Cubs to sign Hunter Harvey

[Jason Ross]

6 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I do believe they will end up with a solid pitcher this off season. And, yes, I am including Gallen as a solid pitcher. I am not saying it will be him, but if it is, I would still consider that strengthening the team. What I am not certain about is adding a bat if any significance. They may be done there. Maybe they add a utility guy. I don’t see Bregman, as an example. I thought the highest they would reach is Okamoto, but that appears to not be happening. While that wouldn’t be exactly what I had hoped for the off season, I do think stretching the pen and the rotation is needle moving.

I don't think we should count Okamoto out. The Cubs move incredibly quietly on Japanese players; Sharma and Mooney said they were unlikely to sign Imanaga four days before they did, Suzuki was supposedly inking a deal with SD, and Michael King was going to sign with one of three AL-East teams before he signed with the Padres. 

The Cubs clearly have interest - we'll see what happens.

[thawv]

5 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

So none of the pitchers are needle moving? I agree that I don’t see it in the line up. But, including Imai there are still several pitchers via FA or a trade. 

I think the Imai, Ranger and Valdez are needle movers.  Gallen will just move Rea to the pen, but I don't consider him a big signing.  Maybe he becomes a guy again?  But I see him as a tier 2 guy right now. 

I'm in the minority as usual with this, but the fact that we would have to give something up in a trade to add pitching is pretty sad.  We are a major market team.  We should sign who we want and keep our young guys.  But that's just me. 

[thawv]

7 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

I think "impact" move and "needle mover" are subjective. I don't think any one of us thought Matthew Boyd was an "impact" move, but he was great last year; he was 15th in ERA and 18th in fWAR, so looking back on it, Matthew Boyd was an impact move. He was a "value" move but also an "impact" one. And I don't think that was luck, either - he was great with Cleveland when he came back. The Cubs identified him and signed him.

We are jumping the shark around here where people seem to just want to see the Cubs spend money more than they do win baseball games. And listen, the team is cheap and I'll scream from the rooftops too that the team should do that, but there have been pockets of Cubs fans across the internet who have decided that now if the Cubs sign Imai and it's not for like $125m than he must not be very good - it has everything to do with the money and not the player. 

The Cubs are still $40m or so away from the LT. The bulk of money is getting spent somewhere, on something. We all have our preferred impact signing, but I think we have to move past this idea that it has to be some massive contract for it to be impactful. 

Said another way, if the Chicago Cubs sign Zac Gallen for 3/$60m, they're letting you know they think that's an impactful signing to them. I might have reservations on his fastball shape, I'd rather have Dylan Cease, etc, but the Cubs aren't dropping $20m a year on a guy who's there to eat some innings. And frankly, the Cubs have probably earned the benefit of the doubt a bit, too.

I'd prefer that they sign the best player(s) available.  Not the best value available.  It just so happens that the best players cost more.  It's not about wanting them to just spend money because they have it.  It's about trying to win the WS and sign the best players out there.  

[Rcal10]

2 minutes ago, thawv said:

I think the Imai, Ranger and Valdez are needle movers.  Gallen will just move Rea to the pen, but I don't consider him a big signing.  Maybe he becomes a guy again?  But I see him as a tier 2 guy right now. 

I'm in the minority as usual with this, but the fact that we would have to give something up in a trade to add pitching is pretty sad.  We are a major market team.  We should sign who we want and keep our young guys.  But that's just me. 

Not sure how Imai can be an needle mover in your mind and not Gallen. And besides your mind, if the Cubs don’t sign Imai and he goes for something like 5/$105 and then they do sign Gallen for 4/$84 that tells me, in the Cubs mind Gallen is a better pitcher. I am not suggesting this happens. I am just saying that if this scenario plays out I trust the Cubs FO decision. If they don’t get Imai and that is the contract, that tells me they don’t value him as highly as we all think they do. That is a contract I could see the Cubs being fine with IF they like Imai. 
 

[Jason Ross]

Just now, thawv said:

I'd prefer that they sign the best player(s) available.  Not the best value available.  It just so happens that the best players cost more.  It's not about wanting them to just spend money because they have it.  It's about trying to win the WS and sign the best players out there.  

Sure, but you've gotten so wrapped up in it, you've jumped the shark. You've decided that the best player must be the player who is the most expensive, and we have learned multiple times that isn't the case. Dansby Swanson has been far better than Bogaerts and Correa, Matthew Boyd was much better than Walker Buehler, Yusei Kikuchi, and Luis Severino. 

I'm not going to sit here and defend the Cubs spending habits, but you're teetering on becoming a single-issue-voter where you're more worried that the Cubs spent money on the most expensive player and you're not even concerning yourself with the most important thing; the player. 

It's cool to point out the Cubs cheap-ness; we should. But we also have to accept that the Cubs do have a budget, and that value does not mean "bad". I'd love it for the Cubs to get irrational once or twice, but you know what I care more about? Winning baseball games, and the Cubs will win baseball games based on player evaluation. So let's move a little beyond the idea that if the Cubs don't sign the guy with the highest salary that it can't count as impactful, needle moving and help the team in baseball games; which ultimately is the goal.

[Rcal10]

9 minutes ago, thawv said:

I think the Imai, Ranger and Valdez are needle movers.  Gallen will just move Rea to the pen, but I don't consider him a big signing.  Maybe he becomes a guy again?  But I see him as a tier 2 guy right now. 

I'm in the minority as usual with this, but the fact that we would have to give something up in a trade to add pitching is pretty sad.  We are a major market team.  We should sign who we want and keep our young guys.  But that's just me. 

It isn’t so much they have to trade guys to get a starting pitcher. It is using the system to acquire major league talent. All teams trade prospects. 

[thawv]

2 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Not sure how Imai can be an needle mover in your mind and not Gallen. And besides your mind, if the Cubs don’t sign Imai and he goes for something like 5/$105 and then they do sign Gallen for 4/$84 that tells me, in the Cubs mind Gallen is a better pitcher. I am not suggesting this happens. I am just saying that if this scenario plays out I trust the Cubs FO decision. If they don’t get Imai and that is the contract, that tells me they don’t value him as highly as we all think they do. That is a contract I could see the Cubs being fine with IF they like Imai. 
 

 

2 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Not sure how Imai can be an needle mover in your mind and not Gallen. And besides your mind, if the Cubs don’t sign Imai and he goes for something like 5/$105 and then they do sign Gallen for 4/$84 that tells me, in the Cubs mind Gallen is a better pitcher. I am not suggesting this happens. I am just saying that if this scenario plays out I trust the Cubs FO decision. If they don’t get Imai and that is the contract, that tells me they don’t value him as highly as we all think they do. That is a contract I could see the Cubs being fine with IF they like Imai. 
 

Just from what I've read, and from what Jason has said on here, I feel Imai is the best of the group.  I see him as a top of the rotation guy.  I see Gellen as a middle of the rotation guy.  I'd rather have Imai.  As a fan, the cost doesn't matter to me.  I want the better pitcher.  

[thawv]

4 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

Sure, but you've gotten so wrapped up in it, you've jumped the shark. You've decided that the best player must be the player who is the most expensive, and we have learned multiple times that isn't the case. Dansby Swanson has been far better than Bogaerts and Correa, Matthew Boyd was much better than Walker Buehler, Yusei Kikuchi, and Luis Severino. 

I'm not going to sit here and defend the Cubs spending habits, but you're teetering on becoming a single-issue-voter where you're more worried that the Cubs spent money on the most expensive player and you're not even concerning yourself with the most important thing; the player. 

It's cool to point out the Cubs cheap-ness; we should. But we also have to accept that the Cubs do have a budget, and that value does not mean "bad". I'd love it for the Cubs to get irrational once or twice, but you know what I care more about? Winning baseball games, and the Cubs will win baseball games based on player evaluation. So let's move a little beyond the idea that if the Cubs don't sign the guy with the highest salary that it can't count as impactful, needle moving and help the team in baseball games; which ultimately is the goal.

As a FAN, I just want the best player signed.  I AGREE with Tom about profits first.  That's how I would be.  But as a fan, I just want the best players at the time signed.  I don't think Tom is cheap at all.  I think that 240 million is way more than enough to dominate this small market division.  

I don't care if they sign guy with the highest salary at all.  The highest salary doesn't win.  The best players win.  But avoiding the best players because they cost the most is pathetic from a fans point of view.  I now think that Imai is the best pitcher available.  I don't think he will cost the most, but he's my first choice, so I think they should do whatever they can to sign him based on pitching ability and not salary.   

[Rcal10]

3 minutes ago, thawv said:

 

Just from what I've read, and from what Jason has said on here, I feel Imai is the best of the group.  I see him as a top of the rotation guy.  I see Gellen as a middle of the rotation guy.  I'd rather have Imai.  As a fan, the cost doesn't matter to me.  I want the better pitcher.  

But, again, if the Cubs sign Gallen to roughly the same deal they could have had Imai for, doesn’t that mean in their mind Gallen is the better pitcher? Sorry thawv, but I trust the Cubs FO evaluation much more than yours.
Keep in mind, if Imai doesn’t up going to something like 7/$175 and then the Cubs sign Gallen instead, they do not deserve the benefit of the doubt as to why they went Gallen. That would be an example of them not signing the best FA, just the one who was willing to accept what they decided to spend.

[thawv]

14 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

It isn’t so much they have to trade guys to get a starting pitcher. It is using the system to acquire major league talent. All teams trade prospects. 

I don't disagree with this at all.  But if you are looking to trade talent in the system because you don't want to get a FA because of cost, I don't like that plan as a major market team.  I'd rather have a star for 5-6 years than give something up for 2 years of control because he's cheaper.  And that's what would be happening here. 

 

Looking at the books after this season, the last thing they should be doing is trading young guys.  They need to start adding talent right now.  There's no way they can spend all the money available next season.  They should be adding payroll this season.  THIS is the season to go way over the cap and start building this team for 2027 and on.    

Edited December 31, 2025 by thawv

[Jason Ross]

8 minutes ago, thawv said:

As a FAN, I just want the best player signed.  I AGREE with Tom about profits first.  That's how I would be.  But as a fan, I just want the best players at the time signed.  I don't think Tom is cheap at all.  I think that 240 million is way more than enough to dominate this small market division.  

I don't care if they sign guy with the highest salary at all.  The highest salary doesn't win.  The best players win.  But avoiding the best players because they cost the most is pathetic from a fans point of view.  I now think that Imai is the best pitcher available.  I don't think he will cost the most, but he's my first choice, so I think they should do whatever they can to sign him based on pitching ability and not salary.   

But it seems like you do because you are essentially talking out of both sides of your mouth. You want to say as a "fan" you want the best players, but then you refuse to give the Cubs the benefit of the doubt to choose the best players. You say that you don't think the Cubs are cheap setting a $240m budget, but also don't think the Cubs are going to use the next $35m or so to make an impact signing. You want your cake and to eat it too; these things can't all be true at the same time. 

It seems very likely you would view Zac Gallen as a "value" signing, but he's likely going to get $20m AAV. I think we both know that no one thinks a $20m pitcher is just some guy; there's a far cheaper way to sign one of those guys. I won't sit here and say I personally would go after Gallen first; I wouldn't. But I also know this; Arizona's pitching development is pretty poor and what Gallen does well (pronator with cut-movement) is exactly what the Cubs specialize in. And if the Cubs think they can get Gallen back to the guy he was in 2022-2023 (which was the 6th best SP in baseball) because of that combination, then it makes sense. That's a needle mover. Only the Cubs know how likely they think it is to get him back to that spot, but I would trust if the Cubs went that route, signing him to a $20m AAV deal, that they very much believe they can do that.

What I'm saying is this; let's not doom-boner yet and let's not decide that "value" equates to "not the best" option. The Cubs have been pretty spot on player evaluation - I'm not going to get all down in the dumps even if they don't get Imai. I trust the organization when it comes to player eval, I think a few more of us need to start doing that.

[thawv]

Just now, Jason Ross said:

But it seems like you do because you are essentially talking out of both sides of your mouth. You want to say as a "fan" you want the best players, but then you refuse to give the Cubs the benefit of the doubt to choose the best players. You say that you don't think the Cubs are cheap setting a $240m budget, but also don't think the Cubs are going to use the next $35m or so to make an impact signing. You want your cake and to eat it too; these things can't all be true at the same time. 

It seems very likely you would view Zac Gallen as a "value" signing, but he's likely going to get $20m AAV. I think we both know that no one thinks a $20m pitcher is just some guy; there's a far cheaper way to sign one of those guys. I won't sit here and say I personally would go after Gallen first; I wouldn't. But I also know this; Arizona's pitching development is pretty poor and what Gallen does well (pronator with cut-movement) is exactly what the Cubs specialize in. And if the Cubs think they can get Gallen back to the guy he was in 2022-2023 (which was the 6th best SP in baseball) because of that combination, then it makes sense. That's a needle mover.

What I'm saying is this; let's not doom-boner yet and let's not decide that "value" equates to "not the best" option. The Cubs have been pretty spot on player evaluation - I'm not going to get all down in the dumps even if they don't get Imai. I trust the organization when it comes to player eval, I think a few more of us need to start doing that.

You're just not going to understand what I'm trying to say. 

[Jason Ross]

18 minutes ago, thawv said:

You're just not going to understand what I'm trying to say. 

Because you aren't consistent in your arguments. You can't say:

Quote

I'd prefer that they sign the best player(s) available.  Not the best value available.

And:

Quote

I don't care if they sign guy with the highest salary at all.  The highest salary doesn't win. 

These two this oppose each other. So if I don't understand your point, please explain which of these viewpoints you hold: do you not care about the value of the contract, or do you?

[Bertz]

Given the medical questions this was never a guarantee to get to the finish line, so good news.

40 man is at 36 now I believe?

[Stratos]

23 hours ago, BigbadB said:

Bullpen and the bench is the only place that absolutely needed upgrades. They could certainly use a SP and possibly one more starter on offense, but those are more luxuries than absolute needs. I think they will add a SP, but I'm not expecting many more moves outside of that.

I dunno, their SP was average at best last year according to metrics like xFIP.  The Wrigley wind and amazing Cubs defense has hidden some of the flaws the last couple of seasons. 

On the other hand, because of the wind the offense has very likely been better than we think the last 2 years.

[Stratos]

20 hours ago, Bertz said:

Given the medical questions this was never a guarantee to get to the finish line, so good news.

40 man is at 36 now I believe?

Yeah that's good news for sure.

[BigbadB]

19 minutes ago, Stratos said:

I dunno, their SP was average at best last year according to metrics like xFIP.  The Wrigley wind and amazing Cubs defense has hidden some of the flaws the last couple of seasons. 

On the other hand, because of the wind the offense has very likely been better than we think the last 2 years.

They have Boyd, Imanaga, Taillon, Horton and Rea that can pencil in as your MLB caliber SP. That's 5 right there without counting Steele eventually coming back. Rea is probably not what you want taking every 5th spot in the rotation, but he is capable of giving you league average production in that spot. They still have Brown, Wicks and Assad. They don't need to start the season with another starter. They could potentially wait it out with what they have and then decide at the trade deadline who is worth giving key starts to this potential and likely playoff team.

Not saying they should do that, but I wouldn't rule it out that it's what their thinking. Make a run at a guy like Imai and if they don't like the price tag, sit back and wait for the right deal or wait until the trade deadline. This team is likely giving a run for the division as is. How it looks come playoff time could be different and should be different if they are serious about winning.

[cubfansince77]

On 12/27/2025 at 2:31 PM, thawv said:

Rea is in the rotation as of today. 

Yeah, Rea was really solid last year for the money IMO. Now that we've traded for Cabrera, what role does everyone see Rea in? Swing guy....spot starter and long relief? Again, I really like the guy for the money. I would say he's got a rubber arm but I don't wanna jinx him.

Next season starters:

1) Horton....prospective ace with dynamite stuff

2)Edward Cabrera....if healthy, he's exciting

3)Boyd....I think he wore down in 2nd half last season. He'll be more effective this season if they lighten his load as the season progresses. I still like him a lot

4) Taillon...really solid vet for a MOR type guy. Very good when healthy

5)Imanaga...showed signs of wear and tear and age in 2nd half last season but like Boyd, they'll lessen his load in the 2nd half by spot starting Assad or Rea

*6)Justin Steele.....one of the best aspects of trading for Cabrera is not having to hurry back Steele. I'd guess he'll be back by June or July but if it's August then so be it. It'll be like trading for an ace at that point. 

 

 

 

[Derwood]

would be interesting to see them do piggyback starts for Rea/Boyd 

[Bull]

8 minutes ago, Derwood said:

would be interesting to see them do piggyback starts for Rea/Boyd 

And Assad/Imanaga 

[cubfansince77]

7 minutes ago, Derwood said:

would be interesting to see them do piggyback starts for Rea/Boyd 

There's all SORTS of creativity that Counsel and Tommy can cook up with what Jed has provided. Strong staff and when inevitable injuries occur they haves some quality depth with Assad/Rea/Wicks/Brown that they haven't had before. I think we've gotten better this offseason, dunno about the Brewers. Still say they do more with less $ than any other MLB team. Sure the playoffs are an issue, but they've had a lock on this division. Would be nice to knock them off this season. 

[Bull]

Is this the place to talk about the bullpen construction?

I don't see a place for everyone to fit.

Assuming an 8 man pen:

One of Brown, Assad, Wicks in the BP (the other two optioned to AAA)

Rea

Palencia

Theilbar

Maton

Milner

Harvey

Webb

 

Seems like the only option. If you sign a lefty bench bat, that could turn into a 7 man pen. 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

1 minute ago, Bull said:

Is this the place to talk about the bullpen construction?

I don't see a place for everyone to fit.

Assuming an 8 man pen:

One of Brown, Assad, Wicks in the BP (the other two optioned to AAA)

Rea

Palencia

Theilbar

Maton

Milner

Harvey

Webb

 

Seems like the only option. If you sign a lefty bench bat, that could turn into a 7 man pen. 

I think the 'everyone is healthy' version is something like that, though it could be all 3 of Brown/Assad/Wicks in Iowa and a MiLB signing(like Keller last year) or someone like Hodge instead.  But the 'everyone is healthy' version is unlikely to be necessary, and once we get much beyond opening day you'll inevitably have further shuffling based on performance.