.jpg.900f6d1bc80a5a156f3ba09ea0e4b3d7.jpg)
Jason Ross
-
Posts
6,710 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
50
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by Jason Ross
-
I posted parts of this article from Sammon/Rosenthal in the Bichette thread as well, but because this portion deals with the Cubs and pitching, it's probably good to toss that part here: Full article There isn't a lot else there on this front, but worthwhile to add.
-
Jon Heyman: Cubs one of teams interested in Bo Bichette.
Jason Ross replied to Jason Ross's topic in Chicago Cubs Talk
Rosenthal: the Cubs remain "in the mix" with Bichette and Bregman. Full article here If the Blue Jays really are more focused on Tucker, the game of musical chairs for Bregman and Bichette does seem to favor the Cubs more here. Enough to get one? Well... -
What a "star" is or isn't is just an adjective. It's not important. If the Cubs spend $240m and get $270m in value, they're doing great. The issue isn't that the Cubs spend whatever% on these four players. And your post was complaining that 40% of their budget is spent on these four players. Make the argument then, that what the Cubs need to do is be somewhat inefficient somewhere because that's the biggest issue that faces Hoyer. It's that the Cubs are getting plenty of surplus value from these four players that what they should be doing is being somewhat inefficient elsewhere to secure a Bo Bichette, or a Dylan Cease, or through a trade where they give up prospects. You're dancing around the argument but you're still kind of missing it. The Cubs are good enough at being efficient that they are a large enough market, and should have enough ability to be somewhat inefficient in some places. Not for the sake of being inefficient, but that it's much harder to be as surplus-driven when the prices get bigger.
-
I agree with this general idea. I do think the Cubs are incredibly risk adverse right now and that is the real issue. It's meant that the bad contracts haven't been there; what's the worst deals the team has made under Hoyer? Trey Mancini? Tucker Barnhart? These are peanuts. It's why I always find it odd when people complain about the Cubs' trading habits or that the team is throwing money at the wrong players - one thing Hoyer really doesn't do is "miss". But in the same vein, to hit home runs, sometimes you have to risk missing and I think some of this is a self-fulfilling prophecy, too. It's why complaining about the Happ, Swanson, or whatever deals is not the right tree to shake. I'd like to see the Cubs finally pick a guy, though. I was personally hoping that was Imai, but it doesn't seem they loved him like I loved him. Maybe it'll be Bichette, who the more I think about the more I think they should love him. But maybe they'll never love anyone, and that's kind of the issue. I don't care, in a vacuum, if they don't love any single player (or mostly any single player), but you also can't love no one, ever.
-
Surplus value means that you get more value than you put in. We can generally track how much teams spend to get wins on the back end - it ranges from like $8-9.5m or so per fWAR. So to get 3 wins, you'd spend somewhere between $24m - $30m; generally stacking wins increases how much you'd spend (these are better players and it's harder to stack wins). It's not always this clean; when you sign a 5 year deal you are doing so knowing you'll get more value today than you will, in say, five years - as players age they get worse eventually, but you get the idea. Think of it this way. It's like spending $40 in groceries but you got what should normally cost $50; you got more food than you would normally get at that price. If the complaint is that the Cubs aren't spending their money well, complaining about these contracts isn't the place to do it at.
-
There is a very good chance all four of those contracts provide surplus value in 2026 and all have provided surplus since they've been signed. This isn't as big of a flex as you're making it.
-
I mean maybe but I don't really buy he's headed back.
-
I'm not necessarily saying it is or isn't a good move; there's real risk that Shota's fastball just doesn't get back. The appeal to authority is that the Cubs didn't do this willy-nilly or without knowledge that he would likely accept the QO - I don't think that's how the Cubs operate. I do think the Cubs knew what they were doing when they offered him a QO and they knew how likely it was he'd pick it up. As it pertains to Shota the pitcher; there's obviously a pathway to be pretty damn good still; the Chris Langin twitter thread explains what and how that could look. I'm not entirely convinced it'll happen - we're at an age where it wouldn't be shocking to see it not bounce back and Shota seems like a razor-thin guy with the velocity. So I don't want to just say "the Cubs know best" with Shota on that aspect. I trust the team is a good org when it comes to pitching, but sometimes, it just doesn't matter how good you are (the Rays couldn't seem to fully figure out talented pitchers like Shane Baz and Taj Bradley, as an example and we know they're a good org for arms) it just doesn't happen. Shota could be a top-30 guy, or he could be "don't start me in the playoffs" guy or something between. Ultimately, it'll depend on what happens here on whether or not I think it was a definite mistake but there's enough wiggle room moving forward for me to really know either way.
-
They probably won't. But I'm not sure that's a bad idea. Shota Imanaga will be 33-years-old next offseason and even if he has a top-30 year, we saw what a razor-thin line it is between top-30 Shota and "guy who might not start a playoff game". He probably isn't a great bet on a 3-4 year deal at that point, either.
-
To think Jed "wanted the draft pick" requires us to believe Jed Hoyer, the captain of value-focused signings, would have ignored everything that suggested it was likely he would accept it. It requires us to believe he was willing to gamble on a 1/$22m to get a comp-pick (one that would have been at the tail-end of the third round, a pick that while it has value, is not one that is great value). This is also why the report he was going to decline it was so surprising; everyone thought he was going to take it. So either Jed is that clueless and is now a gambler, or he's the same very calculated guy. It cannot be both, but you clearly want it to be both to fit your narrative.
-
No. We don't. Jed didn't want the horsefeathers draft pick. Jed thought Imanaga at 1/$22m was fine value, and if Imanga wanted to continue to bet on himself, he would have accepted the draft pick.
-
Here is what happened: 1. The Cubs declined their option on a 3 year, $57m extension 2. Shota Imanaga declined his $15.25m option for 2026, making him a free agent 3. The Cubs offered him a QO, which is a one year, $22m deal. If the Cubs weren't okay with signing Imanaga to a $22m, one year deal, they wouldn't have offered it. That is "not a raise". The Cubs didn't offer Shota Imanaga more money; they followed the contract, and made a choice. At 1/$22m, Imanaga was fine value to this team. Beyond that, you are moving the goalposts. Your original assertion is that Jed is a fool because obviously he was going to accept it and you think he did it just to get a late round comp pick. You and I both know the man is entirely value focused. Maybe you wouldn't have extended him a 1/$22m deal - whatever. Who cares at this point. But I'm not going to sit here and have people twist everything to fit a narrative. When people want Hoyer to be intensely value-focused and unbudging they do that. When they want to bitch and moan about when he does something, they say he's a fool and an idiot who didn't think through the situation. Pick a lane. Either Hoyer thought through the entire thing because he's intensely value focused, or he's a gunslinging fool. It can't be both.
-
Shota Imanaga is making $8m more next year, that is a "raise" but the Cubs didn't "give him a raise" - so let's talk in good faith here. The Cubs chose to spend $8m more in 2026 over giving him a 3 year, $57m extension. This allows them to try to fix him to Imanaga back to 2024 levels without committing to him for the next three-years if they can't.
-
He didn't "give him an $8m raise". He declined their potion of his contract which was a 3 year extension and an increase in AAV, Shota then declined his portion of the contract. The Cubs didn't want to guarantee him added money and years. Shota wanted to bet on himself. And the Cubs felt a 1/$22m contract for Imanaga was a worthwhile gamble in the likely event he accepted the QO. Again, this is not rocket science. We're talking out of both sides of our mouth with Jed Hoyer around here so often. People both want to claim he's too risk-adverse to make any sort of signing, but then also stupid enough to throw a QO at Shota Imanaga without thinking through the situation. That doesn't make sense. Either he is risk-adverse and thought through it all, or he's not.
-
Or, maybe they believe they can get Imanaga back to the level he was and that last years velocity decline was tied to the leg injury. It's really not rocket science. There were even reports the Cubs were trying to sign him to a two-year thing. This narrative that Jed just haphazardly threw a QO on him just doesn't make sense.
-
Well, that's not what I said at all. I said that we'd likely be lightly connected to that player and then the finalized form of that would just, happen. For example, we were connected to Imai but there was no talk about how close things were. Both Cerami and Trueblood have reported that it was very close (note; not me giving them "they tried" points). So I think we should take away two things: 1. The Cubs "being connected" or these reports doesn't just mean the Cubs called once. It could, but it could mean more 2. If the Cubs sign someone, it'll probably be someone we've kind of heard about. I know things are pretty cynical right now, and the Cubs have probably given people a good reason to feel that way, but that the Cubs seem to be scouring the free agent market at the top of things is probably not the worst thing. They're getting connected still to Bichette, Bregman, Bellinger, after being connected to Imai, Cease, and Alonso. I don't know if they'll get any of them, but it's much better than not hearing they're sniffing in that direction, as well.
-
I would expect that anything that the Cubs do will not have those rumors. We never heard we were in contract negotiations with Imai but both Matt and Cerami have said today the Cubs thought they had him and then didn't. It's more likely that we will hear light connections and then, boom, it will just drop.
-
From Imai's perspective, I think it's a home run. Imai is guaranteed $50+million with incentives tied directly to health. If he's bad, or hurt, he's got $50m in the bag and can hit FA at age-30/31, plenty of time to carve out a second contract and possibility to rebound. Or head back to Japan where he knows he's successful. If he's good, he'll rack up the incentives, pick up $21m and then with proof of concept and at age 28/29 will still be the one of the youngest arms on the market and should mop up a $150+m deal. I get why he took it.
-
Sure. Like I said, I didn't tell you what will or won't happen. But if there's more money there than we think there is, that should give us a rosier picture of what could happen than some are willing to have right now. He made it clear the Cubs aren't in on Valdez and won't be however. But if Imai + Bregman money was there, Bichette + Gallen money would probably be available. And I think that'd be a fun way to wrap up the offseason as a possibility. Probably won't happen, but I think before that article, none of us expected there to be that much wiggle room above the LT, too.
-
I mean, here's the thing and it can only be one of these: 1. Matt's report is wrong. 2. The Cubs believe they could sign Imai and Bregman for under $35m together, or by trading Hoerner. 3. The Cubs have more funds than we think available because those two will cost more than the LT. I'm not telling you what will, or won't happen. But the reality is, if Matt isn't wrong, then #3 is probably the more realistic option.
-
It's been frustratingly slow, but this is what happens when Boras controls the market. I still have hope that the Cubs are shooting higher than some people think they are with reports like Matt's that the Cubs were trying to get Imai+Bregman. That would suggest more money than we gave them credit for. So maybe good things still to come.
-
-
I'm not. If they didn't think he was decent value on a one year contract, they wouldn't have offered it. The same guy who did a big article on Imai showed how good Shota can still be; it comes down to his velocity. If the Cubs feel his velo was down due to his injury, and they can get it back, there's a good pitcher there, especially on one year. It also gives them the flexibility if it isn't to move on from him next year. The QO makes sense.
-
I don't really believe Shota and the QO has changed much. I think we all know the Cubs are careful with contracts and money and valuation. It doesn't make any sense that everyone thought immediately "hey I bet he takes it" and the Cubs were got-caught. As well, the Cubs have over $30m under the LT still; the extra few million over his former salary isn't doing a lot of work here.
-
