General Offseason Priorities

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Vote early, vote often, etc.

[Cuzi]

Offense and it's not even close, imo.

Pitching wise the Cubs are looking at back of the rotation fillers which are a dime a dozen and a couple bullpen arms.

On offense the team needs the equivalent of an ace pitcher.

[CubinNY]

I voted pitching, but it's both. They are stuck and stuck worse if Bellinger opts-in. 

[Rcal10]

21 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

Offense and it's not even close, imo.

Pitching wise the Cubs are looking at back of the rotation fillers which are a dime a dozen and a couple bullpen arms.

On offense the team needs the equivalent of an ace pitcher.

While I agree the Cubs need another bat, I don’t really know where they put it if Bellinger doesn’t opt out. Maybe catcher, but how many big bats are there at that position? If they came back with the same offense and upgrade thr right handed platoon guy from Wisdom I think the offense would be much better. A full year of PCA and Paredes helps some and maybe a better bat behind the plate. But if they add at least a MOR to even a TOR starter they then can win with pitching and defense. Throw in adding a pen arm and you can win with that offense, IMO. 
Now, if Bellinger opts out I am all for a major upgrade of the offense. 

[Tryptamine]

Offense no question. They need a stabilizing consistent  big bat. They have a ton of guys who can be counted on to put up 100-130 wRC+ next season, which is solid lineup depth but lacks consistency. They don't have anyone who is likely to be that monster putting up a 150-160 wRC+ season. This lineup needs that one big bat to carry them through their offensive slumps.

[Tryptamine]

16 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

While I agree the Cubs need another bat, I don’t really know where they put it if Bellinger doesn’t opt out. Maybe catcher, but how many big bats are there at that position? If they came back with the same offense and upgrade thr right handed platoon guy from Wisdom I think the offense would be much better. A full year of PCA and Paredes helps some and maybe a better bat behind the plate. But if they add at least a MOR to even a TOR starter they then can win with pitching and defense. Throw in adding a pen arm and you can win with that offense, IMO. 
Now, if Bellinger opts out I am all for a major upgrade of the offense. 

He's up to a 113 wRC+ now. If he continues his recent hot streak for the next couple weeks, he's opting out. 

[thawv]

10 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

While I agree the Cubs need another bat, I don’t really know where they put it if Bellinger doesn’t opt out. Maybe catcher, but how many big bats are there at that position? If they came back with the same offense and upgrade thr right handed platoon guy from Wisdom I think the offense would be much better. A full year of PCA and Paredes helps some and maybe a better bat behind the plate. But if they add at least a MOR to even a TOR starter they then can win with pitching and defense. Throw in adding a pen arm and you can win with that offense, IMO. 
Now, if Bellinger opts out I am all for a major upgrade of the offense. 

I agree.  They very much need offense, but with making trades, there nowhere to play them without benching current every day starters.  It's a tough spot.  

[squally1313]

If you could count on any of Brown, Wicks, or Horton throwing 100 innings next year, I'd probably lean improving the offense. But realistically that's just not the case. A top 50ish starter, acquired from our surplus of bats, is a much neater upgrade than paying market value for the non-Soto's of the world. 

Don't count chickens, etc etc, but projecting just 3 fWAR a piece from Dansby/Nico/Happ/Suzuki/PCA, which is mostly conservative, gets you a baseline of 15 fWAR that would have put you 18th in the majors last year just from those 5. Then you factor in Busch, Paredes, maybe Bellinger, non-black hole production at catcher, and that's before the stable of top 100 bats knocking on the door. It's tough to get to an elite level, but it would be tough to get to an elite level without a Soto (or Tucker) level addition and it doesn't seem all the difficult to get to 25 (7th in baseball last year) with what we have. On the pitching side, give me Steele, Shota, and a Mariners starter to go with Taillon as your top four and let one or more of Brown/Wicks/Horton break out in limited stretches next year. 

Edited September 17, 2024 by squally1313

[squally1313]

In the second half, the Cubs have been:

• 6th in wRC/wOBA
• 1st in baserunning
• 5th in total offense
• 5th in defense
• 4th in offensive fWAR

On the pitching side:

• 21st in K/9
• 16th in BB/9
• 20th in HR/9
• 16th in GB%
• 11th in ERA
• 19th in FIP
• 19th in xFIP
• 20th in fWAR

[Bertz]

Miguel Amaya got benched for a few days in early July to work on his swing.  He came back on 7/7 and immediately started hitting.  That mercifully removed an automatic out from the bottom of the Cubs order.  Since that day, the Cubs are 3rd in wRC+ in baseball, and 2nd in runs per game at 5.4.

Now I don't think the Cubs walk into the offseason with the 2nd or 3rd best offense in baseball.  There's a good bit of schedule and a good bit of batted ball luck to those second half numbers.  However I do think Amaya (and PCA of course) righting the ship and fixing the bottom of the order unbroke the offense. 

I would like to add offense to battle any inevitable regression, though I do think it's worth noting that Iowa has 5 top 100 hitter prospects collectively capable of covering every defensive position.  Jed should address the position player group of course, but it doesn't *need* impact players.  Impact players are always welcome, there should be enough resources this winter to add impact on both sides of the ball, but if paired with balling out on the pitching staff a co-starter at catcher and a better bench wouldn't be the worst outcome in the world on the position side.

The pitching staff though is kind of the opposite.  It needs impact talent, and not really depth so much. 

On the SP side Steele and Shota are great, but neither is a paragon of health, and as low velo pitchers are very prone to rapid drops in effectiveness even setting aside injury.  Jameson Taillon is a boring league average starter.  The young guys all have questions around health (Brown, Horton), ceiling (Assad, Wesneski, Birdsell), or both (Wicks).  Adding a playoff caliber starter, even if he's not an ace, just radically changes the complexion of this group.

Similar story in the bullpen.  Hodge is a GUY.  There are a bunch of other guys who it's easy to like but hard to trust implicitly.  Adding someone else in the Hodge tier, plus maybe a matchup lefty, would insulate the pen from a rough early season going while Hottovy sorts through those promising but unproven arms.  Adding two impact arms would give us a pen that is lock down on day 1, and downright intimidating by June or July.

[Rcal10]

2 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

If you could count on any of Brown, Wicks, or Horton throwing 100 innings next year, I'd probably lean pitching. But realistically that's just not the case. A top 50ish starter, acquired from our surplus of bats, is a much neater upgrade than paying market value for the non-Soto's of the world. 

Don't count chickens, etc etc, but projecting just 3 fWAR a piece from Dansby/Nico/Happ/Suzuki/PCA, which is mostly conservative, gets you a baseline of 15 fWAR that would have put you 18th in the majors last year just from those 5. Then you factor in Busch, Paredes, maybe Bellinger, non-black hole production at catcher, and that's before the stable of top 100 bats knocking on the door. It's tough to get to an elite level, but it would be tough to get to an elite level without a Soto (or Tucker) level addition and it doesn't seem all the difficult to get to 25 (7th in baseball last year) with what we have. On the pitching side, give me Steele, Shota, and a Mariners starter to go with Taillon as your top four and let one or more of Brown/Wicks/Horton break out in limited stretches next year. 

This is kind of my thoughts. The idea we need a 150-160 wRC+ bat is nice, but how realistic is it. Get another good pitcher and make an offensive upgrade at catcher. Maybe add a solid right handed bat to replace Wisdom and win with a decent offense, a great defense a top 6-8 rotation in baseball and hopefully a pen that doesn’t suck. 

[Tim]

The Cubs will have 5-6 position players projected to 3+ wins

• Happ
• Hoerner
• Swanson
• Seiya
• PCA
• Paredes

Busch will be "fine" at 1B with 2-3 fWAR. 

That just leaves DH & C. The Cubs have gotten 1.9 fWAR from their DH spot this year, which is actually top 10. On the other hand, we've gotten -0.1 fWAR from catcher, which is 29th in baseball this year. If Bellinger opts out, the Cubs almost have to add another bat on top of an improved catcher. Adding one more bat for depth would also be a benefit. The top teams in baseball have been around 30 WAR on the position side. The Cubs probably already project to 23-24 wins with Bellinger and 22-23 wins without him.

On the pitching side, There's Shota and Steele at the top of the rotation. Both are very high quality, playoff-rotation worthy starters. Steele has definite durability questions, though. Shota has also been protected throughout the year with extra days of rest, as well. Taillon has been a good back of the rotation starter or fine mid-rotation starter. Assad has been lucky to have the ERA he's had, but he's done it consistently across years now. But he does not eat innings at all and few of us would be comfortable starting him in a playoff game.

Then there's Wicks, Brown and Wesneski. They've each looked very good at points (especially Brown), but all have health and effectiveness questions going into 2025. To me, this is a rotation that is okay at the top two (with durability questions), fine at the bottom with Taillon & Assad, plus youngsters. But it has a gaping hole either at the top to push everyone down a notch, or 1-2 guys in the middle that can reliably eat innings and project as playoff starters.

For me, the big difference is the depth in Iowa. On the position side, we've got Shaw, Caissie, Alcantara, Moises, and Triantos (and Davis if he could ever stay healthy). Then there's Cam and Jonathon Long at AA. On the pitching side, we've got a bunch of injured guys between Wicks, Brown & Wesneski, plus the injured Horton.

This doesn't even touch the bullpen, where the Cubs have to make an investment to avoid the first half struggles of the past few years.

Given all that, I'd make my first investment into pitching this offseason.

[WhyCantWeWin]

Bullpen needs a ton of help and rotation is fine.  But we all know that Hoyer will be stuffing the bullpen again with 30+ year old journeymen, so I voted for offense given that the bullpen will be blowing many leads/giving up a lot of runs again next year. 

[Tryptamine]

12 minutes ago, WhyCantWeWin said:

Bullpen needs a ton of help and rotation is fine.  But we all know that Hoyer will be stuffing the bullpen again with 30+ year old journeymen, so I voted for offense given that the bullpen will be blowing many leads/giving up a lot of runs again next year. 

The bullpen has a ton of promising arms with big time stuff, it's just keeping their arms attached at this point. What they really need in the pen is to add that one solidifying arm. I keep going back to David Robertson. He can be the closer if need be, but can also play the setup role.

[Tim]

Just going by 2024 ranks in fWAR:

• offense is ranked 11th
• pitching is ranked 17th

If Bellinger opts in the offense loses...nobody? I guess the second catcher spot. Literally every other player is under team control.

Pitching loses Hendricks, Lopez, and various chaff.

I'm still on the pitching side.

[Tim]

2 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

The bullpen has a ton of promising arms with big time stuff, it's just keeping their arms attached at this point. What they really need in the pen is to add that one solidifying arm. I keep going back to David Robertson. He can be the closer if need be, but can also play the setup role.

And throwing strikes. And missing bats in the case of Palencia.

[Tryptamine]

8 minutes ago, Tim said:

And throwing strikes. And missing bats in the case of Palencia.

For sure, but between guys like Little/Pearson/Palencia/Neely there's extremely good stuff that, assuming arms don't fall off. At least a couple of them should be strong BP arms in 2025. Then there's the big questions marks of guys like Merryweather and Almonte, who shouldn't be counted on for anything, but could end up being significant factors in the pen next year.

[Tim]

4 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

For sure, but between guys like Little/Pearson/Palencia/Neely there's extremely good stuff that, assuming arms don't fall off. At least a couple of them should be strong BP arms in 2025. Then there's the big questions marks of guys like Merryweather and Almonte, who shouldn't be counted on for anything, but could end up being significant factors in the pen next year.

If Little doesn't come back strong, who is the next best option against lefties?

[Irrelevant Dude]

IT IS BOTH!

IT IS BOTH!

IT'S BOOOOOOOOOOOTH!

[Cuzi]

29 minutes ago, Tim said:

Just going by 2024 ranks in fWAR:

• offense is ranked 11th
• pitching is ranked 17th

If Bellinger opts in the offense loses...nobody? I guess the second catcher spot. Literally every other player is under team control.

Pitching loses Hendricks, Lopez, and various chaff.

I'm still on the pitching side.

The difference between the best team on offense is greater than the difference between the best team in pitching. The Cubs are virtually a top 11 team in pitching with 11-17 being separated by less than 1 fWAR.

[Tim]

1 minute ago, Cuzi said:

The difference between the best team on offense is greater than the difference between the best team in pitching. The Cubs are virtually a top 11 team in pitching with 11-17 being separated by less than 1 fWAR.

Fair enough. There are still all the other reasons I've given for focusing on the pitching, though. 

[Tim]

I also tend to think that whatever I'd like the Cubs to do (sign Soto), Jed may want to break both Shaw and Caissie into MLB next year.

The easiest way to do that would be to avoid any position player signings (except catcher). Even if Bellinger opts in, you could still add Shaw and Caissie to the big league roster and just rotate players through off days and the DH spot. As TT has pointed out many times, this still lets everyone play around 75% of the time. It also strengthens the bench a ton and allows Counsell to pick his spots with the younger guys to ease them into the bigs.

It also means that we avoid giving hundreds of at bats to the Madrigal, Mastrobuoni, Wisdom type players next year.

[Tim]

Now, I've been saying all this about prioritizing pitching while in my head assuming that there's a second catcher in place. Upgrading that position is probably more important than any other move this offseason, even if there's high confidence that second half Amaya is future Amaya.

[Cuzi]

Who is to say that Shaw or Caissie will be any better?

You can probably make a solid case for Shaw being an upgrade, given the alternatives are rock bottom. But are we convinced that Caissie will be an upgrade over Tauchman?

[We Got The Whole 9]

I'm honestly not sure it's the offense. Is a "big bat" really required? If you look across the league, there are several teams putting up big offensive numbers without the usual suspects carrying them. Sometimes those big offensive seasons come from unexpected sources. Any team can get lucky and stumble onto them at times. 

 

AZ has Marte but their best hitter has been Joc inexplicably putting up a 153

Jurickson Profar paces the Padres with a 144

O'Neill leads with a 140

 

I think you can absolutely be a top offensive team if you have a lineup of 110-130 guys. Just for whatever reason like clockwork our hitters tend to slump in clumps and it goes on for way too long. The pen early-on and our 2 month offensive slump knocked this team out of playoff contention. But I don't believe that if just 1 of those hitters maintained a 150+ bat throughout that time that it would have made a significant difference.