Winter Doldrums Thread

[thawv]

8 hours ago, chibears55 said:

Convention crowd dont boo, those are the true blue Kool ade drinkers that cheer for everyone.  Ricketts will come out and talk about last season playoff appearance and 2016 to get them all cheering and then high tail off the stage....

Sounds about right

[Geographyhater8888]

13 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

No doubt Shaw is better. But Alcantara for Cabrera might be light for the Marlins. I would rather just add either Brown, Wicks, or Assad to the deal and see if that got it done. But if additional players from each side had to be added, I would think those add ons would have to favor the Marlins. You are most likely correct, Shaw and Sanoja added slants it too much to the Marlins.

That’s a steal for the marlins and a bad trade for the Cubs. Shaw is good for at least 3-4 wins next year with 6 years of team control. 

 

Edited January 2 by Geographyhater8888

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

There isn’t a word where Shaw for Cabrera is fair trade for the Cubs. Shaw has hit at every level of the minor leagues and has 3 more years of control than Cabrera.
If his floor as a hitter is Addison Russell before the wife besting in retaliation for Mrs. Russell sleeping with Pedro Strop, his defense and base running alone should be worth around 3.5-4 wins.

 

First of all no need to bring up Addison Russell, let alone his wife as if anything she did would explain Russell assaulting her. 
Next, I never said Cabrera for Shaw was fair. I have said Cassie + maybe Brown, Wicks or Assad was fair. When the poster who originally put out his proposal he had Alcantara and Shaw for Cabrera and Sanoja. While I agree that isn’t fair for the Cubs, I did say perhaps the poster realized Alcantara for Cabrera was too one sided the Cubs way and added the other 2 players. If the original offer would be Alcantara for Cabrera and another piece was added each way, the Cubs piece would have to be stronger. Shaw and Sanoja does go too strong the other way. 
I will also add getting a young controlled pitcher is going to hurt. Probably more than what people expect or want to give up here. Cubs fans (all fans, really) always overvalue the their prospects and/or players and undervalue who they get. While I agree Shaw for Cabrera is too much, the Marlins might not think so. Same with Gore or Ryan. As a Cubs fan I would do everything I could not to use Shaw as the centerpiece for a controllable pitcher of only 2 or 3 years. They will need him for second or third base for 2027. 

[Geographyhater8888]

16 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

First of all no need to bring up Addison Russell, let alone his wife as if anything she did would explain Russell assaulting her. 
Next, I never said Cabrera for Shaw was fair. I have said Cassie + maybe Brown, Wicks or Assad was fair. When the poster who originally put out his proposal he had Alcantara and Shaw for Cabrera and Sanoja. While I agree that isn’t fair for the Cubs, I did say perhaps the poster realized Alcantara for Cabrera was too one sided the Cubs way and added the other 2 players. If the original offer would be Alcantara for Cabrera and another piece was added each way, the Cubs piece would have to be stronger. Shaw and Sanoja does go too strong the other way. 
I will also add getting a young controlled pitcher is going to hurt. Probably more than what people expect or want to give up here. Cubs fans (all fans, really) always overvalue the their prospects and/or players and undervalue who they get. While I agree Shaw for Cabrera is too much, the Marlins might not think so. Same with Gore or Ryan. As a Cubs fan I would do everything I could not to use Shaw as the centerpiece for a controllable pitcher of only 2 or 3 years. They will need him for second or third base for 2027. 

That’s why I edited my reply. Obviously you  received the initial one. I was goofing on him and realized I didn’t convey that well.

I don’t think the Marlins have anyone to add make it a fair trade. A utility infielder who was an average hitter in the minor leagues+Alcantara is just as lopsided in my opinion.

Edited January 2 by Geographyhater8888

[Rcal10]

Just now, Geographyhater8888 said:

That’s why I edited my reply. Obviously you  received the initial one. I was goofing on him and realized I didn’t convey that well.

 

Got it. Honestly that surprised me. You don’t do that. But I think we are all just a little frustrated and on edge a little. We all want the Cubs to do something. I agree Shaw for Cabrera is too high an ask. But, sadly, that might be what the Marlins are asking. I am not saying this is where Jed comes out of his confort zone, but I do think the only way the Cubs get better going forward is for Jed to get aggressive and do something that might not fit the FO/ownership model perfectly. Getting tired of saying another team will regret a move they made because they gave up too much, while the Cubs sit idly by. 

[Jason Ross]

7 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Got it. Honestly that surprised me. You don’t do that. But I think we are all just a little frustrated and on edge a little. We all want the Cubs to do something. I agree Shaw for Cabrera is too high an ask. But, sadly, that might be what the Marlins are asking. I am not saying this is where Jed comes out of his confort zone, but I do think the only way the Cubs get better going forward is for Jed to get aggressive and do something that might not fit the FO/ownership model perfectly. Getting tired of saying another team will regret a move they made because they gave up too much, while the Cubs sit idly by. 

There is almost zero chance that the Marlins are asking for Shaw for Cabrera. They were asking for Caissie+ at the deadline and he had a bit of an injury scare and has less team control. 

We are beyond either Gore or Cabrera needing Shaw.

[Geographyhater8888]

13 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Got it. Honestly that surprised me. You don’t do that. But I think we are all just a little frustrated and on edge a little. We all want the Cubs to do something. I agree Shaw for Cabrera is too high an ask. But, sadly, that might be what the Marlins are asking. I am not saying this is where Jed comes out of his confort zone, but I do think the only way the Cubs get better going forward is for Jed to get aggressive and do something that might not fit the FO/ownership model perfectly. Getting tired of saying another team will regret a move they made because they gave up too much, while the Cubs sit idly by. 

If this teams signs, Bichette and Tucker then I’d seek out the Tigers for Skubal and Shaw of course would be one of the key pieces in that trade. That won’t happen unfortunately.

My Valdez/Milton Bradley reply from yesterday was also a joke for the record.

Edited January 2 by Geographyhater8888

[Rcal10]

13 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

There is almost zero chance that the Marlins are asking for Shaw for Cabrera. They were asking for Caissie+ at the deadline and he had a bit of an injury scare and has less team control. 

We are beyond either Gore or Cabrera needing Shaw.

Then the Cubs need to make that happen. Cassie+ for Cabrera. This is assuming the plus is lower value than Cassie. 
I agree we should be beyond needing Shaw for Gore or Cabrera. But I am not sure the other teams FO feels the same. Especially with Gore. Last year they wanted Shaw and Horton. Which is outrageous. 

Edited January 2 by Rcal10

[Jason Ross]

4 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Then the Cubs need to make that happen. Cassie+ for Cabrera. This is assuming the plus is lower value than Cassie. 

A lot of that depends on Ballesteros. If you told me Ballesteros is only a DH, I'm not sure how likely I am to make that trade. I don't love his bat as a DH only. It also depends on medicals on Cabrera and what the Cubs plan to do the rest of the offseason. 

On Mo, if he catches 50+ games a year, it's a different story. I'm not able to really scout defense like I can offense, especially catching defense. So that's a team choice more than anything I can add information on (or at least am willing to add information on - just feels beyond my reach).

[Geographyhater8888]

10 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

A lot of that depends on Ballesteros. If you told me Ballesteros is only a DH, I'm not sure how likely I am to make that trade. I don't love his bat as a DH only. It also depends on medicals on Cabrera and what the Cubs plan to do the rest of the offseason. 

On Mo, if he catches 50+ games a year, it's a different story. I'm not able to really scout defense like I can offense, especially catching defense. So that's a team choice more than anything I can add information on (or at least am willing to add information on - just feels beyond my reach).

Out of curiosity where do you see Shaw in the future in terms of war and offensive production? He reminds me a bit of Addison Russel as a baseball player.

Edited January 2 by Geographyhater8888

[Jason Ross]

Just now, Geographyhater8888 said:

Out of curiosity where do you Shaw as in the future in terms of war? He reminds me a bit of Addison Russel as a baseball player.

Purely baseball terms, I think he's a 3+ win player with upside. He had a 99 wRC+ if we go back to his initial return in May which puts him well above the positional average of 93 wRC+ last year. Ernie Clement put up a 3.2 fWAR season with a 98 wRC+, with an 11 DRS; Shaw put up a 12 DRS in smaller samples (OAA was a -1). So, without really any more improvement if he simply maintains, he's going to get to 3 wins. 

Clement, as well, was tied for the 7th best fWAR of any qualified 3b last year. 

As a human being, there's a lot of weirdness surrounding Shaw (to put it as nicely as possible) and I won't fault anyone for their feelings there (I find it hard to reconcile myself). But as a player there's a good chance that Shaw is a top-7 or better player at his position next year.

[Geographyhater8888]

1 hour ago, Jason Ross said:

Purely baseball terms, I think he's a 3+ win player with upside. He had a 99 wRC+ if we go back to his initial return in May which puts him well above the positional average of 93 wRC+ last year. Ernie Clement put up a 3.2 fWAR season with a 98 wRC+, with an 11 DRS; Shaw put up a 12 DRS in smaller samples (OAA was a -1). So, without really any more improvement if he simply maintains, he's going to get to 3 wins. 

Clement, as well, was tied for the 7th best fWAR of any qualified 3b last year. 

As a human being, there's a lot of weirdness surrounding Shaw (to put it as nicely as possible) and I won't fault anyone for their feelings there (I find it hard to reconcile myself). But as a player there's a good chance that Shaw is a top-7 or better player at his position next year.

It bodes that they’ll have 6 months of a refined Shaw as opposed to 2 months of below replacement play from Berti/Brujan etc That’s at least an extra 2 wins netted. But it was a little concerning how outmatched he looked vs playoff pitching.

 

Edited January 2 by Geographyhater8888

[Jason Ross]

4 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

It bodes that they’ll have 6 months of a refined Shaw as opposed to 2 months of below replacement play from Berti/Brujan etc That’s at least an extra 2 wins netted. But it was a little concerning how outmatched he looked vs playoff pitching.

His swing path, slash line and defense do remind me of Russell a bit, I’ll stay on the sidelines for any political discourse. 

Fernando Tatis, Steven Kwan, Christian Yelich, Giancarlo Stanton, Trea Turner, Cody Bellinger all were pretty terrible in the playoffs - I think anyone making any decisions based on what is just over a weeks' worth of PA's is barking up the wrong tree. I'd say similarly if he had a 200 wRC+. Players have good weeks, they have bad weeks, and while our lasting memory is a bad eight games, it's eight games. You can find terrible eight game stretches for any player.

[Geographyhater8888]

1 minute ago, Jason Ross said:

Fernando Tatis, Steven Kwan, Christian Yelich, Giancarlo Stanton, Trea Turner, Cody Bellinger all were pretty terrible in the playoffs - I think anyone making any decisions based on what is just over a weeks' worth of PA's is barking up the wrong tree. I'd say similarly if he had a 200 wRC+. Players have good weeks, they have bad weeks, and while our lasting memory is a bad eight games, it's eight games. You can find terrible eight game stretches for any player.

He couldn’t catch up to fastballs. He struggled all year with it too, It’s something he has to work on. 

[Jason Ross]

8 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

He couldn’t catch up to fastballs. He struggled all year with it too, It’s something he has to work on. 

Matt Shaw had a .325 xwOBA against fastballs, so that's not really true. His .326 xwOBA on fastballs post-ASB was higher than Nico Hoerner's. Part of this is because Hoerner just smacks everything and doesn't do so with great batted ball data, so he is a traditional overpreformer when it comes to xwOBA, but I think it's important to highlight, too,  I do think there's probably some work to be done there, but it's not some crippling issue like you're making it out to be.

Again, don't let what you think you saw in eight games cloud your mind. Eight games are eight games.

[Geographyhater8888]

14 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

Matt Shaw had a .325 xwOBA against fastballs, so that's not really true. His .326 xwOBA on fastballs post-ASB was higher than Nico Hoerner's. Part of this is because Hoerner just smacks everything and doesn't do so with great batted ball data, so he is a traditional overpreformer when it comes to xwOBA, but I think it's important to highlight, too,  I do think there's probably some work to be done there, but it's not some crippling issue like you're making it out to be.

Again, don't let what you think you saw in eight games cloud your mind. Eight games are eight games.

Nico has gotten away with that his entire career. It’s like he’s able to aim his hits through infield gaps especially on slower breaking pitches. 

Edited January 2 by Geographyhater8888

[Illiterate Scholar]

Thinking about other pitching options, it wouldn't surprise me if Boras is able to get Gallen an opt out after year 1 (though theoretically a little harder to do with the QO attached). I know style wise we'd prefer a different look, but I also wonder if we don't hear a little about the Cubs interest in Ranger Suarez soon; he likely won't need an opt out and Jed is, shall we say, not scared away from soft tossers like other teams might be (meaning there could be precious value in the deal).

Also I guess I'm now interested to see where Okamoto goes. Signing him and moving Caissie to the Marlins either in a package for Cabrera or more straight up for one of their other pitchers could make sense. This path (especially the non Cabrera pitchers) doesn't align as much with what Jed has said about their intentions but ultimately they're going to look for "value." 

 

 

Edited January 2 by Illiterate Scholar

[Rcal10]

14 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

Matt Shaw had a .325 xwOBA against fastballs, so that's not really true. His .326 xwOBA on fastballs post-ASB was higher than Nico Hoerner's. Part of this is because Hoerner just smacks everything and doesn't do so with great batted ball data, so he is a traditional overpreformer when it comes to xwOBA, but I think it's important to highlight, too,  I do think there's probably some work to be done there, but it's not some crippling issue like you're making it out to be.

Again, don't let what you think you saw in eight games cloud your mind. Eight games are eight games.

I agree Shaw should be a non starter in any talks about a pitcher in a trade. But j do think if rhebCubs end up trading for a guy like Cabrera or Gore it is going to cost more than most people are comfortable with. I also think if they do that sort of trade it also has to come with a big bat signing. Let’s at least spend what we can to improve the team. If they are just going to add a pitcher I would rather they just sign one and keep the prospects for now.

For a little out of the box thinking what do you think an Adell and Soriano package would cost the Cubs. Soriano isn’t that established TOR starter, but he is young with many years of control left. If they went this route, instead of spending on FA they can work on extensions. PCA, Horton, Hoerner, Busch, Happ, etc….. Not all, of course. 
I honestly don’t know much about Soriano, so no idea if he has an upside. I just know briefly there was talk of some interest in Adell and tried pairing him with a controlled starting pitcher. 

[Bertz]

6 minutes ago, Illiterate Scholar said:

Thinking about other pitching options, it wouldn't surprise me if Boras is able to get Gallen an opt out after year 1 (though theoretically a little harder to do with the QO attached). I know style wise we'd prefer a different look, but I also wonder if we don't hear a little about the Cubs interest in Ranger Suarez soon; he likely won't need an opt out and Jed is, shall we say, not scared away from soft tossers like other teams might be (meaning there could be precious value in the deal).

Also I guess I'm now interested to see where Okamoto goes. Signing him and moving Cassie to the Marlins either in a package for Cabrera or more straight up for one of their other pitchers could make sense. This path (especially the non Cabrera pitchers) doesn't align as much with what Jed has said about their intentions but ultimately they're going to look for "value." 

 

 

Yeah I've been thinking more about Suarez too.  Like we don't really want him because he goes against type (or I guess too much towards type?) but he's really really good.  And to your point this team is all about value and Suarez sounds like he's going to get right around $100M and his resume with an average fastball would get more like $150M?  Also adding a really good player but still managing to piss off the fanbase is a classic Jed move.

I'm also watching Okamoto.  I really hope Jed lands him, not so much because I'm enamored with him but rather we *know* the team is going to add a SP of substance, but we're left guessing at what they'll do beyond that.  If Okamoto is locked in there's, at least for me, no more worry about whether this team is going to have a proper offseason.  At that point it's just the academics of how they choose to round things out.

[Rcal10]

32 minutes ago, Bertz said:

 

I'm also watching Okamoto.  I really hope Jed lands him, not so much because I'm enamored with him but rather we *know* the team is going to add a SP of substance, but we're left guessing at what they'll do beyond that.  

Do we, though? We KNOW they said they are going to do it. But do we know they will? I am not sure if this. I understand your point on Okamoto. I agree I would like to see that. Then it leaves them with just one move the have said they will make. I am just not as positive as you, and probably Jason, about them actually pulling the trigger. 

[Bertz]

4 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Do we, though? We KNOW they said they are going to do it. But do we know they will? I am not sure if this. I understand your point on Okamoto. I agree I would like to see that. Then it leaves them with just one move the have said they will make. I am just not as positive as you, and probably Jason, about them actually pulling the trigger. 

[Rcal10]

4 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Look, I hope you are right. And I do believe they will add a pitcher. But I don’t know it for fact. And, frankly, neither do you. And this FO doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt on following through with what they say they will do. Until they actually pull the trigger on a higher end staring pitcher, I am not going to claim to know they will do so. I am not down on the Cubs. I know there is still time left. And I do THINK they will add a pitcher of substance. Which is more than some people here think. But as I said, neither I or you KNOWS they will add a solid pitcher. We just know what they said they intend on doing. Kind of like when they said they intend on adding a starting pitcher at the deadline last year so they are keeping money to make that move. How did that work out?

[Bertz]

3 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Look, I hope you are right. And I do believe they will add a pitcher. But I don’t know it for fact. And, frankly, neither do you. And this FO doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt on following through with what they say they will do. Until they actually pull the trigger on a higher end staring pitcher, I am not going to claim to know they will do so. I am not down on the Cubs. I know there is still time left. And I do THINK they will add a pitcher of substance. Which is more than some people here think. But as I said, neither I or you KNOWS they will add a solid pitcher. We just know what they said they intend on doing. Kind of like when they said they intend on adding a starting pitcher at the deadline last year so they are keeping money to make that move. How did that work out?

[Outshined_One]

I think we can agree this offseason has been incredibly annoying so far.

What makes it even more annoying is this team has shown a propensity for coming out of nowhere with big deals (Tucker), and also a propensity for waiting until the absolute second to make a big deal by snatching up a top level guy who's withered on the vine (Bellinger).  The latter is why I truly believe the stories about the Cubs checking in on top flight FAs; they're happy to make an offer to someone whose market hasn't panned out the way they expected.  It's actually why I wouldn't be surprised to see them re-sign Tucker if he's not signed by the start of Spring Training.

We don't know if this team is just running it back with marginal upgrades sans Tucker, or if the team is serious about addressing the rotation and getting a good quality bat, and these same horsefeathers discussions just go round and round and round ad nauseam because this team runs a tight ship and sometimes acts way later than expected, so we end up at each other's throats.

[Bertz]

22 minutes ago, Outshined_One said:

I think we can agree this offseason has been incredibly annoying so far.

What makes it even more annoying is this team has shown a propensity for coming out of nowhere with big deals (Tucker), and also a propensity for waiting until the absolute second to make a big deal by snatching up a top level guy who's withered on the vine (Bellinger).  The latter is why I truly believe the stories about the Cubs checking in on top flight FAs; they're happy to make an offer to someone whose market hasn't panned out the way they expected.  It's actually why I wouldn't be surprised to see them re-sign Tucker if he's not signed by the start of Spring Training.

We don't know if this team is just running it back with marginal upgrades sans Tucker, or if the team is serious about addressing the rotation and getting a good quality bat, and these same horsefeathers discussions just go round and round and round ad nauseam because this team runs a tight ship and sometimes acts way later than expected, so we end up at each other's throats.

Case in point, two years ago the team had signed literally *nothing* at the MLB level by this point.  I think they had made a few waiver claims and that's it.  Shota was still a week out, Busch about a week after that. Neris towards the end of Jan, and Bellinger after ST had already started.