I wouldn't suggest that any of the 3 SS at the top are superstars adding $30 million to the future payroll for multiple years won't limit the ability to add an acutal superstar or at least another near SS.
Slight disagree, but I understand what you're saying here.
Yes there would be payroll coming off, but you have to replace them (except for Heyward), so it isn't really a net savings. Maybe you can replace Happ with a prospect and that gets you some extra money. It is really hard to just spend your way to a good team.
$23M from Heyward is savings straight to the bottom line.
On replacing Stroman, I think we need to consider the rotation as a whole. Essentially, I'm hoping that moving into the 2024 season, we can comfortably slot Steele into Stroman's spot, and that one of Thompson, Killian, Wicks, Wesneski, etc., can be counted on as a Steele replacement. There is absolutely real savings opportunity here as our minor league pitching talent evolves.
If Contreras doesn't accept the QO, there is immediate savings at C this year. And if he does, I don't imagine the Cubs will be looking to earmark $20M for a starter there in 2024. Either this year or next, a good amount of this $ will fall to the bottom line.
And if one of the Davis, Canario, PCA, etc., group isn't ready to take over Happ's spot in 2024, that will be extremely disappointing.
In short, I disagree - I think there are meaningful savings opportunities with the money coming off next year.
I don't think you can just add up projected WAR to get a projection. That team, just ball parking it would be right around the Cardinals and somwhere between 84-88 projected wins. It is a good team, getting to the next level is a lot harder with the 4 guys signed long termed and Suzuki taking up a big chunk.
Yes, it's probably a little more complicated than just adding up WAR, but how are you "ball parking" 84-88 wins?