WrigleyField 22

So if the model is to basically take the current ZiPs® and extrapolate it out to a full season, its not nearly as nice to Ruggiano and Coghlan who others have used as support that we have depth. Neither would be 2WAR players over a whole season with that model. And also Rizzo probably isn't as good as his WAR this year. Only Rizzo and Bryant have a chance to put up real big WAR value (and as awesome as Bryant is I'm pretty skeptical about those preseason projections from Oliver which state that). Most of our guys fall in the 2-2.5 range, and that's assuming full seasons, so there's all the partial players who would still get PA at lower WAR paces. But you take a lot of the good teams and they have at least one guy who is (as of today) a 5-6 WAR monster plus either a few at 3WAR or even 6WAR pace in partial time. Or as a team, the top teams will likely end the seasons with 25+WAR production out of their hitters. Taking only the best 7 projections from that methodology and average catcher production (using preseason rankings for Soler and Bryant*) we'd fall about 20 WAR from our hitters. Still an upgrade from this year, but there's room for improvement. And there is roster and dollar space to bring in additional players. Now while you can't add those extra PAs in there, it just helps to minimize risk overall, whether it be injury or performance risk. We have roster space, we have cash, we have some versatile players. The more 2+war type projection guys we have, the better. Sure a higher WAR player that would legitimately bump a guy down would be nice, but those aren't as available either. *pre-season projections seem really kind to Bryant and harsh to Soler. Intuitively it would seem to be more in the middle for both.

Probably true, but Soler's leg will probably fall off.

Is Zips® the right projection to use for this purpose over Zips(U)?

during the same time-frame you're referencing, Josh Harrison has been the best player in baseball (and Ryan Braun one of the 5-worst); it's not a terribly useful sample size projection systems still like him, and scouts still like him...sometimes players slump I see some basically replacement level projections and a 7%/27% BB/K rate in 172 PA.

I find your logic illogical. Its like someone who says they're not opposed to some political thing when its so obviously the right that by not being for it is just another way to be against but in an attempt to not looking like a horrible person for being outright against it.

Also I'll just say again being "not opposed" to a OF is not enough. With our resources and current projected lineup it should be a top priority just like getting a FA SP (or two). If you're simply "not opposed" you're basically opposed.

It can't be much clearer he is worried about pushing guys out of the lineup. I'll pick on this one. It's pretty clear that he is more worried about what Castillo's level of production is going to be than pushing specific players out of the lineup. He specifically says he could support signing Castillo if the idea is to make Alcantara available in a trade, but isn't sure that Castillo's production will make that worthwhile. Otherwise, he is saying the most likely scenario for 2015 is that Alcantara is in CF and Castillo would be in a corner. When Bryant would come up in May, he is suggesting that it would push Valbuena to the bench. He is specifically questioning whether Castillo's production would be > Valbuena's plus whatever we could get for $60M. Now, I could point out that there are two corner OF's and the only way Bryant would have to push Valbuena to the bench given the presence of a FA OF is if Bryant takes one corner and the other is taken by Soler or the Coghlan/Ruggiano platoon. But this comes back to TT's point that the platoon and Valbuena have both been productive positions for the Cubs this year. Having them in place as veteran options mitigates the benefit of signing any additional offensive FA's. I'm not against acquiring an OF (which seems the obvious choice), but if we are going to lock down a position I would hope that we'd go big with the acquisition instead of getting someone just for veterany goodness. Signing Castillo or whoever doesn't lock you in anywhere either though. There's only 3-4 guys that really absolutely should and realistically I expect to get 600+ PA. Bryant will likely be held down, Soler has an injury history, I don't trust Coghlans run this year. Ruggianio is a platoon guy IMO, and Alcantara and Valbuena aren't good enough to pass up other good hitters ($60M or whatever be damned because there is no foreseeable budget crunch). That leaves Javy, Castro and Rizzo who are locks for PA. And I'm not about "veterany goodness". As stated Castillo isn't an MLB veteran. I am about adding to our options and there isn't too much plausibility in not having the resources to do so.

Sure it doesn't outright state he thinks that's gonna happen but people are still talking about how awesome Alcontara is going to be and he hasn't done much after his first few weeks. I'm pretty sure that very post you quoted was :begging: to sign Castillo. I don't think that person was hoping for Welington Castillo's productivity out of LF. Ha missed that part in between hoping Alcantara, Javy, Soler, and Bryant to be Castro and Rizzo clones. Of course that lineup would be a favorite because we'd have three of the top four HR hitters in the NL plus a bunch more 700+ ops guys. And that's apparently what stands for super pleased. Maybe this dudes just really dull but I'd be super pleased if those prospects were 2013 Castro and Rizzo and I'm pretty sure he's talking 2014 versions. If they were 2014 versions... I don't even know if there are words.

Valbuena and Coghlan/Ruggiano have each been 2+ win players at positions there is a potential need for next season. I'm on board with adding another bat, but the depth is there now to hedge against a prospect falling flat or an injury or two. Nothing to controversial here, but we still only go about 10 deep on hitters, so Coghlan/Ruggianio isn't enough backup for me. It can't be much clearer he is worried about pushing guys out of the lineup. Yeah, I fail to see the craaaaaaazy part of that previous statement. 55Mil+, assuming for 5 years is about what I expected. If it's only 4 years, that's still doable. Probably going to pay someone lesser similar annually (maybe not as many years) if they sign an OF. doubtful Bryant* / Contra / Soler *Ruggiano / Coghlan til May That's in response to "signing an OF" Can't sign an OF cuz were gonna move our 3B top prospect to LF (not sure if to save Valbuena's coveted role or for the AA prospect) 2015 lineup thread as stated has other similar stuff.

Okay it's not scoffing but definitely too much contentment with an all prospecty lineup. The 2015 lineup thread, in between Sulley's Castro/Hammels trade has a lot of homegrown lineups thrown out with no real mention of FA or trades. At this point not automatically including a FA on projections is severely overrating our current hitters. Sure it could still happen that we don't sign a FA hitter because of value issues but the message board offseason predictions don't usually include just missing on guys. And this good gem from that thread. Sure it doesn't outright state he thinks that's gonna happen but people are still talking about how awesome Alcontara is going to be and he hasn't done much after his first few weeks.

Rob is the best example in this thread. May have to look at other threads to fine more examples (perhaps 2015 lineup thread?). Will report back.

This might be the dumbest thing asked on here since Da Bum left it's misguided to keep repeating that some of these prospects are sure to fail with the implication veterans are comparatively a sure thing; it's a point that's needlessly belabored it's been said before, but it warrants repeating that "minor league batting statistics will predict major league batting performance with essentially the same reliability as previous major league statistics" so let's talk about the veterans who'll flame out, too, like Schierholtz, Jackson, Sweeney, etc. have Well there's truth to that but I don't think the actual projections are gonna be as rosey as "plug in all the prospects". Some will be worse one will be better, some on the money. However as long as the alternatives they replace are generally worse we should use the resources we have like money and improve the offense more. But there's a generally growing feeling from fans that would don't need good hitters (or even potentially good ones like Castillo) because our lineup is "full". But I still project a Sczur or Reed Johnson like vet in our roster when I'd gladly bump everyone down one. Same rule applies to pitchers but we have more depth, even if it lacks the high end potential. But with our FO track record and the injury risk of pitchers I wouldn't keep putting big FA resources into pitching after two guys, which again still leaves money to play with. There's too much available funds for people to scoff at hitting just because our first wave happens to be here.

What's the conservative $ estimate on what they'll have to spend, $40-45M. Even if you grab a top of the rotation starter AND a mid rotation starter, your talking 30-35m? Leaving up to another $10m or more. If we thought we had a lot less available, I may feel differently, but they should have plenty to address pitching needs and still add more hitters to give us depth and options.

Why does it have to be a specific guy?

While we need to spend on pitching, hitting is still a need. A ton of the guys we are counting in haven't seen a big league pitch, have injury concerns, or have had struggles with the ML pitching they've seen. A starting caliber OF would go a long way. Hopefully it's addressed somewhere else in FA or trade. So, to solve this problem you wanted to sign a guy that has never seen a big league pitch? Just bring in additional options in anticipation of some of the inevitable failures.

While we need to spend on pitching, hitting is still a need. A ton of the guys we are counting in haven't seen a big league pitch, have injury concerns, or have had struggles with the ML pitching they've seen. A starting caliber OF would go a long way. Hopefully it's addressed somewhere else in FA or trade.

10 Teams. I was a little worried about Jackson too so hopefully I don't regret not keeping one of my RBs instead (could have kept Bush, Spiller, or Vereen, all for around Market value).

Drew Brees, NO QB $41 Matt Ryan, Atl QB $3 Tony Romo, Dal QB $2 Jamaal Charles, KC RB $60 Andre Ellington, Ari RB $19 Joique Bell, Det RB $11 Pierre Thomas, NO RB $3 Donald Brown, SD RB $1 DeSean Jackson, Wsh WR $14 Keeper Antonio Brown, Pit WR $10 Keeper Alshon Jeffery, Chi WR $5 Keeper Riley Cooper, Phi WR $6 Terrance Williams, Dal WR $7 Kyle Rudolph, Min TE $2 49ers D/ST D/ST $3 Matt Bryant, Atl K $1 Left money sitting on the table which I've really never done. And 3 QB's was excessive. Still like my team, though.

I was thinking of Upton, but he doesn't fit the OP's criteria of only having two more years. Not many do, though. Given that, here's what I come up with that have a rough contract fit: Andre Ethier (2017 + Option, $18M/18/17.5) Curtis Granderson (2017, $16M/16/15) Matt Holiday (2016 + Option, all at $17M) Nick Swisher (2016 + option, $15M/15/14) Michael Bourn (2016 + option, $13.5M/14/12) I'd trade Jackson for any of those, no cash exchanged. The Mets aren't trading a hitter for substandard pitching, and nobody is taking Jackson without actual relief. Well Jackson is relief in all those instances, though barely for Bourne.

I was thinking of Upton, but he doesn't fit the OP's criteria of only having two more years. Not many do, though. Given that, here's what I come up with that have a rough contract fit: Andre Ethier (2017 + Option, $18M/18/17.5) Curtis Granderson (2017, $16M/16/15) Matt Holiday (2016 + Option, all at $17M) Nick Swisher (2016 + option, $15M/15/14) Michael Bourn (2016 + option, $13.5M/14/12) I'd trade Jackson for any of those, no cash exchanged.

All these new rules feel targeted at the Cubs because we keep end up being the last to try and start exploiting them, but really it's because we waited too long.

It's our first time with keepers, if you drafted the guy it's the average of the price you paid and this year's ESPN value, if you picked them up as a FA it's 80% of this year's ESPN value. Gotcha. Doesn't reward you too much for smart drafting.

Man how does your league determine keeper price? I think I go Allen and Stacy.

Chicago National Baseball Club. With a big Toyota across the chest. I'd enjoy the team just as much.

It looks crappy in large part because those mock ups plastered a logo nearly on top of the existing. If the uniforms were redesigned and it looked basically like soccer uniforms I'd have a hard time REALLY caring, though may be a little annoyed. It wouldn't effect my enjoyment of the actual game though.