Jason Ross

I would consider that still odd, though. Be weird to have those conversations before the WM's, then show up to the meetings and, well, just not continue them. You'd think he'd be wanting to finish those deals, especially if the Cubs are pivoting from Ohtani. But maybe that's just me.

Yeah, it's fair. I think the easy guesses right now are Glasnow and Hoskins. There's smoke on both. But we've seen in the past the team pull things out of thin air (Counsell. Suzuki) and just because there's smoke, doesn't mean these will happen. It'll be interesting to see where it goes. I certainly hope the aspirations remain sky high for this team.

The optimist wants to say "Well, they're still secretly in on Ohtani and think there's a chance" because Ohtani/Glasow combined feel like a great combination move. The realist thinks the two are kind of dancing around hoping one of them blinks on getting this done to extract a little more value from the other side (or giving up a little less) and that the medicals may be somewhat complicated.

Yeah, it's odd. I can't tell if it's "smokescreen" for Glasnow/Hoskins like we all think. I can't tell if maybe we're misreading the offseason. It's a weird comment.

Yep. It's a weird comment.

Well, what I'll say is this: Sharma just dropped an article in the Athletic. And to give it a quick summary, it doesn't appear there's any surprising moves coming. It's very much that Hoyer is doing this patiently and his way, and he won't jump the market. It talks about Glasnow and Hoskins specifically. But also very much comes to a conclusion that could easily draw you to these being the biggest acquisitions the Cubs are likely to make. That doesn't mean they'll be the only moves. Hell, we haven't acquired either yet (though both feel fairly inevitable, if we're being honest). But I think that's the most likely scenario here.

The Astros inclusion was less their behavior in free agency, but more their ability to remain a powerhouse. The Astros got good around the same time the Cubs did. Through a handful of factors which includes leadership at the baseball ops, ownership and players (and this isn't to say every factor was a controllable one for the Cubs, some things were well within their power, others have been well without of their power) they've maintained their powerhouse status for a much longer period of time. I don't think the Cubs have necessarily acted in accordance to these teams. And it's not asking the Cubs to go back and change the past, but even moving forward, the Cubs, at least to me, feel more like they're going down a path in which the Guardians travel than these teams such as the Astros, the Dodgers, the Yankees in a roster building sense. I'm glad to share a differing opinion, and I'll be happy to be wrong, as well. As I've said a few times, it's less that I'm trying to be the unhappy, fit-thrower or incapable of seeing that the Cubs offseason can still be relatively fine, but that I do think the Cubs need to take some steps beyond where they've been willing to go to reach the level I think they should ultimately be at.

Eduardo Rodriguez is expected to sign soon. Has met with teams and is down to two possible destinations.

Well, I think we should be a little careful of leaning too much into pythag, and our RD last year. I think there's some positive variance (offensively) there in that I think some of those blowout wins are doing a little more work than they should. I say this as a statistics guy, so I'm not throwing stats out, but we were the 12th best wRC+ team. Looking at stats+ we were pretty close to 100 on almost every metric, iso, k%, bb%.... I'm not actually a monster believer in the offense returning right now. It's not that I think it's a bad roster, but I don't look at the Cubs 2023 roster and see a 90 win team. It looks a lot closer to an 84-86 win team that dealt with some negative W-L variance but also had some blow outs that aided on the RD making them look a bit better too. And I want to be clear: I'm not saying an offseason in which we add Glanow, Hoskins, Belt and Imanaga, or whatever is a bad one. I do think it's a failure to address the issues that the Cubs have currently and long term which are those capital S stars we lack. I think the Cubs will be a solid 85-88 win team who has a bunch of pretty good players and some good prospect depth. I think it's a better team than we had opening day last year, with a chance to add some talent at the deadline to be even better. It's probably the NL Central favorites, partly because it'd be a pretty solid team, partly because the NL Central sucks. So I want to make sure no one thinks I'm trying to horsefeathers on this team entirely. But I do, very much, think this team needs something a bit more premium somewhere. So while I think we can have a decent offseason, I don't think that the idea of lacking on hitting on what we need (that truly upper echelon player) is not also mutually exclusive. I think both, in tandem, can be true.

I do think the Cubs gave that effort here, but it's important to remember; you and I are working on some really spurious stuff right now. While it's not enough for me to burn my Cubs jersey to the ground in protest as some have been over Nightengale's report, it's not so ridiculous that it's 100% discountable. As a middle school teacher with zero inside sources, I have to say that benefit of the doubt lays with the Cubs, but it's not without some doubt, too, you know? When it comes to Yamamoto, I think projections are a bit iffy. And I'm open to the belief that maybe a team doesn't love Yamamoto! But it seems like the Cubs liked Yamamoto. They sent scouts to view Yamamoto in Japan. Rumors over the summer linked the Cubs to him. The Cubs seemed in on him early, But then it hit an uncomfortable level and the Cubs seemingly backed out. I think we have to accept things like inflation, an increasingly LT line year by year, and a few other teams starting to swim in higher waters as to factors that push contracts up. But what seemingly has happened as an outsider is once again, the Cubs were interested at the "acceptable" pre-offseason levels but once it hit the uncomfortable have seemingly backed way out. Whether that's because they won't go years, or top-price, not sure. I'm not even sure that's an accurate story. I try to be very realistic. It also seems to have been similar paths they took on Correa (x2) and a few other players recently. I really don't want to seem like I'm coming off as the whiney, creaky wheel here. But I do think that at some point, the bar for the Chicago Cubs needs to be raised a bit higher than it has been.

They are. But I'd say this as well: they're not afraid to be uncomfortable. They traded for, then extended Betts to a $365m contract over 12 years. They went in on Ohtani, full force (the Cubs, may or may not have). They went in on Freeman and beat the Braves for his services. I think, if they miss on Ohtani, they'll do the same on Yamamoto. I do think they're a judicious franchise, but they're also a franchise who, when they're in, tend to be all in. The Cubs seemingly are in...until they hit that line where it becomes uncomfortable. Then all of a sudden, they tend to back out and go back to that safety blanket of the 2nd tier of players (kind of like what I think we both think the Cubs will do now). I don't think the Cubs need to go full force on everyone. But it'd be nice to see the Cubs start to wander past what is comfortable and safe, too.

I think my issue, as I see it, is how the Cubs operate. And maybe it's a personal choice issue, maybe I'm way off (I always know there's personal stuff here) but it feels like the Cubs are operating less like a powerhouse team like the Astros, the Yankees, the Mets, the Dodgers (which they can) and more as if Cleveland had a bigger budget. It's a team that feels like it's designed to make higher budget market inefficiency decisions that leans heavily into run prevention with just enough offense to boot. I know we finished 6th in runs scored, I do question a bit the RD and runs in total (I think there's a bit of a smoke and mirror thing with some of the blowouts). Just a personal feeling more so than probably anything.

While I think these things are fair, I think it's important to note: mid 4 win players are good players but are not what I'd consider to be stars. Like, is TJ Friedl a star? Brandon Nimmo? There are some players like Tatis in this range too, but I'd argue Tatis isn't a star because he made 4.5 fWAR, but what he can do above that. These are players who can have all-star caliber seasons, but I would suggest don't raise the bar to the elite level. And it isn't that you can't build a team with a bunch of pretty darn good players, but truly elite teams have truly elite players. Is there a single Cub hitter you're confident, even with Hoskins or Lowe, or Belt, reaches a 130 wRC+? Is there a true game dominating SP we can count on? Even if we get Glasnow, it's a one year thing; it's not fun to have to continuously have to replace that. Not that this is the only barometer, but just using it as an example of where I find the deficiencies. I know it's half devil's advocate, but these are the issues with the Cubs right now that I see as we move forward because there are a lack of solutions (by nature, stars are hard to come by) and the Cubs remain a team I'm not confident has the ability to lean into the uncomfortable to acquire them. I don't mean to suggest they won't, but for a team who hasn't shown the ability to jump in to the true deep ends, I think maintaining a healthy skepticism they will, is fair (until they do).

He just signed a really big contract to stay with Cleveland. I guess, maybe he does become available. But we're again, at a place where we're hoping a player might become available. Then it doesn't even add into everything that would go into acquiring him and the other teams. Which leads back to: I think it's fair for people to wonder "when?" as it pertains to the Cubs adding legitimately star level players. It doesn't mean it can't...but everything tends to hinge on "if" this player even becomes available. We've been kind of doing it for a bit now. I don't think they'll never get one again, but sometime might not be as soon as it needs to be, either.

I'm not super enjoying it as a fan. But doesn't it feel a bit...entitled, as fans, to demand players to use this time for our entertainment, as well? They aren't being paid for their production during this dog and pony show. At some point, I think we have to remember they're people. this is their offseason, and this is their lives. I'd like it to be more fun for me, but I'm not the main character either.

I like Bregman a lot, though he's an interesting case. The legitimate star player doesn't seem to be there and the power has taken a dip. He'll be 30, and while he'll likely be a good hitter, I think it's fair to wonder how many 130 wRC+ seasons will be left. His last 2,000 PA's have been a 125 wRC+ hitter, and he's decently reliant on the defense. Is that the $250m+ contract the Cubs pay out? Not shitting on him, just throwing down, that I think even Bregman is an interesting case and I'm just not sure that's the guy the Cubs go in on. Maybe they do, they love defense and approach.

Perhaps there will, but there doesn't seem to be many available. I think it's fair to be worried about the Cubs adding stars to this roster at this stage. No one should say "never", and we shouldn't be super "woe is me" but I think it's really fair to look at the Cubs and wonder when that will be. Next offseason has a similar set of hitters past the one star, Soto, which, will be another uphill battle.

Agreed. This feels about finished up. Probably why we're seeing Soto moving now, why Yamamoto is moving a bit now, and why yesterday the Cubs seemed to be more and more on the "outs".

Per Morosi: Ohtani will decide before the end of the weekend.

Morosi keeps pushing that. He's on an island, however. I'd love the Cubs to be in on Yamamoto. But Mooney and Sharma seem to think that's a pretty good no-go (and they're going to be closer to the Cubs) as well, Hoyer's comments on Yamamoto were nice, but not overly glowing. Maybe he's playing it coy, doesn't want to let the cat out of the bag. But just further pushes Morosi on that island for me.

This is Seidler's thread. And while Seidler may be a bit higher on Thorpe than some others, no one was talking like this on Wicks. I say this as a Wicks guy, myself.

I've seen slight bump in velo. Jarred Steidler of BA says his changeup is the best offspeed pitch in the entire MiLB and that he's probably too low on their list at 42. Seems really big on him. So I'd say a significant step up from Wicks who was never getting this kind of love. Lower than Horton, IMO. But that's probably the closest we have to Thorpe.

I mean, significantly worse overall. Thorpe is good, but is like "top-40" prospect good. James Woods is "top-10" prospect good on his own. Michael King is interesting, but he's over 28 and has 9 starts under his belt (though lots of relief appearances). Other prosects are likely to be fine, but not phenomenal. Overall, though, it's a lot for one year of Soto and better than I'd have expected by far if it ends up being those two and prospects.