Bleacher Bums Forum

Only 99?

Dansby is exactly what any unbiased observer would have expected him to be.  Maybe a little more OPB and less SLG than one might have predicted, but on balance exactly the guy we hoped we were buying.  He probably won't be that for 7 years, but that's not really the point.  That isn't how baseball free agency works.

This roster has 99 problems but Swanson ain't one.

Swanson is a good complementary player if the team has stars and when he is your highest paid player that is a problem. Can anyone really look at the farm system and the current MLB team and see a winner before Dansby is declining?

Swanson is a good complementary player if the team has stars and when he is your highest paid player that is a problem. Can anyone really look at the farm system and the current MLB team and see a winner before Dansby is declining?

Swanson was a 6 WAR player last season AND he’s on a 6 WAR pace again this season.

A 6 WAR player is not simply “a good complementary player.”

Yes, remains to be seen whether can continue this pace for another full season in 2023, but seems like what you’re really talking about is an OFFENSIVE star, and not a player including the entire package that he contributes.

In any case, the focus should not be where Cubs are getting productive performances—which are quite a few, including Swanson most obviously—but where Cubs are not achieving, in Craig’s expression, anti-awful levels.

Too many spots ARE awful…and that just negates the really good performances by the guys doing well, such ad Swanson. We know where those spots have been——I posted the awful DH numbers yesterday. 1B again so far this season. Two very bad rotation spots. Pretty much entire bullpen other than Leiter, Jr. A couple of guys hit homers early in season, but don’t do much else offensively.

And, of course, once again, a dismal failure to hit in clutch spots. Beats me what deal is with that.

I agree that would really help Cubs a lot if had a couple of big-time offensive bats in lineup. But, not always predictable where that can come from over a period of a few years going forward.

And, no, neither you or anybody else has any clue whether Cubs will be good for the remainder of Swanson’s deal, or what the future holds.

Heck, maybe even June will be different than May. 

Right now is a low point in the season. Usually a mistake to make any big inferences in baseball when things are too high or too low.

It is a REALLY good thing that “the only holes they have to improve on offense is 1B/3B/DH”——as you put it. These should be among the easiest positions to add offense.

Notion that this isn’t feasible even by 2025 strikes me as misplaced.

If Cubs can do that, It is immensely valuable to have a 6 WAR shortstop. Swanson has been about a 112 OPS+ hitter since 2020. Quite a few HOF shortstops are in that OPS+ range who were also terrific glove SSs too. Very rare in baseball history that the best hitter on a good club is the SS. That’s just not much of an argument against Swanson, historically.

Several weeks ago I listed a bunch of SSs who maintained excellent glove work into their mid-30s, so not going to repeat that again. Just no way to know if Swanson will be one of those guys. I would not assume otherwise. We just can’t know.

What is a “complementary” player? Ideally, you’d have a couple of sluggers betters than Swanson offensively. I agree with that. Cubs need that. But, Swanson can be immensely valuable doing what he’s doing. Bert Campaneris did that. Pee Wee Reese, a HOFer, did that. Rollins, Aparicio, Tejada, quite a few others, playing alongside a couple big bats. Immensely valuable. We’ll see if Swanson can maintain this level. Can’t know. But, bottom line is that having a SS playing at Swanson’s level now is not an impediment to anything. On the contrary, it’s a big plus.

Doesn’t necessarily have to cost a bundle to add offense at 1B/DH/3B. Maybe catcher too if Amaya turns out to be a hitter. Cubs are currently so bad at several lineup spots that a significant improvement at these positions can totally remake the club’s offensive production in the near future. CAN. I’m not presuming anything one way or the other.

Again, notion that this not doable by 2025 presumes a lot of bad outcomes. We’ll see. I’ll be curious to see how it plays out.

The Cubs have players locked up long term at LF, RF, SS, 2B. That doesn’t mean the are studs, it just means that those positions are unlikely to upgraded due to inefficiencies with doing so.  CF with PCA in AA seems an unlikely add unless it is Bellinger.  You could add another corner OF for DH, but that will hurt roster flexibility.  The Cubs have made it clear that they want defense over offense at catcher so that leaves just 1B/3B/DH to improve the team on offense.

Who is going to be free agents:
Third Base
2024 Matt Chapman
2025 Alex Bregman
First Base
2024 Rhys Hoskins, Max Muncy
2025 Rizzo, Goldschmidt

Then you have Ohtani who seems unlikely for a bad record Cubs team and Soto.

Plus fixing the rotation and bullpen.  Assuming Stroman and Bellinger are Cubs next year and the arbitration guys get around $10 million that leaves the Cubs with a small list of players and about $90 million to fix the roster.  Unless they are going to shoot past the CBT that is a lot to ask for this roster. 

Deeg, I posted this in The Farm:

We don't need a better shortstop.   We need a better Hoyer.  Boxleiter,  Fullmer,  Tallon, Hosmer, Barnhardt, Rios.  Jury still out on Merriweather,  Mancini, Tuchman.  And Bellinger probably won't stick around.  Nice off-season, Jedd.  But let's keep whining about Swanson.  And the future?  ESPN did an article on the next stars of the game and the Cubs have two in the top 100, and they aren't in the top 30.  Jedd's a dumpster fire.  How many big market teams would tolerate this mediocrity?
Added later:  the breakdown of ESPN's future stars:
 Teams with 5 future stars: Reds, Orioles, Rays, Dodgers
4 future stars: Cardinals and Mariners
3 future stars: DBacks, Yankees, Pirates
2 future stars: Like the Cubs but ranked higher: Marlins, Red Sox, Nationals, Mets, White Sox, Phillies, Athletics, Guardians, Angels. 
 
Teams with 1 future star: Brewers (but at #3) Padres, Rangers, Blue Jays, Braves, Astros.
 

Cubs are 8-20 since that nice 14-10 start of the season.

The players that the Cubs have “locked up” are good performers, including Swanson. They are not the problem. You can (and should) win with those guys in your lineup.

There are two issues. One is the “awful”——as in violating Craig’s “anti-awful”——performing positions and, two, lack of a major impact bat or two. As to the latter, we are on same page.

Thing is that it is NOT neatly predictable where that comes from. We see that in the Rays lineup. Can’t know what kind of deals are made or high impact a prospect bat may become. If/when that happens, Swanson is type of guy you want as part of your core, as may be other guys under control.

CBT is an impediment to Cubs when in a rebuild. But, wasn’t when were real contenders. So, no reason to think won’t go over CBT again when latter arises again. There is a history there. I see that as a non-issue.

The Cubs don’t have a high impact at at AAA or AA since Davis has flamed out.  So the chance that the Cubs add that impact bat before 2025 is pretty slim through the minors. 

The impact bat in free agency next year is Ohtani.  He reportedly doesn’t want to sign the Angels because of their lack of winning.  How are the Cubs in this conversation?  So where are the impact bats going to come from?  Could the Cubs pull off a Soto like trade?

Hoyer is trying to build a .500 level talent team and hope they over preform.  Until you get some impact bats on this team you can Swanson up the roster as much as you want, but it isn’t going to get you back into the World Series hunt.

As much as the bullpen has been an issue, the Cubs are 25th in runs scored since May 1st.