Cubswin11

For Ben Revere, could take another team out of the running for Fowler

In an article about Lazaro today I saw he can start individual workouts for teams now after his showcase today, even know we won't know if he's available to sign for this period for another few weeks.

I'm more interested in seeing multiple years of 1st rd picks lost (and the draft money lost attached to that)/multiple years of being barred from IFA more than any sort of monetary fine.

What would you do with Schwarber/Soler? Trade one? Keep them, with what they bring to the table and what Fowler brings all 3 would see significant time. Those 3 could serve as a pseudo platoon. Fowler starts against all LHP, occasional RHP to spell Soler and late inning defensive replacement. It probably isn't hard to get all 3 to about 500 PA's without doing anything drastic. What Fowler brings is a very nice hedge against the downside to Schwarber and Soler, albeit a likely expensive and more of a nice to have, than need to have hedge. Figuring out a way to bring Fowler in as the "4th OF" would be my dream move for the offseason finisher, trade Coghlan for the best AA-AAA SP who could contribute this year if needed. I know it's very unlikely, but maybe Fowler doesn't see the big deal out there and liked his time here so much/wants to be a part of what we have built and the weak market next year and signs a 1 year deal for decent AAV (going from Coghlan to Fowler in terms of dollars is maybe a net of an additional $7 million max) or a 3 year deal with an opt out after the year.

I like this idea. My fix is (I know it absolutely would never happen) there's still the voting aspect for those who fall short of the objective/measurable criteria but a player automatically gets in if they reach any of the following criteria; - 1 season of 10 WAR or more - in your 5 best years you averaged 7 WAR or more (ball park guess on years/WAR average) - if you exceed a certain total WAR for you career (probably around 70ish). Those are the rough parameters at least of what I'd propose or like to see. At the end of the day though I really couldn't care less about the HOF and who gets in/doesn't and the yearly outrage over who votes for who or what criteria they use.

I generally agree, but at the same time looking at how the bullpen will likely have multiple guys that can go 2-3 innings.... I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to occasionally limiting his pitch counts/innings here or there or backing a start off a day or 2 once in a while (not skip an entire start thru the rotation) and let Warren or Wood start a game before an off day that Jake was scheduled to go then let him go the day after the off day for example.

Colts sign Pagano to an extension, okay then.

I would agree. But that's why I said the next move would be to bring in Jackson as the back up/4th OF. With the redundancies/shortcomings Coghlan has on the fit with the team right now I think we should try and maximize his value on what he's done here the past year and get a piece(s) that could more easily help/fit both this year and long term and bring in a guy (Jackson) that fits the team construction better.

Here's the full article talking about the Angels which I got my idea from, which came from a MLBTR blurb. Would Coghlan/Villanueva/PJ for Skaggs/Tropeano and Salas/Smith be fair? Too much? Too little? http://m.angels.mlb.com/news/article/160430500/angels-could-still-have-moves-in-store-for-16

The Angels need a LF and it sounds like they prefer it to be a left-handed bat. They also don't want to go over the luxury tax threshold which means they can't add much more than ~$4 million in salary. I don't really love the fit Coghlan has on the team going forward, can't play CF and is probably questionable in RF and being LH he's kinda redundant. I wonder how much more it would take than Coghlan to get either Nicholas Tropeano or Tyler Skaggs + Fernando Salas or Joe Smith? Tropeano/Skaggs are buried on their SP depth chart (not that they wouldn't be buried on ours to begin with but fit the young/controllable guy we are seeking and also both have options to start in AAA I believe) and are said to be available for a bat and Salas or Smith are guys they are looking to move for a little salary relief/could negate a good chunk of Coghlan's salary, keeping them under any tax. Obviously this creates a bit of a 4th OF hole for us and after the trade I'd like to see us bring Jackson back for that role as what he offers I feel like fits the roster construction better than Coghlan.

I like that the Dodgers are loading up on dong feeders for all of our dongsmiths

I kinda agree, especially this year, with taking a TJS injury risk on a guy who would've gone a lot higher or taking 1 tough sign HS guy and blowing the wad on him and then going signability. Going forward I still would like to mostly the F pitchers mentality and take college bats early then going the volume route on pitching.

I wonder how having 1 of those 3 "start" a game would work out. Have 1 start the first inning, hypothetically facing 3 of the best hitters, then let the scheduled starter go in inning 2 and go until like the 6th with the other 2 able to close out the game.

The rule, as always, [expletive] pitchers. Except Jake, we love Jake.

Here they are....http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2016-zips-projections-chicago-cubs/

Coghlan and prospects for McGee and Desmond Jennings would round out both the bench and bullpen pretty nicely. That would have to be some pretty decent prospect package as Coghlan isn't as valuable as either McGee or Jennings and the elite reliever market is pretty crazy right now. Prospects in this case means more that it isn't MLB pieces being sent rather an indicator of quality. Coghlan is pretty close to McGee in value, but while Jennings isn't a star he would require a return of some significance. Coghlan, CJ, Jeimer and since it's an AL team throw in Vogelbach?

Bregman

Sounds like MLB will allow for single team purchases, potentially single game, for MLBTV this year. I probably will still get the whole regular MLBTV package just because I like watching a lot of baseball, but this is a nice option. Will be interesting to see the costs. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/instagraphs/mlb-to-offer-single-team-mlb-tv-purchase-option-for-2016/

160 or so at bats per year of poor offensive production is pretty significant when you're paying someone 20 million a year. From what I've heard Schwarber's minor league track record against lefties is rather good. If he can manage to put together an OPS of around 750 against lefties, while Heyward continues to struggle to the tune of around 660 or so, I'll be curious if there will be consideration of putting Baez in a Center Field platoon (atleast in smaller parks). A ~.660 OPS against LHP would have been about top 20 in baseball last year for CF, add in likely plus defense and Heyward should be starting in CF almost every game against LHP. As you stated before, at Wrigley there isn't a lot of ground to cover. So if Baez is able to show he's capable in Center Field I think a platoon, in smaller parks, is an option which should be considered. Baez putting together a lefty OPS of over 700 is fairly realistic in my mind. Plus it's not a bad idea to give someone who has a lot of big league starts under his belt the occasional day off. i wouldn't do it as a straight platoon, as that isn't necessarily nor do i think it makes us better. starting baez in cf in wrigley against the especially tough LHP would be fine and i might even expect it. at least for as long as baez can show competence. Yeah obviously there shouldn't be a straight platoon and Heyward won't start 162 games. So over the course of the year if Baez starts for him ~10 times in CF against a particularly tough LHP matchup for Heyward, whether it's a specific pitcher or type of LHP he has struggled most against, I'm completely fine with that. Also if Baez can only manage roughly a .700 OPS vs LHP I don't know if he's a better option for CF (other than those 10 or so games) vs Heyward at his career average of .660 when you factor in defense.

160 or so at bats per year of poor offensive production is pretty significant when you're paying someone 20 million a year. From what I've heard Schwarber's minor league track record against lefties is rather good. If he can manage to put together an OPS of around 750 against lefties, while Heyward continues to struggle to the tune of around 660 or so, I'll be curious if there will be consideration of putting Baez in a Center Field platoon (atleast in smaller parks). A ~.660 OPS against LHP would have been about top 20 in baseball last year for CF, add in likely plus defense and Heyward should be starting in CF almost every game against LHP.

The Ben Zobrist signing, at least in the short term, is a perfect fit. Adding someone to the lineup who doesn't struggle against lefties and can take his fair share of walks, while not punching out a a lot, was clearly needed. I simply don't think its financially prudent to give nearly 200 million to a player based mainly on defense, especially when its unknown if Heyward's elite Corner range will be as adept in Center. Although the fact that Heyward will more than likely opt out after year three makes me more comfortable with the contract. As for St Louis, I know its cliche to say, but the reason I give them the benefit of the doubt is that they're the freaking Cardinals. There really aren't that many other organizations, over the past 15 years, who've been more adept at developing young talent and making wise trades. I think its foolish to count them out of the divisional race before the season has even begun (especially considering their rotation has a high amount of upside). Struggling against lefties was/is a problem? Also it's silly to think Heyward will struggle in CF. Fowler had one of his best, if not best, defensive years in CF last year moving to Wrigley after grading out below average most of his career. I look at it that it's very unlikely Heyward isn't a net positive for us in CF compared to what we had last year when you factor in Wrigley and just needing to be better than Fowler out there. As for the Cardinals rotation upside, basically last year was their upside year when they had ridiculous ERA to FIP/xFIP ratios and huge strand rates. They have just as much downside as they have upside with likely regression and pitcher health.

It's quite possible after seeing the projected awesomeness Symborski's brain was melted a little bit.

Betances, Miller and Champman is a ridiculous 7/8/9. Those are 3 of the top 6 RP by fWAR last year. Glad he's out of the division/NL.

How much do we "save" for losing our top 2 picks in the draft this year for signing Heyward and Lackey?

They should be okay to good and also have the ability to add top end talent via trade during season. They shouldn't get close to 100 wins like last yer but one thing I think that could happen with some of the top tier teams in the NL is having inflated win totals since there's a good amount of teams who are going to be awful/trying to lose (Brewers, Braves, Phillies, Rockies, Reds, Padres). So add in the amount of teams sucking, having a pretty solid team and well Cardinals being Cardinals I see a high 80s-low 90s win total being most likely. I do see some downside in them though, they are depending on 2 second year players to be key cogs in their offense who never were big prospects, they have other big pieces aging/showing signs of breaking down (Holliday and Molina) and their entire rotation seemingly has major health/durability concerns so if things go wrong there and they don't have typical Cardinal luck (ERA exceeding FIPs, BABIP, BA w/RISP luck, etc) I could see a high 70s/low 80s win team.