Post Winter Meetings Free Agency thread

[Backtobanks]

2 hours 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. 

They won't stay under this year if they sign Burnes and that "staggering amount under in 2027" will be eaten up by raises, arbitration, and looking for a new LF, DH, and solid middle of the rotation starter.

[LBiittner]

2 hours 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. 

Al Yellon of bleedcubbieblue spells out the payroll situation as it is today. Take a look. He got into $ commitments I'd never figured

[Bertz]

Does Brad have sources now or am I interpreting this incorrectly?

 

[Post Count Padder]

Idk who that is and this is the time of year randos go nuts with rumors. He could just be reacting to his poll he shared that's close.

[Post Count Padder]

Y'know, the Yankees missed out on Walker. We have a spare 1B on our 40 man. We should've gotten more for Bellinger.

Just saying, Matt Mervis for Spencer Jones feels like a no-brainer.

[Derwood]

1 hour ago, LBiittner said:

Al Yellon of bleedcubbieblue spells out the payroll situation as it is today. Take a look. He got into $ commitments I'd never figured

But what site does Al use for payroll figures?

[Bertz]

15 minutes ago, Post Count Padder said:

Idk who that is and this is the time of year randos go nuts with rumors. He could just be reacting to his poll he shared that's close.

Brad is smart and insightful and a good follow, particularly for MiLB stuff.  But as far as I know just a guy.  So either you're right it's just the poll and a poor time of year to use the eyes emoji or there's an implication that he knows something. 

[Post Count Padder]

2 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Brad is smart and insightful and a good follow, particularly for MiLB stuff.  But as far as I know just a guy.  So either you're right it's just the poll and a poor time of year to use the eyes emoji or there's an implication that he knows something. 

Ha and with that

 

 

[thawv]

13 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

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. 

If Burnes costs 36 million, that leaves about 4 million.  I'd personally add a pen guy for that amount and head to camp.  We are replacing all 4 bench guys.  They don't have to cost a lot of money to be effective.   I'm fine with Kelly, Canario, Cowles, and Workman, or some mix like that.  Burnes would be a game changer, while
spending valuable money on a bench guy won't.  

 

I'd much rather use just about all of payroll money on starters players and pen guys, and very little on the bench.  The bench can still be pretty good that way.  The current has already replace every guy from last year. 

Edited December 21, 2024 by thawv

[thawv]

11 hours ago, Backtobanks said:

They won't stay under this year if they sign Burnes and that "staggering amount under in 2027" will be eaten up by raises, arbitration, and looking for a new LF, DH, and solid middle of the rotation starter.

Of course they'd be able to stay under this year with Burnes and a small addition.  With money left for in season spending.

You should take a look at their payroll heading in to 2027.  After arb raises and filling out their roster, it will still be way under with both Burnes and Tucker in 2027.  But it would put them over in 2026

Easy math.  If they give Burnes 36 million, and Tucker 40 million, they will be at around 124 million heading into 2027.  Assuming the CBT number is at around 247, that leaves them with more than enough for arb raises and filling out their roster.   I'm pretty sure they can give arb raises and find replacements that you mentioned for a little over 120 million.  If they can't, there's a real problem. 

Edited December 21, 2024 by thawv

[thawv]

11 hours ago, LBiittner said:

Al Yellon of bleedcubbieblue spells out the payroll situation as it is today. Take a look. He got into $ commitments I'd never figured

Thanks, Larry.  I'm also using the numbers the guys on this board are using, along with the numbers in the article.  Burnes would not put them over their off season spending limit.  

Edited December 21, 2024 by thawv

[thawv]

10 hours ago, Derwood said:

But what site does Al use for payroll figures?

It looks like he uses Roster Resource.  Nice work. 

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, thawv said:

If Burnes costs 36 million, that leaves about 4 million.  I'd personally add a pen guy for that amount and head to camp.  We are replacing all 4 bench guys.  They don't have to cost a lot of money to be effective.   I'm fine with Kelly, Canario, Cowles, and Workman, or some mix like that.  Burnes would be a game changer, while
spending valuable money on a bench guy won't.  

 

I'd much rather use just about all of payroll money on starters players and pen guys, and very little on the bench.  The bench can still be pretty good that way.  The current has already replace every guy from last year. 

Burnes is going to cost $36M a year? For how many years? That is a very easy pass for me. And IMO even easier for this FO to pass. 

[thawv]

4 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Burnes is going to cost $36M a year? For how many years? That is a very easy pass for me. And IMO even easier for this FO to pass. 

I'd say that he's looking at 6/216.  I know it's an over pay, but someone will give it to him, I believe. 

[Backtobanks]

1 hour ago, thawv said:

Of course they'd be able to stay under this year with Burnes and a small addition.  With money left for in season spending.

You should take a look at their payroll heading in to 2027.  After arb raises and filling out their roster, it will still be way under with both Burnes and Tucker in 2027.  But it would put them over in 2026

Easy math.  If they give Burnes 36 million, and Tucker 40 million, they will be at around 124 million heading into 2027.  Assuming the CBT number is at around 247, that leaves them with more than enough for arb raises and filling out their roster.   I'm pretty sure they can give arb raises and find replacements that you mentioned for a little over 120 million.  If they can't, there's a real problem. 

Does that future spending include giant raises/extensions to Steele, Imanaga, Busch, PCA, etc.?

[thawv]

24 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

Does that future spending include giant raises/extensions to Steele, Imanaga, Busch, PCA, etc.?

Yes it does!

 

[Rcal10]

38 minutes ago, thawv said:

I'd say that he's looking at 6/216.  I know it's an over pay, but someone will give it to him, I believe. 

And by someone, you think that should be the Cubs? Hard pass on Burnes. Not only would the Cubs FO not even consider this, I don’t blame them in passing on him.’

[thawv]

8 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

And by someone, you think that should be the Cubs? Hard pass on Burnes. Not only would the Cubs FO not even consider this, I don’t blame them in passing on him.’

Fair enough.  But this is the reason the Cubs are never in on the best players.  And this is likely no exception.  As long as a contract like this doesn't prevent them from adding, what he makes should mean nothing to the fan.

[Rcal10]

39 minutes ago, thawv said:

Fair enough.  But this is the reason the Cubs are never in on the best players.  And this is likely no exception.  As long as a contract like this doesn't prevent them from adding, what he makes should mean nothing to the fan.

I agree as a major market they should be more aggressive. But they are not. And that contract would stop them from adding. So Burnes isn’t happening. And that said, I would not be comfortable with him for 6 years at an annual of $36M. I think that would be a bad signing. 

[Backtobanks]

1 hour ago, thawv said:

Yes it does!

 

I don't get how they know what Steele, Imanaga, Busch, PCA are going to be making in 2027 and beyond since the players and their agents still don't know what they will get in arbitration or in an extension.

 

[JD94]

Personally I’d pay up for Burnes and then turn around and trade Taillon. Surely you can get a contender to take him at 1/18. I don’t know what Burnes will end up get annually, he’s projected for 7/200 ($28M per year), so let’s call it 7/210 ($30M per year). Then you could turn around and trade Taillon and his 1/18. That puts you with around $28M left to spend. Get back on the phone with Miami to bring Luzardo over to take Taillon’s spot. That puts you with around $20M to spend on the bullpen.
 

That’s a good rotation regardless, but if you add Sasaki as well, it’s pretty elite.
 

Burnes

Steele

Shota

Luzardo

Boyd

Sasaki 

[thawv]

10 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

I don't get how they know what Steele, Imanaga, Busch, PCA are going to be making in 2027 and beyond since the players and their agents still don't know what they will get in arbitration or in an extension.

 

We have a pretty good idea of arb numbers based on history.  We know Shota's contract already.  PCA will be 1st year arb and not much money.  Bush 2nd year arb,  Steele probably in the 20 million range.  Shaw minimum salary.  The amount of money under the threshold with all these guys is an incredible amount of cash left over.   They have enough for a couple additional high contracts, and there should be a lot of 0-3 guys on the roster.

[Tim]

The only way I'd commit to Burnes is if Ricketts is okay with being well over the cap next season. And even then I'd do it with the full intention of trading him before he hits the back half of his contract.

It's not the dollars that bother me, it's the term. Very few big pitcher contracts work out well in the long term.

[Rcal10]

I think it is far more likely the Cubs sign someone like Buehler than it is they sign Burnes. If they want to take a chance on a guy who can slot in as a TOR starter he is who I think they will sign. He kind of fits the Luzardo idea. High reward, he risk guy. 
 

The Cubs move prior to this year, would probably be someone like Lyle Gibson. Innings eater, MOR starter. I think the Cubs are aiming higher this year. Hope so, anyway.!

Edited December 21, 2024 by Rcal10

[SOFNR]

28 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I think it is far more likely the Cubs sign someone like Buehler than it is they sign Burnes. If they want to take a chance on a guy who can slot in as a TOR starter he is who I think they will sign. He kind of fits the Luzardo idea. High reward, he risk guy. 
 

The Cubs move prior to this year, would probably be someone like Lyle Gibson. Innings eater, MOR starter. I think the Cubs are aiming higher this year. Hope so, anyway.!

I'm not totally against Buehler. I think he may be being overhyped a bit though. Hasn't pitched over 80 innings in a season since 2021. Was worth negative WAR last year. Has been worth 0.8 WAR over the last 3 years. I don't think anybody in baseball is signing him thinking he might slot in as a TOR starter. He'd have a lot more demand if that were the case. He's purely a bounce back candidate, who's 30 years old, and who's K/9 has been dropping every year.