Bleacher Bums Forum

Hoyer is an boring interview .....  He’s also a smart guy who has to realize he is going to get lit up by not trading Willson.  .... He also had the chance to blunt the criticism when he has asked about Willson.  All he had to do was say yes we will talk to him about and a lot of people would be happy.  He didn’t and instead gave a non-answer.  He also wouldn’t say it was the last time there would be a sell-off. My reading between the lines is that this isn’t done.

.....They haven’t talked about an extension since 2017 with Willson from reports. Hoyer plays things very close to the best in his interviews.

Blue, thanks for your thoughts following the interview.  After listening to it myself, just a couple of add-ons, for those who maybe didn't or won't.

1.  You note that "They haven’t talked about an extension since 2017 with Willson".  But in the interview, at ~6:30, Hoyer said "we've obviously, um, you know, we're not going to talk about contract negotiations, but obviously I've been in communication with his agents, you know, throughout the month..."  I would hypothesize that those conversations involved discussion about extension, and "haven't talked about an extension since 2017" is a misleading narrative. 

2.  *IF* following those conversations Jed was convinced that no Cub-sensible deal was plausible, then not trading Contreras would have been illogical.  Given that he was not traded implies that Hoyer thinks a Cub deal might be plausible.  Blue, you may disagree, and argue that the rebuild is too distant to make a Contreras-extension wise.  But the non-trade combined with reference to conversation-with-agents implies to me that Hoyer is considering an extension. 

3.  Hoyer discussed Wesneski as a starting pitcher prospect.  He referred to a 4-pitch mix.  Law had mentioned that more scouts he'd talked to envisioned Wesneski as a relief guy, but Hoyer seems serious that Wesneski will at least be given a shot to make it as a starter. 

4.  Hoyer made multiple references to last year's deadline deals, as having some highly motivated buyers who offered really good deals and having deals come together really late.  Had highly motivated buyers, who lined up at the right times, we were really fortunate....  He said this year it was different, there didn't seem to be highly motivated buyers, specifically regarding Willson.  "This year, we just didn't find that".  "Had a lot of rational buyers" who weren't willing to part with a particular prospect.  "Buyers were a-motivated". 

5.  There were a couple of questions that gave him the opportunity to discuss the players he did acquire.  He talked Wesneski as starter, and talked the Dodger guy a little bit.  But he never really did say much of anything about Brown or Gonzalez in scouting detail.  Referred to the three pitchers as "big arms", and as guys they had targeted.  (The "big arms" is interesting, because I haven't perceived Wesneski as a very big arm.  And the Gonzalez report had seemed kind of average velocity-wise, too....).

Yeah.  That said, I think a lot of times teams pick up guys with talent, but the Cubs don't necessarily assume they really know the future.  The odds may still be 3:1 that Wesneski never sticks as a starter.  But even the improbable possibility that he might stick as a useful starter could still justify the move, even with only kinda mixed confidence.   

Think maybe we lost sight of a bit of baseball history in assuming that contending clubs necessarily want to upgrade catching offense when they already like their catching defense.

Mets, Rays, Astros, Guardians—clubs we thought wanted Contreras at some point—like their catching defense. Put aside mid-season turmoil learning new pitchers for a moment, they just like catchers who catch and work with their pitchers.

The baseball history that’s relevant is the tons and tons of catchers who didn’t hit a lick and had long careers because of their defense, sometimes as regulars, sometimes as co-starters. You can go to every decade of baseball history and these guys are all over the place.

Just to name a fraction of these guys, Dave and Curt probably remember Jim Hegan who was the Indians catcher for 10 years in a row, caught the great 1954 pitching staff, played 17 years in majors, and averaged 0.5 WAR per season. Or, Mike Tresh (Tom’s dad) who caught mostly in 1940s or Val Picinich from 1920-30s and didn’t hit much. Many, many more. I could go on and on.

Clubs love these guys. Sure, they’d rather have Gabby Hartnett but they’re fine with trying to win with the guy who can handle the pitching staff, catch, and hit just enough——and throw in a modicum of reluctance to change course mid-season.

Blue, thanks for your thoughts following the interview.  After listening to it myself, just a couple of add-ons, for those who maybe didn't or won't.

1.  You note that "They haven’t talked about an extension since 2017 with Willson".  But in the interview, at ~6:30, Hoyer said "we've obviously, um, you know, we're not going to talk about contract negotiations, but obviously I've been in communication with his agents, you know, throughout the month..."  I would hypothesize that those conversations involved discussion about extension, and "haven't talked about an extension since 2017" is a misleading narrative. 

I took it as more keeping the agent in the loop with reguards to trade possibilities than extension numbers.  The leak that they haven't talked since 2017 is clearly from the agent side of things or Willson himself.  I guess if there were actual talks I would expect it to leak out now, just to add to the pressure the Cubs will be under to extend him.

reb, as regards Willson, the question is how many of those teams we thought might want Willson yesterday might want him in the winter.  Transitioning with two-months left is one thing, transitioning with full camp and full seasons ahead is different. 

I don't know.  But maybe none of those teams are going to blow Willson away with mega-offers this winter either?  Hard to know know. 

Astros keep depending on aged catchers.  Detroit?  Boston?  A team like the Phillies may want to alternate Realmuto with Contreras for extra rest.  That seems to be a winning tactic.

BA has a rankings list of all the prospects traded before the trade deadline.

Still trying to get a handle around the seemingly light return for Givens....

Yeah, Gonzalez seemed disappointing.  Givens is better than Martin, so I expected we'd get something a little jazzier. 

These days, the cliche hopeful answer is "scouting and pitch-lab".  Cubs see something they like or that they think they can tweak up? 

Hoyer referred to him as having a "big arm", and being a "targeted guy".  So, I'm guessing the Cubs scouts thought they saw something to work with?  That's more than the one scouting report suggested, which seemingly describe a JAG low-mid-90's fastball, which every RHP in full-season minor-league baseball has at minimum.  I do imagine the Cubs scouting is more informed on obscure A-ball relievers than is BA.  Will be interesting to see what he's got once he's in the Cubs system and we hear more. 

Interesting to me is that the Cubs aren't even sending him to South Bend, instead just to Myrtle. 

Interesting to me is that the Cubs aren't even sending him to South Bend, instead just to Myrtle.

Why is that interesting?