Transmogrified Tiger

Since we're already getting the first bit of rumors about what moves will be made, let's have a thread about the acquisitions you hope/expect/wish to see this offseason. If nothing else it's fun, and this thread gives a place for it so as not to confuse with actual moves/rumors. Make it what you think Theo/Jed will do, what you'd do if you were them, consider financial restrictions or ignore them, you make the call. I'll do mine to start, it is excessively long and detailed/rambling for a thing that won't actually happen, proceed at your own risk. I think the Front Office has the flexibility to have a payroll similar to last year's, hovering around 100 million on opening day. The good news is that depending on the exact moves, it wouldn't necessary need to be that high, or there's ways to cut it without materially damaging the team. Here's the general outline: - Add a very good SP - Add a star OF - Backfill the traded MLB player - Make the roster fit together Add a very good SP - Right now depth is not an issue in the rotation. Samardzija, Wood, Jackson, Arrieta, Villanueva, Rusin, Grimm, and Hendricks give the team an abundance of options that can be relied on to fill out the back of a rotation, where the gains need to be is in the quality. This means that they shouldn't be looking for this year's Feldman or Maholm to flip(Villanueva could be that guy after all if you really want to), they need a guy who clearly slots above the fray and alongside Shark/Wood/Jackson. Plan A - Sign Masahiro Tanaka - Is Tanaka the youngest major free agent ever? The line gets blurry with international players I guess, but it serves to illustrate that players of his age that have proven what he has come available for only money pretty much never. If they can do nothing else this offseason, he needs to be the guy Plan B - There is no Plan B - If you push me then yes, they could try to fish for guys like Johnson or Lincecum in the hopes of getting a Liriano-esque resurgence, but that still comes at a decent pricetag and with far more concerns than I have about Tanaka. As a result, I'm just going to assume that the total outlay for Tanaka is 6/150. It serves to be very sure that he is a Cub without needing to worry about overshooting that estimate in budgeting for later moves. With any luck it's a good bit less than that and there's more money available Add a star OF - Along with SP, the outfield is the biggest opportunity to make some big gains. The good news here is that there's flexibility. If you believe in Lake, you can have him play any OF position on the hope he continues to develop and play like a 3+ win player. Schierholtz is a solid LH OF bat to have around. Sweeney and/or Bogusevic provide the opportunity for league averagish OF play in a couple positions. So you're not pigeonholed into only getting an OF of a certain position. Plan A - Trade for Giancarlo Stanton - With Loria firing Beinfest and taking more control over the organization, it seems even more likely that Stanton becomes available than it seemed last year when we said "he'll get dealt next offseason". I don't share the doubts about his injuries or his ability to improve on his past performance, he'll only be 24 next year and he'd be a middle of the order monster for years to come. As a result, the price is steep: Lake, Alcantara, Almora, and Vogelbach. That's a lot of bats, and hopefully it wouldn't require half the top 6-7 prospects plus Lake, but like Tanaka let's err on the other side and be pleasantly surprised if it's less. Plan B - Trade for CarGo - His contract could complicate later moves, and while he's still prime age he's not 24 like Stanton. But if they are willing to trade him for as little as has been intimated by Cubs "insiders", then it might be worth the tradeoff. A deal here looks something like Russell, Alcantara, Vogelbach, and Grimm Plan C -Sign a FA - Choo and Ellsbury are on the market if other options break down. Given the circumstances this is easily the worst option unless you've already lost Tanaka because the Dodgers bid 200 million to let him star for Albuquerque. Backfill the traded MLB player - This is where things get a bit trickier since the move can depend on who goes out in other moves. Peter Bourjos - If Lake is traded, the only real CF option around is Sweeney, and he's not even under contract(nor am I a huge fan of him as a full-time CF). With Trout, Hamilton, Trumbo, and Pujols as mainstays, the Angels have too many OFs, and Bourjos is a logical trade candidate since he's coming off a wrist injury and he gets a ton of his value from being an elite defensive CF(which he's not going to do in LA). Gauging LA's needs is a bit tricky with their obvious need to compete now but their need to not spend a ton to avoid getting hammered by the luxury tax. Let's say Villanueva and Russell for Bourjos, accepting that this could be way off in how LA values him. Michael Saunders - Another situation that's admittedly hard to read, Saunders is an averagish CF who could be more than that in LF, but he doesn't seem to be part of Seattle's core and may be available this offseason. I won't speculate on a potential package Eric O'Flaherty - If Russell gets sent off, while there are options around, the team could use a more reliable option in the 7th or as a shutdown LHP. O'Flaherty shouldn't get huge dollars having just come back from TJS this August, but he's shown himself healthy and was a steady reliever for years before having TJS. Again erring on the high side, say he gets 2/10 to be sure he's yours, hopefully less. Royals relievers - The Royals are a favorite trading partner this offseason because their needs seem to match up well. If dollars become a concern, upgrading the bullpen in a payroll neutral or better move would seem to be possible. On the high end, the Royals probably don't want to pay Hochevar 5 million to be a reliever given their depth, so swapping him for a Villanueva or Schierholtz might be worth it depending on other moves. If they love Hochevar or finances dictate the move dumps payroll, they have a stable of good relief arms, Kelvin Herrera is my favorite target. Make the roster fit together - This is even hazier now that we're another degree of ambiguity away. To give some clarity, let's pick out the moves I hope would happen, Tanaka, Stanton, Bourjos, and Schierholtz for Herrera. At this point the only other move to try and fit in is bringing back Sweeney, 2 years 6 million(2 mil this year, 4 mil next). I'm putting him in LF which isn't ideal, but he should be fine there defensively, and Bourjos' incredible range will undoubtedly make that an even easier transition. He also provides some CF cover if Bourjos has any lingering health concerns at the start of the year. I sign the best backup catcher I can for a million bucks and do the same for a RH platoon OF bat. The end result is a roster like this: v. RHP/LHP (if different) Sweeney/Bourjos Castro Rizzo Stanton Valbuena/Castillo Castillo/Olt Bourjos/Sweeney Barney Samardzija/Wood/Tanaka/Jackson/Arrieta Strop/Parker/Herrera/Rusin/3 best of the RP calvary FA C/Olt/Watkins/Bogusevic/FA RH OF If Rizzo and Castro combine for 2012-level production, that team is a borderline playoff team. The payroll is right at 90 million, hopefully even less considering how aggressive our Tanaka number is. Baez has a spot at 2B warmed up for him if he knocks the door down, which also hedges against failure from Olt/Barney. Same goes for next year in LF with Bryant and Sweeney. After this year Soriano's money can go to helping extend arbitration eligibles(Shark/Stanton/Wood) or adding a LF/SP of importance. If you made it through that, congratulations and I'm sorry. Let's hear yours now.

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/schedule/index.jsp?c_id=chc&partnerId=as_mlb_20130910_11747664&tcid=chc_redirect_schedule#y=2014&m=4&calendar=DEFAULT - Opening Day 3/31 in Pittsburgh - Home opener 4/4 v. Philly - Home & Home 2-game series with the Yankees - 3 game series in Fenway at end of June/start of July - Last 2 weeks of the season: 10 home games, 3 in Milwaukee

You determine what a "good job" is. Just be consistent in applying it. Past Results: August 2013 - 38% Yes - 39 votes July 2013 - 69% Yes - 26 votes June 2013 - 47% Yes - 34 votes May 2013 - 71% Yes - 28 votes April 2013 - 95% Yes - 21 votes Post 2012 - 96% Yes - 26 votes August 2012 - 90% Yes - 31 votes July 2012 - 85% Yes - 27 votes June 2012 - 96% Yes - 26 votes May 2012 - 96% Yes - 27 votes April 2012 - 61% Yes - 28 votes

Remember, how you define good job is up to you, just be consistent with your definition. Past results: Spring Training 2013 - 100% - 40 votes Post-2012 season - 84% - 31 votes Post-2012 Trade Deadline - 90% Yes - 42 Votes Opening Day 2012 - 87% Yes - 31 Votes

You determine what a "good job" is. Just be consistent in applying it. Past Results: July 2013 - 69% Yes - 26 votes June 2013 - 47% Yes - 34 votes May 2013 - 71% Yes - 28 votes April 2013 - 95% Yes - 21 votes Post 2012 - 96% Yes - 26 votes August 2012 - 90% Yes - 31 votes July 2012 - 85% Yes - 27 votes June 2012 - 96% Yes - 26 votes May 2012 - 96% Yes - 27 votes April 2012 - 61% Yes - 28 votes

I'm going to make this a new thread since the smoke is strong enough to split it out from where others are being discussed. First off, to reiterate. Cubs Den: Garza to Texas looks likely: http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-den/2013/07/garza-to-texas-looks-likely/ Now, someone who appears to be the Rangers version of Mooney is saying the Rangers are close to getting Garza and Marlon Byrd.

You determine what a "good job" is. Just be consistent in applying it. Past Results: June 2013 - 47% Yes - 34 votes May 2013 - 71% Yes - 28 votes April 2013 - 95% Yes - 21 votes Post 2012 - 96% Yes - 26 votes August 2012 - 90% Yes - 31 votes July 2012 - 85% Yes - 27 votes June 2012 - 96% Yes - 26 votes May 2012 - 96% Yes - 27 votes April 2012 - 61% Yes - 28 votes

Since it's the season for such rumors, and the Cubs have so many interchangeable pieces that might be traded, I thought it might be fun to have a spot for you to give your hopes or predictions for what happens during this trading season. Be as grounded in reality as you like, and be prepared for someone to call you out if it's not realistic. If you don't want to hear my weird imagined scenarios, skip the rest of the post and make your own! I'll go first: - Feldman to the Royals for Herrera and Mariot - Moore is desperate for a push to the playoffs here, which is why the value proposition is probably tilted in the Cubs favor. He does add one of the better SP on the market though, so it's an easier sell to his fans. He also deals from his greatest strength(the Royals still have Holland, Collins, Crow, and Hochevar in the pen), doesn't touch the current MLB roster, and trades away a volatile commodity in relief pitching. I've been on Herrera and Mariot for a while now. Herrera immediately slots in to a late inning role, and Mariot will certainly have the chance to prove similarly after finishing the year at Iowa. - Villanueva and Schierholtz to the Rangers for Perez and Burns - The Rangers want to round out their rotation and they have a gaping hole in the OF(plus the small but nagging chance Cruz goes down with Biogenesis). They get 2 guys who help now and in 2014. Villanueva plugs a hole in the rotation and gives them flexibility when constructing their staff next year. Schierholtz replaces Murphy's awful production in LF and also gives them an in house RF option if they don't want to bring back Cruz. They give up a SP prospect who's seen his star dim a bit in Perez, and a relief prospect in Burns. The results are still there for Perez, so as long as the stuff checks out, he's a good addition and can compete for a rotation spot next year. Burns has little left to prove in AAA and would be fighting for a MLB bullpen job as soon as the Cubs would like. - Garza and Gregg to the Dodgers for Lee and Magill - subheading: Letting Colletti hang himself. Ned obviously feels a lot of pressure to get his superteam competitive, and there's no easier way than trading for the best SP on the market. He also adds some bullpen reinforcements for good measure. He pays a pretty stiff price, but he's used to winning bidding wars(and there's certainly one for Garza) and considering that Kershaw/Greinke/Ryu are all under team control for many years, and Beckett/Billingsley already for next year, he isn't creating much of a hole either. The Cubs get a top line pitching prospect that will spend 2014 in AAA getting that full year of work before contributing in full the following season. Magill finishes the year in Iowa, where he works on the control problems that popped up this year before fighting alongside Perez for a 2014 rotation spot. After the carnage, there's a couple internal moves to make. Rusin takes one of the rotation spots to get an extended look to see if he can be a swingman/2nd LH reliever on next year's team. Coleman begrudgingly gets the other rotation spot unless Perez shows he has nothing to prove in Iowa. Rosscup and Cabrera are promoted to AAA, Cabrera continues to start, but both are in the discussion for 2014 pen roles. Once Sweeney gets healthy, he takes over Schierholtz's work in RF. DeJesus will be healthy before him, so some combination of DeJesus/Borbon/Hairston covers CF and RF until then. What that means for 2014 is that you've now got about 40 million dollars to spend, make it a bit under 35 after a couple arbitration raises to Shark/Russell, bringing back Sweeney, etc. To spell it out as an example, you can go after one of the big FA OF (Ellsbury/Choo), add a SP or two, and maybe bring in a reliever for extra stability. Let's call it Ellsbury, Jason Vargas, and Benoit. So then you have: Castillo/Rizzo/Barney/Castro/Valbuena/DeJesus/Ellsbury/Sweeney(with Hairston and Soriano for OF platoons) Samardzija/Jackson/Wood/Vargas/Perez/Magill as SP, with Hendricks, Lee, and maybe Cabrera around as 7th options Benoit/Herrera/Russell/Parker/Burns/Mariot/Bowden/Rusin/Cabrera as bullpen options This exercise is really at it's most fun when you're doing it though, so let's hear the creative options you can come up with.

They're the only Cubs on either roster. http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/events/all_star/y2013/roster_futures_world.jsp

Please pardon the title, the character limitations made it hard to make the topic clear. The Cubs haven't made the playoffs since 2008, and we're in Year 2 of that drought under Theo. One point that you see pop up quite a bit is the idea that the team needs to be taking steps forward in terms of wins and losses. It helps in a variety of ways, from making the team a more attractive FA destination, to keeping fan morale high, to also being a statistical indicator that the team is nearing a break-through that will send them to the playoffs. With that in mind, I took a look at teams that had made the playoffs since 2007 after at least 3 years of drought. http://i.imgur.com/LTmNuo2.png How to read the chart. Year 1 would be 3 years before the playoff appearance, Year 3 the year before the playoff appearance, etc. Additional playoff appearances are for the 3 years following the first appearance. 2013 is projected based on current standings. A few things I noticed after compiling this: - Lots of playoff teams fit this profile. 26% since 2007, and that number would seem more likely to go up with the extra wild card. - The leap that teams make is a huge one. An average of 16 wins across 13 different instances in 6 years is enough for me to be pretty skeptical of the "how do they get from X wins to a playoff team" arguments that come about. - Teams remained competitive in the seasons that followed their leap. 17 playoff appearances out of a possible 32, 53%. - The size of the leap didn't have much impact on following playoff appearances. Teams who had a leap of less than 10 wins were 8 for 12 (67%), teams with a leap of 15 wins or less were 10 of 21 (48%), and teams with a greater than 15 win leap were 6 of 11 (55%). There's not a lot of actionable things to take from this, aside from maybe the idea that teams should always try to be making the next couple years better, because the threshold to being "ready to contend" isn't one that seems to exist as a win count. How that applies to the Cubs is probably a rorshach test for your feelings on the current FO, which is nice I guess since it means I'm not telling anyone they're wrong. Except those of you who say "I just don't see how this team gets to 85-90 wins" during the offseason. You're not right.

You determine what a "good job" is. Just be consistent in applying it. Past Results: May 2013 - 71% Yes - 28 votes April 2013 - 95% Yes - 21 votes Post 2012 - 96% Yes - 26 votes August 2012 - 90% Yes - 31 votes July 2012 - 85% Yes - 27 votes June 2012 - 96% Yes - 26 votes May 2012 - 96% Yes - 27 votes April 2012 - 61% Yes - 28 votes

This is an idea that's been covered before, Obstructed View did something on the same topic a month ago. With another full month to expand the sample I thought it'd be fun to revisit the fact that Chris Bosio appears to have a universal impact on Ground Ball rates. Name Pre-Bosio 2012 2013 Samardzija 40.3 44.6 48.4 Garza 41.0 47.3 43.6 Wood 31.4 34.3 37.0 Jackson 43.8 N/A 50.8 Villanueva 38.8 N/A 45.3 Feldman 46.5 N/A 50.6 On an individual level there's at least a reasonable explanation for any individual guy(Feldman's had high GB rates forever, Shark getting a chance to expand his repertoire as a starter, small sample size for Jackson, etc), but when you see it laid out cumulatively it becomes striking. When you combine this with the FO's priority towards infield defense, along with the FO's general acumen it adds up to an ability to fill out a rotation pretty well without breaking the bank. The funny thing to me is despite the improvements across the staff, you don't seem to hear of Bosio being a big proponent of a single pitch like Duncan or Don Cooper. Another good sign if you ask me. Any thoughts here? I'm no pitching expert and don't see as many games as I'd like, so I'm curious if there's anything that people are seeing that might contribute to this as well.

There's been a couple mentions connecting Headley with the Cubs recently. Headley's seemingly been on the block for an eternity, but I'm curious what people think of him as a trade target. Some assorted facts and thoughts: - Headley turns 29 tomorrow, is arbitration eligible this offseason, and a FA after next year. - He posted a 7.2 fWAR last year (!) and is already 1.0 this year. That's nearly 800 PAs of MVP level play. - He has a significant Home/Road split. .704 OPS career at Petco, .836 career elsewhere. Last year it was .812 v. .937. Shades of Adrian Gonzalez. - He's a well regarded defender, but he doesn't get an abnormal portion of his value from defense. His career UZR/150 is +7, +6 in last year's 7 win campaign. - On one hand, he's a greater impact acquisition than either Stanton or Price. Because of the fewer years of team control and the fact that Andrew Friedman isn't involved means he should have a lower player cost. The rebuilding Padres may be more willing to take on assets not ready to immediately give huge value at the MLB level too. - On the other hand, you'd need to extend him almost immediately to make it worthwhile. Would you trade for Headley then immediately give him something like 5/100? Would the front office even think about that level of investment(dollars and players) for a guy that turns 29 tomorrow? - Do you like Headley enough to acquire him knowing that you're likely out of tradeable assets that can land you a star(at least without savaging the system) for a year or more? - To throw out something of an actual scenario, let's say Baez starts hitting enough to restore confidence, and Barney as well. Do you give those two and one or two other ancillary players and then turn around and extend Headley? Maybe the Padres laugh at that, I don't know you tell me. With a static payroll, a deal like that leaves you a couple smart rotation/outfield decisions from being a very dangerous team in 2014.

You determine what a "good job" is. Just be consistent in applying it. Past Results: April 2013 - 95% Yes - 21 votes Post 2012 - 96% Yes - 26 votes August 2012 - 90% Yes - 31 votes July 2012 - 85% Yes - 27 votes June 2012 - 96% Yes - 26 votes May 2012 - 96% Yes - 27 votes April 2012 - 61% Yes - 28 votes

Entering today's game, Luis Valbuena has 375 PAs as a Cub. In those PAs he's accrued 2.1 fWAR, which if you extrapolate over a full season(650 PAs), becomes 3.6 fWAR. That is obviously quite good, so here's some details to fill in around that number: - There are 39 3B with 350+ PA since Opening Day 2012. Valbuena's 3.6 fWAR per 650 PAs ranks T-14th. - Valbuena ranks as the best defensive 3B in MLB in that timeframe, +15 in a bit more than a half season's work. BR has positive things to say about his defense as well, but not nearly that positive, so worth keeping in mind as that's a huge chunk of his overall value. Anecdotally, Valbuena has seemed to be a very good 3B even if he's not transcendentally good as those UZR numbers might indicate. - Valbuena has played a bit of a platoon's workload, taking 18% of his PAs against LHP. Using Castro as a proxy(since he's played in every Cubs game during Valbuena's era), it would be ~24% as an every day player. The good news is that his performance against LHP hasn't been so bad that changing that proportion doesn't actually change his overall production. Using his wOBA splits as a Cub, changing the proportion to 24% lowers his total wOBA by .001. - More generally speaking, Valbuena is 27 years old and not even arbitration eligible until this offseason. Important details when thinking about his role going forward. Now I didn't start this thread to say, "no need to add a 3B, we've got our man here". Valbuena's value is very defense dependent, and he's only done it over < 400 PAs that have been hand picked to an extent. That said, he's matched or outproduced names like Zimmerman, Middlebrooks, Lawrie, ARod, Moustakas, and Youkilis since the beginning of last year, so I think it's time we start thinking of him as being closer to Barney in value than a random waiver castoff. In the absence of a higher ceiling, long term solution, I'm more and more comfortable with him playing there every day in the interim.

Apologies if this was discussed in detail elsewhere(or maybe you just don't find it interesting), but with Watkins getting off to a good start it led me to take a closer look at how interesting his minor league progression was. I'll stick to his full seasons for the strength of the sample(500+ PAs at each full season level), and note that he's been age appropriate at each level: 20 at Peoria, 21 at Daytona, 22 at Tennessee, and now 23 at Iowa. Let's see each of his peripherals by year: BB% A-: 11.2% A+: 8.8% AA: 12.9% Encouraging to see his best walk rate coming at the most advanced level, in the greatest number of PAs too. After tonight's walkfest, he has 8 BB in 41 PAs at Iowa. K% A-: 18.7% A+: 19.3% AA: 16.5% Again with marked improvement after a slight step back at Daytona. Early Iowa returns are much worse on this front, but it is only 41 PA. ISO A-: .077 A+: .123 AA: .141 Steady improvement, with 20 2B, 11 3B, and 9 HR last year. Unsurprisingly the PCL has helped continue this trend with a .182 ISO thus far. SB A-: 19 SB, 66% A+: 21 SB, 81% AA: 28 SB, 80% Watkins not only became more prolific on the bases, he's become more efficient too. He's 0 for 1 on the young Iowa season. None of these are all that dramatic or surprising on their own. What strikes me is that Watkins has made strides in increasing walks, and lowering strikeouts, and increasing power, and being a greater weapon on the basepaths, all while progressing through full season levels. He even posted his highest fielding percentages at 2B and SS to boot. All this is to say that I think Watkins the prospect is probably more valuable than we've given him credit for. He was a 21st round pick that didn't have a ton of fanfare(his draft day picture is him in football pads, IIRC), but he got the 4th highest bonus in the class, and BA rated him the Cubs' Best Athlete and Late Round Pick of 2008. With the improvements he's made, and the reports that he's a decent to good 2B defender and passable at SS, I think we have to consider him an MLB regular if he continues to hit at Iowa. It's not a huge difference from what he was considered before(a good utility candidate), but an important one, especially with Barney's future potentially in doubt as he hits arbitration.

I thought this was fun last year, so I'll bring it back again. Kudos to Rob, who had the best prediction(accuracy + detail) in my estimation: So let's hear the fearless predictions for this year. I'll start: Schierholtz puts up an .850+ OPS.

I thought this was fun last year, so I'll bring it back again. Kudos to MWV, who had the best prediction(accuracy + detail) in my estimation: So let's hear the fearless predictions for this year. I'll start: Wood and Villanueva combine for 6 WAR.

I meant to have one of these for the midpoint of the offseason, but I forgot. Remember, how you define good job is up to you, just be consistent with your definition. Past results: Post 2012 season - 84% - 31 votes Post Trade Deadline - 90% Yes - 42 Votes Opening Day 2012 - 87% Yes - 31 Votes

Rosenthal:

Nice move for the Nationals. I'd trade a good low level pitching prospect to have Span at 2/12 with an option for 3/21.

Barely thread worthy, but it might give SSR a rage-stroke, so there's that.

Remember, how you define good job is up to you, just be consistent with your definition. Past results: Post Trade Deadline - 90% Yes - 42 Votes Opening Day - 87% Yes - 31 Votes

Thanks to David for picking up the mantle on this, and my apologies for not getting a September poll up. Remember, you determine what a "good job" is for yourself, just be consistent in applying it. Past Results: August - 90% Yes - 31 votes July - 85% Yes - 27 votes June - 96% Yes - 26 votes May - 96% Yes - 27 votes April - 61% Yes - 28 votes

Remember, how you define good job is up to you, just be consistent with your definition. Past results: Opening Day - 87% Yes - 31 Votes