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. Something that *feels* true to me but I don't know for sure that it is: IFA has become less successful in recent years league-wide. For a quick point of comparison, this year there were 38 pitchers age 25 or under that reached at least 1 fWAR(reachable for swingmen and good relievers). By my count 5 of them were IFA(13%). If I turn the dial back 5 years to 2019, there were 33 such pitchers and 9 of them were IFA(27%) by my quick check. That seems to correlate to both the CBA changes and the rise in teams being able to teach 'stuff'(which is the differentiator for a lot of IFA) via pitch dev, so it makes sense to me as an explanation. Not sure if that would hold true for hitting as well(where teaching tools has been less rapid) or if there's other factors, but useful to think about when comparing across those eras just for the Cubs.
  2. Paredes' slump pre-dated the trade though, and he finished the year much stronger. We've talked about Wrigley's heavy pitcher-friendly turn and Paredes was no different. He had a 159 wRC+ on the road *after* the trade, and even at home he was much improved in September(103 wRC+ v. 68 in August). Plus he missed a few games with a nagging injury that may have influenced his performance in the 2nd half. There's nothing beyond general anxiety/skepticism that indicates he'll continue to struggle like he did midseason(for both Rays and Cubs).
  3. Paredes fWAR per 600 PA: 2022: 3.7 2023: 4.5 2024: 3.2
  4. Right now the 10th/11th hitters on the roster are Bellinger and Tauchman, and Bellinger can opt out. So a RHH bopper doesn't necessarily force Busch to a platoon role since they'd be up for plenty of DH at bats. But that acquisition does hedge against him regressing, which I think is a useful secondary goal for the offseason.
  5. Over the past 2 years, Paredes is 3rd in 3B wRC+ and 4th in fWAR, he's also the youngest of the very good 3Bs. Calling him filler is an unserious opinion.
  6. Yep, we're on the same page. The important part of it is that the marginal resources get used elsewhere. So instead of spending X million(or trade equivalent) on all 3 of the non-catcher spots, you do it on 2 and make more meaningful upgrades elsewhere(slightly better SP, your preferred RP target less bound by AAV, etc).
  7. I agree that an explicit goal of the offseason should not be finding room for Shaw or any of the Iowa hitters, there's too much risk regardless of your view of them to be doing things like trading Nico, or leaving DH open for Caissie. However, I think that they could very well have a bench spot that's functionally earmarked for one of multiple AAA prospects(with an NRI placeholder if that isn't possible opening day) if that means that they get to use resources elsewhere. Especially if you're able to build the roster such that it's 'the best/most ready of these 2-4 options' for a single roster spot(when all of those guys are Top 100 prospects), I don't think that's nearly as risky.
  8. Bad aggregators aggregating a bad aggregator's unsourced FA predictions, phenomenal stuff
  9. I’m also not sure what problems the Twins are solving with this deal aside from getting rid of Vaxquez’s dead weight. They have oodles of bats lying around if they want to bet on less certain production. It’s less creative than trading for Jax and starting him (which is truly an interesting idea), but if a 2025 SP is coming from Minnesota, it’s probably Lopez. His money off the books will go further for MIN given their payroll constraints, and also potentially keep the cost to a sub-Alcantara level.
  10. FWIW Fangraphs has the Cubs 29th after 8/1 at 93.3 mph, though i suspect that’s probably a matter of what fastballs are being counted. The biggest thing though is that Hendricks will be gone. Using that FG number if you exclude him they go up to 94.0, tied for 22nd. The three teams just ahead at 94.1(MIL, NYM, KC) feel like a decent proof of concept that you can be quite successful at that level, though more is not a bad thing by any stretch.
  11. It is not a strongly held opinion, but I think my favorite option at this stage(no other holes filled, Bellinger's decision not yet made) is Jansen. He's got a career 100 wRC+ and played at about a 2.5 fWAR/season pace overall, and he is a pretty 'neutral' addition(above average K rate, good BB rate, good HR power, split neutral, doesn't cost player resources or big $$) that keeps other options open. Defensively he's been up and down and he consistently has struggled a bit with pop times, but he's been consistently better than 2024 Amaya in that regard so far from catastrophic.
  12. If so they've put as many resources into the White Sox relative to other teams as Reinsdorf has
  13. Degree probably matters here too. 10 of the first 13 picks this year were college hitters, and while many of them hit well, the only one to clearly exceed Smith's pro production is Christian Moore.
  14. Two things can be true. Opt outs are a player benefit, teams don't put them in because they want to play roulette with what the rest of the contract is. At the same time, an opt out *that is used* when a player is at the end of their prime is not necessarily a bad thing for the team. A player outproducing the contract for several years opting out at age 30 doesn't mean the team would have signed them to the remainder of the original contract at that point. The value of FA deals is always front-loaded, so just because you were comfortable with that downside originally doesn't mean you'd optionally sign up for it again after you've gotten the main benefit. EDIT: I should also add that players/agents are generally savvy enough to put opt outs in a place where that potential *shrug* response to opting out from a team is less likely. Soto will play all next year at 26, he's less likely to be looking for an opt out after 5-6 years than he is at 2-3. Macroeconomic conditions are hazier than they have been though, so this isn't an ironclad rule.
  15. It is hilarious how so many people have basically responded to Jed's presser with "here are the things that this definitely means for the offseason, which also happened to be my preconceived notion of what will happen". And even those notions are sloppily held together too. Using bWAR, saying Swanson's track record doesn't compare favorably to a list that includes 3 players with less than 2 years of service time, saying Swanson's value being defense heavy doesn't count while ignoring that Seiya outhit a chunk of that group(not to mention propping up BRICE TURANG in the previous paragraph), it's just hastily thrown together backwards justification of previous hobby horses. Then there's the decisively ruling out any and all free agent bats for increasingly flimsy reasons, and Alonso and Santander being merely 'good' WAR guys apparently is fine now that they have been cast as unreachable upgrades.
  16. The Orioles built a roster with a baker's dozen Top-25 hitting prospects and they're about to get bounced by losing 1-0, 2-1. I'd turn into the Joker
  17. Assad/Brown/Wicks/Wesneski is perfectly fine as the 5th starter even if one gets traded, so I I don't think they're going to add 2 SP over that group. The one exception to this is if they manage to pull off Sasaki, they can't assume he'll pick the Cubs so they need to pursue other candidates, but if he does there's basically no change to the team's resources so you can get your super rotation for the same cost as the non-Sasaki plan.
  18. Whoops, he should go in the Maybe pile. I think the stuff is common enough, the performance history short enough, and the salary high enough that it makes sense to non-tender and try to bring him back on a lower number/MiLB deal. Merryweather edges him out in all 3 of those areas to tip the scales in favor of tendering.
  19. Initial glance seems like they break down like this: Obvious tender: Steele, Paredes, Tauchman, Pearson Probably: Merryweather Maybe: Wisdom, Bethancourt, Thompson Non-Tender: Madrigal, Alzolay, Wingenter, Herget, Brewer Possible they like one of those waiver wire relievers enough to bump them into the maybes, but even then I'm guessing everyone below Merryweather is non-tendered.
  20. No, full stop. This is a very silly thing to think, and one that is only possible to think if you have been so brain-poisoned by cynicism that you try to fit every bit of news as proof of a hyper-negative caricature you have in your head.
  21. Thank you for having the courage to speak the truth about the disastrous handling of first base and bullpen coaches
  22. coaches so meaningless that Counsell doesn't actually care about them, but so meaningful that they will strategically announce them(through journalists and not through official comms) to try to get good PR schrodingers coaches
×
×
  • Create New...