Cody Opts In

[thawv]

19 hours ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

You have to count a handful of extra league minimum salaries to account for the fact that players on the IL still earn money towards the CBT and so do their replacements even if they get demoted after.  Fangraphs counts league minimum salaries up to 33 players for this reason and they're about the gold standard for this estimate: https://www.fangraphs.com/roster-resource/payroll/cubs

This also means that non-tendering only nets you the benefit *above the league minimum*.  Fangraphs shows the team at 43.3 million under with all players assumed tendered.  If you assume a handful of non-tenders that gets you to the low 50s depending on who you choose, but there's no way to really get north of 55 unless you do something silly like non-tender Steele or Paredes.

How are my 23 player salaries not at 65 million below the cap?  This includes all 40 man guys, 0-3 bonus pool money, and all player benefits.  What am I missing?

[thawv]

With Happ, PCA, Belli, and Suzuki all being OF'ers, I can't imagine carrying 2 more OF'ers.  I think there's on spot for 1 OF bench player.  Even though Suzuki is going to DH, he's still the 4th OF'er.  

 

What am I missing with Canario?  Both Tauchman and Canario are out of options.  One is 34 years old at 3 million.  One is 25 years old at 760k.   We know who Tachman is, and we don't know who Canario is.  If I'm removing one of the from the system, it's not going to be Canario.  They both can't stay around on the 40.  I'm choosing Canario as the 5 OF'er over Tauchman here. 

[Jason Ross]

37 minutes ago, thawv said:

With Happ, PCA, Belli, and Suzuki all being OF'ers, I can't imagine carrying 2 more OF'ers.  I think there's on spot for 1 OF bench player.  Even though Suzuki is going to DH, he's still the 4th OF'er.  

 

What am I missing with Canario?  Both Tauchman and Canario are out of options.  One is 34 years old at 3 million.  One is 25 years old at 760k.   We know who Tachman is, and we don't know who Canario is.  If I'm removing one of the from the system, it's not going to be Canario.  They both can't stay around on the 40.  I'm choosing Canario as the 5 OF'er over Tauchman here. 

Canario isn't very good is the issue. He strikes out a third of the time, and he's still in Triple-A. This isn't his first rodeo in Iowa and the contact issues aren't getting a lick better, they're getting worse - a major red flag . His contact rate is sitting at around 60% currently...woefully bad. That's 13% worse than average Triple-A. His MiLB contact rate was lower than every qualified MLB hitter last year. What do we think would happen against MLB pitching instead of Triple-A pitching? He does damage when he makes contact, yes, but the process matters as much if not more here. His processes are really bad as of right now.

If you're choosing Canario, someone who has every red flag as a failure of an MLB hitter over a career 101 wRC+ hitter,  over his last 700 PA's a 110 wRC+ hitter and positive corner defender...then you're making the choice simply because "we don't know" what Canario can do and he's younger. There's almost no reason to believe he's the better player now or will be any time soon. Just because we don't 100% know, doesn't mean we can almost assuredly educated guess our way to the conclusion that "As it stands, Canario is not going to be successful".

To put it another way, Alexander Canario had a 116 wRC+ at Triple-A while Tauchman had a 111 wRC+ at a much more difficult level. The gulf between the two levels is massive as it stands - larger than it's been in a long while. So Canario's 116 wRC+ coupled with a completely unsustainable K% at a lower level should be all we need to see to know that there's no way as it stands he'd be likely to approach a 111 wRC+ in the Majors.

I fully suspect if given a chance, Canario is a sub replacement player unless something majorly changes. with his ability to hit a baseball with regularity.

[thawv]

17 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Canario isn't very good is the issue. He strikes out a third of the time, and he's still in Triple-A. This isn't his first rodeo in Iowa and the contact issues aren't getting a lick better, they're getting worse - a major red flag . His contact rate is sitting at around 60% currently...woefully bad. That's 13% worse than average Triple-A. His MiLB contact rate was lower than every qualified MLB hitter last year. What do we think would happen against MLB pitching instead of Triple-A pitching? He does damage when he makes contact, yes, but the process matters as much if not more here. His processes are really bad as of right now.

If you're choosing Canario, someone who has every red flag as a failure of an MLB hitter over a career 101 wRC+ hitter,  over his last 700 PA's a 110 wRC+ hitter and positive corner defender...then you're making the choice simply because "we don't know" what Canario can do and he's younger. There's almost no reason to believe he's the better player now or will be any time soon. Just because we don't 100% know, doesn't mean we can almost assuredly educated guess our way to the conclusion that "As it stands, Canario is not going to be successful".

To put it another way, Alexander Canario had a 116 wRC+ at Triple-A while Tauchman had a 111 wRC+ at a much more difficult level. The gulf between the two levels is massive as it stands - larger than it's been in a long while. So Canario's 116 wRC+ coupled with a completely unsustainable K% at a lower level should be all we need to see to know that there's no way as it stands he'd be likely to approach a 111 wRC+ in the Majors.

I fully suspect if given a chance, Canario is a sub replacement player unless something majorly changes. with his ability to hit a baseball with regularity.

I was looking at a couple factors.  Age, cost, and power.  But I get your point.  Thanks. 

[Rcal10]

16 minutes ago, thawv said:

I was looking at a couple factors.  Age, cost, and power.  But I get your point.  Thanks. 

Canario not being a good answer does not change the fact that Tauchman isn’t either. He is a fine player. A useful back up outfielder and even an ok bench bat. But for the Cubs, that outfield bat needs to be right handed. To me the goal of the off season  would be to add a solid semi-regular infielder who bats left handed, a right handed hitting outfield/1B bat, a catcher to drop Amaya to a back up/split equal time roll, and upgrade the last bat in the team, left or right handed. That would be how to upgrade the offense. Then from the pitching side add a guy near the top of the rotation and at least one left handed pen arm and maybe another pen arm. They have enough money and minor league talent to make a few of those movers bigger moves and then improve along the margins with the small moves. 

[Jason Ross]

36 minutes ago, thawv said:

I was looking at a couple factors.  Age, cost, and power.  But I get your point.  Thanks. 

Yeah. He's just not good. Tauchman is a pretty good player. He's not a star, but he's useful. The Cubs don't need to penny pinch $5m. Now, can the Cubs trade Tauchman for something else? Sure thing! He's better than getting 150 PA's and some team should probably be willing to roll with him as a 4th.  They can find a different 5th OF'er. But I don't think any answer for the Cubs on Opening Day should be Alexander Canario as of now.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

1 hour ago, thawv said:

How are my 23 player salaries not at 65 million below the cap?  This includes all 40 man guys, 0-3 bonus pool money, and all player benefits.  What am I missing?

The link you quoted literally shows it line by line, compare to see where you aren't including something.

[Bertz]

Sleeping on it I think one thing the Cody news does is it basically cements SP as the most likely item to tick off via trade?

When it looked like Cody was gone, I had roughly this budget in mind for the offseason:

Position Players - $30-35M for 3 guys

Starting Pitching - $20-25M for 1 guy

Relief Pitching - $15-20M for 2 guys

Obviously the ranges could shift based on specific prices and of course trades, but that was the rough outline in my mind to successfully execute the shopping list.

With Bellinger in the fold, you've spent $27M and still need 3 guys on the position player side (a catcher, and infielder, and a righty bat).  You can move some money around, cut some corners, but generally money is a bit tight.  Probably about $10M shy of what I'd want to comfortably do all this shopping via FA?

I think that means that the inevitable trade this winter, or at least one if there's multiple, needs to involve netting cost controlled talent.  And I think SP is the most logical and direct place to do that without it feeling like a cost cutting move.  For instance trading for Dylan Cease 100% fits this MO.  Trading for Jesus Luzardo fits this MO.  etc.

You can absolutely save that $10M elsewhere.  But likely requires A) doing it piecemeal with multiple moves or B) trading for a pre-arb closer which doesn't feel very Jed.

[LBiittner]

Crochet costs little $ 

[Bertz]

2 minutes ago, LBiittner said:

Crochet costs little $ 

He does.  $3M for one of the half dozen best pitchers in the sport would be quite a needle mover.

[LBiittner]

Just a thought bednar @ 6mil?

[thawv]

1 hour ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

The link you quoted literally shows it line by line, compare to see where you aren't including something.

I didn't miss a thing.  Everything in my post adds up to my numbers.  There's nothing left out.  It would be a lot easier conversation if you just told me what you're referring to.  Thanks!

Edited November 4, 2024 by thawv

[Transmogrified Tiger]

18 minutes ago, thawv said:

I didn't miss a thing.  Everything is in the post, that to add up to my numbers.  It would be a lot easier conversation if you just told me what you're referring to.  Thanks!

I'm talking about this: https://www.fangraphs.com/roster-resource/payroll/cubs

The big difference from what you typed out and what Fangraphs has is they are accounting for a proper number of roster days, like I said in my original post.  Think of it this way, right now you're only counting a 23 man roster(the '40 man' piece in your 22 million is counting the MiLB salaries of the minor leaguers).  You not only need to be a full roster, you need to be more than that.  

 

For example, if Shota misses the season due a freak gasoline fight accident, he will still make his full salary towards the CBT.  But they will still use all 26 roster spots so you'd need to add another league minimum salary to get to the actual amount they spent.  This applies to all time spent on the MLB IL, which will add up to a handful of full-season roster spots.  It's an estimate, they could be super healthy and use less or super hurt and use more, but when you think of how many days guys spend on the 60 day IL along with every 15 day IL trip, it adds up.  Using Fangraphs' injury tracker, it looks like the Cubs had 1546 IL days last year, which is right about 9 minimum salaries' worth in addition to a 26 man roster.

 

So in addition to your 23 man roster plus player benefits/non-payroll stuff(which you have), you need to add about 10 league minimum salaries.  That's the biggest difference.  Also, you don't have Tauchman (+2.15 million), and your arb estimates for Steele(100k), Paredes(1.6 million), Merryweather(100k), and Pearson(200k) are lower than Fangraphs/MLBTR's.  Which is the additional ~4 million to bring us down to 52-53 under the CBT.

[LBiittner]

If Jed were to exceed the luxury tax in 2025 by $10-15mil, cubs then would be hit with 30% charge. So it would be 3-4.5mil penalty? Or is it 30% of the entire payroll? Like 75mil penalty?

[squally1313]

2 minutes ago, LBiittner said:

If Jed were to exceed the luxury tax in 2025 by $10-15mil, cubs then would be hit with 30% charge. So it would be 3-4.5mil penalty? Or is it 30% of the entire payroll? Like 75mil penalty?

It's the incremental piece. $3-$4.5m.

[LBiittner]

14 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

It's the incremental piece. $3-$4.5m.

Thanks squally, so it's a mere slap on the wrist, kinda like the equivalent of Tucker barnhardt monies

[squally1313]

9 minutes ago, LBiittner said:

Thanks squally, so it's a mere slap on the wrist, kinda like the equivalent of Tucker barnhardt monies

There's an additional surcharge if we go more than $20m over, but not a terrible one (penalty percentage goes from 30% to 42%). Over $40m past the limit it starts to get pretty painful (think we move from 30% to 72%), but I don't think anyone thinks that is a realistic outcome here. Percentage goes from 30% to 50% if we cross the threshold again in 2026, and given the lack of expiring deals after 2025 (Swanson/Bellinger/Happ/Suzuki/Taillon/Imanaga/Hoerner are all signed through 2026), that's probably the real motivator in staying under this year and resetting. You'd probably expect them to fall back under after 2026. 

 

[Irrelevant Dude]

9 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

given the lack of expiring deals after 2025 (Swanson/Bellinger/Happ/Suzuki/Taillon/Imanaga/Hoerner are all signed through 2026)

If Bellinger has another decent year in 2025, I think he is much more likely to opt out next time to sign a multi-year deal going into his age 30 season.  He wasn't going to beat the $27.5M the Cubs are going to pay him in 2025, but he would probably be willing to give up 1 year of $25M in exchange for a long term deal.  Of course if he gets hurt or regresses further in 2025, then he would opt in again, but hopefully that isn't an issue.

Edited November 4, 2024 by Irrelevant Dude

[thawv]

1 hour ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

I'm talking about this: https://www.fangraphs.com/roster-resource/payroll/cubs

The big difference from what you typed out and what Fangraphs has is they are accounting for a proper number of roster days, like I said in my original post.  Think of it this way, right now you're only counting a 23 man roster(the '40 man' piece in your 22 million is counting the MiLB salaries of the minor leaguers).  You not only need to be a full roster, you need to be more than that.  

 

For example, if Shota misses the season due a freak gasoline fight accident, he will still make his full salary towards the CBT.  But they will still use all 26 roster spots so you'd need to add another league minimum salary to get to the actual amount they spent.  This applies to all time spent on the MLB IL, which will add up to a handful of full-season roster spots.  It's an estimate, they could be super healthy and use less or super hurt and use more, but when you think of how many days guys spend on the 60 day IL along with every 15 day IL trip, it adds up.  Using Fangraphs' injury tracker, it looks like the Cubs had 1546 IL days last year, which is right about 9 minimum salaries' worth in addition to a 26 man roster.

 

So in addition to your 23 man roster plus player benefits/non-payroll stuff(which you have), you need to add about 10 league minimum salaries.  That's the biggest difference.  Also, you don't have Tauchman (+2.15 million), and your arb estimates for Steele(100k), Paredes(1.6 million), Merryweather(100k), and Pearson(200k) are lower than Fangraphs/MLBTR's.  Which is the additional ~4 million to bring us down to 52-53 under the CBT.

I'm pretty confused right now.  My payroll number is before FA starts.  So it's not going to have a 26 man roster.  It also includes a full 40 man roster.  It includes 0-3 bonus pool.  It includes player benefits.  And it includes signing 4 arb guys, with 12 pre arb guys on the roster before FA. 

Again, my number of having 65 million, is before free agency. 

I have about 131 million in contracts.  I have 14 million in arb guys.  I have a little over 9 million in league minimum guys.  I have 22 million in benefits, 0-3 bonus pool, and a full 40 man roster.  That's in the area of 176 million dollars with 23 player on the active roster.   What am I not seeing here?

I'm not sure where you got my arb numbers from.  It's nowhere near that.  I have Steele at 6.3 mil, Paredes at 5.3 million, Pearson at 1.3 million, and Merryweather at 1.2 million.  I don't have Tauchman getting tendered, but I'm starting to second guess that choice of mine.  

 

EDIT:  FG arb numbers differ from Cot's numbers a bit.  I'm using Cot's.  But since I'm only having 4 arb guys on the roster, it's not off by much compared to FG. 

 

Edited November 4, 2024 by thawv

[squally1313]

8 minutes ago, Irrelevant Dude said:

If Bellinger has another decent year in 2025, I think he is much more likely to opt out next time to sign a multi-year deal going into his age 30 season.  He wasn't going to beat the $27.5M the Cubs are going to pay him in 2025, but he would probably be willing to give up 1 year of $25M in exchange for a long term deal.  Of course if he gets hurt or regresses further in 2025, then he would opt in again, but hopefully that isn't an issue.

Possibly, but you're still looking at that being the only money coming off the books vs the $50m we had this offseason and the much higher number after 2026, and that's before arbitration raises to Steele and Paredes. 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Just now, thawv said:

I'm pretty confused right now.  My payroll number is before FA starts.  So it's not going to have a 26 man roster.  It also includes a full 40 man roster.  It includes 0-3 bonus pool.  It includes player benefits.  And it includes signing 4 arb guys, with 12 pre arb guys on the roster before FA. 

Again, my number of having 65 million, is before free agency. 

I have about 131 million in contracts.  I have 14 million in arb guys.  I have a little over 9 million in league minimum guys.  I have 22 million in benefits, 0-3 bonus pool, and a full 40 man roster.  That's in the area of 176 million dollars with 23 player on the active roster.   What am I not seeing here?

I'm not sure where you got my arb numbers from.  It's nowhere near that.  I have Steele at 6.3 mil, Paredes at 5.3 million, Pearson at 1.3 million, and Merryweather at 1.2 million.  I don't have Tauchman getting tendered, but I'm starting to second guess that choice of mine.  

I think you're genuinely trying to understand this, but we've also had multiple people spell it out a couple times so I think you also need to try re-reading it again to see if something clicks.   There's 2 components to the differences:
 

• Your arb numbers are different from Fangraphs/MLBTR.  You aren't including Tauchman at all(he projects to 2.9 million), and several of your estimates are lower than theirs.  For Steele/Paredes/Merryweather/Pearson I highlighted the difference between them.  Tauchman I only added 2.15 instead of the full 2.9 because...
• You are not including enough minimum salaries due to IL time.  Adding 10 would be consistent with how we're talking about it.  You can then subtract a minimum salary for any external additions(e.g. a 2 million dollar addition is only 1.25 million closer to the tax).  

If you want to think of the roster spots as 'open' and you include the full freight salary that's fine, but you still need to add ~7 of them to account for IL time.

[Jason Ross]

2 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Possibly, but you're still looking at that being the only money coming off the books vs the $50m we had this offseason and the much higher number after 2026, and that's before arbitration raises to Steele and Paredes. 

It'll be interesting to see who the Cubs do or don't trade this offseason as they should have some prospects ready to take some spots. Could see the Cubs shimmy out of the last year of a contract early in a trade, even with a player or two who has an NTC (expect it's easier to convince someone to waive one year of a NTC over multiple, especially if you don't expect to resign them).

[squally1313]

1 minute ago, 1908_Cubs said:

It'll be interesting to see who the Cubs do or don't trade this offseason as they should have some prospects ready to take some spots. Could see the Cubs shimmy out of the last year of a contract early in a trade, even with a player or two who has an NTC (expect it's easier to convince someone to waive one year of a NTC over multiple, especially if you don't expect to resign them).

Agreed, while I'd prefer all the post-2026 FA guys here because I don't see any better options for 2025, it's a different decision process next offseason. Hopefully by then you've either brought in or can point to a couple of the Shaw/Caissie/Alcantara as solid/elite talent that lets you offload a Happ, Hoerner, Suzuki, etc for some cash relief. 

[thawv]

9 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

I think you're genuinely trying to understand this, but we've also had multiple people spell it out a couple times so I think you also need to try re-reading it again to see if something clicks.   There's 2 components to the differences:
 

• Your arb numbers are different from Fangraphs/MLBTR.  You aren't including Tauchman at all(he projects to 2.9 million), and several of your estimates are lower than theirs.  For Steele/Paredes/Merryweather/Pearson I highlighted the difference between them.  Tauchman I only added 2.15 instead of the full 2.9 because...
• You are not including enough minimum salaries due to IL time.  Adding 10 would be consistent with how we're talking about it.  You can then subtract a minimum salary for any external additions(e.g. a 2 million dollar addition is only 1.25 million closer to the tax).  

If you want to think of the roster spots as 'open' and you include the full freight salary that's fine, but you still need to add ~7 of them to account for IL time.

I just now looked at FG's arb numbers.  They have 35 million in signed arb guys.  I have 14 million in signed arb guys.  If we just sign the 4 arb guys that I would sign, that brings FG number down to 176 million.  Exactly where mine is at. 

One thing I thought was different was the opt out money.  I was 100% certain that Bote's and Smyly's opt out money went against this season.  It looks like I was wrong about that. 

 I'm not able to comprehend what salaries due to injuries that haven't yet, have to due with the payroll before free agency starts tomorrow.

Thanks for trying to spell it out for me.  It actually looks like before my assumption on where the opt out money goes, they will actually have that 65 million, minus the 3.5 opt out money.  FG is going to have to back out a ton of arb payroll when it comes time.  I already did it.  

Edited November 4, 2024 by thawv

[mul21]

4 minutes ago, thawv said:

I just now looked at FG's arb numbers.  They have 35 million in signed arb guys.  I have 14 million in signed arb guys.  If we just sign the 4 arb guys that I would sign, that brings FG number down to 176 million.

One thing I thought was different was the opt out money.  I was 100% certain that Bote's and Smyly's opt out money went against this season.  It looks like I was wrong about that. 

 I'm not able to comprehend what salaries due to injuries that haven't yet, have to due with the payroll before free agency starts tomorrow.

Thanks for trying to spell it out for me.  It actually looks like before my assumption on where the opt out money goes, they will actually have that 65 million, minus the 3.5 opt out money.  FG is going to have to back out a ton of arb payroll when it comes time.  I already did it.  

The thing you're not compensating for is the salary paid to players on the active roster while someone else is on the IL.  As TT said, it equated to about 10 players worth of salary for the season, so you have to figure in probably $8 million minimum for that plus the $3million for Tauchmann and that gets your number to the $53 million everyone else is talking about.