Screw Winter Doldrums! The Get a Big Bat and Call It an Offseason Thread

[CubUgly]

15 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

I think we are. I like Bregman and Mo to produce Shaw and Tucker numbers. Cubs added Cabrera and have Steele coming back. The pen was revamped but should be fine. Bench is better. And, they were arguably in the running for the second best team in the NL last year. I think the Phillies got worse. As I said, you never know with the Brewers, but on paper they shouldn’t be as good as the Cubs. Even if you don’t agree the Cubs are better than last year, they most likely are not worse. And last year they won 92 games. 

I do too.  Steel played what like 3 games last year.  If Steel is Steel when he comes back and with adding Cabrera and the real possibility of Wiggins coming up some time - I think the pitching and pitching depth is better, and while Bregman does not bring Tuck's overall value with the bat  he does bring more value defensively and IMHO in ways that are not measurable by analytics and sabermetrics.   I also think as you, Mo Baller f'in to eat at the plate - don't sleep on him.  Shaw as a super utility also improve over any of the bench bats from last year I think. 

[Rcal10]

If the Cubs play to what they should I think they are very good. As I said, second best team in the NL. As to the argument of if they are better than last year, which version of last years team are we walking about? They probably aren’t better than the one that was playing 99 win ball for 70+ games. But they are probably better than the one that played at a 84 win pace the rest of the season. I know a lot of people are concerned about that 84 pace win team. And I would say Bregman is better than THAT Tucker. PCA, Kelly, Seiya and Swanson shouldn’t regress from what they were at that time. And hopefully the rotation is healthier. They are deeper. So, IMO, they are definitely better than that version of that ‘25 team. I think Jed built another 90 win team. Which, IMO is second, only to the Dodgers in the NL. It isn’t like they had to get much better to be the second best team team. They were top 4 all last year. And, IMO, Phillies got worse and at some point the Brewers magic has to end. 

[Geographyhater8888]

6 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

If the Cubs play to what they should I think they are very good. As I said, second best team in the NL. As to the argument of if they are better than last year, which version of last years team are we walking about? They probably aren’t better than the one that was playing 99 win ball for 70+ games. But they are probably better than the one that played at a 84 win pace the rest of the season. I know a lot of people are concerned about that 84 pace win team. And I would say Bregman is better than THAT Tucker. PCA, Kelly, Seiya and Swanson shouldn’t regress from what they were at that time. And hopefully the rotation is healthier. They are deeper. So, IMO, they are definitely better than that version of that ‘25 team. I think Jed built another 90 win team. Which, IMO is second, only to the Dodgers in the NL. It isn’t like they had to get much better to be the second best team team. They were top 4 all last year. And, IMO, Phillies got worse and at some point the Brewers magic has to end. 

And if you flip Happ and Shaw’s second and first halves they’d be on a 76 win pace in the second half. Everyone  stabilized to their career averages with some give and take. Swanson and Happs age related decline is also a question mark. Happ seemed to have lost a step and Swanson had a down year defensively. Don’t know if it’s a coincidence or something more. 

[Rcal10]

7 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

And if you flip Happ and Shaw’s second and first halves they’d be on a 76 win pace in the second half. Everyone  stabilized to their career averages with some give and take. Swanson and Happs age related decline is also a question mark. Happ seemed to have lost a step and Swanson had a down year defensively. Don’t know if it’s a coincidence or something more. 

Happ’s OPS+ the last 4 years are 117, 118, 120, 120. I think he is a step slower, basically comes with age. But he has been very consistent with end of year numbers. 

[CubinNY]

If we say they’ve treaded water and they get a 50th percentile outcome they should be in the 90 win range. If they’ve gotten better they should be 90+. Not everyone needs to have a career year. They’re a good team, how much better or worse is anyone’s guess. 

[Derwood]

I think PCA and Horton are the most obvious candidates for regression

[CubinNY]

41 minutes ago, Derwood said:

I think PCA and Horton are the most obvious candidates for regression

I think just the opposite is true. 

[Rcal10]

40 minutes ago, Derwood said:

I think PCA and Horton are the most obvious candidates for regression

I don’t agree on PCA when using his end of season numbers. He won’t be as great as the first half of last year. But I don’t see why he can’t put up similar offensive numbers. Maybe a few less homers but similar OPS+ number. I also think Horton will be better than his projections. Might not be as good as last year, but, IMO, he is a solid MOR to even a good #2 starter. 

[Bertz]

Pretty much any argument you'd make for Horton regressing (totally reasonable) has the flipside of implying positive regression for Ben Brown.

[Derwood]

57 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

I think just the opposite is true. 

Horton was Jake Arrieta 2.0 and PCA put up a 5.4 fWAR. I think regression (if even just a little) is far more likely than improvement on those numbers

[Geographyhater8888]

Is PCAs second half cliff dive a regression to who he is as an above average hitter on the aggregate or a negative trend that’ll continue into this year?

Edited January 17 by Geographyhater8888

[Rcal10]

2 hours ago, CubinNY said:

If we say they’ve treaded water and they get a 50th percentile outcome they should be in the 90 win range. If they’ve gotten better they should be 90+. Not everyone needs to have a career year. They’re a good team, how much better or worse is anyone’s guess. 

I would agree with this. This idea that guys will regress is possible. But there is also room for guys to grow. Add it all together and you are looking at another 90+ win team IMO. Sure, we can find reasons they won’t do that. But there are also reasons for optimism that guys can actually be better. 

[We Got The Whole 9]

1 hour ago, Derwood said:

Horton was Jake Arrieta 2.0 and PCA put up a 5.4 fWAR. I think regression (if even just a little) is far more likely than improvement on those numbers

We told you before the season PCA 's floor is basically a 4 win player. If he hits above average he will be 5. Its not a super hard bar to clear for him.

[Stratos]

12 hours ago, Bertz said:

Can you show your work on that last part?

Easily verifiable on Fangraphs.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Steamer(huge grain of salt to begin with) projections sum up to a league-wide ERA of 4.21, and it projects four different Cubs SP better than that. 5 or even 6 if you want to be kind enough to Brown and Assad that if they started more than Steamer projects that they'd stay under.

[Bertz]

16 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

Steamer(huge grain of salt to begin with) projections sum up to a league-wide ERA of 4.21, and it projects four different Cubs SP better than that. 5 or even 6 if you want to be kind enough to Brown and Assad that if they started more than Steamer projects that they'd stay under.

With Steamer you can actually now do guys who by default have a mix of SP and RP outings as a pure SP or as a pure RP.  And if you do that it's 6;

Steele - 3.64

Boyd - 3.97

Cabrera - 3.97

Brown (as a SP) - 3.97

Wicks (as a SP) - 4.05

Shota - 4.12

[Post Count Padder]

Another huge signing

Iowa bullpen depth. His numbers are pretty garbage but he did well in winter ball this year and his fastball hits the upper 90s. 

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

Steamer(huge grain of salt to begin with) projections sum up to a league-wide ERA of 4.21, and it projects four different Cubs SP better than that. 5 or even 6 if you want to be kind enough to Brown and Assad that if they started more than Steamer projects that they'd stay under.

It's not just Steamer, it's all of the projection systems that FG lists.  I didn't include Steele, so there's that, but all of the guys who will be with us Opening Day (barring injury) are projected for about average ERAs or worse.  FG also projects the Cubs rotation sitting 19th in WAR.

1 projection system has Cabrera at 3.67 ERA, but the other 3 systems have him at around league average 4.00 ERA.

[Bertz]

Man those goalposts are getting quite the workout 

[Derwood]

The projections always skew conservative on, well, everything

[We Got The Whole 9]

I cant imagine why you would even watch if you're just gonna adhere to projections like that. Honestly give it a rest, for your own good.

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, Bertz said:

Man those goalposts are getting quite the workout 

What are you talking about?  I said our rotation project to have average ERAs and that's exactly what the projections say.

[tartan22]

you realize people just have to click back one page to see you actually said "nobody in our rotation projects as better than an average ERA"

you have subsequently qualified that to say that one of our starters doesn't count, and also some of the projections don't count, and also you can decide the average era is lower than it actually is 

[Geographyhater8888]

19 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t agree on PCA when using his end of season numbers. He won’t be as great as the first half of last year. But I don’t see why he can’t put up similar offensive numbers. Maybe a few less homers but similar OPS+ number. I also think Horton will be better than his projections. Might not be as good as last year, but, IMO, he is a solid MOR to even a good #2 starter. 

He projects to post 4.4 ERA and a 1.2 fWAR, basically Ben Brown with better BABIP luck. 
I think a couple more wins and well over an earned run less is way more realistic assuming he makes at least 25 starts. He’s not Arrieta but he’s certainly better than a 5 starter. 

Edited January 18 by Geographyhater8888

[CubUgly]

11 hours ago, Post Count Padder said:

Another huge signing

Iowa bullpen depth. His numbers are pretty garbage but he did well in winter ball this year and his fastball hits the upper 90s. 

I'm down with signing alot of minor league contracts, worked out pretty well for us last year.  If you find just one or two gems out of 20 that can help us win,  it's worth it.