Bleacher Bums Forum

Disappointing that Harold Ramirez taking up a 40-man spot with all the other Cubs needs to be filled.

Maybe they’ll try to get him thru waivers at some point.

Kinda fun article on Frank the Tank.

https://www.marqueesportsnetwork.com/how-frank-schwindel-was-able-to-reach-new-heights-with-cubs-in-2021/

I’ve heard of shortlinks but that’s ridiculous.

No idea what you mean.   

Rays committing 9 figures to Franco. Marlins locking up Alcantara. Poorest teams in baseball with money to spend.

But the Cubs? We're not going to do anything before the lockout, and then after the lockout, Hoyer will scramble to scoop up all the leftovers, talking about "value".

Cubs' ownership is increasingly a joke. This is one of the most valuable franchises in all of sports, and the Ricketts' have *already* made a KILLING on their investment in the club. But we're going to cry poor. Whatever goodwill ownership won in 2016 is fully and completely used up in my book.

Absolutely fair point, Jeff, and I hope to be wrong.

I guess I'm observing the pattern of the past few years, believe the impending lockout provides Cub ownership a convenient excuse for not doing anything, and perceive an opportunity to sign an impact position player in this FA market, the likes of which we may not see again in the next few years.

Bottom line: it's embarrassing that an org like the Cubs should be relegated to kick-the-tire and LIAB signings, which has been our MO for a few years now.

Love what's happening with the pitch lab stuff, believe in our high-ceiling minor league approach, but want to see more spend at the major league level, and am fed up with the excuses of the past few years.

In most cases involving good players, I assume the Cubs will need to very significantly over-bid the market in order to persuade players to choose us.  At this point in time.  Free agents have choice, and most appreciate winning. 

DeSclafini had good coaching and a great experience on a terrific team in San Fran.  After being on bad Reds teams for a career, he enjoyed the fun of a 100-win team.  Offers being moderately close, why would he choose a Cubs offer? 

Matz has had some un-fun seasons with lousy Mets, and got to enjoy the better pleasures of a 91-win team in Toronto.  Bids being comparable, which does Matz choose between the 90-win Cardinals and the 71-win Cubs?  Plus his wife is from the south with a career in Nashville.  Bids being comparable, which would she choose? 

Other than the small portion of players/wives with family in the Midwest, the only reason a good free agent should choose the Cubs is if the Cubs significantly outbid the market.  Otherwise all ties work against us. 

I understand.  I think the Cubs are in an awkward position, brought on by pretty much every member of "the core" greatly regressing.  I feel like they kind of have to do this "reboot".

I want them to spend, but I really don't want them to muddle through the broad middle of free agency.  I want Corey Seager and then a bunch of bargain shopping.  A couple of shrewd trades, if they can manage something.

Yep, this exactly. I don't expect them to go all-out this winter on FA signings. But to balk at the opportunity to acquire a generational talent like Seager or Correa (28 and 27 years old, respectively) due to a "rebuild" is to miss the forest for the trees.

And it's one thing to compete for those players but lose in the end. It's another to take a pass at the chance all together. It seems the latter is the front office's inclination, and that is unacceptable in my view.

I understand this thinking Jeff, and it may be wise. 

But I wonder if you don't maybe need to build more skeleton, even if some bones are non-elite?  My "skeleton" view is that FA's want to join a team that has enough skeleton to give it a realistic chance to win, if that player signs and presumably improves it further.  Who wants to join a team that's likely to lose 90 games a year for the next two seasons? 

I'm not sure we've got enough bones on the skeleton yet. 

If we could pick up one or two via FA, even if they aren't stars, it could help?

I think this is the reality the club has put itself in.  The Cubs are not a desirable FA destination - the way things went down with the last group doesn't play well, the on-field product sucks, and they don't have a respected manager in place as a draw.  The only way the Cubs are going to sign anybody other clubs actually want is to significantly outbid them.  And does anyone see this front office and ownership group doing that?