dew1679666265

By Chen I meant Wei-Yin Chen, a 26 year old Japanese pitcher who projects to potentially being a #3 starter and would be about $10 million cheaper than Buerhle (an estimate). And yes, Francis has the upside of Buerhle or a little better, but he's only 31 years old, will come far cheaper and with less commitment than Buerhle, and at worst is likely to be a 2-3 WAR pitcher and at best could be nearly a 4+ WAR pitcher. Buerhle's age concerns me on a 3/36-39 deal.

Sorry, that wasn't my intent. dextermorgan was arguing that he has little interest in Wilson because of all the guys who will be available next year and I was pointing out the reasons why those guys may not hit the market and why it's not a safe bet to pass on one stud because more might come available in a year.

The good thing is we don't need to sign all, or even most, of the big time FAs that have been discussed. We simply need to sign 1-2 this offseason and then make a couple shrewd signings (Sizemore? Chen? Francis? Headley? Stewart?) or trades and this team is a lot better. With the money coming off the books, the much-heralded front office, the Cubs' history and tradition, and Ricketts' willingness to spend big on improving the team, we should have as good a chance as anybody to bring in a guy like Pujols or Prince or Wilson.

Of course you're looking at it just from the teams' position. Any/all of those guys (except Shields) could take the stance that they'd rather test FA than accept an extension with their current club. Right. I never said they simply won't hit the market, I said there's a good chance many of them don't and I listed the reasons why. My point was that passing on a stud pitcher like Wilson because some guys comparable to him might be available next year isn't a good idea, nor is it a safe bet.

I agree with the bolded pretty much completely. The only reason I was arguing in favor of Darvish was because I was arguing that we could have a chance to be competitive without Aramis, even in the worst case scenario where we miss on Pujols/Prince. A Darvish/Wilson tandem would be almost essential at that point because of Darvish's upside. If we're not working under a worst case scenario, however, I'd rather let somebody else take the gamble on Darvish.

If Wilson doesn't hit the market, I could stomach Buerhle a lot more easily. Still would prefer to look at more upside guys like Francis/Chen/Danks/etc than a mid-30s pitcher. That said, he's the best of the mid-tier pitchers (Buerhle, Oswalt, Jackson) so if we go that route, I like that we're targeting Buerhle.

This is my biggest concern. I think there's a good chance he never hits the market.

It's possible, but I don't think they'll be major players for CJ unless the Steinbrenners fall in love with him. They just gave an extension to CC at 5/122 (24 AAV) and have Teixeira, ARod, Burnett, Jeter, Cano, Soriano, Granderson all locked up for long periods of time (a couple through 2013, the rest through 2015-2017). Obviously that's not going to stop them if they really want Wilson, but Cashman doesn't tend to be the free spender that the Steinbrenners are. After investing the big money in CC, I could see them making a push for Oswalt, Buerhle, or Edwin Jackson who they can get for lesser money and years. I could be wrong, but I don't think it's a shoe-in they jump in with a major money deal. Here's the problem - there's plenty of reason to believe most of the pitchers currently slated to be available, won't be. Matt Cain - the Giants aren't a poor team and could afford to bring Cain back with the young, cheap talent they have coming up. If they can dump some Zito salary on somebody this year or next, that makes it all the more likely they retain Cain. John Danks - could be had in trade this offseason potentially, but will cost a lot. As for the 2013 offseason, the Sox aren't in a financial bind at this point and there's really no reason for them to let a young pitcher like Danks walk for nothing. I'd expect him to be re-signed if they can't get a trade done. Zack Greinke - very likely to near certain to be on the market unless the Brewers fall out of the race and deal him midseason. Cole Hamels - the Phillies have a higher payroll than the Cubs, have already let Oswalt go, and only have Halladay and Lee currently set in their rotation. They have prospects, but also no reason not to bring back Hamels. I'd be surprised if they let him walk. Anibal Sanchez - probably second to Greinke as most likely to be a FA next season, but is also very good trade bait at the deadline if Florida's out of it. James Shields - has an extremely affordable $9 million option with the Rays - no reason for them to not pick it up. So basically there's a really good chance that only two of those guys hit free agency and that's if they're not traded. If Wilson becomes a FA, then he's a certainty to be available and we have the money to get him. He's also comparable to every pitcher in that list and better than a number of them. There's really no reason to pass on him with the thought that somebody better might come available next year.

More people need to talk about the MacPhail compensation because that's a perfect comparison to this situation. Anything more than a low-A ball player is a good deal for the Sox and more than they should receive.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying there's reason to believe he might be different, but it's not a certainty. But I think it's a risk worth taking if our only other option is to overpay for a 34 year old, oft-injured third baseman. That said, I've stated many times and will again - I'd rather push very hard for Prince/Pujols and pass on Darvish. But if we miss on Prince/Pujols, the answer is not to bring Aramis back at the price he'll likely demand.

And Darvish isn't a guarantee to be great, I don't disagree. However, just because a few Japanese pitchers have failed doesn't mean another one will. The difference between Aramis and Darvish is with Darvish you're paying for upside. You're paying more, but you're paying for what he's capable of doing going forward. With Aramis, you're paying him for what he's already done. He's a very, very high injury risk player who also has a good chance to decline going forward after barely being worth what he was paid last year. Aramis is the perfect example of what Theo was talking about in his press conference about not paying for past performance. As much as I like Aramis, there's almost no chance he's worth his next contract at any point.

Danks is the only guy I'm really interested in trading for this offseason, along with maybe Headley. I'm afraid Butler would cost too much in prospects for not being much of a power hitter at first, but I'd be willing to explore it.

I'd be scared of the team next year with Aramis under contract. He's not a good bet to be healthy and he'll be 34 next year - his offense could easily decline even if he stays healthy. As for Pujols/Prince, I've tried to be pretty clear in this thread that signing either of them is by far the most important thing we should do this offseason. However, what I've been arguing is that we're not hopelessly screwed if we miss on them. We can still cobble together a below average to average offense with some upside and a really good to elite pitching staff. I probably would simply because he's not a pitcher, but the chances of either being healthy most of next year are pretty low. I'd prefer it if we stay away from both. And overpaying for Aramis would be giving him something a little below what he's likely to get on the market - for example, a $15 mil per year contract that runs through his age 37-38 seasons. Given the third base FA market, a 3/45 deal for him might be a hometown discount. I could see him getting an extra year and a few extra million AAV as a free agent.

As I posted, 2011 Garza posted a better WAR than 2010 Cain and the 2 year average of Wilson starting posted a better WAR than 2010 Lincecum. If you want to compare Garza to Lincecum and Wilson to Cain, the two Cubs pitchers were still better. If you want to take either of Wilson's two seasons as a starting pitcher instead of an average, you still get a better WAR than either Lincecum or Cain. Garza appears to have taken the next step to elite status and Wilson has been elite each of the two years he's been a starter. Garza will be 28 all of next season and while Wilson will be 31, he's only thrown around 700 ML innings so his arm should have more mileage than most 31 year old pitchers.

We were talking about that in another thread last night. I was guessing (complete guess) some package centered around Vitters. toonsterwu was speculating a package surrounding either McNutt or Szczur. I'm wary about giving up that much for Headley, but could buy into it with enough persuasion, maybe. I really like Headley as a player, though.

So your preferable route is to overpay for a 34 year old, oft-injured third baseman who has missed significant portions of time (60 games one year and 80 games another) in 2 of the past 3 seasons? Why is a good, but injury risk pitcher a bad idea, but a good, but injury risk hitter is a good idea?

Oh yeah. Pissing away eleventy billion dollars on a posting fee + contract for a Japanese pitcher is totally the way to go. I mean, those guys have a proven track record of stardom in MLB. Way better than a shorter term, lower dollar commitment to a guy who's been the best 3B in Chicago for like 30 years. BRB, checking on how Daisuke/Irabu/Iwamura are doing. Since all Japanese pitchers are exactly the same? Darvish is far from my #1 target, but there's plenty of reason to believe he can be very successful in the majors.

Sorry about that, I read that as offensive starters and three relievers. The argument could easily be made that Wilson is better than Lincecum's 2010 and that Garza is better than Cain's 2010. Darvish is clearly a question mark, but Sanchez was a 2.4 WAR pitcher in 2010 and I don't think it's outlandish to think Darvish could provide close to that. 2010 Lincecum: 4.9 WAR Wilson avg as starter: 5.2 WAR 2010 Cain: 3.7 WAR 2011 Garza: 5.0 WAR

Sizemore has been broken for a couple of years, but is a very talented player with a ton of upside. I'm not expecting him to become his old self again next year, but there's a chance it could happen. Burnitz was never the player Sizemore is when healthy, though, so I'm still not sure where that comparison is coming from. As for Headley, he's been well above league average third baseman the past couple of years and will be 27 next year - the beginning of his prime. I'm not convinced he'll make a huge jump upon entering his prime years, but if he's going to then next year is the time to do it. He showed solid power in the minors and has always been a patient hitter, so it's not like I'm advocating bringing in a guy with little to no upside. Not sure where I've made this argument. I said I'm very much in support of going all out for Prince/Pujols this year and it's very important we get one of the two. But if the worst case scenario happens and we miss out on them, then putting the money into two stud pitchers is better than putting it into an old, oft-injured third baseman who is likely to decline. At that point, you do the best you can in a bad scenario and you surround your fantastic pitching staff with high upside offensive guys who have the potential to help you long term and could help you short term. Then you have the money to pursue a guy like Kemp next offseason should he come available. Again, it's not ideal but it's better than pouring too much money into Aramis hoping for an old, oft-injured third baseman to stay healthy and productive enough to warrant his $15 million per year contract through his age 37 season. Below average would probably be the likely outcome for that offense, but with the upside to be above average. Really below average is probably the worst case scenario - it's assuming no improvement from Headley, more injuries for Grady and another down year for Soto.

You mean Aubrey Huff, who posted a .694 OPS in 2009 and a .676 OPS in 2011? An extremely up and down player who happened to have a really good year that season? If Grady can stay healthy, he could give us Huff-type numbers. And then there's Pat Burrell who had a .682 and .756 OPS around the 2010 season. Again, the Giants took a chance on a highly up and down player and got an up year. They caught a break - one we could get from a Soriano/DeJesus platoon if the breaks go our way. Soto could also have an up season next year and give us an .800+ OPS like Burrell did for SF. As for Posey, Castro probably won't be that good but he could give us an .800+ OPS next year. As for the relievers, Marshall can be close to as good as anybody in their pen that year and Marmol can as well if he can rebound. As for the third, we have a plethora of options to work through, all with upside.

And what are we relying on if we give Aramis a 3/45 deal at minimum? Health. We're overpaying a 34 year old, oft-injured third baseman in the hopes that he will stay healthy. I've said multiple times this isn't an ideal scenario and my first option this offseason is to pay very large amounts of money to one of Prince/Pujols. But if that doesn't work out, bringing in two stud pitchers is better than one stud pitcher and overpaying for an old, oft-injured Aramis.

I'm not following you. How does Jeromy Burnitz compare to Headley or Sizemore and how does Soriano compare to Matt Kemp?

Right. It's clearly not ideal, but having a fantastic pitching staff and a really good defense can work if you get some breaks.

It kinda does. From my perspective it's worst case scenario, though. With the money we have freed up, we have a very high likelihood of landing one of Pujols/Prince. There's the real chance we miss, though, and rather than make a rash, short term only move (Aramis), I think we should pursue guys who can perform at a high level for multiple seasons going forward. Then in the 2012 offseason we make a hard push for Matt Kemp or someone similar with the money freed up from Z and Dempster.

Which is why I've been one of the most vocal supporters on this board of bringing in one of Pujols/Prince for months now. However, if worse comes to worse and we somehow miss out on both Pujols/Prince, then bringing in two stud pitchers is better than overpaying for an oft-injured 34 year old third baseman who's likely to decline soon.