Rcal10

I am not sure I follow. What evidence is needed? All that is being said is TR and Jed appear to agree with a plan on team building. Hasn't the last several years kind of shown what that plan is? Just because Jed agrees with Ricketts way to run a team doesn’t mean Ricketts will be happy with his work if they don’t make the playoffs again next year. I believe that TR does set the budget and does have a certain philosophy of how he wants his team built. I would think he would believe his plan is good enough to actually win. So just because Jed also believes this philosophy, that does not give him free reign to continually underperform what TR expects. So that is why he didn’t just extend him. I am sure there are many potential GM’s that would be fine taking the job with the Cubs, even if it meant they need to follow certain philosophies. And I would think TR would sign one who does believe in his plan.

That is what I thought. That said, IMO Fried is highly unlikely.

I know he did with Burnes. I am not sure about Fried. But I doubt he signs him.

Agreed. Now if they wanted to sign Adames and then trade Parades for a young starting pitcher and then not sign Fried, that might make some sense. Considering you have to add Taillon to this plan, they cannot sign both Adames and Fried. Personally k am fine with Parades. But if they signed Adames, Parades would need to be traded, not benched. And they need to get someone decent for him.

Agreed. It really is hard to separate the two of them. On one hand Tom is setting the budget and is clearly not interested in giving a guy a 10-12 year deal. But on the other end, I think Jed agrees with that philosophy. I also agree with what you said earlier. If/when Tom replaces Jed it will be with the same sort of guy.

I think he will get $10M for one year. Maybe with a team option for year 2, or mutual option. I might do the 2/$20M, no more than that. And I would do the 1!for $10M prove it deal. But with another good pitcher picked up this off season as well.

If they did this and traded for a front of the rotation pitcher is signed a front of the rotation starter, I would hate Buehler for a 1 year or at most a 2 year deal. But can’t just go with him.

I think if they like him enough to go 5 years they won’t worry about the QO penalty. But to sign him for 2 or 3 years they might not want to part with a second round pick. I don’t believe they have ever lost a second round pick for a guy they signed for 3 years. I realize you never said 3 years. I am saying it as a time line that, IMO, they would have to exceed in signing someone if they are losing a pick. So if it is Pivetta my guess is he would get a 4 or 5 year deal.

I think the Phillies wouldn’t consider this for even a minute.

Let me clarify my statement. Stratos said Pivetta wasn’t good enough but Kikuchi was. I happen to like Pivetta a bit. So I added to his comment that he was not good enough, because I thought the only way he would say that is because of the draft pick compensation. I don’t see how Kikuchi could be someone they should sign but not Pivetta if it wasn’t for that reason. That said, I am not certain the Cubs will sign a mid level starter on a 3 year deal if it means losing a second and fifth would pick. Maybe they would do it on a 5 year or more deal. But do you want then to sign Pivetta for 5 or more years? I’m not sure I would want that. That is why I will stay with my belief that they won’t do it. I would be more than happy if they proved me wrong. As I said, I do like Pivetta a bit more than Kikuchi. But, I think, more than likely, they will either trade for a starter or sign a mid level guy not attached to a QO to a 3 year or less deal.

To finish your sentence, he isn’t good enough “to lose a second and fifth round draft pick to sign him’

I agree with you. But I doubt that happens. I don’t think the Cubs will be in an obvious sell position next deadline. And, dor that matter, I don’t think the Red Sox will be in an obvious buy, either. But for the scenario you suggested, it does make sense.

I understand Castillo might not be any better than the mid level pitchers they can just sign. But if they traded Bellinger for Castillo my hope would be they then add a big bat like Tucker via trade, to replace Bellinger. I would rather have Tucker and Castillo than Bellinger and Eovaldi, as an example. I think the Castillo/Tucker combo is actually cheaper than Eovaldi/Bellinger. Besides that, several of the mid level pitchers are attached to a QO. Trading Bellinger gives the Cubs room to add a big bat. And why not do that and also fill a hole in the rotation. The catch is, they then need to sign Tucker. I would think the FO should have a pretty good idea what Tucker would cost. If they don’t plan on paying that price for him, then there is no reason to make a trade for him. I don’t want to lose the prospects they will have to lose for one year of Tucker. To me, this would be the biggest reason not to entertain something like Castillo/Bellinger. But it is also something they can absolutely control. Just pay him more than anyone else does and you have him. Time to be aggressive if they want to win.

I think LA has an advantage because of a huge Japanese population there. Also, all the glamour and glitz of Hollywood. New York gets that same advantage IMO. That is what the players in Japan know best about the US. It also didn’t hurt those two teams that they played in the World Series this year. And LA has Ohtani and Yamamoto being in the rotation next year. I can completely understand why the Dodger would be the favorites to land him.

Thanks. That is fair. But I do think the Mariners could still use Bellinger and the Cubs can use Castillo. At least enough to make those two the main pieces in a deal.

Just curious, how much sense does a Bellinger for Castillo trade make, straight up. Both have a similar salary. Both underperformed a bit. But both make some sense for the team they are traded too. Is that fair? Does something else need to be added somewhere? Would Castillo excite some Cubs fans as a guy better than Taillon and a top 2 or 3 in the rotation? Maybe they do that and trade for Lowe? Or think bigger and go with Tucker or even Vlad.

True. But the problem I have with mid market pitchers is some come with a QO. I don’t see the Cubs giving Pivetta, Eovaldi, or even Manaea a 2 or 3 year deal and lose a couple picks in the draft. If Flaherty is considered mid market, I can see him and, of course, Kikuchi.

Hoyer gets a lot of grief from the fanbase, mostly justified. But, tbh, he does a good job selling Chicago to the Japanese market. He may not get Sasaki, but I do have faith he will do a good job recruiting him. Cubs treat the Japanese players they do get very well. That goes a long way. And, again, Hoyer has something to do with that as well.

I think geography gets overstated most times. I agree with you on factors like branding, marketability, team fit and team culture are imporrant. I also feel the cities Japanese population plays a large part in the decision making. I think that is why LA is so appealing to Japanese players. Plus they are a major market in Japan as well. I really don’t feel being a few hours closer, via plane, makes that big a difference. How often do players fly home during a season? Besides that all players start the season in either Arizona or Florida. I guess family traveling from Japan to see the player could mean something. However I think it is far lower in the level of importance than a players comfort day to day.

It not a done deal. But IMO the Dodgers have better than a 50/50 chance of getting him. Cubs are probably the second most likely (they have done a good job with recruiting Japanese players), but that still probably gives them about a 20% chance. This is not a signing that money will factor in. Cubs do have a chance, but I wouldn’t count on it.

I get it. But I don’t think you need to trade them all to build a winner the next few years. With trades and FA signings you can build a good team and still have some top end prospects. I would agree everyone is available in the right deal. I just wouldn’t trade everyone. I don’t think k there is enough guys on the trade market for the Cubs to blow through all their high end prospects. Plus you might want to keep a few around to fill a spot and/or to be used as trade bait at the deadline.

I am not quite on the trade all prospects bus, but I do agree they should be trading prospects for major league talent. And I also agree using the 2015-2016 team as an example of why you keep prospects is foolish. I am sure we can find many examples of it not working like that. You don’t keep prospects because 1 time it worked not trading them versus 15-20 times it doesn’t work.

Him doing what ownership wants him to do is no different than any employee doing what his boss wants him to do. Deviating from what your boss wants you to do gets you fired in all types of work. No different in baseball. In fact, the reason Jed has the job is because he agreed to do what ownership wants him to do to build a team.

Three things here. First, I am not talking about extending anyone. Honestly haven’t even thought of that and never talked about it. I am talking about not trading major league talent and replacing it with minor league talent this off season. I don’t think you just trade Happ or Suzuki and assume a minor leaguer will fill in for them and be just as good. Second, I agree that more of the same is not ideal. But even bringing back the 9 guys who played most games at the end of the year is not more of the same from MOST of 23’. This year they have Parades and PCA all year. They have a more established Busch. Those 9 guys, when playing together won at a 90 win pace. I know, small sample. I also agree with that. But that is why you get a front line starting pitcher to replace Hendricks starts. You improve the pen. They bring in another catcher to either share time with Amaya, or take over the job. They add a solid utility/ semi regular infielder who bats left handed and strengthen the bench. That takes an 83 win team to a 90+ win team. Maybe add a right handed bat better than Wisdom to the bench. Between prospects and money they can spend there is no reason they can’t add enough through trades and FA to be that team. IMO now is not the time to get rid of good players and replace them with minor leaguers. That is all I am saying. And finally, the Cubs aren’t missing out on big name free agents because they have other guys signed already. They are missing out because the FO and ownerships philosophy of building a team does not include giving guys a contract of more than 7 years. Big time FA want to be paid until their later 30’s to even early 40’s.

I get your plan. I just think too often people suggest trading good players and replacing them with minor league players and assume that minor league player is going to be successful instantly. And that that player will be every bit as good as the guy he replaced at a 1st year salary. Replacing guys like Happ, Suzuki, Hoerner, and even Parades with Alcantara, Cassie, Shaw and Triantos would turn this team into a 70 win team. And I realize you aren’t suggesting trading all of those guys. This is just an extreme example. IMO the Cubs are pretty close to being that 90 win team they are shooting for. Replacing Hendricks with a solid starter, having Paredes and PCA all year, adding solid catcher, a pen arm or two and maybe strengthening the bench get them to a 90 win team. Between prospects and money they can spend, they can do all of that. For me, rather than trading Happ or Suzuki(who both have NTC anyway) and replacing them with a prospect, use those prospects to bring back someone like one of the Seattle pitchers or Crochet. Maybe a solid starting catcher. Maybe a solid left handed hitting bat who can play the infield. Maybe a bench bat or pen arm. Not all of those things via trade. Don’t trade all the minor league talent. Keep some to hopefully take over in a year or two. But they can use 3 or 4 of their top 10 prospects along with a few more between 11-30 to add a few solid pieces via trade. That plus spending on a few guys through FA and using the minor league talent they keep to filter into the majors could make this a very good team and still have talent to replace guys in a few years.