Bertz

It's a good point... Fields could be having standard rookie struggles AND be greatly held back by terrible coaching/team, which would dip him into historically poor numbers relative to other QBs. Not to say that other rookies haven't had bad coaching, but its a bit of a unique situation. Also again it's 9 games. He does have some things he needs to work on but if you parse the numbers out, he's doing some things well and has shown enough flashes to keep my faith high. If he's still in this range this time next year, then sure I'll be concerned. I think he's gotta progress a little faster than that. We're seeing with Kyler Murray that sometimes the big jump comes from year 2 -> 3. We're seeing with Tua that guys don't necessarily come out guns blazing the first few weeks of their sophomore year. But I think he needs to be at least average-ish for the bulk of next year to hold out hope that he's the guy moving forward. That said he's improved as the season has gone on, which I think is very encouraging. Since the debacle against Tampa he's averaging 7.7 yards per attempt, which is quite good. The turnovers and sacks have improved (though to be clear, they've gone from ludicrously high to merely very high). His QBR has averaged in the 40's, compared to the 20's through the Tampa game. Passer Rating up from 62 to 79. From a more qualitative standpoint, he seems to be adapting during halftime each week and has stepped up big during a couple of two minute drills You can't just throw out the first half of the year, but if the trendlines keep pointing in the right direction it'll be hard to not chalk this rookie year up as a success.

I mean the truth is you can't really say a ton of concrete things about rookie QBs. Most rookie QBs suck (at least at pure passing), and you're just trying to parse out different degrees of suck and hang your hat on certain splits or signature moments or whatever. And even being the rare non-sucky rookie QB doesn't necessarily make a difference. Baker Mayfield was one of the better rookie QBs ever from a pure pocket passing standpoint and has still settled in as merely pretty good. QBs improve a lot between year one and year two, and hopefully again between years two and three. But the magnitude of that improvement, from the outside, seems largely random. You just kind of have to cross your fingers and hope you got one of the good ones.

Reading the Fangraphs top prospects list reaffirms to me this should happen. Conventional wisdom for the best time to sign a mega deal is when you've got a critical mass of prospects either about to or having just broken into MLB. The Cubs did both last go around, bookending 2015 with Lester and Heyward. Even though Fangraphs paints a pretty rosey picture of the Cubs' minor league system, there's not a near term wave of prospects coming. The cohort of guys opening next year at Low A South Bend looks really impactful, but it's still a half dozen teenagers 3-4 years from the majors. There's still plenty of talent ahead of those guys in the pipeline, but it's not gonna be the deluge like late 2014/early 2015. But financially, that might actually make taking the leap more palatable? One of the problems with the last core was that the homegrown guys were all on the exact same timeline, which meant they were getting expensive all at once. On top of that, Lester and Heyward's contracts were similarly timed, so as they got older and worse, the homegrown guys got older and more expensive (and aside from Javy, worse). Because of that, after the spending spree in 2018, the team was pretty locked into a corner contract wise. And with a miserly owner refusing to lift his self imposed payroll cap, we saw what happened. A mega deal now would hit differently. Like I laid out above, the team's contractual outlook would still be pretty clean for the next 3-4 years. After that depends on a lot of unknowns, but if a few of those teens on the farm are the goods you've got an infusion of high end talent hitting the MLB club on the cheap right as Correa's deal is moving into its back half. That's a great way to blunt even the most albatross-y of contracts. If next year's FA class were better I'd probably say to hold off and focus on short term deals the rest of this winter, but I feel like Jed ought to take this shot in the next year or so. And with Correa's market being fairly small this is probably the best opportunity to nab a high impact guy.

Yeah I'd say on net that it's slightly light, I'd take the over on Hendricks, one of Mills/Steele/Thompson, and Happ, while the 3B and SS projections are more aggressive(and probably Stroman too), but nothing outrageous and as fans we'll always lean optimistic. I think what this does is lay out that if they do go the route that's expected and add some type of SS and someone like Seager, that they're really embracing variance with the OF. That's a decent place to do it since there's lots of playing time to cycle and new options are easier to come by(especially in the high minors relative to other positions), but it does underscore that you need an unexpected outcome and maybe two of them. Yeah, the OF looks really prepped to be a free for all. Happ's probably got a fairly firm initial hold on LF, but otherwise it's going to be a case of throwing guys at the wall until three stick. Steamer likes Harold Ramirez and Brennen Davis a little more. ZiPS likes Hermosillo, Wisdom, and Ortega better. Both like Hoerner, so if/when we get a real SS he can be a CF option as well. I believe the rule of thumb is that a replacement level team would win 45-50 games. So a low 30's WAR projection is a smidge under .500 projected performance.

A lot more bearish on the offense than Steamer (though more in terms of playing time than talent), but comparatively bullish on the pitching (except Justin Steele)

https://twitter.com/dougprish54/status/1470213974985781253?t=LSp5wpP2_SkQjFXuBOeHUw&s=19

I understand the sentiment here, but at the same time those 3 were 16th, 25th, and 37th in IP last year, and 26th, 35th, and 52nd in 2019. Yes there is no prime Lester/Arrieta workhorse you can count on for 32 starts of 6 innings, but that's partially because that pitcher is going extinct, 6 pitchers had 400 IP from 2018-19, and 4 hit 450 IP from 2019-2021. I'm not sure if there's a current rotation better equipped from an innings perspective to handle back end uncertainty right now. I'd feel better if they added someone else of significance, but on the list of the team's problems it's no longer near the top. I think too, the team's specific circumstances make rolling with the in house options a much more defensible choice than it has been in prior years On the personnel side, there are FAR more options than were available through most of the Theo era. Alzolay projects as a better than league average starter, and Steele/Kilian project at roughly average. None of the three are going to give you a full set of innings though obviously. Alzolay can probably give you 150ish, Kilian the same but some of those will obviously be at Iowa, and maybe 120 from Steele? Mills and Thompson project south of average, but north of replacement level. I imagine Mills will be the 6th starter, and Thompson will be a two inning reliever who gets stretched out if things break right. But they're quality depth that any non-superteam would be happy with. It'd be ideal if Mills had another MiLB option, but it helps that the other four names I've mentioned so far do. There's also the non-Kilian starters in the upper minors. None of these guys should specifically be counted on, even as depth. But in aggregate they have enough prospect pedigree and more importantly there's enough of them that you probably get a viable option or two in the second half. Anyone who tells you whether that will be Espinoza or Jensen or Marquez with any degree of certainty is lying. Personnel aside, I think the other key fact is that the team isn't balling out this year. Even if Jed adds Correa/Story, Seager, and a couple relievers, the team projects out to ~85 wins? This is a bridge year. So while you certainly shouldn't punt anywhere, and the Stroman signing alleviates my worries that Jed was going to, you also don't go out and load up on vets to minimize downside risk like we might have done in ~2017. I'm sure guys like Matthew Boyd or Martin Perez have a higher realistic floor than Justin Steele, but probably not by as much as you'd think and they certainly have less upside (likely short term and definitely long term). That's more of a move for when you're trying to make sure the ground doesn't give out underneath your 95 win team IMO.

The big thing here is that the Cubs are mostly done with the rotation. Sounds like they'll add a flier but probably no one else that would definitely own a rotation spot. I think that's the right call. I know I've been the most vocal "let the kids play" guy with the rotation since the start of the offseason, but aside from Rodon (whose medicals are probably a disaster given the Sox actions) I'm not sure there's anyone out there I'd rather have in FA than just letting Mills/Steele/Kilian fight for a spot. Probably Yusei Kikuchi, but he's getting a 3 year deal based on last reporting. It is interesting that three starters seemed like a given, and now it's two. I'm wondering if that's because Stroman's such a rock, or because they've found an opportunity to reallocate ~$10M elsewhere. Say it became a lot more realistic to sign a $35M/year shortstop instead of a $25M/year one? The infield defense is the other biggy talked about. 3B isn't really talked about, but it really feels like adding a shortstop (even just Jose Iglesias) AND adding Kyle Seager sure feels inevitable?

This is interesting, and pairs with an article on vertical approach angle from last year. I kind of think this is part of why the Cubs have turned into a team that can spin reliever straw into gold the last few years, but it hasn't extended to starting pitching. The Cubs have brought in some guys with extreme deliveries (Kyle Ryan, Brad Wieck, Dan Winkler) and gotten more success than you'd expect from them. So while funk can get you through an inning versus the right part of the batting order, to go 5-6 innings you need talent and not just smoke and mirrors.

Welp, scratch him off the list?

Given the need at 3B and the staff's groundball rate now with Stroman on board, Seager seems like a fait accompli

Broken hand/forearm?

I didn't realize Duffy's injury was so severe. He was my choice for the other starter to add this winter, but this cools me on him a lot. Because we do now have depth at SP, I'd still much rather have good-but-fragile Duffy over some of the pure innings eater types. But I think I'd now rather have Richards and Kikuchi among the second tier starters.

Offensively I actually like Vogelbach's fit on the roster. I just don't think it's workable defensively. With the Gomes addition meaning Contreras probably DH's one or two days a week, plus the huge number of outfielders on the roster, I don't think a pure 1B fits on the roster. Rivas is nice because he has minor league options, so he can come up after someone gets hurt or gets sent down for sucking. Hoerner and Wisdom are the only guys on the roster who can play the left side of the infield. The team currently has two hitters to add, and I think one needs to be a surefire starter at 3B/SS and the other needs to be able to at least moonlight there.

There was also a question he answered that said he hasn't bailed on Howard yet

I was disappointed in the lack of substance. It spent most of the article talking about how the Stroman deal fit their needs and bookended it with essentially "maybe they'll go after Correa too, who's to say" It's so frustrating that for the first time, maybe ever, the team has multiple very good beat writers yet the two who actually sometimes get scoops (Mooney and Rogers) are by far the worst at the day to day.

They *really* need to do this. And if Jed falls short on Correa he damn sure needs to come away with Story. 1. Financial flexibility isn't an issue. I'm generally more sympathetic to this type of argument than most (from the GMs POV not the owners, obviously), but it's not a contributor here. If you add Correa at $35M per, current payroll is still south of opening day last year. Next year's payroll at the start of the offseason would be a modest ~$160M, and the team would rank 12th in the league on dollars committed to '24, and 11th in dollars committed to '25 2. Next year's FA class sucks. There's a couple of superstars who are definitely getting extended (Judge, Turner, deGrom), a couple of superstars on team options (meaning they only hit FA if this year goes terribly), a decent number of 3 WAR SPs and OFers, and Xander Bogaerts. So your next 9 figure contract probably needs to come now or wait for the offseason prior to '24 3. There's nothing in the org at SS anywhere close to MLB. Nico Hoerner and Chris Morel are both fringey defensive shortstops. The next closest SS of note to MLB is Kevin Made, the 18 year old who OPS'd .662 in A Ball this year (that's great for an 18 year old! He's not clearly knocking on the door) 4. The pitching staff is very groundball heavy, and that seems unlikely to change any time soon. So SS defense is going to be a priority for the team for several years at least

I’d be shocked if this thing lasts in to the season and they start losing games. I’d bet they have something done in February at the latest. This is so optimistic but how can you feel this way? They've had months to negotiate and walked away after 7 minutes yesterday. What will create the incentive between now and February that wasn't already there? February 1st is roughly the point it starts affecting money. You can get all of the offseason stuff done in 2-3 weeks and have spring training still open mostly on time. Most of the league reporters think they sit on their hands until then, but don't expect more than a week or so of spring training to be affected.

Not actually familiar with the prospects but at a high level they shouldn't be enough to get out of Bradley's contract AND get Renfroe back?

I don't understand what happened with Hermosillo the past few days. I assume some esoteric procedural thing only Arizona Phil understands?

I don't like Dom but literally LOL'd at this

After '23, Heyward and Happ fall off, while Stroman falls off if he's good, and Hendricks falls off if he's bad. Given the timing of what's on the farm too, post 2023 offers a good opportunity to either *really* push the chips in, or dial things back a bit if the next two years don't go so well.

Wow that is not as much money as I expected

Yeah, no transactions that would impact the 40 man roster at all. Also, you can't sign guys who were in the majors last year to minor league deals. Technically no trades either, but I wouldn't be surprised if we see them happen and just have to wait until the lockout is over for then to be finalized.