Transmogrified Tiger

Also the Cubs have their share of relievers with below average velocity already, if they're making guaranteed deals to one I don't have the guy with uncertain MLB production who tops out at 94 particularly high on my list.

I think that one has a more compelling reason for it(Mormons) than Hawaiians choosing Nebraskan colleges.

Yeah, players who do the slow approach/hop to try to get the keeper to commit typically have a longer run up. But I've seen a variant of that PK a bunch of times. If you don't get the keeper to guess wrong or keep the slotted shot too close to the center it looks very bad. And frankly, they deserve it because those types of PKs make a mockery of the spirit behind them, especially since keepers are on a super strict VAR leash to not leave their line.

Prospects of PCA and Horton's caliber(going off their consensus rankings in Top 100s) just don't really get traded anymore. They have too much value in terms of potential upside and cheaper team control, and teams are less and less willing to trade pre-arb or even early arb talents in return. When they do happen, it's for players who also have lots of years of team control along with good performance(e.g. the Varsho/Moreno trade last year), not very good players with only 1-2 years to FA that are closer to market prices and post-prime performance. Valdez is an excellent pitcher and a good trade target, I would give up prospects that I probably wouldn't in other rumored deals to get him(Shaw and Alcantara come to mind). But he is not a 'trade half your top 5 including a Top ~25 prospect' player, partially due to his qualities but mostly because those trades just don't really exist in the 2020s.

I doubt it's the most *likely* option, but I half wonder if there's a 3 team deal to be had there, where Bieber and a bat from a 3rd team comes to the Cubs, a 'bigger than Bieber's value' prospect goes from the Cubs to the Guardians, and the Guardians make up the difference across to the third team. If they don't agree on Naylor's value but are pretty interested in getting Bieber over the line that would match up on motivations, though I'm not certain who a great partner is since some potential 3rd teams are divisional rivals of either team that don't trade often(Twins, Reds).

This is just divorced from reality, there's no coherent argument to be made that they've been 'shopping for scraps no one else wanted'. It's taking your frustration about the team and retrofitting a narrative for why that is, even if it doesn't fit(and it does not).

On one hand, you have today alone people suggesting the Cubs will add no one better than Brandon Belt and a "MORP/BORP" starter, and people calling ownership cowards for not letting 15 Al Yellons ask their weird personal pet peeve questions of them at the convention. On the other hand, you have people saying that is silly and to let the offseason play out since they've clearly spent significantly in FA before and there's numerous options available. Sure seems like two sides of the same coin to me?

Looks like they got rid of the Farm system panel too? Definitely seems lighter on sessions in total than when I last checked(which admittedly was over 5 years ago) compared to the 'expo' type stuff.

I don't disagree that these are probably the three 40 man spots I'd swap out first, though I am curious how many of them are going to be needed. I've been under the assumption that 4, probably 5 MLB additions were coming, and depending on the route and the trade pieces given up to get there, it's very plausible with the roster currently at 37 that none of those folks need to lose their spot before ST. By *Opening Day* on the other hand, very different conversation.

But they didn't sign Lee, and we don't know if they were deep in negotiations to give him near 100 million like the Giants, or if they scouted and him and liked him as a depth option and bowed out when someone was ready to pay him 8 figure AAVs. Searching for this type of meaning out of brief mentions of FA interest(especially from national/agent-side sources) is an exercise in futility.

I appreciate the sentiment, since the vitriol towards Chapman is a bit over the top. But Hoskins is unlikely to get 24M(Bellinger's 17M is probably a decent benchmark), and he's quite likely to take a 1 year deal a la Bellinger. At a minimum it's fair to expect Hoskins will sign for at least 2 years fewer than Chapman.

Yes, I have been saying as much all offseason.

I'm not sure I'd put much more stock in that than the times they've been connected to Yamamoto, but when you've got 1B and DH unspoken for, there's always plenty of at bats to go around. As long as you don't have someone besides PCA who you expect to get the bulk of their value from CF defense, then between rest, injuries, and performance variance you'll easily find room for everyone. Especially since PCA should not be in Chicago opening day.

I'll caveat this that despite the date it's still earlier in the offseason than it feels. While lots of teams have made moves or definitely done more than the Cubs, very few teams are *done*, and with the delayed start plus Boras clients remaining headlining the market, I think there's still opportunity to have a good offseason. That said, the thing that frustrates me the most about the current trajectory(which is not assuming zero moves, but some of what's been rumored), is that it double dips the same risk tolerance. I'm more willing than maybe anyone here to be on board with Jed's reluctance to give out long term deals, and I understand the hesitancy to avoid plundering the farm since it has to be the lifeblood of a consistently excellent modern MLB winner. But the thing about valuing financial flexibility is if you don't come close to using it when you have it, then you're ultimately tying a hand behind your back when financial might is one of your biggest advantages. Similarly, if you're wanting to have the team rise and fall by the farm system, then the way to make that easier is to fill fewer gaps at the MLB level but fill them with higher quality players that lower the pressure for prospects to contribute immediately. This is why the seeming preference to pursue Bieber more than Glasnow doesn't make sense to me. The things that Bieber has in his favor(AAV, slightly more durability), are the exact things you expect the prospect depth to smooth out so you can get the things Glasnow has in his favor(premium velo/TOR performance).

Welcome!

Economically you receive more value with a straight 10/500 than the deferred 700 million that Ohtani chose, because a dollar today is more valuable than a dollar 10 and 20 years from now.

Morel's per/150 game error pace at 3B by year: 2017: 50 (12 games) 2018: 41 (36 games) 2019: 31 (72 games) 2021: 52 (23 games) 2022: 34 (22 games) 2023: 28 (36 games) Total: 35 (203 games) Total as a SS: 47 (105 games) Total as a 2B: 8 (78 games) No qualified 3B in MLB committed errors at a rate greater than 20 per 150 games last year. The only person to do it since the start of the pandemic is Devers, with 22 in 151 games in 2021. Morel's problem isn't that he's committed a couple errors in a handful of winter ball games, it's that he's never demonstrated the ability to field and throw consistently enough to be on the left side of an MLB infield.

we've been reduced to offseason hug watch, DO YOU SEE WHAT YOU'RE DOING TO US JED

The Dodgers have a 100 million dollar head start every year on every other team in MLB thanks to their TV contract, and they still tried(and failed thanks to Bauer shenanigans) to get under the luxury tax this past year.

I keep going back and forth on Counsell being misaligned on Morel(both in terms of 3B willingness and emphasizing versatility after Hawkins/Hoyer both mentioned getting him a single position) means that it's more likely they trade him, more likely he's exclusively a 3B, or more likely that he gets used in a utility role. My answer changes a couple times a day.

There's a wide enough range of outcomes even in that list that I'd have to see how it played out specifically. Bieber/Wacha/Chapman/Belt fits the above and would be a large disappointment. Bieber/Imanaga/Bellinger/Hoskins also does and while not what I would've drawn up certainly makes them materially better and likely NLC favorites.

If I had to guess, I think the plan is roughly along these lines: Trade for Bieber and maybe like Karinchak. That gives you your rotation stability, gives you RP upside, doesn't commit large dollars, years, or even likely trade assets. Something like Canario and Arias is probably not so far away? Also get a FA SP, but more on your terms. Imanaga is the deluxe version of this but we've seen names like Wacha and Martin Perez connected at least once, and in that permutation I think they're as much to give you permission to trade from the Wesneski/Assad/Brown group as anything Sign a FA RP to a 1 year deal. If you've gambled on upside with Karinchak then maybe someone like Suter is the pairing? He might be as "successful" an RP you can get to sign a 1 year deal Wait out Bellinger and Chapman's markets, with the intent of making sure you get one. Get a secondary bat. This is where it depends on how far the Bellinger/Chapman markets come down and who your second SP is, because there's the range from signing Hoskins to trading for Polanco to playing in the JDM/Belt FA waters, to some type of off the radar trade(Alonso? Moncada?) The order may change, and Imanaga and Bieber might end up being mutually exclusive for various reasons(they want to invest more in the offense, the market for SP heats up more once you get one, etc). But that feels like the rough contour of what they're aiming for.

Anyone who is obsessive enough to be hyped about the Counsell hire is also gonna be all the more disappointed or upset if no substantial moves came to fruition. It's a move that raises expectations instead of lowering them and shines a brighter light on the team's roster, not some machiavellian scheme to avoid spending more on payroll.

The Bieber/Imanaga/Hoskins/Bellinger offseason would definitely make them a better team than last year, and fit within what we expect them to be able to spend if our understanding of the likely FA costs are close. The issue I would have is that right now they have done 0 of the 4 and this is a plan without many contingencies before you start losing a fair amount of the certainty/benefit from those 4 names. In other words, it's a narrow path considering you are 0% of the way there. There's so few leaks that come from Jed's FO that it's hard to get a handle on what else there is. I have to think that there's something more substantial on the trade market that they're pursuing, whether that's an expanded Bieber deal, or a SP from Seattle or Cease, or even Alonso since his name has come up again in indirect ways. Having this much financial wiggle room and betting it on being able to do something like the above is fine when you can pivot away from it when you don't go 4 for 4, but at least in FA there's not a ton else they can do that helps and would make good use of that money.