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. Yes, i think there’s absolutely money for that permutation, and I don’t think it’s true that it’s either that or your best trade assets out there door to get a SP.
  2. Well sure, on the hierarchy of needs having that 2nd bat falls beneath having a playoff series SP. But there's no sign those are mutually exclusive that I can see. You can still do the above and sign Imanaga or Montgomery or trade for Bieber or Cease or maybe a Marlins or Mariners SP.
  3. He could, but the point is that he doesn't have to. You could get Bellinger and Hoskins and still have the aforementioned 6 players for 5 spots between Happ/Bellinger/Suzuki/PCA/Hoskins/Morel. This lets you minimize the pressure on PCA's bat, hedges against injury and underperformance, and lets the team have a higher floor day to day. Long story short, we worry a bit too much about having a neat place in the ideal 9 person lineup when that is basically never the circumstance the team ends up playing in.
  4. Suzuki mostly DHs, he's at almost 250 MLB games in RF as an average at best defender. Also, and I apologize for making this point before, but you can get away just fine with 6 guys for 5 spots(OF + 1B/DH) even if you want all 6 to get 'starter' playing time. That's 135 games per person, and when you add up injuries, rest, matchup preferences, and PCA preferably not breaking camp with the big league team, it ends up being a solved problem or (rarely) a luxury.
  5. You can play Bellinger in RF, and if you look at what it took for, say, Adolis Garcia to put up a near 5 win season from that position, that feels like an entirely reasonable outcome to invest in as the 'if PCA is in fact good' contingency.
  6. Several weeks ago, probably. But since then potential Bellinger suitors have filled holes with Lee, Garver, and Kiermaier, while some may prefer fellow Boras client Chapman at this point, so the appetite to do so in January is far less certain. Hence the likelihood that he ends up stuck with a Correa deal, possibly because Boras overplayed his hand. Or maybe he signs with the tigers for 8/220 or something in the next few days. It only takes one, but the pool to find that one is shrinking.
  7. I suspect if there was a team ready and willing to give Bellinger 200 million, especially straight without any option machinations, he’d be signed by now. At this point I’d say there’s better odds of him taking Correa’s short term deal than it is he gets a 180+ million guarantee.
  8. The number of reasonable Hoskins suitors is starting to get pretty thin, I really hope Boras isn’t holding him up given the market overlap with Bellinger.
  9. Tough to tell for certain, but Seiya probably would've done that last year without the oblique injury. Even with that plaguing him in the first half he was a Top 25 hitter in the game.
  10. 35 players were worth 4.5 fWAR or more last year. The Cubs had 3 of them(Steele, Swanson, Hoerner), all were under 30 and all are under team control for 3 (or more) seasons. They didn't have a Top 5 pitcher or Top 10 hitter, but as far as nuclei go it's not bad.
  11. They are, but for the purposes of baseball's soft cap, it only impacts them for the duration Ohtani is on the team. Normally, the amount a player counts towards the luxury tax payroll is the AAV of the deal they signed. If I sign a free agent for 5/100, they'll count 20 million towards the luxury tax each year regardless of if I'm paying them 30 million in year 1 or 10 million. In the case of deferrals, the CBA says to use the Net Present Value of the contract to know what AAV they assign to the deal. Net Present Value basically says 'using a set discount rate, how much is this contract worth in today's dollars'. Since a dollar today is more valuable than a dollar 10 and 25 years from now, the net present value of Ohtani's 10/700 deal is roughly 460 million, so he counts 46 million towards the luxury tax for the next 10 years and then nothing afterwards. So the luxury tax captures the economic benefit that they gave to Ohtani, but the deferrals are so extreme it makes the announced 700 number not very 'real' outside of being technically correct.
  12. I don't, because the player has to agree to it. Teams are not that stratified that they can risk being the one to bring up the idea of massive deferrals without potentially alienating that player. Players have lawyers and agents and accountants too, so it's not like they don't know what's being offered and what that means in practical purposes. Maybe you see a few more teams try to do smaller deferrals, but that's been a pattern with certain ownership groups before(e.g. the Nats), and the LT savings if you aren't doing Ohtani scale deferrals are very, very small
  13. Harper's contract is actually frontloaded in real dollars, he gets 30 million in year 1, 26 million for the next 9 years, and 22 million for the final 3. So even if they did that as NPV(and maybe they do? I forget if they do it for all contracts or just those with deferrals) it would be a trivial difference, maybe even a higher LT number depending on the discount rate.
  14. is today confidently incorrect about basic econ concepts day or something
  15. No they are not gaming the system, the only 'manipulation' is so Ohtani can claim to have gotten say that eye popping number. There was never a 700 million offer in real terms available to him from the Dodgers or anyone else, and it's been widely reported that Ohtani shared the deferral idea of his own volition with other teams.
  16. Do you view this offseason has continued a trend in that regard? Because the Dodgers spending in the last few weeks has taken their LT payroll from 4th in MLB and 3rd in the NL to....3rd in MLB and 2nd in the NL. They underspent their norm last year and then dropped enough payroll from their roster to pay for all their FA signings. They're leaning into stars and "scrubs" (in quotes because they have a strong farm and PD) more than escalating their spending into a higher gear.
  17. Like 20 teams were in playoff contention until mid-September, and a few of those who were not were some of the biggest payrolls and/or markets in the game(SD, NYM, LAA, BOS). Spending increases your margin for error, but the most important factor in how successful(and consistently successful) teams are in the last 2 CBAs is how well run the organization is.
  18. I would handicap it as more of a tossup, depending on how strictly you view the Dodgers' happiness with the deal. Any outcome where Yamamoto opts out is good for them because even if it's only a couple years they got an elite pitcher. The outcomes where he doesn't opt out though(which is probably much more likely) are stacked in favor of them not being happy with the investment. 12 years is a really long time and 27 million is non-trivial even for the Dodgers.
  19. Having multiple opt outs caps this potential benefit though, with the caveat we don’t know when those are yet AFAIK.
  20. No, the LT value is accurate for the Ohtani deal, it's the announced 700 that's fake for any practical purposes. It's because they cut payroll last year to try to get under the line (unsuccessfully), and then had Kershaw, Urias, and Bauer(combined LT: 57 million) fall off in addition to another 41 million in marginal players(K Hernandez, JDM, Treinen, Hudson, Peralta).
  21. Doesn't feel this way because the Dodgers have made a number of expensive moves, but both New York teams still have a higher LT payroll than the Dodgers. It took this move for the Dodgers to pass the Braves.
  22. It's true the Dodgers could comfortably beat Angola, probably Yugoslavia too.
  23. The Mets collapsing on themselves is pretty hard to beat in terms of schadenfreude, but the 2024 Dodgers going out in the NLDS to the Reds would give it a run for its money.
×
×
  • Create New...