Starting rotation options available now

[thawv]

On 6/18/2025 at 4:20 PM, Rcal10 said:

I had mentioned the exact same players a few days ago. So obviously I agree with you. I think the Cubs make their bench better by improving their starting line up and putting Shaw in the bench. That one deal would improve the line up, the bench and the rotation. 

This has been my concept for many years when guys on here wanted to add bench depth to the team.  The best way to strengthen the bench is to replace starter with better players and put that player on the bench.  Thank you for mentioning that!

[Rcal10]

12 minutes ago, thawv said:

This has been my concept for many years when guys on here wanted to add bench depth to the team.  The best way to strengthen the bench is to replace starter with better players and put that player on the bench.  Thank you for mentioning that!

I got you thawv. 

[thawv]

Not that he's "available," but what do you guys think Gore would cost? 

 

[gflore34]

Hard pass on Lugo besides, don't the Cubs have plenty of the current version of Lugo in their system?  Rea, Flexen, Assad (hopefully, after the break), Noland, Birdsell (him to, after the break) why spend any resources to get another?  I'd also look at giving Wicks another shot, who, I believe, recently has been showing well at Iowa.

[G.Krisch]

15 minutes ago, gflore34 said:

Hard pass on Lugo besides, don't the Cubs have plenty of the current version of Lugo in their system?  Rea, Flexen, Assad (hopefully, after the break), Noland, Birdsell (him to, after the break) why spend any resources to get another?  I'd also look at giving Wicks another shot, who, I believe, recently has been showing well at Iowa.

Have you actually looked to see how Lugo has pitched the last couple seasons?

[gflore34]

2 minutes ago, G.Krisch said:

Have you actually looked to see how Lugo has pitched the last couple seasons?

I was referring to this season, read the article, while the surface numbers suggest he may be okay.  Under the hood suggests something different, for a recent example, although not a starter, see Pressly.

[thawv]

8 minutes ago, gflore34 said:

I was referring to this season, read the article, while the surface numbers suggest he may be okay.  Under the hood suggests something different, for a recent example, although not a starter, see Pressly.

His under the hood numbers scream that he's succeeding with smoke and mirrors.  I don't want him at all. 

 

[Tryptamine]

1 hour ago, thawv said:

Not that he's "available," but what do you guys think Gore would cost? 

 

Honestly something like Shaw/Horton+Ballesteros+Caissie, the price would be very high. Hell they might ask  for Shaw and Horton with an upside sweetner like Mule.

[Bertz]

We've gotta move away from lucky=bad.  You can be good and have luck make your results look great.  It's not complicated.

[gflore34]

It's only downside with Lugo, with Edward Cabrera or Sandy Alcantara, there are elements of upside.

[Rcal10]

6 minutes ago, gflore34 said:

It's only downside with Lugo, with Edward Cabrera or Sandy Alcantara, there are elements of upside.

Even with underlying numbers not being as good as his actual results, he is still better and ready, now, to pitch than any of the guys mentioned to be like him. And because of his contract and his possible opt out at the end of the year or his option to stay another year, he should come cheaper than most. He isn’t great, but far better than Rea and he also might allow the Cubs to slow some Horton innings. I think Cabrera cost more and Alcantara even more than that. 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

11 minutes ago, gflore34 said:

It's only downside with Lugo, with Edward Cabrera or Sandy Alcantara, there are elements of upside.

I think it's good to interrogate logic like this.  Since he got to start full-time in 2023, Lugo is 9th of 83 qualified starters in ERA and 21st in FIP, which combined with his durability and in-start endurance makes him 13th in fWAR.  I get the impulse to think of the stuff-monster pitcher as being able to reach a level of performance that others can't, and there are ways that can be true especially as it relates to playoff expectations.  But in terms of results, I don't think it's reasonable to think that Cabrera and Alcantara have a chance to be a clear level above what Lugo has proven, at least not a chance high enough worth discussing.

[Tryptamine]

Let's not kid ourselves, there is no super nasty high velocity plus stuff pitcher out there who is available. Lugo is a perfectly reasonable get. 

[Outshined_One]

43 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

Honestly something like Shaw/Horton+Ballesteros+Caissie, the price would be very high. Hell they might ask  for Shaw and Horton with an upside sweetner like Mule.

What would a recent comp be for a trade for a guy like Gore?

If you told me he could be had for a package built around something like Brown/Wiggins/Caissie, I'd give it serious thought, but I get the feeling that deal might need another name or two to be realistic.

[Rcal10]

6 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

I think it's good to interrogate logic like this.  Since he got to start full-time in 2023, Lugo is 9th of 83 qualified starters in ERA and 21st in FIP, which combined with his durability and in-start endurance makes him 13th in fWAR.  I get the impulse to think of the stuff-monster pitcher as being able to reach a level of performance that others can't, and there are ways that can be true especially as it relates to playoff expectations.  But in terms of results, I don't think it's reasonable to think that Cabrera and Alcantara have a chance to be a clear level above what Lugo has proven, at least not a chance high enough worth discussing.

You also have to factor in acquisition cost. Alcantara is going to cost way more. Cabrera will cost more as well and I am really not sure this year he will be better. I like him because we have him longer. But for this year I am not sure he does any better at a higher cost to acquire. 

[Tryptamine]

Just now, Outshined_One said:

What would a recent comp be for a trade for a guy like Gore?

If you told me he could be had for a package built around something like Brown/Wiggins/Caissie, I'd give it serious thought, but I get the feeling that deal might need another name or two to be realistic.

I'd give up that package without a second thought.

[Rcal10]

2 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

I'd give up that package without a second thought.

I would too. Which means it isn’t enough 

[cubfansince77]

4 hours ago, thawv said:

Not that he's "available," but what do you guys think Gore would cost? 

 

More than we are willing to pay I'm sure....Shaw/Moises for starters. I've said for a few weeks I like Lugo of KC and we've supposedly been kicking the tires on him recently. 

[Geographyhater8888]

21 hours ago, Tryptamine said:

Honestly something like Shaw/Horton+Ballesteros+Caissie, the price would be very high. Hell they might ask  for Shaw and Horton with an upside sweetner like Mule.

And with the uncertainty over a Tucker extension and the Ricketts insistence on a fringe top 10 payroll then the risk isn’t worth the worth the reward if it’s World Series or bust. Too much to give up. If Tom insists on operating the cubs like a mid market team you’re better off waiting for the farm to be on the ML roster on cheap deals and hoping they’re supplemented with a John Lester/Zobrist/Heyward/Lackey like 2015/16.

You use your farm to acquire ML talent when you have an owner who’ll replace the lost talent with high priced veteran talent. Cubs have shown no indication they’ll operate that way.

Edited June 28, 2025 by Geographyhater8888

[Geographyhater8888]

I don’t know what the rangers plans are but Degrom is intriguing depending on the price. If you eat his salary you might be able to keep your top farm talent and roll the dice that he stays healthy for the remainder of the season, since he’s the only true number 1 on the market in a hypothetical world where the rangers are sellers. Of course the cubs picking up the cost is anotywr road block 

[squally1313]

3 hours ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

If Tom insists on operating the cubs like a mid market team you’re better off waiting for the farm to be on the ML roster on cheap deals and hoping they’re supplemented with a John Lester/Zobrist/Heyward/Lackey like 2015/16.

We’re…kinda closer to that than I think most people realize? PCA, Busch, Shaw, Amaya are all here and cheap, Nico is somewhat cost controlled, and then Brown and Horton in the rotation. You can argue about individual abilities or whatever, but 48-34 with all those guys playing prominent roles. 

[Geographyhater8888]

22 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

We’re…kinda closer to that than I think most people realize? PCA, Busch, Shaw, Amaya are all here and cheap, Nico is somewhat cost controlled, and then Brown and Horton in the rotation. You can argue about individual abilities or whatever, but 48-34 with all those guys playing prominent roles. 

Good. Then Tucker will be a Cub in 2026 and beyond now that we know there’s a coherent vision in place and you’ll have more future stability in the outfield to justify trading a Cassie or Alcantara and put your chips into 2025 while still having a foundation in place for the next 5 years or so during what we assume is Tuckers peak. With the future locked in and Happ Suzuki and Taillon on medium length deals who’ll be off the books in the next few years, financial flexibility shouldn’t be a problem.
 

 

Edited June 28, 2025 by Geographyhater8888

[Bertz]

21 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

We’re…kinda closer to that than I think most people realize? PCA, Busch, Shaw, Amaya are all here and cheap, Nico is somewhat cost controlled, and then Brown and Horton in the rotation. You can argue about individual abilities or whatever, but 48-34 with all those guys playing prominent roles. 

Yeah an underrated story around this team right now is how much cheap talent is on the roster and already contributing.

You figure between 9 position players, 5 SPs, and a closer there are 15 spots on an MLB roster that have potential to get pricey.  Heading into next year the Cubs likely have 5-6 of those filled with guys making the league minimum, and it wouldn't be crazy to see it get up to 8.  Add in guys like Nico and Steele too and there's a lot of surplus value flying around. 

I've mostly bowed out of the Tucker conversation because it inevitably revolves into a rabbit season/duck season sort of deal but the team is set up to take one or two big swings because of how little dead weight there is.

[Rcal10]

50 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Yeah an underrated story around this team right now is how much cheap talent is on the roster and already contributing.

You figure between 9 position players, 5 SPs, and a closer there are 15 spots on an MLB roster that have potential to get pricey.  Heading into next year the Cubs likely have 5-6 of those filled with guys making the league minimum, and it wouldn't be crazy to see it get up to 8.  Add in guys like Nico and Steele too and there's a lot of surplus value flying around. 

I've mostly bowed out of the Tucker conversation because it inevitably revolves into a rabbit season/duck season sort of deal but the team is set up to take one or two big swings because of how little dead weight there is.

The think with Tucker, thou I do think they will retain him, is if they don’t where do they spend the money? Schwarber? Bellinger? Who? I think they will add a big bat and maybe an arm, depending on what they add this season. If they added Schwarber at something like 6/$162m  would that make up for not getting Tucker? Maybe Bellinger 6/$138m? As I said, I think they will retain Tucker, but there are other, cheaper, options. 

[thawv]

On 6/27/2025 at 12:40 PM, Bertz said:

We've gotta move away from lucky=bad.  You can be good and have luck make your results look great.  It's not complicated.

Complicated?  Of course it's not complicated.