Transmogrified Tiger

Color me very surprised. The farm could use a nice influx of talent. You're surprised they offered Fowler a QO? They did last year and then he was even better in 2016.

If I'm understanding you, clicking either of these orange icons will do that:

good grief Toronto, they're already dead

To be clear, I'm not terribly interested in trading Baez, but if we're talking about trading for Berrios, that is almost certainly what it would take. I don't think that'll be the approach though, if Baez were traded I think it'd be someone who is a bit of a better bet to stay healthy than Berrios, and Berrios isn't even a terribly bad health bet.

Baez for Berrios would be a very interesting challenge trade. Speaking of the Twins, I'm forever a homer for him but I wonder if Gibson isn't a buy-low guy.

Exactly, Theo is more people oriented than some saber-savvy GMs(looking at you Luhnow), but this is the same org that kept Bryant down until late April 2015 too. Is giving Hammel some agency part of the decision? Probably a little. But the likely larger reason is Hammel being not worth terribly much in trade at 1/12 to make doing that dance worth the hassle/downside.

Thinking on this a little more, potential reasons that they couldn't trade Hammel: - They want to add rotation depth with or without Hammel and navigating that marginal deal among multiple others isn't worth the benefit - Teams that would be interested in Hammel for 1/12 would probably be most interested in him as a Plan B, which means you can't trade Hammel until later in the offseason when his freed up money is potentially less useful. - Theo and Hoyer are going to take the goodwill from the title and get creative/crazy with what they want to do to set up the pitching staff for success in 2017 and the post-Arrieta/Lackey/peak Lester beyond. This requires flexibility that they can't spare on Hammel, even if for only part of the offseason

Not sure if this is what you mean, but in the last 3 years the only innings Montgomery has in relief are in 2016(78 of them). Also, he threw 14 innings in the postseason so his total this year is ~115.

I'm looking at the list of FA pitchers, and I'm having trouble finding someone who I think is definitely better than Hammel. More than a few guys of similar caliber, but I have a really hard time believing that some team wouldn't be happy to give something to get one of those caliber guys for 1/12.

Wow. [tweet] [/tweet]

The Galaxy just ended their season on a horrific set of penalties, Dos Santos shanked one, Cole telegraphed an easy save, and then Larentowicz hit the post that Howard had covered anyway.

It's certainly possible that 25 is too high an AAV, but we don't really have a good point of comparison. Kimbrel never reached free agency(he just reached 6 years of service time this year) for example, there just isn't much precedence for relievers with the dominance, longevity, and youth at free agency that Jansen and Chapman have. The lack of elite FAs at any other position will probably funnel more dollars their way too.

This was discussed in the Game 7 thread and I believe one other. In short, Miggy was drunk and said something he probably wouldn't have otherwise. If he feels he wasn't communicated with enough then he and the Cubs should fix that, but otherwise that's about the end of the story because nothing about his actual playing time appears to be undeserved.

I'm a nominal fan of one of the NBA super teams and even the thought of investing just 5 minutes in watching them seems like a waste of time. All non-baseball sports are bad, basketball and football and their respective divisions are especially bad

Doesn't change your point, but FYI Neshek got traded to the Phillies yesterday.

Chapman and Jansen aren't going to get huge bucks because of a closer label though, or if they do it's like 5% of the reason, it's because they're really really good. Since most teams are bright enough to catch on, that means that really good non-closer relievers are going to see their trade costs rise too. Like Colome for example, I really doubt that Soler alone would fetch him in trade. That said, it doesn't scale all the way down(e.g. Justin Grimm isn't going to give you somebody's starting CF), and if you want to try to get ahead of the next Miller or Jansen by buying low, there are ways to do that. The problem is that those come with much greater uncertainty, and the back end of the Cubs current bullpen has a ton of uncertainty. If Rondon hadn't gotten hurt and had been healthy through the playoffs I'd probably feel differently with him, Edwards, and whatever you consider the current version of Strop to be. But there's a significant chance that Rondon the elite reliever is dead, and by not going after one of the (several!) elite but expensive relievers available we'd be risking on a Giants-esque derailment of 2017 that I'm not comfortable with.

1) Even though the team is in much better financial shape than it was even 18 months ago, there are still limits to what they can and will spend on payroll. Maybe the title gives them the leverage to secure an awesome agreement for the 2019 TV deal this offseason, which gives them a clear path to FU money that they can jump the payroll to 250 million right away. More likely they're going to have a very high payroll that is in the neighborhood of the luxury tax, which means given the existing obligations they can't just treat the offseason like . 2) There is a negative one million percent chance that any team signs both Chapman and Jansen. Market forces mean that signing the 2nd one naturally means less to you than it will to the competing teams, and pretty much every wealthy NL team and probably some AL teams are going to be in said market. This happens every offseason and every team with payroll wonders it(why can't we get Heyward and Price? Lester and Martin? Tanaka and Choo? Greinke and Hamilton?), and then when the time comes to target the 2nd guy someone offers 'silly' money because they don't want to be left out. Also, as good as both Jansen and Chapman are it would be extremely risky to tie up that much of your payroll in two relievers. As the Yankees ably demonstrated this year, a super pen means little without leads to protect.

Rondon is in a really interesting spot to me. For 3 years running now he's been one of the 10-15 best relievers in the game, he's got two years of team control left, and he's got experience closing. On the other hand, he had an arm injury and was terrible after it(with Maddon highlighting in red ink how much he distrusts him in the playoffs), and he's reached the spot in the post-TJS timeline where that ligament is more likely to fail again. I could see him being seen as poison by other teams, in which case you probably just hang on to him and hope an offseason of recovery does him good. However, even if teams discount his value by 50% because of the uncertainty, in a market that could see Jansen and Chapman get 9 figures that's still significant value, and if the Cubs are bearish on his health then securing one of those 9 figure guys and then sending Rondon to someone who can't play in those waters would be a smart sequence of moves. Strop is a year from free agency and this year illustrates how quickly bullpen depth can dissipate, so I'm not really interested in trading him given that his return wouldn't be significant.

I think one is absolutely gone, and it'd be Szczur getting sold off or DFA'd. I like him fine as a 5th OF, but a good org has his equivalent always waiting in the wings, and sure enough Mark Zagunis can likely do everything Szczur can(save for play CF, which the Cubs rarely had Szczur do and is more than covered by Heyward/Almora/Blanco) and he's got options to boot. After that I don't think you need to trade anyone, injuries and ineffectiveness will make things clearer. This year was an especially good illustration, Schwarber missed the whole year, Soler got less than 300 PA, if Heyward is as awful as he was offensively again he'll lose playing time, etc. By getting 5 guys who you're partially confident in for various reasons, you help ensure you always have 3 for a particular point in time. If several pan out and you have fewer days with Bryant or Zobrist in the OF, that's not a problem in my eyes.

Also, since we're to the spitballing offseason ideas, this was the path I had come up with. I'm still not sure if I'll like it in a few days, but when you're a team without super obvious holes and a trash FA class, that's probably inevitable. - QO Fowler, let him walk - Sign Jansen. This is going to take a lot of money, like imagine how much you think Jansen is going to cost, then add money to that. Like maybe 5/125. I will give it to him even though it costs pick #30, partially because they'll still be in the comp round thanks to Fowler - Sign Gregor Blanco. I want a depth outfielder that 1) can play all 3 OF spots 2) fits the FO's preferences with his ability to take walks/control the zone 3) is preferably left handed. Blanco is the guy. - Pick up Hammel's option, trade him to Detroit for Justin Wilson. Detroit needs to cut payroll but their rotation also is a sieve. This lets them fill a rotation spot without committing long term dollars, and at the cost of a disappointing reliever(who they can back fill now that Boyd doesn't have to be awful against RHP in their rotation). Wilson throws very hard for a LHP and gets back to the NL where he adds a bit more insurance to the middle relief uncertainty surrounding Strop/Rondon after the playoffs. - Trade Candelario and a pitching prospect to the Braves for Wisler. I don't know what the Braves think of Wisler, but he fits the bill as a prospect with traits our FO likes who failed spectacularly at his first attempt at MLB. The Braves don't lack for arms, but 3B in their org is a tire fire, Candelario could quite possibly start opening day at 3B. Montgomery goes to the rotation, Wisler probably goes to AAA to stay stretched out in case of injury/ineffectiveness. Contreras/Rizzo/Zobrist/Russell/Bryant/Schwarber/Heyward/Soler; Montero/Baez/Almora/Blanco/? (Szczur? TLS?) Lester/Hendricks/Arrieta/Lackey/Montgomery; Jansen/Strop/Edwards/Grimm/Wilson/Rondon/Zastryzny That team comes in between 180-185 million.

Almora is a top CF prospect. Not one that I want to give 600 PAs to next year, but that's going to apply to any CF prospect that you can trade for too. You've got Almora, Soler, and Baez(via Bryant/Zobrist to the OF) from the right side and Heyward and Schwarber playing most every day from the left side. Almora, Heyward, and Baez are elite of elite defenders that are potentially used as defensive replacements. You can mix and match to keep people fresh and protect against individual weaknesses while seeing if Almora can take enough pitches to be next-gen Kevin Pillar. You can do it even if you trade Soler to be honest, since the Coghlans and Szczurs of the world can soak up 200 PA in specialized roles if you want further depth.

Montero gone. Lackey gone. Arrieta gone. Zobrist just about gone. Those first 3 will clear up about 40M. Hammel's another $10 mil gone and a new TV deal will be coming around then too. Also, Jeffh we aren't horsefeathering poor people. We're going to be able to afford things on top of Russell/Bryant/etc won't even be making big money in 2018 or 2019 yet. Those 3 leaving does free up 40 million, but it also opens holes in 40% of the rotation to be filled without obvious replacements, and existing raises(5M for Lester, Arb 1 for Bryant/Russell/Hendricks) will eat away a significant chunk of it. As far as how high the payroll will go, I imagine a lot will depend on the exactitudes of the CBA, but after this year's huge jump there aren't as many increases in revenue that are recurring until the TV deal reloads in 2019, and until then the luxury tax adds more weight to every dollar above 190 million. I don't see a reason they don't have at least up to the luxury tax threshold to spend to, but it's not so high that they don't want to be a little cognizant of upcoming obligations and where more pressing holes are when making a decision on Fowler. I don't expect him back.

So they have until Monday to offer Fowler a QO. I'm not sure how the option stuff works with deadlines, but I imagine it's similar. Wasn't the rumor back when Dex signed that there was an under the table agreement that the Cubs wouldn't make him a QO in order to allow him to get a better contract? I know it breaks MLB rules, but there was more than one person who insinuated that was the case. I don't recall that, but it's possible that such a rumor existed. It seems like they did enough to hedge their bets by giving him a 5 million buyout that it wouldn't be a huge concern though.

http://www.northsidebaseball.com/archive/viewtopic.php?p=2475959#p2475959

I can't say I didn't warn you. First it was just a mascot, and he wouldn't even be on the field Then he started waving the flag after victories, but hey it's a happy moment who cares Now he's doing terrible things but they're at Theo's discretion and we trust Theo right But soon he's going to go rogue and then no one is safe, NO ONE