Jason Ross

Mike isn't wrong a lot. He's wrong almost 100% of the time.

As is Arizona. They did not get a meeting.

Yeah, I've been leaning SD for a bit here. Feels like the best of all worlds - you get a west coast city, you play with your guy Darvish and the media attention in San Diego just isn't what it is elsewhere.

He reportedly has been visiting cities in the last week. Which cities are unknown. So there seems to be some information he's only recently gotten.

Sounds like we'll probably know soon where the Cubs sit, then.

Nightengale says LAD and SD are favorites. Doesn't rule out Toronto or Texas. Doesn't mention Cubs. In a weird way, I like it that way more. Either tell me we're out, or don't even mention the Cubs as a leader - that's kind of how Imanaga and Suzuki went down and I'd feel decent about it going that way here, too.

Arias has upside, and frankly, would have been absolutely fine had the team DFA' Killian over him. With that said, it's probably preferential choice, and while I think Killian isn't an MLB arm, he's probably more likely to be used in 2025 if things got a little sideways. So I think its fine they did something a little bit differently than I maybe would have if given the choice (though it's kind of 6 in one hand, for me). Cool story, think the Rea contract looks like a stinker if they don't clean up a bit of the redundancy, but the DFA is kind of in the "whatever" bin. There's something to dream on but hes unlikely to fulfill a return.

Id reccomend going to read the quotes Jed Hoyer gave when speaking on why they did not pursuit Juan Soto. There was the quote that everyone latched on to (about making an internal choice that Soto was not going to be pursued), but within there, Jed Hoyer spoke about how these kinds of contracts take a long time to work through and it takes time. That the Cubs would be willing to go big for the right players. One day later the Cubs were considered a front runner to trade for Tucker. Three days later they landed Tucker in a trade. You can look at those quotes in a vacuum or you can apply them to the Tucker trade. I dont think it's a coincidence that the Cubs didn't pursuit Soto, but Hoyer traded for Tucker very shortly after those quotes. The Cubs have not extended Tucker today but their *intentions* are entirely unknown. It seems best to refrain from deciding what their intentions are simply because it hasn't happened yet. Hoyer let us know these things take a lot of time. The easy defense is "well they havent signed a big contract like that ever!" And, sure, not wrong. But the contact he gets will likely be around the 5-7th biggest ever, so it's a self fulfilling prophecy for almost every team. I am going to let this play out before I throw a fit about signing or not signing Tucker. It would be a mistake to not earnestly try, I agree. But they have 10 months to engage there. It's going to be a long ride.

Extensions of that magnitude rately if ever happen. Two sides coming together on an 11 year, $400m contract in 48 hours is not realistic. Neither Betts nor Lindor extended beforehand. And while Matt Olsen did with Atlanta, he was born and raised in the city - he had a good idea he wanted to be there. Kyle Tucker has never lived in Chicago and has no rush to make that determination now. We need to get away from this idea that extending Tucker at the time of the trade was feasible. It wasnt. It's not a thing, we gotta let it go. I, too, wish he'd had agreed pre-arb if just for optics. Ultimately, an extension remains just as likely as before - whatever % you gave it a week ago, it's not different now.

Cubs make it official. DFA Michael Arias.

Yeah, there comes a point when you just...don't need eight depth starters. It's good to have depth, but eight is exorbitant and feels like you're ignoring the forest through the trees. Yes, Counsell asked for more depth, but I think he'd also like a good SP.

I think the most likely reason they signed Rea can boiled down to one of two things: 1. The Cubs plan on moving from Javier Assad or Jordan Wicks in short order (likely the first) for something; Willi Castro? Pablo Lopez? Dylan Cease? And Assad or Wicks is apart of some package to help something else and the Cubs remain steadfast in adding another SP 2. The Cubs finances are worse than we expected and they're going to sign Rea to start him. They're not the only options, but they feel like the most likely.

Nothing the Cubs have done makes me think they signed Colin Rea to complete the bullpen. If you want to have that opinion, you're welcome to! I really don't think that's the case.

I highly doubt the Cubs signed him to be a bullpen guy. Or to complete the bullpen.

It feels like the Cubs are kind of getting to a "capped out" level of "guys who could do something in the BP but might not". And while $5m isn't a lot, it isn't nothing, and they've kind of acquired enough Poteets, Festas' and the like that adding a $5m guy who you might cut bait on...feels excessive.

Yeah....that's my feeling here as well. I'm hoping it's the first. I'm dreading the last.

Yeah. I'm struggling on the appeal here. Maybe Assad is about to be traded in a move for a better SP? And he's the Assad replacement? But he shouldn't belong in a rotation. And I dont get what role he fills.

1/$5m

Eh, it sounded more or less like he has no idea. "I have not heard if he's going to visit Chicago. I dont believe he is. I do believe he's maybe visiting other cities". There wasn't a lot to go on there. The negative view is that Rogers hasn't heard anything to make him think he's coming to visit, so maybe he isnt. But the inverse is that the entire thing sounds like he's guessing. It could very well be that the Cubs have kept it under wraps and Jesse doesn't know. He didn't offer a single city he *was* visiting. And even then it was "believe". He didn't use the word source or anything. So you can take that for what its worth. I still think the Cubs are unlikely, but Brett's tweet feels more negative than I took Rogers - who just kind of sounded guess-worky along the lines of "no one told me he's coming, so I guess he isnt".

I also think there's is some residual fears from Heyward, Bryant and Baez (though obviously the Cubs are not on the hook for the latter two). A fear that the next big contract will go the same way - Tucker will become injury riddled and no longer hit.

Justin Turner had 318 PA's before his 29th birthday in the MLB. He had a sub 100 wRC+, and negative fWAR. Comparing Turner's pre-age 29 to Tucker is both unfair, nor relevant, as the Justin Turner we know today was not a thing yet. We could do that comparison, but by that level of measurement, Tucker runs such circles around Turner that we could conclude he'd be liable to put up 90 fWAR over his age 29-38 years. Conversely, Tucker's fWAR of ~21 compares very favorable to both Goldschmidt ~20 and Freeman ~23 fWAR through ages 23-27. It should also be noted that Tucker's age 23 year, worth roughly 1.8 fWAR was the 2020 covid shortened season, which means he's unfairly penalized. Tucker posted a 143 wRC+ compared to Goldschmidt's 145 wRC+ and Freeman's 145 wRC+ as well. I already compared Santana's age 23-27 to Tucker in the previous post. If you're going to worry about a bone bruise as a significant injury moving forward causing chronic issues...well then be my guest. That's ridiculous. That is not an issue that anyone should have any concern moving long term, and is easily dismissible. Both because it's not something that will be reoccurring (it was misdiagnosed causing the lengthy down time), nor did it effect him, as Tucker returned just fine as he had a 193 wRC+ after his return. The point of my post was to show players who had similar skillsets and how they aged, not comparing them through their aged 27 season. But if you want that, there you go.

There is survivor bias here, for sure. But when we look at Rendon, we again look at someone who's had injuries ravage him. He's been hurt again and again. Now, most of this is post-extension, so these things happen. And if we really want to go down the Anthony Rendon path - he's on record as saying he doesn't love baseball. So we can maybe question how that plays into here if we really want to skewer Rendon, but I'll pass on going down that road more than just pointing it out. So when it comes down to it, the injury thing is the risk you inherit when you sign these contracts. The risk exists, it's understood in the contract and it's just the life we live. With Tucker, you can look at his injury history and his game and at least come the conclusion that he's not someone who requires an exceptional level of athleticism like McCutcheon did to BABIP in the .350's, he's not someone with an extensive or nagging injury list, he doesn't have a skill flaw (like Baez)...so I feel very confident that the risk here is properly mitigated. It can never be zero. There's always what-ifs and unknowns. But generally speaking, you won't find a 28 year old player who has as few mitigations, IMO, as Kyle Tucker currently. And without a crystal ball, it's all we can do. (Not disagreeing, more just expounding)

The team has been chronically connected to almost every of the better RHH RP's in the offseason, either through more reputable people like Sharma and Mooney down to more spurious connections. The Cubs love to wait a market out and get the best value - and the entire back-end-RP-market is frozen. I very much suspect the Cubs will end up with at least one of Hoffman/Estevez/Robertson/Yates (though Hoffman could be seen as a SP).