ryanrc

This is a fantastic explanation. For those who don't have confidence? Here's some good hope. 1) Imanaga is himself 2) Boyd can fill the shoes 3) Assad will return 4) Taillon will give you Quality Starts 5) Brown is on the rise. 6) Rea can do the job 7) Horton is on fire. 😎Keller is looking dominant 9) We have ample budget to land a midseason elite pitcher. 10) Wicks could figure it out. 11) the best hitting team in baseball can cover for imperfect pitching. That's many high-odds lottery tickets.

Hey Cubs World, Ill get back to evaluating the position roster performance after game 20 of the season. This is a short piece about the state of the pitching. Here's a list of insights so far: The starters 1) No worries about Steele. Sure, Steele has struggled with health, but those struggles are minor. He's looked consistently like a top starter when healthy, and he will come back to 100 percent by Mid-May. He'll still give us 25 starts this year and earn his keep. (UPDATE: I WAS WRONG. SEASON ENDING SURGERY) 2) Imanaga should repeat his performance from last year, or even improve it. Ignore his 1 bad game. The Rangers were overdue to hit. He's still an elite option and healthy as an ox. 3) Boyd is fantastic. Hes our #3 guy. Sure, he gave up a 3 run HR to Tommy Edman, but other than that he's been virtually unhittable. He looks like he could outpitch Steele this year and that's a tall order. I had my doubts but now I expect him to repeat last year's sub-3 ERA. He's got a formula... and it's maximum confusion. He even made Ohtani look foolish. 4) Taillon has regressed, and could be demoted if that continues. I'm not terribly worried about his high ERA thus far, as he is showing quality start stuff, but I am seeing a guy who can't get KOs and gives up XBHs. He's looking like his 2023 self again- eeking out 6 innings for many quality starts and then occasional epic meltdown games- and those metltdowns need to stop., At this rate he projects to give up about 3 runs an outing- and thats 4.5 to 5 ERA territory. We simply can't get 92+ wins at that rate. He has a 50/50 chance of coming back to 2024 form. 5) Ben Brown needs a AAA stint. I'm not ready to give up on him as a key piece for 2025, and I think he could develop quickly. But he needs more starts in low pressure to work on his faatball control and his changeup/curve. We don't need another fastball/slider bullpen arm right now... let's see what he does against the Dodgers. Counsell is showing faith so far. 6) Colin Rea is our best #5 Candidate until Assad is ready. Let's get on with it- I'm not happy we have no hard throwers in the rotation but Brown. Still, reliability is more important and Rea can pitch reliably. I have confidence he can give us a circa 4.0 ERA performance and win games. ********** The Backend Bullpen: the Good News 1) Let Pressly and Hodge ride. I won't hit the panic button. Pressly has been sloppy but pitches out of jams like a true vet. He's NEVER been bad, but is not elite this year. Hodge will eventually take his job, but maybe not this year. Hodge is our top setup man this hear. 2) Merryweather looks solid. don't worry about small sample size effects. He's effective and throws hard. 3) Keller is excellent- make him the long relief solution! He was a revelation in camp and looks like a dominant arm this year. He may lead the team in KO/9. Keep it up, and give him multiple innings whenever possible. I'd rather use him as the go-to long reliever than the 5th starter, though. Give him close 50 2-3 inning appearances and a 40 pitch limit. 4) I have faith in Roberts. Ethan's journey to the Majors has been full of setbacks but right now he looks like yet another hard throwing option that could become higher leverage soon. He's here for more than a cup of tea- I think he's already flashing the ability to come in for early inning, high leverage situations. He can keep a game alive. The Low Leverage Bullpen: Bad News 1) Nate Pearson should go to Iowa. He's got potentially dangerous stuff but he's regressed to his historical sloppy mean. I don't have faith in him. He could re emerge but not anytime soon. When Brasier or Assad comes back, he's demoted. 2) Morgan can handle low leverage, but isnt special. enough said- he can be serviceable but don't expect heroics. Expect him to stay on the major roster though. 3) WTF is wrong with Thielbar? This is surprising me. I expected better. He's supposed to be a high leverage lefty killer. NO SIREE... he looks like a low leverage arm this year. He was mediocre in spring training. Hes showing 5 to 6 ERA stuff. Let's hope he recovers so we don't waste salary. I am on the fence about cutting the guy. 4) Tom Cosgrove was a Great Pickup but needs time. We finally added a serious developmental lefty piece to give us depth...but there's a reason the Padres moved on. They have very high standards for their bullpen and he's been wild recently. We don't need anymore walk machines at Wrigley, so the pitch lab needs to unlock his best formula. I hope he shows up by June- I can't stand only having 1 lefty in the pen. We need 2. 5) We need Brasier and Miller back. Our bullpen is really not as effective until we get these breaking ball pitchers back in action. Although we are chock full of fastball slider guys, Miller's sweeper and Brasier's breakers are sorely missed. Hopefully Brasier replaces Pearson ASAP, and Miller comes back to cover the next inevitable injury. Miller may replace Morgan, when he is ready. ******* The Minors 1) We are stacked with depth. No need to panic- we've got an impressive array of AAA pitching right now. Many guys could get called up to replace Pearson and Thielbar. I'll discuss the top candidates: 2) Cade Horton is looking fantastic. Don't be surprised to see him take a roster spot soon. He's too good to ignore. He's leading the minors with 12 KOs and has been unhittable. No rush though- we want him as confident as possible. 3) Daniel Palencia will find the Majors soon. He always seems just a few games away from greatness. i think hes virtually interchangeable with Merryweather right now- on some teams he'd already be a middle inning reliever. 4) Brandon Hughes is back... perhaps. He's had a rough time coming back from his 2023 injuries, but looks like a serious lefty option. Still, Tom Cosgrove has higher upside potential... so Hughes seems like an injury sub only. 5) We need to trade some arms and consolidate. It's rather bizarre that we have two full AAA bullpens, most of which are pitching very well, and yet are riding with mediocre performamces from Brown, Taillon, Pressly, Thielbar.... and also still have Assad, Rea, and ... this feels wrong. There must be a few teams willing to pick up several of our insane depth options so we can get 1 truly reliable piece. Hoyer better be on the phone every day until we assemble a championship top 13. What good is a dozen guys fighting for the bottom edge of the bullpen and the #5 spot? What good is it to have NO scary lefty relievers? Conclusion Overall, I love our top 3 rotational guys. I'm confident enough in Hodge, Pressly, and Merryweather. But let's take a step forward with the rest. No mercy on the weak. Let's get Horton and Brasier going somwtime soon and stop coddling sloppy pitching.

Another really important fact to discuss: There won't be many suitors. The biggest spending clubs are heavily locked in with big contracts. They are running out of wiggle room to add any more stars. I'll get into this more on a blogpost soon- but for now, note that right field is one of the most popular positions for the big contracts . Most big spenders have one already, and the small spenders won't jump. Yankees, Dodgers, Phillies, Padres, Mets, Blue Jays, Angels, Pirates, Braves, Brewers, Padres all ruled out. Also, no worries from Diamondbacks, White Sox, Athletics, Rays, Rockies, Guardians, Marlins, Mariners. Easily outbid: Royals, Tigers, Reds, Nationals, Orioles. What does this leave? Cardinals, Red Sox, Rangers, Giants... Astros. Cubs are in a great position to offer 43mm/year, 10 years, 430 million contract,... and win that bid. I believe Kyle Tucker is a more complete player than Soto (he adds .5 fielding WAR per year, with the same bat upside potential) and has a good chance to outplay him over that time frame. Soto's AAV is $51 mm, which is obscene considering its absurd length of 15 years. Still, I consider the market too small, and too few teams willing to go much higher on Tucker given their current roster statuses. People forget that contract size are not only shaped by the other contracts received by recent players, but also by the supply/demand. He may be the only super contract signed in 2026, but he's also arriving at a tricky moment, with a down economy, down media revenues, and all the top spending teams being heavily committed to big spending, and all the mid-tier teams needing more pitching help before hitting.

it was an ugly game... nobody played their best ball... Pitching has been below average around the league though. Not just a Cubs problem... I do think Ben brown needs a trip back to the minors and a few outings to work on his control, but also his changeup/curve. As you analyzed during preseason, he cant start in this league if he's a predictable 2 pitch guy... AND he's wild, to boot. And we already have too many fastball/slider guys ahead of him on the depth chart in the bullpen. If we give him 1-2 months in Iowa, he could come back and look great. Hopefully. Colin Rea has earned his shot at the rotation. Put him in, coach!

Thanks for the award! Most high-quality sports conversations are hidden deeply behind paywalls. This site is a real hidden gem, as are the top writers here. Although my family hails from Illinois, I've lived all over the east coast. Currently I reside in Atlanta, where there are about 3 Chicago-themed sports bars in the greater metro, serving about two million locals in theory - in practice, a few hundred locals and a few thousand random out-of-town visitors. If my job situation results in a longer stay, I will be promoting a North Side meetup at Black Bear Tavern in north midtown to cover recent news and highlights, and teach beginners about WAR, Statcast analysis, pitching/hitting strategies, and other metrics. It would be feasible to promote a small club with regular news briefs from this site. Wouldn't that be fun!

Hello Cubs world, on this blog I'll be laying out revised expectations for the Cubs 2025 Season. Hopefully I'll routinely update those expectations as the season progresses. It is a bit early to say too much about pitching -there's not much correlation between March and season performance. As usual, my goal here is not to predict what Craig Counsell will do, but rather what he OUGHT to do, if he wants to take advantage of the current hot/cold patters of Spring player performances. It is a common fact in baseball that some players are consistent and start slow/fast every year, whereas others have "special seasons" where they are unexpectedly but persistently hot/cold. Even the greatest players have dry spells. For now, let's talk about getting the most out of the position players based on what they are showing us. How Hot are They? Cubs are starting off near the top of the league in bat production. This is great news, as a hot start may give the team some insurance wins. On the other hand, their pitching is still looking inconsistent, so the hitters MUST hit to cover for that. Only a few players are cold so far: Tucker, Swanson, Shaw, Hoerner, and Turner. However, things can change at any moment. The only player that is deeply concerning at the moment is Swanson, because he's been cold too much, too often over the past 2 years. Sure, he's still one of the best gloves in all of baseball, but he really needs to hit in the .750-.770 range to earn his big contract. That's the range we were expecting when we have him 7 years, 177 million. Don't be surprised if Counsell treats every game like a playoff game and strategically alters the lineup radically to go with the best short-term matchups. Obviously, the team keeps data and inside knowledge I can't access. But from the outside, these lineups are my best guesses for how to get the best results from what we saw in Spring. Batting Expectations - First 20 Games VS RHP Let's start with projections for the batting order VS RHP: The main story here is that Swanson isn't looking ready for the season yet, and our catchers - especially Amaya - are hotter than expected. Also, due to Tucker's slow start, his place in the order is unstable, but should settle in eventually. Turner hasn't flashed much, but he's not meant to be a starter. He's a professional hitter who is unlikely to be terrible, but is only meant to pinch hit for Busch/Armstrong when facing lefties; otherwise, he's there for injury coverage or covering Suzuki's DH spot to give planned days off for the other three outfielders. This order reflects gut instincts about how these players OUGHT to be situated, even though I don't expect Counsell to follow this plan exactly. *** = Hot Spring hitters ***1) Happ - Solid spring! he looks a bit above his usual .800 OPS performance against righties. ***2) Suzuki - This guy wants to win a batting crown. I predict him to have his first .900 OPS year and start at least that strong. 3) Tucker - If he starts slow, expect Justin Turner to get DH opportunities in this slot. I expect maybe .700 OPS for 20 games... but a great year. ***4) Bush - He's looking poised for a step up in power from last year. He'll beat .800 OPS for the first 20 games. ***5) Armstrong/Turner ph - He's hot enough to rake in the 5 spot right now, and steal a base every third game. Turner can pinch here vs lefty relievers. 6) Shaw/***Workman - A cold start for Shaw, but small sample size. His baserunning warrants batting before the hot Amaya. Workman can rotate here. ***7) Amaya/Kelly - Amaya and Kelly are both hot and Amaya's flashing power. This is a good RBI slot, following Armstrong and Shaw. 8 ) Swanson/Turner - Yikes! A slow start at the plate is concerning. We want .750 OPS Swanson, but we are getting .600. Turner can pinch here. 9) Hoerner / ***Workman ph - Hoerner needs time to warm up. Workman is ready to hit, and should frequently pinch into this spot. First 20 Games VS LHP The main difference here is that Berti will get opportunities at 3rd or 2nd, whereas Workman is unlikely to hit against lefties. Busch is also pushed back in the order due to his weak splits; Armstrong will probably be benched against lefty starters to give Turner opportunities to kill his preferred prey. I could potentially see either Berti, Workman, or Shaw eventually fight Happ for the leadoff position- man, I hope they are that good. ***1 Happ ***2 Suzuki 3 Tucker 4 Turner/***Armstrong 5 Berti / Shaw ***6 Busch ***7 Amaya/Kelly 8 Swanson 9 Hoerner/Berti ph Summary When teams aren't in a tight divisional race, they often treat the first 20 games as if it were an extension of spring training. They let their stars "work out their kinks", and they let young guys "stretch their legs" in an extended battle for a roster spot. But when you have high expectations to be a contender like the 2025 Cubs, every game counts. Don't be at all surprised, as I said, if big name starters like Tucker and Swanson find themselves getting early days off, or not facing certain types of pitchers who are throwing exactly what they aren't hitting well at the moment. This is no time to "let it ride" - its a team, and all of the 40 man roster should be used as if they are here to PLAY to get tough outs, face tough matchups, and/or be the hot hand, if they are the most likely to contribute to immediate wins. And don't expect Shaw to have an automatic 3rd base gig- Workman and Berti have both proven they could hold down the spot if Shaw needs some AAA bat time while recovering from recent tweaks. Shaw shouldn't be overworked at the moment or else risk a 4-6 week injury. Again, a hot Workman may present an opportunity to eek out a few more wins even if Shaw has the higher upside. There's no rush- he's got plenty of options remaining. Personally I'd rather see Berti/Workman get the bulk of the starts in the first 20 games and let Shaw get hot in Iowa, and then come roaring back. Under such a scenario, it would be an opportunity for a spunky Alcantara to burn an option and cover for a slow-starting Tucker. Interesting possibility....

Turner was the last best option. everyone else was gone. Hence, we got hosed for almost double the price. Let's hope his red beard and social media brand helps young fans take notice. There is a notable advantage to signing household names from the other big markets (Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, players especially). You get opposing fans curious about Cubs and watching more, to see how "their guy" is doing now he's a Cub. That's not worth an extra 4 million, but maybe Justin's brand recoups a fraction of that money in ratings during a postseason run. Player brand is the best way to draw viewers who normally dont watch the Cubs.

Hello Cubs World, After dissecting Hoyer's strategy for the past three months, I came to the conclusion we are the clear division favorite this year; moreover, even if missing on the division, we are a practical lock for a wild card. So, let's high five about that. In today's blog piece, I'll go over reasons to really be pumped about this team. Top 12 Reasons to be Excited. 1) Fangraphs and Zips predict Cubs as third-best overall record in MLB. Enough said- that's a strong endorsement. 2) Cubs should have top 8 Pitching. We don't have the flashiest top two pitchers, but they are both competing for 2nd team all-MLB performance this year. The biggest concern is whether our top bullpen pieces collapse - there's no strong indication we have a top 8 closer on our roster, or adequate left handed bullpen. 3) Cubs should have top 8 Slugging. Hoyer may have done "just enough" to have assembled a gig step forwards in power from last year. Kyle Tucker beats Cody Bellinger; Matt Shaw beats "3b rotational mess"; Justin Turner should beat Patrick Wisdom; and, Jon Berti should demolish Nick Madrigal. Plus, PCA and Busch are both likely to take a small step forward in power as sophomore starters. 4) The Cubs can FIELD. No, really. I can't remember a time when the Cubs last had a serious shot at gold glove at 6 positions. Happ, PCA, Tucker, Swanson, Hoerner, and Busch. I mean, wow. And, Berti's a truly great utility guy. This may be the best fielding team in the Majors this year, but definitely top 5. 5) Cubs can RUN and STEAL. With the additions of Workman, Berti, and Tucker, the Cubs are absolutely STACKED with good baserunning. I predict they are 2nd or 3rd best in the league at this statistic. Some realistic estimates: 200 team Stolen Bases. PCA, 55, Hoerner 30, Tucker 25, Berti 20, Workman 15, Swanson, 15, Happ 10, Suzuki 10, Shaw 10, Other 10. 6) Pete Crow-Armstrong. This kid is going to put on a show and earn his first Gold Glove. Not only that, he's gonna clobber right-handed pitchers (.750-.800 OPS range). Unfortunately, I don't see a big upside to his poor lefty splits- but that won't matter with all our platoon options. 7) Michael Busch. Look. Busch was the 9th best overall first baseman last year and could easily be the 5th-7th best in 2025. I covered this in a prior blogpost. With another year of MLB hitting experienced, this "professional slugger" should crank up his RHP results to .800 or higher OPS, and vs LHP to at least .720. 😎 Matt Shaw. There's so much pressure on this kid; however, I feel like he will be good at 3rd, but eventually evolve into the best 2B on the Cubs since Ryne Sandberg. He has the potential to peak as a .300 / .400 / .500 type hitter with 20-30 SB, but not in the next two years. For now, .730-.770 OPS, 10 SB, and a league average glove makes sense. 9) The Young Bullpen Guys. Porter Hodge, Tyson Miller, Ben Brown, and Nate Pearson were fantastic last year for the Cubs. The 40 Man depth in AAA is loaded with guys capable of giving great innings. If Pressly/Brasier falter or get hurt, there's reason to believe their absence may not be terribly missed. 10) What if Matthew Boyd really DOES IT AGAIN? It may be a bit hopeful, still...Boyd did unlock something quite new in 2024. His pitching style was consistently more successful with a new pitch arsenal. If he could seriously repeat a sub 3 ERA season of at least 28 appearances and over 9.5 SO/9 Innings- I give it 1/3rd chance - he could push the Cubs towards 100 wins and a serious World Series run. 11) Kyle...effing...Tucker. Before Cubs snagged this guy, I said that Tucker was my #1 player in MLB to target for a big, long term Cubs contract in 2026. A better fit than Soto or Judge, Tucker profiles as a 5 tool all-star chasing player for the next 9 years. Plus, he's a generally healthy guy. I expect him to turn in a roughly .900 OPS performance and give the fans another Gold Glove. Ricketts may surprise everyone and make Tucker the face of the franchise for the next 10 years. Fans over-estimate how many bidders there will be- of the biggest market teams, you've only got a few serious bidders for a superstar RF. Everyone already has one! Yankees and Mets already have that guy. Same with the Dodgers, Braves, Brewers, Phillies... etc. The Cubs may walk away as the winner for 10 years, 400 million, backloaded annual ladder with only 35 million in year 1, and then...... add another 50 million deferred signing bonus in years 11, 12, and 13 which would not be payable if Tucker or Cubs choose to opt out early by season 5 .... could vary quite a bit depending on his 2025 season. Ricketts could invest in ONE brand value player who's worth more than just his field performance in revenue - the big draw, the jersey seller. 12) The Division Stinks. Hey, They Know it, Too. Everyone's got good pitchers. Everyone's got a few great guys in their lineup. However, nobody has the depth or completeness as the Cubs. And, the Brewers are projected to have gotten worse since 2024. The Reds are the only team that may "Surprise" and overperform/ mid-season spend, but even still, I don't see them catching us. The pitching situation is gonna be wild ride this year, with brutal repercussions for guys that slump. We could see several guys get cut or traded, and who knows WHO gets hurt these days- the injury rate is so high. However, I'm confident the fans are gonna love the excellent hitting, fielding, and baserunning no matter what.

remember, Berti actually has outhit Hoerner twice in the past 3 years, really doing solid against lefties.

Aha, i totally forgot they have reverse splits! Man, thanks. As far as Berti leading off, I wsa talking about, like, ten games. I disagree that he cant do that for 10 games- his running ability and solid ops make him a temporary sub at that spot.

However, let me add that you're correct about most of the rest of yit, and I agree. remember, the purpose of my blog is not to beat up on the Cubs. Its to find ways that Hoyer's roster strategy missed. Other GMS sometimes make better calls- for example, signing Solano early was still a good idea here, and I was annoyed he didnt take care of the bench before Bregman. Because obviously, if you're out of discretionary money to win a bidding war in contract length, then there's no reason to go after Bregman in the first place. My ideal solution would be WIN THE BREGMAN BID, backload the contract just like Red Sox did (but not identically constructed). If you already knew you werent going to win, you'd have a stronger, cheaper bench, and more money for an elite midseason pitcher/hitter trade.

thanks for your reply, but your very first complaint was false: I did NOT ignore that these guys were off the table already, I specifically wrote the entire article about "Bergman chase, leading to turner instead of these better alternatives". it was the whole main idea, my friend.

I must point out that subbing for PCA is usually better than Subbing for Busch against LHPO. I imagine both will occur, but usually better to save PCA as a pinch hitter/runner/fielder, let Busch use his higher projected ops against lefties (about .100 higher than PCA). Also, you have the catchers backwards? But it doesnt matter- catchers usually follow their own starting pitchers rather than worry about ideal bat matchups. VERSUS LHP: Jon Berti until Hoerner's Ready - 2B Kyle Tucker - RF Seiya Suzuki - LF Justin Turner - DH Dansby Swanson - SS Ian Happ - CF MICHAEL BUSCH - 1B Matt Shaw - 3B Miguel Amaya - C VERSUS RHP (Supposing Gage Workman is on the roster and hitting well): VS. RHP Ian Happ - LF Kyle Tucker - RF Seiya Suzuki - DH Michael Busch - 1B Dansby Swanson - SS Pete Crow-Armstrong - CF Gage Workman until Hoerner's ready - 2B Matt Shaw - 3B Carson Kelly - C If Shaw can hit .750 OPS or higher, as a second cleanup hitter, this lineup is deadly.

Hello Cubs World, I'm sending off an academic publication this weekend! Its always a big landmark moment. Academic studies can take months or years, with the average turnaround time dramatically varying by field. I'm a business professor, and our publication rates are much slower than hard scientists. Its normal for research faculty to produce 1 "b" quality journal paper every 12-24 months, and in addition to that research, producing 1 "a" quality paper every 3 years. However, only about 1/3rd of faculty are research these days- the rest publish at low rates or not at all. I'm stuck in the middle, as I have the profile of a researcher but my career was ruined by the pandemic- it disrupted me from 2020-2023. Second, researching alone as opposed to in teams can dramatically reduce the pace of production. I'm submitting a backlog of solo papers several years old this spring. The one I just completed is a framework for managers to use when designing a new venture in a revolutionary technical area such as AI or Self Driving vehicles. Its called the 5 S Framework for Technical Venture Design (Sectors, Sourcing, Scaling, Standards, and Sequencing). Anyhoo, I have some time to spare to finish my assessment of Justin Turner. And let me remind you folks I don't hate the signing - its a B minus situation. However, several better opportunities could have been seized. Let's dig into that analysis!. Baseline Analysis: Cubs Team WAR Projections Let's focus right now on the 11 field players, minus the catchers, and take a look at where we stand. I will ignore my own personal adjustments to WAR (MOJO) and report the most optimistic between Zips /Zips DC projection numbers. Interestingly, it comes out to roughly the same ceiling as when I use my own MOJO + Baseball References' WAR numbers! Fangraphs Team Projection, assuming no major injuries: 96.3 Wins Swanson 4.5 Tucker 4.4 Hoerner 3.5 (injury Time) Happ 3.4 PCA 3.3 Suzuki 3.1 Busch 2.3 Berti 1.3 (prorated 60% of a starters' plate appearances) Turner 1 (prorated 80%) Shaw 2.0 (Workman) .5 (pro-rated 30%) TOTAL: 28.8 Other WAR: 17 pitching, 2.5 catching. Total: 48.3 48+48.3 = 96.3 Given this particular assembly of players, we've got a lot to be proud of! Yay us! However, The Fangraphs projection assumes Turner gets 478 plate appearances. Steamer has a more realistic expectation of 100 less, and projects a .5 WAR. I agree with this. Thus, I will be evaluating Turner as a ,5 WAR contributor (prorated 50%), not as a 1 WAR (80%) contributor. Starters average 600 plate appearances. How Good is This Bench? Now, that being said, it would be possible to squeeze more war out of the bench (Berti/Turner/Workman). First, players with ideal platoon splits could challenge for more playing time and markedly outperform certain starters. Those starters with hitting vulnerabilities close to, or below, league average are: PCA (vs left), Busch (vs Left), Swanson (vs both), Hoerner (vs. Right). A great bench player can actually outperform these splits, and thus be a routine pinch hitter for those starters. Turner, projected splits (me) : RHP .720 OPS LHP .740 Berti : RHP .700 LHP .740 Workman: RHP .730 LHP .690 PCA: RHP . 770 LHP .640 Busch RHP .810 LHP .720 Swanson RHP. 730 LHP .730 Hoerner: RHP .700 LHP. 730 Suzuki: RHP .850 LHP .850 _____________________ Does Turner Create "profit" at the plate? No, because he can only sub for Busch or Suzuki and would underperform each of those players substantially. Even when platooning, he is maybe "breakeven" with Busch, because his slight advantage versus left hand pitchers is offset by his glove. Second, Turner has more value when subbing at DH for Suzuki vs left- handed pitching. In that situation, Suzuki replaces PCA and greatly increases CF OPS from .640 to .850; however, that would be true regardless of who covers DH. Turner is still barely above league average, and a DH is usually about 110 OPS+ or higher. Thus, he's not a positive difference maker in either DH or 1B; however, he does set a high floor because he's never had a bad season at the plate. Its rather easy to find players who can outperform at DH AND sub at multiple positions instead of just 1B. Yet we are paying 6 MM plus up to 2.5 MM for extended playing time, which is a pricey insurance policy. A more accurate contract would have been 3MM + 2 MM extended playing time. Does Turner Create Loss in the field? Yes, he is expected to be 1 WAR worse than Busch per 150 games played. that's a pricey deficit. So, we would go from a 2.3-3.0 WAR player to a 1.3 WAR player in the case of very early season-ending injury to Busch, for $8.5 mm. Thats a 300% premium on the usual price for a 1 War 1B. What about Turner's Slugging? I've said before that slugging is a key stat for playing contender baseball. Cubs were .391 last year. Well, Turner Projects to be no higher than that number, meaning he doesn't add any slugging to the team average this year - if anything, he detracts from it. Not a good thing for a 1B/DH to set you backwards from your goal of more team slugging! I'd prefer a player with a .400+ slugging projection at the pricey bench bat. How Does Berti Fare overall? Berti is a fantastic signing. He can sub for Swanson, Hoerner, AND Busch, not to mention Shaw if he fails at 3rd. Furthermore, he has the potential to outhit Swanson or Hoerner against lefties, and match pace with Hoerner vs righties. Berti was pretty much the perfect guy to grab to fill in for the recovering Hoerner early on; and most of all, his glove is such a high floor that you don't worry about losing much WAR compared to two gold glove starters. Also, the guys he's backing up are OPS guys and good baserunners, and Berti is very solid in those stats. At 2-3MM, his contract was a steal, and easily worth 4-5 MM. In the worst case scenario, we lose Swanson for the season and Berti plays 2 WAR ball at SS and we pay him $3MM. Well, that's easily worth $6 MM, isn't it? I doubt the worst case happens, but if nagging injuries affect both Hoerner/Swanson, you can easily arrive at my quoted valuation. At his ceiling, Berti could even be worth Turner's $8.5 mm salary - Which Turner himself can't likely pull off! How about Workman? Right now, he's a wild speculation. However, with his 20-30 SB target, and with a 20hr/600PA projection, much better than Mastrobouni or Madrigal, there's much to like. His glove is solid at 3rd and serviceable elsewhere in the infield, so he's a perfect platoon if Shaw needs to sit against any righties. Second, he could realistically outperform Hoerner or Swanson against some righty pitchers, meaning he's a potential increase in team hitting WAR. Third, the loss of glove performance when he subs is not bad enough to negate his hitting ability. Thus, projecting about 100 plate appearances, 300+ innings of junk time glove duty, and 40 pinch runner appearances in place of Suzuki/Busch/Turner/Catchers, I'm being conservative to suggest .5 WAR but that's based on a difficult time getting on the field. I REALLY HOPE this guy works out because he looks like the convincing long term replacement for Mastrobouni, with a 3 WAR ceiling as a full-time player, similar to a Jon Berti from the opposite hand, but with more slugging. What if we End up With Nicky Lopez for Workman? This takes us back to 0 WAR, with his great glove being negated by his lousy hitting. Not likely to cost us more than 1 real game - you know, a Cubs style doubleheader loss in the 11th inning when Lopez chokes on an easy at bat. That sorta thing. Example "Better Signings" Than Turner These four are not exhaustive of the cheaper players with same or better fit to the Cubs roster, but they were the most obvious free agents at 1B. All of these guys are younger, similarly experienced as a bench/rotational piece, could have been signed for $4-6 million less, and can play 4 positions compared to Turner's 1 position. I won't repeat my analysis of Randal Grichuk and Ramon Laureano, but I will remind readers that the former produced 2.1 War in the same plate appearances as Turner is projected for 2025. I Understand fans really are freaking out about backup first, but either of those guys could have taken reps there all spring training and have instead focused on their value in the outfield and DH as right handed lefty killers. I had Laureano as a 1 to 1.5 WAR player worth 5-7 Million, but being paid a bit less. I had Grichuk as 2 years, 20 Million to be "accurately priced", but he ended up going for $5 mil back to Arizona. So let's pretend a veteran 1b role seriously matters, which I'm not convinced it does: #1: Donovan Solano. Here's a guy that signed for 1 year, 3.5 MM for the Marlins but would easily match or beat Turner's $8.5 MM valuation for the Cubs. In 2024, Solano slashed .286/.343/.417 in 309 plate appearances. He produced 8 HR last year, which puts him on pace to beat Turner by about 3 HR in a full season of duties. He's a career .381 slugger, with his last four seasons averaging around .400. His Steamer projection is 356 plate appearances, .6 War = roughly identical to Justin Turner. But he's also 3 years younger than Turner. He's been a plus-to-average glove all over the infield, and was a plus first baseman in relief last year, meaning he could handle junk time performance all over. Furthermore, he isn't projected to cost us much glove performance. All in all, he would be worth about 1.4 War in Turner's same 1.0 WAR insurance role, if Busch went Down, while also finding opportunities to sub at SS or 3B in low leverage situations. He was still avialable in January, and thus was only bypassed due to the Bregman chase. #2: Connor Joe. This one isn't really a "better" signing, so much as it is so much cheaper. Connor Joe signed a 1MM deal with the Pirates. Connor is a 1B who can play all 3 outfield positions - thus, unlike Turner, he can directly sub for PCA and add some bat. Zips DC projects his value at .9 WAR across a similar number of appearances as Justin Turner or Donovan Solano. Frankly, he's a better glove now than both of the older vets, but has balanced splits that don't give him any clear platoon opportunities beyond 1B or Center field; and, just like Turner or Solano, it's a miniscule advantage over our starters. His career slugging is .391 and therefore doesn't add anything over 2024, but his career walk rate is very high and likely to exceed Turner or Solano in 2025 (Zips 11%). In summation, Joe could have provided the same quality WAR contribution as Solano at a tiny price. He was gone months ago. If the Cubs were intending to cut Canario, Joe would have immediately filled the same "steady high hit tool" role as Solano or Turner that Canario can't fill. #3: Mark Canha. This one's a head scratcher. Unsure why he's still unsigned. A year younger than Solano at 36, Canha can cover 1B and OF like Connor Joe. His Zips DC projection is .8 WAR with 420 plate appearances. My estimate is he would have taken $3 million to play at first, outfield, and DH and could truly match Turner's supposed value at 8.5MM for a full season (1.2 WAR). He's barely a better glove at 1B than Turner but can actually repeat that performance at 4 positions. Suppose we were fine with Berti, Workman, and our AAA guys covering backup situations in the infield. His career slugging is .414 (>.391), and his hitting profile isn't far from Solano, but with a tad more upside power and a bit less average than Turner. #4. Yasmani Grandal Again, I'm not sure what the holdup is. Maybe injury? Grandal is a 1B and catcher- a valuable set of tools! He has a lifetime .424 slugging with .228 .304 .400 slashes from 2024. Definitely has the slugging to make a difference, but the hit tool isn't there. On the other hand, having a 3rd catcher as a 1B/DH is gold- and he's a catcher with several plus microtools who had a 1.6 WAR season in 2024. Personally, I LOVE 1b/catchers as a 3rd roster spot, because frankly a 3rd guy who fills in for junk time takes a lot of pressure of your two starting catchers in a 162 game season. If anyone gets hurt, Ballesteros is the next man up, but wouldn't it be nice to have zero catcher worries and also improve team slugging? Yes. Trade Pieces: The final evaluation. Its always a better situation to sign a player that has net positive trade value to the league. IF the Cubs find they need a change of direction, some team out there will want a catcher (Grandal) or a 4-position utility guy with a plus hit tool (the other guys). Nobody wants Turner or his salary. Counsell is STUCK with him unless he cuts him. All the other guys could be traded for a hot upgrade player in a package - either pitcher or a replacement starter. As I said, all the suggestions i made would give this trade option a real life. Final Conclusion: How much does it matter? Overall, Justin Turner set us back: 1) at least $4 million in extra salary over the alternatives 2) multiple positions of glove coverage 3) lowers our WAR ceiling by about 1 compared to the best options 4) lowers our WAR floor by about .2 compared to the other options 5) We're stuck with the money- nobody will trade, so we have to cut him if we want a mid-season upgrade 6) We have 4 million less to pursue a final pitcher this year, with only about $20 million left to spend My preferred signing? The player with the most trade value and slugging at the lowest price: Donovan Solano for $4 mm + $1 MM incentives. As I said, I'm okay with the signing, but it only makes sense after everyone else is off the board, and if Canha/Grandal have bad health projections we don't know about. At half the price, Solano is the most likely player to have an up year and outperform Tucker, while also providing extra insurance bat at every infield position. How much does it matter? Mostly his mid-season trade value. Solano's tradability means he could be moved for ANY infield position in need, if the situation arises; or, in a package deal for a replacement starting pitcher. By the time that decision needs to be made, It is possible that Jonathan Long would be ready and able to cover backup 1B. He's already looking like a guy who can contribute in the majors for short stretches. In a perfect world, Grandal would repeat his 2024 performance as a 2025 Cub. But his downside signals are too strong.

hey Cubs world, I just got finished a rousing game of Company of Heroes and saw Justin Turner was scooped up by the Cubs. Nobody's mad at the deal, but some people are surprisingly PUMPED, as if this move was the "big difference". Also, I hear a lot of "good price"! Sorry guys, but for me, this is the equivalent of being pumped about Caleb Thielbar after missing on Tanner Scott. Sure, I like Theilbar as an interesting option. His only down year happened to be last year, however, and let me remind you we paid Michael Fulmer almost the same with similar confidence. There's a bit of good reason to be a healthy skeptic about this move. Many, in fact. But before we dive into that, I must address a conversational issue I've encountered quite a bit about player value and use of cash. I really feel the need to get this rant off my chest and I think many people could use this information! I must warn the reader that this is a two part blog- I wont even get into the Turner Evaluation until the next piece. Some Principles of Roster Construction: Player Value Sit down and relax- this may take a few minutes to cover. But it'll be a solid read, I promise you. Okay, let's start with WAR pricing and make sure we are all on the same page on this. As most every fan knows these days, Wins Above Replacement prediction is more of a solid, yet complex art than a highly laser-precise science. The most popular models for WAR are fairly predictive of reality, but its very clear that MLB clubs don't follow any simple WAR formulas as their "final answer". Each club management team has their own proprietary formulas that combine many factors, including the estimated brand value of the player and their impact on club revenues, which is ultimately even more important than WAR. Furthermore, presidents and GMs have discretion to break from these formulas. Each owner has a unique way of managing the total decision process of contracts. My Motives: To Predict a Better Plan B That being said, let's get back to the basic purpose of a person like me having a blog about roster construction. Frankly, I'm a hobbyist, attempting to "compete" with managerial contract formulas for fun, and maybe eventually contributing something to the science of roster construction itself. Clearly, there's a lot of room for discretion in the industry, as some teams place wildly different valuations on the same players. Not all of that variation can be simply explained by factors such as the relative park-to-player fit, as that data is fairly well available and yet doesn't cover the whole story. Furthermore, if you gave the exact same 2024 end-year roster of the Cubs to various GMs, they would make different deals in the 2025 offseason. Put simply, there are competing philosophies and strategies out there. Some sports writers can fairly guess which teams like what player just based on past year patterns. Much of my strategy is to look at GAPS between club management style, where I ask myself: "If I thought like the Padres, or maybe Phillies or Astros, what stats might drive changes in their philosophy for a different direction to the Cubs lineup? Why is this change of direction not being considered by Jed Hoyer, and do I think Jed is wrong?"" Now, I can't prove those teams would actually think like I think they will (say that three times fast), but I can find evidence for a plan B approach. I prefer to discuss/explore these plan B strategies, fully well knowing they aren't the most likely outcome for a Hoyer team. Furthermore, I am looking to more accurately guess a player's' true value and question the efficiency of how a budget is used. And there's a HUGELY IMPORTANT reason why nitpicking budget matters for winning a World Series if you're not one of the top 3 spending teams in the league! The Price of a Marginal Win is Non-Linear Let me go over this before we get back to Justin Turner. A few more minutes, please! Danke. First, let's address this from the player side of wins as WAR. Its fairly obvious that high WAR players are exceedingly rare - in fact, they are exponentially rare according to a power law equation. Consider Sohei Ohtani - there's only one person in the world who is a threat to produce extremely high WAR both as a hitter and pitcher. Or a 5 tool player like Kyle Tucker -he's the best total package in Right Field in the MLB from 2021-2024, and there's only a couple players close at the same position. Obviously they will cost exponentially more money, but Ohtani is worth almost TWICE a Tucker. Thus, we can presume that WAR is not linearly increasing in price - when you get to players over 4 WAR, the bidding wars really take off, and a few teams are willing to drive the auction past the point of "WAR profit", with clear hope of recouping it instead in additional revenue. As you move down to 3 or 2 WAR, players have fewer total "tools" and "microtools" . For example, a utility glove player has to do dozens of things right at each position. An example of microtools: its exponentially rare to find a utility glove player that is gold glove candidate level at multiple positions compared to one position. But again, these 3 and 2 WAR players are more common, and we expect maybe 4-8 million per WAR in market price, depending on position and contract length. Superstars can run over 10 Million per average projected WAR, like Juan Soto, who is being paid for 75 WAR @ 10 MM each (not counting inflation), even though odds are he falls short of 60 WAR over that contract. By the time you get down to 1 WAR, the free agent price falls as low as 2 MM/ WAR, or even lower if there's more 1 WAR players than there are positions of need in the league that year (usually RF, 1B, DH 1 WAR hitters are in very low demand and high supply, which explains why Mike Tauchman got ripped off by the White Sox on a sub 2MM contract, despite being a potential 1 .5 to 2.5 WAR range player). Thus, we should always remember that some mid-market teams have pre-arbitration stud players in the very pricey positions and can go cheap on abundant positions, and make that work out. This is partially why the Rays can be competitive- they usually drop long contracts on opportunistically available platers of most abundant roles, like glove-first 2nd baseman or SS, while big market teams pay through the nose to squeeze another WAR out of scarce positions like slugging catcher. Theoretically, it should NOT be possible for all 30 teams to fill all 26 roster roles with all desired tools and microtools because, first, there aren't enough multi-tool players in the world; second, because players compete in matchups by rank order or performance, not against absolute performance standards like in swimming, or track and field. The tenth best hitter has varying statistics year to year, and isn't always an elite hitter for the ages, but sometimes can be. Still, competing for a World Series, in a given year, the best estimate of victory is just to rank-order compare all tools on both squads in all 7 planned games, and you'll probably guess the series winner, if there's any sizable gap between the two teams. If they are close to evenly matched, small differences won't override random luck. Still, every team will attempt to "right price" each player for their true on-field value and economize on contracts to stack up the most complete team possible - that should be obvious. Player Brands versus WAR Teams have unique formulas for how much the player's total brand is worth, and some can therefore accidentally "overpay" the field value of the player compared to their true performance, but also overpay compared to the next highest bidder. The bidding process has some secretive aspects to it - teams don't always know how much the second highest bidder offered. Still, the over-the-tax-line spenders have a strong advantage bidding on superstars because those players will raise revenues in many ways, including the club brand value. Even beyond marketing, a legendary player can raise the equity value of the club- such as Ohtani raising the resale value of the Dodgers organization to a future buyer. Organization equity values are growing faster than their revenues in "goodwill", but only towards the top of sports leagues. Then, add broadcasting rights, and so on. Thus, an elite team has level on top of level on top of level of ways to recoup the contract costs of a superstar. Thus, a rich team may pay outrageous prices on WAR because there's hidden variables beyond WAR justifying those prices. Now, back to WAR. Suppose you're not one of "those organizations" and you have a hard spending cap, such as the Cub's current self imposed $240 million limit. This artificial limit also should limit your use of "revenue driven valuations" of a player. Put simply, the Cubs are refusing to sacrifice the profit they gain from Kyle Tucker jerseys to pay the guy more money. Its an "F U" to the player that their only value is what they do on the field. Cubs CANT value Tucker as high as a "Brand driven club" only because the Ricketts aren't betting on equity gains to the Cubs the way the Dodgers do - and the best guess as to why is the declining population of Illinois cant compete with the booming population of California. Otherwise, Hoyer would be allowed to pass the spending limits with "franchise brand players", knowing Kyle Tucker would pay for himself. So, mathematically speaking, the Cubs CANT spend a dime past what they think he's worth on the field. Why? Because if they do, then they are imposing an even TIGHTER cap on their budget for field play! For example, if Tucker was worth $40 mm/year on the field, and the Cubs signed him for $45 million, then effectively they are reducing their "Field play budget" for player contracts from $240 million to $235 million. the other $5 million was spent on player brand, because they pull it from that account as opposed to pulling his salary from the "Brand" account! Unlike the other top 8 market size teams, The Cubs don't use any separate brand account to justify over-the-threshold spending, making it hard to match top bids! Moneyball at the Tax Line: Finding Undervalued Field Play, not Star Power For this reason, the Cubs are forced to find wins from better, counterintuitive assessments of a player's near future worth than the other 29 teams, but especially counterintuitive formulas for future WAR compared to the top spenders. They MUST bid on DIFFERENT players often! They can't bid on OBVIOUS players often ! The Cubs rarely bite the bullet on bidding wars with conventional success formulas, and usually lose those bids (such as Bregman). To be unconventional is their only hope to "beat the market" on each marginal free agent and amass more Team WAR than their big market rivals. They must bet on upside potentials of players, or be opportunistic for evolving their plans as players pop up. If they had a separate budget for player brand to pull from, they would be able to get into conventional bidding wars and sometimes win conventional stars, like say the Red Sox, who are willing to win bids against the Yankees head-on sometimes. The Yankees can afford Cody Bellinger because he's a brand draw- his personality is beloved. beyond his field play, and the Red Sox can sell Bregman to their fans as the "missing piece to beat the Yankees". The Cubs HAD to move on and find the best unique deal on a superstar possible - Kyle Tucker. What if There's Better Counter-Intuitive Options? Hoyer's biggest problem is being overly confident that he's got "the best formula in the majors" for building a Cubs team from counter-intuitive WAR pricing strategy. He's not doing enough scouting of other team strategies, in my book, and that's a huge problem. For example, has he really figured the Brewers out? No, clearly not, which is why he gave up and hired Counsell to help him out of his rut. He made some bad choices 2022 and 2023 with roster construction. Furthermore, there's some other teams that found amazing Moneyball player combos, such as perfect platoon players or styles of player in roles, which were always available to Hoyer in free agency but he simply didn't get right. He could have assembled Joc Pederson and Grichuk as a DH duo, or something similar, but he didnt. The Diamondbacks called that one correctly and had the best DH duo in MLB. There's quite a few clever moves that Cubs fans really should be aware of that Hoyer missed, and rival teams got right. Frankly, Hoyer's above average in roster construction, but He's never really struck me as a genius at it. I give the Braves, DBacks, and Astros more credit, just off the top of my head. What's Wrong with Justin Turner? I'm going to leave you with a cliffhanger question, as this post is getting long. Part 2 will get into the answer of that question. But let me adress one more WAR principle: Stacked rosters are hard to improve - the better the team, the exponentially harder it is to improve it. Not only do you pay more for rare players, but your baseline is so high that there's no cheap buys to be found to bump your Win expectations up significantly. First, Even 1 additional win may cost you a full $10mm if you have no players in your starting lineup under 3 WAR, because you're forced to enter a bidding war to finish your roster with that "perfect fit player". Second, you have injuries to worry about. With each additional Team WAR a marginal injury is also that much more FINANCIALLY devastating; thus, having enough suitable 40 man players becomes an obsession. Notice Hoyer seemed more worried about his AAA roster this year than his MLB bullpen. That obsession is because of last year's failures and likely a key issue for getting Hoyer's own contract renewed next year by his boss! 1) So, the Cubs are a Team with a great roster that's hard to improve. 2) But, they can't overpay, especially not based on star power. They must play "straight WAR" strategies. 3) Depth is essential... but that Depth need be better than league average to keep a very high win total, not just "many warm bodies". 4) The Cubs already had a tight 26 man roster entering 2025, with few places for obvious improvement. 5) Many fans were disappointed the Cubs didn't land enough high WAR arms - too many "solid, not All Star" pitchers and relievers. 6) All that's left to work on was the bench, which was below average among big market teams for 5 years in a row. 7) DID THEY DO ENOUGH ON THE BENCH? Will Turner be a difference maker? Could they have afforded more, done better for the same money? I'm claiming that the current Roster is quite good, with a ceiling of about 95 Wins, and 92.5 projected. However, Turner was "a wash, or worse" compared to other options, so he doesn't increase Cubs' ceiling at all. Furthermore, he BARELY raises the Cubs's floor of 92.5 Wins, because I think there's several different ways they could have ended up with a 97 Win projection - and I'm already being generous/optimistic about their current 26 man, compared to Pecota/Zips. I'm claiming that Hoyer did well with Berti, but the only reason we ended up with a $6 mm Turner is because he lost out on other moves while bidding on Bregman. He wagered he would WIN the Bregman bid and lost handily, or else he wouldn't have wound up with the last overpaid 1B/DH of the entire market at that price. not a bad signing, all things considered, but also a wrong turn in roster construction choices that could have been avoided if Hoyer was never serious about winning the Bregman bidding war in the first place. next article, I'l give many examples of better overall projected WAR for the buck, as well as better total WAR results, with toolsier, younger players that have more upside.

Saying that 'being optimistic about Turner is questionable because people liked Mancini and Hosmer' doesn't make any sense. If anything he has more in common at the plate with someone like Tauchman who continued to exceed expectations at the plate despite being older than Mancini/Hosmer were during their Cubs tenure. Now you're really not making sense here. Tauchman was a lefty outfielder, not even 1b / I bow out of this because I dont even know what we're talking about anymore.

60 games? no, because you're bypassing the actual young outfielders who can hit as well or better than Turner.....

"Looking at bench players with this type of $/WAR lens is missing the point of the purpose bench players serve. Saying that he's paid as a pro-rated 18 million dollar player is non-sensical. Plus Turner's big benefit is raising the floor. He's not going to add 3 wins by himself, but by having a decent major league hitter you hedge against injury and underperformance elsewhere with less risk than if Canario was the primary 1B backup." Nope. not nonsensical at all. Would you like me to write a full length article about how WAR works in regards to bench players as "pro-rated starters?" because that's how it works, my friend. There's nothing special or magical about a 6 million dollar bench insurance policy. Its still worth what its worth in terms of at bats and reps on the field. If Turner isnt saving defensive runs, or if he isnt outhitting a replacement player, he's not worth that money. Math is math, and it often annoys sports fans - but that's just how it is. Berti has a bigger chance than Turner to add wins to the Cubs this year, and that may feel wrong but it isnt. this is why many lower ranking teams can be competitive- they keep grabbing up players like Paul DeJong or Randal Grichuk and getting more WAR for their buck, and lo and behold being pretty good teams. while top market teams overspend for guys with fan appeal and then ..... poof, they lose games to teams like the DBacks or Brewers or Rays. Huh. Gee. Maybe its because those teams I mentioned fight for every million in a contract and respect their WAR values even against the wishes of their fans, whereas other fans say things like: "its nonsensical that bench players be treated as pro-rated starters". when that's exactly what they are, in WAR terms. So, not sure why you're so intensely arguing for no point here, but you've basically agreed with me on most points and then nitpicked the exact wrong think to nitpick and called me nonsensical at the same time.

I count every million, just like every pro coach and administrator does, because we have a hard cap on spending, we are trying to sign impactful contracts, and every million given to one player takes it from another position. that's just "How it works" my friends. Only teams that routinely go far over the threshold can say, "eff it, give Tommy Edman twice what his WAR projections are! who cares? " It all counts!

The only scenario where he gets more at bats than that is a long term injury to suzuki or busch. Otherwise, based on the Cubs' use of bench players over the last 5 season, I disagree that Turner should get that many hits. 1) Suzuki is our DH, and his splits are over .850, both ways. There's no platoon there- Suzuki only doesn't DH when he's giving our 3 TREMENDOUS gold glove starters a day of rest. So, that covers DH, as I said. a .700-.750 hitter does not replace a .850+ hitter. 2) I think there's this general feeling among doubters that Busch and Turner are platoon bats, and I think that's the wrong way to look at it. I don't understand why everyone is so down on Busch's ability to hit- a guy who hit nearly .800 in his rookie season, or why they think he will regress rather than improve when he's been a phenomenal bat his entire pro career. His split under .700 against lefties was a bit of an anomaly based on Wrigley Field last year and is highly unlikely to happen again. Furthermore, and in stress this, Busch's glove was among the best in the league his first year as a starter. Why pull his stellar glove for a below average one on the hopes you get 1 more hit per 40 plate appearances, which is roughly how much better Turner projects than Busch against left handed pitching this year? Nah, you'd actually be risking a negative WAR outcome. 3) My point is simple: Let's HOPE we don't need Turner to hit more than 200 times, because it means other guys are sucking this year or out for really long injuries. Hoerner's career OPS projects about the same or better as Turner in 2025, and if he's sucking, then we are already concerned. Same thing with Amaya, who is supposed to hit .750 against lefties. put simply, the more we are using Turner, the worse our starters are doing compared to their career projections. On the other hand, we would be glad to have our asses covered, as I said, if we do use Turner, and that makes him worth a bench bat. 4) Let's not forget the last several over the hill first basemen we overpaid and did jack squat- its a pattern with the Cubs. Being optimistic that Turner has a great year at 40-41 is a bit questionable, because of all the people who liked Mancini and Hosmer. Its a recent pattern for the Cubs to be overly optimistic about ancient 1B guys , and not a pattern I like. I hope I'm wrong, but the odds are pretty bad that Turner raises our win chances- he's there to prevent disasters, not raise our win total.

The last spot will be volatile. It is best used for option players. Ideally, you start the season with Canario as the 5th outfielder due to his upside bat potential and lack of options. Unlike Turner, he can play all 3 OF spots in a pinch, although he's really a left fielder in the long run. And, being so cheap, you dont mind if he rides the bench all season and only gives you like 50-75 at bats. It doesnt matter. However, if Canario looks bad in the field or at the plate in preseason, he's DFA material and we have lots of plan B's. Supposing Canario doesn't look good, we have enough depth to go for a weak lefty utility bat, which for some reason is an obsession of Hoyer's. Hoyer will endeavor to keep the best out of Brujan, Lopez, and Workman - the best among league minimum guys whose best platoon split is .680 - .700. Again, this player is only worth 50-75 at bats, unless injury disasters strike. So it really doesnt matter which one. But remember, only Lopez is signed to a safe contract, of the three, because he has upside of being a phenomenal SS who can produce over 2 WAR without even hitting. He's a top 5 utility glove in the entire MLB. Brujan is only there in case of injuries, and Workman was signed before any of the others, so returning him the Tigers costs $50k. Big deal, nobody cares. Workman would need to put on quite a show in spring training to land a roster spot.

Meh. It's not a bad move, and I'm fine with him having the 26th roster spot, which usually doesn't play much of a factor in a pennant race. But at 6 million, I'm doubtful he produces enough WAR to earn his keep. I think he's worth 3 or 4 million - a bit less than Berti's true value of over 5 million, but being paid twice as much as Berti on the hopes his name recognition makes fans happy. I expect him to hit about .730 OPS this year against mostly lefties and only play 1B/DH. 1) He can start at DH occasionally against opposing lefty starters, with Suzuki subbing for PCA/Happ/Turner in the field, but that's hopefully only a dozen starts (under 50 at bats) - maybe twice that if we run into injury woes. We want our starting three out there with gold glove performances, because the chances that Turner significantly outhits even PCA is actually fairly low. 2) His splits against left-handed pitching still can play ok, so he can occasionally start for Busch at first, too, but again, that's another dozen games, tops (under 50 at bats). Busch is expected to start 150 games and will usually outhit Turner by a nice margin. 3) He can OCCASIONALLY pinch hit in games when other players are slumping. Last year he was .758 against lefties in a small sample size but only .730 against righties. Good enough for power situations in place of Hoerner/Berti, or Amaya/Kelly, if he's on a hot streak and they aren't, and you don't even use his glove. However, you don't even want Swanson off the plate for Turner. let's call that another 50 pinch reps, playing a similar role as Patrick Wisdom over the last two years. All in all, this is an estimated 150-200 plate appearances for 6 million - that's an 18 million dollar pro-rated season for a meh DEH! His bat is only "a slight improvement" over the players for whom he's pinching. As I've said before, most teams pay a guy with his bat, sans glove, 6 million for a full season of appearances. On the upside, he's the kind of experienced bench bat you want in the post-season because he's seen it all and performed well under pressure. I wanted Grichuk as our lefty killer bat because the guy can hit almost .900 OPS as a platoon, as opposed to Turner's projected .700-.750 range. And yet we paid Turner 1 million more than Grichuk got paid by the Dbacks this year- I'm scratching my head about that. The WAR doesn't add up.

Meh. It's not a bad move, and I'm fine with him having the 26th roster spot, which usually doesnt play much of a factor in a pennant race. but at 6 million, I'm doubtful he produces enough WAR to earn his keep. I think he's worth 3 or 4 million - a bit less than Berti's true value of 5 million, but being paid twice as much as Berti on the hopes his name recognition makes fans happy. I expect him to hit about .730 OPS this year against mostly lefties and only play 1B/DH. 1) He can start at DH occasionally against opposing lefty starters, with Suzuki subbing for PCA/Happ/Turner in the field, but that's hopefully only a dozen games (under 50 at bats) - maybe twice that if we run into injury woes. 2) His splits against left-handed pitching still can play ok, so he can occasionally start for Busch at first, too, but again, that's another dozen games, tops (under 50 at bats). Busch is expected to start 150 games. 3) He can OCCASIONALLY pinch hit in games. Last year he was .758 against lefties in a small sample size but only .730 against righties. Good enough for power situations in place of Hoerner/Berti, or Amaya/Kelly, if he's on a hot streak and they aren't, and you don't even use his glove. However, you don't even want Swanson off the plate for Turner. let's call that another 50 pinch reps, playing a similar role as Patrick Wisdom over the last two years. All in all, this is an estimated 150-200 plate appearances for 6 million - that's an 18 million dollar pro-rated season for a meh DEH! His bat is only "a slight improvement" over the players for whom he's pinching. As I've said before, most teams pay a guy with his bat, sans glove, 6 million for a full season of appearances. On the upside, he's the kind of experienced bench bat you want in the post-season because he's seen it all and performed well under pressure. I wanted Grichuk as our lefty killer bat because the guy can hit almost .900 OPS as a platoon, as opposed to Turner's projected .700-.750 range. And yet we paid Turner 1 million more than Grichuk got paid by the Dbacks this year- I'm scratching my head about that. The WAR doesn't add up.

Hello Cubs World, I was in the middle of prepping my slow cooker for chili, and an interesting thought exercise popped into my head. Every once in a while, seismic shifts occur in a sport's competitive landscape: expansion teams, relocations, ownership change, and the like. Pretty soon, the collective bargaining agreement will expire. In 2 years, we could see a shuffling of many rules, especially related to player salary tax/cap/veterancy structures. However, teams are already preparing for that future and are in many ways revealing their long term commitments to competitive spending through their willingness to take on big player contracts and their willingness to "spend form behind" in a tough division. I'm currently pondering how the new tiers of competition will look. There's a good chance we add 2 expansion teams, but I'll pretend that if we do, they would slot in cleanly to the same levels of spending as their rival franchises of the same tier. 1 Are the Cardinals and White Sox really permanently down a tier, in terms of spending and club competitiveness, from their old heights? 2 Are the Orioles and Diamondbacks really up a tier? 3 What are the tiers, anyway? Setting those questions aside, let's dig into a list of tiers with an explanation of some of the clubs in the list. If I am ambitious, I'll come back and add more detail to this list later! The Tiers of Franchises, a speculative rough draft, according to yours truly. TIER ONE: THE DODGERS I believe this franchise is in a tier of its own for as long as the league permits it to be. It will likely outspend tier 2 by a small margin for the foreseeable future. ITs tv deal and possible rebranding as "the Japanese-led all-star team in MLB" makes it an insanely valuable franchise with special power. However, it does make me wonder if other franchises are developing similarly distinctive cultural identities to raise their own value and following. TIER TWO: THE BIG APPLES METS YANKEES The two New York clubs love to spend and outdo each other on the field. That won't change. And they both have superstars on their roster under long term contracts. The real question is if they can take on other mega-contracts in the next few years, or if they become too locked in tightly to keep landing huge stars. TIER THREE: THE HIGH ROLLERS PHILLIES BLUE JAYS RED SOX PADRES Each of these teams could threaten at any moment to get into a bidding war on big contracts. However, there will be quite a bit of volatility on these rosters over the next two years, especially on starting rotations. These are teams that will spend to be competitive, no matter the climate or the toughness of their division. TIER FOUR: THE WINNERS ASTROS BRAVES CUBS RANGERS This is your tier of big market clubs that angle to compete for the division every year and should be fearsome opponents for years to come. They also have very strong brands and keep the fans happy. However, they are unlikely to dish out the biggest deals anytime soon. They try to outsmart the other big market teams above with "clever" uses of their budgets. The Braves and Cubs have knack for securing team-friendly contracts, although the latter doesn't produce homespun talent at quite the rate of the former. The Rangers are a very volatile club that usually spends more on hitting than pitching and suffers for it; however, they recently won a World Series. TIER FIVE: THE INTERMITTENT SPENDERS ANGELS GIANTS DIAMONDBACKS CARDINALS These are the teams that oscillate the most in their spending levels. They seriously push in their chips for a few years, and then perform multi year rebuilds with deeply cut budgets while licking their wounds. Of the four, only the Diamondbacks are in a good place in 2025 but maybe be about to fall off a cliff by 2028. The rest are on the rise but rebuilding from bad showings. The Cardinals should be out of their spending slump by 2027. TIER SIX: THE FEISTY MID-MARKET COMPETITORS ORIOLES (this is the NEW Orioles- no longer bottom dwellers) TIGERS BREWERS RAYS (They annually outperform their spending more than any other team) TWINS ATHLETICS (Assuming they are in Vegas or Portland soon. if Sacramento, tier seven) This is your list of team that is not going to make headlines with lengthy contracts; however, they have strong farm systems, a will to win, and great coaching. These teams are the most efficient spenders: they often "Beat the market" and try to trade back frequently with bigger markets to land pre-arbitration stage players whenever possible. They always seem to manage a couple of stars to anchor a young club. TIER SEVEN: DON'T COUNT US OUT YET! Small Market Heroes NATIONALS REDS GUARDIANS MARINERS ROYALS This is your tier of teams with fanbases who never expect to win a world series, or even a division, but can be proud of occasional wildcard showings and better than .500 ball. They have longer rebuild periods than average. If they ever do make a Pennant or World Series game, they do so as an underdog using lottery ticket players to carry them forwards, which can only happen so many times per generation. Truly, many of these franchise markets could support a TIER SIX ballclub, if they had the right owner, but under current guidance aren't reaching full market potential. Some may spend abruptly mid-season if they have a good luck situation, particularly the Nationals and Reds. TIER EIGHT: WE'RE DOOMED : PRAYING FOR GIANT METEOR WHITE SOX ROCKIES PIRATES MARLINS These teams are simply not competitive under current ownership for more than 2 years forward and need some rebooting to reach ANY 2020s post-season game. Rumors swirl every year they will change owners or locations. Personally, I think the White Sox will find their Way back to Tier 6 eventually, which was their historic spot; but the Sox are building slowly, minimally for 2 more years. Rockies and Pirates are simply mismanaged and have no excuse for their low spending and crappy vision. They should stay where they are and petition the league for higher spending owners with a real vision. They have nice brands and great ballparks. The Rockies could reach Tier 6 again at any moment with a will to win, with $160-$190 million spending annually after 2027, and the Pirates should be like the Guardians and re-commit to a higher spending target of $120 million in Tier 7. No more $60-80 million payrolls in the majors, please. The Marlins are a lost cause and will continue to suck. They should relocate the team to either Nashville or Charlotte, and with a change of name (Mountaineers? that sorta thing) they could move up to the top of TIER FIVE and spend like the Angels!!!. THE SALARY CAP? YES, BUT...... I endorse a $100m annual minimum payroll in the new agreement. (obviously this goes up over time as league revenues increase). I would also endorse a $500k bonus money penalty for teams spending under $110 million, and another $250k bonus money penalty under $120 million, to be distributed to all other teams under the competitive balance tax levels but over $120 million. Teams should only be able to go under this $100 floor number once every fourth year for a "deep rebuild", and even still only as low as $80 million until hitting a $100 tax. However, teams also lose their seventh round draft pick that same summer, or the following summer if they went too low after the draft. For Tax tiers, I endorse a two-tier system, instead of four tiers. I would continue the first- and second-year escalator rates but drop the THIRD year of luxury spending. It is too punitive. TIERS: 1) $260 m first tax threshold, 2) $280, second tier. Thus, the Dodgers, Mets and Yankees, could perpetually spend in the second tear, second escalator range if they really wanted to, but it would generate substantial revenue sharing outcomes. Finally, I Support a $360m salary cap, with 10% of the net present value of deferred salaries counting towards that cap (with an estimated interest rate), with salary deferrals starting to count 2+ years from the players' last day with the club. So suppose the Dodgers have 1.3 billion in deferred money spread over 20 years. Not counting inflation this would be $65 million/year towards the cap... but counting inflation would be closer to $40 million. as that number slowly dropped, so would their cap hit, across 20 years. Due to their huge commitments, this rule would effectively cap the Dodger's long term spending ability to about $320 million a year beginning in 2027, and thus would be the only team who couldn't spend active payroll in the $320-$360 million range for years to come. On the other hand, it would also lock in their advantage for years to come, as their time-value discounted deferred money deals are unlikely to be imitated by any other organization. MY suggested tiers: YEAR ONE SUBSEQUENT YEARS DRAFT PICK PENALTY FOR YEARS 2+ $260 million 20% 40% RULE 4 pick moved back $280 million+ 35% 70% RULE 4 pick moved back AND forfeit 9th round pick years 3+ Pick auctioned to the highest bidder under tax line. This last trick- 9th rounders being auctioned - is a fun way to reset the value of picks and drive the market upwards. Similarly, for teams under the salary floor, they also would auction their sacrificed 7th rounders to the highest bidder. Again, teams over the tax line couldn't participate in bidding. This auction strategy would favor teams in a usual 180 to 260 million dollar spending range but who were rebuilding and looking for an edge - willing to overpay for one extra lottery ticket on a decent draft pick. This money would be kept by the league-wide player benefits pool and would not benefit the auctioning team directly.

my choice was Grichuk. we missed on him. he was hitting almost .900 OPS against lefties and was THE BEST lefty killer in all MLB last year with less than 400 at bats. Far better option for overspending on the bench than Turner. But that was also when we didnt have Berti, or Pressly/Brasier, which shifted the whole scenario. Honestly, the only reason we are having this conversation is because we let other elite platoon bat options go that were far superior, and chose those three guys instead. The fact that this conversation is "turner or bust" means its really a bust! I'm doubling down on the argument that we dont need jack squat right now because all the best eals come later in the season. the general obsession with the "complete postseason roster before spring training" has gotta go. No serious GM in the league thinks like that. Its a typical fan obsession to scrap for every single homerun or strikeout, no matter the risk or cost, and with complete disregard to midseason thinking.. I guarantee you at least half a dozen better postseason bat options appear as the season goes on, and that no 26th roster spot matters one iota for proving we can beat the brewers. period. I also guarantee you a better trade deal comes along than betting the farm for Dylan Cease, if we wait. Lets just roll with the punches and make our big moves for when they really count.