General Offseason Priorities

[Cuzi]

From the bits and pieces I've read of Hoyer's comments, I dont get a feeling that offense is going to be a priority. It seems more like their entire offseason plan, now that Bellinger opted in, is focusing on pitching. Hoyer's made comments about how many infielders and corner outfielders they have that can step up (from AAA) in the event someone goes down. He's also commented on focusing on bolstering the rotation and back end of the bullpen, specifically with a left handed reliever.

I really havent heard anything to suggest he intends to make a moderate investment in a hitter, other than maybe a catcher.

[Stratos]

22 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

From the bits and pieces I've read of Hoyer's comments, I dont get a feeling that offense is going to be a priority. It seems more like their entire offseason plan, now that Bellinger opted in, is focusing on pitching. Hoyer's made comments about how many infielders and corner outfielders they have that can step up (from AAA) in the event someone goes down. He's also commented on focusing on bolstering the rotation and back end of the bullpen, specifically with a left handed reliever.

I really havent heard anything to suggest he intends to make a moderate investment in a hitter, other than maybe a catcher.

True.  Hoyer also said they'd try to be "creative" generally.  But we have all positions filled with quality regulars besides catcher so unless there's a trade I can't see any quality FA bat wanting to sign here, nor does it even make much sense for us.

Pitching should be the focus.  Keep in mind that if the Cubs offense was suppressed at home that means the pitching wasn't as good as the results appear either.  Cubs were 10th in ERA and 20th in xFIP.

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, thawv said:

I'm more of a fan of 155-160 games for the every day starters.  I'd hate to see guys get 30 scheduled days off.  That's a ton of money on the bench daily.  I'd prefer to play the best 9 just about every day.  They get enough days off during the season.  

That is 1960-1970’s baseball thinking. Also Leo Durocher thinking that cost the 1969 Cubs a pennant. This isn’t baseball in those year thawv. Pitchers don’t throw 300 innings on a 4 man staff. No one throws 30 complete games like Fergie did back then and no one needs to play 155-160 games a year. Especially when you have similar guys to move guys around. We are not suggesting putting Wisdom or Tauchman in a rotation to play 140 games a year. We are talking about adding Lowe or Tucker to the mix. Huge difference. And it improves the bench greatly.

Edited November 6, 2024 by Rcal10

[Rcal10]

17 minutes ago, Stratos said:

True.  Hoyer also said they'd try to be "creative" generally.  But we have all positions filled with quality regulars besides catcher so unless there's a trade I can't see any quality FA bat wanting to sign here, nor does it even make much sense for us.

Pitching should be the focus.  Keep in mind that if the Cubs offense was suppressed at home that means the pitching wasn't as good as the results appear either.  Cubs were 10th in ERA and 20th in xFIP.

I agree the focus in free agency will be pitching. Probably also a bigger focus in a trade too. I also agree a FA bat, except Soto, wouldn’t want to come here because they cannot guarantee an everyday spot. But if someone is traded here he doesn’t have the option of picking his team. That is why guys like Lowe, Tucker and maybe even Vlad are brought up. And I also know that is doubtful. But slightly more likely than a FA signing here without a position. 

[Rcal10]

53 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

From the bits and pieces I've read of Hoyer's comments, I dont get a feeling that offense is going to be a priority. It seems more like their entire offseason plan, now that Bellinger opted in, is focusing on pitching. Hoyer's made comments about how many infielders and corner outfielders they have that can step up (from AAA) in the event someone goes down. He's also commented on focusing on bolstering the rotation and back end of the bullpen, specifically with a left handed reliever.

I really havent heard anything to suggest he intends to make a moderate investment in a hitter, other than maybe a catcher.

Fair point. But he also said improve within the margins. Adding a decent bat to replace one of the bench bats they have is improving within the margins.  I absolutely agree pitching will be the main focus. Starting and a lefty in the pen. Then catcher. But I can see one fairly decent bat added to the mix. If for nothing else, to be a solid bench bat, guy who may play 3 to 4 days a week. They have enough young talent to trade for that semi regular bat and still not hit the farm much. 

Edited November 6, 2024 by Rcal10

[squally1313]

2 hours ago, thawv said:

I'm more of a fan of 155-160 games for the every day starters.  I'd hate to see guys get 30 scheduled days off.  That's a ton of money on the bench daily.  I'd prefer to play the best 9 just about every day.  They get enough days off during the season.  

35 players appeared (not even started) in 155 games. Preferences aside, asking or expecting Happ/pca/bellinger/suzuki/busch to all make 150+ starts is incredibly unrealistic. 

[Rcal10]

22 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

35 players appeared (not even started) in 155 games. Preferences aside, asking or expecting Happ/pca/bellinger/suzuki/busch to all make 150+ starts is incredibly unrealistic. 

Honestly, it is just thawv living in the 60’s and 70’s when you grow up on baseball in that time it is hard for some to let it go.  I remember those times too. But that doesn’t mean I still think that is how the game should be played. 

[Stratos]

5 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

Fair point. But he also said improve within the margins. Adding a decent bat to replace one of the bench bats they have is improving within the margins.  I absolutely agree pitching will be the main focus. Starting and a lefty in the pen. Then catcher. But I can see one fairly decent bat added to the mix. If for nothing else, to be a solid bench bat, guy who may play 3 to 4 days a week. They have enough young talent to trade for that semi regular bat and still not hit the farm much. 

I think recently, maybe from the end of season presser, Jed also said they would work to improve processes too.  To get the most out of what they already have so players can "overachieve" their projections.  Some of that has been with some coaching changes so far, and we've seen some scouting shifts.  Who knows what's going on elsewhere behind the scenes that doesn't include personnel change.

If they can make the rotation and pen a real strength, including by getting SP depth and forcing some of their young SP to the pen, that would go a long way.  If .e.g Wicks were to do well as an SP and Brown/Assad are in the pen that would help us.

[thawv]

10 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

That is 1960-1970’s baseball thinking. Also Leo Durocher thinking that cost the 1969 Cubs a pennant. This isn’t baseball in those year thawv. Pitchers don’t throw 300 innings on a 4 man staff. No one throws 30 complete games like Fergie did back then and no one needs to play 155-160 games a year. Especially when you have similar guys to move guys around. We are not suggesting putting Wisdom or Tauchman in a rotation to play 140 games a year. We are talking about adding Lowe or Tucker to the mix. Huge difference. And it improves the bench greatly.

I understand that.  But having your best players only play 135 games is not good.  I also thought to myself, "Rcal is probably going to chime in."  Have a great day, kid!

[Jason Ross]

2 hours ago, thawv said:

I understand that.  But having your best players only play 135 games is not good.  I also thought to myself, "Rcal is probably going to chime in."  Have a great day, kid!

Teams have learned that having your players play 135 well rested, healthy, and strong games beats 155 games where an extra 20-30 are banged up, and below full health. Worse yet, it beats playing 100 games because you over extended yourself and got hurt, losing extra games because you played when you were in less than good condition health wise. 

In a perfect world, your best players would play every game, in full health, with full stamina, in perfect working conditions. But we don't live in that world. Load management, health and the likes are all real things. 

[Rcal10]

4 hours ago, thawv said:

I understand that.  But having your best players only play 135 games is not good.  I also thought to myself, "Rcal is probably going to chime in."  Have a great day, kid!

Doing well thawv. Hope you are too. Now, back to baseball. No one is suggesting Mastrobuoni or Wisdom should be added to the 8 non catching regulars the Cubs have now. People are talking about Lowe or Tucker. If the Cubs added one of those guys who are the best 8. What 8 should play 155 games and who should only play 50 games. In reality, even with 9 guys for 8 positions, when you factor in inevitable injuries, guys that are healthy all year from the 9 guys being discussed would probably play 145-150 games anyway. That is more than enough, especially when you have a back up just as good. The best part of this plan, besides giving guys rest, is you always have a starting caliber player on the bench. 

[chibears55]

19 hours ago, Bertz said:

 

 

Didn't think they'd trade him now

[KCCub]

Hmm

 

[JBears79]

2 minutes ago, KCCub said:

Hmm

 

Could just send him across town for Crochet.

[Tryptamine]

17 minutes ago, KCCub said:

Hmm

 

I'm in the minority, but I'd deal him before Alcantara whom everyone seems ready to ship out of town.

 

WSox and Mariners definitely make sense. 

Edited November 6, 2024 by Tryptamine

[Tryptamine]

From a BR article, so it's nothing more than speculation, but I'd pull the trigger. I'm not terribly high on Rojas and I think Caissie is pretty expendable. 

[Post Count Padder]

What are thoughts on Kyle Higashioka one a one year deal to team with Amaya? Veteran with decent numbers behind the plate who provides some power. And gives us another year to see if Ballesteros is gonna be the guy at catcher. Also shouldn't cost a ton and savings can be used to help the pen.

[Jason Ross]

5 minutes ago, Post Count Padder said:

What are thoughts on Kyle Higashioka one a one year deal to team with Amaya? Veteran with decent numbers behind the plate who provides some power. And gives us another year to see if Ballesteros is gonna be the guy at catcher. Also shouldn't cost a ton and savings can be used to help the pen.

If the Cubs miss out on others, he wouldn't be a terrible 1 or 2 year option. He'll turn 35 early into the season, and catchers + age can sometimes equal quick fall-offs. He had some really solid Savant data, and is a good framer (terrible pop and arm, however). 

[Rcal10]

Interesting that the Mariners and Cubs seem to match up pretty well. I know people hate to give up prospects. But would Shaw+ be something anyone would be willing to deal for either Gilbert, Kirby, Miller or Woo? It would give the Cubs a controlled pitcher for at least 2 years and maybe as many as 5, depending on who they got. It would also be giving them a pitcher better than Taillon for not a lot of money. Again, depending on who they got, he could be very cheap. Maybe this would allow the Cubs to think bigger for the lefty pen and and think of Scott. And they would still have money to improve the bench as well as the catchers position. If the Cubs could get one of the Seattle pitchers or Crochet for a few prospects it does open up possibilities to spend money elsewhere. 

[Post Count Padder]

10 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Interesting that the Mariners and Cubs seem to match up pretty well. I know people hate to give up prospects. But would Shaw+ be something anyone would be willing to deal for either Gilbert, Kirby, Miller or Woo? It would give the Cubs a controlled pitcher for at least 2 years and maybe as many as 5, depending on who they got. It would also be giving them a pitcher better than Taillon for not a lot of money. Again, depending on who they got, he could be very cheap. Maybe this would allow the Cubs to think bigger for the lefty pen and and think of Scott. And they would still have money to improve the bench as well as the catchers position. If the Cubs could get one of the Seattle pitchers or Crochet for a few prospects it does open up possibilities to spend money elsewhere. 

I'd be all for one of the Mariners starters and they have the depth. I think we could possibly do it without Shaw. I think they go all in on Bregman in FA (the M's that is). Maybe Caissie and Triantos and someone like Arias or a further away INF prospect for one of them?

[JBears79]

14 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Interesting that the Mariners and Cubs seem to match up pretty well. I know people hate to give up prospects. But would Shaw+ be something anyone would be willing to deal for either Gilbert, Kirby, Miller or Woo? It would give the Cubs a controlled pitcher for at least 2 years and maybe as many as 5, depending on who they got. It would also be giving them a pitcher better than Taillon for not a lot of money. Again, depending on who they got, he could be very cheap. Maybe this would allow the Cubs to think bigger for the lefty pen and and think of Scott. And they would still have money to improve the bench as well as the catchers position. If the Cubs could get one of the Seattle pitchers or Crochet for a few prospects it does open up possibilities to spend money elsewhere. 

Id like to avoid dealing Shaw or Cam Smith in any deal this offseason. I think we have the depth to get any deal done with out including those two.

[Cuzi]

4 minutes ago, Post Count Padder said:

I'd be all for one of the Mariners starters and they have the depth. I think we could possibly do it without Shaw. I think they go all in on Bregman in FA (the M's that is). Maybe Caissie and Triantos and someone like Arias or a further away INF prospect for one of them?

The Mariners want to upgrade their infield. They aren't trading away one of those pitchers with the best infielder being Triantos in return.

The Cubs are probably more interested in taking some of the salary burden of Castillo off their hands. I doubt they have it in them to give up what it would take to get any one of the other 4.

[Stratos]

4 hours ago, Tryptamine said:

I'm in the minority, but I'd deal him before Alcantara whom everyone seems ready to ship out of town.

 

WSox and Mariners definitely make sense. 

I would 100% deal Caissie before Alcantara.  I like both and would keep both if possible.  We have lots of talent in the low minors to deal plus guys like Triantos.

Edited November 7, 2024 by Stratos

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, Post Count Padder said:

What are thoughts on Kyle Higashioka one a one year deal to team with Amaya? Veteran with decent numbers behind the plate who provides some power. And gives us another year to see if Ballesteros is gonna be the guy at catcher. Also shouldn't cost a ton and savings can be used to help the pen.

I think should they have a good idea by now what Bellasteros will or won't be capable of.  

[Backtobanks]

6 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

The Mariners want to upgrade their infield. They aren't trading away one of those pitchers with the best infielder being Triantos in return.

The Cubs are probably more interested in taking some of the salary burden of Castillo off their hands. I doubt they have it in them to give up what it would take to get any one of the other 4.

Rather than the Mariners and their infield situation, I'd rather get Crochet from the WS who need to upgrade everything.