Winter Meetings Thread

[Rob]

54 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

That's how they got Swanson. Going into that year's offseason, Dansby was the fourth SS by a large margin.

The other big SS's that offseason were Carlos Correa, Trea Turner, and Xander Bogaerts.

2022 fWAR:

• Correa - 4.6
• Turner - 6.4
• Bogaerts - 6.0
• Swanson - 6.6

Previous three years fWAR:

• Correa - 12.1
• Turner - 16.3
• Bogaerts - 14.7
• Swanson - 12.0

fWAR since signing:

• Correa - 8.5
• Turner - 14.7
• Bogaerts - 9.8
• Swanson - 12.3

Swanson, a former number 1 overall pick, was coming off the best season of the 4. And while his recent track record wasn't quite as good as Turner/Bogaerts, he was basically tied with Correa. Correa's contract stuff played out weirdly, but I think it's safe to say Swanson ultimately received the least money and years of the bunch.

Why do people keep thinking the Swanson signing is a valid criticism of the Hoyer regime? 

[Bertz]

9 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

This is more speculation than reporting, but there does seem to be a gathering smoke-storm on the Imai stuff. While I don't really think any of it is definitive, it does seem like we're winding this thing down. 

God dammit Romero and now Ralph?  Once Bob chimes in we're horsefeathered 

Start moving on folks

[Jason Ross]

5 minutes ago, Rob said:

The other big SS's that offseason were Carlos Correa, Trea Turner, and Xander Bogaerts.

2022 fWAR:

• Correa - 4.6
• Turner - 6.4
• Bogaerts - 6.0
• Swanson - 6.6

Previous three years fWAR:

• Correa - 12.1
• Turner - 16.3
• Bogaerts - 14.7
• Swanson - 12.0

fWAR since signing:

• Correa - 8.5
• Turner - 14.7
• Bogaerts - 9.8
• Swanson - 12.3

Swanson, a former number 1 overall pick, was coming off the best season of the 4. And while his recent track record wasn't quite as good as Turner/Bogaerts, he was basically tied with Correa. Correa's contract stuff played out weirdly, but I think it's safe to say Swanson ultimately received the least money and years of the bunch.

Why do people keep thinking the Swanson signing is a valid criticism of the Hoyer regime? 

I'll speak for others, but my assumption has always been that "Swanson was the cheapest, and Hoyer always does the cheapest option" is the criticism. Where I think this doesn't hold up is in how the players have aged, and how much better Swanson has been than even I thought at the time. 

I'll freely admit I admonished the signing and didn't love it and I've been taken to the woodshed and been super wrong about it (and I'm happy to be wrong). But it seems like the Cubs also had their pulse on these players and maybe it wasn't just "years and money" but "who's actually going to be better". 

Where the disconnect comes is that I think people like blaming Jed for the signing but then don't want to give him credit for Swanson's actual success because he's not a great hitter and that they feel like it was lucky or something, but considering how well the team has been when acquiring players, it feels like they should have the track record where they get that credit, and yet, don't.

But you crushed it here. This is a great breakdown of the players and there's little doubt so far, Dansby's been right there at the top of the list in terms of successes.

[CubinNY]

5 minutes ago, Rob said:

The other big SS's that offseason were Carlos Correa, Trea Turner, and Xander Bogaerts.

2022 fWAR:

• Correa - 4.6
• Turner - 6.4
• Bogaerts - 6.0
• Swanson - 6.6

Previous three years fWAR:

• Correa - 12.1
• Turner - 16.3
• Bogaerts - 14.7
• Swanson - 12.0

fWAR since signing:

• Correa - 8.5
• Turner - 14.7
• Bogaerts - 9.8
• Swanson - 12.3

Swanson, a former number 1 overall pick, was coming off the best season of the 4. And while his recent track record wasn't quite as good as Turner/Bogaerts, he was basically tied with Correa. Correa's contract stuff played out weirdly, but I think it's safe to say Swanson ultimately received the least money and years of the bunch.

Why do people keep thinking the Swanson signing is a valid criticism of the Hoyer regime? 

Because he was. 

[ILMindState]

 

[JBears79]

I thought it was pretty obvious that the Swanson contract has been a pretty good one so far. He's outperformed both Correa and Bogaerts and as much as I love Trea Turner, the backhalf of that contract when he loses his speed is gonna be brutal. Hoyer made the right choice there. 

Even though Swanson drives me insane at the plate sometimes.

[Jason Ross]

 

[thawv]

1 minute ago, JBears79 said:

I thought it was pretty obvious that the Swanson contract has been a pretty good one so far. He's outperformed both Correa and Bogaerts and as much as I love Trea Turner, the backhalf of that contract when he loses his speed is gonna be brutal. Hoyer made the right choice there. 

Even though Swanson drives me insane at the plate sometimes.

He was most certainly the best long-term choice for the cost.  But Jed signed him because he was the cheapest, and not because he thought he was the best option.  He was the cheapest option.  It just worked out for the Cubs. 

[squally1313]

Jed Hoyer is really good at certain things. He identifies players, particularly pitchers, that are undervalued, that can be improved internally,  that play better in front of an elite defense, etc. I think the Swanson conversation is another component of that. It's probably too pro-Hoyer to say that he uniquely happened to identify that Swanson was going to age the best and also be the cheapest, but I think it's very plausible that he looked at all of them and saw far less of a difference between the players than other teams did, and was content waiting it out and getting the one for the least money. From what I can recall, it was pretty similar to the Bellinger signing with the rest of the Boras Four.

The Ian Happ/draft pick complaint doesn't hold weight for me either. The only player drafted after Happ who has outperformed him career to date is Austin Riley, and that's by 0.1 bWAR. No one drafted after Matt Shaw has outperformed Matt Shaw. Ditto Cade Horton. It was really bad for a stretch at the end of Epstein and the beginning of Hoyer. It's much better now. 

That skill set would play well at a midmarket organization. Someone like the Cardinals, or the Twins. Guys like Shota or Boyd or even Taillon scream the type of pitchers who show up and beat us twice a year while we complain about losing to crap pitchers. 

That skill set should, in my head, play EXTREMELY well at an organization with a stated budget of the first luxury tax line. Because being that good at the work around the margins and the middle market should let him throw his financial weight around on the top end. And he just refuses to do so, to my rapidly growing frustration. If he wants to stand on his ability to sign non-elite pitchers that are going to outperform their contracts, then maybe be less worried about what 2030 Kyle Schwarber is going to look like, because 2026 Kyle Schwarber would look pretty horsefeathers amazing in front of Suzuki and Busch. And maybe this is more of a Ricketts thing ultimately. We'll never know, and I don't trust the media reports on how active/close they are as much as some other people here. But...come on, just do something stupid once and see how it plays out. 

[Bertz]

 

Two years, gonna guess this more or less confirms they're going pure volume with the bullpen

[Jason Ross]

Just now, Bertz said:

 

Two years, gonna guess this more or less confirms they're going pure volume with the bullpen

$22m which reads "reliever" to me on the contract, putting to rest the "maybe someone will convert him" thing (though it's not so low that it's all reliever).

But yeah, come on down, Ryne Stanek (or someone)

[ILMindState]

1 minute ago, Bertz said:

 

Two years, gonna guess this more or less confirms they're going pure volume with the bullpen

 

[ILMindState]

Just give Fairbanks 2/26 with a mutual 3rd year option already

Edited December 17, 2025 by ILMindState

[Rcal10]

21 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

I'll speak for others, but my assumption has always been that "Swanson was the cheapest, and Hoyer always does the cheapest option" is the criticism. Where I think this doesn't hold up is in how the players have aged, and how much better Swanson has been than even I thought at the time. 

I'll freely admit I admonished the signing and didn't love it and I've been taken to the woodshed and been super wrong about it (and I'm happy to be wrong). But it seems like the Cubs also had their pulse on these players and maybe it wasn't just "years and money" but "who's actually going to be better". 

Where the disconnect comes is that I think people like blaming Jed for the signing but then don't want to give him credit for Swanson's actual success because he's not a great hitter and that they feel like it was lucky or something, but considering how well the team has been when acquiring players, it feels like they should have the track record where they get that credit, and yet, don't.

But you crushed it here. This is a great breakdown of the players and there's little doubt so far, Dansby's been right there at the top of the list in terms of successes.

Since we are going down the road with Jed just signing who is left or taking cheap options and not giving him any credit for the signings (not you I am talking about, but others) we should also add Boyd. While he wasn’t a guy who fell to them, he was a cheap option for a starting pitcher. And that worked pretty well, too. So he should be credited for that as well instead of criticized for going cheap. Seems when things don’t work Jed is a fool for not knowing it won’t work. But when it does work Jed got lucky….

[Neuby]

27 minutes ago, Rob said:

The other big SS's that offseason were Carlos Correa, Trea Turner, and Xander Bogaerts.

2022 fWAR:

• Correa - 4.6
• Turner - 6.4
• Bogaerts - 6.0
• Swanson - 6.6

Previous three years fWAR:

• Correa - 12.1
• Turner - 16.3
• Bogaerts - 14.7
• Swanson - 12.0

fWAR since signing:

• Correa - 8.5
• Turner - 14.7
• Bogaerts - 9.8
• Swanson - 12.3

Swanson, a former number 1 overall pick, was coming off the best season of the 4. And while his recent track record wasn't quite as good as Turner/Bogaerts, he was basically tied with Correa. Correa's contract stuff played out weirdly, but I think it's safe to say Swanson ultimately received the least money and years of the bunch.

Why do people keep thinking the Swanson signing is a valid criticism of the Hoyer regime? 

 

Are you trying to say that Swanson wasn't the fourth best option at short that offseason?

[Rcal10]

6 minutes ago, ILMindState said:

Just give Fairbanks 2/26 with a mutual 3rd year option already

I’m not sure Fairbanks gets more than Keller. And if the Cubs would give him that deal I would have thought they would have given Keller 2/$22 over that.

[Rob]

23 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

Because he was. 

In accordance with Hitchens's Razor, I will simply say "nope."

[ILMindState]

1 minute ago, Rcal10 said:

I’m not sure Fairbanks gets more than Keller. And if the Cubs would give him that deal I would have thought they would have given Keller 2/$22 over that.

2/20 with a mutual 3rd then

[Neuby]

Expect the Mets to snag Fairbanks shortly.

[Rcal10]

Interesting that all 3 pen arms of the 25 Cubs went within hours of each other. Wonder if the Cubs were in on all and when they gave the thumbs up or thumbs down deals were signed.!

[Rob]

2 minutes ago, Neuby said:

 

Are you trying to say that Swanson wasn't the fourth best option at short that offseason?

If memory serves, I figured Turner would be best. But I had Correa, Bogaerts, and Swanson lumped pretty closely together (albeit with large variance on Correa due to the ankle thing). So while I preferred Turner, I was perfectly happy with taking the cheapest of the other three.

[Neuby]

1 minute ago, Rob said:

In accordance with Hitchens's Razor, I will simply say "nope."

There isn't a GM in baseball who would rank Swanson the 1 target at shortstop going into that offseason. 

[Rcal10]

Just now, Rob said:

If memory serves, I figured Turner would be best. But I had Correa, Bogaerts, and Swanson lumped pretty closely together (albeit with large variance on Correa due to the ankle thing). So while I preferred Turner, I was perfectly happy with taking the cheapest of the other three.

I did not want Bogaerts, for sure. So the worst I had Swanson was 3rd. 

[Rcal10]

1 minute ago, Neuby said:

There isn't a GM in baseball who would rank Swanson the 1 target at shortstop going into that offseason. 

True. But what happened to spots 2 and 3? Why, if he wasn’t the top guy does he have to be the low guy? 

[mul21]

5 minutes ago, Neuby said:

There isn't a GM in baseball who would rank Swanson the 1 target at shortstop going into that offseason. 

Nice job moving the target there.  That wasn't the original question.  And when it comes to value vs contract given, Bogaerts was definitely at the bottom of the list for me.