Transmogrified Tiger

AFAICT it's only the QO stuff that Bertz has highlighted. If you lose a QO'd FA you get a pick after the 4th round instead of after the 2nd. If you sign a QO'd FA you lose your 2nd & 5th best picks and 1 million in IFA money, instead of your 2nd best pick and 500k in IFA money. So for the purposes of the 2025 Cubs, the difference is their 5th round pick and an additional 500k in IFA money lost if they sign a QO'd FA.

In year 3(and any subsequent year they don't reset), if they are 5 million over the tax line they pay 2.5 million in penalties. This also scales even if they do plan to increase beyond 'just barely over'. To quote myself from around the trade deadline: In a budget where you're pushing 240-250 million in payroll to begin with, the penalties are not themselves a limiting factor. You just set total spending target like 2% lower to account for them and don't worry about whether or not you inch over the line.

If they went 5 million over this year, they will pay 1 million in penalties. If they go 5 million over again next year, they'd pay 1.5 million in penalties. The penalties and their escalation are just not meaningful if you aren't significantly over the tax line.

Nathaniel Lowe had a good xwOBA and a lot of red statcast numbers his big year too! Unsustainable doesn't have to be lucky or undeserved. Rooker is flirting with the highest single season BABIP since the pandemic, and that's not a leaderboard that has much in the way of repeat names, especially not those with as much swing and miss as he has. I generally think Cruz is a better pure hitter, but comparing to Nelson at similar ages might actually be a good barometer. He had one outlier BABIP season in Texas with a 147 wRC+, but was otherwise a 115-120 guy until his mid-30s. Maybe Rooker is a 140 guy now, it's not an idea that's completely without merit, but I think the smart money is that he's more of a good hitter having an incredible season that won't repeat for various reasons(age, unsustainable BIP, etc).

I am very wary of Rooker, or at least what to expect given his likely cost. I think there's a lot of Nathaniel Lowe risk, in that they are pop up successes, have one aberrant BABIP year and they can't return to that level again. 2023 Rooker is a player worth having too, but I'm not keen to pay through the nose to get the 30 year old arb years of Rooker when there are other options(Joc, Teoscar, Santander) I have similar expectations for that are available for fewer resources.

Full season of PCA, full season of (good) Paredes, non-negative value from backup catcher, Swanson and Nico are likely marginally better offensively, Amaya may exceed 82 wRC+/0.6 WAR, contributions from the best of the Iowa hitting prospects

farewell Cody, thanks for everything

Welcome!

Statcast says basically all of them are on 4 seamers, as a function of number of pitches it's 0.5% for the splitter and 1.7% for the 4 seamer.

Vote early, vote often, etc.

He just passed Corbin Carroll

Swanson just passed Trea Turner in fWAR for the season

This is also incorrect on all accounts. The idea that the Cubs' future spending is going to be affected by sneaking into the luxury tax by a couple million requires some logical leaps that are frankly absurd. They clearly signaled they weren't prioritizing 2024 when they traded away one of their more reliable relievers while being 6.5 games(and nearly as many teams) out when they started making moves. It would've been trivial to make an additional move to get under the tax line if it were meaningful to their future plans. Assuming it's a failure that is hamstringing future seasons requires assuming Jed(the guy constantly criticized for his conservatism) decided to go full bore on 2024 with the team in last place and did so by trading away a key player in the most problematic are of the roster. It's either that or maybe exceeding the tax line just barely doesn't really matter. And then again with Taillon, the two seasons he pitched matter, the shots they had at the postseason were real, every season is sacred, etc. But the price for a 'clearly better than Jameson Taillon' SP in the market is not set at what he's currently making. It'll take more money, more years, or most likely both. And the Cubs need a SP even with Taillon around, and adding several SP in an offseason is not an easy thing to do when 20 teams have designs on being competitive and everyone wants more SP at all times. You can't just flip a switch when you hit 80 wins(ignoring that Taillon is a big part of why they aren't still in your 70 win quadrant!) and make wholesale additions in a single offseason, the market does not work like that.

And they got 27 yards! (they did not convert 3rd and 32)

1. This is just plainly incorrect. The 'stars, then role players' mental model of team building some fans like to cling to isn't real. None of those players mentioned have comparable replacements available for less dollars or years, and if you can look at the FA class and think 'man I wish we had spent less so we can nab two more of these guys' you're looking at a different list than me. Plus this is not feasible in a practical sense, other teams have needs/desires too and you can't expect to add 5 role players in one offseason. 2. It'd be one thing to rue the Taillons of the world if the team had lost 95 games 2 years running, but they're on track to have a winning record both seasons despite having their share of adverse circumstances/injuries. Those seasons matter and they won those games and will miss the playoffs by a small margin. A small margin that can very easily be made up with the right offseason moves even if they aren't adding an inner circle HOF. Adding stars is often the easiest way to make a multi-win jump, but as Bertz illustrates it's far from the only way. And we should avoid the trap of assuming 2024 as the baseline for the team etched in concrete, especially given the way the season progressed for the bullpen, young hitters, etc.

Shaw is a double short of the cycle, it is the bottom of the 4th

The more I think about this the more I think this is a tricky offseason to get just right unless you can manage to get Soto out of NYC(v unlikely imo). I think the way I'd think about it is generally like this: SP is the most important addition to make. I'd probably look to the trade market on this one since there's a couple options where you can possibly find a goldilocks zone of upside v. cost(both $ and player), plus the FA options aren't very noteworthy Bat is the trickiest role to fill. If Bellinger opts out there's a clear spot in the best 9 for one addition, but if that player has defensive pride/aspirations it may be trickier to convince them. The FA options are imperfect after Soto for various reasons, and there are less obviously available trade matches than SP. Both Leverage RP and C I think you prefer to buy in FA. There will be good options that don't stretch the budget or Jed's contract length preferences, and that saves trade resources/QO picks for the bigger impact acquisitions without gutting the farm. As for who that could be, I think something like these names(one per) could work: SP: Castillo, Keller Bat: Santander, Teoscar, Pederson (note: you can still pursue Soto as hard as you're able since these guys are all likely waiting out his market) Catcher: Kelly, Jansen RP: Holmes, Scott, Estevez Add in re-upping Lopez and maybe some bench shuffling(Drury? JD Davis?) you can fit this in without a ton of worry(but also not a ton of room to spare) if Bellinger is opting out.

Outside of those you mentioned, Framber Valdez, Gausman, and Mitch Keller feel like decent bets to be available in some fashion. As for the Seattle dynamic, I think because of what Seattle is looking for the best/most likely option is probably Castillo? They keep their core of pre-FA arms, get to turn Castillo's money into Alonso/Bellinger/Bregman, and the Cubs get to do a Darvish deal from the other side where they get multi-year ceiling from a SP without paying huge years or an insane player package.

The Twins took this guy in the 6th round and gave him 300k to sign and just released him for re-enacting Space Jam

Poor Benjamin Cowles broke his wrist on a HBP, worked his way back to game action in record time, and has been rewarded with 2 HBP in his first 6 PA off the IL

Yeah that's fair, for anyone unsure Langeliers is A and Kelly is B. The thing that stands out in that comparison is less about Kelly(who is fairly described as boring/responsible) and more about Langeliers, since it's striking to me that he is so bad at everything besides hitting the occasional HR and controlling the run game that he's struggling to be an average player. Definitely takes some wind out of my sails about the prospect of paying a healthy player cost to target him.