Cubswin11

23 times in last 27 games the Bears have gone at least half the game without an offensive TD. 2nd half MIN.

This isn’t what I “want” it’s just something I think is a route to really turn things over and still be competitive enough in this division. KB and Schwarbs combined for ~$25 mil last year. Their arb number almost certainly pushes north of $30 mil combined. I think you could get something like 1 of DJ/Brantley, 1 of Wong/Eaton and another 1-2 pieces for ~$30 mil in this market. That pretty drastically changes the offensive profile we badly need and don’t think it makes us any worse and helps diversify the offense that maybe we’re actually better. Only DJ/Brantley would take more than a 1 year commitment. Leaves plenty of flexibility for the next offseason. The Kipnis add wasn’t bad, I liked it. But it’s clear we need to make multiple adds/changes on offense and a starter or two and I don’t believe we even have the ability to add 3-5 guys in that Kipnis range where payroll stands without making moves to shed salary. If we had the room to do like Eaton, Pillar, and some sort of contacty IF plus a FA SP in that Q/Odorizzi range with only NT’ing Schwarbs and/or moving Bote I’d be all for just doing that and seeing how the year goes but I don’t think they have the money to do it without shedding more money. Do you think they’re going to be pushing a $200 mil payroll again this year? Or where do you think they’re getting the flexibility to make additions/changes?

This is interesting. In two posts you've gone from them being able to shop among the top tier of FAs (except Bauer) with a couple cuts to now struggling to shop even among cheaper FAs without basically those same cuts...Do you see why I'm confused and don't see how any of what you're suggesting adds up!? Contreras, Happ, Caratini, and Bote are all guys who will be valued for their low prices and multiple years of control, would save something like $15 million in 2021, and would bring players back that aren't well below what they're worth...Seems like those are the obvious guys to move I think with where they’re at right now with the ~$45 falling off with FA leaving is where they want payroll for the year. If they can move some guys (KB/Schwarbs/etc) and free up $30+ mil I think that will go a long ways in this FA market and you can bring in 3-5+ guys for that ~$30 mil to “replace” them/deepen the roster/diversify the offense and fill other needs plus get whatever back in trades. They can only really shop in the FA market if they cut further salary, imo. And how they get there can involve moving a lot of different guys. I don’t think they can really be buyers in FA if they bring back basically the whole team again outside of some Kipnis level adds. The ~$45 mil falling off isn’t enough to really add. I think we are looking at dealing with a $160-175 mil payroll this year. That’s what I’m suggesting and where we seem to have a misunderstanding.

They probably will need to cut some money more through trade (KB/Willy/Javy) or NT (Schwarbs and some of the bullpen guys like Winkler and Ryan) vs just the FA money falling off to even add in what’s likely to be a great buyers market and have the ability to build out a better team vs just running it back and standing still. That’s the whole point.

I guess what I don't get is how opening up jobs and spending more money to fill those jobs on older players they woulda coulda shoulda signed two years lines up with the crying about budgets/being poor *and* keeps this team competitive both in 2021 and beyond? Like we're not talking a little older and more expensive - Brantley and LeMahieu are top of the market FAs, one tied to draft picks, and they're a half decade+ older than the guys they'd be replacing (Brantley closer to a decade!!) Just seems like a mixed message that is wildly different from what we've been told the situation is, and instead is being presented as one of the three possible ways this offseason can go (this route, another multi-year rebuild, or Kipnis) despite...I mean if you just say this plan out loud, it seems absurd and contradictory and alot of work to get to, if we're lucky, the same place with an older and more expensive 2021+ roster You don’t lose draft picks for signing QO’d players. They changed that rule with everything going on. Brantley and DJ are only 2-4 years older than KB. It’s not spending more/having a more expensive team if you’re shedding guys to get there (DJ and Brantley probably won’t hit KB’s AAV this year). I think we all agree this team needs changes. There really isn’t a way to improve if you just bring everyone back because of the unwillingness to spend to add above the existing core. So this is one of the only routes I can see to change things and stay as good and even get a little better potentially without really adding money and it leaves us in fine shape for next offseason’s big FA class. This team (especially the offense) needs a profile makeover, imo, and this is a way to do it.

I still do not get the thinking, BN's writers like to do this too, that the Cubs will dump their current starters because budgetz to then go pay more money in FA for older starters. How does that work? Are they looking to be competitive in 2021 by signing those guys? The budget is keeping them from adding to a team that clearly has some flaws, shortcomings, redundancies, etc. The only way to change that and still try and win without bottoming out is to move on from one of the better/more expensive players and use that money/trade capital to deepen the roster. Not saying I like it, but I get it. Moving KB for Kieboom (or whatever prospect(s) you want to consider) and NT'ing Schwarbs free's up about $30 mil, it also gives you a player(s) for KB who you presumably control longer. I think there's a decent argument that whatever KB returns + 2-3 of DJ, Eaton, Wong, Brantley, other NT/FA position players and a non Bauer FA SP for that ~$30 mil can give us a more competitive team in 2021 vs just running it back with the core and a few Kipnis level FA adds on the margins.

Even in a healthy market that seems like a ridiculous amount to pay him off his past few years and injury/performance history.

I have trouble believing that trading off our veterans in the age of COVID is going to get "equal" talent. Obviously, all of the owners are tightening the purse strings and are reluctant to give up good young players/prospects. It's going to be interesting to see what Theo can do in his last year. I don't think he wants to go out with a mediocre team. I wasn’t meaning that we’re going to get appropriate value back for Kb or Javy or whatever. Moving any non Willy, Happ, Yu, and Hendricks guys will probably be at a discount. But the savings in the money by moving them, if they’re still willing to spend (the turnover comment) they can go replace the talent in FA plus have whatever trade return. As an example, trade KB for Kieboom and NT Schwarbs and then the money savings let you go get 2-3 of DJ, Eaton, Wong or Brantley, any non Bauer FA SP, etc for the rough money they take this year.

Being me some chaos and trades. Somewhat encouraging it mentions turnover and not pure selling off. Meaning outgoing talent could be replaced with equal/different talent and they’ll still try and compete.

Harden to the Nets sounds like it’s happening

Nice win man! I’m waiting for an update from the pools I got in at my golf course, definitely lower stakes but think I placed in at least one of them for a few hundred.

[attachment=0]73970B32-B32E-4763-8A1E-B30350E7BF6A.jpeg[/attachment]

Bernhard Langer out here under par at 63. He’s the man. I just hope I’m able to take solid shits and play 18 holes at muni course from the woman’s/senior tees 2-3 times a week without dying at that age

Good amount of low scores with the soft conditions this morning, but says something about his skill level that after that start and generally struggling through the round, he's still at -1 through 17. Yeah getting to -2 today still is testament to his skill level. Today was probably the worst day for him with conditions elevating the field with soft greens and him not getting as much run out on drives. Still think he’s going to relatively struggle through the rest of the tournament though, his warts showed today with the iron/wedge play and the putting. Just feel this courts fits a lot of other guys better for their games.

Bryson is struggling

Of course there’s a stupid ass stat from the fucks at baseball prospectus behind the reasoning

Go away rain

Show me on the doll where Slate hurt you. I don’t really care for them either way, just seems like they’re going out of the way to be whimsical and too cool about it (like the “sports ball” mention above) or they just didn’t take any time to do some basic research. It is the biggest tournament of the year and was part of a tradition at Augusta with trying to skip the ball on the water to the hole during practice rounds and it was done by a current top golfer in the world and a favorite to win. It wasn’t some dudes caddy or kid or spouse during the par 3 event they normally do.

This was cool enough to catch Slate's attention. The headline: In the body: Poor Jon Rahm. He's the Mike Trout of the PGA (if there were about 8 guys as good as Mike Trout) You know, I get that they don't cover golf, but they could try to not be "sportsball" about it. And for those who don't know, Jon Rahm is currently the World #2, behind Dustin Johnson. Yeah, who cares about Slate’s take on golf? They’re either trying to be willingly ignorant and witty about this or just being morons and not taking 2 minutes to do some background about reporting on it.

Stroman and Gausman both accept their QO’s.

I kinda like fading him this week. Not a great history at the course, wet conditions will hold back his drives from rolling out as much, it’s a second shot/wedge around the green and putting course. He isn’t very good at that and you can’t use a putting book on the greens which seems like something that would mess with his methodology. Maybe he’s just able to bomb and bully the course and being 25-50+ yards longer than the field leading to having more wedge/short iron shots than everyone is enough to overcome his deficiencies there, but I’m looking at some H2Hs and like outside top 15-20 finish for him to bet.

As I've posted before, Theo leaving and us getting a good, young player as compensation would be fantastic. Neither Theo nor Hoyer is going to fill the holes with high-priced stars with little/no trade value and PTR refusing to loosen the purse strings. We sent Chris Carpenter, a shitty ass pitching prospect, to Boston for Theo and that’s when Theo was probably more highly valued. We aren’t getting anything meaningful back from the Mets. I’m fine to move on from Theo (though the downside is probably much larger than any upside, imo) but I don’t think he’s going to bring anything back as a trade.

Bryant isn’t going to return horsefeathers with 1 year and ~$25 mil left during the offseason. We’re better off keeping him or NT’ing him if they feel they can spend the money better.