Jeff Passan: Cubs expected to operate in "mid tier" pitching market

[Jason Ross]

 

[Jason Ross]

This comment was directly related to the free agent market. Interesting to see Hoerner's name pop back up as a trade candidate even with the injury. Interestingly, is how he characterized Bellinger. "another Cub available" he said, which made it feel like the Cubs are certainly open to moving him. 

Cubs were mentioned in the Yusii Kikuchi and Nick Pivetta blurbs of the article (it was an ESPN+ exclusive) but more as a group of other teams who might be in the same market, and less, it felt like, "The Cubs are actively looking at this guy".

This has the feeling of a weird offseason build up. 

 

[Bearded_Beef]

At least they doused us with all of the cold water upfront this season. 

It looks like we're running it back unless Jed can work some trade magic this off-season.   I doubt we'll get anything too "magical" for Cody and/or Nico though.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I believe this is the source: https://www.espn.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/42331709/mlb-offseason-2024-25-passan-predictions-juan-soto-roki-sasaki-corbin-burnes-pete-alonso

 

The Hoerner stuff in particular feels more speculative than I'm used to seeing from Passan.  I also wonder if a hotter trade market makes FA even harder to handicap this early.

[CubinNY]

1 hour ago, 1908_Cubs said:

 

This has the feeling of a weird offseason build up. 

 

weird is a word. 

Edited November 12, 2024 by CubinNY

[Jason Ross]

7 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

I believe this is the source: https://www.espn.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/42331709/mlb-offseason-2024-25-passan-predictions-juan-soto-roki-sasaki-corbin-burnes-pete-alonso

 

The Hoerner stuff in particular feels more speculative than I'm used to seeing from Passan.  I also wonder if a hotter trade market makes FA even harder to handicap this early.

Yep! I avoided posting the full source because it's an ESPN+ article and many don't have access to it. 

I agreed with the Hoerner thing...until the next line. It sounded very speculative, until he said "also available" and transitioned to Bellinger. Had he just moved to the Bellinger thing I'd have 100% agreed, but the use of "also" seemed to indicate the same feeling on Bellinger as they did Hoerner's trade status. But maybe that's just my interpretation. 

[Bertz]

I think the difference between what Passan actually said here and what the local guys said last week is pretty negligible.  

[Tryptamine]

At least there's zero reason to have any offseason hype

[Jason Ross]

25 minutes ago, Bertz said:

I think the difference between what Passan actually said here and what the local guys said last week is pretty negligible.  

On the pitching front I agree. Seems to be more or less confirming that the Cubs are likely to sit out the Burnes/Fried top of the market type thing in free agency, I think the Hoerner speculation/non-speculation is worth monitoring and the discussion revolving around Bellinger feels a bit "new". 

My hope is that the FA mid-tier search is as a 2nd piece to a bigger, more aggressive and top-end-starter minded trade. 

I do have a nagging fear that the will fall into the rut of "we can fix the rotation by signing mid-tier guys and fixing them". But trying to remain on the optimistic side.

[Bertz]

12 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

On the pitching front I agree. Seems to be more or less confirming that the Cubs are likely to sit out the Burnes/Fried top of the market type thing in free agency, I think the Hoerner speculation/non-speculation is worth monitoring and the discussion revolving around Bellinger feels a bit "new". 

My hope is that the FA mid-tier search is as a 2nd piece to a bigger, more aggressive and top-end-starter minded trade. 

I do have a nagging fear that the will fall into the rut of "we can fix the rotation by signing mid-tier guys and fixing them". But trying to remain on the optimistic side.

I mean a healthy amount of it is semantics.  Like these are the pitching WAR leaders from last year among free agents:

Burnes - 3.7

Kikuchi - 3.5

Fried - 3.4

Flaherty - 3.2

Manaea - 2.8

Eovaldi - 2.7

Passan's comment tied them to Kikuchi, feels like if it didn't include the words "mid market" there'd be like 80% less whining right now?

[KCCub]

4 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Passan's comment tied them to Kikuchi, feels like if it didn't include the words "mid market" there'd be like 80% less whining right now?

It's more so he's 34 coming off a career year. If it's Kikuchi + a trade for a cost controlled SP, sign me up. If he's our only major SP acquisition, then yea I'm extremely disappointed. 

[Jason Ross]

1 hour ago, Bertz said:

I mean a healthy amount of it is semantics.  Like these are the pitching WAR leaders from last year among free agents:

Burnes - 3.7

Kikuchi - 3.5

Fried - 3.4

Flaherty - 3.2

Manaea - 2.8

Eovaldi - 2.7

Passan's comment tied them to Kikuchi, feels like if it didn't include the words "mid market" there'd be like 80% less whining right now?

Which is a fair point! Please don't add me to the "whining" crowd, as I think I'm pretty level headed. With that said I also think there's something to be said about track record and expectations moving forward. I don't think Kikuchi is a bad pitcher at all. Pretty good, actually! But last year was a high water mark for him, in his age 33 season. Perhaps we're seeing a mid-30's revival, but he's also already on the low end of exit velocity, doesn't miss barrels, gives up hard contact, and doesn't generate a good deal of chase. There's a pretty good chance 34 and 35 year old Kikuchi looks more akin to 2023 and 2022, as well. 

Which leads me to where my concern is. If the Cubs plan is "trade for a true 4+ win SP and sign a mid-tier guy" then I'm all abord. Good offseason! If the plan for the rotation is a Yusei Kikuchi...then I'll remain fairly underwhelmed with their ambition. Which is where I am at. Which, I do, again, feel is pretty level headed. I'm trying to remain pretty optimistic that the team is aiming for more this offseason.  We have seen reports they will be aggressive in trades, so I'm not ignoring that either. Optimism remains. 

Where the Cubs have an issue is a bit in marketing. I do think there's some upheaval with the ambitions of the team. Rightly so in many ways, IMO. It probably doesn't help much that the team has basically ruled out any big FA of note before FA. Rightly or wrongly, it's probably creating some extra annoyance. 

[Rcal10]

8 minutes ago, Bertz said:

I mean a healthy amount of it is semantics.  Like these are the pitching WAR leaders from last year among free agents:

Burnes - 3.7

Kikuchi - 3.5

Fried - 3.4

Flaherty - 3.2

Manaea - 2.8

Eovaldi - 2.7

Passan's comment tied them to Kikuchi, feels like if it didn't include the words "mid market" there'd be like 80% less whining right now?

True. But the problem I have with mid market pitchers is some come with a QO. I don’t see the Cubs giving Pivetta, Eovaldi, or even Manaea a 2 or 3 year deal and lose a couple picks in the draft. If Flaherty is considered mid market, I can see him and, of course, Kikuchi. 

[KCCub]

7 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Idk what a good 2025 offseason looks like trading Hoerner (edit: or Bellinger!)

Yea that's something I've been struggling with. It's kind of a loaded scenario and I would need to see what the return is for Hoerner.

e.g. Does including Hoerner in a deal with the Mariners get us Gilbert/Kirby when they were otherwise off the table? If so, is Gilbert/Kirby + Shaw + decent IF bench acquisition that can play 2b if Shaw struggles better than the alternative of keeping Hoerner + trading for a lower tier SP? 

I could probably get there with trading Hoerner in a few scenarios, but they would have to really knock it out of the park. 

[Irrelevant Dude]

Mid tier pitching for a mid tier franchise.  This checks out.

[jersey cubs fan]

[squally1313]

49 minutes ago, KCCub said:

e.g. Does including Hoerner in a deal with the Mariners get us Gilbert/Kirby when they were otherwise off the table? If so, is Gilbert/Kirby + Shaw + decent IF bench acquisition that can play 2b if Shaw struggles better than the alternative of keeping Hoerner + trading for a lower tier SP? 

That's where it kinda gets to be a dealbreaker for me. I don't see any obvious 'Hoerner for offense' ideas out there where the guy coming in clearly outpaces the overall value Hoerner brings to the table. And then any Hoerner for pitching idea kinda falls apart because when you think about what the other side wants in a deal where they give pitching away, it's probably not 'league average bat/elite defender'. If it's a non-contending team, his contract doesn't offer much appeal. If it's a contender, they're probably trying to rebalance some strength to the offensive side and Hoerner doesn't seem like an obvious solution. 

Overall reaction to all this is a big shrug, for what it's worth. Maybe it's just me coping, but it's early November, and one of the few positive review comments Hoyer seems to get is how the organization usually plays things close to the vest, minimizes leaks, etc. So if there's a spectrum between 'Baseball writers need to fill article space in the slowest point of the year' and 'Someone/someones high up in the front office has outlined the entire offseason plan and categorically ruled out multiple players', I'm going to lean pretty heavy to the first one.  

[Jason Ross]

The one world where a Hoerner trade works is if internally, you're really high on Matt Shaw., I'm just kind of spitballing here, but if your analytics department is projecting him as a guy in 2024 you can pin down as a 105-110 wRC+ hitter, with positive base running and a neutral(ish) defender at 2b? I think you can find the math that works in the right kind of trade.

For example, using Jonathon India's 2024, India finished with a 108 wRC+, a neutral base running value, and a -10 DRS/+1 OAA. In 150 games, this got India to the 2.8 fWAR plateau. If you're looking at Shaw, and internally you've got his bat around that range, you'd expect he's probably going to be able to add value on the bases even if he loses a little defensively. 

If you get the 4 fWAR+ SP on the back end while preserving the majority of your MiLB system for other things and you're losing ~1 fWAR of value at 2b or so, I think you're coming out ahead. Now, that comes down to how confident you're in Matt Shaw immediately. But I think the math on Hoerner trade works depending on how high on Shaw you are.

[KCCub]

16 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

The one world where a Hoerner trade works is if internally, you're really high on Matt Shaw., I'm just kind of spitballing here, but if your analytics department is projecting him as a guy in 2024 you can pin down as a 105-110 wRC+ hitter, with positive base running and a neutral(ish) defender at 2b? I think you can find the math that works in the right kind of trade.

For example, using Jonathon India's 2024, India finished with a 108 wRC+, a neutral base running value, and a -10 DRS/+1 OAA. In 150 games, this got India to the 2.8 fWAR plateau. If you're looking at Shaw, and internally you've got his bat around that range, you'd expect he's probably going to be able to add value on the bases even if he loses a little defensively. 

If you get the 4 fWAR+ SP on the back end while preserving the majority of your MiLB system for other things and you're losing ~1 fWAR of value at 2b or so, I think you're coming out ahead. Now, that comes down to how confident you're in Matt Shaw immediately. But I think the math on Hoerner trade works depending on how high on Shaw you are.

Appreciate you adding an example/doing the math. That's kind of where my mind was at, but at work and can't dig very deep into it.

I could get on board with that. Anything less, I'm out. 

[squally1313]

18 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

The one world where a Hoerner trade works is if internally, you're really high on Matt Shaw., I'm just kind of spitballing here, but if your analytics department is projecting him as a guy in 2024 you can pin down as a 105-110 wRC+ hitter, with positive base running and a neutral(ish) defender at 2b? I think you can find the math that works in the right kind of trade.

For example, using Jonathon India's 2024, India finished with a 108 wRC+, a neutral base running value, and a -10 DRS/+1 OAA. In 150 games, this got India to the 2.8 fWAR plateau. If you're looking at Shaw, and internally you've got his bat around that range, you'd expect he's probably going to be able to add value on the bases even if he loses a little defensively. 

If you get the 4 fWAR+ SP on the back end while preserving the majority of your MiLB system for other things and you're losing ~1 fWAR of value at 2b or so, I think you're coming out ahead. Now, that comes down to how confident you're in Matt Shaw immediately. But I think the math on Hoerner trade works depending on how high on Shaw you are.

Can definitely see the math there. I just think that the 4 fWAR SP you're picking up is either coming from A. a rebuilding team (Miami, Crochet, etc) who would have no interest in only two years of Hoerner, or B. a Mariners esque team (said another way: the Mariners), who just rode their all-pitching/no-offense roster to another non-playoff year, and I can't see them being too intrigued by Hoerner. Really, in both those situations, unless the other teams projections of Shaw is significantly off, Shaw is the guy who is going to get you the biggest return pitching wise. Yeah, you're losing probably the biggest piece of your system, but you're keeping maximum value at second base and probably optimizing the pitching you're getting back. 

[Bertz]

2 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Can definitely see the math there. I just think that the 4 fWAR SP you're picking up is either coming from A. a rebuilding team (Miami, Crochet, etc) who would have no interest in only two years of Hoerner, or B. a Mariners esque team (said another way: the Mariners), who just rode their all-pitching/no-offense roster to another non-playoff year, and I can't see them being too intrigued by Hoerner. Really, in both those situations, unless the other teams projections of Shaw is significantly off, Shaw is the guy who is going to get you the biggest return pitching wise. Yeah, you're losing probably the biggest piece of your system, but you're keeping maximum value at second base and probably optimizing the pitching you're getting back. 

This is a big part of it.  The list of teams where you can construct a deal for Hoerner that makes sense for both sides really seems to begin and and end with the Mariners?  I feel like most deals with that narrow of a potential scope are destined to not materialize.  Though Jerry does love making deals so maybe there's a shot.

[KCCub]

The Red Sox desperately need a 2b (Maybe SS). You would have to add a 3rd team to the equation, however if pitching is the target for our return. 

Edited November 12, 2024 by KCCub

[squally1313]

5 minutes ago, KCCub said:

The Red Sox desperately need a 2b (Maybe SS). You would have to add a 3rd team to the equation, however if pitching is the target for our return. 

Nico Hoerner (and then some, probably) for Kyle Teel is something to keep in the back pocket if we're 35-50 at the ASB. 

[Jason Ross]

Yeah, there's probably not many Hoerner-for-SP straight swaps that make a ton of sense. It's probably Seattle-or-bust here. I wonder if the Giants would be a team you could engage with, too. But I think that's probably me just wanting to see if you can take advantage of Buster Posey after his weird comments on RBIs and not based on anything real.

I think there's one other avenue, and it's finding a team who needs a 2b but has a deep farm system or something else extra. The Boston Red Sox could be a match here. There's been some talk, for example, that they would be willing to trade someone like Wilyer Abreu to open up space for Roman Anthony. So maybe you find a team who wants Abreu - have to assume Breslow and Hoyer could get together on something. Not trying to create something out of thin air here, just spitballing another solution. Sean Murphy for Willson Contreras type three-team-deal.

I know Kyle Teel is a popular name but I think the Red Sox keep him. I think the Red Sox/Cubs avenue here requires a third team. But could be possible, too.

[Outshined_One]

My takeaway from the article is we're pretty much Roki Sasaki or bust when it comes to a high level acquisition in the FA market, considering he'll come with a nominal cost.