Author Topic: Cubs in '18  (Read 5251 times)

CUBluejays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9173
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #360 on: November 14, 2017, 10:20:14 am »
I've seen some that say the $50 only applies to revenue sharing teams.  If it is a >$50 million they get a pick after the 1st round, <$50 the same pick as the Cubs.

Jesse Rogers seems to think the Cubs are going FA route and not trading from the major league team because Happ won't bring enough back.

He mentions Cobb and a reclamation project for a the rotation.  He also mentions Mike Minor being a reliever of interest.   

Deeg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8720
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #361 on: November 14, 2017, 10:33:27 am »
He's certainly of interest to me.

No more assets for closers.  Sign 2-3 good setup guys and let them fight it out with Wilson for the job.

craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7448
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #362 on: November 14, 2017, 10:44:25 am »
Unless Britton is a straight salary dump, that's a firm "no" from me.  I'm tired of giving up valuable assets for rental closers, especially ones coming off lousy years.


Agree.  Agree agree agree. 


And now that we have zero farm assets, you can't trade for a valuable rental unless you're trading from the big-league roster. 


JR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9827
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #363 on: November 14, 2017, 10:45:22 am »
Jed Hoyer squashes the latest Phil Rogers make-believe rumor.

Quote
Jason Heyward - OF - Cubs

Cubs general manager Jed Hoyer said Tuesday that the team is not shopping Jason Heyward.
There was some chatter last week that the Giants and Cubs might be working on something involving Heyward, but it sounds like no actual discussions ever took place. "That whole rumor was out of nowhere with zero base for truth," Hoyer said. "I think Jason has done a great job for us on defense, in the clubhouse, on the bases. He hasnít been offensively where he was before getting to us, but heíll get there. Heíll keep working hard. There is no point in going into hypotheticals." Heyward has batted just .243/.315/.353 in 268 games since signing an eight-year, $184 million contract with Chicago, but he has also earned two Gold Glove Awards in two seasons.

craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7448
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #364 on: November 14, 2017, 10:46:25 am »
I've seen some that say the $50 only applies to revenue sharing teams.  If it is a >$50 million they get a pick after the 1st round, <$50 the same pick as the Cubs.

Jesse Rogers seems to think the Cubs are going FA route and not trading from the major league team because Happ won't bring enough back.

He mentions Cobb and a reclamation project for a the rotation.  He also mentions Mike Minor being a reliever of interest.   

Thanks Blue, for note on the $50M comp factor. 
And for Rogers note on Happ's value and the likely resort to FA. 

brjones

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16627
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #365 on: November 14, 2017, 10:56:46 am »
He mentions Cobb and a reclamation project for a the rotation.  He also mentions Mike Minor being a reliever of interest.   

Rogers clarified the "reclamation project" statement by saying that he was talking more about a typical 5th starter type.  So that could mean a pure reclamation project, but he also mentioned Sabathia and Lackey by name as players who could also fill that role.

I tend to agree with Rogers that there isn't going to be a big trade for a TOR guy.  I just don't think the deal is out there.  I still don't see the match for Archer that a lot of people think is there, and the Rays don't seem that interested in trading him anyway.  It doesn't sound like the Blue Jays are going to make Stroman available.  Cole might end up being available, but he's been more of a mid-rotation guy outside of his 2015 season and only has two years of control left.  I think those are the only TOR names that have been speculated to be available so far this offseason.

I do wonder about guys like Odorizzi (coming off a bad year and getting expensive), McHugh (injuries in 2017 pushed him to 6th/7th on Astros depth chart), Corbin (5th starter on that team with only one year of control left, and Diamondbacks may need to use his money somewhere else), and maybe a few others.  I wonder the Cubs might still be able to match up with some team without using the major league depth because those teams have motivations beyond just getting top value back.

DelMarFan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2873
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #366 on: November 14, 2017, 11:19:14 am »
Lackey returning wouldn't surprise me.

craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7448
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #367 on: November 14, 2017, 11:26:44 am »
It's kind of interesting to imagine how the next season will evolve, and provide more context for the Cubs building plan. 

Cubs have won WS already, and two other playoff seasons, and are likely to get into the playoffs more times future, so the Theo legacy is secured even if they never get to another WS or never rank among the top 2-3 teams in the league again in any future season. 

But it's going to be interesting to see how some of the philosophies play out:
1.  Accumulate hitters, trade for good pitching.  They picked up a couple of rental relievers, and Eloy/Quintana.  Not sure that's quite the quantity or quality of cost-controlled young pitching that was envisioned in the plan?  Maybe if Happ and Schwarber explode this year, there might still be a chance for more.

2.  Young hitters develop.  Premise of the plan and Maddon's view is that young hitters develop and improve.  What they had in 2015, the expectation was that by 2018 the improvement would be huge.  But to some degree Russell/Baez/Schwarber weren't much better 2017 than 2015 (or Soler).  (Baez numbers were better, as deeg will note).  Think 2018 will be a big year to see whether Schwarber, Baez, Russell, Almora, and Happ show improvement.  If not, I think it's going to be harder to assume that 4th year guys are just young and will  start to figure things out in years 5 and 6. 

3.  Hangover plateau?  Development is often non-liner, and has progression interrupted by periods of plateau or regression.  Coming off WS they were all stars, perhaps not much perceived need to get better.  If status-quo is 103 wins and WS, who other than Heyward needs to mess with success?  But perhaps this year, after hitting badly first half and 2nd season, plus ugly situational hitting stats, perhaps there will be some motivation both organizational and individual to adjust? 

craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7448
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #368 on: November 14, 2017, 12:11:25 pm »
http://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/how-wade-davis-returning-cubs-could-fall-place

Theo, and Mooney, talking about closer and Davis.  Mooney makes a good point: with a lot of the big-market and contending teams set at closer, and with a lot of other interesting relievers on the market, how many teams will bid crazy on Davis? 

Certainly Cardinals might be one team that's interested?  Houston with the way Giles finished off, may have interest?  Only take one team to give the extra year(s) or the extra dollars.  But given supply and demand, not implausible to envision a scenario where Davis comes back at a deal that's anti-awful from the Cubs perspective? 

brjones

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16627
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #369 on: November 14, 2017, 12:46:48 pm »
The problem with Davis is that even if his price tag falls, he's still going to cost somewhere around $60 million over 4 years.  That's still at least twice what guys like Reed, Shaw, McGee, etc. are likely to get.  And given that Davis' underlying numbers were no better than those guys this year, I don't think you can really project him to be much better than them going forward.

I just don't see any way the Cubs can bring in Davis and still improve as much as they would if they brought in Reed, McGee, and maybe even a third cheaper reliever for the same amount of money they're giving to Davis.

CUBluejays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9173
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #370 on: November 14, 2017, 01:03:38 pm »
http://www.bleachernation.com/2017/11/13/another-closer-trade-the-cubs-have-reportedly-spoken-to-the-orioles-about-zach-britton/

More summary of rumors and Rogers.  He mentioned the Cubs would be interested in a 3 year/$50-55 million deal with Davis.  Additional starters mentioned Bucholtz and Mikolas from Japan.

Deeg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8720
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #371 on: November 14, 2017, 01:25:20 pm »
I fear a precipitous decline from Davis over the next 3 years.  Just not that interested.

CurtOne

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18131
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #372 on: November 14, 2017, 01:52:33 pm »
Wouldn't it work for Davis to take the QO and go FA next year?  3/55 and the QO Aren't that different.

DelMarFan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2873
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #373 on: November 14, 2017, 02:49:55 pm »
I wonder how Davis profiles compared to someone like Eckersley, who remained pretty effective late into his career (as I recall). 

grrrrlacher

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 923
  • Location: Indianapolis
Re: Cubs in '18
« Reply #374 on: November 14, 2017, 03:20:40 pm »
It's kind of interesting to imagine how the next season will evolve, and provide more context for the Cubs building plan. 

Cubs have won WS already, and two other playoff seasons, and are likely to get into the playoffs more times future, so the Theo legacy is secured even if they never get to another WS or never rank among the top 2-3 teams in the league again in any future season. 

But it's going to be interesting to see how some of the philosophies play out:
1. Accumulate hitters, trade for good pitching.  They picked up a couple of rental relievers, and Eloy/Quintana.  Not sure that's quite the quantity or quality of cost-controlled young pitching that was envisioned in the plan?  Maybe if Happ and Schwarber explode this year, there might still be a chance for more.

2.  Young hitters develop.  Premise of the plan and Maddon's view is that young hitters develop and improve.  What they had in 2015, the expectation was that by 2018 the improvement would be huge.  But to some degree Russell/Baez/Schwarber weren't much better 2017 than 2015 (or Soler).  (Baez numbers were better, as deeg will note).  Think 2018 will be a big year to see whether Schwarber, Baez, Russell, Almora, and Happ show improvement.  If not, I think it's going to be harder to assume that 4th year guys are just young and will  start to figure things out in years 5 and 6. 

3.  Hangover plateau?  Development is often non-liner, and has progression interrupted by periods of plateau or regression.  Coming off WS they were all stars, perhaps not much perceived need to get better.  If status-quo is 103 wins and WS, who other than Heyward needs to mess with success?  But perhaps this year, after hitting badly first half and 2nd season, plus ugly situational hitting stats, perhaps there will be some motivation both organizational and individual to adjust? 


Just think we have traded Jorge Solar, Gleyber Torres, Donald DeWees, Matt Szczur, Zach Rosscup, Dylan Cease, Eloy Jimenez, Jeimer Candelario, Starlin Castro, Adam Warren, Arismendy Alcantara, Paul Blackburn, Daniel Vogelbach, Billy McKinney and some others.

And what do we have from all those trades less than 2 years later?  Mike Montgomery and Jose Quintana (and a WS).  It just feels like we wasted a lot of assets.