Jason Ross

That makes sense. Yeah, I feel that's the case too right now.

I don't think the Cubs do that. The offers, for example, to both Bregman and Scott last year were competitive and considered. They lost because they don't go above that point. This is more than terminology because I don't think the Cubs are in the business of just dumping offers in inboxes the way someone in your fantasy football league does where they offer a backup QB for a WR1. If the Cubs are actually interested, I suspect the offer for Bichette would be one someone would consider. I also expect the team who signs Bichette to go above that point, and that the team wouldn't be the Cubs. Now, this report could be just "Hey Bo, noticed your market was weak, what are ya thinking?" stuff and they never get to more then that, but I get the feeling many people think the Cubs are just dropping in random, lowball offers to these guys and I don't buy that.

I think the Cubs get a little bit of a bad wrap on the "interest". I don't think the Cubs are hitting up agents with embarrassing contract offers. I would expect that if the Cubs are getting connected to players they are serious. The issue is that Cubs rarely go the extra yard, but that isn't un-serious, either...if that makes sense. So I'd probably say it like this: the Cubs, if this is accurate, probably are serious. But they probably aren't prepared to be irrational and that probably isn't going to be enough. That said, this does feel a bit more like the Cubs are just peeping in on someone who has a slow market, so who knows?

This is a pretty light connection, but Heyman isn't a nobody and this is a new one. Maybe something to keep an eye out; if they're interested in Bregman, Bichette makes sense.

Link here

Matt Shaw had a .325 xwOBA against fastballs, so that's not really true. His .326 xwOBA on fastballs post-ASB was higher than Nico Hoerner's. Part of this is because Hoerner just smacks everything and doesn't do so with great batted ball data, so he is a traditional overpreformer when it comes to xwOBA, but I think it's important to highlight, too, I do think there's probably some work to be done there, but it's not some crippling issue like you're making it out to be. Again, don't let what you think you saw in eight games cloud your mind. Eight games are eight games.

Fernando Tatis, Steven Kwan, Christian Yelich, Giancarlo Stanton, Trea Turner, Cody Bellinger all were pretty terrible in the playoffs - I think anyone making any decisions based on what is just over a weeks' worth of PA's is barking up the wrong tree. I'd say similarly if he had a 200 wRC+. Players have good weeks, they have bad weeks, and while our lasting memory is a bad eight games, it's eight games. You can find terrible eight game stretches for any player.

Purely baseball terms, I think he's a 3+ win player with upside. He had a 99 wRC+ if we go back to his initial return in May which puts him well above the positional average of 93 wRC+ last year. Ernie Clement put up a 3.2 fWAR season with a 98 wRC+, with an 11 DRS; Shaw put up a 12 DRS in smaller samples (OAA was a -1). So, without really any more improvement if he simply maintains, he's going to get to 3 wins. Clement, as well, was tied for the 7th best fWAR of any qualified 3b last year. As a human being, there's a lot of weirdness surrounding Shaw (to put it as nicely as possible) and I won't fault anyone for their feelings there (I find it hard to reconcile myself). But as a player there's a good chance that Shaw is a top-7 or better player at his position next year.

A lot of that depends on Ballesteros. If you told me Ballesteros is only a DH, I'm not sure how likely I am to make that trade. I don't love his bat as a DH only. It also depends on medicals on Cabrera and what the Cubs plan to do the rest of the offseason. On Mo, if he catches 50+ games a year, it's a different story. I'm not able to really scout defense like I can offense, especially catching defense. So that's a team choice more than anything I can add information on (or at least am willing to add information on - just feels beyond my reach).

There is almost zero chance that the Marlins are asking for Shaw for Cabrera. They were asking for Caissie+ at the deadline and he had a bit of an injury scare and has less team control. We are beyond either Gore or Cabrera needing Shaw.

Yeah, I won't say that I know what the plan is, either. I think they're better set up to trade for a SP than they are someone on offense, so Bregman + a Cabrera trade feels like something they could do versus, say, sign Imai and trade for a hitter, if they're trying to get both one hitter and an impact SP. Or maybe they really are cheaping out. They boxed themselves in last offseason, so let's hope they learned something.

I don't think that passes the smell check. Sharma and Mooney suggested the Cubs moved on from King once he was looking at a opt-out heavy deal and the Cubs didn't seem to go for the Imai opt-out-deal. I'm not sure they will sign a 10+ year contract or maybe even a 6 year contract but I don't think they're as worried about 2027 money as fans think they are. I think they'd have signed King or Imai on opt-out heavy deals if they were. More so, I think were just seeing another Jed Hoyer "in the periphery, wait the market out" type of an offseason for better or worse.

To preface this; the Cubs ownership sucks and I'm not defending any billionaire's spending practices, but the Astros will be on the hook for more than that. First, the Astros have to pay the posting fee on the entire contract, even if he opts out. So they'll first pay 20% of the total contract. Then if he's good, he'll opt-out. It'll be a pretty massive one-year contract if Imai is good when you take that into account. Again, every team should be able to afford that, but in terms of just the money, it'll likely be closer to $30m on a one year deal in terms of money paid out if Imai is good.

Then his AAV is going to be $21m AAV as long as he's healthy and not terrible.

I could have missed that. If that's the escalation, then he's going to get to $21m AAV if he's healthy.

Well...ish. He got $18m with escalators to $21m. We don't know what those are yet.

Any discussion about financials and the way the Cubs behave are difficult because there's two aspects of it, ownership (which isn't budgeing and wont be on how they function) and front office. I agree the Cubs should also sign the good players, but as I talked with someone else the other day, I don't think the Chicago Cubs and this board always agree with "who the good players are". When I said I threw a fit about Boyd and Rea, I did so because I didn't think they were the good players. And listen, let's not make Collin Rea into what he isn't, he's not a star, but he was much better than I expected. And Boyd, I should have seen more what the Cubs saw. None of this is to say the Cubs are immune to being wrong either. You pointed out they walked into last year with unused funds - they missed there. I've been very consistent in saying I think Hoyer leaves the team a player short at almost every bend. Long story short, I just want to wait this one out a bit before I get my feelings out. So give me some time, and if I feel like I need to jump on the anger ship, I will. But even now, I can say that I wish the Cubs would have signed Imai, I think they'll wish they did, but there's no guarantee I'm right on Imai, either and there's a lot of offseason to go, and lots of options for the Cubs to still go after.

I think the Cubs can offer opt outs. I don't think they can realistically offer opt outs in 2027 to their best player they acquire in 2026. Whether it's Imai, Gallen, or whatever they sign in FA, the player they acquire this way will likely be their best player acquired. Dylan Cease didn't get opt outs. Nor did Schwarber, or Alonso. Or Diaz. Other players won't get them, too.

Please don't tell me how to feel, or react. It's unfair. Just because I'm not throwing a fit, doesn't make my responses any more or less valid than others. I told you before, I'll be critical when the offseason takes full shape. Until then I'm going to maintain an open mind. I threw a fit last year when the Cubs signed Matthew Boyd and Collin Rea and I was frankly, wrong, and I look silly for it. I won't make the same mistake.

When did I say any of that? I never said the Cubs should win fewer games or sign lesser players. I like Tatsuya Imai, but based on reports and the contract he got, teams didn't go ape-horsefeathers for him so something is off here. Maybe team's evaluations are off. Maybe I'm off. But it isn't like Tatsuya Imai is the only good player the Cubs can get. I think not offering more money/years to Imai will be something the Cubs wish they had done, but it's also not a forgone conclusion, either. And they can still have a perfectly good offseason even if they didn't get my personal pet-project. If the Cubs, say, sign Alex Bregman and trade for Edward Cabrera, they'd both be winning baseball games and not adding to the roster cliff. So let's avoid putting words in my mouth. And let's avoid making a mountain out of molehill right now too, on Imai. Imai might be very good; the Cubs have many ways to skin a cat, and not going with an opt-out deal in 2027 is probably a good thing regardless. There are plenty of options remaining. I'll panic in March that the Cubs aren't trying to win baseball games.

Of course the roster cliff isn't that bad if the Cubs extend players; it's like saying a fall off a building isn't that bad if you take the ladder instead. There isn't a roster cliff if you aren't losing players. But I also think we know the Cubs probably won't be extending most of these players. As well, these players will require, likely, salary increases which then eats into the money you have remaining to rebuild the remaining positions. There will be some outcome next year that the Cubs will have to navigate and adding another opt-out situation to it probably isn't a great idea.

Lance suggests teams are wary of his projections. Private sector loves him, teams less so. That's what he was hearing from team sources at least.

I'm still bummed we didn't get Imai. The contract for Houston sucks in many ways, but I think he's a good one. If he is, at leas the org will get another shot at him next year, but it'll be far pricier. This was a good chance to get in on the ground floor.

As stated elsewhere the Cubs already slated to lose their starters at C, 2b, RF/DH, LF, 3 SP's (Boyd, Shota, Taillon) and a lot of their BP. They probably don't want to add "another SP" to the mix.

How many good players at each position do you think are available every offseason? How often does a team replace 3/5ths of it's rotation while also signing 3+ new position player starters? At some point it's video game fantasy to think a team can lose 6-8 starting players and bring in replacements for all of them. Which doesn't begin to account for the Cubs and their spending habits. If it were the Dodgers and you'd expect the Cubs to spend like sailors? Sure! But they're going to Cub and it's just not realistic. They need some sort of a floor for 2027.