Roki Sasaki Picking the Dodgers is the Latest Reminder: Cubs Need to Show Free Agents They Care About Winning

[matto1233]

In lots of cases, a free agent might eschew slightly more money to sign with one team instead of another. Usually, they do it because they love to win. But to prove they're a place where players can come to win, the Cubs also need to spend more money.

Image courtesy of © Jayne Kamin-Oncea-Imagn Images

In case you missed it, Roki Sasaki is headed to the Los Angeles Dodgers. This news came out just a few days after it was reported that the Cubs were not on the final list of contenders for the Japanese ace. As a Cubs fan, or even just as a baseball fan, this stings. And it should. The rich get richer, and this time, the Dodgers didn’t even have to hand out a historic contract in order to get there. Consider that an insult, added to our injury.

For those unfamiliar, because Sasaki was posted to MLB prior to his 25th birthday, he was considered an international amateur free agent, meaning he will make the rookie salary for 2025 and be under team control for six seasons. He will receive a $6.5 million signing bonus. However, just about any other team could have, and probably would have, matched that signing bonus. 

Basically, his decision had nothing to do with money, and everything to do with, well, everything else. Sasaki going to the Dodgers felt like a fait accompli as soon as it was reported that he would be posted.

Episode 2272 of the fantastic podcast Effectively Wild did a good job stating some of the reasons why. In the episode, hosts Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley were discussing Sasaki going to the Dodgers, and Rowley articulated something that I had been pondering, so I’ll quote her here:

“It goes to show that money can help to secure talent, but it doesn’t just end with the individual player that it helps you sign. It creates an understanding of your want as an organization. What do [the Dodgers] want? They want to go win a World Series. Again. They are not satisfied with one.”

In addition to the fantastic players (like Freddie Freeman, Yoshinobu Yamamoto, and Shohei Ohtani) whom you typically get to roster by spending big in free agency, you also signal to everyone else that you’re serious about contending for the World Series every single season. The fact of the matter is that the Cubs have not been signaling this of late. 

Following a 2020 season in which they won the NL Central, the Cubs trimmed payroll by non-tendering fan favorite Kyle Schwarber and trading Yu Darvish. They went from third in payroll, to 14th, according to Spotrac. Team performance, unsurprisingly, also suffered. The team has not been back in the playoffs since. The payroll didn’t bounce back up into the top 10 until this past season, but currently, the Cubs sit 12th in projected 2025 payroll.

The Dodgers, on the other hand, have consistently invested resources to maintain a very good baseball team. Following a World Series in 2020, they signed Cy Young winner Trevor Bauer to try and fortify their rotation. That, of course, didn’t work out, but that was no sweat for them (at least from a baseball perspective). They traded for Max Scherzer and Trea Turner at the 2021 trade deadline, then (following a disappointing showing in the playoffs) signed Freeman that offseason.

Last offseason, of course, they brought in Ohtani, Yamamoto, Tyle Glasnow, and others, and they have maintained a similar level of aggressiveness this offseason, despite now coming off of two World Series championships in the past five seasons. They signed Blake Snell and Michael Conforto. They brought back Teoscar Hernández. They were serious players for Juan Soto. 

The Cubs, meanwhile, did not even engage the superstar right fielder, and seem continually content to play in the middle tier of free agents. They’ve opted for guys like Marcus Stroman instead of Kevin Gausman. Dansby Swanson instead of Trea Turner. Jameson Taillon instead of Kodai Senga. Shota Imanaga instead of Yoshinobu Yamamoto. Some of those have worked out for the Cubs, but I’d argue the other options still offer a higher ceiling. Also consider for one second what the consistent, year-in and year-out yearning for value contracts from a big-market team communicates to players and agents: that you’re willing to win, but not at the expense of giving a player what you deem to be too expensive of a contract. 

This doesn’t even touch on the developmental gap between the Dodgers and the Cubs. Our own Matthew Trueblood recently touched on the necessity for the Cubs to get everything possible out of their players at the major league level. Recall Ryan Brasier, Anthony Banda, and Evan Phillips. None were drafted by the Dodgers, and all were acquired for basically nothing. They combined to pitch 23 ⅔ innings in the playoffs this past season (over 16 percent of the total innings that the Dodgers played in), and did so to the tune of a 2.28 ERA.

Last offseason, the Cubs landed Michael Busch from the Dodgers in exchange for Jackson Ferris and Zyhir Hope. Both Ferris and Hope have seen their prospect status explode since entering the Dodgers organization. I am not here to relitigate that trade. The Cubs acquired someone to fill a position of need, and Busch had a very good rookie season for them. With that said, Ferris had some terrifying quotes about the difference in coaching between the two organizations.

“I just feel like coaching is a big thing. You wouldn’t expect coaching to be too different in the minor leagues or big leagues with teams, but it is a big difference," Ferris said. "When I first got traded over to the Dodgers, just kind of critique and fine-tuning little things with my mechanics even when I was younger. Which the Cubs didn’t want to mess with, since I was young. Now that we got to fine-tune some of those things, it really let me take off throughout the year.” 

While he stops short of completely calling out the Cubs, I don’t think it takes much to read between the lines there: a former Cubs prospect feels he is getting much better coaching in his new organization. That is concerning.

On paper, it feels like the Cubs were a decent fit for Sasaki. They play in a big market. They currently employ Imanaga and Seiya Suzuki, two notable Japanese players. They would have employed him for very cheap, which is right up their alley. You know they were all-in. 

Unfortunately, with contract offers all being equal, why wouldn’t a player want to play for an organization that has shown that it takes winning seriously, and is willing to continually invest resources to ensure a winning product is on the field? An organization that always seems to get the most out of all of their players?

I’d certainly pick the Dodgers. Wouldn’t you?

View full article

[We Got The Whole 9]

Just read the article that basically said Ohtani led the push hard for L.A. They pulled out all the stops and appealed to his senses in several ways. Why rent out the biggest sushi restaurant in town (like TOR did for Ohtani) when you can just have a minority owner open his mansion and hire the best sushi chefs? Magic Johnson lives and breathes L.A. in a way the GOAT never does for Chicago. He got in on the recruiting. The team has made the postseason for a decade straight, are the defending champs, have 2 of the most prominent legends from the NPB already, a massive Japanese-American population, has the best development system in the league, has unlimited resources and 100% willingness from the owners to do whatever it takes to keep getting better. It was pretty much a foregone conclusion.

[Rob Grothman]

The Cubs will not get better as long as Hoyer is there. Being this is his contract year, you'd think he would be all in? This is all in?

Making it clear you will not hand out long term contracts will kill you in free agency. Why didn't you start this policy b4 Swanson contract? Or is this your way of showing you learned a lesson? Trading Jackson Ferris for Busch will go down as one of worst trades in Cubs history. Not to mention we through in good OF pros too?

Throw in Bellinger and Aries trades and Cubs look like laughing stock. 12th leading payroll and 3rd highest tickets in league?

SMH

[ChiBob]

Hasn't the Dodgers led or been at the top for pitcher injuries per year recently ? 

[Jason Ross]

6 minutes ago, ChiBob said:

Hasn't the Dodgers led or been at the top for pitcher injuries per year recently ? 

Welcome to NSBB! 

And yes, good call. The Dodgers have seen multiple starters drop due to injury and really haven't done a great job developing arms recently either - Bobby Miller has the look of a monster and yet the Dodgers can't seem to figure out a way to help get him to that finished product. 

Ultimately, it feels like maybe geography played a stronger role here than maybe he or Wolfe made it seem originally.

[Jason Ross]

8 minutes ago, Rob Grothman said:

The Cubs will not get better as long as Hoyer is there. Being this is his contract year, you'd think he would be all in? This is all in?

Making it clear you will not hand out long term contracts will kill you in free agency. Why didn't you start this policy b4 Swanson contract? Or is this your way of showing you learned a lesson? Trading Jackson Ferris for Busch will go down as one of worst trades in Cubs history. Not to mention we through in good OF pros too?

Throw in Bellinger and Aries trades and Cubs look like laughing stock. 12th leading payroll and 3rd highest tickets in league?

SMH

I don't want to stump fully for Hoyer (I got my gripes), but I think adding an MLB arm, while DFA'ing a raw, 22-year old reliever who really struggles to control the baseball does feel like an "all-in" move, no? I think Arias has a potential future as a member of an MLB bullpen, but he's pretty far away yet. Mechanical inconsistencies and good not elite stuff+ has him in a pretty risk-heavy category right now. 

[Rcal10]

11 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

 I don’t buy there’s some huge gap in coaching or development. Its the owners all the way 

I completely agree with the above. 

[Rob Grothman]

3 hours ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I don't want to stump fully for Hoyer (I got my gripes), but I think adding an MLB arm, while DFA'ing a raw, 22-year old reliever who really struggles to control the baseball does feel like an "all-in" move, no? I think Arias has a potential future as a member of an MLB bullpen, but he's pretty far away yet. Mechanical inconsistencies and good not elite stuff+ has him in a pretty risk-heavy category right now. 

You say ML arm. I say that is debatable. To pick up a DFA and turn around and DFA your 19th best prospect just cuz he walked 36 guys in 36 innings? Do yo remember Carlos Marmol? Yes, raw. Yes having trouble with control. Side winder who hits 98 and has so much movement he hasn't been able to control it yet. There are 7-8 on 40 man roster that will NEVER give the team any value. Very silly of Hoyer

[squally1313]

8 minutes ago, Rob Grothman said:

You say ML arm. I say that is debatable. To pick up a DFA and turn around and DFA your 19th best prospect just cuz he walked 36 guys in 36 innings? Do yo remember Carlos Marmol? Yes, raw. Yes having trouble with control. Side winder who hits 98 and has so much movement he hasn't been able to control it yet. There are 7-8 on 40 man roster that will NEVER give the team any value. Very silly of Hoyer

The back end of a teams top 20/30 prospect list is generally littered with these types of pitchers, and you had to go back to a guy who was last an effective pitcher in 2011 (13 seasons ago) to find someone who worked out. Do you think it's a little telling that you couldn't pick a more recent example?

[Bertz]

There are people really sweating Michael Arias?  Like he would absolutely get demoted to AA if he were still in the org on opening day.  There are upwards of 20 guys you would pick to save a game before you'd pick him right now.

Like yeah the stuff is good (and to be clear, just good not amazing), and there's a chance he goes somewhere and it clicks, but so what?  Relievers do that all the time.  If you hold onto every reliever with a live arm just because you're scared of the 5% chance they suddenly develop command you're not going to have any depth options capable of actually getting outs.

[Jason Ross]

48 minutes ago, Rob Grothman said:

You say ML arm. I say that is debatable. To pick up a DFA and turn around and DFA your 19th best prospect just cuz he walked 36 guys in 36 innings? Do yo remember Carlos Marmol? Yes, raw. Yes having trouble with control. Side winder who hits 98 and has so much movement he hasn't been able to control it yet. There are 7-8 on 40 man roster that will NEVER give the team any value. Very silly of Hoyer

Colin Rea is going to start with the Cubs and play on the MLB roster. He's not a star, but he's undoubtedly going to provide MLB value. Michael Arias was almost assuredly not going to provide that in 2025 (and if they needed him, we were likely in a world of hurt). Secondly, you say there are 7-8 players on the 40-man (I'll be honest, I can't find that many myself) who will likely never provide the team any value...as if Arias isn't in that exact group. 

Listen, Arias has some upside, yes. But the hand wringing over losing a player like Arias is super unneeded. These guys pop up every year. Just wait, the Cubs will have another guy or two do the same thing in 2025. There will be some new version of Michael Arias - guy with stuff who can't throw enough strikes. 

All things being equal, it'd have been better to have Arias in our system than someone else's, but we don't live in a world where all things are equal. It's more likely than anything that we look back in two or three years and realize Michael Arias still hasn't made his MLB debut and is bouncing around some random team's system than it is that he's established himself as a guy.

[Rob Grothman]

8 hours ago, squally1313 said:

The back end of a teams top 20/30 prospect list is generally littered with these types of pitchers, and you had to go back to a guy who was last an effective pitcher in 2011 (13 seasons ago) to find someone who worked out. Do you think it's a little telling that you couldn't pick a more recent example?

Really, that is your response? " generally" and you couldn't come up with more recent example?

Jed is that you? Lol you my friend are spewing non-sense.

There are several players ranked 20-30 that will play at MLB level. I can name them if you want. Aries would have been one of them.

[Rob Grothman]

7 hours ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Colin Rea is going to start with the Cubs and play on the MLB roster. He's not a star, but he's undoubtedly going to provide MLB value. Michael Arias was almost assuredly not going to provide that in 2025 (and if they needed him, we were likely in a world of hurt). Secondly, you say there are 7-8 players on the 40-man (I'll be honest, I can't find that many myself) who will likely never provide the team any value...as if Arias isn't in that exact group. 

Listen, Arias has some upside, yes. But the hand wringing over losing a player like Arias is super unneeded. These guys pop up every year. Just wait, the Cubs will have another guy or two do the same thing in 2025. There will be some new version of Michael Arias - guy with stuff who can't throw enough strikes. 

All things being equal, it'd have been better to have Arias in our system than someone else's, but we don't live in a world where all things are equal. It's more likely than anything that we look back in two or three years and realize Michael Arias still hasn't made his MLB debut and is bouncing around some random team's system than it is that he's established himself as a guy.

You could be right. At least what you say has ring of truth. But, I would be shocked if Aries doesn't debut this year. He may not be great but his upside is immense. Everyone would love to have RHP who throws side arm with great movement in their pen.

[Rob Grothman]

4 minutes ago, Rob Grothman said:

You could be right. At least what you say has ring of truth. But, I would be shocked if Aries doesn't debut this year. He may not be great but his upside is immense. Everyone would love to have RHP who throws side arm with great movement in their pen.

Here is my list

Gavin Holloway

Ethen Roberts

Rob zastryzny

Caleb Theilbar

Greg workman

Matt Theiss thought we traded him to sox

Cody poteet

Matt Fiesta this one is ironic

 

[squally1313]

14 minutes ago, Rob Grothman said:

Really, that is your response? " generally" and you couldn't come up with more recent example?

Jed is that you? Lol you my friend are spewing non-sense.

There are several players ranked 20-30 that will play at MLB level. I can name them if you want. Aries would have been one of them.

There are several players ranked between 20-30 who will play at the major league level AND there are 7-8 players on the 40 man roster who will "NEVER" give the team any value. This is the most backwards roster ever!

[Jason Ross]

9 hours ago, Rob Grothman said:

You could be right. At least what you say has ring of truth. But, I would be shocked if Aries doesn't debut this year. He may not be great but his upside is immense. Everyone would love to have RHP who throws side arm with great movement in their pen.

Michael Arias walked over 17% of hitters across Double-A and Triple-A last year. This is essentially, double that of what an average MLB reliever walks (around 9%). Hitters only get better and better at not chasing and offering at pitches off the plate as levels increase. Considering the Yankees are among the favorites to come out of the AL next season, Arias' age (23), that he is likely to at least need a prove it stint back in Double-A at the start of 2025 and his immense control issues, I would put the likelihood he debuts in 2025 as "incredibly unlikely outside of extreme emergency situations" and his likelihood as being a useful MLB reliever in 2025 even more unlikely than that. It might happen! But...it's almost assuredly not going to.

Everyone would love to have a funky RHP who has good stuff in their BP. The flip side to the Arias coin is that no one wants a pitcher who walks one out of every five hitters. 

I'm wishing Arias the best out there. No ill will, seems like a hard working dude. But there's such an uphill battle with him that it's not worth worrying about, either. 

[Jason Ross]

9 hours ago, Rob Grothman said:

Here is my list

Gavin Holloway

Ethen Roberts

Rob zastryzny

Caleb Theilbar

Greg workman

Matt Theiss thought we traded him to sox

Cody poteet

Matt Fiesta this one is ironic

 

Matt Thaiss was traded, he's not even a Chicago Cub. Matt Festa, Caleb Thielbar, and Cody Poteet all have interesting underlying pitch data (and two of the three have worked directly with Tyler Zombro, who was hired this winter to oversee pitching development and runs a very good pitchlab/pitcch developmental program), and have made the MLB already. Gavin Hollwell has some big stuff himself - and has similar issues to Arias (control issues) but has made his MLB debut and far more likely to make an impact at the MLB level in 2025, as well.

Greg Workman isn't even a pitcher, so their roster spots aren't even close to interchangeable. The Cubs need position players too, they can't keep every pitcher. He's also one of the best defensive players in the minor league side of baseball with some interesting power. 

If you want to say that none of these players are singularly good - yeah, not sure I disagree. On the surface, none are particularly amazing with out some tweaks, fixes, and changes. All of them,. and I mean all of them (even including the guy who's not on the Cubs any more) are far, far, more likely than Arias to make an MLB impact as of today. They're probably all more likely to make MLB impacts in the future as well - Arias is that much of a project as it stands. 

The Cubs, the team who knows Arias the best decided these guys were more interesting. That should probably tell you what you need to know. The Cubs are likely confident they can find a new Arias (RHP reliever with stuff but control issues grow on trees) while using the 40-man space for a player they think might make an impact on the MLB roster at some point, especially with some fixups.