Jason Ross

Here is a list of current MLB free agents aged 25-30. Which one of them is a utility player the Cubs could sign? You've got guy like Luis Urias who was worth .1 fWAR last year. Luis Rengifo who's been a classic compiler who has never gotten to 2 fWAR n any full season and last year was worth 0 fWAR. Nick Madrigal, everyone loves Nick. Willi Castro is about the only good version of this, and the Cubs traded for him and have let him go. Most of these are either: guys who are going to start somewhere or pretty limited players. These magical 25-30 year old free agent utility players just don't exist, man. Hoyer signs those 30+ free agents for those roles because that's who's available. If you want to build out a bench you can trade for the Vidal Brujans' of the world (he was awesome, wasn't he?) or you sign Scott Kingery or a Jon Berti, or you sign Tyler Austin. Those are your choices, generally. And to be clear, I'm not saying anything about evaluation or you saying it's bad...but the reason Hoyer signs those types is because that's what the market has available. I don't think Hoyer is specifically jazzed about older bench hitters or anything, it's just who's there.

It may be true, but Boras has been burned a bunch recently from waiting these things out. Considering recent reports are that he's at a finalist stage, dragging this into the holiday season feels pretty unlikely at this point. Dylan Cease is represented by Scott Boras too. He was the first major domino to fall.

How do you find younger players, though? Should the Cubs be trading prospects for 29-year-old backups? They tried Gage Workman in the Rule 5 draft last year - that didn't work out. Free agents are generally players in their 30's. So, it makes sense that the team is finding those types; it's who you can find. It's a supply chain issue. In terms of being DFA'd, he's making only a bit more than minimum wage. Minimum salary in 2026 will be $760,000; it will be only the smallest amount above that of DFA'ing a league-minimum player. If he doesn't work out, and you want to go with Johnny Long, the price paid to make that swap isn't going to really make a major dent. It's a pretty painless player to move on from.

Just guessing, I kind of think this weekend is the time. We're getting the "finalists" talk and the smoke, then it died back down today. Feels like it's final pitch time and then decision day shortly after.

Well, it's kind of hard to put young guys on the bench. You can't sign young players in FA, and many times young players are given starters roles. Kingery is on an MiLB contract and isn't guaranteed to make the roster and Austin at $1.25m isn't so expensive he can't be DFA'd. They also right now project to have Amaya and Alcantara on the bench, two young players.

I mean, Austin had a 147 wRC+ in NPB. I'm not sure Austin will or won't hit at the MLB level at age-34 coming back over, but he absolutely smashed Japanese pitching for years so I don't think we know if he'll hit. Good news is at $1,250,000 for the year, the Cubs aren't beholden to Austin at all.

Yeah he murders LHP.

That's going to be a cheap contract. And I wonder if the Cubs have an indication they have a very large contract that is getting signed shortly...

I do quite like Imai. And think his low-arm-slot plays well into how the Cubs like to teach pitching. This is an article from Chris Langin, a former Driveline instructor. He specializes in NPB pitching. It's in Japanese but with the marvels of the internet, translation is easy as can be. His article is an excellent resource on what Imai can be at the MLB. Article can be found here.

I believe his comments were clarified as him not being expressly drawn to a team with Japanese players, not that Japanese players would disqualify a team.

Sir, I'll have you know that I'm pretty sure I did once a handful of years ago. Can't be quite certain.

Reports on Phillips is he only wants a one-year deal to re-hit the market and he'd be willing to wait maybe until the spring to sign. I'd be totally cool with him! But probably looking at like a David Robertson situation from last year where you're waiting into the season to sign him (he wants to be at a point where he can throw some to showcase per the reports). So I'd consider him like a bonus signing. Here for it, though.

Armstrong would be good, but he's going to likely come in around $8m+ I would think. Could be closer to $9m or $10m. He had a very good year. He's a little older, so it's probably 1 year as opposed to the two that Keller or Weaver got, but he's not much lower on the money-per-year totem either.

Unless I'm missing something, the reports on the Cubs and Correa is that the Cubs never made a formal offer to Correa. Where are you getting this? I don't think this is true.

In a vacuum, you're probably correct. But we don't live in a vacuum. Budgets, injuries, aging all are factors. I'll admit, I would have ranked Swanson fourth, and I'd have been wrong. We don't exactly know the processes by which the Cubs signed Swanson. Two things can be true at the same time, however; that the Cubs liked Swanson and he ended up being the cheapest but it also doesn't mean the Cubs liked Swanson, as many like to insensate, simply because he was the cheapest. There are plenty of other factors and we need to stop pretending we are in Hoyer's head here.

$22m which reads "reliever" to me on the contract, putting to rest the "maybe someone will convert him" thing (though it's not so low that it's all reliever). But yeah, come on down, Ryne Stanek (or someone)

I'll speak for others, but my assumption has always been that "Swanson was the cheapest, and Hoyer always does the cheapest option" is the criticism. Where I think this doesn't hold up is in how the players have aged, and how much better Swanson has been than even I thought at the time. I'll freely admit I admonished the signing and didn't love it and I've been taken to the woodshed and been super wrong about it (and I'm happy to be wrong). But it seems like the Cubs also had their pulse on these players and maybe it wasn't just "years and money" but "who's actually going to be better". Where the disconnect comes is that I think people like blaming Jed for the signing but then don't want to give him credit for Swanson's actual success because he's not a great hitter and that they feel like it was lucky or something, but considering how well the team has been when acquiring players, it feels like they should have the track record where they get that credit, and yet, don't. But you crushed it here. This is a great breakdown of the players and there's little doubt so far, Dansby's been right there at the top of the list in terms of successes.

This is more speculation than reporting, but there does seem to be a gathering smoke-storm on the Imai stuff. While I don't really think any of it is definitive, it does seem like we're winding this thing down.

We can't know anything. But I think it's probably important to remember that people like Jon Heyman run on reputation; that's what reporting is. It's why when Jeff Passan tweets something we respond differently than what our friend Fancys Romero tweets above. We also haven't had anyone refute that report. I don't think Heyman puts that out there unless he believes it's true to a high degree, and while Heyman can kind of be a shill for owners or Boras at times, he rarely just reports false horsefeathers. This isn't a Bob Nightengale thing, for example. Can we take this as a stone-cold-fact? Fine, there's some level of "I don't know..." to it. But there's also zero reason to believe that report isn't true, either.

Yeah, Romero was the guy who had us connected to Suarez the other day, too. My best hope here is that he's just reading tea leaves and guessing.

To be clear, I'm not over the moon with Hoyer. I'm mostly willing to give him a pass on 2021-2023; he was essentially forced to gut the team mid-2021 due to "biblical losses" and the team in 2023 probably over performed what it looked like it'd have done. Rebuilding the roster is something I'll give you two years to get right. You can see that differently, but that's my viewpoint. Entering 2024, I felt the Cubs were a player short in the offseason, they missed the boat at the deadline, and deservedly, crashed on the back end. It was a team that had some negative variance but the Cubs didn't properly handle that. That's on Jed, don't disagree. 2025, the Cubs landed on their high end of projections. It's an imperfect roster; they missed on Scott and Bregman, ended a player short on the offseason and then couldn't get another useful piece at the deadline. Even if we're assuming SP prices were out of control, relievers were doable and two of the three players the Cubs acquired weren't useful in the playoffs. They also brought in players who did better than we expected - they get credit for that. Overall, it was a successful, yet flawed year in the sense that I don't think the Cubs optimized their output. When it comes to spending, the spending does give the Cubs a boost, but they've also been highly dependent on outside help as the farm system wasn't really producing much. I can't find many places where the Cubs are overspending right now; they're pretty much market value or surplus value on their contracts, too. So I think it's a bit overblown, but it certainly gives the Cubs an advantage and it's fine to point that out, too. We'll see what 2026 brings. At this point, when it comes to Jed I expect a few things: The Cubs will do well with player acquisition and they won't really miss The Cubs will likely not get the top-wishlisted player ever The Cubs will routinely be a player short The Cubs will be a pretty good and competitive roster Fans will be upset initially at many of the signings but later will turn out fine I'd like to be proven wrong at some point by their inability to get "the" guy they want or to close out a full-offseason or deadline without being a perceived player short.

Well, here's the issue; the Cubs did pony up for Shohei Ohtani it seems. They offered him a contract that would have structured things out in a way that he would have made more real-world-money by not using deferrals. I'm uninterested in playing any game where we create narratives around it in such a way where we are affirming our pre-conceived beliefs (for example "the only reason the Cubs offered that is because they knew he'd never sign it and was always going to the Dodgers". While it may be true, it also is just an assumption made by people with no knowledge, so let's skip on the narratives). Regardless, the point is this; the Cubs probably did offer him plenty of money. Ohtani wanted deferrals, the Cubs didn't do it. Why? Not sure. You say my post is "naive" because I pointed out that the Cubs make a lot of moves every year (they do) and that the Cubs brought in successful MLB players last year (they did) and that the Cubs had a successful year (success is subjective but I think we're jumping the shark when 92-wins and a playoff series win becomes beneath success in any fashion, especially for a team that was not considered an elite one at any point). I would say my post was realistic, finding the middle ground between the consistent whining while also pointing out counter claims (roster turnover, lack of killer ability to get the best players). I don't love Jed Hoyer. I don't hate Jed Hoyer. Jed Hoyer is generally fine at what he does, and yet feels flawed as well. He is what he is.

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought your comment was about King. I misread!

I think we're forgetting how good Michael King is when he's healthy. From 2023-2024 when he was healthy, here is how he ranked among SP's: K% - 10th ERA - 4th FIP - 10th xFIP - 13th fWAR - 25 barrel% - 11th hardhit% - 2nd Yes, 2025 was an unhealth season, and yes, I'd like to be a little more sure that the 2023-2024 version of Michael King was coming back for sure. But let's also not act like this dude doesn't upgrade every rotation in baseball if he's healthy, because over the two years prior to 2025, he was inarguably a top-15 pitcher in baseball.