Jaxon Wiggins Promoted to AAA

[Jason Ross]

1 minute ago, craig said:

"....His AAV of $13.25m is asking him to be a #4 on a good staff. ..."

Jason, not sure I'm understanding. 

• $13.25, that's been his lux line assuming Cubs DO NOT pick up his option.  $13.25 is based on the guaranteed money *IF* Cubs decline option, and assuming Shota does pick up his.  
• Do you know what happens if previously non-guaranteed options do get picked up by Cubs?  $57/3 is $19 AAV.  Would Cubs get luxed at $19.0 for next 3 years?  Or would some of that get back-luxed?  Combine the upcoming $57/3 with the previous $23/2, the pre-option and post-option would sume to $80/5 = $16.0 AAV? 
• In other words, if the Cubs pick up the new 3-year option, would they get luxed at $19 for each of those new years?  Or would they get down-luxed to only $16 by adding in cheaper 2-years past?  And the previous two seasons would get retroactively upluxed from $13.25 up to $16.0 instead?  (So the Cubs would then get retroactively given a little more tax bill from 2024?). 
• Not sure, but to me the logic would seem that if/when the Cubs claim the higher-ave $57/3 option for the future, they should get luxed based on that for the future.  $19/year, not $13.25.  
• $19 seems kinda high for a #4 who has partially lived on Wrigley and Cubs defense.  But maybe that's just dumb, and $19 multi-year-guaranteed is market norm for a #4.
• But yeah, to me it seems like if you have a choice on how to invest $57/3, they might think they could do better on the market.  Maybe somebody with a little more velocity, or a little younger, or somebody whose pitch mix they think they can optimize a bit as they've done successfully with some pitchers?  
• Anybody they sign will get to pitch in Wrigley, so the HR-suppression that has helped Shota will help anybody else also.  And anybody new that they sign will also get the Cubs defense suppressing even more runs.  So anybody added to replace Shota will also get some of the major Cubs/Wrigley run suppression that Shota has enjoyed, right?  
• I think they'd prefer Shota on $30/2, with ongoing $13.25 AAV, than $57/3 with $19 AAV.  
• So, my guess is that Cubs will decline, and then it will up to Shota to then make his choice.  Stay for $30/2-guaranteed, with opt-out after 2026?  Or hit the market this winter at age 32 and try to get better than $30/2?  That decision, for Shota, seems more uncertain to me than the Cubs decision regarding the $57/3 guarantee at $19-per.  
• You mentioned some early decision timelines.  Assuming Cubs have early decision and they decline their option, how much time will Shota have before his option decision?  Given my idea that his decision is the more uncertain one, I'm wondering how much time he'll have to explore the market, and when the Cubs will know whether they've got him at $30/2 and $13.25 for lux, versus looking for a replacement on the market.  If that makes sense?  
• Obviously the third potential outcome is that Cubs and Shota simply renegotiate a new compromise contract together, less than the $57/3.  Beats me.  
• Other thought:  his injury was in May, he's been pitching since June.  17 starts since IL.  Maybe he's been heroically pitching injured for the last 3+ months and 17 starts. But kinda thinking the start-of-May injury isn't that relevant to his post-all-star performance.  
• Again, not trying to diminish Shota's production.  Just thinking that locking in at $19/year, plus unnecessarily guaranteeing a 3rd year at that rate, doesn't seem Hoyer-esque.  

 

 

It would jump to a $16m AAV if the Cubs opt in. It's a difference of under $3m on the LT if they opt in. They must make this decision essentially, immediately in the offseason. There is no wait-and-see. Here are the three options:
1. They opt in, sightly raising his LT number and getting him for the next three years.
2. They opt out and Shota also opts out, becoming a FA
3. They opt out, and Shota opts into a 4 year contract, forgoing free agency.

The opt in only increases three-years, and the Cubs love shorter-term contracts (I.E. see every free agency under Hoyer). The Cubs are not afraid of pitchers in their 30's (I.E. see who they brought in last year, Rea, Pressley and Boyd). The Cubs are already short Justin Steele for at least a month if not a bit more next year and Wiggins is about the only prospect near-MLB ready to take a spot. It's already very likely if they don't resign Kyle Tucker that much of the excess will be spent on a pitcher. Think Michael King or so. 

Do we really think that the Cubs are going to opt-out right away of this contract? They would then have to bring in two SP's next year instead of one, they have no guarantee which FA pitcher they could acquire to replace him, and it would likely cost even more to bring in someone else. 

I am sure the Cubs will consider all options. I also think this will be an easy decision. They will opt in to the final 3 years. Yes.

[Jason Ross]

3 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I do think they will keep him. But it isn’t a simple $13.5M a year decision. It is closer to $18M a year for the next 3. Sure the 5 year AAV works out to $16M. But the AAV for the next 3 years is $17.83. 

The Cubs care about the LT more than anything. It's the AAV that will matter most, especially with a lot of the dead money from releases and retention off the book. I don't think $2m is really a big deal - it's a near non-factor, even to the Cubs. It's half of what Turner made.

[Rcal10]

9 minutes ago, craig said:

"....His AAV of $13.25m is asking him to be a #4 on a good staff. ..."

Jason, not sure I'm understanding. 

• $13.25, that's been his lux line assuming Cubs DO NOT pick up his option.  $13.25 is based on the guaranteed money *IF* Cubs decline option, and assuming Shota does pick up his.  
• Do you know what happens if previously non-guaranteed options do get picked up by Cubs?  $57/3 is $19 AAV.  Would Cubs get luxed at $19.0 for next 3 years?  Or would some of that get back-luxed?  Combine the upcoming $57/3 with the previous $23/2, the pre-option and post-option would sume to $80/5 = $16.0 AAV? 
• In other words, if the Cubs pick up the new 3-year option, would they get luxed at $19 for each of those new years?  Or would they get down-luxed to only $16 by adding in cheaper 2-years past?  And the previous two seasons would get retroactively upluxed from $13.25 up to $16.0 instead?  (So the Cubs would then get retroactively given a little more tax bill from 2024?). 
• Not sure, but to me the logic would seem that if/when the Cubs claim the higher-ave $57/3 option for the future, they should get luxed based on that for the future.  $19/year, not $13.25.  
• $19 seems kinda high for a #4 who has partially lived on Wrigley and Cubs defense.  But maybe that's just dumb, and $19 multi-year-guaranteed is market norm for a #4.
• But yeah, to me it seems like if you have a choice on how to invest $57/3, they might think they could do better on the market.  Maybe somebody with a little more velocity, or a little younger, or somebody whose pitch mix they think they can optimize a bit as they've done successfully with some pitchers?  
• Anybody they sign will get to pitch in Wrigley, so the HR-suppression that has helped Shota will help anybody else also.  And anybody new that they sign will also get the Cubs defense suppressing even more runs.  So anybody added to replace Shota will also get some of the major Cubs/Wrigley run suppression that Shota has enjoyed, right?  
• I think they'd prefer Shota on $30/2, with ongoing $13.25 AAV, than $57/3 with $19 AAV.  
• So, my guess is that Cubs will decline, and then it will up to Shota to then make his choice.  Stay for $30/2-guaranteed, with opt-out after 2026?  Or hit the market this winter at age 32 and try to get better than $30/2?  That decision, for Shota, seems more uncertain to me than the Cubs decision regarding the $57/3 guarantee at $19-per.  
• You mentioned some early decision timelines.  Assuming Cubs have early decision and they decline their option, how much time will Shota have before his option decision?  Given my idea that his decision is the more uncertain one, I'm wondering how much time he'll have to explore the market, and when the Cubs will know whether they've got him at $30/2 and $13.25 for lux, versus looking for a replacement on the market.  If that makes sense?  
• Obviously the third potential outcome is that Cubs and Shota simply renegotiate a new compromise contract together, less than the $57/3.  Beats me.  
• Other thought:  his injury was in May, he's been pitching since June.  17 starts since IL.  Maybe he's been heroically pitching injured for the last 3+ months and 17 starts. But kinda thinking the start-of-May injury isn't that relevant to his post-all-star performance.  
• Again, not trying to diminish Shota's production.  Just thinking that locking in at $19/year, plus unnecessarily guaranteeing a 3rd year at that rate, doesn't seem Hoyer-esque.  

 

 

I am with you on all of what you said. But I think the numbers are off a little. Hasn’t Shoto made $26.5M over 2 years, not $23M. That would make the last 3 at $53.5, not $57. Or was his original 4/$53 structured to get different amounts per year?

[Jason Ross]

7 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I am with you on all of what you said. But I think the numbers are off a little. Hasn’t Shoto made $26.5M over 2 years, not $23M. That would make the last 3 at $53.5, not $57. Or was his original 4/$53 structured to get different amounts per year?

His final contract would be 5/$80m if they opt in. These numbers come directly from MLB.com. 5/$80m is $16m AAV. Currently his AAV is being factored in from his 4/$53m deal. Which is $13.25m. His AAV would rise under $3m. I'm only looking at AAV.

https://www.mlb.com/news/shota-imanaga-cubs-deal

[Rcal10]

4 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

His final contract would be 5/$80m if they opt in. These numbers come directly from MLB.com. 5/$80m is $16m AAV. Currently his AAV is being factored in from his 4/$53m deal. Which is $13.25m. His AAV would rise under $3m. I'm only looking at AAV.

https://www.mlb.com/news/shota-imanaga-cubs-deal

They're not off.

I never said $80M over 5 years was off. I am talking about Craig saying he made $23M already. He signed a 4 year $53M deal. Wouldn’t he have made $26.5 up to now. So wouldn’t the option be for $53.3M over 3 as opposed to what he is saying, which is 3/$57M. That is all I said to Craig. 

[Jason Ross]

Just now, Rcal10 said:

I never said $80M over 5 years was off. I am talking about Craig saying he made $23M already. He signed a 4 year $53M deal. Wouldn’t he have made $26.5 up to now. So wouldn’t the option be for $53.3M over 3 as opposed to what he is saying, which is 3/$57M. That is all I said to Craig. 

Oh duh. You quoted Craig.

[Rcal10]

1 minute ago, Jason Ross said:

Oh duh. You quoted Craig.

We’re good👍

[craig]

59 minutes ago, Bertz said:

In the context of that post I meant four veteran locks as in we'll have four veterans who are guaranteed rotation spots heading into spring, barring injury of course.  For roster management purposes I think that's important to keep in mind for gameplanning how you'd get Wiggins to MLB.

For the names specifically, I'd say it's very unlikely Shota goes anywhere, but admittedly it's not a lock. ...

Yeah, correct in terms of Wiggins.  Whether it's Shota on $57/3 or $30/2, versus some other veteran signed to replace him, you're right that there will be four veteran locks.  

Wiggins will not be in play for April rotation.  If/when his opportunity comes, that will depend on him and on the health/performance of other guys.  

There has been analogy to Horton.  I'm a little hesitant on that one.  Horton has two distinctions.  Remarkable control, and remarkable composure.  I'm hoping Wiggins has the latter, but he's not going to have the level of control that Horton had.  That may impact how quickly they want to call him up.  

Hopefully the Cubs will have a good team, and a healthy staff, and there will be little urgency to call him up.  Who knows how long they might have waited with Horton, had not all three of Assad, Steele, and Shota gotten injured.  Not sure how quickly Steele will be back, so I guess good shot that he might be one starter who's not available early.  But hopefully we won't have both Steel and two others injured so quickly as was true this year.  

Part of me wonders about having some scheduled breaks?  Even if health landscape is pretty good, what if Wiggins got brought up and optioned back periodically, to give guys some skipped starts?  I think Assad will still have options left next year, no?  Brown for sure.  And Wiggins obviously.  Wicks.  Would be fun to have all four of those guys healthy and pitching well enough that each of Boyd, Taillon, Horton etc. can maybe each skip one start per month, or whatever, and stay relatively fresh.  

[craig]

37 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I never said $80M over 5 years was off. I am talking about Craig saying he made $23M already. He signed a 4 year $53M deal. Wouldn’t he have made $26.5 up to now. So wouldn’t the option be for $53.3M over 3 as opposed to what he is saying, which is 3/$57M. That is all I said to Craig. 

His pay has been unequal.  The next two years are $15 each, *IF* Cubs don't pick up the richer/longer 3-year deal, and if Shota picks up the $30/2.  So, $53/4 - $30/2 means the first were basically $23/2 actually paid.  That's where I got the $23 paid from. 

2024 was like $9.25; 2025 $13.5.  And there was $1M signing bonus.  

 

Edited October 1, 2025 by craig

[craig]

34 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

His final contract would be 5/$80m if they opt in. These numbers come directly from MLB.com. 5/$80m is $16m AAV. Currently his AAV is being factored in from his 4/$53m deal. Which is $13.25m. His AAV would rise under $3m. I'm only looking at AAV.

https://www.mlb.com/news/shota-imanaga-cubs-deal

So Jason, you're pretty sure that converting $53/4 to $80/5, that lux still calculated it all as a package, even with the option complexities?  So rather than viewing the option as a 3-year $19 AAV, they'll retroactively convert the past two years to $16? 

Saving $3-per-year in lux isn't huge, but it helps for sure.  

So mlb would then retroactively jump 2024 and 2025 from $13.25 to $16.00 in their lux calculations. 

• Meaningless for this year 2025, right, because we're still comfortably sub-lux?  
• But retroactively jumping 2024 from $13 to $16, then Ricketts would get retroactively billed a little bit of over-lux retroactive tax on that? 
• Peanuts, obviously, I think tax is only 20%, so at $2.75 x 20%, barely a half million.  

I'm just learning, so this is insightful on how complex options contracts can result in retroactive lux recalculations even from several years past.  

[Rcal10]

28 minutes ago, craig said:

His pay has been unequal.  The next two years are $15 each, *IF* Cubs don't pick up the richer/longer 3-year deal, and if Shota picks up the $30/2.  So, $53/4 - $30/2 means the first were basically $23/2 actually paid.  That's where I got the $23 paid from. 

2024 was like $9.25; 2025 $13.5.  And there was $1M signing bonus.  

 

👍 thanks for clarifying. 

[Jason Ross]

45 minutes ago, craig said:

So Jason, you're pretty sure that converting $53/4 to $80/5, that lux still calculated it all as a package, even with the option complexities?  So rather than viewing the option as a 3-year $19 AAV, they'll retroactively convert the past two years to $16? 

Saving $3-per-year in lux isn't huge, but it helps for sure.  

So mlb would then retroactively jump 2024 and 2025 from $13.25 to $16.00 in their lux calculations. 

• Meaningless for this year 2025, right, because we're still comfortably sub-lux?  
• But retroactively jumping 2024 from $13 to $16, then Ricketts would get retroactively billed a little bit of over-lux retroactive tax on that? 
• Peanuts, obviously, I think tax is only 20%, so at $2.75 x 20%, barely a half million.  

I'm just learning, so this is insightful on how complex options contracts can result in retroactive lux recalculations even from several years past.  

Meaningless for 2024 and 2025, they can't apply it retroactively. It's just for 2026 and beyond, the AAV would jump under $3m. 

But yeah, overall, I think the Cubs would be very hard pressed to decline the option. Shota at $16m is very reasonable for a mid-rotation starter. That we know that he can find some extra juice is more reason to believe he'd be a very likely pickup. 

I won't ever say "never" but I think the Cubs picking up his option is one of the most likely things all offseason.

[craig]

T

1 hour ago, Jason Ross said:

Meaningless for 2024 and 2025, they can't apply it retroactively. It's just for 2026 and beyond, the AAV would jump under $3m. ...

Jason, that sounds like a cheat!  You're going to have an $80/5 contract, but have composite lux sum to only $74.5 over those 5 years?  That seems wrong.  Perhaps that's a flaw in the CBA, and lux-ish teams are all doing it?  But if you can cheat your way out of some lux assignment, I'd imagine teams could do that even more dramatically.  Seems illogical to me.  (not that all contracts are fully logical; or that I understand or agree with all of the logic.). 

But yeah, seems to me that if you convert a $53/4 deal ($13.25 AAV) into an $80/5 deal ($16) mid-stream via option, on of three things should happen:

1. Retroactive recalculation.  If it's re-calculated as a 5-year deal, then all 5 years should get accounted for at $16 each.  In this case, two years should get retroactively re-calculated, with any attendance consequences.  In this case, it would only be ~$0.5 million in 2024 tax, but would have no 2025 consequence, and would have zero ensuing consequence for 1st-time/2nd-time/3rd-time repeater, or any of that lux-tax stuff.  Tacking an extra $2.75 retroactively onto Hoyer's 2025 lux calculation would still keep us comfortably under.  *IF* hypothetical re-accounting happened.
2. Option-chosen years as a new contract.  Just calculate the optionally determined contract as a "new" contract with a new average.  Cubs elect to apply a new $57/3 option?  Then apply the new $19 AAV for those three years as the new lux dollars.  That would seem logical to me, but I'm trusting you that CBA doesn't work that way.
3. No retroactive; divvy up remaining years to reach $80.  Don't retroactively recalculate past years, but divide up the ensuing years so that they composite lux calculations sum to the composite contract.  Composite 5-year would sum to $80, the 5 years of lux should sum to $80.  (Seems logical to me.). If the first two years got luxed at a sub-average rate, the final 3 years would need to make it up to reach $80.  So luxed for only $26.5 ($13.25 x 2) for the first two years, if those are not retroactively changed....  That would leave $53.5 of the $80 total, to be luxed over the last three years.  So lux at $17.83 for the remaining three years, and five years lux will sum to $80/5 to match the $80/5 in contract.  
4. Cheat, lux << contract.:  $80/5 contract, but $74.5/5 lux.  Lux two at $13.25, three at $16, don't worry that $5.5 of the composite is never getting luxed.  To me that seems least logical; but the CBA is not beholden to my perception of logic or fairness!!!  :):)

 

[craig]

2 hours ago, Jason Ross said:

...I won't ever say "never" but I think the Cubs picking up his option is one of the most likely things all offseason.

Yeah, we'll see.  Perhaps his performance today, and hopefully next week, and maybe beyond, will reinforce his value.  

I think I respectfully just disagree on this presumption.  But for sure it's a scouting evaluation, and the Cubs will need to make it.  Perhaps also a market evaluation as well.  Some Q's Hoyer/Hottovy/Counsell will answer:

1. Will lux be $16/year, or $17.83/year?  Does it matter?
2. Was this an "off year", and as he ages he'll probably get better again?  Or might being 32, 33, and 34-turning-35 during last year cause some decline?  
3. His fastball velo dropped this year; will that decline, stay steady, or might he recover more velo as his 30's progress?  
4. Shota market value?  4.86 FIP this year.  How many teams figure his HR-profile is bad fit for home stadiums, and how many teams will still want him?  
5. $30/2 alternative/risk.  Hoyer would obviously prefer $30/2 ($13.25 lux), over $57/3 (whether $16 or $17.8 lux).  If Hoyer doesn't lock into longer/higher-lux, how likely is that he'll still keep the player at the shorter/lower-lux?  That obviously relates to the market value question.  But yeah, Hoyer needs to evaluate the odds on Shota leaving or staying at $30/2.  50/50?  10/90? 90/10?  Jason, your premise is that Hoyer will pick up the longer/richer option, so that presumes the market will offer better than $30/2.  I'm thinking it's maybe no more than 50/50 that Shota will walk away from $30/2.  (Keeping in mind that if he has a bounce-back year, he's not obligated to the second year.)
6. Extra year;  $57/3 obviously has the extra year.  Does Hoyer like that, or dislike the 3rd year obligation?  
7. Risk+consequences:  The risk, in declining longer/luxier, is that Shota walks away from $30/2.  How harmful are the consequences of applying the money to somebody else?  Can you find somebody else at $27/2 who could probably do as well as Shota?  If Shota doesn't want your $30/2, might somebody else take it and be just as good, maybe better?  Or would that consequence be unacceptable?  Or if you don't want to pay $57/3, but he walks from $30/2, might you then sign somebody else at $53/3 who's just as good, maybe better? Or would that consequence be unacceptable?  

My bottom line is that I'd not exercise the $57/3.  If he stays at $30/2, we've got a chance to get really good value at low lux, but the risk of being stuck with a higher-lux for longer is evaded.  And if he walks away from $30/2, that's life.  Just scout it up and sign somebody else.  

[CaliforniaRaisin]

 

[craig]

On 10/1/2025 at 10:33 AM, Jason Ross said:

....I won't ever say "never" but I think the Cubs picking up his option is one of the most likely things all offseason.

As I'd expected, Cubs did NOT pick up Shota 3-year $57/3 option. 

• They still have choice to make QO and offer him $22/1 instead, but I don't think they'll want to pay $22/1 for a 4.86-FIP HR-factory. 
• Think they can easily get a replacement that will do as well with Cubs defense and Wrigley's HR-suppression for less than $22/1. 
• And I think the odds that a HR-factory 4.86-FIP will get a market offer better than $22/1 QO is too risky for Hoyer to risk that in hopes of getting a free draft pick.  
• While I got it right that Cubs would not pick up his option, I got it wrong that Shota would decline his $30/2 option.  Given his HR-profile and fastball decline, I'd figured $30/2 would seem safer than hitting the open market.  Chance he may end up regretting that decision?  Will be interesting to see what he ends up getting.  And of course how he performs moving forward. 
• QO deadline is Thursday, so we'll know soon.  
• But even with both Cubs and Shota having declined their options, and *IF* hypothetically the Cubs also decline to make QO, that still won't necessarily preclude Shota resigning with the Cubs.  He'd still be a full FA, and if he finds the market softer than he'd hoped, he might still hypothetically make some deal with Cubs less than $57/3 or $22/1.  

[craig]

Cubs did make QO for Shota!  Very surprised.  Hope he gives them a decent year.