Transmogrified Tiger

Counsell has managed multiple elite relievers and done so in ways that don't always adhere to traditional closer roles, but my limited perspective is that it has always been very clear who was at the top of the food chain and in what order, and had several really good relievers to pick from. I expect Alzolay if healthy to be part of that inner circle, but maybe it's a little more likely that there's a no-questions-asked really good RP added instead of someone who maybe has more minor warts. Adding on to the platoons bit, there's a lot of RHH on the fringes of the roster, I wouldn't be surprised if this hastens the exit of one of Wisdom or Madrigal in favor of a LH IF(maybe it just means Mastrobuoni is first choice), and mayyybe it increases the odds of a RHH CF to hedge against Tauchman regression and PCA growing pains? The Brewers stole an above average amount of bases last year, but had fewer steals and attempts than the Cubs and those attempts were slightly more concentrated. Maybe there's a little less interest in a player who only adds marginal SB value if he's gonna attempt 5-10 fewer steals per year.

AFAIK Hoyer has only released the statement that talks about dismissing Ross and briefly mentioning they'll be introducing Counsell next week, so no other real indicators.

This is where I am, even when Renteria got dumped there was some rumblings and fan chatter about the possibility of Maddon coming. Counsell has been on the market for weeks and interviewed multiple places and there was zero indication that this was a possibility. I'll maintain that managers don't make an enormous difference, that Ross was fine and most criticisms of him were silly, and that a large part of the perceived gap in Ross and Counsell comes down to the bullpens they were equipped with. But I am excited at the aggressiveness for the roster that this move would seem to foretell. It probably also speaks to a bigger disconnect in some lineup or utilization decisions, e.g. maybe the front office really does want Morel at 3B but Ross wouldn't put him there when given any alternatives?

Just a matter of where you want to put the resources. There is risk by aiming your sights slightly lower/less certain with a SP acquisition, but the logic is there(pitching is more risky so strength in numbers is better, statement of belief in one or more of Taillon/Horton/Wicks, etc). If you make e.g. a Morel for Woo deal, then it really becomes incumbent that you land multiple very good bats and take fewer risks there. Pressure is on to make sure you get one of Ohtani/Soto, or walk a very thin line without them(Bellinger/Alonso?)

I'm not at a place of high confidence in how hot the FA market will be(I rarely am), but I also wouldn't be surprised to see the range for Hoskins to be about 5 million lower because of his position and the relative lack of ceiling he offers compared to a Bellinger. We should know pretty quickly though, because if he's in line for an 18-22 million dollar deal then the Phillies should probably give him a QO. That QO if given might actually be the thing that drives his market down several million too, but either way we'll know if I'm being overly rosy about his cost.

I would push back on the idea of Hoskins as a 'bounce back' or 'lightning in a bottle' type of acquisition. Yes, he didn't play this year, but it was due to an injury(torn ACL) that was long enough ago(March) and in a location that shouldn't impact him in a material way going forward. Prior to that injury he was just a really good hitter, a career 126 wRC+ that he hasn't had significant ups and downs in reaching. I don't think he should be the primary bat added, but he's also far more of a sure thing than say, Bellinger was last year in a similar 'signing a 1 year deal as a platform to get a big FA deal' contractual situation.

Looks like Keuchel did it in 2015.

seems good

Yes, correct. Hoyer (or any GM) being mindful of long term and/or post-prime commitments because like any front office they have limits to their resources is not the same as the caricature you've created of them being terrified of long term deals and preferring to sign terrible players to 1 year deals to avoid multi-year commitments.

I assume Reinsdorf isn't going to permit a payroll as high as the last couple years for a team with minimal contending hopes, so flushing marginal value guys on higher salaries keeps them from needing to make deeper cuts that hurt more simply for payroll reasons.

no, that remains a thing that is made up in your head

I think they're different pitchers who will get to value in different ways, but I think putting Wicks and Brown in the same tier is fair. BBTV has Brown with significantly more value, which I don't really get. Assad, no, I don't think he's gonna be a lifelong dramatic FIP-beater. I also agree that I don't think Wicks is going for Alonso, though I wouldn't be shocked to see it for Brown.

Some good notes from Mooney/Sharma this morning: https://theathletic.com/5030992/2023/11/05/cubs-offseason-rumors-gm-meetings/ Cliff notes: Bellinger may have a preference for a big market Trading for an established reliever to avoid a bigger/longer guaranteed commitment could happen, possibly a smaller market option in arb Hoyer not likely to shy away from Soto or Alonso just because they have 1 year left, it means their cost is lower and the team's books retain flexibility Teams are doing their homework on Morel

...at the expense of Morel! Look I don't want to deal in absolutes, maybe they'll get an elite player who occupies DH without trading Morel and they'll force him at 3B one way or another. There's a lot more fun paths to the offseason if Morel is occupying 3B and isn't a defensive liability. But I also don't think we need to try to retrofit the org's behavior as if that's what their intent is likely to be. Across 2 seasons, there have been nothing but journeymen and other positional converts at 3B, the door has been wide open for Morel(who has played lots of minor league 3B at a very poor level) to get run there in both low stakes and competitive environments. Instead they had him play actual new positions(CF) and primarily DH. The most likely outcome is that the guy who played a lot of MiLB 3B very poorly and then wasn't given that chance at the MLB level is that the org doesn't think he can do it. There's a distinction between that behavior and trying to give a decent/good defensive 2B that chance in Madrigal(which again, came at Morel's expense).

Writing actual blog posts remains annoyingly difficult compared to rambling message board replies, but here it is:

The 2015 Cubs needed a frontline starter. They had an emergent Jake Arrieta(a former 5th rounder finally come good), some depth via FA in Jason Hammel, and the first full season of Kyle Hendricks(a command over stuff prospect) to look forward to. They needed another rotation anchor, and they got it in Jon Lester, a 31 year old FA known for his durability, playoff pedigree, and high floor with potential ace ceiling. The parallels to the 2024 Cubs can be overfitted but are still interesting. They have an emergent Justin Steele(a former 5th rounder finally come good) headlining the rotation, some depth via FA in Taillon, and the first full season of Jordan Wicks(a command over stuff prospect) to look forward to, to say nothing of the potential return of Hendricks himself. They need another rotation anchor, and I think there’s an under discussed Lester successor in Aaron Nola, a 31 year old FA with durability, playoff pedigree, and high floor with ace ceiling. Nola is a name that doesn’t need introduction, he’s a Top 10 pick who has had significant success with the Phillies, and will receive a qualifying offer and a 9 figure contract. And yet, during this period in the offseason when all options are on the table and fans debate all options both realistic and not, I’ve seen very little enthusiasm for the possibility of adding Nola. I think that’s a potential blind spot given what he offers. The first place to start with Nola is his durability. He’s made all his starts for 6 years running, averaging more than 6 innings per start. We saw first hand this year the negative feedback loop created when starters get hurt or have consistently short outings. Good bullpen arms get strained or used in the rotation, bad bullpen arms get used more, and the whole staff suffers. Nola, more than any arm available in 2024, provides the availability to minimize that loop. However, availability without productivity doesn’t mean very much, and thankfully Nola has a lot to offer in those innings. He’s averaged more than 4 fWAR per season for his career, hasn’t pitched at worse than a 3.4 fWAR pace since the Cubs won it all in 2016, and has multiple 5+ win seasons to his name. Above the top line value added, Nola throws strikes, exceeding 3 BB/9 just once. Moreover, Nola demonstrates plus command by issuing so few free passes despite getting an elite amount of chase. Nola is in the Top 10 qualified SP in CSW% every year. It’s that ability to induce chase(96th percentile in 2023) that I think is at the heart of the disconnect in Nola’s actual value compared to what Cubs fans perceive their team needs. After several seasons near the bottom of the league in SP velocity, there’s a natural desire for a frontline starter with an elite fastball. Nola’s fastball doesn’t light up the gun, running similar average velo to the now-departed Stroman. But velocity or ‘stuff’ more broadly is a proxy for a different quality, the ability to get outs yourself and stand up to the best players and offenses with consistency. When you look at that underlying quality, Nola stands up well. He consistently posts K% appropriate for a frontline starter, especially when considering he takes the ball every 5th day and gets more outs per game than many strikeout specialists. Nola hasn’t finished outside the Top 20 in K% since the Obama administration. Only 5 Cubs SP seasons have exceeded his career mark(27.2%) since the turn of the century and only one(Darvish, 2019) in the last decade. Nola isn’t without his flaws and risks. He’s prone to home runs on occasion, will cost a draft pick in compensation, and will command a salary befitting the winner of a FA bidding war for a player of his quality. Most importantly, he’ll be 31 early in the 2024 season, and while a 6 year deal worked out for Lester it’s a risky proposition to invest big into those ages. But the Cubs are at the point in their competitive cycle where it’s prudent to bank high end production, and the departure of Stroman means that investment would have limited impact on the ability to make other upgrades. Nola isn’t the only SP option worth getting, but he’d make for an excellent addition, representing one stop shopping for high end quality and rotation stability.

Morel has spent most of his professional career playing at 3B and on the left side of the infield, he has played more 3B than any other position. I think it's perfectly reasonable to believe he could be a playable 3B, but I also think we need to use Occam's razor when it comes to *what the Cubs think* of his 3B ability. They had plenty of opportunity to give him chances at 3B(across 2 seasons!) and declined to do so. The idea that all of a sudden out of the offseason he's going to be preferred over the same cast of characters requires a lot of mental gymnastics.

That one was very weird, but the one that really bugged me was earlier in the drive. Ball overthrown by 10 yards, receiver gave up on the route and initiated the limited contact, and called so far after the play the broadcast didn't realize it.

I watch too little football to be this tired of trying to figure out what counts as pass interference

With today's news I'm definitely gonna have to write up the 'Aaron Nola is Jon Lester redux' take I've had kicking around in the back of my mind for a few weeks

Trying to understand the logic Stroman uses for any decisions he makes is a path to madness, but at a minimum he's probably worthy of a similar AAV and he sees a potential opportunity to lock in another year or 2 that may not have happened if he waited until he was nearly 34 to sign.

Bellinger can make plenty of sense even if you ignore 1B. PCA may be the bad version of JBJ instead of the good one and not be worth a starting spot. A corner OF can get a long term injury, have a dip in performance, or become less viable with the glove and be better as a 1B/DH themselves. Bellinger will be signed longer term than the existing corner OF too and could play corner OF as Plan A for part of the contract if desired. Players at any position are unlikely to play 162 games and having that flexibility makes your lineup more consistently good. The fact that there may be a more immediate need at 1B is a bonus and not something to fear. Also, there's been plenty of great teams and offenses with worse hitters than Bellinger at 1B, having that as a potential outcome isn't perfectly efficient, but reality never is. Raising the floor has value too.

With the way it exists right now, the 'Budget' number that best matches the 2024 Luxury Tax threshold(which makes sense to me as a single line since you'll either want to stay under it or be aware of how much over it you are) is around 210m I think?