Transmogrified Tiger

With rare exception, yes. Also Doherty would be called for a foul on another field player plenty of times, he’s so late he doesn’t even bother facing the ball! If this is at midfield and the field player equivalent tried to control the ball, Doherty bowls them over and it’s a foul all day. Not possible to do one without the other. The only way to avoid open season is zero tolerance, because the incentives are too great that people will try to legally take out the keeper at every opportunity and create many other illegal instances. It’s the same reason people dive when there’s a 5% chance they get a PK, only this would be throwing themselves at a person who is way more vulnerable than the average position player.

Don’t really understand how there can be any controversy here. Doherty is not looking at the ball and therefore is challenging for it only in the most generous sense. His trajectory carries him into the keeper, checking him at a point after he had gotten to the ball(the last part being irrelevant in this case because it’s a foul before he touches it too). A foul 1000% of the time. If Doherty had been making an honest attempt at the ball then it gets a little more gray, but the rules are the way they are for keeper safety. You already see too many instances of players undercutting opponents on aerial balls at midfield, with the incentives in front of goal and a keeper’s center of gravity on those plays it’d be begging for a slew of injuries.

The Pepi destination appears to be Wolfsburg. Opportunity there, especially if Weghorst gets sold before August, but their track record with Americans isn’t glowing and they’re currently managed by Sargent’s former Bremen manager who doesn’t inspire a ton of long term confidence.

Bring the guy

It really comes down to how averse they are to the years. On the negative side of the coin, you have the beat writers saying that going to 5 years is a huge bridge to cross for this FO, never mind potentially 7-10 like Correa may command. You have new blood in the FO that mostly cut their teeth in restrained if not outright stingy organizations. It's always easier to talk yourself out of a signing from a numerical perspective, and Correa only needs one other suitor to decide they must have him and make it happen. If payroll isn't bouncing back to near pre-covid norms quickly there may also be some AAV restraints in the short term, especially given there's a few other role players this team should add. The draft pick/pool price is non-trivial on top. On the other hand, going to 5 years for 30 year old pitchers is very different than a 27 year old shortstop, especially when that SS fits a huge need and has a skillset that should allow for impact performance even after a position change(to a position where there's no current long term solution). For as inefficient as that spending can be, the remaining FA targets and likely future FA classes(especially next year's) aren't exactly winning you $/WAR titles, and the org has no long term money committed. The pessimist's take here is they're being opportunistic that the CBA somehow kills his market and there's a creative deal left for a big market team with lots to spend still, and we're basically hoping for about 5 consecutive unlikely things to happen in order to land Correa. The optimist's take is Stroman clearly indicates willingness to use financial muscle, and Correa is uniquely suited to be a good option for this team at this point in time, so they'll make sure the CBA doesn't dramatically change the calculus and if not go after him as target #1 and head into next season a fringe playoff contender.

JSU was on ESPN for their first 2 games against UAB and FSU(which they won). The rest of the games were on ESPN+ so you could've noticed their name regularly if you tended to watch through the app.

Yeah I'd say on net that it's slightly light, I'd take the over on Hendricks, one of Mills/Steele/Thompson, and Happ, while the 3B and SS projections are more aggressive(and probably Stroman too), but nothing outrageous and as fans we'll always lean optimistic. I think what this does is lay out that if they do go the route that's expected and add some type of SS and someone like Seager, that they're really embracing variance with the OF. That's a decent place to do it since there's lots of playing time to cycle and new options are easier to come by(especially in the high minors relative to other positions), but it does underscore that you need an unexpected outcome and maybe two of them.

I'm not sure of the exact mechanisms of how these interact, but the 3 problems I saw identified were 1) Man U was drawn w/ Villareal, which was not allowed 2) Man U was not in the pot to be drawn with Atletico Madrid, which should have been allowed 3) Liverpool were in the pot to be drawn with Atletico Madrid, which should not have been allowed

I understand the sentiment here, but at the same time those 3 were 16th, 25th, and 37th in IP last year, and 26th, 35th, and 52nd in 2019. Yes there is no prime Lester/Arrieta workhorse you can count on for 32 starts of 6 innings, but that's partially because that pitcher is going extinct, 6 pitchers had 400 IP from 2018-19, and 4 hit 450 IP from 2019-2021. I'm not sure if there's a current rotation better equipped from an innings perspective to handle back end uncertainty right now. I'd feel better if they added someone else of significance, but on the list of the team's problems it's no longer near the top.

I'm more interested in who the Cubs picked. Any details from people who know about these things? They took Conor Menez from SF, a 26 year old LHRP who has pitched in the majors each of the last 3 seasons(a rarity in the minor league phase of Rule 5, I imagine). As is you can squint and see some appeal, he has an ERA around 3 in 25 MLB innings the last 2 years, but he doesn't throw hard and RH hitters crushed him last year. There's been some chatter that a tweak to his fastball(maybe moving to a 2 seam) or arm angle(which has drifted over the last few years) might help unlock something and he'd be a useful short reliever candidate. He's out of options, so if and when he does get moved to the 40 man he'll have to stick or risk the waiver/outright carousel.

maybe he thinks it stands for normal face transplant

Mooney with some good stuff behind the scenes of Stroman's signing: https://theathletic.com/3005814/2021/12/09/how-the-cubs-closed-a-buzzer-beater-deal-with-marcus-stroman-before-mlbs-lockout/ I don't want to read between the lines too much, but making the distinction that they were unwilling to go 5 years for any *pitcher* is interesting in light of the potential interest in Correa(who admittedly will probably get far more than 5 years). That also could explain how some of the other pitchers came off the market without much Cubs noise even if interested, since the Cubs were not at all interested in a 5 year deal and may have been assuming any deal for guys like Gausman or Gray that came pre-lockout would probably be going that extra year to get them to sign early.

I'm fine with gambling on Bryant's production/injury risk, that's the type of risk you need to take on. I'd also challenge the idea that star upside isn't there, he played at a 5 win level in 2019 and was doing so again in 2021 until he went to SF, any contract he's likely to sign isn't going to require him to be an MVP candidate to be worthwhile. I also think his risks will keep his market from being too much of a runaway. That said, he strikes me as the type of player where someone eventually gets desperate enough and gives that extra year or little bit of AAV to make it happen, and I don't think the Cubs are at all likely to be that team. I also agree that he isn't an ideal fit for the roster(LH hitting has to come from somewhere) so even though his versatility makes it easy to avoid being boxed in by his contract, it's not the cleanest fit.

Rosenthal has a piece on what he thinks the new CBA *should* look like, not necessarily what will happen or what is being discussed: https://theathletic.com/3003758/2021/12/08/rosenthal-what-a-new-collective-bargaining-agreement-should-look-like/ Here's the tl;dr for non-subscribers

My overall advice is if you're the one doing the legwork for building up a podcast, make it one that you would want to listen to even if that feels more niche/less popular. Trying to drive forward other people's ideas in the name of popularity won't get the best outcome. For more specific ideas, if the goal is to improve traffic to the site, then using the podcast as a vehicle for the site's content makes sense to me. Have people on to flesh out their particularly unique posts/opinions, that format could be as serious("Frank Schwindel is the 1B of the next 5 years") or not("Shut up about the Beatles already") as you like. Maybe some oral history stuff about events in Cubs history(Bartman, Nomar trade, Theo's hire, WS Game 7, etc) as experienced at NSBB would be neat.

Weirdly enough, 3 of the 4 playoff teams this year and 9 of the top 13(Kelly, Aranda, Tucker, Whittingham, Narduzzi, Sitake) have head coaches from the defensive side of the ball. Only Ohio St, Michigan, OK State, and Ole Miss have offensive head coaches in that group. There's guys like Bielema and Orgeron who have had significant if not sustained success. Pete Carroll is a defensive coach.

I was disappointed in the lack of substance. It spent most of the article talking about how the Stroman deal fit their needs and bookended it with essentially "maybe they'll go after Correa too, who's to say"

Here's a hypothetical I've been ignoring for what I thought were good reasons, but now feel is worth revisiting. What if the FO is comfortable with the current SS options and is treating a Correa/Story addition as a luxury? In order for that to be true in a world where they added Miley and Stroman, they probably need to be comfortable with their defense, is there an argument for that? To test that out, here's a quick look at the options with their defensive metrics, Fangraphs scouting grades, and recent comments from Fangraphs prospect list. In both of these cases, there is a limited MLB sample(those numbers above are career numbers), so we don't want to draw too many sweeping conclusions. For Hoerner, the scouting was more lukewarm on his potential defense at middle infield, though his speed is noteworthy as it could help him exceed expectations. By all accounts he's been excellent at 2B defensively, and at SS in a more limited sample he's been a shade above average. While I don't want to assume that Hoerner will exceed his scouting grades, there's no numerical proof he won't and past precedent exists with players like DeJong who don't have loud defensive tools but still put up strong numbers. Alcantara is a bit more straight forward, as the scouting consensus is his glove and especially arm at SS would carry his MLB future. His metrics at SS are consistent with that evaluation as well, and the sample at 2B is small enough that it seems more likely to be noise than a sign that his scouting report and SS performance are wrong. The other thing that sticks in my head is how these two could help get the best out of each other and the current roster. Alcantara's big concern is if he can hit enough to be a big leaguer, and being a switch hitter who is much better from the left side complements Hoerner nicely. To that end, Alcantara had a near league average bat against RHP last year, and while Hoerner has had reverse splits so far, I wouldn't bank on that going forward. Hoerner sliding to 2B in late innings for Madrigal also would help maximize the value from those three. I want to be clear that this isn't my preferred outcome, given the lack of high minors alternatives and the options available it makes sense to me to go big on Correa/Story. There may be roster crunch issues in carrying Alcantara too, so even if they miss on the big fish I'd be aggressive in exploring the trade market. But if that doesn't happen, I think running it back might be more palatable than some of the bottom of the barrel FA options that remain.

Some interesting details from Sharma, and everyone's favorite word of the day "nimble" gets a heavy workout: https://theathletic.com/2994323/2021/12/02/why-marcus-stroman-made-sense-for-the-cubs-who-arent-shifting-their-plans-for-the-offseason/?source=emp_shared_article

Now that a few holes have been filled, let's do another round of the tradeoff game. In terms of spending, I think last year's opening day payroll of 150 million is a decent soft target for the offseason spending capacity. It could be more(and *should* without question), but I think that strikes a reasonable balance of giving the team midseason flexibility, money to pay Willson more than his arb salary if extended, and otherwise insurance since right now the only payroll leaving for next year is Miley (and potentially Contreras). I'm also gonna hold back 5 million for a pair of relievers, again it might be conservative with as free flowing as 95 mph fastball/slider types are these days, but that means the team would have just more than 30 million to spend. As a reminder, take these options seriously more than literally, since we're estimating potential costs. Option A: Superstars and Superscrubs SS: Correa SP: none IF: Shaw/Moustakas OF: none Option B: Stars and Scrubs SS: Story SP: Urena/Richards IF: Shaw/Moustakas OF: none Option C: Spread the wealth SS: Ahmed SP: Kikuchi IF: Seager OF: none Option C could be several variants too(e.g. Urena/Seager/Gardner, Urena/Shaw/Schwarber), though the SS probably is gonna have to have a decent $ obligation compared to the scrubs level options at other positions. If those are the choices, do you have a strong preference now that Stroman/Gomes/Frazier have been added?

I’d be shocked if this thing lasts in to the season and they start losing games. I’d bet they have something done in February at the latest. This is so optimistic but how can you feel this way? They've had months to negotiate and walked away after 7 minutes yesterday. What will create the incentive between now and February that wasn't already there? I can only speak for myself, but what we've seen from the MLBPA so far is not a big enough overhaul to the current system for me to think they're going to start costing themselves money just to get a win on the last dollar of where specific lines are drawn. If the players were like "2 million minimum salary and restricted free agency after 2 years service" then I might feel differently, but what we've seen thus far is the same broad mechanisms and just trying to shift the lines, which makes for easier points of compromise than blowing things up. Also a lockout has been coming for a very long time regardless of the progress in negotiations, and given the lack of actual consequences for waiting to this point I don't think much of that part. Nothing helps progress like a deadline.

This topic might be worth its own thread, but I was also thinking about what we are able to infer about Jed's pitching preferences last night. I was looking at durability and command. If you look at Miley, Stroman and Kilian, all three have plus command. Maybe they feel that velocity / stuff is overpriced? I admit I didn't pay nearly as much attention to the draft as normal this year. Is Wicks also a plus command guy? Or maybe it's too few data points to be a trend. After all, Arrieta isn't a command guy and neither was Williams. Yes, Wicks and Killian are not quite the same, but I would group them together in that they have better command than stuff, but the stuff isn't a big limitation. I think the 2021 acquisitions were at least partially about the unknown of how pitching staffs would hold up after 2020's weirdness(and Williams and Arrieta did take the mound consistently I guess), but Miley and Stroman(and Wicks/Killian to a lesser degree) seem to paint a picture that durability and command are something Jed cares about.

I was out during some of Stromania last night and lockout depression hasn't hit quite yet, so I'm wondering what we can read into Stroman's signing about the rest of the offseason. - It gives lots of flexibility to future moves on a lot of different axes. Stroman didn't require a long term deal, so if they're worried about stacking too many long term commitments at once they still have that club in their bag. He didn't require a QO so if they want to pay a player cost they have less concerns about losing the gains they've made on the farm. He makes for a third durable starter(Stroman, Miley, and Hendricks are all in the Top 30 of IP since 2019 and Stroman opted out of 2020) which means they can take some bigger risks with subsequent pitching additions if they want. - It also didn't answer a few questions that will inform those moves. The flexibility afforded by a 3 year deal and no QO is great, but it also means it's unproven that they'll be willing to hand out a longer term deal to a Correa/Story, or sign a QO'd player like those two, Castellanos or Conforto. It bumps the payroll up to a less pathetic 114 million, but if last year is a reasonable target of where they'll land it remains to be seen if upcoming spending will be deep or wide since either are reasonable options but both might be pushing it. Based on the rumors that the Cubs were still in conversation with FA pitchers, and what we know about Jed's treatment of the rotation in his tenure(namely: he seems to value innings/durability more than the average GM), it seems likely they'll be spending at least a little more capital in the rotation. Whether that looks like an aggressive pursuit of Rodon or picking off a velocity flyer like Urena or Richards would depend on their view of the position players on the roster, which is a pile of hopes and dreams more than a robust offense right now.

Got to playing around with baseballtradevalues.com last night, here's a couple trades that almost certainly won't happen, but add up on that site and have at least some mutual logic so they could be starting points for more realistic deals. Keegan Thompson for Chris Paddack and Ha-Seong Kim Brailyn Marquez and Kevin Alcantara for Ketel Marte and Nick Ahmed

I’m curious what they have planned for the position player group, because it seems clear that even aside from the talent/expectations that there’s more work and re-work coming. Both catchers are right handed, every infielder is right handed(unless you count Rivas and I do not), and they just intentionally gave 3 different RH OF major league contracts in the last week(and Frazier is technically the only one with options). If they add a SS the odds are very high that it’ll be right handed too(Gregorius is basically the only reasonable option unless there’s an unexpected trade). The most immediate impact prospect is a RH OF. That makes the only LH hitters Happ, Ortega(not guaranteed production or playing time), and Heyward(offensive dead weight). The obvious way to help with that is a LH corner IF, but even that feels light unless you’re really high on Ortega(or I guess Deichmann). Even with some of those RH hitters not having dramatic splits it feels like an imbalance you need to address before opening day, but the haziness of how much they value Wisdom, Ortega, and Schwindel makes it tough to say what direction they’d go to do so.