving to patch holes along the way. Outside of a small handful of teams, I think this is going to become a widespread approach. We're not the only fanbase having this conversation.

It's easy to see why greedy types would go this route, as recent history shows it's just as effective hurling truckloads of cash at the roster. And odds are that the team that comes out on top in 2024 isn't going to be the one that spent the most money, again. And that'll just validate all the other owners who want to go the same way. Almost everyone wants to be the Rays, not because they have to, but because they're stingy.

As a fan, this sucks, because the product just isn't as entertaining as it could be, and it's riskier than loading your roster. The fact your FO is making the choice not to field the best product they can reasonably afford is galling. The most popular team in the third largest market in the country should absolutely be mitigating risk by throwing money at their problems.

 

This is why I’m rooting for the dodgers this year. Let them buy that championship.