Transmogrified Tiger

Thanks for joining us!

Manny Rodriguez's last 20 appearances for Iowa: 22 IP, 25 H, 9 ER, 34/5 K/BB, 1 HR The one HR came in the 2nd inning of a multi-inning appearance too. Might not be the easiest path to time in 2023 since he got outrighted, but it sure looks like he's figured things out in AAA.

The top 4 pitchers in the pen have all gone each of the last 2 days, and I'm not sure the exact degree that Assad is available with his weird long man usage. Gotta use the bottom of the pen with a 6 run lead even if it makes you white knuckle for a moment.

Nimmo is where my mind went too. Bellinger has had higher highs and lower lows and is 2 years younger at FA so maybe he goes for a little lighter years and higher AAV, or is more aggressive with opt outs?

I could be wrong about this and over-reacting to how Contreras played out, but I suspect it will need to be something a fair amount better than what we think of when we say 'Top 100' prospect. Like decent cost controlled major leaguer or locked on Top 50 prospect. It's a nuanced thing especially since prospect evals can vary, but like if the Guardians want Bellinger to make a run and to keep him from the Twins, something like Daniel Espino(a very quality prospect by all accounts, especially since his blemishes are injuries) is probably not going to cut it. Having said that, I've basically ensured a Bellinger/Espino deal coming to fruition if for no other reason to spite me for spending so many posts on the idea.

This is what I was referencing above, looking at the pick in isolation is underrating the value it has to front offices, at least those that are consistently successful. It's not simply that they can get a player of Wiggins' caliber or even the nominal bonus pool, it's about how aggressive they can be in free agency without significantly hurting the player development pipeline. In the scenario where you don't really care about the pick and trade Bellinger for whatever, then in the offseason if you sign a QO Free Agent your next chance to infuse talent into the farm system comes without the 2nd best pick/bonus pool and 500k less in IFA. Especially if you're picking in the mid-teens or later like the Cubs seem likely to land, that's a significant drop in the total amount of resources you have to keep that talent pipeline(the most important element for consistent MLB success) going. Plus the current state of the Cubs farm has plenty of depth so they would value a similar player in the 2024 class more than one in AA now that's imminently needing added to the 40 man. But don't just take my word for it, you can see this in how teams actually behave. Look at who has signed QO Free Agents over the years and if they also gained a pick that same offseason. The names on the 'also gained a pick that offseason' side of the ledger are generally the organizations that set the standard(and not just in spending), the names that did so without getting a pick in return are...a lot less admirable in their approach and results, broadly speaking.

Montgomery is the other one that you could say is in that conversation, their results have been strikingly similar this year. He doesn't quite have Stroman's reputation but also Stroman's reputation at times exceeds his raw stuff so that might net out in how some competing teams view him as a target. The Cubs should do themselves the double favor of battering him around today to return the favor from Stroman's start. But yeah, increasingly I'm of the view that some team is gonna make it worth the Cubs while to let go of the possibility of a Stroman extension, and given how Jed has increasingly approached these deadline deals I strongly suspect it's someone who plays a meaningful 2024 role. So the overall short term impact of the sell is that instead of a not-opted out or extended Stroman, you have an additional 20ish million and some other contributor heading into 2024.

His stock dropped a little bit because he was less dominant as a junior than he was as a sophomore, especially at missing bats. Feels like there's a takeaway there for some of this year's draftees in particular.

I'm with you about the team's approach to the rest of 2023, the time for them to add 2023-only contributors has been gone for a while, and I expect them to find a new home for Fulmer as soon as they can. The point I keep coming back to in the 'sell' conversation is the odds that Bellinger 'gets a return more valuable than the comp pick' are actually quite low, because the value of having a QO'd FA is a lot higher than the pick valuation chart that floats around as the justification in these cases. So really the only real difference in the state of the team pre/post deadline even in a broadly 'selling' situation comes down to Stroman. If you made me guess I would say he will be traded, but given how open he has been about an extension and the likelihood a semi-reasonable extension is possible(plus the questionable benefit of negotiating in the offseason having kept him), I would say those odds are a fair amount less than 100% too even if it's still ~70-80%.

Welcome! That username looks familiar, if by some chance you've been a poster here before and want to find a way to get into an account you can't access since we changed platforms, @Brock Beauchamp can potentially help. If I'm mistaken, 1) sorry about that 2) welcome again!

It does, because the comp pick and associated flexibility is worth more to Jed(and frankly, most front offices) than what rentals have gone for in the 2020s. He took what he could in 2021 because the system lacked depth and the team without those rentals was less in a place to immediately compete(and therefore aggressively pursue QO'd FA), but the team isn't in that place any more. You see that in how he didn't trade either of Happ or Contreras and then extended the former, and in how since the Baez/Rizzo/Bryant exodus they've only traded away relievers.

I think the cost for Singer would be a fair amount higher than indicated. Even with his struggles he's been the Royals best SP by FIP/xFIP and therefore is trending towards a third straight 2+ fWAR season, plus as another data point BBTV has him roughly on par with Morel in value. From a quick glance I don't exactly see much in the way of rumors of him being shopped or the team ready to move on from him either.

I was 7/7 with a 35 rarity score and then biffed the last two, got dang Orioles

I don't want to harp on this point but I think that's always been the plan regardless of their play in July. They have been too far back for a while to make any 2023-only moves, but 2024 contributors should absolutely going to be the priority. So much so I have a lot of conviction that Bellinger in particular won't be traded because they want the flexibility to sign a QO FA without crippling their 2024 draft(or extend Bellinger). That means that Stroman is the only really consequential wild card, which I don't have a great feel on. He's consequential enough that I don't think they should base the trade/hold/extend decision on whether their playoff odds are 8% or 14% or 21% though.

Wesneski in his brief July stint at Iowa: 3 appearances, 11 IP, 10 H, 2 ER, 19/2 K/BB, 1 HR

Here's a fun chart, teenagers in High-A with at least 80 PA

The 9th is set to be Gorman-Arenado-Herrera (or PH) so that's still on the table.

Welcome!

I should try to distill the broader point that's driving the back and forth from my end a bit(which is more macro than about JD's words specifically), because I don't have particularly strong feelings about Perlaza. If they bring him up I hope he hits and sticks, and I doubt they'll jeopardize the development of anyone I think deserves it more to do so in that case. I also don't think much of his future impact, without more cartoonish AAA performance or other pedigree there's not much reason he clears the high bar to be a significant contributor with where he lives on the defensive spectrum. As such I don't think there's much urgency to make irreversible decisions(cutting Mancini, adding Perlaza to the 40 man) to facilitate his 2023 debut. That said, I think a lot of fans(some who I respect their analytical thinking, like Brett/Bleacher Nation) have fallen into a trap in how they think about the deadline and remainder of the season. It starts with the buy/sell binary, which in this situation has never made sense to me. Jed has set the roster to continue to try to be competitive in 2024-2026, and he almost certainly doesn't have the job security to blow it up and start over. You see this in last year's deadline where despite heavy rumors he didn't do anything but trade a few relievers, and one of those was for an immediate contributor. Add in that there's about 3 teams that are looking to trade away any quality outside of rentals and the likely outcome is a minimal trade market or one that the Cubs participate in at both ends in searching for 2024 contributors. The related issue to this is fans have not only been conditioned into that buy/sell binary, but that August/September is an open tryout for new contributors once you've stripped the roster in your Sell-off. There's nothing wrong with the idea that post-deadline you prioritize some things differently, but this gets warped into the idea that anyone currently on the fringes of the roster has no use if they weren't able to fetch a prospect at the deadline. There's plenty of marginal roster players who could have a 2024 role even if they had struggles in 2023, and it's far from certain that casting them aside just to make way for a player with limited ceiling is the right way to maximize your talent to be the best you can be in the short and long term. This is magnified in Perlaza's case by him being a defensive zero, because he has a higher bar to clear to be useful and more competition for the spots where he could fit in. Mastrobuoni, Wisdom and Madrigal(all of who are hitting well at the MLB level most recently and exceeded Perlaza's AAA line in limited time there) can be similarly useful as a good Perlaza outcome without unexpected leaps at the plate thanks to their defensive value, and players with greater pedigree and ceiling(Amaya, Morel, Mervis, a potential deadline acquisition) sap potential opportunity along with starter incumbents(Happ/Suzuki).

If you like Perlaza you can add him in the winter when more dust has settled, but you also don’t have to. I’m all for trying to find internal solutions but this line of thinking (specifically throwing away Wisdom) is oversimplifying the roster nuances involved and is generally more hopeful thinking than anything. There are 8 different players with at least 50 PA at Iowa who have outhit Perlaza this year(including some MLB names you might be ready to move on from). He has very little defensive value or prospect pedigree. If they bring him up because of necessity or they see something in his performance, great. I hope he carves out a role and hits well. But he is not banging down the door and forcing the issue, and there are many options of a similar caliber who arguably can and should get that opportunity instead.

Again, if you like Perlaza you don’t have to promote him to avoid Rule 5 consequences, players get added to the 40 man without MLB experience all the time. He is a bench bat without positional value, I won’t get worked up if he’s on the roster over Mancini, but there are players who should get regular time instead(plus potential deadline acquisitions). Adding him to the 40 man just so he can play once or twice a week isn’t some big mistake but it’s not urgent or consequential.

I’m not going to be upset if they give Perlaza a roster spot, I just don’t think it’s necessary or likely. He’s a guy whose likely outcome is a yo-yo bench bat, and in the short term there are players with greater present or future upside that works against him getting any significant amount of time.

Welcome!

You can add Perlaza to the 40 man after this year without giving him an MLB audition, that's not a problem. If anything that's preferable because you're not using an option year on the limited PA he can scrounge up between LF/1B/DH on a roster that already has Happ, Morel, Amaya, and likely Mervis. And after the year you may have taken more decisive action on some of the weird situations I mentioned(plus Mancini/Barnhart), so those option years are years of greater opportunity.