The Athletic: Cubs Eying Justin Turner

[SOFNR]

11 minutes ago, ryanrc said:

my choice was Grichuk. we missed on him. he was hitting almost .900 OPS against lefties and was THE BEST lefty killer in all MLB last year with less than 400 at bats. Far better option for overspending on the bench than Turner. But that was also when we didnt have Berti, or Pressly/Brasier, which shifted the whole scenario. Honestly, the only reason we are having this conversation is because we let other elite platoon bat options go that were far superior, and chose those three guys instead. 

The fact that this conversation is "turner or bust" means its really a bust! 

I'm doubling down on the argument that we dont need jack squat right now because all the best eals come later in the season. the general obsession with the "complete postseason roster before spring training" has gotta go. No serious GM in the league thinks like that. Its a typical fan obsession to scrap for every single homerun or strikeout, no matter the risk or cost, and with complete disregard to midseason thinking.. 

I guarantee you at least half a dozen better postseason bat options appear as the season goes on, and that no 26th roster spot matters one iota for proving we can beat the brewers. period. I also guarantee you a better trade deal comes along than betting the farm for Dylan Cease, if we wait. 

Lets just roll with the punches and make our big moves for when they really count. 

 

The Cubs have atleast 30 million to spend. There's no reason to not improve the team for the first 4 months of the season so they can try to squeeze in 30 mil worth of salary into the last 2 months. It's not even very realistic to think they would have opportunities to.

[Jason Ross]

4 minutes ago, SOFNR said:

The Cubs have atleast 30 million to spend. There's no reason to not improve the team for the first 4 months of the season so they can try to squeeze in 30 mil worth of salary into the last 2 months. It's not even very realistic to think they would have opportunities to.

Just to add to how difficult to impossible the team would find it to spend that much money - all of the LT money they would add would be partial LT money - meaning that a $20m contract would count as far less - probably under $10m on the 2025 LT with two months to go. The likelihood that the Cubs gut the system enough to add in three impact players like that under the LT in July is...very, very, very small.

[Bertz]

1 minute ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Just to add to how difficult to impossible the team would find it to spend that much money - all of the LT money they would add would be partial LT money - meaning that a $20m contract would count as far less - probably under $10m on the 2025 LT with two months to go. The likelihood that the Cubs gut the system enough to add in three impact players like that under the LT in July is...very, very, very small.

Yeah Vlad Jr.'s probably the most expensive player they could plausibly add and even he'd be a smidge under $10M come the deadline?

I don't hate the team holding onto more than the customary $10M for in season stuff, but once you get past like $15M you start leaving the realm of likelihood IMO.

[Jason Ross]

Just now, Bertz said:

Yeah Vlad Jr.'s probably the most expensive player they could plausibly add and even he'd be a smidge under $10M come the deadline?

I don't hate the team holding onto more than the customary $10M for in season stuff, but once you get past like $15M you start leaving the realm of likelihood IMO.

Entirely. Saving a bit more because you're really expecting to add some impact at the deadline is fine for me. We don't need to spend for spending sake. At the same time, eschewing signing any help with the idea of "save it all for later!" misses the mark as well. Find a middle ground. It doesn't have to be Justin Turner (though I think he solves a needed role of a RHH who you can count on to hit LHP on the bench) or Kyle Finnegan or any particular name - but if the Cubs don't sign Bregman than they should make one or two moves with the $30m as well - unless they really want to push their luck on a pre-November contract extension for Kyle Tucker that for accounting purposes starts in 2025 as opposed to 2026.

[Bertz]

I try to avoid linking to Twitter but Marquee doesn't cross-post videos and you can't screenshot one

 

Counsell explicitly calls out the org's lack of depth at 1B.  So I definitely expect one at this point.  Likely Turner if no Bregman, and then someone more league minimum-y (Juan Yepez?) if paired with Bregman.

[KCCub]

1 hour ago, ryanrc said:

Lets just roll with the punches and make our big moves for when they really count. 

The 5 posts above explain why holding onto $30m until the TDL is overkill but here's a few additional thoughts:

1. One or two additional wins in April of 2023 sure would have been nice right? Fixing holes now have a larger impact on how your season plays out. (That does not mean you have to have your full playoff roster set before the season and signing JT and/or adding a SP now does not mean the roster is complete)

2. We just don't know who will be available at the TDL.

• We can confidently say there will be a bunch of BP arms moved and the higher end ones will require premium prospect capital.
• Difference maker SP will be sought after by almost every team in playoff contention and there won't be enough available arms to satisfy every team's wants.
  • Last season's TDL impact arms were what Flaherty and Kikuchi? And then you had a few innings eaters types in Montas, Civale, Lorenzon, etc. I'm sure I'm missing someone, but there's just not a guarantee the dream candidate we want will be available and/or acquired by the Cubs due to many factors - availability, cost, other teams can be desperate/willing to overpay in prospect capital as well. 
• Platoon type hitters are a dime a dozen at the TDL and cost very little cash and prospect capital to acquire.  

 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

1 hour ago, ryanrc said:

my choice was Grichuk. we missed on him. he was hitting almost .900 OPS against lefties and was THE BEST lefty killer in all MLB last year with less than 400 at bats. Far better option for overspending on the bench than Turner. But that was also when we didnt have Berti, or Pressly/Brasier, which shifted the whole scenario. Honestly, the only reason we are having this conversation is because we let other elite platoon bat options go that were far superior, and chose those three guys instead. 

The fact that this conversation is "turner or bust" means its really a bust! 

I'm doubling down on the argument that we dont need jack squat right now because all the best eals come later in the season. the general obsession with the "complete postseason roster before spring training" has gotta go. No serious GM in the league thinks like that. Its a typical fan obsession to scrap for every single homerun or strikeout, no matter the risk or cost, and with complete disregard to midseason thinking.. 

I guarantee you at least half a dozen better postseason bat options appear as the season goes on, and that no 26th roster spot matters one iota for proving we can beat the brewers. period. I also guarantee you a better trade deal comes along than betting the farm for Dylan Cease, if we wait. 

Lets just roll with the punches and make our big moves for when they really count. 

 

I think the point is well taken that fans can get overly focused on having a perfect roster on opening day when that will not make it to the postseason, this is especially useful in how we think about the bullpen in particular.  But there is an opportunity cost to waiting, and I'm far less confident about the wealth of superior options as the season progresses.  

Adding Turner or a similar 1B bat at the deadline would help, but it would also have an opportunity cost of more than half the season.  A big part of that addition in particular is risk mitigation, if e.g. Busch face plants in year 2, or Happ pulls a Schwarber and tears his ACL early on, you're playing a lot of games with a worse lineup having waited to make that move.  Trades before the all-star break have become basically non-existent as well, so having willing trade partners is a problem until you're nearly 100 games into the season.

And the alternatives are not necessarily abundant.  With the extra wild card there are fewer teams than ever looking to trade away useful MLB players in July.  Platoon 1B/positionless bat isn't a rare enough profile that there'd be no options to be found, but we should careful about being overconfident that there are oodles of better options waiting for us just down the road. 

[squally1313]

5 minutes ago, KCCub said:

1. One or two additional wins in April of 2023 sure would have been nice right? Fixing holes now have a larger impact on how your season plays out.

Agreed on the larger point that we should optimize the roster as early as possible besides leaving some cash around, and that $30m is way too much to leave around. But we start to get away from the math a little bit when we start to talk about 1-2 wins/month in a conversation about a theoretical part time player projected for 1 fWAR in 500 PAs. 

[KCCub]

19 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Agreed on the larger point that we should optimize the roster as early as possible besides leaving some cash around, and that $30m is way too much to leave around. But we start to get away from the math a little bit when we start to talk about 1-2 wins/month in a conversation about a theoretical part time player projected for 1 fWAR in 500 PAs. 

While I agree with your overall math point, (and I don't want to open up a can of worms here in a JT thread which might be completely moot) but there's WPA (Win Probability Added) and WE (Win Expectancy) in play here and we could go down a rabbit hole on how much having JT in certain situations could lead to more real world wins vs not having JT available in said situations vs just looking at how his entire season plays out above replacement level player.  

We'll just call it that I have personal beliefs that having a good RH bench/platoon player, with how the roster is currently constructed, could lead to more real world wins vs his 1 fWAR projection

Edited February 12, 2025 by KCCub

[Bertz]

It should also probably be noted that Connor Joe and Ty France each signed 1/$1M contracts in the last week.  Donovan Solano, whose current profile isn't too terribly different, got $3.5M.  

There's a pretty good chance we're talking about $4-5M rather than $8-10M,  and the only alternative move this is truly incompatible with is Bregman

[Rcal10]

22 minutes ago, Bertz said:

It should also probably be noted that Connor Joe and Ty France each signed 1/$1M contracts in the last week.  Donovan Solano, whose current profile isn't too terribly different, got $3.5M.  

There's a pretty good chance we're talking about $4-5M rather than $8-10M,  and the only alternative move this is truly incompatible with is Bregman

If we keep JT in the proper perspective I think most can at least agree the Cubs should spend some money on a decent bench bat. Doesn’t have to be JT. Could be Canha. I am sure there are a few others. But the pool is dwindling. We also have understand this is based on NOT getting Bregman. It is also not the most important thing they do with they money if they don’t get Bregman. I solid pitcher would be more important, IMO. But a bat would be second. If they go to the trade deadline $10M under their max they will be fine. They do not need to be $30M below. 

[squally1313]

1 hour ago, KCCub said:

While I agree with your overall math point, (and I don't want to open up a can of worms here in a JT thread which might be completely moot) but there's WPA (Win Probability Added) and WE (Win Expectancy) in play here and we could go down a rabbit hole on how much having JT in certain situations could lead to more real world wins vs not having JT available in said situations vs just looking at how his entire season plays out above replacement level player.  

We'll just call it that I have personal beliefs that having a good RH bench/platoon player, with how the roster is currently constructed, could lead to more real world wins vs his 1 fWAR projection

Appreciate your point that the situations he would find himself in would have an outsized impact on the outcome of the game vs treating every PA the same. 

On the other hand, Steamer gives you projected splits. Either I can't find ZIPs or they don't exist.

Against LHPs:

• Turner: .256/.339/.406, 111 wRC
• Canario: .228/.295/.428, 103 wRC

Certainly an upgrade, but 22 points of OPS? I just don't want to confuse 'this role gets more ABs' with 'Turner is a noticeable upgrade for those situations'. Suzuki, Tucker, Swanson, Shaw all project as better against LHP, Hoerner as the same, Happ, Amaya, Kelly all as above average hitters. It's Busch (90 wRC) and PCA (80 wRC). who are markedly worse. 

As an FYI, Turner, with a Steamer projected 104 wRC against RHP, would be tied for 6th on the roster, again tied with Hoerner. 

 

[KCCub]

52 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Appreciate your point that the situations he would find himself in would have an outsized impact on the outcome of the game vs treating every PA the same. 

On the other hand, Steamer gives you projected splits. Either I can't find ZIPs or they don't exist.

Against LHPs:

• Turner: .256/.339/.406, 111 wRC
• Canario: .228/.295/.428, 103 wRC

Certainly an upgrade, but 22 points of OPS? I just don't want to confuse 'this role gets more ABs' with 'Turner is a noticeable upgrade for those situations'. Suzuki, Tucker, Swanson, Shaw all project as better against LHP, Hoerner as the same, Happ, Amaya, Kelly all as above average hitters. It's Busch (90 wRC) and PCA (80 wRC). who are markedly worse. 

As an FYI, Turner, with a Steamer projected 104 wRC against RHP, would be tied for 6th on the roster, again tied with Hoerner. 

 

I was on the "Give Canario a chance" train last season. But here's my negatives for him if he's your best bench bat -

• 83 wRC+ projected overall. In the days off/injury/platoon scenarios that we've beat to death, is he the guy you want getting 300 ABs?
• In the "got to have it" PH scenarios for Busch/PCA, is he the guy you want to PH knowing his quality of contact? Bases loaded, 1 out, tough lefty on the mound, need the ball put in play, etc
• He's not a 1b

Why not roll with Turner/Canario/Berti/Kelly? You have 5 OFers then on the roster, and all positions covered with backups who can handle each position on the field. On top of that, you have a guy in JT who you feel ok with in the starting role when needed. 

 

[Bertz]

1 hour ago, KCCub said:

I was on the "Give Canario a chance" train last season. But here's my negatives for him if he's your best bench bat -

• 83 wRC+ projected overall. In the days off/injury/platoon scenarios that we've beat to death, is he the guy you want getting 300 ABs?
• In the "got to have it" PH scenarios for Busch/PCA, is he the guy you want to PH knowing his quality of contact? Bases loaded, 1 out, tough lefty on the mound, need the ball put in play, etc
• He's not a 1b

Why not roll with Turner/Canario/Berti/Kelly? You have 5 OFers then on the roster, and all positions covered with backups who can handle each position on the field. On top of that, you have a guy in JT who you feel ok with in the starting role when needed. 

 

Nodding to Trueblood's article this afternoon, I anticipate one bench player will be someone with a *very* tenuous grasp on a roster spot.  They are keeping a spot warm until there's a multi-day but not IL-worthy injury or one of the prospects goes ultra instinct and forces a callup.

Canario is still in the org IMO because there are certain permutations where it makes sense for him to be that guy compared to Workman or Brujan.  But all three are clinging to the roster by their fingernails IMO.  

[Jason Ross]

Maddie Lee reports the Cubs are "evaluating" whether Canario can handle 1b currently. Which sounds like a very cheap, internal 1b option....in the case that the Cubs don't really have much money to get someone else. *cough* Bregman *cough*.

[Bertz]

33 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Maddie Lee reports the Cubs are "evaluating" whether Canario can handle 1b currently. Which sounds like a very cheap, internal 1b option....in the case that the Cubs don't really have much money to get someone else. *cough* Bregman *cough*.

Especially given he played winterball and didn't touch 1B yeah it's pretty clear this is a Bregman related deal.  That said, they could have had Connor Joe or Ty France for just $200Kish more.  So I'm curious which of these is why Canario's now the play:

- Those guys were understandably not willing to wait on Bregman's decision before taking the bird in hand, so Jed's gotta scramble a bit

- That $200K matters to Jed (might imply a sign Bregman keep Hoerner scenario?)

- The team doesn't love Canario anymore (clearly) but still likes him more than that caliber of veteran

It doesn't ultimately matter and we'll never know, but that second one popped into my head as a potential implication.

[Irrelevant Dude]

This is almost certainly me being a meatbally Cubs fan (and a bit of a Turner-hater), but Rizzo is 5 years younger than Turner.  Why not bring him in for near league minimum to be the backup 1B?  I get that it's not ideal for both 1B to hit left handed, but both Busch and Rizzo can hold their own against left handed pitchers.  And if there are any injuries in the outfield, Rizzo can slide into the DH spot with Suzuki going back to the field.  I know Rizzo is nowhere near the player he used to be, but I wouldn't be opposed to having him as a cheap part timer if the roster can support that.

[JD94]

5 hours ago, Irrelevant Dude said:

This is almost certainly me being a meatbally Cubs fan (and a bit of a Turner-hater), but Rizzo is 5 years younger than Turner.  Why not bring him in for near league minimum to be the backup 1B?  I get that it's not ideal for both 1B to hit left handed, but both Busch and Rizzo can hold their own against left handed pitchers.  And if there are any injuries in the outfield, Rizzo can slide into the DH spot with Suzuki going back to the field.  I know Rizzo is nowhere near the player he used to be, but I wouldn't be opposed to having him as a cheap part timer if the roster can support that.

Rizzo just isn’t the answer. Love him and his time here, but I think his back just can’t hold up anymore as a baseball player. He looks pretty much washed. Justin Turner is a better baseball player even at 40 years old. Turner also gives you the flexibility to play some 3rd if he has to, though those days are almost behind him. 

[BigbadB]

51 minutes ago, JD94 said:

Rizzo just isn’t the answer. Love him and his time here, but I think his back just can’t hold up anymore as a baseball player. He looks pretty much washed. Justin Turner is a better baseball player even at 40 years old. Turner also gives you the flexibility to play some 3rd if he has to, though those days are almost behind him. 

I'd also give the nod to Turner as a righty hitter. The times to give Busch a day off would be a day where they face a tough lefty, and Turner would be a better handcuff than Rizzo.

[Jason Ross]

6 hours ago, Irrelevant Dude said:

This is almost certainly me being a meatbally Cubs fan (and a bit of a Turner-hater), but Rizzo is 5 years younger than Turner.  Why not bring him in for near league minimum to be the backup 1B?  I get that it's not ideal for both 1B to hit left handed, but both Busch and Rizzo can hold their own against left handed pitchers.  And if there are any injuries in the outfield, Rizzo can slide into the DH spot with Suzuki going back to the field.  I know Rizzo is nowhere near the player he used to be, but I wouldn't be opposed to having him as a cheap part timer if the roster can support that.

Let's take name out of it. The player we are discussing:

- Has a 91 wRC+ over his last 796 PA's

- Has an ISO of .121. This is despite playing in a very LHH friendly field. 

- Had a 68 wRC+ away from that home field advantage last year

- Is LHH, and doesn't really compliment our already LHH 1b 

- Has a long history of back injuries - a likely reason for the major decline in offense and power

- Is 35 and will turn 36 mid-year

I adore what Rizzo did for the Cubs. But outside of nostalgia for the name, there's little there to make you think he'd be a asset to the Cubs or fill in the gaps needed. Just imagine his name was Sam Baker and had a career as a Pittsburgh Pirate. Then re-apply all of the information above. Nostalgia is a powerful drug - I watched Gladiator II the other night. It was horsefeathers. They got me. So there's no blame or shame and I dont want to make you feel bad...I just think we have to take nostalgia out of it. Or we'll get Gladiator II at 1b.

[gflore34]

Don't want to waste money on Turner, he's done, much like Mancini, etc.  Maybe pursue a trade for Arenado?  He'd be relatively cheap both monetarily (Cardinals would be on the hook for a portion of his salary) and in prospects.

[17 Seconds]

7 minutes ago, gflore34 said:

Don't want to waste money on Turner, he's done, much like Mancini, etc.  Maybe pursue a trade for Arenado?  He'd be relatively cheap both monetarily (Cardinals would be on the hook for a portion of his salary) and in prospects.

trueblood talked about this idea in his article today on the front page

[SOFNR]

18 minutes ago, gflore34 said:

Don't want to waste money on Turner, he's done, much like Mancini, etc.  Maybe pursue a trade for Arenado?  He'd be relatively cheap both monetarily (Cardinals would be on the hook for a portion of his salary) and in prospects.

It's not a horrible idea. Arenado is still a useful player. He's probably still a 3 win guy right now. He's owed 32 this year, 27 next year, and 15 in 2027. If you could talk the Cardinals into eating 12 this year and 7 next year that's really not a bad contract. But I'd also not want to give up anything of significance. He's not a great hitter anymore. He's projected around 106 wRC+ for 2025. That's actually better then he hit last year. That's around the same area as Matt Shaw is projected, who's a lot cheaper, and probably has a higher ceiling going forward. Compared to Bregman, who was definitely an offensive upgrade, I think I'd be more inclined to just go with the young guy in this situation, rather then taking on a declining veteran for 3 years.

[gflore34]

26 minutes ago, 17 Seconds said:

trueblood talked about this idea in his article today on the front page

If not Arenado, there's got to be better options than older than dirt Turner and Robertson.  They're both a waste of resources and may cost the Cubs a win or two.

[Derwood]

I can't imagine the Cardinals trading Arenado to their rivals for anything close to market value