Bertz

Don't like this. Possible explanations, in order of how much I don't like them - There's about to be a trade coming down that impacts the pitching depth, and Rea is backfilling e.g. Assad (I do potentially like this one) - All of the depth starters are technically optionable, so Rea is the long reliever and all of Assad, Brown, Wicks, Poteet will 100% open the year at Iowa - One of the guys we've been counting as SP depth is viewed as 100% a reliever, e.g. Brown - There's an injury we don't yet know about - This is the other SP we've been promised. Which would heavily imply that the payroll's indeed been cut

The Padres need to cut payroll, and seem to be pinning a lot of their offseason hopes on Sasaki. So depending on what Sasaki chooses, that might make someone like Dylan Cease or Michael King available. It seems like the remaining SP is the biggest item left on Jed's to-do list so one of those two guys coming available would be significant.

Might still need to wait for the Padres to get closure

I personally don't love it. He did great against lefties last year, but with his two primary pitches being east -> west I think he'd probably get eaten up by lefties if forced to sacrifice velocity and go through the order multiple times. Maybe a year from now if he's proven the strike throwing is permanent and the splitter becomes more than a ascent offering. We do have a pretty interesting relief conversion candidate in house though: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5917662/2024/11/13/mlb-relievers-converting-to-starters I probably wouldn't do it but it's worth considering.

Just wait til April. The haughty "90 wins huh" arguments from people unwilling to acknowledge strength of schedule are gonna be a blast.

No that's actually very fair. I think anecdotally, all of the spare parts guys they've brought in this year have had very obvious reasons why they could work out (Ben Heller throws 96 with movement, Pitching Bot wants to have Matt Festa's babies, etc.), while those guys from yesteryear felt more like projects. But that's anecdotal. Less anecdotally I think the projections are more pleased with this bullpen too. Like last year, when Dan Szymborski ran his ZiPS article the Cubs bullpen was projected for 2.9 WAR. This was pre-Neris, so he'd bring it up to 3.4. Of that 3.4, 60% was attributed to Alzolay, Merryweather, and Neris. This year, before Thielbar and presumably with one more big-ish signing out there to be had, ZiPS has the bullpen at 3.6 WAR. Hodge/Miller/Morgan, the current projected top 3 relievers combined for 45% of that WAR. So I think the depth being better isn't just our fan-induced bias (though I don't want to celebrate too much no longer having a reliever projected for star-level production).

I think the problem last year, almost as much as Alzolay/Merryweather/Neris all going bust right at the start of the year, was there not being anyone immediately ready to go at Iowa except Palencia. So when things were really bad in late April/early May they couldn't even re-arrange deck chairs and hope it'd help. This year it seems like the Iowa bullpen will be a unit where we can turn essentially immediately if things go wrong. Like I think this is roughly what we're tracking towards for an opening day AAA bullpen CL - Daniel Palencia Setup - Jack Neely, Luke Little Matchup Guys - Gavin Hollowell, Riley Martin Middle Relief - Ethan Roberts, whichever two veteran Zastryzny/Festa/Heller types they can convince to stick at Iowa That's a pretty solid crew of reserves. Palencia, Little, and Hollowell are each guys I'd feel comfortable giving the ball to in April. Neely's obviously got fun potential, and Roberts did quite well last year (mostly in garbage time to be fair). There's also to your point the young starters. Brown and Horton in particular would likely really eat out in the bullpen. Shifting back to the MLB bullpen, I do think a legitimate closer is absolutely necessary to tie things together. And I'm a bit wistful neither of Morgan or Thielbar are guys I have more immediate confidence in. I like the acquisitions, I see what they're going for, and they seem reasonably likely to work out. But I would have liked two "name brand" types this winter to overcorrect from last year. Unless they end up with a SP in the ~$25M range they had the resources to do so.

Happ's the last prominent player that I'm aware of and clearly the well wasn't poisoned. I'd prefer this wasn't going down this way but most likely it doesn't matter.

Based on what?

https://www.mlb.com/news/ian-happ-wins-arbitration-case-against-cubs https://www.mlb.com/news/ian-happ-cubs-agree-to-extension

I'm about as sympathetic as you're going to find on these types of arguments generally, but A) 29 is still very much on the young side for a long term contract to start B) the Cubs have essentially no money aside from Swanson tied up past 2026 C) Tucker's about as safe, consistent, and well rounded as you're going to get an opportunity to watch yourself to Like if you say no to Tucker, you're pretty much categorically out on these sorts of deals broadly? Because even the 25/26 year old who reach FA are starting to get 13/14 year deals, so you're not getting away from paying players in their late 30's unless you refuse to play the game entirely.

Also not that it's been much of a secret but outright dumping Mastro further outlines that a LHH infielder is going to get added to the big league bench. Also makes me wonder if the intention is to trade to keep Workman even if the Rule 5 stuff doesn't work out.

FWIW both of the pitch models on Fangraphs actually like what he did in limited time last year quite a bit

I mean sure we're not tracking the actual documents getting submitted to the league office, but they drag their feet on getting this information out publicly on every single deadline. And there's no strategic value to the secrecy around these administrative items.

Okay the Cubs always wait until the last horsefeathering minute on these sorts of deadlines but two hours is still a lot. You really do have to wonder if something is up, good or bad.

Going to keep attempting to manifest this until we hear a Kyle Tucker arb number

Feels like this idea's not really evolving

Sasaki is notoriously reclusive

Really glad this is no longer 5pm on a Friday

Yeah I'm probably toward the higher end of that, but something like Steele/Shota on a rate basis. So if you combine that with the aesthetics of a triple digit fastball you're looking at someone comparable to Hunter Greene. Hunter Greene is great! But I have a feeling fans (and not just Cubs fans in this case) are going to have a meltdown when he's not a god-like rookie like Strasburg or Skenes.

So this is probably worth asking: How good do you think Roki Sasaki is going to be? Because I feel like a lot of people are getting very far out in front of their skis.

Feels like having to face the juggernaut Dodgers is potentially more of a feature more than a bug