Post Winter Meetings Free Agency thread

[Rcal10]

6 hours ago, Stratos said:

Well you could easily spend 40m on 2 good relievers and a SP.  The bench money can be the difference between Buehler and Flaherty.

It wouldn't be a bad idea to get a bench bat that can cover both 2b and 3b since we have some questions there.  For the OF we have 4 starters so no real need there, we can use Canario.  An injury could bring up Caissie.

I don’t think they are going to get a starting pitcher they have to pay for several years. I really think they plan on extending Tucker and I am not sure they can carry him for $40m, Swanson for $27M and a pitcher they pay $23M a year too. Maybe why I don’t expect all $40M going to the staff. Same thing with a relief arm. I doubt they sign one long term, like Scott. And to me the Tucker extension is most important. I do agree with you about the outfield. My original thought was just one bat to cover 1st and 3rd. Either switch hit or right handed. Others jumped in for a 2nd bat who is an outfielder. I see that point, but I am more in favor of 2 pen arms and a starting pitcher and one bench. So we really are close to the same here. The last point I will make is I don’t think throwing money at pen arms automatically means the pen is good. I think people suggesting this really don’t realize how unstable a pen is. From one year to the next guys are good than bad. Unless they go with an elite closer(and that would mean multiple years at a high salary) I don’t think it makes much difference if you sign a guy for $4M or $14M. The higher priced guy fails as often. Which, again, is probably why I don’t see them spending $40M on arms. One thing I am certain of, however, is the first time the pen loses the game people will be complaining about it. Complaining about the pen is a yearly ritual across fan bases of all 30 teams. 

[Rcal10]

7 hours ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

The pen lacking legit lethal weapons has kind of been the bugaboo for the last 5 years, more than the bench. I can spend 20 easy on 2 RP and I'm not sacrificing the quality of the SP I get so I can go from Mastrobuoni to like Chris Coghlan. Spend that horsefeathers on Scott and Yates, build a powerful bullpen. They're way more lethal and instrumental to team success these days to the guys getting 150 PA. 

 

Ideally for me:

 

• Blow it all on Burnes and hope you can squeeze a guy like Minter in with a backloaded 2 year deal.
• Get Flaherty (who's market has skepticism due to 5 years of suckage and bad postseason numbers, but who offers the most upside not attached to a QO - may end up signing for 20 AAV reading the tea leaves) and Scott.
• Trade for Castillo/Lopez/et al and add Minter and Yates 
• Sign Hoffman to convert and add Scott and Yates

 

I'll spoon Jed after that. 

I get this. And I like the idea of Lopez, Minter and Yates. But even after that there should be some cash for a bench bat. We are using $40M like it is this line in the sand. I think at that number they are $10M+ short of the line. I don’t expect Flaherty or Scott. I don’t see the Cubs going long term in a pen arm. And I am skeptical of Flaherty for the reasons you provided above. I also don’t think Castillo is possible unless another team is involved. Seattle wants major league talent back. If you like the idea of Hoffman converted then something like Hoffman, Yates and Minter should be good for you. And that would definitely leave several million to add one bat who can play 1st and 3rd. 
Since you put a few scenarios together, how would one of these look: 

Cease/Kirby/Gilbert/Keller/King/Ober  Beuhler with Yates and Minter. There is also some pitchers in Tampa like Baz, and Bradley they can trade for. I can see $15M to $20M for a starter and that same number for the pen. But if you go $20M on one the second will be closer to $15. 

That would leave plenty for a bench bat. 

I agree with you, the arms come first. I just think there are ways to get those arms without spending all the $40M and be able to get at least 1 guy who can fill in at 1st and 3rd who has major league experience. 

[We Got The Whole 9]

22 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t think they are going to get a starting pitcher they have to pay for several years. I really think they plan on extending Tucker and I am not sure they can carry him for $40m, Swanson for $27M and a pitcher they pay $23M a year too. Maybe why I don’t expect all $40M going to the staff. Same thing with a relief arm. I doubt they sign one long term, like Scott. And to me the Tucker extension is most important. I do agree with you about the outfield. My original thought was just one bat to cover 1st and 3rd. Either switch hit or right handed. Others jumped in for a 2nd bat who is an outfielder. I see that point, but I am more in favor of 2 pen arms and a starting pitcher and one bench. So we really are close to the same here. The last point I will make is I don’t think throwing money at pen arms automatically means the pen is good. I think people suggesting this really don’t realize how unstable a pen is. From one year to the next guys are good than bad. Unless they go with an elite closer(and that would mean multiple years at a high salary) I don’t think it makes much difference if you sign a guy for $4M or $14M. The higher priced guy fails as often. Which, again, is probably why I don’t see them spending $40M on arms. One thing I am certain of, however, is the first time the pen loses the game people will be complaining about it. Complaining about the pen is a yearly ritual across fan bases of all 30 teams. 

Definitely agree and I understand the volatility of bullpens, have argued the same point for years. But the things is, we have the money, and each time we don't want to pay for it, we kind of pay for it in the end. Whether it's having to watch September meltdowns over and over, or having to send Gleyber Torres out for a guy they could have signed for free in the previous winter to finally roast the goat. 

 

Jed should horsefeathers pay for some RP who have several seasons of absolute dominance under their belt. They have a ton of position players making peanuts to round out the roster. 

 

The pitching is several steps behind. The Cubs are also aware that their pitching staff had a road ERA of 4.3 last season and Wrigley hadn't ever been so offensive-suppressive. They need to turn up the gas! They're still out here dicking around with funky, low velo guys. I'm sure the staff will be really effective. But give me the LH who chucks 99 and the grizzled vet with a decade of excellence that just posted a 1.17 ERA. Don't skimp on the rotation either. Push the chart down, get a (sorry) guy with a big freaking arm for once. 

[BigbadB]

34 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t think they are going to get a starting pitcher they have to pay for several years. I really think they plan on extending Tucker and I am not sure they can carry him for $40m, Swanson for $27M and a pitcher they pay $23M a year too. Maybe why I don’t expect all $40M going to the staff. Same thing with a relief arm. I doubt they sign one long term, like Scott. And to me the Tucker extension is most important. I do agree with you about the outfield. My original thought was just one bat to cover 1st and 3rd. Either switch hit or right handed. Others jumped in for a 2nd bat who is an outfielder. I see that point, but I am more in favor of 2 pen arms and a starting pitcher and one bench. So we really are close to the same here. The last point I will make is I don’t think throwing money at pen arms automatically means the pen is good. I think people suggesting this really don’t realize how unstable a pen is. From one year to the next guys are good than bad. Unless they go with an elite closer(and that would mean multiple years at a high salary) I don’t think it makes much difference if you sign a guy for $4M or $14M. The higher priced guy fails as often. Which, again, is probably why I don’t see them spending $40M on arms. One thing I am certain of, however, is the first time the pen loses the game people will be complaining about it. Complaining about the pen is a yearly ritual across fan bases of all 30 teams. 

I agree that they will try to resign him. I don't think you trade for him with the intention of just going for it for the one year. Sometimes it makes sense to pull the wallet out and just do it, and Tucker seems like the guy to do just that. He's not going to be attempting to set a contract record, but the Cubs know he will cost more than anyone they've ever signed. They are aligned to do that and seem to be bargain shopping guys like Luzardo to stay within the parameters of what is needed to sign him long term. Put together a playoff caliber team where Tucker is having some fun, and getting that contract signed will be that much easier.

[We Got The Whole 9]

15 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I get this. And I like the idea of Lopez, Minter and Yates. But even after that there should be some cash for a bench bat. We are using $40M like it is this line in the sand. I think at that number they are $10M+ short of the line. I don’t expect Flaherty or Scott. I don’t see the Cubs going long term in a pen arm. And I am skeptical of Flaherty for the reasons you provided above. I also don’t think Castillo is possible unless another team is involved. Seattle wants major league talent back. If you like the idea of Hoffman converted then something like Hoffman, Yates and Minter should be good for you. And that would definitely leave several million to add one bat who can play 1st and 3rd. 
Since you put a few scenarios together, how would one of these look: 

Cease/Kirby/Gilbert/Keller/King/Ober  Beuhler with Yates and Minter. There is also some pitchers in Tampa like Baz, and Bradley they can trade for. I can see $15M to $20M for a starter and that same number for the pen. But if you go $20M on one the second will be closer to $15. 

That would leave plenty for a bench bat. 

I agree with you, the arms come first. I just think there are ways to get those arms without spending all the $40M and be able to get at least 1 guy who can fill in at 1st and 3rd who has major league experience. 

I also feel like we can trade like a Pedro Ramirez type prospect to a builder and get a pre-arb bench guy too. Jed just picked up 2 probable bench players in the last 5 months. Those were deliberate moves. I don't think he wants to allocate resources there. We'll see. 

 

We know Jed likes to leave some for the TDL. I just hope he makes the absolute most impactful moves for the roster that he can make. We can take the division by the throat again. There are several elite pitchers available right now, many without compensation attached, that he can add to supplement the last roster that he might build in Chicago. Get creative to add to the bench. Add as much premium pitching as you can. 

 

I've heard us lightly linked to Flaherty. I hope Jed gets involved with a performance-based complex deal. I think he has the most upside if we don't count Burnes, who he probably won't even sniff.

[Stratos]

55 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t think they are going to get a starting pitcher they have to pay for several years. I really think they plan on extending Tucker and I am not sure they can carry him for $40m, Swanson for $27M and a pitcher they pay $23M a year too. Maybe why I don’t expect all $40M going to the staff. Same thing with a relief arm. I doubt they sign one long term, like Scott. And to me the Tucker extension is most important. I do agree with you about the outfield. My original thought was just one bat to cover 1st and 3rd. Either switch hit or right handed. Others jumped in for a 2nd bat who is an outfielder. I see that point, but I am more in favor of 2 pen arms and a starting pitcher and one bench. So we really are close to the same here. The last point I will make is I don’t think throwing money at pen arms automatically means the pen is good. I think people suggesting this really don’t realize how unstable a pen is. From one year to the next guys are good than bad. Unless they go with an elite closer(and that would mean multiple years at a high salary) I don’t think it makes much difference if you sign a guy for $4M or $14M. The higher priced guy fails as often. Which, again, is probably why I don’t see them spending $40M on arms. One thing I am certain of, however, is the first time the pen loses the game people will be complaining about it. Complaining about the pen is a yearly ritual across fan bases of all 30 teams. 

I think 65 IP from a reliever is like a position player getting 2-3 months worth of ABs.  You get high variance from the small sample.  Players are still better or worse but it can be skewed in small samples. Serious injury risk is also higher in pitchers.

I don't know what the stats say about building a bullpen but we've been a bit deficient on late inning talent for significant periods the last 2 seasons.  Talent being different than results.  Having 2 guys with proven success would be nice so there's depth in case someone gets hurt who fails.  Hodge has good stuff but far too inexperienced to rely on.

There's room for taking chances on guys but when you build your late inning staff around those random arms it can take half a season to figure out roles and who doesn't suck and by that time you've blown several games. Whatever the Cubs have been doing lately is deficient.

[squally1313]

1 hour ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t think they are going to get a starting pitcher they have to pay for several years. I really think they plan on extending Tucker and I am not sure they can carry him for $40m, Swanson for $27M and a pitcher they pay $23M a year too.

They can obviously fit a pitcher at a big 2025 salary. There's likely a one year crunch in 2026, and I think that's probably driving the push to stay under the cap this year and reset the count. But after 2026 they have roughly $80m (Happ, Seiya, Taillon, Boyd, Hoerner) coming off the books. They can absolutely have three guys taking up $100m of what will be a $250m first tier cap. I don't know if they necessarily want to lock in on a particular guy this offseason when they can probably go short term and still be pretty easy division favorites. But three guys making up 40% of our salary isn't that outrageous. You're basically just consolidating Happ and Suzuki into Tucker and then Taillon and Boyd into someone like Burnes or whatever. 

[Rcal10]

2 hours ago, squally1313 said:

They can obviously fit a pitcher at a big 2025 salary. There's likely a one year crunch in 2026, and I think that's probably driving the push to stay under the cap this year and reset the count. But after 2026 they have roughly $80m (Happ, Seiya, Taillon, Boyd, Hoerner) coming off the books. They can absolutely have three guys taking up $100m of what will be a $250m first tier cap. I don't know if they necessarily want to lock in on a particular guy this offseason when they can probably go short term and still be pretty easy division favorites. But three guys making up 40% of our salary isn't that outrageous. You're basically just consolidating Happ and Suzuki into Tucker and then Taillon and Boyd into someone like Burnes or whatever. 

There are two points of view when I am posting. One is what I would like the Cubs to do and what I feel they can do, but won’t. The other is posting what I think they can do and it fits in what I perceive the FO to be and how they operate. So while I will agree with you that they CAN fit a high salaried starting pitcher and/or Scott on the team with multiple years on their deals, (and still sign Tucker to an extension) I don’t think they will. 
What I think they will end up with using $40M is a starting pitcher, 2 pen arms and a major league player who can play 1st or 3rd. Either a switch hitter or right handed bat. I think the other spots in the bench will be Kelly, Canario and either Workman or Cowles. There are numerous combinations of players that can fit to get to $40M. 
But for me, the best use of $40M would be trade for Cease(extend him), sign Yates and Minter and then get the best bat you can for insurance on Shaw and to sub for Busch. Then extend Tucker and you have 3 guys moving forward when the roster clears, making $90-$100M. I would be thrilled with that. I just don’t think they would do it. I think they should and don’t understand why they wouldn’t and why they can’t act like a major market team. And I hate they don’t. But I do not see them doing it. 

[CubinNY]

do we know that the Padres want to trade Cease? And if they do, will he shave that terrible mustache? 

[thawv]

On 12/19/2024 at 12:28 PM, chibears55 said:

Im still convinced that Hoyer is waiting on a Sasaki decision before deciding on if he wants to add another SP .

Not saying the reason is money, saying Sasaki is plan A and if he don't come, then it'll be plan B of who left via FA or a trade if they're to add another starter.

Why not both if money is not the issue?  I'd sign Burnes first, and then hope for Sasaki.  

[gflore34]

41 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

do we know that the Padres want to trade Cease? And if they do, will he shave that terrible mustache? 

The Jeff Kent porn-stache?

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, CubinNY said:

do we know that the Padres want to trade Cease? And if they do, will he shave that terrible mustache? 

It has been rumored previously. So just going off of comments and media reports. I believe there thing to cut some payroll and Cease and King were mentioned as possible trade options. 

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, thawv said:

Why not both if money is not the issue?  I'd sign Burnes first, and then hope for Sasaki.  

This is the type of thing we all know they aren’t doing. They are not signing Burnes. Jed actually ruled him out several times this off season. So why even suggest it? But I agree they should get another pitcher regardless of what happens with Sasaki. And I am sure they aren’t waiting until there is a Sasaki decision to try making a deal for a pitcher, whether through FA or trade. That said, they may not get something done until after the Sasaki decision, but not because they are waiting on his decision. Might be because they don’t find the deal they want. 

[Post Count Padder]

Quote

December 20: The Cubs are going to be meeting with Sasaki today, reports Bruce Levine of 670 The Score.

 

[We Got The Whole 9]

Working his way west. Let's make him keep thinking about that quirky midwest when he gets there.

[Rcal10]

38 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Tbf the Cubs under Theo and Hoyer have been very opportunistic in FA, and Burnes is exactly someone the league would definitelynotcollude down. QO’d, no major injuries, nigh impeccable track record of performance going back to prospect days, throws tons of strikes, power stuff, gets outs in a variety of ways etc etc…I imagine this isn’t a hard no of Hoyer’s if the Actually Not That Good campaign keeps him hanging around into the new year. Burnes doesn’t get the hype of one but he’s a true elite player and one without a ton of earning potential (edit: as a former 4th round pick who probably signed for nothing from a small school, topped out at $15,637,500 during the arb years)

Edit: Basically there’s some shot the league turns him into another Darvish, who had a crazy resume but ending up sitting around before signing for like $1.50

Doubtful. I would say signing Burnes has about a 1% chance of happening. So to me, not worth talking about. He isn’t coming here. 

[Rcal10]

29 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

Working his way west. Let's make him keep thinking about that quirky midwest when he gets there.

This would make a good off season into an amazing one. Hopefully Suzuki and Imanaga tell him how best it is in Chicago and how well the FO treats them. I do think they have a chance at him. Jed has done a nice job with the Japanese market. 

[Backtobanks]

1 minute ago, Rcal10 said:

This would make a good off season into an amazing one. Hopefully Suzuki and Imanaga tell him how best it is in Chicago and how well the FO treats them. I do think they have a chance at him. Jed has done a nice job with the Japanese market. 

Yeah, Suzuki can point out that he's now a DH against his will and when he mentioned it the trade rumors started.

[NorthsideAvenger]

NM. 

Edited December 20, 2024 by NorthsideAvenger

[We Got The Whole 9]

9 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

Yeah, Suzuki can point out that he's now a DH against his will and when he mentioned it the trade rumors started.

Carter will just slip in and show him highlights of the whiffs in RF

[thawv]

1 hour ago, Rcal10 said:

This is the type of thing we all know they aren’t doing. They are not signing Burnes. Jed actually ruled him out several times this off season. So why even suggest it? But I agree they should get another pitcher regardless of what happens with Sasaki. And I am sure they aren’t waiting until there is a Sasaki decision to try making a deal for a pitcher, whether through FA or trade. That said, they may not get something done until after the Sasaki decision, but not because they are waiting on his decision. Might be because they don’t find the deal they want. 

It feels different this off season.  I know that I'm setting myself up for a let down, but there was a sense of urgency to get as much money off the books as they can with Cody.  To the point the the 5 million they are paying is split in half over the next two seasons.   It's not to bank.  If they stay under this season, and go over next season by a little, they can sign Burnes and Tucker, and still be a staggering amount under in 2027. 

I know what they said, but at some point they have to believe an ace pitcher is more of a guarantee than a couple of crap shoot draft picks.  It's time to act like a major market president.  The money is without question in the budget to sign Burnes this year. 

[Rcal10]

41 minutes ago, thawv said:

It feels different this off season.  I know that I'm setting myself up for a let down, but there was a sense of urgency to get as much money off the books as they can with Cody.  To the point the the 5 million they are paying is split in half over the next two seasons.   It's not to bank.  If they stay under this season, and go over next season by a little, they can sign Burnes and Tucker, and still be a staggering amount under in 2027. 

I know what they said, but at some point they have to believe an ace pitcher is more of a guarantee than a couple of crap shoot draft picks.  It's time to act like a major market president.  The money is without question in the budget to sign Burnes this year. 

Is it though? If Burnes cost $27M that leaves $13M to $17M to spend and be under the LT. Please don’t rehash what you think they have, and accept these numbers. So how are we adding 2 pen arms and a bench bat with what’s left? And if you are being honest do you really see the Cubs committing 6+ years for a pitcher? I don’t. I would be Shocked If they signed Burnes. I think their chances at Sasaki are far greater than Burnes signing here. Money in the budget or now,  I don’t see the Cubs signing Burnes. I take Jed at his word that he isn’t even remotely an option. 

[Crusader]

This just in. Sasaki was allegedly spotted signing Go Cubs Go after his meeting with Hoyer.

[Cuzi]

Just now, Crusader said:

This just in. Sasaki was allegedly spotted signing Go Cubs Go after his meeting with Hoyer.

Is he deaf?

[Crusader]

14 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

Is he deaf?

Apparently Go Cubs Go sounds eerily similar to "I will pay you above market value" in Japanese.