Jump to content
North Side Baseball

squally1313

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    10,347

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

 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

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by squally1313

  1. squally1313
    Yeah seriously. Anyways, my vote is to just have it automated by your team. Business has picked up, excitement should be higher going into the year, Bregman or not, but I think a consistent, generic first going up every morning would still let some form of the older traditions continue. You can still have a Mad Men gif winning streak, just has to develop in the responses as opposed to waiting for the thread creator to getting around to create the topic. Come playoffs...maybe a different opinion.
  2. squally1313
    Wait, the Astros are out on Bregman because of a guy with 20 PAs above high A but we should get him and send the guy with the AAA wRC of 142 back to Iowa again? Serious teams don't make major league decisions based on a guy who just barely got to AA. He's the 59th ranked prospect in baseball, should we be keeping a spot warm for Triantos (73rd)?
  3. squally1313
    Yeah exactly. No one can take on salary? Fine, find the most desperate team (ie the Padres) and fleece them (for Cease and/or King). Or, there are teams that can take on salary? Cool, they probably want a really good second baseman/shortstop at $12m a year and would happily toss some controlled names at the Padres to send King our way.
  4. squally1313
    I mean I just threw out names. If the Mariners can't stomach a $12m 4 win player, fine, I guess. I'm sure some team could. If every team is supposedly looking to lose salary, either now or in a hypothetical future, then yes, trades seem very hard to accomplish.
  5. squally1313
    I mean, those are nitty gritty details. Take on Haniger and a portion of his salary or whatever.
  6. squally1313
    To be fair to chibears, he mentioned getting a third team involved in some sort of lose Hoerner/pick up King situation. Hoerner to Seattle, Ford to San Diego, King to the Cubs as a (very loose) framework.
  7. squally1313
    The part I can mostly suss out is that the Astros original deal was 6/$156m, and he's made $30m annually the last two years, so I think he at least miffed (offended?) by their offer being a pay decrease. Also saw something about him wanting to beat Devers in AAV, who is making $31.3m or so. There was an improved offer today, who knows what that means, in the same report it says it's still not good enough. Then there's also the matter of how much of it is deferred. If it's 6/$200 but paid out $10m at a time over the next 20 years, that's probably not going to do it either. I can't imagine the Cubs are offering AAV much higher than that Devers deal. Past that, even with a Hoerner tradea you still end up a little tight. But something like 4 years, $100m, with the actual cash split being $40m in year one and then $20m the next three years, gives him an attractive payday with the opt-out chance to go establish himself as the top AAV 3B next offseason.
  8. squally1313
    1. When have you seen this play out 'too often'? 2. We all read the second paragraph of that tweet right? 3. Does the season start tomorrow?
  9. squally1313
    Two points, one on each side: I agree with 1908 and KC that Hoerner is very undervalued by BBTV and we should ignore that. The projections for Schmidt as shown above show 108 innings pitched, and I'm not totally sure what drives that number, but I was under the impression it was some sort of dynamic playing time projection analysis where he is coming in as the 5th/6th starter in the current Yankees rotation and that's just what normal fringe starters usually get in terms of innings. He threw 96 total last year and 159 in 2023 so he's capable of more. Basically what I'm saying if he got traded to the White Sox tomorrow he'd be their opening day starter, I would imagine his innings would go up (to that 150 IP number, maybe), and I would then imagine his projected fWAR would increase because I can't imagine his rate stats would take too much of a hit, right? Said another way, the rate stats give every pitcher some miniscule amount of projected fWAR per inning, and then it gets multiplied by how much they think he's going to play, which is somewhat a factor of the roster he's on. But I might be thinking about that wrong.
  10. squally1313
    Not to muddy the waters even further, but I feel like you want to weigh short term production/projections over the longer term ones. A. They're more reliable, and B. a win now is more valuable than a win 3 years from now. If I wanted to overcomplicate the math, I'd weigh 2025/2026/2027 as like 50/30/20.
  11. squally1313
    Have to assume the medicals were real scary and appeal to authority on Flaherty, because using the money on him seems a lot easier than anything else we're currently discussing.
  12. squally1313
    I would have guessed that the sample sizes are too small either way to make a definitive lean one way or another and you should just default to 'success' in the regular season translating to 'success' in the playoffs, especially on the offensive side of the ball. 'Success' being combined offensive and defensive contributions. Certainly could be wrong, but I think however you optimize your team for the regular season should be the way you approach the playoffs (setting aside differences in pitching approach because of the additional days off, etc).
  13. squally1313
    FG has the 2026 at $112m in guaranteed contracts for 2026. In 2025 we're paying $27m to arb eligible players, call that $30m for 2026, and then they're estimating $11.4m in 2025 for 'for players not yet eligible for arbitration and other players with non-guaranteed contracts'. We can keep that consistent for 2026. Plus $2.5m for Bellinger, $2.5m for 40 man roster guys in the minors, plus $18m for benefits, plus $1.66m for the bonus pool, you're at $177.6m. I think the argument pre-supposes you're either paying Tucker ($40m) or replacing him in the aggregate with that kind of cash. Rea, Pressly, Brasier 'need' to be replaced as well. Honestly it's not as automatic as I thought it was going to be when I started typing it out, unless I'm missing something.
  14. squally1313
    This doesn't actually hold up, right?
  15. squally1313
    Yep. It's February 6th, you can't say that you want a 6-7 year deal AND that you want in excess of $30m/year. If it hasn't come yet, it's not coming. The long term offer (6/160) is presumably still on the table from Houston, or else you're looking at us and Boston I guess for the short term cash grabs. I know Detroit is out there but I must have missed the stories on them drastically increasing their budgets. They ended up at $121m for CBT purposes last year and are already at $156m for this year with the Flaherty signing (which, cash wise, is front loaded). Obviously all these teams can afford it, but that's a big leap.
  16. squally1313
    Was curious about this. Cots is obviously not the end all be all here, but from what I could tell: Shota: $1m for winning the Cy Young, $500k for 2nd or 3rd, $250k for 4th-10th Boyd: $100k for hitting 80, 90, 100, 110, 120 innings pitched, so theoretically $500k total Kelly: "may earn additional $500k annually in performance bonuses based on games started" Brasier: "may earn additional $4m(!) in performance bonuses based on relief appearances". This looks to be $2m/year. Berti: "may earn additional $1.3m in performance bonuses"
  17. squally1313
    You need 900 innings from your starters. Steele gave you 135 last year, we can call that 150. Shota gave you 175. Optimistic, but fine. Boyd? 100 is probably optimistic, but sure. That's 425. A midseason trade for a better starter typically happens right around the deadline, using Jack Flaherty as an example, he threw 55 innings for the Dodgers last year. So let's just say you've got 450-500, or a little over half covered by those pitchers. Do we want 400+ innings to be covered by the rest of the pitchers on the roster? Assad and Rea are stretched out but clearly a level below Taillon, and even full, healthy seasons wouldn't cover the full need. Wicks threw 67 innings last year, Brown 55, Horton 34. Poteet 77. What if Steele or Shota goes down? How are you covering this?
  18. squally1313
    Even if you're real optimistic about Bregman as a hitter and call him equivalent to Suzuki (126 and 118 wRC the last two years vs 128 and 138 wRC), you're basically just...improving third base defense by a little bit at the end of the day? The prospects, at a high level, wash out because whatever comes in for Suzuki probably has to go back out (or at least the equivalent value, switch some names out, whatever) to upgrade the pitching, and so ultimately you're going from 2/34 on Suzuki to 4/110 or whatever on Bregman, plus a mid-level 'rental' starter in a trade (if you aim higher, debit the farm system). Realistically though, you just made the offense worse and lost $12m-$15m in available money this year. Kinda just seems like a way to avoid some of it going back in RIcketts pockets without actually improving the team. BaseballTradeValue is very flawed but has Suzuki with basically the same trade value as Ryan Pressly.
  19. squally1313
    Yeah I get you. I think ultimately you were talking more about 'what happens if we get him' and I was still stuck on 'let's not do this', which are two different conversations. If we sign Bregman, I certainly don't want some late February, everyone knows we're trying to dump Hoerner, trade just in the name of financial flexibility. Basically, if signing Bregman means our only way to a midseason starter is a Hoerner trade, I'd like to politely pass. If signing Bregman means we have to trade Hoerner right away, hard pass.
  20. squally1313
    Agree on the last point, and candidly if you asked me I'm more Team Megathread but I understand the desire to generate new topics. Here's a link to the thread with plenty of discussion on Bregman in the last 24 hours:
  21. squally1313
    That's fine, seems like everyone here (implicitly or explicitly) wants Bregman to bail after this season too. Trading prospects for a one year guy is a win now move, but pretty much everything is telling us we should be in win now mode. On top of that, I think everyone here wants to extend Tucker. Cease 100% coming off the books at year end gives us a better shot than whatever the probability is of Bregman opting out. You're down prospects, sure, but Cease is a bigger improvement to the team, and you're more likely to sign Tucker, which makes you less likely to need someone like Caissie or Alcantara.
  22. squally1313
    But that's the thing, you won't find the same conversations in all of them. I think people here are trying to help you, in one way or another. I assume you want to see people here talking about the latest news (ie Bregman), giving their opinions, dropping in the latest news, etc. That's why you came here with those tidbits right? That's all happening, but not in this thread. You'd (maybe) get more enjoyment here if you found the other threads where this news is being discussed (some would say ad nauseam!).
  23. squally1313
    I'm not going to be thrilled about adding $18m ish in 2025 payroll and like $60m in future payroll to wind up in a wash for the 2025 major league team. There isn't really a prospect package out there that bridges that gap for me, especially in a 'win now' mode. I know a Bregman contract and 2/24 of Nico isn't apples to apples in terms of overall contribution to the team. But, what, you then thread the needle a third time (after the Bregman contract, and after the Nico trade) to trade prospects for the starting pitcher you still probably need in a few months? And ultimately you end up with a slightly better farm system than just getting a starter now, three months of a good pitcher instead of six, and a likely uncertain payroll situation, a la Bellinger, going into 2026. Isn't it just easier to bite the bullet on Caissie, Assad/Birdsell, and a lower level lottery ticket now? Your farm system takes a hit, but you're a better team than you are in a increasingly unlikely hypothetical of a Bregman and Hoerner and Shaw future, and you maintain better in season flexibility and a lot more flexibility going into next year. And yes, I know we can't just wave our wand and force a Cease trade, but we also shouldn't just assume Bregman is waiting on our offer.
  24. squally1313
    We did though, didn't we? Catcher we went from Gomes/Amaya to Kelly/Amaya Third Base we probably didn't upgrade from Paredes, but on the whole last year our 3Bs generated -0.8 fWAR, and Shaw is projected for 2.1. Centerfield, PCA outproduced Bellinger last year in less ABs (obviously in the aggregate, not offensively) Right field we went from Suzuki to Tucker DH, we had Suzuki there for 60 games last year, then a mix of others (Morel with 29 games, Bellinger with 24, Tauchman with 20). Everyone listed besides Suzuki is worse than Suzuki, more starts for Suzuki here is an upgrade. Meanwhile on the pitching we took Hendricks 24 starts (0.4 fWAR) and replaced them with Boyd and Rea. I'd argue replacing Assad (1.0 fWAR in 29 starts last year) with a 4 fWAR pitcher is more valuable (and less of a financial commitment) than replacing Shaw (2 fWAR) with Bregman (4 fWAR).
  25. squally1313
    At the risk of minimizing your really well thought out post, there's a common trend there: I don't know. If those are your options (and I think they largely are), and they all come with some less than ideal implications for 2026 and beyond, I'd rather just overpay for Cease? His money falls off after this year and you're left with essentially the same pile of cash you'd need to extend Tucker, you're down someone like Caissie and a pitching prospect but you also aren't on the hook for like a 3/90 Bregman contract. Caveat that I would do whatever it takes to get the price down on Cease (or go talk to Seattle again, or see if Miami wants to talk, etc). But the knock on effects of a Bregman deal feel like an overpay all on its own. Go get an elite starter.
×
×
  • Create New...