ryanrc

Hey all! I appreciate all the readers of my first blogpost. I won't typically post twice in two days. I figured I'd keep this new blog momentum rolling, though, with a fun topic. In my first post I argued that Paul Dejong would be the best 1 year sub at 3B because of his combination of glove and power. In this Scenario, Shaw starts at Second for Hoerner and then slides into a platoon at 3rd with DeJong. We still haven't sorted out the other two bench spots: 1) The 5th outfielder; 2) The lefty utility glove smallball guy to replace Mastrobouni. Now, I doubt the latter will move the needle noticeably in our quest to win the division, so I'll ignore the Mastrobouni issue. Who cares about a role that is typically worth less than 1 WAR? On the other hand, we could squeeze a 96+ win season if we have a killer platoon bat on the outfield bench. QUESTION: On our quest for 96+ wins, who should replace Alexander Canario as the 5th outfielder on the squad? I want a guy who can produce 1.5 - 2 WAR off the outfield bench. Let's go over the logic at play. In a team with a stacked outfield, this is a luxury, one might say. Indeed, our top three outfielders are top 5 MLB defenders at their positions. All of our top four are starter quality. All four can hit AND steal, and all four are expected to top 20 HR. Let that sink in- this is the best outfield we've had since Sammy Sosa was on the team. However, there may be ways for a 5th guy to justify his playing time. Let's go over them. 1) Our top 3 guys are lefties. Common sense would dictate the next guy up would be a righty. Well, we have that in Seiya Suzuki, who was the Cub's best hitter last year and is the default DH. Suzuki's splits are fairly balanced, too. Happ is a switch hitter, and Tucker is a superstar, so neither needs to come off the field. This leaves Pete Crow-Armstrong. Well, his splits are classically lefty: He was a roughly .600/ .700 OPS against lefty/righty pitching last year. If my 5th guy sees any serious playing time, he'll be subbing for PCA somehow. To justify removing an elite glove from center field, the 5th guy needs to really MASH against lefty starters. Conclusion: A righty platoon specialist makes tons of sense. 2) Our 5th guy doesn't need to play center. Happ can cover center, Suzuki has the corners. Suzuki can cover both corners with "meh" defense, but you're not actually afraid to give him the assignment. He was a Japanese gold glove type before he bulked up for power in the majors. Something tells me he could easily bounce back and play plus defense in his quest to be a superstar. His arm is solid anyhow. Now, Happ can slide over and cover center quite well - i don't get this narrative that Happ isn't enough glove at center if PCA goes down. Happ is, by some measures, THE BEST LF glove in MLB. He's a plus center fielder. So, the 5th guy really doesn't need to play the field much. He's a DH while Suzuki subs. Conclusion: I'll take a righty who can play left field; however, I want my next guy up from the minors (6th outfield) to be a LEFTY, in case of a long-term injury. His name is Owen Caissie BTW. 3) How good must he be to take PCA off the field? We still look great with Suzuki(LF), Happ(C), and Tucker(RF) out there, so glove doesn't concern me. However, we really need as much hit and power tools as we can get to face teams like the Dodgers and Phillies. PCA could have an upside potential of hitting .700 against lefty pitching, and we want him to get some of those reps; however, PCA is not projected for a high batting average. Our 5th man doesn't need to run because we are stacked with those guys. Conclusion: This guy should reliably hit over .800 OPS against lefties with power- the more hit tool, the better. 4) How many at-bats are we talking? Many veterans avoid bench contracts because it drags down their lifetime expected earnings. They will, however, play the bench temporarily for a juggernaut contender. It can be tricky to find a guy at the START of a season who is a reliable bench slugger. This is why most teams have a Canario type guy and promote from within. Let's say this guy gets 100 at bats to cover for Happ, Tucker, and/or Suzuki's minor injuries, and another 150 platooning with PCA. He'll also get another 50 pinching for catchers or other position players. Conclusion: Now we've got it narrowed to 300 at bats. 5) How much money are we talking? This is the key question for a tightwad organization. If I'm willing to contend, I want a guy with a 3+ WAR projection per 162 games, who is willing to play only 40% of the time, typically at DH. He will want to be paid a premium to sit and platoon. He's also good enough to start at DH full-time we lose a player for the season, or else he wouldn't be worth the dough. The Cubs have the cash to burn on a 1 year deal for this exact type of player. Conclusion: I'm looking for a $10-$15 MM guy who strikes fear into the hearts of left-handed pitchers but can handle righties if necessary. I'm also willing to take him on a 2-year 30 MM contract if he's THAT good, especially if he can take over for DH in 2026 if Suzuki replaces Tucker in RF. I don't believe in arbitrarily making room for prospects that aren't ready during a contention year - that is a true small market philosophy and shouldn't be at the heart of Cubs roster building strategy. The Big Reveal: Who Fits this Profile? As you might guess, a handful of guys could fill this role via trade, now or mid-season. However, among the available free agents there is one specific guy: Randal Grichuk. The 33-year-old had a landmark season for the D-backs. He hit .291 with 12 home runs, 46 RBIs and an .875 OPS (140 OPS+) in 106 games. He absolutely dominated lefties while sharing a platoon role with the elite righty killer Joc Pederson. Here are his 2024 splits from Fangraphs: Season Handedness G AB PA H 1B 2B 3B HR R RBI BB IBB SO HBP SF SH GDP SB CS AVG 2024 vs L as R 94 163 184 52 31 14 1 6 6 32 16 0 28 3 2 0 2 0 0 .319 2024 vs R as R 57 91 95 22 9 6 1 6 6 14 4 0 18 0 0 0 3 0 0 .240 Arguments Against Grichuk. 1) It's too much spend on the outfield. I disagree with this. We are blessed to have very few holes on the 26 man roster. The biggest need is more bat, and I'll spend for that because we haven't proven ourselves yet at the plate. This is one of only three places you can spend that money. Depth outfielders don't get hurt much compared to pitchers. So spend it on a killer platoon! Besides, he worked wonders for the Diamondbacks last year. 2) He won't want to play bench anymore. Aye, this is a problem. He had such a monster year that like the Pirates are begging for the guy as a full-time player. Our best counter-argument is that he's not getting any younger or better at defense. Grichuk projects as a 0 to -.5 WAR defender for the future. He's better off where he can focus more on the DH role and contend immediately. 3) We've got other young bats at no additional cost- stretch them out. If money was a concern, I wouldn't even be writing this. However, we've got it to burn this year. The only player we are really stifling is Canario. Alcantara needs 1 more year of seasoning to be anything but a glove. Caissie hasn't even burned options yet, and his lefty bat makes him a better injury replacement at DH than an Opening Day 5th man. I have both of them pencilled in as competing for 5th man in 2026, not 2025. 4) Suzuki would get madder. Meh, this one doesn't concern me. Suzuki is the next GLOVE up- most of the time he's playing, Grichuk will be DH, with 3 of the top 4 guys playing the field. Suzuki should get as many glove reps as Grichuk gets DH reps. 5) Maybe we need a glove? If we want to lock down the #1 outfield defense in the majors, we could go with lefty Alex Verdugo. However, this WOULD make Suzuki mad, indeed, because it would remove any chances of him getting serious reps in the outfield. It would also defeat the purpose of platoon reps. I don't like it at all. 6) Wait until mid-season. Let's go back to conventional wisdom - let the young guys get their cups of coffee in the outfield and then go get your veteran bat at the All-Star Break. Why don't I like this idea? Lately, rental bats haven't been very effective. I much prefer rental pitchers. Furthermore, I'd rather spend the money than the prospects for a rental bat. I want to only deal prospects for pitching because arms are what we lack in the low levels of the minors. Verdict: Grichuk could be had for maybe 2 years, 20 million, or 1 year, 12 million. He'll definitely outhit Canario, especially because of his much lower strikeout rate and higher walk rate. It would be a bold statement that we are really going for it and won't let anyone ride out a mid-season hitting slump in our outfield. Please comment below if you have other suggestions. I will run a poll if we get enough interest!

I agree with most of your response. Baseball is a game of risk. On the outside it is really hard to predict which of our guys has a setback year. However, I am VERY bullish on Busch. This is a guy who, on his rookie starter year, was a top 10 1B. Here is a list of the top 12 in WAR from Fangraphs in 2024: Guererro, Harper, Freeman, Perez, Santana, Walker, Lowe Olson Raley, Busch (#10), Naylor, Alonso. Among these particular guys, Busch ranked 7th in defense, too. I'll doing an article about the Busch/ PCA chances of improving this year, and how much the fans are under-rating Busch. My instincts tell me one of our top three starters will be lost for much of the season, with the most likely one being Steele; and, that a second out of the top four will have a regression year- most likely Boyd, who I have as a 3.8-4.0 ERA type of player. (I don't buy the narrative that Imanaga can't possibly have a 3.0 ERA again. He's a wizard who can find a way).

Right, but hoarding inflates the pitching costs dramatically - as we are seeing. The way around this is exactly what Hoyer is doing: adding lots of arms, but mid-tier players, finding workhorses instead of studs, running them hard, and replacing them with studs as the season wears on! The only real "gamble" here is Matt Boyd, because at the price he's being paid, our front office will make him play, just like they did with Hendricks last year. They may demote Boyd to the bullpen if he collapses, but he won't be out of the mix. Rea? No worries. 5 million is a rounding error on a big contract! Nearly everyone would rather trade midseason for a guy who is cheap and under team control but has a 98 fastball. So, you wait for your early season injuries to hit, the dust to settle, and THEN go get em! There will be at least a dozen of those guys on sale when we need them, and another dozen guys coming off last season's major injuries. In other words, I expect an actual bumper crop of those guys mid-season. However, if we don't have the slugging, it won't matter: Braves were virtually unhittable and still lacked the pop last year to beat the big boys.

Matt Boyd, now Colin Rea: What is This Strategy Anyway? Let's get right into it, shall we? Many fans were disappointed by this dual signing of backend starters. Fans ALWAYS want to fill from the top of the depth chart - they wanted a new #1 or #2 (Max Fried, Garret Crochet) or at least a #3 to leapfrog Taillon (Walker Buehler, Luis Castillo). But there's more reasons to NOT do this than to do this - especially given the organization's strategy to cap salary at the tax line. Let's reflect on arguments in favor of the Hoyer Strategy. He wants to win "just enough wins" to take the division and go from there, without overspending, and without worsening the future roster. He clearly doesn't expect to win the World Series; still, it is his sworn duty to beat the Brewers this year if he wants to return to his Cubs role in 2026. 1) The price of #1-#3 starting pitchers is currently well exceeding the WAR value. Luxury spending teams are paying absurd premiums on 2025 pitching. The Mets are giving Sean Manea a salary about 50% over his WAR value...and then paying a tax on top of that! 2) Prices over/under WAR value are mostly determined by a short-term pitching scarcity. The entire league is stockpiling extra pitching due to injury trends. They are still in process of adjusting their roster building strategies at the minor league level. This all leads to short-term over-bidding on starters. It's simply a bad year to be going nuts on pitching, especially if you like what you're developing internally. Take, for example, the absurd Red Sox proposition of a 21 MM PILLOW CONTRACT for a weak-throwing version of Buehler - about 50% over the expected price. Also, the 50% inflated example of the A's and Severino: a 3-year 66MM deal to play Ace when he's not better than our #3 Taillon. Frankly, any organization that can work around this pitching bubble deserves credit, as fans adjust to the realization that top arms are sitting out entire seasons lately. 3) The price of starting pitching will be more rational mid-season. Let's face it - when the primary cause of pitching prices is injury rates, the best time to buy pitching is mid-season. It allows young talent to emerge - and every year about 1/3rd of popular free agent arms are surpassed by lesser known or injured names. In fact, that's how Boyd ended up getting paid by the Cubs. He emerged from injury to have a killer run from August to October. As professionals know, most teams snag about 2 impactful pitchers later on, to push for contention. in 2024, the Cubs did a phenomenal job in recovering their bullpen mid-season with cheap but excellent pitchers. I expect them to find such pieces in 2025 later on, especially in the LH closing dept. Also, don't forget that Cade Horton and Cody Poteet both have a real shot of stealing a rotation slot by August. 4) Workhorse starters should have a high floor, not high ceiling. To win a 162 game season, you want starting depth that can eat innings but need not be relied on to start in the postseason. These are 1 to 1.5 WAR players who fill out the #4 to #8 ranks of the depth chart. Their job is to NOT MESS UP. The cubs have 4 guys who rightly fit this formula: Boyd, Assad, Rea, Poteet, and in a pinch, Wicks. Perhaps you want your #9 and #10 guys to be the youngsters with compelling high-upside. Well, we've got those in #9 (Horton) and #10 (Brown), although the team insists Brown is a bullpen guy for 2025. 5) Workhorse starters should profile as very healthy. You don't want hot young fireballers who blow out their arm. You want guys with mediocre stuff, whose pitching style focus on control and complexity offerings, with low risk of injury. You especially want them to have plausible narratives of having put any injuries behind them well BEFORE the season. Boyd and Rea fit this bill nicely. Both project to be very healthy and to be pitching their career-best ball in 2025. Both can maintain this pattern because they don't rely on stuff, and they both had their elbow reconstruction already and look great health-wise ever since. They both unlocked new strategies in 2024 that maximize their 5 pitch arsenals to create confusion for hitters. And, they both have low walk rates, which means they can stay in the game for 1-2 more outs than average. 6) Workhorse starters should have a good WAR price. Because these guys are somewhat expendable for the post-season, and won't sell many jerseys, they should be good deals. This is a classic area of the roster for saving money when on a tight budget. Boyd @ 1.5 WAR for AAV of $14.5 MM/year is not inflated, due to his upside of 2.5 WAR. Rea @ 1 WAR for $5 MM is actually cheap- his projected value is $7-8 MM. 7) The Cubs starters were good enough for the postseason in 2024, except for Hendricks. So, fans keep underestimating how hard it is to rank 6th in rotation ERA when you've got Hendricks throwing over 6. Hendricks' WAR was -1.6. Replacing his innings for Boyd @1.5 WAR is a positive swing of about 3. That's big. Rea's 1 WAR replacing 0.2 WAR Drew Smyly gets us yet another win. The combined cost of Boyd/Rea is also much cheaper than Hendricks/Smyly ! 😎 Rea is a swingman - but he can push Assad. Despite Assad's success, his fundamentals are poor, especially his walk 9.9% rate. Rea has a very low walk rate and pounds the strike zone. This is a great combo, because whenever Assad's junk approach falters, you've got a guy you can trust to throw strikes behind him. I've said it before - Assad needs to develop a true strikeout pitch. Maybe a Japanese-style splitter? While he figures that Out, Rea is a stable option. 9) Cubs need to hit. Period. 2024 was a tough year for hitters. Still, the top teams (Dodgers, Mets, Yankees, Phillies, Orioles) all had high slugging percentages. Many of the top pitching squads like Braves, Mariners, Tigers, Guardians, Brewers, AND CUBS didn't have the bat success to make it. When league batting averages are low, the big bats are the place to be spending. By only spending $15MM in 2025 on Boyd/Rea, they can and should redirect that money for fixing their hitting weaknesses. 10) 3B is a solvable problem and the bigger problem. If Hoyer fails, the pitchforks are coming. So, after thoroughly defending Hoyer's pitching strategy, let's go to the real question: will he spend enough to finish the team? Let's suppose Hoyer stashes extra money for pitching mid-season, and so only spends 220MM on Opening Day Payroll. Where do you spend it? I think me and everyone else would be okay with Alex Bregman, but that doesn't fit their spending strategy. So, let's assume they go for serious power bat on a short-term contract at 3B, so that Shaw can ease into the majors and the Cubs can solve their slugging dilemma. Problem is, they instead loaded up on cheap, sub-par LH hitters with gloves for camp, such as Gage Workman and Vidal Brujan, who are only playable as platoon hitters and can't hit a homer. There's really only one FA left with HR pop AND a glove, and that fit a 1-year profile: Paul DeJong. He projects as a .230 /.280/.440 hitter at Wrigley, with 30 HR per 162. He's a superb glove at 3B and only average at SS. I have him as a 2 WAR guy at the hot corner, with 1 coming from the glove and the other from his HR swing. His hitting splits are reverse: last year he was .730 against righties, which makes him a potential platoon with Shaw. Because the Cubs were -1 WAR at the position last year, this would be a 3 WAR swing, with a sticker price hopefully in the 8-10 million range. This would be EXACTLY where we need to be to aim for a 220 MM roster, assuming Hoyer spends the rest on a contract extension for Steele - the only guy I think will sign an extension soon. So: is it a good strategy? Mostly, but I have a few concerns. Let's ADD THE WAR and find out. I have the Cubs as a much-improved team, in the 92-93 WAR range, even with the "weak signings" of Boyd/Rea. Carson Kelly gives you net 1 WAR at catcher. Tucker is about 3 net WAR. You expect PCA and Busch to combine for +2 WAR over last year. At least +3 from Boyd/Rea, although I'm expecting +4. And, +1 for starting the season with a closer/setup Hodge/Miller who will outperform Alzolay/Neris. This all takes us from about 83 wins to at least 93, even before we evaluate third base. We still have budget to upgrade the bench with a killer combo like DeJong/Shaw, which would add enough additional slugging to swing us into the 95 win level like the Phils and Orioles. Or, miracle of miracles, Jed pulls the trigger on Bregman and we are a 96 win team with exceptional fielding chemistry, Now, if Hoyer fails to do enough, its unlikely the rotation. Blame it on a "meh" approach to bolstering our team slugging, and the glove-only infield bench. Should we really trust Canario as the OF bench solution, or would you have preferred moving him for an experienced player? I'm not sure on this. The catcher position still has a lot riding on it to improve - all the greatest teams have great catchers right now. Conclusion If you like this kind of analysis, you'll like what I have planned for future articles on fornorthsidebaseball.com! I may even crack the odd joke or tell the odd story, but my writing style is on deeper analysis of publicly available facts that tell a better story.

its not a terrible 1 year signing, but its not a clever one. I would prefer to drop the focus on the left-handed bat and convince Paul DeJong to play 3B on a 1 year, 9 million deal. Paul profiles better as a long term 3B in a league that desperately needs more guys with a power plus glove profile there. Too many guys are either/or. Let us focus on 1) defense and 2)home runs instead- our 3B MUST contribute to team slugging, or else the team won't play postseason. Most of the top 10 teams in 2024 were also top ten in slugging. The BEST overall 3B glove + slugging free agent is Paul DeJong, and also the best 1 year type guy. He projects as a 2 WAR 3B. He's a plus defender there- better than he is at SS! 1 WAR bat, 1 WAR glove. Sure, he's got a .230 avg, .280 OBP type of profile, but that comes with @.710 OPS, 30 HR per 162 games. His splits are actually REVERSED. Despite being a righty, he hits .730 against righties and only .620 against lefties. This actually works well with Shaw. Shaw projects as a higher average, lower power, hit-to-all-fields guy in 2025. I see rookie Shaw as a similar hitter to rookie Busch, but a bit more contact and less slugging. Shaw 162 game avg : .270 hitter, .360 OBP, .400 SLG, 18 HR, .760 OPS, 25 Steals... and a slight split advantage against lefties. Those are rookie projections, as I think Shaw will evolve into an .800+ OPS guy with avg glove, unless he moves back to 2B where he can have a plus glove.

All of this sounds correct. My best guess: 1) Counsel will be stashing EVERY optionable starting arm, and MANY optionable bullpen arms. 2025 is the last year Assad, Poteet, and Wicks can "work on plus offerings" in AAA and get the reps. All three of them could use more time developing one plus pitch to raise their K rates. 2) Assad has the high upside, but 2 major problems to fix to become a stud #3 level pitcher. His 19% K rate and 9.9% walk rate. He needs at LEAST 22% and 7.5% to maintain a sub 4 ERA. If I were Counsel, I'd make him work on a plus strikeout pitch for a few AAA outings, if it's not ready by Spring Training. He relies on 6 slightly below average pitches. Maybe: a deadly Japanese splitter with Imanaga's help? 3) Fans grossly underestimate how the insane injury rate for pitchers affects roster building strategy. When you expect to need 8 - 10 starters, you want your back-end starters to be boring but RELIABLE. Boyd and Rea hopefully combine for 2 to 3 WAR, which is a 3.6-4.6 WAR gain over Hendricks negative 1.6 WAR. These were good signings precisely because these pitchers rely on a big pitch mix and control to get stable results. Hot flamethrower guys with back-rotation control levels are big injury risks and also can have wildly oscillating ERA over time - I prefer them in the bullpen. Poteet was actually a great find for depth: he also profiles as a rock-steady 1 to 1.5 WAR back-rotation guy with 5 pitches. Boyd/Assad/Rea/Poteet are close to interchangeable!!!! 4) Only the top 3 guys will be expected to pitch a quality start. I expect Assad/Rea to split the 5th spot. If Boyd aims for 120-140 innings due to a low pitch count, they will stack a multi-inning reliever with him every time (my guess: Boyd 5 innings, Thompson 3 innings, Closer). 5) Rea figured something out last year with his strategy, but had 3 bad outings that cost him an otherwise sub 3.6 ERA. His walk rate is much better than Assad, and the Cubs LOVE minimizing walks. Rea's control is projected to a 3.8-4.2 ERA and a 1 WAR, 100-120 inning season, 12 starts, 50 appearances, which is solidly worth the $5 mil. I think he begins as the fifth starter, and then Assad steps in around June and Rea becomes long relief. Ideally, Assad will be throwing like an All-Star in the second half of the season, while Rea quietly becomes the swingman.