Rcal10

You lost me. Why would he be a good fit if he “could fake it in centerfield”? How does adding Garcia and Lowe help, even with Garcia a solid defensive outfielder? And why center? Is PCA being moved? This is not a criticism. This is an actual question to what your vision would be if García was a good defender. What does the 25 roster look like with him and the prospects they have?

Lowe fits well even when Hoerner comes back. If Bellinger is gone, he is the DH. Even if they added another bat that is a “regular” everyday guy, that player and Lowe still fit with Hoerner back. They would have 9 guys for 8 non catching spots. Which is fine. If Bellinger leaves you have around $80M to spend. Plenty of money to have a solid pitcher signed along with trading for Lowe, adding a pen arm, a share time/starting catcher and another decent bat. If they are getting right to their budget, instead of signing another bat or a high end staring pitcher, they can use some of their minor league assets to trade for one of those spots to get a younger, controlled starting pitcher or bat. Money should not be an issue this off season. Not if Jed gets aggressive with some of his minor league talent. IMO now is the time to trade them before they start losing value. if Bellinger comes back, Lowe still works with the 9 guys for 8 positions idea. But then they might need to trade some prospects for one of the main things they need. Either a trade for a controlled pitcher, a high leverage pen arm, or a starting catcher. Then use the rest of the budget to fill in the other spots. By no means is Lowe someone they have to have. Just saying he does make sense and he doesn’t make that much money to mess them up. There are several ways to make this team solid next year, however. But Jed needs to be aggressive and this is the year he should be.

There isn’t a chance in hell that the Cubs trade a top minor league bat and Horton to get Garcia and either Gray or Mahle. That is just ridiculous. Texas getting rid of those guys should be closer to a salary dump, not getting top prospects.

I am pretty sure you are right about Soto. And any idea I post is based on no chance on Soto. If they are in in him, that takes center stage over any other options, without question.

Honestly I don’t even care which stats belong to which player. After a while I stop caring about EV, how often he hits a ball in the air, barrel rate, bat speed, k rate, w rate, or any other metric people love to use to make a point. After a while of year in and year out numbers, end results matter. Lowe beats Torres in both career numbers and numbers last year in OPS, and OPS+. And he beats him rather easy. Hell, Torres numbers last year were equal to Hoerner. Besides that Lowe hits from the left side and can, in limited times, play the outfield. If Bellinger does opt out he is a better fit. I don’t hate the idea of Torres if he overvalues himself and ends up costing himself a multi year deal. On a cheaper 1 or 2 year deal he would be fine. He would be a good fill in for Hoerner when he is out. But he wouldn’t be my choice between him and Lowe. And if they did get Torres, IMO, they would still need to add a better bat then his, who also hits left handed. When Hoerner comes back they mix 9 players into 8 non-catcher spots in the line up and always have a decent guy in the bench. I just wouldn’t want only Torres. With Hoerner back Torres would be the primary DH. And his bat isn’t good enough for that.

Neither stats from last year or from their career agree with this. I am sure you can find some metrics to explain why Torres, with worse career number as well as worse numbers last year is a better hitter, but Lowe ends up with better results. This goes for both last year and over his career. And he hits left handed. Also a plus, assuming he is replacing Bellinger in the line up.

I don’t know about not calling him an outfielder. The dodgers played Edmans, Betts, and Taylor in the outfield and infield, They even played SS. If it is good enough for them to mix guys all over the field, I am not sure why we can’t put Lowe in the outfield. And if not, than DH. If Bellinger opts out, IMO, he is a better option than Torres because he hits from the left side and is better offensively. But it will all come down to cost. If Torres is willing to sign a short deal and the Cubs have to give up what they are not comfortable giving up for Lowe, then sign Torres. But it can easily go the other way too. Torres might get a 4-6 year deal and an average higher than he should get, and Lowe’s cost might not be something the Cubs view as too extreme. So trade for Lowe. All equal, meaning they are ok with either acquisition cost, and they can only have one of those players, I would take Lowe.

I don’t mind Torres either. But if Bellinger does opt out I would rather get a lefty bat to replace him. An added bonus is Lowe can also play the outfield. That would be the reason I would be interested in Lowe. And frankly, why not Lowe and Torres. If Bellinger opts out, once Nico does come back, that gives the Cubs 9 guys for 8 non catching spots. So there will always be a solid bat in the bench. If they aren’t going big (and we don’t know their plans), in a trade of a FA pick up, this would be a way to strengthen the team.

Considering the Cubs and Rays did make a deal at the deadline, I am pretty sure each tr knows what the other might want or be willing to give in a Lowe deal. So I agree that Lowe is a strong possibility as a trade target.

I think I would rather trade for Cease and not sign a second pen arm. The Cease trade drops Assad into the pen, if Assad isn’t in the trade, which would be the second pen arm you talked about. If your number was $70M including the pen arm and Cease cost $15M annual, saving $6M by not adding a pen arm would put them just under the $80M they will have to spend. And they would have a great 5 man staff.

Which Jansen? Pen arm or catcher? Either way, if it is the pen arm then they trade for a catcher. If it is the catcher they trade for a pen arm. Sneaky good off season if they added someone like Mountcastle as a right handed bench option. No “WOW” signing or major trade, but a pretty solid off season.

To be fair, they had no chance with Ohtani. He wasn’t going anywhere. Judge was pretty set on NY as well. As for Turner, IMO, he doesn’t fit the criteria of a guy you break the bank on and change your entire FO philosophy to acquire. Besides that there were rumors even before free agency started that he wanted to be in Philly. He is a solid ballplayer but far from a generational talent. Soto is the last chance at a generational talent at such a young age. If there is ever a time to throw “stupid money” at a player now is the time.

And maybe he will sign Eovaldi for 2 or 3 years and it turns out to be a good deal.

But if you signed Fried for 5 years you have him at 33,34, and 35 the last 3 years of his deal. And, honestly I think he will get 6 years. So add 36 too. So rather than worry about Eovaldi now you have to worry about an aging pitcher in a few years. And on top of that, the aging pitcher at that time will be being paid more than Eovaldi. Plus, you run the risk of him getting hurt even before he gets older. Now if that happens you have a guy in a 6 year deal for a high annual salary who is injured. For me I would rather take the short term risk who also happens to be a right handed pitcher and will cost less annual and in years, and not cost the Cubs a penalty because of QO. Bottom line is there is risk everywhere with pitchers. But the best ones want to get paid well into their mid to late 30’s.

I get that. I know they will be in on him. I also know they have a lot of dead money coming off. But they also have some good players to replace. And they were substantially over last year. Will they do it again? Probably. My point was not so much the Mets won’t be in on Soto, it was actually that there is no reason the Cubs shouldn’t be. They can spend as much on Soto as the Mets can. I also am pretty sure the Xubs won’t be in on Soto. Just saying it shouldn’t be a forefone conclusion that if the Mets wanted him the Cubs can’t do anything about it. They can. They can pay him more…

Moises with a double and a homer today. Both balls crushed to right/right center. Sitting right behind home plate. Ball sounds different off his bat.

You are 100% correct on the Mets. But they are losing 2 middle of the line up bats and 3 starting pitchers along with that salary they have coming off the books. So they have a few more places to add players with that money. The Cubs are basically losing Hendricks. And they have $50M (give or take) to replace him and then add. And if Bellinger opts out that number goes to $75M (give or take), but they have to replace Bellinger. And frankly, they actually have whatever they want to have if they ever decide to play like a major market team plays. If they want Soto they can get him. They just have to change the FO philosophy on team building. And that won’t happen.

But why? Why can’t the Cubs just give him the most money and most years? Why is it a foregone conclusion that if the NY teams and the Dodgers want a guy the Cubs can’t outbid them? I know they won’t. But I don’t know why they get a pass if one of those other 3 teams gets him. I give them a pass on Ohtani. He wasn’t leaving LA. I don’t think Soto is locked in to any one city.

But the problem is younger guys similar to an older guy in results would want a longer contract that would take them through his older years. Using Eovaldi and Fried in this example, my guess is Fried gets a 6 year deal. So you have him 34-37 years old anyway. Just not next year. Eovaldi would probably get a 2-3 year deal. Sure he may drop off. But Fried could also drop off towards the end of his contract. But along with the risk of Fried falling off older, he is also a risk to get hurt even before he gets older. Sure, if the discussion is Eovaldi on a 2 or 3 year deal or Fried on a 2 or 3 year deal, give me the younger guy every time. But that isn’t the choice. The younger guy will want to be paid until 35-36. So taking the younger guy on a longer contract is just kicking the can down the road on the risk if having an older pitcher who breaks down. Between Eovaldi and Fried, IMO Eovaldi is way more likely the guy who the Cubs sign.

Pretty much my thoughts. Maybe I pick Eovaldi over Flaherty and maybe add O’Neill in your potential bat signings if Bellinger opted out. But for the most part, this is about what I would expect too. If he opts in I would like to see Mountcastle as that right handed bench bat. Of course they can also trade prospects for a bat and sign or trade for a second pitcher if Bellinger opts out. They have enough minor league assets to use for bigger trades IMO. And if there ever was a year to do it, this would be the year.

I would like to believe Jed will not care about the penalty for signing a guy with a QO. And as you said, he did so with Dansby. However that was also the year he lost Contreras and got a pick back for him signing elsewhere. That will not be the case this year. While not wanting to lose the pick(s) without gaining an pick back, might not be the only reason not to go after Fried, that on top of having to give him a longer contract, higher AAV, and him being a 3rd lefty at the top of the rotation might be reason enough to look into Eovaldi over Fried. Eovaldi doesn’t come with the QO penalty, is a righty, will sign for less years, a lower AAV and fits what they don’t have in the rotation. A hard thrower. And he is pretty good as well. Seems to be more the type of guy Jed targets.

I think Eovaldi/Flahery is way more likely than Fried. Besides the QO, I think the length of the contract needed for Fried versus Eovaldi comes into play. Maybe not with Flaherty. I also think they would rather have a right handed starter. I don’t see the top 3 pitchers in the rotation being left handed. Plus Wicks will get some starts. For me, there are too many reasons Jed would go after Fried. If not Eovaldi/Flaherty I would guess a trade for a starter is more likely than Fried, as well.

Ask Lonzo Ball.

If they want better than Taillon I would rather he already be better, not “may be better after the Cubs work with him”. That said, I like Keller. I would be fine with him as a MOR starter, for the right price. I am just not assuming he is better than Taillon. He is better than Hendricks, and that is who he would be replacing. So the staff would be better. But if the FO goal is someone ahead of Taillon I would rather they aim higher.

Is he better than Taillon? Over the last 3 years his era and whip are higher than Taillon. He is younger, throws harder and probably has better “stuff”. But are the end results better? Does he give up less runs per game? IMO, they need to aim higher than Keller if the goal is “better than Taillon”.