Rcal10

But why do we need Naylor? Busch is cheaper just as good and has more control left. Naylor is a FA after this year.

Makes the Dbacks better.

Followed a few years later with Jackson for Jackson trades. Source: I have an 8 year old grandchild who’s 3 best friends are named Jackson.

He isn’t going to play anywhere with the Yankees. . Why did you quote me with this comment. My point was I assumed Rizzo was done anyway, with the Yankees. I didn’t need Goldy signing with them to confirm it.

I didn’t need Goldy signing with the Yankees to confirm Rizzo is done. But what does this do to Bregman’s market? Are the Yankees still on him?

I understand your point. I am just posting what I think is something the Cubs might do. I think he is more likely than Burnes.

I think it is far more likely the Cubs sign someone like Buehler than it is they sign Burnes. If they want to take a chance on a guy who can slot in as a TOR starter he is who I think they will sign. He kind of fits the Luzardo idea. High reward, he risk guy. The Cubs move prior to this year, would probably be someone like Lyle Gibson. Innings eater, MOR starter. I think the Cubs are aiming higher this year. Hope so, anyway.!

I agree as a major market they should be more aggressive. But they are not. And that contract would stop them from adding. So Burnes isn’t happening. And that said, I would not be comfortable with him for 6 years at an annual of $36M. I think that would be a bad signing.

And by someone, you think that should be the Cubs? Hard pass on Burnes. Not only would the Cubs FO not even consider this, I don’t blame them in passing on him.’

Burnes is going to cost $36M a year? For how many years? That is a very easy pass for me. And IMO even easier for this FO to pass.

Is it though? If Burnes cost $27M that leaves $13M to $17M to spend and be under the LT. Please don’t rehash what you think they have, and accept these numbers. So how are we adding 2 pen arms and a bench bat with what’s left? And if you are being honest do you really see the Cubs committing 6+ years for a pitcher? I don’t. I would be Shocked If they signed Burnes. I think their chances at Sasaki are far greater than Burnes signing here. Money in the budget or now, I don’t see the Cubs signing Burnes. I take Jed at his word that he isn’t even remotely an option.

This would make a good off season into an amazing one. Hopefully Suzuki and Imanaga tell him how best it is in Chicago and how well the FO treats them. I do think they have a chance at him. Jed has done a nice job with the Japanese market.

Doubtful. I would say signing Burnes has about a 1% chance of happening. So to me, not worth talking about. He isn’t coming here.

This is the type of thing we all know they aren’t doing. They are not signing Burnes. Jed actually ruled him out several times this off season. So why even suggest it? But I agree they should get another pitcher regardless of what happens with Sasaki. And I am sure they aren’t waiting until there is a Sasaki decision to try making a deal for a pitcher, whether through FA or trade. That said, they may not get something done until after the Sasaki decision, but not because they are waiting on his decision. Might be because they don’t find the deal they want.

It has been rumored previously. So just going off of comments and media reports. I believe there thing to cut some payroll and Cease and King were mentioned as possible trade options.

There are two points of view when I am posting. One is what I would like the Cubs to do and what I feel they can do, but won’t. The other is posting what I think they can do and it fits in what I perceive the FO to be and how they operate. So while I will agree with you that they CAN fit a high salaried starting pitcher and/or Scott on the team with multiple years on their deals, (and still sign Tucker to an extension) I don’t think they will. What I think they will end up with using $40M is a starting pitcher, 2 pen arms and a major league player who can play 1st or 3rd. Either a switch hitter or right handed bat. I think the other spots in the bench will be Kelly, Canario and either Workman or Cowles. There are numerous combinations of players that can fit to get to $40M. But for me, the best use of $40M would be trade for Cease(extend him), sign Yates and Minter and then get the best bat you can for insurance on Shaw and to sub for Busch. Then extend Tucker and you have 3 guys moving forward when the roster clears, making $90-$100M. I would be thrilled with that. I just don’t think they would do it. I think they should and don’t understand why they wouldn’t and why they can’t act like a major market team. And I hate they don’t. But I do not see them doing it.

I get this. And I like the idea of Lopez, Minter and Yates. But even after that there should be some cash for a bench bat. We are using $40M like it is this line in the sand. I think at that number they are $10M+ short of the line. I don’t expect Flaherty or Scott. I don’t see the Cubs going long term in a pen arm. And I am skeptical of Flaherty for the reasons you provided above. I also don’t think Castillo is possible unless another team is involved. Seattle wants major league talent back. If you like the idea of Hoffman converted then something like Hoffman, Yates and Minter should be good for you. And that would definitely leave several million to add one bat who can play 1st and 3rd. Since you put a few scenarios together, how would one of these look: Cease/Kirby/Gilbert/Keller/King/Ober Beuhler with Yates and Minter. There is also some pitchers in Tampa like Baz, and Bradley they can trade for. I can see $15M to $20M for a starter and that same number for the pen. But if you go $20M on one the second will be closer to $15. That would leave plenty for a bench bat. I agree with you, the arms come first. I just think there are ways to get those arms without spending all the $40M and be able to get at least 1 guy who can fill in at 1st and 3rd who has major league experience.

I don’t think they are going to get a starting pitcher they have to pay for several years. I really think they plan on extending Tucker and I am not sure they can carry him for $40m, Swanson for $27M and a pitcher they pay $23M a year too. Maybe why I don’t expect all $40M going to the staff. Same thing with a relief arm. I doubt they sign one long term, like Scott. And to me the Tucker extension is most important. I do agree with you about the outfield. My original thought was just one bat to cover 1st and 3rd. Either switch hit or right handed. Others jumped in for a 2nd bat who is an outfielder. I see that point, but I am more in favor of 2 pen arms and a starting pitcher and one bench. So we really are close to the same here. The last point I will make is I don’t think throwing money at pen arms automatically means the pen is good. I think people suggesting this really don’t realize how unstable a pen is. From one year to the next guys are good than bad. Unless they go with an elite closer(and that would mean multiple years at a high salary) I don’t think it makes much difference if you sign a guy for $4M or $14M. The higher priced guy fails as often. Which, again, is probably why I don’t see them spending $40M on arms. One thing I am certain of, however, is the first time the pen loses the game people will be complaining about it. Complaining about the pen is a yearly ritual across fan bases of all 30 teams.

They have $40M to spend. What pitching is going to cost $40M? Why not one bench guy with major league experience. This fan base complained all year about Mastrobouni and Wisdom being in the bench and now they don’t want to spend any money to put a proven major leaguer in the bench. There is enough money available for 2 pen arms and a starting pitcher and still get a bench bat. No one is suggesting spending $20M on two bench bats. Just one bat with a max payroll of $5M to $8M is not going to stop them from getting a solid starting pitcher and a couple of pen arms. If they can do it for less that is fine. But there is no sense skimping on a bench bat to spend on pitching. Plenty of money for both.

That is my thought. Then one more pen arm and they are done until Sasaki decides.

Canario, Workman and Cowles are not the same as Baez, Russell, Contreras and Bryant. All of those guys came up to start. The guys you want on the bench aren’t even the best prospects the Cubs have.

Because they have 4 guys who may pitch 550- 600 innings between them I would like to get a guy you can count on for 170+ innings. I understand it could work. And you have great examples of it working. But I would rather they get a guy who is a starting pitcher now. I would rather they get an established starting pitcher..

I can see the argument against spending big on a bench bat. But I would like one, at least. Maybe spend $32M to $35M on a starting pitcher and 2 pen arms and $5M to $8M on someone who can cover 3rd and 1st. Castro makes $6.8. The bench would be Kelly, Canario, Workman and Castro. I don’t like the idea of all 3 non back up catcher spots taken by unproven players.

While we are at it, why not get Castro too?

I like Lopez too. But he does make $21M a year for 3 more years. If they got him they would only have $19M left to spend on improving the pen, a guy for cover for Shaw and at times Busch and maybe another bench bat or another pen arm.