General Offseason Priorities

[Cuzi]

1 minute ago, Tryptamine said:

It saddens me a lot, but yeah Alcantara is the most likely of the top guys to get dealt. If it were it would be Caissie, but it definitely doesn't feel like the Cubs view it that way.

I'm not convinced they view Caissie as the best option, he simply will be able to be an option because he hasn't used any MiLB option years since hes not on the 40 man. Alcantara had to be added a couple years ago to protect him from the rule 5 draft, so he only has 1 year left. That's 1 year before any kind of playing time will be available for him, so he'll be rotting on the bench or DFA'd during that time. Hoyer has known this for over a year since he gave the 2 corner OFers NTC's and PCA was going to beat him to MLB. The only thing I can think of for why he is even in the organization now is for PCA insurance in case he failed, but it's beyond time to trade Alcantara to improve the mediocrity at the MLB level.

[thawv]

I was thinking that if Cody doesn't opt out, they will have in the area of 60 million to spend.  And that is including arb guys and 0-3 guy using my own estimates.  Without trading current rostered players, there's really no room to add offense.  That said, I would spend just about all of that money on a couple of SP.  I don't see any way that Burnes is a realistic signing.  I'd be all in on Flaherty for sure.  And at least one of Bieber, Fried, and Buehler.  If they can't realistically improve the offense with new players, I think that they should go all in with pitching. 

[We Got The Whole 9]

20 hours ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

I am very wary of Rooker, or at least what to expect given his likely cost.  I think there's a lot of Nathaniel Lowe risk, in that they are pop up successes, have one aberrant BABIP year and they can't return to that level again.  2023 Rooker is a player worth having too, but I'm not keen to pay through the nose to get the 30 year old arb years of Rooker when there are other options(Joc, Teoscar, Santander) I have similar expectations for that are  available for fewer resources.

OTOH he has a 400 xwoba and a ton of crimson in areas where they usually portend great things going forward. To do what he's done in Oakland is insane. Statcast says he'd have 44 HR as a Cub. I might be out of pocket with this but to me he's the next Nelson Cruz. Plug him in the lineup and get a top 10 hitter and pay about 40M for his prime? Bye, Kevin, Jordan/Brown, best of luck.

[Tryptamine]

I know there's a substantial amount of risk involved in it, but I wouldn't hate if Nico was dealt for a SP and Shaw was your opening day 2B. He's an odds on favorite to not match the 3.5 fWAR Nico will likely end up providing this year, but he does provide a larger ceiling, especially offensively. As usual, Seattle makes sense as a trade partner. I'd rather run out Shaw at 2B and Bryce Miller as a starter with tons of money left to spend In FA. Nico alone might not get it done but I don't think it would require anyone big, maybe a guy in the 15-20 range. 

[Bertz]

11 minutes ago, thawv said:

I was thinking that if Cody doesn't opt out, they will have in the area of 60 million to spend.  And that is including arb guys and 0-3 guy using my own estimates.  Without trading current rostered players, there's really no room to add offense.  That said, I would spend just about all of that money on a couple of SP.  I don't see any way that Burnes is a realistic signing.  I'd be all in on Flaherty for sure.  And at least one of Bieber, Fried, and Buehler.  If they can't realistically improve the offense with new players, I think that they should go all in with pitching. 

Hard to put exacts on it this far out but it's closer to 80M available if Bellinger leaves

[Cuzi]

4 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

I know there's a substantial amount of risk involved in it, but I wouldn't hate if Nico was dealt for a SP and Shaw was your opening day 2B. He's an odds on favorite to not match the 3.5 fWAR Nico will likely end up providing this year, but he does provide a larger ceiling, especially offensively. As usual, Seattle makes sense as a trade partner. I'd rather run out Shaw at 2B and Bryce Miller as a starter with tons of money left to spend In FA. Nico alone might not get it done but I don't think it would require anyone big, maybe a guy in the 15-20 range. 

Nico Hoerner isn't going to net any starter from the Mariners. If the Mariners wanted to go that route they would be calling up the Orioles and talking about Holliday.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

7 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

OTOH he has a 400 xwoba and a ton of crimson in areas where they usually portend great things going forward. To do what he's done in Oakland is insane. Statcast says he'd have 44 HR as a Cub. I might be out of pocket with this but to me he's the next Nelson Cruz. Plug him in the lineup and get a top 10 hitter and pay about 40M for his prime? Bye, Kevin, Jordan/Brown, best of luck.

Nathaniel Lowe had a good xwOBA and a lot of red statcast numbers his big year too!  Unsustainable doesn't have to be lucky or undeserved.  Rooker is flirting with the highest single season BABIP since the pandemic, and that's not a leaderboard that has much in the way of repeat names, especially not those with as much swing and miss as he has.  I generally think Cruz is a better pure hitter, but comparing to Nelson at similar ages might actually be a good barometer.  He had one outlier BABIP season in Texas with a 147 wRC+, but was otherwise a 115-120 guy until his mid-30s.  Maybe Rooker is a 140 guy now, it's not an idea that's completely without merit, but I think the smart money is that he's more of a good hitter having an incredible season that won't repeat for various reasons(age, unsustainable BIP, etc).

[Backtobanks]

16 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

I know there's a substantial amount of risk involved in it, but I wouldn't hate if Nico was dealt for a SP and Shaw was your opening day 2B. He's an odds on favorite to not match the 3.5 fWAR Nico will likely end up providing this year, but he does provide a larger ceiling, especially offensively. As usual, Seattle makes sense as a trade partner. I'd rather run out Shaw at 2B and Bryce Miller as a starter with tons of money left to spend In FA. Nico alone might not get it done but I don't think it would require anyone big, maybe a guy in the 15-20 range. 

I hate the thought of trading Nico, but he has the most trade value while having a possible replacement.  as I posted before, going all out for Vlad and using Busch, Paredes, Shaw at 2B/3b would improve the offense.

[thawv]

1 hour ago, Bertz said:

Hard to put exacts on it this far out but it's closer to 80M available if Bellinger leaves

I think your right!  I was going by memory.  Right now, it show they are 90.6 million under the threshold.  It will probably be closer to 85 million after the whole Smyly pay out.  If Cody opts out, that would bring it to around 112 million.  Add in, let's say 30 million in arb guys and 0-3 guys, and we're at 82 ish.  Nice catch!

[Rcal10]

2 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

I hate the thought of trading Nico, but he has the most trade value while having a possible replacement.  as I posted before, going all out for Vlad and using Busch, Paredes, Shaw at 2B/3b would improve the offense.

I do understand this idea. But to do that they have to extend Vlad. Move Busch to second and the offense replaces Nico with Vlad. Plus they get something for Nico. Even if you have to add a higher end prospect to Nico I would do it for a solid young pitcher. So you improve there as well. And if Busch can’t handle second they can always bring in Shaw or Triantos, eventually. I would be fine with something like this, but it does come with risk. Of course, if you trade for a solid pitcher and Vlad you have depleted the farm substantially. So they might not have Shaw or Triantos to fall back on. Guess that is the risk. Busch has to handle second. 

[Rcal10]

2 minutes ago, thawv said:

I think your right!  I was going by memory.  Right now, it show they are 90.6 million under the threshold.  It will probably be closer to 85 million after the whole Smyly pay out.  If Cody opts out, that would bring it to around 112 million.  Add in, let's say 30 million in arb guys and 0-3 guys, and we're at 82 ish.  Nice catch!

But you said if Cody doesn’t opt out they would have round $60M. So you were right from the start. Around $60M to $63M if he doesn’t opt out and $80M to $85M if he opts out. 
ITS BOTH!!!!! 

[thawv]

12 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

But you said if Cody doesn’t opt out they would have round $60M. So you were right from the start. Around $60M to $63M if he doesn’t opt out and $80M to $85M if he opts out. 
ITS BOTH!!!!! 

I'm looking at 90.6 million below the cap with Cody's contract in that number.  I made a mistake by going by old memory!  If he opts out, it's about 112 million under.  Add back in all the arb guys and 0-3 guys and we're back down to the low 80's if he opts out.  Now I'm confused!

 

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, thawv said:

I was thinking that if Cody doesn’t opt out they will have in the area of 60 million to spend.  And that is including arb guys and 0-3 guy using my own estimates.  Without trading current rostered players, there's really no room to add offense.  That said, I would spend just about all of that money on a couple of SP.  I don't see any way that Burnes is a realistic signing.  I'd be all in on Flaherty for sure.  And at least one of Bieber, Fried, and Buehler.  If they can't realistically improve the offense with new players, I think that they should go all in with pitching. 

Above is what was written. It says “if Cody doesn’t opt out” they have around $60M. Later Bertz said he see it around $80M if he does leave. Give or take a few million(like Bertz said, it is hard to be exact on this) you are both basically saying the same thing. Are you now saying you think they have $80M+ with Cody? 

[thawv]

14 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Above is what was written. It says “if Cody doesn’t opt out” they have around $60M. Later Bertz said he see it around $80M if he does leave. Give or take a few million(like Bertz said, it is hard to be exact on this) you are both basically saying the same thing. Are you now saying you think they have $80M+ with Cody? 

Ok, let's try this again.  With the extra Smyly money being paid out, they should be around 85 million under with Cody in the mix.  If he opts out, they will be about 112 million under.  With 0-3 guys and arb guys, I estimate that to be in the 30 million range.  So yes, if Cody opts out, they should have in the low 80's to spend.  If he doesn't, they will be about 55 million under. 

I meant that if he doesn't opt out they will be around 60 million.  But then I forgot about Smyly's bonus money. 

 

[Bertz]

7 minutes ago, thawv said:

Ok, let's try this again.  With the extra Smyly money being paid out, they should be around 85 million under with Cody in the mix.  If he opts out, they will be about 112 million under.  With 0-3 guys and arb guys, I estimate that to be in the 30 million range.  So yes, if Cody opts out, they should have in the low 80's to spend.  If he doesn't, they will be about 55 million under. 

I meant that if he doesn't opt out they will be around 60 million.  But then I forgot about Smyly's bonus money. 

 

These rules are inscrutable, but Smyly doesn't impact 2025 at all.  That money is accounted for already in '23 and '24.  The CBA uses average annual values with buyouts and such included specifically to head off as many schemes and shenanigans as possible. 

Separately, a quick and dirty rule of thumb is that guys get a 50% raise each round of arb.  If we use that rough number plus make these two assumptions:

- Wisdom, Alzolay, Bethancourt, Madrigal, and Almonte all get traded or non-tendered

- Jed holds $5M back for breathing room (trade deadline acquisitions, performance bonuses, IL time, etc.)

I'm showing the team $79M under the tax.  There might be a little deviation from those two assumptions above, which would likely lower the $ available.  At the same time Jed showed this year he's not necessarily going to sweat being a couple million over, which would raise it.  But overall without getting too deep into the accounting weeds $80M is a nice round number to us to collectively keep in our heads even if it might be off by a couple percent in either direction.

[Rcal10]

33 minutes ago, Bertz said:

These rules are inscrutable, but Smyly doesn't impact 2025 at all.  That money is accounted for already in '23 and '24.  The CBA uses average annual values with buyouts and such included specifically to head off as many schemes and shenanigans as possible. 

Separately, a quick and dirty rule of thumb is that guys get a 50% raise each round of arb.  If we use that rough number plus make these two assumptions:

- Wisdom, Alzolay, Bethancourt, Madrigal, and Almonte all get traded or non-tendered

- Jed holds $5M back for breathing room (trade deadline acquisitions, performance bonuses, IL time, etc.)

I'm showing the team $79M under the tax.  There might be a little deviation from those two assumptions above, which would likely lower the $ available.  At the same time Jed showed this year he's not necessarily going to sweat being a couple million over, which would raise it.  But overall without getting too deep into the accounting weeds $80M is a nice round number to us to collectively keep in our heads even if it might be off by a couple percent in either direction.

This is without Bellinger on the team, right? 

[Bertz]

1 hour ago, Rcal10 said:

This is without Bellinger on the team, right? 

Yup.  Lop off $25M if he opts in

[thawv]

2 hours ago, Bertz said:

These rules are inscrutable, but Smyly doesn't impact 2025 at all.  That money is accounted for already in '23 and '24.  The CBA uses average annual values with buyouts and such included specifically to head off as many schemes and shenanigans as possible. 

Separately, a quick and dirty rule of thumb is that guys get a 50% raise each round of arb.  If we use that rough number plus make these two assumptions:

- Wisdom, Alzolay, Bethancourt, Madrigal, and Almonte all get traded or non-tendered

- Jed holds $5M back for breathing room (trade deadline acquisitions, performance bonuses, IL time, etc.)

I'm showing the team $79M under the tax.  There might be a little deviation from those two assumptions above, which would likely lower the $ available.  At the same time Jed showed this year he's not necessarily going to sweat being a couple million over, which would raise it.  But overall without getting too deep into the accounting weeds $80M is a nice round number to us to collectively keep in our heads even if it might be off by a couple percent in either direction.

This all sounds fair.  Symly's bonus is going to put them over this year, and has nothing to do with next year.  I don't recall implying that it did.  Sorry if it sounded that way. 

I also want to add that I believe that Jed very much wanted to stay under, and is very upset that he's going to go over.  Not upset as Tom is though.  Even if it's by a tiny bit.  He had one job.  Stay under budget.  He couldn't do that, and the team missed the playoffs.  Not a prediction or anything, but that to me is a fireable offense.   The key to staying under, was to have the room and ability to go over next season if it could make them a WS contender.  The penalty is not an issue for Tom.  It's the inability to not go over next year that's the issue.  

Edited September 18, 2024 by thawv

[Bertz]

14 minutes ago, thawv said:

This all sounds fair.  Symly's bonus is going to put them over this year, and has nothing to do with next year.  I don't recall implying that it did.  Sorry if it sounded that way. 

I also want to add that I believe that Jed very much wanted to stay under, and is very upset that he's going to go over.  Not upset as Tom is though.  Even if it's by a tiny bit.  He had one job.  Stay under budget.  He couldn't do that, and the team missed the playoffs.  Not a prediction or anything, but that to me is a fireable offense.   The key to staying under, was to have the room and ability to go over next season if it could make them a WS contender.  The penalty is not an issue for Tom.  It's the inability to not go over next year that's the issue.  

What are you basing any of this on?

[thawv]

1 minute ago, Bertz said:

What are you basing any of this on?

Tom said that the first level of the CBT is the budget.  He actually said something like, "we like to operate below the first level."  That's code for, the first level is our budget.  So Jed went over budget.  Which isn't as bad as going over the threshold.  Now they won't go over next season. 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

[Backtobanks]

3 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

I do understand this idea. But to do that they have to extend Vlad. Move Busch to second and the offense replaces Nico with Vlad. Plus they get something for Nico. Even if you have to add a higher end prospect to Nico I would do it for a solid young pitcher. So you improve there as well. And if Busch can’t handle second they can always bring in Shaw or Triantos, eventually. I would be fine with something like this, but it does come with risk. Of course, if you trade for a solid pitcher and Vlad you have depleted the farm substantially. So they might not have Shaw or Triantos to fall back on. Guess that is the risk. Busch has to handle second. 

To get Vlad and a solid pitcher, I wouldn't worry about the system.

 

[Bertz]

4 minutes ago, thawv said:

Tom said that the first level of the CBT is the budget.  He actually said something like, "we like to operate below the first level."  That's code for, the first level is our budget.  So Jed went over budget.  Which isn't as bad as going over the threshold.  Now they won't go over next season. 

If crossing the LT was a grave sin that is going to cost Jed his job, why do you think he re-signed Bellinger to the deal that he did?  Adding an extra year, lowering the AAV, and giving Bellinger additional money to opt into would have been a win win for all involved.  Further, why did he add salary at the trade deadline knowing that all of the IL time in the first half of the year put them right on the edge?

[squally1313]

22 minutes ago, Bertz said:

If crossing the LT was a grave sin that is going to cost Jed his job, why do you think he re-signed Bellinger to the deal that he did?  Adding an extra year, lowering the AAV, and giving Bellinger additional money to opt into would have been a win win for all involved.  Further, why did he add salary at the trade deadline knowing that all of the IL time in the first half of the year put them right on the edge?

Because he's Bad At His Job, duhhhh

[thawv]

13 hours ago, Bertz said:

If crossing the LT was a grave sin that is going to cost Jed his job, why do you think he re-signed Bellinger to the deal that he did?  Adding an extra year, lowering the AAV, and giving Bellinger additional money to opt into would have been a win win for all involved.  Further, why did he add salary at the trade deadline knowing that all of the IL time in the first half of the year put them right on the edge?

If it wasn't a grave sin, then why did he stay below it leaving just enough room for additions?  They could have gone over much earlier, but chose to stay under.  Smyly's bonus' are going to put them over.  Maybe it's not a big deal, but either way, they are staying under in 2025 because of this. 

Paying Belli this kind of money is a huge mistake.  Just another Jed blunder.