Starting rotation options available now

[Backtobanks]

4 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

It is not a have to extend Jed because of the great things he has done. It is more about continuity moving forward. If they want a chance of extending Tucker or even signing him at the end of the year they need a POBO and GM in place moving forward. Jed has been fine. He gets way more grief than he deserves here. He isn’t the best at his job, but they can do far worse. As long as Ricketts owns the team the baseball ops will never take full advantage of Thor spending advantage. So whoever else comes in would have the same restraints. Might as well stick to who is here and who has put the team together. 

How about waiting until the end of the year to see what deals he makes at the deadline and whether he can extend Tucker?  It's not like somebody is going to snap him up.

[Rcal10]

2 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

How about waiting until the end of the year to see what deals he makes at the deadline and whether he can extend Tucker?  It's not like somebody is going to snap him up.

Honestly I don’t care either way. But I think they will extend him. And it is better if they do before he starts trading, IMO. I think it also helps if they are trying to extend Tucker or PCA right now if they know what the FO would look like moving forward. Just look at Devers. He was told he would be the Red Sox 3rd baseman and then a new FO was signed. They told him they didn’t make that deal with him, the old one did. Just more continuity. 

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

It's not like there's somebody out there i.e. Theo in 2011 they should be going after to run the org.

[Rcal10]

2 minutes ago, Tangled Up in Plaid said:

It's not like there's somebody out there i.e. Theo in 2011 they should be going after to run the org.

Rizzo!🤷 Not suggesting I want him, but there will be guys there. The bigger question is will the Cubs job be a job an established POBO would want? Not sure any of the established guys would want to work with Ricketts restraints. As I said, I am fine with ext using Jed and building continuity in the FO. Then he can sign and trade knowing he will be here several more years to see what he built. 

[Backtobanks]

5 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

Honestly I don’t care either way. But I think they will extend him. And it is better if they do before he starts trading, IMO. I think it also helps if they are trying to extend Tucker or PCA right now if they know what the FO would look like moving forward. Just look at Devers. He was told he would be the Red Sox 3rd baseman and then a new FO was signed. They told him they didn’t make that deal with him, the old one did. Just more continuity. 

Tucker could care less who is in the FO when those offers of $500,000 + come flying in.  If Hoyer doesn't deliver at the trade deadline, doesn't go deep in the playoffs, and doesn't extend Tucker, why should he be retained?

[Jason Ross]

36 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

Tucker could care less who is in the FO when those offers of $500,000 + come flying in.  If Hoyer doesn't deliver at the trade deadline, doesn't go deep in the playoffs, and doesn't extend Tucker, why should he be retained?

The Cubs so far have put together a roster that has performed in the top of the league this year. His "bad" years (if we cut out the first two in which he was mandated a rebuild post-Covid) were 83 wins and his good year is "96 win pace at the break". That's a pretty good outcome spread if you believe he's capable of delivering good years fairly regularly.

The reality of baseball organizations these days is that the homogenization of ideas and concepts is pretty real. As long as your team places data and analytics as a top priority (read another way, isn't the Colorado Rockies) than the differences between two Baseball Ops are hard to determine. 

Hoyer is probably just as good as the next guy if we are being honest. The Cubs have a pretty good talent evaluation system going on, they are developing players well, they draft well, and they have upgraded their pitching department in recent years and more so with Zombro. A fresh reset of all of those things just because a 93 win team has a bad playoff series is probably not worthwhile at that point. Extending Hoyer now is just doing the inevitable unless for whatever reason you think:
1. an extension will make Jed Hoyer so content that he would essentially pack-it-in because he doesn't care (which neither has any evidence to suggest, and Hoyer has been active and aggressive in both of the last two deadlines with the 83 win teams)
2. the Cubs are really a not very good team and will regress to that talent level (and I just don't see any reason to believe that will occur).

It's pretty safe to assume that Hoyer will be active over the next few weeks regardless of his status and that the Cubs, who may have injuries derail them yet (that's something that most of the time cannot be prepped for. Backup plans to PCA and Tucker dying for the rest of the year are not available. At least not at their 8+ win level) have put together the type of roster that you feel comfortable with remaining good on paper for the remainder of 2025 (especially with a few deadline additions) and 2026.

[Rcal10]

25 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

Tucker could care less who is in the FO when those offers of $500,000 + come flying in.  If Hoyer doesn't deliver at the trade deadline, doesn't go deep in the playoffs, and doesn't extend Tucker, why should he be retained?

I already told you why I think he will be retained and I will be soon”ish”. Apparently you don’t like my reason. Which is fine. I am not even suggesting I think he has done a great job. I think the Cubs think he has done fine and will retain him.
2 of the requirements for you retaining him, IMO, are things that would be easier for him to do if he was retained already. I don’t want a lame duck POBO trading away young talent for rentals. i don’t want Tucker to not be talking to someone he knows will be around for a while. And if he goes to free agency I don’t want the Cubs looking for a FO while Tucker is getting offers from other teams.

I also want him to know he is sticking around so he doesn’t gut the system and let the next guy worry about it. And, as for going deep in the playoffs, really all the POBO can do is put a team in the field that can win. 

[Stratos]

On 7/14/2025 at 10:20 PM, 731.4life said:

I agree. I wasn't a big fan of Jed at first but he is growing on me. I believe he does deserve an extension.

Jed has made some great deals (Busch, Seiya, Imanaga, Boyd, PCA etc plus Counsell) and few stinkers of significance.  He's also drafted well, and had a very good offseason this past one, especially considering the payroll restrictions.  He's also a good dude.

He's not perfect but I'd have no issues if he's extended.  

[Rcal10]

7 hours ago, Stratos said:

Jed has made some great deals (Busch, Seiya, Imanaga, Boyd, PCA etc plus Counsell) and few stinkers of significance.  He's also drafted well, and had a very good offseason this past one, especially considering the payroll restrictions.  He's also a good dude.

He's not perfect but I'd have no issues if he's extended.  

Not only this, but I think short of a total disaster of a first half the ownership planned on retaining Jed, assuming he still wants the job. So why not get it done now rather than wait until the off season where that is one more thing to worry about? Can you imagine an off season looking for a POBO and possibly an entire new FO while also trying to bid on FA and/or make trades. It would be a shitshow. He may not be the best in the game, but he is solid and he does what ownership wants. 

[squally1313]

On 5/28/2025 at 12:56 PM, Karsten said:

I would look into Trevor Bauer. It would only cost money, not prospects. He hasn't been quite as good this year as he was the last couple though. The off the field stuff appears to be in the past.

drunk and taking my wins where I can get them. 

[Tryptamine]

2 weeks left until the deadline;  don't drag this out Jed.

[Geographyhater8888]

On 7/15/2025 at 8:07 AM, Jason Ross said:

Oh they are. The one thing about baseball is that it really plays into the advanced metrics. Team sports have to filter out so much noise. Like a WR not getting yards could be because:
1. He sucks
2. The QB sucks
3. The OL sucks
4. The RB sucks
5. The play calling sucks

But the hitter-pitcher faceoff creates such an easy vacuum that filters out so many other human beings that finding data within is...easy! And I know advanced stuff can really scare some folks off, it changes how we see the game and that can go against our held beliefs. But I guess I like the sport so much that I enjoy being challenged that way and I appreciate when others at least hear it out. There's still some noise in there, and we can always find more stable data, but I really think the nuts and bolts of it all eventually make sense. 

If you're ever bored and need a cool baseball discovery hole to go down, there is a YouTube Channel called Secret Base and they did an amazing look back using storytelling and some advanced stuff (but the right amount) to tell a four part, four+ hour story on Dave Stieb from the 1980's that is both fascinating, heartfelt and one of the most eye opening baseball documentaries I have ever seen. I think if you like baseball, it's must-see viewing. Hell, it looks like I'll be stuck in airport limbo again today, so I might have to download it and give it a watch while I bounce around.

The NFL is much harder to quantify players with advanced data for too many reasons to list but one thing you never see is +’s that adjust for era. From the naked eye. Marino’s career 86 passer rating is below average in 2025 but he was roughly +1.18 above league average for his career. One thing that’s never adjusted for is stadium factors. Soilder field and MetLife is much harder to throw in than a domed stadium, that’s a start. 
 

wOBA and wRC+, while tightly linked are also baseballs equivalent of passer rating and or ANY/A because it’s more of an efficiency based stat as opposed to triple crown stats and OPS that’s a lot more concrete in nature, and don’t assign different values to different outcomes to the extent that that a single is weighed higher as a multiplier than a walk, even though both result in one base. Is this fair?

 

For defensive fWAR how do they quantify that outside of fielding percentage? I’d assume it’s mostly quantity of outs from a positional standpoint. PCA has more unassisted outs than any outfielder because of his remarkable range.

 

 

[Jason Ross]

1 hour ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

The NFL is much harder to quantify players with advanced data for too many reasons to list but one thing you never see is +’s that adjust for era. From the naked eye. Marino’s career 86 passer rating is below average in 2025 but he was roughly +1.18 above league average for his career. One thing that’s never adjusted for is stadium factors. Soilder field and MetLife is much harder to throw in than a domed stadium, that’s a start. 
 

 

wOBA and wRC+, while tightly linked are also baseballs equivalent of passer rating and or ANY/A because it’s more of an efficiency based stat as opposed to triple crown stats and OPS that’s a lot more concrete in nature, and don’t assign different values to different outcomes to the extent that that a single is weighed higher as a multiplier than a walk, even though both result in one base. Is this fair?

 

For defensive fWAR how do they quantify that outside of fielding percentage? I’d assume it’s mostly quantity of outs from a positional standpoint. PCA has more unassisted outs than any outfielder because of his remarkable range.

 

 

DRS and OAA are our two biggest defensive metrics today. OAA uses MLB Statcast inputs to determine everything; EV, defensive positioning, closure rate, attack angle...you name it. DRS has human input in which using the Fielding Bible and historical defensive metrics and defensive results and they assign difficulty ratings, meaning it does have a human element to it. DRS is good and OAA is a bit better, though both are behind offensive metrics in reliability and age. I find both can get wonky on even a year-to-year basis with odd outliers here or there and there are times the two do not agree; Ian Happ a great example. DRS loves him. OAA feels hes kind of "meh". None of this wonkiness is enough to ignore or go elsewhere, just important to note when discussing them if we are to be comprehensive. 

[Geographyhater8888]

31 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

DRS and OAA are our two biggest defensive metrics today. OAA uses MLB Statcast inputs to determine everything; EV, defensive positioning, closure rate, attack angle...you name it. DRS has human input in which using the Fielding Bible and historical defensive metrics and defensive results and they assign difficulty ratings, meaning it does have a human element to it. DRS is good and OAA is a bit better, though both are behind offensive metrics in reliability and age. I find both can get wonky on even a year-to-year basis with odd outliers here or there and there are times the two do not agree; Ian Happ a great example. DRS loves him. OAA feels hes kind of "meh". None of this wonkiness is enough to ignore or go elsewhere, just important to note when discussing them if we are to be comprehensive. 

Much more sophisticated than baseball reference which I would assume they quantity DRS by fielding percentage or something less comprehensive? 
 

Fan graphs projects the cubs to finish with 91 wins, tied for the third best record in baseball behind the tigers and Dodgers who top out at 96 wins. Very conservative projections for all teams.
 

out of curiosity, the Cubs are only third in total team WAR as of right now despite leading MLB in run differential. Since runs correlate with wins, I’d think they’d be number 1. Is it also projection based and players over performing some metrics will penalize total WAR? If so Suarez and Shaw wouldn’t have a 2.8 win gap so I’m curious what’s going on with that.

Let me know if when you’re sick of answering my questions.

Edited July 17, 2025 by Geographyhater8888

[Jason Ross]

12 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

Much more sophisticated than baseball reference which I would assume they quantity DRS by fielding percentage or something less comprehensive? 
 

Fan graphs projects the cubs to finish with 91 wins, tied for the third best record in baseball behind the tigers and Dodgers who top out at 96 wins. 
 

out of curiosity, the Cubs are only third in total team WAR as of right now despite leading MLB in run differential which doesn’t make a lot of sense unless of course it’s projection based and there’s player over performing some metrics, which if true, Suarez would be penalized and Shaw would be rewarded. Runs=wins, not wins. 

Let me know if when you’re sick of answering my questions.

I will never grow sick of questions. Keep asking, my guy. Baseball is a community. Consider this "passing it on". I only learned because I asked questions and people two decades ago gave me a crash course. 

So, think of WAR as our best single-all-encompassing number, but don't think of it in absolutes. WAR in general is a great approximation, taking in tons of data points (offense, defense, ballpark, neutralizing for era, pitching, etc) and dumping it into an easy-to-digest number, like...four. On the surface, that's kind of insane. Sincerely, it's a revolutionary concept for a sport so inundated in different numbers to boil something down to a number (in almost every case) under 10, with just a single decimal point and it mean something. Like, when you think it of it, it's kind of insane. But because of that, it's prone to being somewhat inaccurate in terms of absolution. 

Anecdotally, Kyle Tucker has been worth 3.8 fWAR and Francisco Lindor, 3.6. Should we really concern ourselves over fractional aspects of a win? Nah, they're virtually the same value. Maybe your team needs a RF over a SS or whatever, but value-proposition wise? The same, essentially. No use debating it. 

When it comes to fWAR and run differential, etc, lots of things go into that. Strength of schedule can play a part (of which fWAR does not account for, because over the a 162 grind it's not really a factor in it) especially in partial seasons, sequencing plays a part of it, and a full-team aspect plays apart in it. For example, we can't just add all of the fWAR up on a team and say "well, their fWAR and their win totals are different so something here is fishy!" It's a cool way to project things out, but they have enough variabilities that they don't entirely equate. That said, they usually are close; for example, having the best run differential and the 3rd best fWAR makes sense. We rarely see a team leading in fWAR and then, say, 22nd in RD. That would raise some weird flags.

 

[Geographyhater8888]

44 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

I will never grow sick of questions. Keep asking, my guy. Baseball is a community. Consider this "passing it on". I only learned because I asked questions and people two decades ago gave me a crash course. 

So, think of WAR as our best single-all-encompassing number, but don't think of it in absolutes. WAR in general is a great approximation, taking in tons of data points (offense, defense, ballpark, neutralizing for era, pitching, etc) and dumping it into an easy-to-digest number, like...four. On the surface, that's kind of insane. Sincerely, it's a revolutionary concept for a sport so inundated in different numbers to boil something down to a number (in almost every case) under 10, with just a single decimal point and it mean something. Like, when you think it of it, it's kind of insane. But because of that, it's prone to being somewhat inaccurate in terms of absolution. 

Anecdotally, Kyle Tucker has been worth 3.8 fWAR and Francisco Lindor, 3.6. Should we really concern ourselves over fractional aspects of a win? Nah, they're virtually the same value. Maybe your team needs a RF over a SS or whatever, but value-proposition wise? The same, essentially. No use debating it. 

When it comes to fWAR and run differential, etc, lots of things go into that. Strength of schedule can play a part (of which fWAR does not account for, because over the a 162 grind it's not really a factor in it) especially in partial seasons, sequencing plays a part of it, and a full-team aspect plays apart in it. For example, we can't just add all of the fWAR up on a team and say "well, their fWAR and their win totals are different so something here is fishy!" It's a cool way to project things out, but they have enough variabilities that they don't entirely equate. That said, they usually are close; for example, having the best run differential and the 3rd best fWAR makes sense. We rarely see a team leading in fWAR and then, say, 22nd in RD. That would raise some weird flags.

 

bWAR does adjust for SOS, they use a simple ranking system which is exactly what it should be called by assigning a MOV vs a dead average team with a 0 SRS based on RF and SOS. If a team has a lot of base runners but struggles to hit with RISP the total WAR will remain higher than the team with less baserunners but more timely hitting, which evens out but obviously there’s still some give and take and it’s never exact. Like the 2015 cubs who overachieved their pythag win loss record by 7 wins for that exact reason.

The Cubs are top 3 in stolen bases bottom 4 in strikeouts, dead last in double plays and 1st in OPS+, something you’re not a fan of but it doesn’t usually deviate by more than a few points off of wRC+ in most cases while their SOS has been difficult. All things besides GIDPs and OPS in place of BABIP, walks and home runs that factor into wRC+ WAR calculation. I’m rambling on but from the naked eye, based on what’s actually happened and not projections I’m surprised they’re behind 2 teams.

It seems like fWAR assigns wins based on how much teams would pay for said player unlike bWAR which gives Nico an almost 1.5 win edge over fWAR and assigns less wins to Suzuki than fangraphs and other power hitters, which I find interesting and more accurate. 2.8 fWAR vs 1.8 bWAR for Ryan Howard in 08 as another example.

Thanks for keeping me engaged. I wish I could reciprocate with some profound insight to share.

Edited July 17, 2025 by Geographyhater8888

[Derwood]

8 hours ago, Tryptamine said:

2 weeks left until the deadline;  don't drag this out Jed.

Nothing will have changed between Sunday night and Friday morning. A five day break just two weeks before the deadline is a blessing g and a curse. 

[Rcal10]

9 hours ago, Tryptamine said:

2 weeks left until the deadline;  don't drag this out Jed.

Not totally up to him. If teams are not deciding to sell the pickings are slim. 

[gflore34]

20 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Not totally up to him. If teams are not deciding to sell the pickings are slim. 

Shouldn't there be a few teams already in sell mode?  Anyone not the Tigers in AL Central, Rangers, Angels, Athletics, Orioles, Marlins, Diamondbacks, Rockies, Nationals and Pirates are a few of the teams with little to no post season chances.  Could be just waiting out the market, think the Cubs have a pretty good idea of the sellers whether they've made it official or not.

Edited July 17, 2025 by gflore34

[We Got The Whole 9]

13 minutes ago, gflore34 said:

Shouldn't there be a few teams already in sell mode?  Anyone not the Tigers in AL Central, Rangers, Angels, Athletics, Orioles, Marlins, Diamondbacks, Rockies and Pirates are a few of the teams with little to no post season chances.  Could be just waiting out the market, think the Cubs have a pretty good idea of the sellers whether they've made it official or not.

Every team is "dragging this out"

[Rcal10]

31 minutes ago, gflore34 said:

Shouldn't there be a few teams already in sell mode?  Anyone not the Tigers in AL Central, Rangers, Angels, Athletics, Orioles, Marlins, Diamondbacks, Rockies, Nationals and Pirates are a few of the teams with little to no post season chances.  Could be just waiting out the market, think the Cubs have a pretty good idea of the sellers whether they've made it official or not.

I won’t argue with you on who “should be selling”, but that doesn’t mean their FO has committed to it. KC just traded for Frazier. Twins have already said at this time they are not selling. For some reason the Angels haven’t committed to selling yet, nor have the Rangers. I think the only teams obviously selling right now are the Marlins, Sox, A’s, Rockies, Pirates and Nationals. I doubt Jed is dragging his feet. I think there just isn’t much there and/or since not much is there teams are crazy high in their ask now. Who in those team that are obvious sellers is worth buying at a premium? 

Edited July 17, 2025 by Rcal10

[Rcal10]

18 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

Every team is "dragging this out"

Exactly! 

[Jason Ross]

1 hour ago, gflore34 said:

Shouldn't there be a few teams already in sell mode?  Anyone not the Tigers in AL Central, Rangers, Angels, Athletics, Orioles, Marlins, Diamondbacks, Rockies, Nationals and Pirates are a few of the teams with little to no post season chances.  Could be just waiting out the market, think the Cubs have a pretty good idea of the sellers whether they've made it official or not.

The Kansas City Royals, who have an 11% chance to make the playoffs just bought Adam "replacement player" Frazier with the belief he could help them win. They gave up an overager who doesn't look like much of a prospect at age 28, but he's crushing Triple-A, and wasn't nothing either. As much as we might think these teams should sell, the slim prospect of making the playoffs or having a strong two weeks is still enticing to teams.

[We Got The Whole 9]

Are we working on an extension for Boyd in the winter?

[Tryptamine]

12 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

Are we working on an extension for Boyd in the winter?

My guess would be no. He's 34 and they already have him under contract next year.