Rcal10

So your plan is to bring players along until they are good and then trade them and replace them with prospects who may or may not be good. Probably will not be good for at least a few years, if ever. And then once they get good I assume you trade them too? And the reason to do this is to cut payroll so you can add quality players as free agents. The problem with that is usually you pay for past performance with free agents and actually overpay. The other problem with that is you are signing free agentd onto a bad team. So maybe you take a 70-75 win team with Cassie and Alcantara in the outfield and by adding a few decent free agents turning it into 77-83 win team. Your plan is what small market teams have to do. And sometimes they get lucky and hit on young talent. It isn’t something the Cubs should do, IMO. I just feel this plan is a plan to constantly kick the can down the road to becoming a good team. You put way too much faith in young talent. Happ and Suzuki are not easily replaced.

I doubt Morosi is just making stuff up. I am sure what he says is something he heard. The problem is that doesn’t mean a trade is imminent. And then when nothing happens you have people suggesting he made stuff up. I would guess 90% of what is talked about doesn’t happen. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t discussed. Doesn’t not mean Morosi or any other reporter was just throwing horsefeathers against the wall.

That’s fair. But you do have to factor in the team they would be trading with, too. I think TB is far more likely to trade Lowe than Houston is to trade Tucker. And as I said, I was responding to thawv when I wrote what I wrote. And he already eliminated Tucker. Tucker would obviously be a bigger upgrade. But keeping him around would be a huge financial commitment, after 25. Lowe, not nearly as much.

Agreed. Add a young pitcher by using some minor league talent. Then they still have a good chuck of money to add other needs.

Honestly, for me, everyone is available. I am not suggesting depleting the system. I am saying there is no one guy I know of that I feel strong enough to have to keep. The Cubs might have one, and I understand that. I just don’t know enough about the way the Cubs view any particular prospect and I am not a scout or deep into the team to have a strong opinion of any one prospect. I just know this is a good year to trade some of those assets for proven talent. I don’t expect their value to be higher than it is now. And now is also the time where adding a proven major league talent via trade should be used as a tool to get this team from an 83 win team to a 90+ win team. Not the only tool. But at least a part of the plan.

I would love Tucker. But while some do project what they think Jed would do, based on his past, you tend to ignore it, all together, and act like NOW he will start being aggressive. As for Langeliers, he is just an option. Could be O’Hoppe, could be a guy that splits time with Amaya. Langiers does add power to the team, however. As for the last bat, you mentioned filling it from within, which is fine. But the Cubs can do that with a Lowe trade as well. Really all I was trying to do was show thawv how they can add another bat and still have money to add elsewhere. He already suggested not seeing how it could be done with Tucker. That is why I used Lowe. As I said, I love Tucker. I just see that far less likely. Yes, they can do it with him, but IMO he is far less likely an option.

I agree it won’t be Tucker. His salary will be too high, it is only 1 year before he hits free agency, he probably should play 155 games, the Astros probably won’t trade him, and he might cost too much in minor league assets. But why not Lowe? He cost $10M this year and the Cubs would have an option for him in 26. He fills in for Nico now. He is similar to the players he would be mixing with. So playing 140 games works for him. And he is on a team who is known to trade guys around this time. If the Cubs did make a trade for one of the Seattle starters or Crochet, there is plenty of money to add a $10M bat. Honestly they would still have enough money to add someone like Tanner Scott for the pen, keep Tauchman as the 5th outfielders and add a catcher by trade or free agency. All that would be left is picking up a right handed bat for the bench and maybe another pen arm. depending on how aggressive Jed wants to be with prospect trades he could deal for Langeliers and get a catcher cheap too. Which, even keeping Tauchman and spending big on the pen arm, he would have roughly $20M for a right handed bench bat and maybe another pen arm. Even if my numbers are of some and they don’t have $20M, we are talking about adding the last bat on the team and maybe a pen arm. There would be enough money for that. We are also talking about adding Scott. They could cut some cost there too and get a different lefty for less. Point is, if they do fill the rotation with a cheaper, young, controlled starting pitcher via trade they do have money to use to add aggressively elsewhere. I agree that most likely this doesn’t happen. All I am trying to show is that with something like this you can play 9 guys at 8 positions effectively. You don’t need a set line up for 155-160 games a year.

You are using Tucker, which is fine. But IMO, if the did something like this someone like Lowe would be more likely. He cost less in salary and assets and with him the platoon can be 9 guys for 8 positions. With Tucker it would only be 6 guys for 5 positions. Yes, Tucker is clearly a better player, but he is not typically someone Jed goes with. Lowe fits the entire Cubs team. Good, not great talent. Which, to me, makes him way more probable. Plus, if you trade for Lowe, technology they can just keep Tauchman for the bench too. So all they would need is a right handed bench bat and a catcher. Bench bat can play anywhere.

I agree with you Tucker. I think he will cost too mich in in the way of assets and salary. And he is actually too good. He should play everyday. But if the Cubs added Lowe, his salary doesn’t hurt too much, especially if they trade some prospects for a starting pitcher. And his asset cost shouldn’t be too high since he is in the last year of his deal. He would also give infielders a day off as well as outfielders. Lowe can DH from time to time. Which would allow one of the 4 outfielders a day off.

Interesting that the Mariners and Cubs seem to match up pretty well. I know people hate to give up prospects. But would Shaw+ be something anyone would be willing to deal for either Gilbert, Kirby, Miller or Woo? It would give the Cubs a controlled pitcher for at least 2 years and maybe as many as 5, depending on who they got. It would also be giving them a pitcher better than Taillon for not a lot of money. Again, depending on who they got, he could be very cheap. Maybe this would allow the Cubs to think bigger for the lefty pen and and think of Scott. And they would still have money to improve the bench as well as the catchers position. If the Cubs could get one of the Seattle pitchers or Crochet for a few prospects it does open up possibilities to spend money elsewhere.

The Cubs😬

Doing well thawv. Hope you are too. Now, back to baseball. No one is suggesting Mastrobuoni or Wisdom should be added to the 8 non catching regulars the Cubs have now. People are talking about Lowe or Tucker. If the Cubs added one of those guys who are the best 8. What 8 should play 155 games and who should only play 50 games. In reality, even with 9 guys for 8 positions, when you factor in inevitable injuries, guys that are healthy all year from the 9 guys being discussed would probably play 145-150 games anyway. That is more than enough, especially when you have a back up just as good. The best part of this plan, besides giving guys rest, is you always have a starting caliber player on the bench.

Honestly, it is just thawv living in the 60’s and 70’s when you grow up on baseball in that time it is hard for some to let it go. I remember those times too. But that doesn’t mean I still think that is how the game should be played.

Fair point. But he also said improve within the margins. Adding a decent bat to replace one of the bench bats they have is improving within the margins. I absolutely agree pitching will be the main focus. Starting and a lefty in the pen. Then catcher. But I can see one fairly decent bat added to the mix. If for nothing else, to be a solid bench bat, guy who may play 3 to 4 days a week. They have enough young talent to trade for that semi regular bat and still not hit the farm much.

I agree the focus in free agency will be pitching. Probably also a bigger focus in a trade too. I also agree a FA bat, except Soto, wouldn’t want to come here because they cannot guarantee an everyday spot. But if someone is traded here he doesn’t have the option of picking his team. That is why guys like Lowe, Tucker and maybe even Vlad are brought up. And I also know that is doubtful. But slightly more likely than a FA signing here without a position.

That is 1960-1970’s baseball thinking. Also Leo Durocher thinking that cost the 1969 Cubs a pennant. This isn’t baseball in those year thawv. Pitchers don’t throw 300 innings on a 4 man staff. No one throws 30 complete games like Fergie did back then and no one needs to play 155-160 games a year. Especially when you have similar guys to move guys around. We are not suggesting putting Wisdom or Tauchman in a rotation to play 140 games a year. We are talking about adding Lowe or Tucker to the mix. Huge difference. And it improves the bench greatly.

Couldn’t they do this with someone like Lowe as well? It would be the infield moving around, but is there a world where that would be 9 guys for 8 positions? I imagine that would have to have Busch at 3rd or Lowe at 3rd every so often. But isn’t that also an option and a less costly one than Tucker? Besides that, Nico might miss some time, so there is an example of an injury that would allow more playing time. Doesn’t Lowe also give them a left handed bat we want for the infield?

I am also out on Alonso. Now if he misplays the market and ends up with a Chapman like deal, sure, why not for a year or two. But definitely not 5/$125M.

I actually think Snell is more likely than Fried. Mainly because of the QO.

Canario not being a good answer does not change the fact that Tauchman isn’t either. He is a fine player. A useful back up outfielder and even an ok bench bat. But for the Cubs, that outfield bat needs to be right handed. To me the goal of the off season would be to add a solid semi-regular infielder who bats left handed, a right handed hitting outfield/1B bat, a catcher to drop Amaya to a back up/split equal time roll, and upgrade the last bat in the team, left or right handed. That would be how to upgrade the offense. Then from the pitching side add a guy near the top of the rotation and at least one left handed pen arm and maybe another pen arm. They have enough money and minor league talent to make a few of those movers bigger moves and then improve along the margins with the small moves.

I also think 2 things can be true about him. 1. He is a nice bench bat, 4th outfielder. 2. He is not a good fit for the Cubs. They have enough left handed bats in the outfield and can use an outfielder who hits right handed.

I don’t necessarily agree that Amaya has to go back in a trade for a catcher. Especially if it is to the A’s. I don’t think anyone has any idea of what the A’s value in trades. That said, I wouldn’t be opposed to a deal if Amaya had to go back. And I also agree it would take probably 2 top 100 prospects and maybe Amaya or another guy further down on the Cubs list of prospects to get Langeliers or O’Hoppe.

I am fine with Tauchman, but I am also more than happy to trade him for a pen arm. I would rather have his spot taken by a right handed hitting outfielder. They have 2 lefties and a switch hitter ahead of him in the outfield. I think a right handed bat is a better option.

It looks to me that at the very top high end they have $57M-$58M. That being the case, I would assume they would hold some back in the event of a trade deadline move. So brings us to probably $50M-$53M to add. Basically what you are saying. But, IMO, that is enough to make this a very good team. Add via trade or free agency a decent catcher, probably a decent right handed bat, a high end pitcher and a pen arm or two and maybe a lefty bat for the infield and the team should be very good. They have several prospects they can use in a trade as well as Tauchman to trade. Depending on if they want to spend money to get the players or minor league assets to get the players they should have enough money and/or young talent to do all of that.

I agree with this. Nothing wrong with having 9 starters for 8 non catcher spots. But I would rather that guy be Lowe over Rooker as well. I like the idea of a guy who can play the infield. Especially with Hoerner possibly miasing some time to start the season. And he would cost less in the way of prospects. Maybe then use more prospects to get that quality catcher. O’Hoppe or Langeliers.Then use free agency to add pitching. That would strengthen the line up, the bench, the rotation and the pen.