Author Topic: Cubs in ‘23  (Read 20686 times)

CUBluejays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16123
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #60 on: October 20, 2022, 12:30:37 am »
So if I'm understanding, then stacking seasons above lux line has no impact on draft picks, only on financial tax levels.  Yes?
-Hoyer could go $39 over lux every remaining CBA season, and the only consequence would be financial, no draft factor?
-And the 10-back draft factor doesn't matter whether it's 1st, 2nd, or 3rd year over the lux line. 

I don't think Hoyer is going to go $40 over the lux line this winter, so non-factor. 

Under old CBA, it seemed like even Yankees tried to avoid the triple-lux, and would try to restart the lux count.  Are the penalties less now, and triple-luxing will be routine instead of exceptional?  I ask because if triple-lux is still a big deal, Hoyer may prioritize staying under the line this year to defer approach of triple-lux? 

It had more to do with MLB’s revenue sharing.  Teams that were repeat offenders had to pay a tax on big market teams that would have gotten revenue sharing but had to refund it (White Sox, Blue Jays, A’s). It was around $100 million that was refunded. The A’s are revenue sharing recipients again so that decreases the amount a lot and I’m not sure it is even still in the CBA about repea offenders getting taxed.

https://www.mlb.com/glossary/transactions/competitive-balance-tax

Here is the penalties.
For $19 million over it is over $5 million dollar difference between year 1 and 3.
For $39 million over it is over $10 million dollar difference between year 1 and 3

Now the Steve Cohen tax has bite, but the difference for a repeat offender is still small. If you were $80 million over the last $20 million would cost and addition $16 million in year 1 and $22 million in year 3.

Informative Informative x 1 View List

ticohans

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4798
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #61 on: October 20, 2022, 04:53:29 pm »
A difference is that we don't already have guys stepping towards arbitration.  Once Bryant and the young guys hit arbitration, the inflation path was severe even without adding new talent.  Right now, it seems like other than Hoerner, there aren't any imminent arbitration-inflation guys?  Keegan and steele, soon enough I guess, IF they remain good.  But if cats like Mervis and Canario and PCA and Wicks do become part of the next good team, there remains a 3-year window before those kinds of guys even start the arb spiral. 

This is a big part of why I'm so adamant on spending significantly this winter.

Further, not only are we going to have very little arb inflation over the next few years, but as I've mentioned previously, we continue to see big contracts cycle off the books the next two years.

While frustrated with how Ricketts has controlled spending the past few years, like others on the board, I'm willing to give the ownership the benefit of the doubt this winter.

But I need to see ~$90M added to the current payroll to feel like ownership is making good on its word.

craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11861
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #62 on: October 20, 2022, 05:48:24 pm »
tico, I agree with your analysis.  Your ~$90 would leave them ~$10 below lux; the $75-90 Jeff has suggested could leave $15-25 sub-lux.  With Heyward and Hendricks $35 coming off, there could still be solid spending space entering 2024 and beyond. 

Reb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3792
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #63 on: October 20, 2022, 07:03:47 pm »
Would be helpful if Hoyer could pull off a major trade to get impact or significant guy instead of having to rely entirely on FA market.

But, hard to see how Cubs match up from the major league roster. Happ only a year away from free agency, which reduces his trade value; doesn’t seem to make sense to trade Hoerner or Steele, etc. Doesn’t seem like Morel or Velazquez would get you much in return.

Would love to get, say, Pablo Lopez, but Marlins had a huge ask for Lopez at trade deadline—insisting on Gleyber AND Oswaldo Peraza from Yankees. So, hard to see anything like that.

Wouldn’t shock me if maybe Cubs put together a package of prospects for the right guy, especially as that might help with the 40-man roster crunch. Presumably, Hoyer will be open to a variety of ways to get better in 2023.

JeffH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #64 on: October 21, 2022, 07:16:45 am »
Maybe an opportunity to trade for Kelenic with the Mariners?  He's been a disappointment in the majors so far, but he has the pedigree.  He's lost the CF job to Rodriguez.
Like Like x 1 View List

DUSTY

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 732
  • Location: Sevierville,TN
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #65 on: October 21, 2022, 07:35:58 am »
The path to us being good again soon is an easy one and its paved in green.

Dont trade away the prospects we've accumulated.

Just fill our holes via free agency.

We're the Cubs not the Royals.

People want to play here.

And BTW...

Bring back Rizzo.

CurtOne

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25525
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #66 on: October 21, 2022, 12:46:36 pm »
Dusty for Cardinals GM

ticohans

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4798
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #67 on: October 21, 2022, 12:54:31 pm »
Maybe an opportunity to trade for Kelenic with the Mariners?  He's been a disappointment in the majors so far, but he has the pedigree.  He's lost the CF job to Rodriguez.

I like the idea, and that Kelenic is a lefty, but can he actually play the position? Would be hesitant to commit serious prospect resources to the trade if he's just going to need to move off the role.

JR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13107
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #68 on: October 21, 2022, 01:05:48 pm »
Kelenic sounds like a younger Clint Frazier to me.

Seriously it is amazing how a guy like Kelenic can seem so promising in the minors, come up to the majors and be a completely overmatched whiff machine.  By the way modern baseball hitting philosophies and approaches stink.

ticohans

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4798
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #69 on: October 21, 2022, 01:25:27 pm »
https://blogs.fangraphs.com/lets-admire-some-of-the-strongest-arms-in-baseball-infield-edition/

Fun article on best infield arms, including one of our own, and one of our top FA acquisition targets...

craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11861
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #70 on: October 21, 2022, 01:55:31 pm »
I'm open to anything.  I kinda hate rehashing the 2016 success, but they had successful conversions on all kinds of talent acquisition.
* The big FA splurges with Lester, Heyward, Zobrist, Lackey (and later Hamels and Darvish). 
* The less pricey FA pickup with Jason Hammel, who provided solid 170 and 166 good innings in 2015 and 2016 (3.7 and 3.8 ERA's). 
* Rizzo was obviously a prospect-for-prospect trade.  That was a pure baseball trade, nothing $$-related at all.
* Arrieta the high-ceiling-wildman take-a-shot who turned out wildly good. 
* Hendricks, the low-ceiling-soft-tosser who turned out shockingly good. 
* Fowler, kind of a mixture of trade/salary-pickup and then surprise FA re-sign.  (I often think of that offseason as Heyward-Zo-Lackey. 
* Hector Rondon via Rule 5, he was terrific in 2015 (30 saves, 1.0 WHIP, 1.7 ERA)
* Chris Coghlan was a +115 OPS+ guy in 2015, he was huge regular contributor during the second-half surge.  Scrap-heap reclamation. 

So just a beautiful variety of talent-acquisition approaches taken, and a bunch of them turned out really good, at least for a while, and particularly so during the 2015 breakout leading into the 2016 magic.  Obviously they made some other efforts too, that didn't always work great.  (Mike Olt, Ian Stewart...). But they hit on a lot of the pickups.  Whatever Hoyer and Hawkins do, they've got to click on a bunch of the moves they make. 

If they were to do some prospect-for-prospect, and they picked up a 3B prospect who turned into a good player, that would be super cool. 




JeffH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #71 on: October 21, 2022, 01:57:27 pm »
tico, I've never seen anything to suggest that Kelenic can't be a long term CF.

JR, in Kelenic's defense, his K rates are bad, but not "overmatched" by modern day standards.  His biggest problem is that he's just not hitting the ball hard.

craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11861
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #72 on: October 21, 2022, 01:59:24 pm »
Kelenic sounds like a younger Clint Frazier to me.

Seriously it is amazing how a guy like Kelenic can seem so promising in the minors, come up to the majors and be a completely overmatched whiff machine.  By the way modern baseball hitting philosophies and approaches stink.

I admit some fears for Brennen and Canario along these lines.  Internally, I wonder which the Cubs believe in more strongly?  *IF* they had some trade for a guy they really believed in, but they had to include Brennen or Canario to get that guy, I wonder which one they'd be more willing to send? 

ticohans

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4798
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #73 on: October 21, 2022, 02:00:03 pm »
Fangraphs has 45 ratings on both his fielding and arm, and his defensive metrics at the major league level are inconclusive, at best. That's why I ask. If he could be counted on for at least an average CF, I'd be very interested.

JeffH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
Re: Cubs in ‘23
« Reply #74 on: October 21, 2022, 02:09:03 pm »
The thing about Clint Frazier is that he was never really that great in the minor leagues.
Like Like x 1 View List