Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Transmogrified Tiger

Community Moderator
  • Posts

    38,769
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    70

 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 Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by Transmogrified Tiger

  1. I think my answer to that question would probably be 'never'. Maybe if you've got the Cubs current farm system depth and the MLB roster of a Dodgers/Braves and that's the maximum significant upgrade that you can get, but it's nigh impossible for me to think of circumstances where giving up those resources for Clase(or any pure reliever) is a better decision than using the same resources towards a SP(to use one example of opportunity cost).
  2. I will again point out that Bellinger is not locked into 1B if PCA hits, Seiya has been average at best defensively in RF and players need rest/insurance from injury.
  3. LA Times Dodgers beat writer:
  4. Maybe I just lack imagination, but I really struggle to see the slippery slope created here. There's zero question that if Ohtani wanted the money straight that he would've gotten it from someone, including the Dodgers. Any team proposing this in free agency risks alienating the player, and there aren't so few winning teams that a very good team can leverage a player down(if that were true winning teams would just do this with pure AAV now). The only way this persists is if a player is insistent on signing with a specific team and also being able to claim a specific top line contract number. The unsavory side of it is on the player/union end of the deal. I don't disagree that this is against the spirit of the way the CBA is designed, but I think in the same way that Ohtani the player is a unicorn, his contract is probably unlikely to have much imitation either.
  5. The player still has to agree to it though, and they have agents and lawyers and accountants to make the equivalency of value clear. Plus there's reporting that this was Ohtani's idea to begin with. If this deal had been reported as a 10/460 deal originally would we be calling this an abuse of the system? In the way we talk about contracts that's what it is. Let's ask ourselves this, do we think that the Dodgers offering and Ohtani accepting a straight 10/460 was possible/likely? I have no reason to think the answer is no. So in that case the main beneficiary of the deferrals is Ohtani himself(along with his agent and the players union). They get the contract he was destined to sign and they get to hold up a new record number. The Dodgers get the guy who wants to play for them at the CBT number they were always destined to offer.
  6. If Ohtani signed a straight up 10/460 deal when others had offered more, would we want that voided? There's basically zero difference between that hypothetical and the actual deal, to Ohtani or to the CBT.
  7. Yeah, it's not really a loophole, it's no different than a player taking a couple million less to play for a winner, or close to home, etc. The only thing that is 'won' from this is various parties being able to technically claim the 700 number, which doesn't appear to have ever been a possibility from any suitor in PV terms.
  8. We've reached the 'No Trade Clauses are just words and they can be waived' stage of transaction deprivation syndrome. Please get on with the offseason Jed, for our collective sanity.
  9. To go back to Turnbull, I would categorize him as such: You will always need more pitching than you think, so even without a super clear path I don't have a viscerally negative reaction to Turnbull To steal Bertz's framing, I don't think he jumps in ahead of Assad/Wesneski in the pecking order, so he can't be considered one of the primary offseason additions Because of that though, to steal 1908's framing I'm not sure the Cubs can win the race for Turnbull's services without coming in over the top financially And if paying Turnbull real money is a necessity for him being that depth, I don't think he's worth that expense if it jeopardizes more immediate needs. And if I were paying real money to that type of depth option, I think I'd probably go the extra step up and try for a rehabbing SP with more promise(Woodruff, Mahle, etc)
  10. Bellinger played about 30% of the team's innings at 1B, whatever impact he did have was on the margins.
  11. 1:31, 3:40, 6:35, and 10:40 are all defensive plays Also let's not worry ourselves too much that the 2028 or 2030 version of Naylor might not be a viable 1B, he has 2 years to FA and extending 1B(*especially* non-elite bat 1B) is not a good idea as a general rule to begin with.
  12. I noticed that too and wasn't immediately sure. My best guess is they were out of timeouts, so the only way they're getting the ball back again is with an onside recovery. That means that their 2nd drive will have such good field position and enough time remaining that they're likely able to get in position to score a TD or at least have a hail mary that's closer to a 30-40 yard pass. That downside was worth the upside of being able to win with a FG maybe?
  13. Is this the first we've seen connecting to the Mariners that wasn't us fans hoping to poach a pitcher? If you've picked up two external bats via 1B and DH and spent good money on one SP, if they don't want to give Morel serious time at 3B then something like the Morel for Bryan Woo framework becomes pretty viable again.
  14. Slight aside, but am I missing something or do they very much need to hold on to Lux? They’re already stretching Mookie to 2B.
  15. It's basically just like any other free agent, there's no contract limits and he can choose whatever team he wants. I believe the main limitation is he needs to sign within 45 days of being posted, and then a percentage of the contract value gets paid as an additional posting fee to the Japanese team.
  16. I don't think that's a huge concern as long as they aren't very similar profiles(velocity, pitch mix, release point, etc), and I don't think that's the case here. Also I suspect there's a very real chance Wicks is not one of the 5 best starters on the roster by Opening Day and starts the year in Iowa.
  17. I suspect the answer is there's only one team Ohtani was willing to make that sacrifice for. Based on all available information there's no way an NPV AAV in the (low?) 40s was the most lucrative offer he had.
  18. I'm still struggling with Bieber being a particularly good target. He's basically Stroman redux in terms of general profile and productivity expectations, and I'd hope for a SP better than that being acquired. With only 1 year to FA, if you pair him with Glasnow you're creating quite the post-2024 cliff in the rotation(Glasnow, Bieber, Hendricks), and the other better SP options(Yamamoto, Cease, etc) are much harder to pull off. A mega deal for all 3 Guardians + Yamamoto & Hoskins is probably the best case scenario in that permutation? You'd take a chunk out of the farm and probably Morel, but you've added Bellinger's QO pick(and not signed any QO FA) to reinforce, and have another potential QO guy in Bieber next year if he pitches well. You probably have to punt 3B with incumbents or Rios-level pickups, but Naylor + Hoskins is a good bit of offensive depth and Yamamoto + Bieber + Clase is a huge shot in the arm of the pitching staff.
  19. Cubs get connected to Josh Naylor on the Cleveland side: It goes on to say imply that there isn't a ton of urgency to trade Naylor(especially since the Guardians struggled offensively more than on the mound), but they have so much payroll uncertainty being part of the Bally deal that they basically have to sit out Free Agency for now. That combined with Naylor being Arb 2 and his heir apparent(Manzardo) recently being acquired means it could be a possibility.
  20. 1) I don't for one second believe the folks at "Third Down Thursdays" have the inside scoop any more than Charles the Cat or any other pop-up Twitter personality 2) However, that conclusion(the money is there if the front office thinks it's a good idea) has always been the case, and takes a willful ignorance of the facts(top of market deals for Heyward and Lester during a competitive cycle, paying a posting fee for Seiya, etc) as well as every statement they've ever made on the topic to reach a different conclusion.
  21. Nothing as substantial as we've seen with the Cubs. There aren't very many teams with real playoff aspirations with the need and desire to hand Hoskins the AAV he wants. Maybe the Mariners? But their ability to spend is in question and they might prefer to bet on France's bounce back and upgrade corner OF instead. The only other connections I have seen are to teams with zero competitive chances(Pittsburgh, Washington).
  22. Over the last 5 years, the Rays, Brewers, Guardians, and Twins are all in the Top 8 for wins. Spending big cuts down on your margin for error, and the motivation for some of the other changes is less than altruistic, but spending is less correlated to winning than it was prior to this CBA and the last one.
  23. Bertz's quoted example illustrates that it has to be well beyond the Bonilla deal to be super impactful. Like 80-90% of the contract deferred for a generation after the 10 year deal ends.
  24. Since Bertz mentioned it I've done a little searching and seen a few mentions of the NPV calculation, so it could be the case. That said, it has to be a ton of money deferred for very, very long time to make a difference greater than, say, 5-8 million.
  25. Yeah I saw that, unless there's some language in the CBA that is unique and been widely misinterpreted, that is not correct(a rarity from Passan). MLB's own glossary is fairly clear on that front: https://www.mlb.com/glossary/transactions/competitive-balance-tax
×
×
  • Create New...