Jason Ross

Because you aren't consistent in your arguments. You can't say: And: These two this oppose each other. So if I don't understand your point, please explain which of these viewpoints you hold: do you not care about the value of the contract, or do you?

But it seems like you do because you are essentially talking out of both sides of your mouth. You want to say as a "fan" you want the best players, but then you refuse to give the Cubs the benefit of the doubt to choose the best players. You say that you don't think the Cubs are cheap setting a $240m budget, but also don't think the Cubs are going to use the next $35m or so to make an impact signing. You want your cake and to eat it too; these things can't all be true at the same time. It seems very likely you would view Zac Gallen as a "value" signing, but he's likely going to get $20m AAV. I think we both know that no one thinks a $20m pitcher is just some guy; there's a far cheaper way to sign one of those guys. I won't sit here and say I personally would go after Gallen first; I wouldn't. But I also know this; Arizona's pitching development is pretty poor and what Gallen does well (pronator with cut-movement) is exactly what the Cubs specialize in. And if the Cubs think they can get Gallen back to the guy he was in 2022-2023 (which was the 6th best SP in baseball) because of that combination, then it makes sense. That's a needle mover. Only the Cubs know how likely they think it is to get him back to that spot, but I would trust if the Cubs went that route, signing him to a $20m AAV deal, that they very much believe they can do that. What I'm saying is this; let's not doom-boner yet and let's not decide that "value" equates to "not the best" option. The Cubs have been pretty spot on player evaluation - I'm not going to get all down in the dumps even if they don't get Imai. I trust the organization when it comes to player eval, I think a few more of us need to start doing that.

Sure, but you've gotten so wrapped up in it, you've jumped the shark. You've decided that the best player must be the player who is the most expensive, and we have learned multiple times that isn't the case. Dansby Swanson has been far better than Bogaerts and Correa, Matthew Boyd was much better than Walker Buehler, Yusei Kikuchi, and Luis Severino. I'm not going to sit here and defend the Cubs spending habits, but you're teetering on becoming a single-issue-voter where you're more worried that the Cubs spent money on the most expensive player and you're not even concerning yourself with the most important thing; the player. It's cool to point out the Cubs cheap-ness; we should. But we also have to accept that the Cubs do have a budget, and that value does not mean "bad". I'd love it for the Cubs to get irrational once or twice, but you know what I care more about? Winning baseball games, and the Cubs will win baseball games based on player evaluation. So let's move a little beyond the idea that if the Cubs don't sign the guy with the highest salary that it can't count as impactful, needle moving and help the team in baseball games; which ultimately is the goal.

I don't think we should count Okamoto out. The Cubs move incredibly quietly on Japanese players; Sharma and Mooney said they were unlikely to sign Imanaga four days before they did, Suzuki was supposedly inking a deal with SD, and Michael King was going to sign with one of three AL-East teams before he signed with the Padres. The Cubs clearly have interest - we'll see what happens.

I think "impact" move and "needle mover" are subjective. I don't think any one of us thought Matthew Boyd was an "impact" move, but he was great last year; he was 15th in ERA and 18th in fWAR, so looking back on it, Matthew Boyd was an impact move. He was a "value" move but also an "impact" one. And I don't think that was luck, either - he was great with Cleveland when he came back. The Cubs identified him and signed him. We are jumping the shark around here where people seem to just want to see the Cubs spend money more than they do win baseball games. And listen, the team is cheap and I'll scream from the rooftops too that the team should do that, but there have been pockets of Cubs fans across the internet who have decided that now if the Cubs sign Imai and it's not for like $125m than he must not be very good - it has everything to do with the money and not the player. The Cubs are still $40m or so away from the LT. The bulk of money is getting spent somewhere, on something. We all have our preferred impact signing, but I think we have to move past this idea that it has to be some massive contract for it to be impactful. Said another way, if the Chicago Cubs sign Zac Gallen for 3/$60m, they're letting you know they think that's an impactful signing to them. I might have reservations on his fastball shape, I'd rather have Dylan Cease, etc, but the Cubs aren't dropping $20m a year on a guy who's there to eat some innings. And frankly, the Cubs have probably earned the benefit of the doubt a bit, too.

I think there is a lot of doom and gloom across the Cubs landscape right now. They have made needle moving deals every off-season in some fashion. The Cubs are not going to lose Kyle Tucker, off of a 92 win season, with their biggest addition being Phil Maton. I get that people are a little apprehensive that the Cubs are going to sign a $200m deal (I would be too) but they're going to make a needle mover and we don't need to fall that far down the rabbit hole of doom bonering, either.

Roster resource does not have predictions like that. You have to find predictions elsewhere.

Roster resource is great, but you're using it incorrectly. You're using the crowd sourced contracts like they mean something. Use roster resource for actual terms (not Spotrac who is terrible). Here, compare what crowd sourced contracts are compared to what guys got to see how well they're doing this offseason: Dylan Cease - 5/$130m vs 7/$210m Kye Schwarber - 4/$112m - vs 5/$150m Pete Alonso - 4/$105m vs 5/$155m Edwin Diaz got less year but the same AAV. Josh Naylor almost directly on it. Michael King did much better in AAV and got a highly player-friendly contract. Crowd sourcing gets you much lower than what these guys are getting. Using Imai's numbers there is going to put you $20-$50m low on his total. 4/$64m isn't happening. This should tell you that while crowd sourcing can get a temperature, they're not doing well this year. We can't see how much these guys are over performing these numbers, then look at the reported numbers on Imai (which have ranged from around $80m on the low end to $200m on the high end) and think 4/$64m makes sense.

Imai has 3-4 "formal" offers. It's already been clarified, once again, as a translation issue that yes, Imai has had interest. Him having no interest doesn't make sense. Secondly, roster resource is just a crowd sourcing. They had Dylan Cease at 5/$130m. Almost every prediction from every clued in reporter and baseball guy has him well over the $20m AAV. The $200m mark was always the high mark, but no one has had him under $80m and he's not getting Shota money. He might get a somewhat similar(ish) sliding deal, like Greg Zumach suggested where it's 5/$100m with an opt-out after year-3, and the Cubs can then cancel that with a bigger contract, but he ain't getting $16m AAV, either. I'd look at this like most of the other 2nd-tier-ish NPB guys where he's going to get about the same AAV you expected but it'll be quiet on reporting until it just breaks. Even Murakami got the AAV most expected (16-18m) but the years were low because the K's were such a concern. Imai has some funk to his eval, so maybe he doesn't get the 6+ year deal, but I think anything under $20m AAV is not anywhere near it, either. The amount of concern on Imai might drop him from $150m to $100m but it won't drop him to $60m, either.

Yep! Lance Brodkowski just named him one of this top-5 pitching minds in baseball today in a video. Smart guy! The White Sox aren't a great org, but I'd trust anything Bannister said.

Every NPB player has the same % of their total contract posting fee. Murakami's was just under $7m.

Brian Bannister is their pitching director. He's considered one of the best pitching minds in baseball. That isn't accurate. The White Sox are cheap. Bannister is a smart guy.

Just a reminder on the White Sox/Imai stuff; just hours before Seiya Suzuki inked a contract with the Cubs, there were reports out of Japan that he had signed with San Diego. I don't know if the Cubs will or wont sign Tatsuya Imai, but if the Cubs do, it'll probably just drop out of nowhere. That's how Suzuki and Imanaga happened. We probably won't see small articles about them being a finalist like that.

I don't think that's the best way to look at this. Imai is a weird evaluation here. I've posted this article before, but I'll post it again; this article breaks down why teams may be hard-pressed to evaluate him well. Just because you get a great deal doesn't mean what you bought is any better or worse. In fact, if the Cubs get Imai for $90m, we should all rejoice.

Interesting to see the White Sox pop-up late.

There haven't been any major NPB players who's news broke on the very last day of their posting. When you add in all of the things that need to still happen (contracts signed off, lawyers, a physical, etc) that almost assuredly won't take place on a federal holiday like the 1st, it's incredibly unlikely that it'll happen on Friday. It's also pretty unlikely for it to break on the first - that's a bad news day to begin with and people are busy. So while it's "possible" the probability is incredibly low. I think it's today or tomorrow, and if I was a betting man, I'd put money on that. I have an appointment at 2pm EST today, so that sounds like a good time for it to break just to annoy me. Overall though, it's far more likely it breaks these two days than the 1st or the 2nd when you take context into account. Maybe a team can keep everything very quiet and have the news wait until the 2nd, but I just have a hard time thinking it will.

Yeah, I've assumed that quote is some sort of a translation issue. A "formal" and "informal" contract offer feels very easy to lose across languages.

Followed by Bruce Levine as well FWIW

As much as I want to avoid tea-leaf reading, that's probably a good thing for the Cubs based on what we have heard (wanting to avoid $150m+) and how they have handled Suzuki/Imanaga in the past in similar ways. You'd assume if Imai was getting his top line number, with Boras, it could be wrapped up (I.E. see Cease and Toronto). So if he's coming under that, probably means the Cubs stand a strong chance.

The Cubs have Owen Caissie, Moises Ballersteros, Jaxon Wiggins, Jefferson Rojas, Ethan Conrad, and others. "Bereft" means lacking - so that's untrue; there's plenty of talent. The good news and the bad news is two-fold; that talent if pretty close to the MLB level; which is both what you want if you're going to need to rely on some of that talent now (which the Cubs probably will) but also bad when that talent graduates for prospect rankings. That said, the goal is to win baseball games at the MLB level, not win prospect rankings, so the Cubs are at least on the right side of the tradeoff. What you're picking up is that there is a lack of defined talent beyond the next wave. Part of this is because the team has traded that away; Cam Smith (1st round pick -24), Jackson Ferris (2nd round pick-23), Zyhir Hope (10th round with helium-23) Ryan Gallagher (late round pick helium - 24), Ronny Cruz (3rd round - 24). Part of this is because the Cubs drafted so well that Matt Shaw sped-run the MiLB and ended up at the MLB level faster than you'd have expected. Part of this is because some of the upside gambles just haven't turned out great so far; Naz Mule, JP Wheat, Drew Gray, etc have big stuff but just can't put it all together. So it feels like a bit of a combination of the Cubs choosing that route with trades and part of it being unable to develop some of the big-stuff guys yet (but with Cade Horton and Jaxon Wiggins it's hard to say it's been an unmitigated disaster, either). They also haven't done amazing in IFA recently - but that always feels like such a dice-throw, too. I'd say anyone is being harsh if they poo-poo the system for being top-heavy by ignoring all of the help the Cubs are about to get. I'd also say that same person was not being harsh to point out the lack of defined players behind it. The hope is that the Cubs will luck into a few pitchers as the team gives more responsibility to Tyler Zombro, that the 2025 draft class (Conrad, Kepley, Hartshorn) develops. and maybe in year-2 the Cubs see more of what they hoped from someone like Cole Mathis. Prediction is that the Cubs go very heavy-pitching in the 2026 draft and you hope that as the team stack young talent at the MLB, that the team can take some time behind them to develop the 2025, 2026 and 2027 draft classes into the next wave of young players.

Right but everyone here knows the Cubs are going to bring in another SP in some fashion, so might as well put him where he's likely to begin the season when discussing it.

Love this. Health barring, the bullpen has really shaped up well. Interesting to see the team enter with a far more settled BP situation. Ben Brown and JVier Assad feel much more moveable today than yesterday, not that it means anything (nor am I shoving them out the door, only that they are more viable to be traded with the way the BP is settled)

Ian Happ, Nico Hoerner, Justin Steele, Cade Horton, Matt Shaw, Daniel Palencia, Pete Crow-Armstrong, Miguel Amaya... It is also likely that Owen Caissie, Moises Ballesteros, Jaxon Wiggins, Jonathon Long and Kevin Alcantara all make contributions next year. They will also likely see more players see time, like Ben Brown, Jordan Wicks, Javier Assad and a few others who have spent significant dev time with the team. The Cubs are not failing at developing players nor are they failing at drafting players currently. They have also traded drafted players like Zyhir Hope, Jackson Ferris and Cam Smith for other MLB talents. And it's not like these were universally lauded on draft day as "can't miss", either. There was certainly a lull in young talent from 2017-2022, but part of that is because the Cubs traded players away and part of that was internal. The issue with the org right now, however, would not appear to be with finding and developing young players.

Right now, the BP probably isn't much of a downgrade from where it was at the end of the last year. Palencia and Thielbar are back, where as Milner fills a Pomeranz role and Maton fills the Keller or Kittredge role. Finding a Keller or a Kittredge internally isn't a guarantee, but between Ben Brown Porter Hodge, Jacob Webb, Collin Snider, and their MiLB (Jack Neely?) the team has plenty of options who have the ability to break out and fill that spot. It'd be nice to know that they had that guy more than just a hope, but they also have enough pitchers who could take that leap that I'm not super worried about it either. Maybe it won't land as well as Keller did, but I suspect someone from that group will fill a reliable back end role.

On the same end, it's frustrating to come in here and read a full doom-boner party of everyone lamenting that the Cubs never spend money and suck. I get it, we are impatient and we are concerned that the Cubs may not do something. At the same time, I can barely say a decent thing about Jacob Webb or Collin Snider and what they can become without someone flying off the handle that they didn't sign Devon Williams as their only response. Here, I'll add some context; I don't hate Fairbanks. He has a fastball shape I think the Cubs could help as he has a lot of cut. He limits hard contact and probably doesn't need to strike everyone out. And there is no such thing as a bad 1 year deal. I wouldn't have minded the contract. I don't mean to horsefeathers on every contract someone else signs, but adding to the doom-boner pile isn't worthwhile or helpful. Me jumping in and simply agreeing with 9 other people doesn't do anything new. So someone needs to remind everyone that there is 2 months of an off-season to go, that his fastball shape has fallen off significantly two years running and there's medical red flags because it's true. And if it helps one person step off the ledge a bit then good.