Post Winter Meetings Free Agency thread

[Cuzi]

Just now, TarzanJoeWallis said:

Could also be a trade for a third baseman. I don’t have anyone in mind, but I think Shaw gives them the flexibility to move Hoerner if it makes sense. That’s my main point. 

Shaw gave them the flexibility to move Hoerner or Paredes. That's been done. Only Arenado and Bohm are publicly being shopped around. Bohm would be ok, but when the Phillies are putting the "he's not really available" asking price on his head, he's not an option.

[mul21]

11 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

What does this mean? What does Arenado not accepting a trade to Houston have to do with the Cubs getting  Tucker? Houston was going to move Paredes to first had Arenado agreed to the trade. His decision has nothing to do with the Cubs getting Tucker. 

He's saying that with Tucker gone, the Astros are a worse team and that's why Arenado doesn't want to go there, which totally makes sense. I thought it was a weird fit anyway with the Astros having just traded for Paredes and allegedly trying to cut payroll, but apparently Arenado is willing to move to 1B to mitigate some of the back issues he's had and that would have been the fit.

[Rcal10]

4 minutes ago, mul21 said:

He's saying that with Tucker gone, the Astros are a worse team and that's why Arenado doesn't want to go there, which totally makes sense. I thought it was a weird fit anyway with the Astros having just traded for Paredes and allegedly trying to cut payroll, but apparently Arenado is willing to move to 1B to mitigate some of the back issues he's had and that would have been the fit.

This makes no sense. He said Arenado not accepting a trade to Houston was the main reason the Cubs got Tucker. Except the Cubs traded for Tucker before Arenado refused to waive his NTC. I couldn’t care less why Arenado didn’t go to Houston. That isn’t the point. I am just trying to understand why him not going made the Astros decide they had to trade Tucker. I assume he is suggesting that had Arenado allowed the trade to happen they wouldn’t have wanted Paredes. But since they were in on him at the deadline last year, when they had Bregman, that would have me believe they would put him at 1st. Just like what they would do now if Arenado did agree to a trade(or Arenado would love to first). As for the money involved, I read the Cardinals were kicking in $10M to $15M to get the deal done. Whether Arenado went to Houston or not has no bearing on them trading Tucker. 

[jersey cubs fan]

52 minutes ago, TarzanJoeWallis said:

Could also be a trade for a third baseman. I don’t have anyone in mind, but I think Shaw gives them the flexibility to move Hoerner if it makes sense. That’s my main point. 

 

49 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

Shaw gave them the flexibility to move Hoerner or Paredes. That's been done. Only Arenado and Bohm are publicly being shopped around. Bohm would be ok, but when the Phillies are putting the "he's not really available" asking price on his head, he's not an option.

Yeah, I was in favor of moving some of the supposed core parts of the team, including hoerner, at the beginning of the offseason. It was obvious this team needed a shakeup. Shaw gave them options to fill a spot and backfill with competence. It wasn’t guaranteed competence but it was a bet worth taking.  Now that they’ve moved Paredes and Bellinger I think there is less value in moving Hoerner as well. 
 

Nico is probably the best backup SS option for an aging Dansby the next two years. Probably best to keep him now 

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, TomtheBombadil said:

https://aroundthefoghorn.com/young-sf-giants-infielders-may-be-on-the-move-after-willy-adames-signing

Looks like Giants media also thinks Casey Schmitt could be on the move. Versatile, glove first with a long rep, 6 HRs in 113 PAs last year, also known for some Baez-like tagging skills on defense….The fit still seems strong esp if the expectation is Workman sticks 

I think he would be a great option. For one thing he would be cheap from a salary standpoint. Maybe instead of the prospect going for a pitcher it goes for him. Then the Cubs sign Beuhler. They would have a good amount of money for a few pen arms, and probably an upgrade over Canario, right handed bat to play the outfield. And if he hits, and Shaw hits it would allow them to trade Nico next year if they needed to. 

[squally1313]

I can maybe get on board with his defensive versatility, but he was a below average hitter in AAA last year and has a .264 OBP in almost 400 MLB PAs. Basically non-existent walk rate, K rates consistently above 20%. I generally trust Tom's finds, but it is a gigantic leap from what he's done to 'maybe he can take over for Hoerner next year'. 

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, squally1313 said:

I can maybe get on board with his defensive versatility, but he was a below average hitter in AAA last year and has a .264 OBP in almost 400 MLB PAs. Basically non-existent walk rate, K rates consistently above 20%. I generally trust Tom's finds, but it is a gigantic leap from what he's done to 'maybe he can take over for Hoerner next year'. 

That fair. Maybe my excitement of him went a little too far. Didn’t check his minor league numbers. Just saw he was a second round pick and only 25. He also had decent slug in the majors. But forget about taking over for Nico in 26. He would still be a nice option in 25. I like it because he would be a cheap find allowing the Cubs to spend elsewhere. 

Edited December 19, 2024 by Rcal10

[chibears55]

2 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

This makes no sense. He said Arenado not accepting a trade to Houston was the main reason the Cubs got Tucker. Except the Cubs traded for Tucker before Arenado refused to waive his NTC. I couldn’t care less why Arenado didn’t go to Houston. That isn’t the point. I am just trying to understand why him not going made the Astros decide they had to trade Tucker. I assume he is suggesting that had Arenado allowed the trade to happen they wouldn’t have wanted Paredes. But since they were in on him at the deadline last year, when they had Bregman, that would have me believe they would put him at 1st. Just like what they would do now if Arenado did agree to a trade(or Arenado would love to first). As for the money involved, I read the Cardinals were kicking in $10M to $15M to get the deal done. Whether Arenado went to Houston or not has no bearing on them trading Tucker. 

To clarify why I said what I said,  when the report of Arenado came out, I thought it was just coming out that he had turned down the trade prior to the Cubs trade. I didn't realize it was something that just happened. 

[Bertz]

Passan's article today says Walker Buehler is in line for a multi-year deal.  If true hardest of hard passes.  I can talk myself into 1/$15M or thereabouts but I'd legitimately much rather take the risk and pitch lab someone rather than give Buehler a multi-year deal.

[Rcal10]

Just now, chibears55 said:

To clarify why I said what I said,  when the report of Arenado came out, I thought it was just coming out that he had turned down the trade prior to the Cubs trade. I didn't realize it was something that just happened. 

Got it. That makes more sense. That said, I don’t think it mattered with Tucker. Astros wanted Paredes last year and they had Bregman. I think that has they have traded for Arenado either he or Paredes would have moved to first. Astros were going to deal Tucker, regardless. 

[chibears55]

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.

[Rcal10]

1 minute ago, Bertz said:

Passan's article today says Walker Buehler is in line for a multi-year deal.  If true hardest of hard passes.  I can talk myself into 1/$15M or thereabouts but I'd legitimately much rather take the risk and pitch lab someone rather than give Buehler a multi-year deal.

If 2 years is on the table, I MIGHT do that. Nothing beyond 2 years. And at 2 the deal may have to be similar to Boyd’s deal. 2/$25 or 1/$15. 
 

That said, with the current staff I might rather get a guy they know will take the  all 30+ times a year. I feel the current rotation shouldn’t be counted on for more than 105 starts. Because of that I think it is best to get a guy you can count on for 30+ starts. Buehler wouldn’t be that guy. 
 

[Rcal10]

Just now, 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.

 But that is still 4 weeks away. I just don’t see him waiting 4 weeks on a guy that, at best, they have about a 15% chance of getting. By then all other options might be gone. I really doubt any team is sitting back waiting on Sasaki. Even if the Cubs add another pitcher I am sure they will gladly find a spot for Sasaki if he chooses them. 

[KCCub]

 

[Bertz]

29 minutes ago, KCCub said:

 

Minter and Yates or Minter and Robertson is probably my ideal.  I like Finnegan and Martin and to a lesser extent Jansen too.

[CubinNY]

1 hour ago, 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.

I think everyone already has a pretty good idea and it's an inside secret within the industry and it isn't the Cubs. 

[We Got The Whole 9]

8 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Minter and Yates or Minter and Robertson is probably my ideal.  I like Finnegan and Martin and to a lesser extent Jansen too.

I agree and feel like they will all take 1 or 2 year deals. Right up Jed's alley. I think Minter and Yates would be absolutely insane and give us the best pen we've ever had.

[chibears55]

1 hour ago, Rcal10 said:

 But that is still 4 weeks away. I just don’t see him waiting 4 weeks on a guy that, at best, they have about a 15% chance of getting. By then all other options might be gone. I really doubt any team is sitting back waiting on Sasaki. Even if the Cubs add another pitcher I am sure they will gladly find a spot for Sasaki if he chooses them. 

It usually quiet for the Holidays with transactions,  so if nothing happens with them in the coming week, I can see them waiting it out til the 15th or sooner if they don't feel like he'll be coming if they do meet with him.

[Dfan25]

Cubs next move probably wont come until the new year now , i would guess .  I imagine they want a SP in , before getting into the other needs .

Starting pitching prices will probably be high for while still and we know Hoyer loves to wait things out .  Long períod of silence probably coming .

[squally1313]

2 minutes ago, Dfan25 said:

we know Hoyer loves to wait things out .  Long períod of silence probably coming .

Do we know that? Starting pitcher, backup catcher, the biggest trade of the offseason and then also the Bellinger trade and it's not even January. 

[SOFNR]

2 minutes ago, chibears55 said:

It usually quiet for the Holidays with transactions,  so if nothing happens with them in the coming week, I can see them waiting it out til the 15th or sooner if they don't feel like he'll be coming if they do meet with him.

It's been said on here several times, but if you grab Sasaki you're probably going with a 6 man rotation. If there's a pitcher you plan on penciling in to the rotation there is no reason to wait for the Sasaki results. The Cubs have already proved they aren't waiting on Sasaki by being involved in several trade conversations. Now if they ultimately move on to the FA market for SP then who knows. If that market isn't moving fast and all the guys you're looking at are being slow to make a decision then it could stretch out long enough. You might just put in Wicks as the 6th guy if you were able to grab Sasaki. But there's no way they just sit and watch guys they want go to other teams. The chances of Sasaki coming aren't high enough that you pin your offseason on his decision. 

[BKHoo]

Big No on Finnegan. There is a reason the Nats let him walk. 

[mul21]

1 hour ago, BKHoo said:

Big No on Finnegan. There is a reason the Nats let him walk. 

Yep.  They didn't want to pay him.  I'm not saying he's the guy you have to have, but he's a reasonable option.

[KCCub]

 

 

[Bertz]

I know a couple folks have been pushing for us to be the team that lets Jeff Hoffman try starting again.  I think I might be coming around to that post Luzardo.