Bleacher Bums Forum

General Category => Archives => Topic started by: Dave23 on September 30, 2019, 02:29:21 pm


Title: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 30, 2019, 02:29:21 pm
So that we can put the smell of '19 behind us...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on September 30, 2019, 03:01:45 pm
Theo's press conference should be starting up any minute. The Cubs are showing it on YouTube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRIxIOvBKn0
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 30, 2019, 04:44:53 pm
Jesse Rogers has an interesting piece on Maddon's departure, the issues the team has had and what they need in a new manager.  It includes the following:

"The Cubs might already have their next manager in mind, but at the very least they should know the qualities they need. Maddon worked hard to connect with a younger generation of players, but a younger manager and former major leaguer will inherently speak the millennial language. Whether the next manager has experience or not, he had better understand the ever-changing dynamics within a pitching staff, especially as it relates to the National League. If people wondered about Maddon's bullpen maneuvers, what will they say of a rookie manager's?

"Just as important as any in-game decision, the new manager must work with a firmer hand. By their own admission, Cubs players have been pampered by owner Tom Ricketts and team brass. It's first class all the way, but the players haven't always reciprocated. In a sense, it feels as if they've taken advantage of their parents and now need a little more discipline in their lives."



If those are legitimately the concerns, is it really a good idea to hire the guy those players are publicly asking you to hire?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 30, 2019, 04:47:34 pm
The players were apparently asking for more scheduled team batting and fielding practices.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on September 30, 2019, 04:48:12 pm
Maybe Rogers read my post!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 04:58:35 pm
Theo's press conference should be starting up any minute. The Cubs are showing it on YouTube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRIxIOvBKn0

A very long press conference. I listened to most of it. Would like to have been able to take notes. Seemed pretty clear there .will be substantial changes. At one point, discussing players nearing end of control, said if longer deal cannot be reached that would be a factor in openess to trades. Said he cared more about what they would receive in trade than what they would give up. Emphasized the need for players adept at contact, also the importance of how they would benefit the team long term, not just short term.





Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 05:26:22 pm
Other stuff as I think of things. One is that Theo had high praise for Contreras and Castellanos. He also mentioned again that some players had made adjustments they were asked to at the plate (though he did not give names, he presumably was referring to Happ and Schwarber).

He specifically acknowledged leadoff and CF as areas in special need of improvement, aling with 2B. Said he would love to have a prototypical leadoff guy, but said the options there are very limited. He stressed his philosophy of  trying to fill up the lineup with high on base hitters

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 05:32:22 pm
I believe Theo said one member the coaching staff eould be considered for manager, and also that one person on their list is with a plaoff team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 30, 2019, 05:42:49 pm
I believe Theo said one member the coaching staff eould be considered for manager, and also that one person on their list is with a plaoff team.
Hank White is currently with the Nationals.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 30, 2019, 05:50:21 pm
That was a really good interview.  Theo is really good with those, and that one may be his best I've ever heard. 

After that, I'm more confident than before that Russell is gone.  Theo made a couple of references to "consequences" being "evident" for not being prepared.  I may not remember it correctly.  But I kinda think the only guys who I recall experiencing evident "consequences" were Russell and Almora, the two guys who got sent down.  Almora was consequences for being completely unable to hit, but I'm not sure effort or preparation were at issue.  I'm guessing not being prepared and consequences would seem to have Russell's name on it? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 05:51:15 pm
Speaking about Ross, Theo said his connection to playwrs, particularly 2016 team would not be a particular asset (though not a deyriment). Throughout Theo stressed the need to look forward, not back, to seek change that will build a new culture. He als said he places a high value on experience
 It did not sound like Ross is anywhere near a favored candidate.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 30, 2019, 05:51:35 pm
Ron, I noted with interest how enthusiastic and positive he was when discussing Castellanos, too.  Found it interesting. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on September 30, 2019, 05:53:47 pm
Send almora to the wsox, I like him! I don't think he recovered from the ball hitting the little kid.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on September 30, 2019, 05:54:37 pm
Atleast Theo seems to know Casty is worth keeping... He's exactly the type of player they need hitting wise.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 30, 2019, 05:59:56 pm
I believe Theo said one member the coaching staff eould be considered for manager, and also that one person on their list is with a plaoff team.

The latter will be Acosta, the former Loretta. Presumably.

As for Castellanos there’s a lot there to like.  But I just don’t see how he and Schwarber fit together long term.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 30, 2019, 06:12:32 pm
That was a really good interview.  Theo is really good with those, and that one may be his best I've ever heard. 

After that, I'm more confident than before that Russell is gone.  Theo made a couple of references to "consequences" being "evident" for not being prepared.  I may not remember it correctly.  But I kinda think the only guys who I recall experiencing evident "consequences" were Russell and Almora, the two guys who got sent down.  Almora was consequences for being completely unable to hit, but I'm not sure effort or preparation were at issue.  I'm guessing not being prepared and consequences would seem to have Russell's name on it? 
One of Addison Russell's most egregious offenses was missing signs. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on September 30, 2019, 06:12:46 pm
Hank White is currently with the Nationals.
so is Dave Martinez.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 30, 2019, 06:25:17 pm
Had an interesting comment about supplementing starting rotation—-getting younger and a different look (along with the usual comment about depth). Guessing that might mean Theo looking for a youngish power pitcher for 2020.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 30, 2019, 06:35:00 pm
I wonder if Dylan Cease is available.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on September 30, 2019, 06:51:22 pm
Theo is a master at those news conferences.  He made it clear that significant changes are needed, but the proof will be in the pudding.  I inferred two things from what I heard.  Like Ron, my sense is that Rossy is far from the preferred candidate.  Secondly, I was struck with Theo praising Contreras and then immediately talking up the season that Caratini had.  I might be reading too much into it, but I'm sensing that they will be ready to move Contreras for the right return.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 30, 2019, 06:54:12 pm
Theo is a master at those news conferences.  He made it clear that significant changes are needed, but the proof will be in the pudding.  I inferred two things from what I heard.  Like Ron, my sense is that Rossy is far from the preferred candidate.  Secondly, I was struck with Theo praising Contreras and then immediately talking up the season that Caratini had.  I might be reading too much into it, but I'm sensing that they will be ready to move Contreras for the right return.

Indeed - Theo sounded many of the same notes after last season and then stood pat.  The question is whether he was blowing smoke, or genuinely thought he had license to do what he needed and had the rug pulled out from under him by ownership.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on September 30, 2019, 06:54:29 pm
I wish someone would have asked Theo about the failure of the 2018 and 2019 Cubs to "rise to the occasion".  How does a team like Milwaukee lose their star player and yet play so well down the stretch whereas the Cubs just seem to shrink from the spotlight.  How do you change that "culture"?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 30, 2019, 07:01:49 pm
A factor that nobody has brought up so far is that once you win, you have a target on your back.  You get everyone’s best shot.   That will be gone in 2020.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 07:09:03 pm
As for Castellanos there’s a lot there to like.  But I just don’t see how he and Schwarber fit together long term.

I agree, unless they are platooned, which seems highly unlikely.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 07:10:32 pm
so is Dave Martinez.

Yeah, but more than any other theme Theo stressed was not looking back, but looking forward. Dave Martinez would represent looking back.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on September 30, 2019, 07:17:41 pm
Bryant has pretty well let it be known that he intends to test the free agent market.  I think he will be the first of the "top line" Cubs to be traded, most likely this winter.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 07:26:20 pm
I had several overall impressions from Theo's  press conference.  The first thing is how consistently he stressed the need to focus on the future, not 2016 and the past. He took responsibility for relying on the talent of the young players from 2016 and his belief in those players' abilities to continue to grow.  But over and over he kept saying the Cubs need to look forward and not backward to prior successes.  He talked about building something new. 

The second thing was his focus on hitters making contact, as opposed to relying on power, given the current MLB environment.  Somewhat related was his clear preference for players with high on base percentage.

The third was his firm commitment to not simply focusing on the current "window" but rather building toward the future, while still being committed to the goal of winning the World Series in 2020. He was clear in not being willing to sacrifice the future for the short term (even though his own contract runs only through 2021).  He implied regretting some deals he'd made in the past in that regard, I thought.

The fourth was his emphasis on embracing change, at all levels of the organization.  I would be very surprised if there is not at least one player who at least some of us have considered to be core players.  My own expectation is that Kris Bryant, after being unwilling to sign a long term contract, will be very aggressively shopped.  I think it's very likely that some team will be willing to make a sufficiently attractive offer for the Cubs to trade Bryant over the winter. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bluebufoon on September 30, 2019, 07:47:10 pm
Do the Mets have enough top young prospects to interest us in a trade for Bryant ? Noah Syndaguard and prospects ?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 30, 2019, 07:54:02 pm
I agree, unless they are platooned, which seems highly unlikely.

I wonder.  He talked about the difficulty of finding a CF, and suggested other workarounds as opposed to just finding an every-day CF. 

CF:  "have in house options but...."  "prototypical"  "not a position with great surplus"  "have to be realistic"  "maybe platoon, or complement with a more attainable player from outside the organization". 

In that context, I wonder if a "more attainable" "complementary" players might be the workaround.

I don't necessarily think Castellanos would necessarily be prohibitively redundant.  1.  Guys get injured or need some rest.  2.  Schwarber-Heyward-Castellanos isn't a great defensive outfield, but it might be a very good offensive OF.  3.  "More attainable" "Complementary" guy could pick a bunch of starts (depending on if he's any good); Heyward's bat could take some rest; Schwarber has plenty of lefties that he doesn't match up well; guys get hurt, etc.. 

If you added a "more attainable" "complementary" RH guy who picked up 50-100 starts, I'd consider that as an interesting workaround.  Typically ~45 starts are LHP.  So if for those starts you rested either Heyward or Schwarber, that seems perfectly reasonable to me.  Maybe Heyward would play 50 starts in center, maybe 100.  But there wouldn't be a shortage of starts for either of them, or Castellanos....  as long as you're willing to play Schwarber-Heyward-Castellanos together for 50-100 starts. 

He talked up Schwarber, "breakthrough season", etc.; maybe that's pure trade salesmanship, maybe he's sincere. 

Also with Castellanos, "we'd love to have him back" but he knows that "it's not as simple as that".  Maybe it's "not as simple" because it's all about the money.  Or maybe it's "not as simple" because they'd need to find a worthwhile deal for either Schwarber or Heyward to make it work, beats me.  Or maybe it's "not as simple" because Cast and Schwarber are just too similiar as bad-fielding outfielders. 

But he also a couple of times referred to "parts of the strike zone we're otherwise vulnerable too", "harder to game-plan for", and "team that can be game-planned-for", and that Castellanos is NOT vulnerable to those same part of the strike zone. So if he's trying to improve contact and not be so "game-plan" vulnerable to anybody who can work the upper half, Castellanos still seems to be a good fit lineup-wise. 

Obviously the "game plan" is the upper half.  Bryant, Schwarber, Baez, Happ, Bote, none of those launch-angle guys thrive up there.  Not sure with Willson.  Almora was supposed to do well there, but not this year. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 30, 2019, 08:02:08 pm
 "least contact"  "fewest fastballs" "parts of the strike zone we're otherwise vulnerable too" "harder to game-plan for".    "Schwarber, breakthrough season.."  "team that can be game-planned-for"

"environment for development at major-league level"   "young players don't fully develop in the minor leagues"

Some interesting quotes, I thought. 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on September 30, 2019, 08:03:24 pm
Theo is the ultimate salesman.  Beware.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 08:08:12 pm
Theo is the ultimate salesman.  Beware.

Jeff is the ultimate turncoat. Beware.  ;)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 30, 2019, 08:34:20 pm
Theo is a master at those news conferences.  He made it clear that significant changes are needed, but the proof will be in the pudding. 

Yeah, we'll see.  It's one thing to "need" change, it's another for it to be "attainable".  Every-day CF types are few and will be VERY expensive.  It's one thing to want personnel changes; but if the only way is to make bad trades, unfavorable trades, is that the thing to do? 

He still thinks his guys are really good, had a lot of good years, and seemed to think he had a lot of trade fodder.  In particular, he used the word "studs".  I thought that was interesting.  I don't think you talk about "studs" when alluding to Almora, or Ademan, or Abbott or Happ.  Who would qualify as "studs" on this team?  Baez, Bryant, Contreras, Rizzo.  Maybe in Theo's world, Schwarber's hot stretch makes him a stud?  Certainly not Heyward.  I don't think Happ's good week qualifies, either.....   

I inferred two things from what I heard.  Like Ron, my sense is that Rossy is far from the preferred candidate.  Secondly, I was struck with Theo praising Contreras and then immediately talking up the season that Caratini had.  I might be reading too much into it, but I'm sensing that they will be ready to move Contreras for the right return

Maybe he's just trying to sell Contreras and Schwarber.  Who knows.  I thought it was fun that he was selling the idea that Contreras has fixed pitch-framing, and late in year he figured out what's going to work for him, that he's going to work at it this winter, and that he's going to be a MUCH improved framer next season.  I'm an optimist so love those spring camp hope-springs-eternal stories, so I'll be happy to believe it might be true.  :) But I admit I don't really see how you "work on" framing big-league velocity and movement during a winter hanging out at home? 


Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on September 30, 2019, 08:44:50 pm
"least contact"  "fewest fastballs" "parts of the strike zone we're otherwise vulnerable too" "harder to game-plan for".    "Schwarber, breakthrough season.."  "team that can be game-planned-for"

Since I've been saying "dysfunctional offense" for three years, this kind of talk really resonated with me. Hope they finally address it this offseason.

Secondly, I was struck with Theo praising Contreras and then immediately talking up the season that Caratini had.  I might be reading too much into it, but I'm sensing that they will be ready to move Contreras for the right return.

I didn't really read it the same way because (unless I'm forgetting a Caratini reference) it was a part of the news conference where he was just listing off players who were good this year. It made sense that he'd mention the backup catcher who performed immediately after the starting catcher who performed. He also talked later about how Contreras had made a framing adjustment late in the season that was working for him, so it sounded like he thought there had been some positive development in his only weakness.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Contreras traded, but I didn't think anything Theo said today really changed my expectations from yesterday.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 30, 2019, 08:45:36 pm
Other thought is he can talk "change, change, change", and I think "different players".  But Theo is exec of a big organization and a believer in organizational impact.  So he might view changes in manager; in interface between analytics and scouting; in minor-league minor-league coaching structure; in introducing team practices; in adding a coach; in getting McLeod out of scouting and development; in improving implementation of pitch lab; and in changing how much time the manager spends in the clubhouse as "big changes".  Even if the core personnel on the roster change not so much.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 30, 2019, 08:50:00 pm
Theo’s press conference is really a rorscharch test of your Cubs fandom.

Cubs non-pitchers had a 74.2% contact percentage. The 15 team was 76.5%. The number 5 team was 77.7%. The Astros were top at team at 80.8%.

Bryant (74.1%) Schwarber (73.9%) and Happ (71.7)ranked 9, 10, 13 on the Cubs this year. Castellanos was 16 at 70.4%. Contreras 18th at 69.7%  Baez ranked 20th at 66.7%.   I set it to a minimum of 50 PA.

My gut is that the Cubs will look into trading some of the position players, but the returns won’t be worth enough and you’ll see them supplement. So you stick Happ in CF and bring in somebody like Jarred Dyson to platoon with him. Hoerner and his contact percentage gets 2B and you protect him some with Kemp and Bolte.

The Dodgers had a run differential of +273, the Cubs +97.  The Dodgers starting rotation pitched 893 IP and gave up 344 runs. The Cubs starting rotation pitched 888 IP and gave up 455 runs. The Cubs were -111 runs to the Dodgers because of their rotation. That needs to be fixed or the Cubs offense is going to have to score 1000+ runs to win the World Series.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 08:53:26 pm



Maybe in Theo's world, Schwarber's hot stretch makes him a stud?  Certainly not Heyward.  I don't think Happ's good week qualifies, either.....   

Maybe he's just trying to sell Contreras and Schwarber.  Who knows.  I thought it was fun that he was selling the idea that Contreras has fixed pitch-framing, and late in year he figured out what's going to work for him, that he's going to work at it this winter, and that he's going to be a MUCH improved framer next season.  I'm an optimist so love those spring camp hope-springs-eternal stories, so I'll be happy to believe it might be true.  :) But I admit I don't really see how you "work on" framing big-league velocity and movement during a winter hanging out at home? 

Schwarber's "hot stretch" lasted either a full half season (.996 OPS) or full season (.871 OPS).  Come on, craig. I've never been a particular Schwarber fan, but reality requires he be given credit for a terrific second half season (not just a hot stretch) and an overall very solid season at the plate.

He did not claim that Contreras had "fixed" his pitch framing issues.  He said that Contreras tried different approaches to improving pitch framing and found one approach toward the end of the season that he was comfortable with, and that he would work on that over the winter.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 08:56:49 pm
Other thought is he can talk "change, change, change", and I think "different players".  But Theo is exec of a big organization and a believer in organizational impact.  So he might view changes in manager; in interface between analytics and scouting; in minor-league minor-league coaching structure; in introducing team practices; in adding a coach; in getting McLeod out of scouting and development; in improving implementation of pitch lab; and in changing how much time the manager spends in the clubhouse as "big changes".  Even if the core personnel on the roster change not so much.

It's hard to believe that you reached that conclusion after listening to the press conference.  Seems to me that flies in the face of everything he said about the players. Depending, I suppose, on what you mean by "core personnel." 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 30, 2019, 09:06:01 pm
Raul Ibañez is getting some mention as well for the manager job. He has been a special assistant to Friedman with the Dodgers since 2016 and the Cubs has interest in him as a bench coach last year.  If the Cubs could tap into the Dodgers work with hitters that would be nice too.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 09:06:25 pm
Theo also addressed the Cubs' pitching issues, something that has been a subject of some debate here. He said the expectations were that the starting pitching would be a major strength, a strength that would "separate" the Cubs from other teams, but that this did not prove to be the case. And he noted that the Cubs were particularly poor in high leverage situations, saying that having an overall very good ERA did not matter that much if there was a weakness in high leverage situations.  He did praise some the relief pitchers who utilized the research and development resources to become more effective.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on September 30, 2019, 09:09:24 pm
I've seen these BetOnline.ag manager odds on a few different Twitter accounts today. Espada is the Astros bench coach, is he the playoff coach candidate Theo referred to today?

David Ross +200
Joe Espada +300
Mark DeRosa +400
Mark Loretta +600
Hensley Meulens +600
Joe Girardi +750
Carlos Beltran +750
Kevin Youkilis +1000
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 09:10:54 pm
Theo’s press conference is really a rorscharch test of your Cubs fandom.

Cubs non-pitchers had a 74.2% contact percentage. The 15 team was 76.5%. The number 5 team was 77.7%. The Astros were top at team at 80.8%.

Bryant (74.1%) Schwarber (73.9%) and Happ (71.7)ranked 9, 10, 13 on the Cubs this year. Castellanos was 16 at 70.4%. Contreras 18th at 69.7%  Baez ranked 20th at 66.7%.   I set it to a minimum of 50 PA.

I'm confused. You seem to be saying that there were 8 Cubs who had better contact rates than Bryant, that 15 had better rate than Castellanos, 17 had higher rate than Contreras and 19 higher than Baez. Who were they?  Of course, 50 PA is very low standard for comparison.



Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 30, 2019, 09:17:26 pm
Zobrist, Rizzo, Hoerner, Kemp, Lucroy, Heyward, Caratini, Almora, Bryant, Schwarber, Descalso, Happ, Russell, LESTER, Castellanos, Bote, Contreras, DARVISH, Baez, HENDRICKS.

This is the Cubs top 20 hitters by contact rate. My phone didn’t reset it to 50 PA my first post and guys like Zagunis and Taylor Davis where in there. 

I’m not sure why Baez gets a pass when it comes to contact rates. I love him, but he is the streakiest player on the team.


Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 30, 2019, 09:23:59 pm
Ron, basically it's Schwarber, Bryant, Baez, or Contreras as the four core guys who might be hypothetically considered for trade in order to bring back impact talent. 

I'd consider the "core personnel" to be the following guys:
1.  "studs", which would be Baez, Bryant, Contreras, and Rizzo. 
2.  Add Schwarber as you suggest, now with his great second-half and breakout season. 
3.  Darvish and Hendricks would also be core. That's 7. 
4.  Heyward and Lester are 2016-2020 starters; not "core" in being long-term future assets.  But kinda "core" in that they've been around for all 4 or 5 years; will surely be around next year; and are "core" from a budget-perspective. 

So, that's 9 core-guys. 

I think Theo is looking to consider moving one of those 9 guys. 

But he's not able to move Lester or Heyward; he won't want to move Hendricks or Darvish; and he won't want to move Rizzo. 

So basically that leaves Schwarber, Bryant, Baez, or Contreras as the four core guys who might be hypothetically considered for trade in order to bring back impact talent.  Baez seems awfully unlikely, too.

It might happen, and it will be exciting and scary and a big deal and kind of disappointing if he does move any one of those guys. But I think there's a very real possibility that Theo won't get fair value for any of those four, and that the "changes" will occur with the other supporting personnel. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 30, 2019, 09:33:54 pm
Craig say the Cubs replace Hamels and Quintana in the rotation and Strop, Cishek, Kintzler, Phelps, Brach, Morrow, Duensing in the bullpen. Would that be a big change?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 30, 2019, 09:50:17 pm
Theo said—maybe even emphasized- that Cubs don’t know what will be available to them in trade market. So, would not be so sure about big moves with position players. Depends.

Regarding Contreras, I think he was asked a specific question about Contreras and, therefore, went on in some detail in response.  Called him a potential league MVP. Pretty effusive if you take it at face value.

If recall correctly, a year ago Theo kind of minimized leadoff at his end of season presser. Thought he was a bit more needy about it compared to a year ago. Guessing they get somebody significant.

Basically agree with CBJ that bolstering top end of rotation is the move to make for 2020, if possible. As Ron notes, Theo was clear that the 2019 rotation was not the trump card he expected, compared to rest of division. Yeah, would be nice to still have Dylan Cease but not going to hit on all trades when you look back. That’s just baseball.

I think that IF Cubs trade Bryant, it will be more a matter of getting something good for him now instead of watching him leave in two years and getting a compensation 4th round pick back for losing him. But, hard to see how trading him upgrades Cubs run scoring ability. Not really a fan of such a move now.

Cubs have other major league players of value to trade: Happ, Caratini, Bote— with years of control and youth. And there are prospects of value to supplement trades, without trading top 3 or 4 prospects.

Kind of doubt will move Schwarber. After the break, batted .280 and .997 OPS. Was hitting ball to opposite field and doing what they wanted him to work on. Among other things, not sure it sends a good message trading a guy who managed to do that and change his game somewhat.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 30, 2019, 10:01:24 pm
Did Dylan Cease learn how to throw strikes?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 10:12:02 pm
craig - Thanks for the clarification and specificity. I do not consider Schwarber a "core" player, but I do consider him to be a valuable part of the team, and someone who could bring a substantial return were he to be traded (particularly to an AL team).

Among the position players, I agree that Bryant, Rizzo, Baez and Contreras should be considered core players.  I don't think there is any chance Rizzo would be traded. Theo explicitly did not rule out trading anybody, and I think his suggestion that the failure to reach an extension with other guys who will be free agents (Bryant and Baez) will factor into trade decisions was meaningful.  Given the high probability Bryant won't agree to a deal, I expect him to be aggressively shopped. While I do not expect Baez to be traded, if he doesn't agree to an extension I think that is possible.

I know some are skeptical or even cynical about Theo being serious about making substantial changes, based on his failure to do so after the 2018 season, but it seems to me he is clearly in a different place now, and I think anyone who listened to this press conference should come away convinced of that. He explicitly acknowledged that he was slow to accept the limitations of players who had made the team so successful in prior years. He also focused heavily on the need to build a new team that is built for the future, not the past. Hard to do that without some meaningful change in personnel.

I fully expect him to try to force the issue of a trade or trades to make a fairly basic change in the makeup of the team on the field. Granted, he'll need to find a favorable deal, but I expect there will be some very aggressive offers for Bryant, if not for others.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on September 30, 2019, 10:16:08 pm
Im betting Schwarber and/or Bryant go [possibly Happ,Almora,and Russell too],we resign Castellanos,bring in a leadoff man in CF,leave Hoerner at 2nd,and go after a #1 starter.

I say we hire Girardi.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ben on September 30, 2019, 10:18:16 pm
CUBluejays, those are interesting stats on how much behind Dodgers our SPs were.  Thanks for those stats.  Clearly, we've got some SERIOUS starting pitcher issues!  Good starting pitching can mask lots of team deficiencies...and the Cards (and other teams in our division) should have plus starting pitching next year!!  We will seemingly need to land a #3 starter, at the least, to keep up, if we can!  Other pitching moves will need to be made, too, one would think (e.g. Lester as swing man?? Wick with a more prominent role)

As for Schwarber and/or Castellanos, Nick CLEARLY fits the Cub - and EVERY other team's - lineup...yet with Boras as his agent, why should we think Cubs will outbid everyone else to land him (at a likely ridiculous price), particularly with our starting pitcher needs?  I'd love to think Nick would give us a discount due to how he mashes at Wrigley etc., but that's just not what Boras' clients tend to do. 

Maybe the future Kyle Schwarber will be the 2nd half guy?  He's now had 1.600 or so ABs and many scouts talk about 1,200 as the magic number for a lot of MLB hitters to better handle MLB pitching and gain more consistent success. 

Schwarber may or may not be close to Nick Castellanos as an offensive force next year or in future years; however, it's VERY clear that Kyle will be a LOT less expensive for at least the next couple of years and, as we look to add better starting pitching and other help, MONEY will be a requirement.  At least next year, we will be blessed with some things (and another high payroll is one of them), but seemingly not MLB-ready starters at the AAA level!! 

I'm not complaining (as what Theo et al have accomplished for Cub fans over the past 5 years has been unprecedented in our lifetimes), but improving Cub pitching in 2020 seems to me the #1 priority.   I'll always believe what Joe Torre said as Yankee manager, "I used to think pitching was 70% of the game.  Then, I became a manager and realized it's a whole helluva lot more important than that!"
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 30, 2019, 10:26:05 pm
Craig say the Cubs replace Hamels and Quintana in the rotation and Strop, Cishek, Kintzler, Phelps, Brach, Morrow, Duensing in the bullpen. Would that be a big change?

Not sure how to answer that! 
A.  In terms of the fan base perception, I don't know?  Not sure deeg and br would say yes?

B.  Personally, I would be very comfortable with that level of change myself, Blue.  I think that's a lot of change.  And that's the sort of the level of change that I'd have anticipated, prior to Theo's press conference; and still think is quite possible, once he gets actual offers.   

C.  Theo-wise, I'm not quite sure that's the change Theo's presser would suggest, though?  What do you think, Blue?  Ron, how about you?  The reason I wonder if Theo would view that as the "big change" he seemed to be talking about is because: 
1.  That's entirely pitching-staff changes.... yet his 2-hour presser spoke relatively little about pitching. 
2.  To my ears, more of his comments spoke to lineup.   ["least contact"  "fewest fastballs" "parts of the strike zone we're otherwise vulnerable too", "team that can be game-planned-for".]  So replacing Q, Phelps, Duensing etc. doesn't really address those game-plan-vulnerabilities that he seemed to talk about?   
3.  He also seemed to talk about having stuck too long with his 2016 core, but now being ready to "change".  Personally I'm good with your pitching changes; but if Theo again brings back the same 2016 guys lineup-wise, would that be the "change" Theo himself maybe seemed to be implying today? 

I have no idea. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 10:55:09 pm
I re-listened to parts of the press conference and wanted to add some observations.

Re Theo's assessment of the offense: he specifically noted that the Cubs had the lowest contact rate in baseball and as evidence of how easy it is "game plan" the Cubs the fact that they see the fewest fastballs in baseball. He expressed frustration that the Cubs have not adjusted to these issues. He also bemoaned having the most outs on the bases in baseball. Seems to me that these are clear areas he wants to focus on in player acquisition (and development) going forward.

He referred to the results from the leadoff position as "unacceptable numbers." He said the best solution would be to acquire a prototypical leadoff hitter, but said if they cannot do that the best solution is "to get as many players who specialize in getting on base as possible, and if they can be a great baserunner all the better." He referred to improving the performance from the leadoff position as "the lowest possible hanging fruit there is."  He said he places "a huge priority on getting on base" which would provide "lots of options."  He said "if you have as a goal leading the league in on base percentage you usually are not going to be wanting in the leadoff spot ... but the best outcome by far is to get someone who is comfortable in that spot, thrives in that spot, provides energy."

He pointed out that while the Cubs had the 5th most runs in the league, they had the 3rd best ERA in the league, saying that the pitching outperformed the offense in that regard (though he went on to point out the Cubs' very poor pitching in high leverage situations).

So I do not believe that making significant changes in the pitching staff alone would come near satisfying Theo.


Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 11:12:38 pm
Zobrist, Rizzo, Hoerner, Kemp, Lucroy, Heyward, Caratini, Almora, Bryant, Schwarber, Descalso, Happ, Russell, LESTER, Castellanos, Bote, Contreras, DARVISH, Baez, HENDRICKS.
This is the Cubs top 20 hitters by contact rate. My phone didn’t reset it to 50 PA my first post and guys like Zagunis and Taylor Davis where in there. 

I’m not sure why Baez gets a pass when it comes to contact rates. I love him, but he is the streakiest player on the team.

Of the guys in front of Bryant, Zobrist (who will presuably not be back) and Rizzo are obviously no surprise.  Hoerner has not been exposed to major league pitching enough to draw conclusions from his numbers, but obviously Theo likes that quality in him. Kemp, Lucroy and Almora obviously have not had the kind of contact that is all that useful are really not relevant. It is interesting that Heyward does as well as he does, considering that he seems to have hit the ball hard this season, and that Caratini shows up there - Theo has to like that.

I don't think Baez gets a pass on contact rates, but there are so many other aspects to his game that his contact rate is something you can live with - if your lineup has enough contact guys.  And the reason I think that Bryant is more likely to be traded is not only because he's less likely to sign a long term contract, but also because replacing Baez at SS would be way more difficult than replacing Bryant at 3B.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 11:23:23 pm
I think the Cubs would be fine with living with low contact rates of Baez and Contreras if they had six other regulars with good (reasonably hard) contact rates in the lineup. Rizzo and (hopefully) Hoerner are a start. Maybe Heyward and Schwarber would count?  I look for the Cubs to try hard to get a CF (and if they trade Bryant a 3B), and maybe a transitional 2B who fits that bill.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 11:33:04 pm
Theo said—maybe even emphasized- that Cubs don’t know what will be available to them in trade market. So, would not be so sure about big moves with position players. Depends.

I think that IF Cubs trade Bryant, it will be more a matter of getting something good for him now instead of watching him leave in two years and getting a compensation 4th round pick back for losing him. But, hard to see how trading him upgrades Cubs run scoring ability. Not really a fan of such a move now.

Kind of doubt will move Schwarber. After the break, batted .280 and .997 OPS. Was hitting ball to opposite field and doing what they wanted him to work on. Among other things, not sure it sends a good message trading a guy who managed to do that and change his game somewhat.


Yes, Theo pointed out that it all depends on what/who is available in trades. Obviously he isn't going to just trade Bryant or anyone else without getting what he considers fair value in return.  One of the things he emphasized was that he was more concerned with what he would get back in a trade than what he would give up.

To me that implied that he was willing to give up a lot (Bryant, Contreras, Schwarber?) so long as he received the quality and types of players he seeks in return. The anticipated loss of Bryant after 2021 sounded to me like a very significant factor in Theo's thinking, and his emphasis on preparing for a "new window" after 2021 reinforced that for me.  He is still thinking long term, whether or not he's going to be around after 2021.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 30, 2019, 11:57:14 pm
Sahadev Sharma has chimed in on Theo's press conference.

Here are some excerpts. There are lots of quotes from Theo mixed into the article as well. It is a good summary/analysis, well worth a read.

This is a group that’s notorious for chasing breaking balls out of the zone and failing to make contact with high fastballs. So along with pitching – both starters and bullpen – the Cubs will be looking for contact-oriented hitters who know how to control the zone and handle those troublesome high fastballs. They need to upgrade at both center field and second base. Their production from the leadoff spot — the .294 OBP from the top of the lineup was worst in baseball — was atrocious.
...
While Anthony Rizzo or Javier Báez being traded would come as quite a surprise, there are other valuable players who could be made available. Happ and Schwarber are easy to point to, but it’s certainly not out of the question that one of Bryant or Contreras is traded.
...
While Epstein was effusive in his praise of Contreras, his description of him also almost sounded like a sales pitch to teams who may be interested. And as good as Bryant is when healthy, he has two years remaining on his contract, meaning now may be the best time to maximize his value on the trade market.
...
The Cubs have engaged Bryant and Báez in extension talks in previous offseasons. There will be discussions again this offseason. The smart money is on Báez being more amenable to an extension. He seemed open to the idea prior to Sunday’s season finale, saying he’d like to stay with the Cubs his whole career.
...
The Cubs aren’t tearing it down. There won’t be another run like 2012-14 now or in the near future. But would taking a step back for 2020 be something that’s necessary to avoid a total teardown a year or two later?
...
The short answer seems to be that while contending is preferred for 2020, ignoring the seasons beyond is not a route they’ll take. There are those who will say it’s foolish to move key pieces when this team has proven it can win. But Epstein seems over being stuck in the past. He admits that perhaps they misevaluated just how good this group would be and clung too long to certain players.
...
An 11-16 September and 2-9 stretch to end the season pushed the Cubs to this point. There can be no more masking of the failures. No more pointing to high win totals or deceiving statistics that don’t truly expose the flaws of the roster. Change is essential, at all levels.

So, is the reckoning finally here?


https://theathletic.com/1256530/2019/09/30/whenever-you-dont-make-it-its-horrible-around-here-a-winter-of-change-awaits-the-cubs/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on October 01, 2019, 07:00:09 am
Quote
discussing players nearing end of control, said if longer deal cannot be reached that would be a factor in openness to trades. Said he cared more about what they would receive in trade than what they would give up.

KB.  KB.  KB...

Trade his ass to a shitty team for some young talented players and then see how bad he wants to return to Chicago in two years.  Don't do what Washington did with Harper.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robb on October 01, 2019, 08:05:08 am
I will consider this offseason a success if they can sign Cole or possibly Strasburg if he opts out, trade either Contrerras or Bryant for impact talent and remove Russell, Almora, Happ and finally, eat whatever they have to of Heyward's contract to trade him.  As a bonus signing Castellanos and bringing in a healthy high k/low walk guy or two for the bullpen wouldn't hurt either.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robb on October 01, 2019, 08:09:34 am
Wick, Wieck and Ryan are a nice start to next year's bullpen. Short an injury Kimbrel will be there. Is there anyone else you want back from this year's crew? I've seen enough of Cishek and Kintzler. Maybe Strop based on his final, presumably healthy weeks? Chatwood is back but could be given a sniff at the rotation. Maybe pick up Q's option, trade him and then plug in Chatwood/Mills as 5th starter?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dev on October 01, 2019, 08:32:51 am
Brandon Morrow is a free agent now....<ducks>
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 01, 2019, 08:50:40 am
After his season, I bet Strop has trouble finding a job in this market. I wouldn't be surprised to see him coming back for something like Brach's contract late in the offseason.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 01, 2019, 09:24:41 am
I think the Cubs would be fine with living with low contact rates of Baez and Contreras if they had six other regulars with good (reasonably hard) contact rates in the lineup. Rizzo and (hopefully) Hoerner are a start. Maybe Heyward and Schwarber would count?  I look for the Cubs to try hard to get a CF (and if they trade Bryant a 3B), and maybe a transitional 2B who fits that bill.

If you look at MLB players with 400 PA, Baez was the 6th worst contact percentage and Contreras was 21.  Eloy is 17 and Soler is 23 incase you where wondering. 
The Astros only had 1 player sub 70% in Chirinos.  The Dodgers are closer to what the Cubs can be.  The only sub 70% guys where Negron, Garlick and Buehler.  It is going to be hard to be a better contact team with both Baez and Contreras getting that much playing time, unless you are going to start fielding a team of Rizzos. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 01, 2019, 09:31:30 am
Theo was very positive about Kimbrel going forward.  Basically hoped that with full off-season to get right physically, combined with a normal spring training, Theo is ready to count on him for next season.  I can totally see how a proud competitor would be really ashamed of how awful he was, and be ultra motivated to try to be good again.  Whether the "best version of himself" at this point can actually be any good, time will tell; hopefully he can be variably useful.   

Re Kimbrel, and with Baez and Bryant, Theo said that none of them need surgery, and that actually there isn't anybody on the roster who will need surgery, to his knowledge. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 01, 2019, 09:37:55 am
I wonder with new manager and with those contact issues, whether that won't mean the annual change in batting coach. 

Last year, Chili was supposed to be better for situational and opposite-field and not so all-or-nothing.  Were the contact rates equally bad last year as this? 

I recall being surprised when Iapoce came over, that his comments didn't talk a lot about mechanical stuff.  He seemed more of a cheer up, don't think too much, swing free;  you were a first round pick and a top prospect for a reason, just relax and let your talent play out.  That was in his comments in the one or two interviews that I read. To some degree seemed pretty consistent with Maddon's relax, don't practice too much, don't stress too much, have fun psychology.  Which obviously has a ton of merit. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 01, 2019, 09:44:46 am
Brandon Morrow is a free agent now....<strains elbow>

Fixed that for ya, dev.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 01, 2019, 09:50:23 am
I'm an eternal optimist, but I'm hopeful that Schwarber's 2nd half and season overall will not be too much fluke.  I've always thought he'd have a chance to put together a .250 season, and if he ever did that HR's and numbers would follow.  I think it's possible that he might hit .250 again before his control finishes, and with it the kind of slugging that accompanies it for him. 

I think over his career, he's been making a variety of adjustments.  How much to crouch or not; I think he made some adjustment to stand a little straighter.  Obviously going opposite has been an emphasis; I think for a hunk of this year that was to the extreme.  Seemed like he was very committed to popping to left; some of that got enough lift to carry out, lots were easy flyouts.  But my perception was that he was so left-field oriented that he was NOT using the whole field and was so weight-shift committed to aiming for left field that then pitchers would work inside, or hang breaking balls that he should drive to right, that he wasn't using the pull side or taking advantage very consistently. 

Seems to me that during the strong finish, his balance and weight-shift was better, so that he was effectively pulling the ball in addition to going opposite.  So I'm hopeful that he's kind of settled into a stance and a weight transfer balance that is better for him, and that he'll be able to stick with.  Obviously he's going to be a hot-and-cold guy, good pitchers are going to blitz him, lefties locating their stuff are going to blitz him, and fastballs above the belt are going to blow through his swing.  So I'm not anticipating some .275-average guy with a .950-OPS or anything to be sustainable.  But his composite .250-average .871OPS from this year, I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't repeat that again, during a year in which he stays healthy. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 01, 2019, 09:58:32 am
One of the "contact" questions is what the ball will be like.  This year, the ball was so juiced that anybody who could make contact could hit HR's.  (Tommy LaStella, etc..) 

But I wonder if that won't immediately be corrected?  Such that what you want in the offense might shift somewhat?  And perhaps what works for a hitter might also shift some?  Castellanos hit 27 HRs; will de-juiced ball make that 15, and a lot of his HR's will be deep flyouts, and a lot of his doubles won't get over or through the OF?  Schwarber hit lots of high launch-angle flies to left that just carried out?  Will a bunch of those be routine outs next year? 

Hard to guess what the game will be once they make their annual correction on the ball.... 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 01, 2019, 10:16:19 am
Are you sure the powers that be will want to change the ball?  Owners connect offense to attendance.  Chicks love the long ball.  Even the change in pitching rules (a reliever must face 3 hitters) is a double intentioned rule...shortens game time and may result in more offense.  They're toying with moving the rubber back...why?  To improve the pitching advantage?  (Which they may be doing unintentionally since pitches that break nastiest are in the last 3 feet.)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 01, 2019, 11:47:58 am
"What Theo Epstein is searching for in the next Cubs manager (Hint: It’s David Ross)"

I'm hoping that Patrick Mooney did not come up with that headline for his article on Theo's comments on the managerial search during his press conference.  While the article spends a lot of time discussing Ross, it does not support the headline.

https://theathletic.com/1256607/2019/10/01/what-theo-epstein-is-searching-for-in-the-next-cubs-manager-hint-its-david-ross/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on October 01, 2019, 12:55:13 pm
Are you sure the powers that be will want to change the ball?  Owners connect offense to attendance.  Chicks love the long ball.  Even the change in pitching rules (a reliever must face 3 hitters) is a double intentioned rule...shortens game time and may result in more offense.  They're toying with moving the rubber back...why?  To improve the pitching advantage?  (Which they may be doing unintentionally since pitches that break nastiest are in the last 3 feet.)
Why not have three designated hitters instead of one?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 01, 2019, 01:01:20 pm
Or 9?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 01, 2019, 01:19:08 pm
I had forgotten that Schwarber becomes a free agent after the 2021 season also. I suppose the lack of an extension with Schwarber would make him more likely to be actively shopped as well. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 01, 2019, 01:24:29 pm
"What Theo Epstein is searching for in the next Cubs manager (Hint: It’s David Ross)"

I'm hoping that Patrick Mooney did not come up with that headline for his article on Theo's comments on the managerial search during his press conference.  While the article spends a lot of time discussing Ross, it does not support the headline.

https://theathletic.com/1256607/2019/10/01/what-theo-epstein-is-searching-for-in-the-next-cubs-manager-hint-its-david-ross/

On their podcast with Brett Taylor on the Athletic both Sharma and Mooney are convinced that Ross is the choice.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 01, 2019, 02:03:00 pm
Would that to placate the players who loved Maddon?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 01, 2019, 02:35:17 pm
They think following Maddon is going to be exceptionally difficult and it will take a big personality.  They also think the relationships will help, but he was also the guy to go after people when they made a mistake in 2015/16.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 01, 2019, 02:43:12 pm
That's a tough one.  To a degree it's like a teacher trying to achieve discipline in a classroom allowed to get out of control.  Easier to get a different teacher.  Advancing a former student, even if he was a class leader, is not a real answer.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 01, 2019, 03:01:42 pm
Managing isn't just dealing with the clubhouse though.  The media has to managed as well.  Maddon was amazing at this and that's why they think somebody like Ross is needed. 

Maybe Ross was the teacher that kept the kids in line during 2015/16 and without him the classroom was lost.  I really have no idea what is needed as the next manager, Theo seems to have a decent track record at picking guys and picking guys to interview so I'm just gonna go with the flow.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on October 01, 2019, 03:14:01 pm
Someone mentioned the trade of LaStella above.

Is the lack of contact something that Epstein just noticed this year?  It certainly wasn't new to most on this board.  If contact was such a glaring flaw in the team, why trade one of the only guys that actually made consistent contact.  Certainly, no one expected LaStella to turn into a power hitter, but they must have known that trading him would reduce the overall contact level of the team, not increase it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 01, 2019, 03:17:42 pm
I think Ross will be an excellent manager...in 2025.

Theo has NOT always been right.  Remember the dick he hired first?  In the interview he claimed he was into sabermetrics and joked about it later?  Maddon was his third pick.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 01, 2019, 03:28:22 pm
"What Theo Epstein is searching for in the next Cubs manager (Hint: It’s David Ross)"

I'm hoping that Patrick Mooney did not come up with that headline for his article on Theo's comments on the managerial search during his press conference.  While the article spends a lot of time discussing Ross, it does not support the headline.

https://theathletic.com/1256607/2019/10/01/what-theo-epstein-is-searching-for-in-the-next-cubs-manager-hint-its-david-ross/

Heh heh.  My brother used to write for the Milwaukee Journal, and their Washington correspondent.  A routine frustration was bad headlines assigned to good articles.  For paper stuff, the layout people decide how many columns wide an article is, and thus how much headline fits. 

So pretty sure that Mooney has NOTHING to do with that. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on October 01, 2019, 03:57:17 pm
I'm not so sure.  On the podcast, Mooney seemed pretty convinced it's going to be Ross.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dihard on October 01, 2019, 04:00:08 pm
I think Ross will be an excellent manager...in 2025.

Maybe I’m going too much on his tv persona, but I haven’t been very impressed with Rossy during his time on ESPN. It’s clear how buddy-buddy he is with the Cubs players still, and I feel like it was pretty rare he provided much real insight or signs of thoughtfulness or strategy.  Maybe down the road, but I don’t feel like he’s the best choice for 2020.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 01, 2019, 04:31:09 pm
One of the managerial candidates reported to be of interest to Cubs is Raul Ibanez.

Ironically, Ibanez was one of the three finalists to replace Maddon with the Rays after 2014 but he took his name out of consideration during the process and the job went to Kevin Cash.

Below is a broadcast booth interview with Ibanez from 2015 talking about that and other things. Seems like an impressive guy.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=P3IeIXSs7PY
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 01, 2019, 04:53:29 pm
I'm told the Chicago Cubs offered a position to
@DrivelineBB
's Kyle Boddy but he'll be heading to the Reds per
@JeffPassan

From Travis Sawchek.  Balls.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 01, 2019, 04:55:18 pm
Patrick Mooney
@PJ_Mooney
The Cubs confirm Mark Loretta and Will Venable will join David Ross as internal candidates to replace Joe Maddon.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 01, 2019, 05:03:17 pm
I'm told the Chicago Cubs offered a position to
@DrivelineBB
's Kyle Boddy but he'll be heading to the Reds per
@JeffPassan

From Travis Sawchek.  Balls.

Very interesting that Theo couldn't outsell the Cubs versus the Reds.  Given the lack of young arms in the Cubs system, and the big volume of great ones with the Reds, it certainly makes sense from Boddy's perspective.  Discouraging, though. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 01, 2019, 05:46:04 pm
Ron, I heard Theo's comments re Ross more favorably.  Referenced Ross's "worldview"; said his past connection would not be a detriment; and said he'd be evaluated on his merits. 

Theo could have easily iced Ross speculation, by emphasizing need for outside voice, or more strongly talking up value of experience.  (Seemed token valuation to me.)  He didn't. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 01, 2019, 05:48:27 pm
Boddy wants to remain at Driveline. That might have been a sticking point for the Cubs. So say Boddy helps develop a new technique of training or a new use of tech or new tech. You have to keep him from using it at Driveline, which might be a friction point.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 01, 2019, 06:07:26 pm
I'd be pretty surprised if Rossy is the choice. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 01, 2019, 06:26:51 pm
If he was loose, I'd bet on Terry Francona
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 01, 2019, 06:28:55 pm
Maybe Zobrist will retire, be named manager, leave the team in June, come back in September and let the guys rule themselves all summer.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 01, 2019, 08:11:48 pm
Ron, I heard Theo's comments re Ross more favorably.  Referenced Ross's "worldview"; said his past connection would not be a detriment; and said he'd be evaluated on his merits. 

Theo could have easily iced Ross speculation, by emphasizing need for outside voice, or more strongly talking up value of experience.  (Seemed token valuation to me.)  He didn't. 

It could be that Theo wanted to simply shoot down any notion that, should he decide to choose Ross, that the decision would be based on his relationship with the players and his identity being tied to the 2016 team. 

I seriously doubt that Theo knows who is going to be the next manager, and that he's open to a variety of options at this point.  This is not a 2015 Joe Maddon situation.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 01, 2019, 10:19:07 pm
I think Ross will be an excellent manager...in 2025.

Theo has NOT always been right.  Remember the dick he hired first?  In the interview he claimed he was into sabermetrics and joked about it later?  Maddon was his third pick.
  I was angry that I couldn't remember the dick's name.  Dale Sveum.  Did anyone else know that the Cubs gave him a World Series ring?  I wonder if they gave Renteria one too.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 01, 2019, 10:22:00 pm
  I was angry that I couldn't remember the dick's name.  Dale Sveum.  Did anyone else know that the Cubs gave him a World Series ring?  I wonder if they gave Renteria one too.

Yep. 
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/cubs/2017/08/17/no-hard-feelings-cubs-give-ex-manager-rick-renteria-world-series-ring/576104001/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 01, 2019, 10:25:17 pm
I’d imagine they’d have a pretty good idea if Ross has the qualities that they are looking for in a manager.  That doesn’t mean that somebody from outside they org couldn’t come in and blow them away.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 01, 2019, 10:35:02 pm
Exactly.  He's going to go through due process for sure. 

I guess I had assumed Ross was just a media name, and that the Cubs wouldn't actually take him seriously.  So after Theo's comments, I felt surprised that he brought up Ross like three different times, and that none of his comments to me seemed to downplay Ross's chances to be taken seriously, or perhaps to even end up getting hired.  Certainly it's nothing like Maddon's targeted hiring.  And certainly none of the comments suggested that Ross was pretty much pre-determined. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 01, 2019, 10:41:42 pm
Ross would make a terrific bench coach, smoothing things between a new manager and the players.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 01, 2019, 11:10:04 pm
Ross would make a terrific bench coach, smoothing things between a new manager and the players.

He'd never take that job.  If he doesn't get the manager gig he'll keep working part-time and hang out with his kids.

Craig, for my part I never doubted the Cubs would take Ross seriously as a potential manager.  They've always seemed enamored with him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 01, 2019, 11:49:44 pm
Yep. 
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/cubs/2017/08/17/no-hard-feelings-cubs-give-ex-manager-rick-renteria-world-series-ring/576104001/

I didn't know Renteria got one.  Good for the Cubs on that.  Hiring Maddon to replace him was obviously the right move, but he still got hosed in that deal. 

Sveum...well might have been a little too generous!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 02, 2019, 08:21:23 am
Whether the Cubs are interested in him is another matter, but Girardi just basically said on the radio he wants the job.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on October 02, 2019, 08:39:23 am
I want the job too.  Don't know if I will land it but I sent an email.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 02, 2019, 08:44:05 am
I don’t think Girardi sits out 2019 waiting on the Cubs job unless his back-channel communications were that he had a shot.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 02, 2019, 08:47:52 am
Maybe I’m going too much on his tv persona, but I haven’t been very impressed with Rossy during his time on ESPN. It’s clear how buddy-buddy he is with the Cubs players still, and I feel like it was pretty rare he provided much real insight or signs of thoughtfulness or strategy.  Maybe down the road, but I don’t feel like he’s the best choice for 2020. .


Thanks, dihard.  That's helpful to hear. 

Cubs admin have a reputation for being really smart/intellectual.  I'd like to get somebody who's really intelligent and smart.  Maddon is, no question there.  But I'm not sure all of their managerial hires, or batting-coach hires, have necessarily mirrored that.  Think they have maybe tended to go more for style.  Elan, the word Theo used several times.  Soft skills. 

I hope they get somebody who's got good soft skills, but who's also an intelligent and thoughtful guy too. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 02, 2019, 08:50:16 am


Thanks, dihard.  That's helpful to hear. 

Cubs admin have a reputation for being really smart/intellectual.  I'd like to get somebody who's really intelligent and smart.  Maddon is, no question there.  But I'm not sure all of their managerial hires, or batting-coach hires, have necessarily mirrored that.  Think they have maybe tended to go more for style.  Elan, the word Theo used several times.  Soft skills. 

I hope they get somebody who's got good soft skills, but who's also an intelligent and thoughtful guy too. 
That rules out WJ
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on October 02, 2019, 08:52:37 am
Does MLB still require that at least one minority candidate be interviewed?  There was talk a few years ago about that rule not being effective.  Teams were accused of only making "token" interviews.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 02, 2019, 08:55:08 am
I thought that was just an NFL rule.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on October 02, 2019, 08:58:08 am
I thought that was just an NFL rule.
No.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 02, 2019, 09:08:33 am
Pretty sure the rule is still in play. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on October 02, 2019, 09:25:48 am
Any team signing Joe Maddon will claim to have given serious consideration to a minority.  Who was that guy when Maddon came to the Cubs?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 02, 2019, 09:33:09 am
Well, at the time, Renteria was our manager.  Would Dave Martinez count? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 02, 2019, 09:42:34 am
I don’t think Girardi sits out 2019 waiting on the Cubs job unless his back-channel communications were that he had a shot.

Is there some reason to believe Girardi sat out the 2019 season waiting on the Cubs job?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 02, 2019, 12:49:23 pm
Is there some reason to believe Girardi sat out the 2019 season waiting on the Cubs job?

It was “industry speculation”—another way of saying pure speculation.

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2018/10/22/industry-speculation-joe-girardi-is-waiting-for-a-job-with-the-cubs/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 02, 2019, 02:39:03 pm
I think we should get Paul Heyman as manager.  As a manager, his guys always do well.  Before the Star Spangled Banner, he could take the mike ans day, "Ladies and Gentleman, my name is Paul Heyman, and I am the manager of the once and future champions of the World, the Chicago Cubs, and this other team, so totally unworthy of being on the field with us, will suffer at our hands shortly."

It would be great!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 02, 2019, 02:42:17 pm
Jim Cornette might work too.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on October 02, 2019, 02:53:04 pm
I think we should get Paul Heyman as manager.  As a manager, his guys always do well.  Before the Star Spangled Banner, he could take the mike ans day, "Ladies and Gentleman, my name is Paul Heyman, and I am the manager of the once and future champions of the World, the Chicago Cubs, and this other team, so totally unworthy of being on the field with us, will suffer at our hands shortly."

It would be great!
The WWE would probably want compensation for Heyman.  Angel Hernandez and CB Bucknor are qualified to be WWE referees.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 02, 2019, 03:16:29 pm
Josh Bard was another name mentioned by Sharma. 

He was a backup catcher for the Red Sox in 2006, among various stops.  He's been a special assistant and bullpen coach for the Dodgers and is currently the Yanks bench coach.  Estrada (Astros), Ibanez (Dodgers), Venable, Lorretta and Ross where the other guys mentioned.

*Hottovy and Iapoce are expected to be back.  Hottovy is almost a given.

Too bad Bobby "The Brain" Heenan isn't around he would have been perfect, motivation and analytics all in one.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 02, 2019, 04:15:22 pm


Thanks, dihard.  That's helpful to hear. 

Cubs admin have a reputation for being really smart/intellectual.  I'd like to get somebody who's really intelligent and smart.  Maddon is, no question there.  But I'm not sure all of their managerial hires, or batting-coach hires, have necessarily mirrored that.  Think they have maybe tended to go more for style.  Elan, the word Theo used several times.  Soft skills. 

I hope they get somebody who's got good soft skills, but who's also an intelligent and thoughtful guy too. 

If they go the intellectual route, Ibanez is the guy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 02, 2019, 05:25:31 pm
As to Girardi, there were six openings last year and one team (Cincinnati) all but made him an offer, and he pulled out of consideration because he “wanted to see what openings there are next winter”.  I suppose if you’re determined to be obtuse you could call all the reporting on his interest in the Cubs unfounded speculation l but it seems pretty founded to me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 02, 2019, 06:34:26 pm
Heyman tweeted that the industry thinks it is Ross’s job if he wants it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 02, 2019, 06:38:31 pm
Heyman tweeted that the industry thinks it is Ross’s job if he wants it.

He's not the least connected beat guy out there but that isn't the sense I'm getting.  He'd know more than most, but Theo doesn't sound to me like he's sold on Ross yet.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on October 02, 2019, 06:40:54 pm
If fan favorite Ryne Sandberg was told to get some minor league managerial experience, why wouldn't that apply to David Ross as well?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 02, 2019, 06:42:48 pm
If fan favorite Ryne Sandberg was told to get some minor league managerial experience, why wouldn't that apply to David Ross as well?

Because the Cubs never wanted Sandberg as their manager but wanted to find a way not to have to say that outright?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 02, 2019, 07:16:02 pm
Because the Cubs never wanted Sandberg as their manager but wanted to find a way not to have to say that outright?

There was also a different GM then (Jim Hendry).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 02, 2019, 07:48:20 pm
There was also a different GM then (Jim Hendry).

I don't think so.  Theo was already in place.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 02, 2019, 07:54:49 pm
Sandberg’s last year managing in the Cubs system was 2010. Hendry gave Quade the full time job over Sandberg.

Theo probably wouldn’t have even gone through the motions of letting him manage in the minors.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 02, 2019, 11:17:29 pm
I’ve always been kind of fond of Joe Girardi. He always seemed like a smart guy and there was something about him that made me fond of him. There was a time, under Hendry, that I would have loved to have had Girardi manage the Cubs.  However, since Theo took over the Cubs’ and brought a very different approach to the organization and the team, I’ve believed that Girardi is not a good match for the team. My general impression has been that he's too old school for this organization. But I want to be open minded, and I listened to today’s Dave Kaplan interview with Girardi.

https://art19.com/shows/cubs-talk-podcast/episodes/1ceb1f2d-03ed-4b38-85b3-933520351461

Among Girardi’s comments were that he’s always been a “big believer that numbers tell a story over time,” as someone trained to be an engineer, he’s always used numbers a lot. He said as a manager, he did everything analytically, using instinct sometimes, but numbers don’t lie over time. He said that now you have a lot of people looking more deeply into stuff, and that you want that information in front of you to help you prepare and make decisions.
I think that’s all pretty believable and a good point in his favor. The fact that he was reputed to have problems communicating with younger players on the Yankees (if true, but who knows?) certainly is not in his favor.

He also talked about the importance of having a culture of accountability in the clubhouse – I think he emphasized the players role in that.

I’m still skeptical that he’s the guy Theo will want, but I recognize that my perspective is very, very limited on Girardi’s managerial approach and on how Theo views, or will view him if he is a candidate.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 02, 2019, 11:28:25 pm
I'm rooting for Girardi myself.  He's a smart guy, been part of a winning culture and a winning organization for a long time, averaged 91 wins a year and won a World Series as a manager, etc.  I think a change in the relatively laid back Maddon culture would be a good thing, and I think Girardi could bring it. 

Honestly I'm fine that he's not a walking version of Fangraphs or Baseball Prospectus.  I think teams or managers can be too over analytical with that. 

He's pretty much already what you hope David Ross turns into if Ross begins a managerial career.  Ross would be fine by me, by the way, but Girardi's proven, already been well tested and wouldn't need any on the job training.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on October 02, 2019, 11:35:13 pm
The job has been Girardi’s destiny since the day Darryl Kile died.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 02, 2019, 11:53:40 pm
If they hire Girardi hopefully they kept a copy of Millennials for Dummies.

If you want to catch the Dodgers or Astros you need to pretty much have somebody that can take the analytics digest it and spit it out to their players in terms that they can use and be on the same wave length as the front office. That isn’t Girardi.

Cashmen when he fired him said he couldn’t connect to the players. He was rumored to ignore the stuff that the front office was giving him analytics wise. The Cubs just walked away from a guy who mixed old school with analytics and had trouble connecting with younger players. You guys really want to do that again?

My favorite millennial philosopher, “Let the past die, kill it.”

That is a recipe for more third place finishes.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 02, 2019, 11:55:27 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRIxIOvBKn0

Going back to Theo's press conference, at ~19:00.  I was really interested and somewhat clueless about what Theo is talking about.

"There were real efforts made last offseason, real um unconventional methods, methods that never want to have to do again to be honest with you to try to reach guys, and they were coming from the players, as well, players identified areas of concern, areas where we needed to try to do things differently.  And there was good healthy conversation about that.  The vast majority of it remained confidential, behind the scenes, I think there was good intentions and good effort, but in in the end that kind of change is really difficult especially with tremendous continuity, and I think that's one of the reason were really embracing a lot of change now."

Any ideas what he's talking about and what any of this means? 
1. He refers to "guys", plural.  So, apparently not just Addison's deal. 
2.  "To try to reach guys" is pejorative.  Is he thinking baseball skills, here?  (Edwards' weird pitch delivery?  Happ to the minors?)  Mechanical baseball things?  Or off-field behaviors (wine women and song)?  Non-game skills-improvement commitments?  Things related to "dominating the strike zone" or lack thereof?  Interpersonal conflicts within the team?  Team stuff, wanting more scheduled practices together or team building together activities?  Is he "trying to reach" players, or coaches? 
3.  "there was good intentions, but that kind of change is really difficult".  Again, hard to know whether that's practice habits, problems with alcohol consumption, situational swing adjustment, whether it's about holding more team practices, or whether it's mechanical adjustments needed for the Edwards and Happs of the team?   
4.  "Unconventional methods... that never want to have to do again to be honest with you". 

Just curious if you guys had thoughts on that bit?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 03, 2019, 12:13:49 am
craig - That part of the press conference got my attention as well. Seemed very cryptic. No idea what he was talking about though.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 03, 2019, 12:56:24 am
I'm rooting for Girardi myself.  He's a smart guy, been part of a winning culture and a winning organization for a long time, averaged 91 wins a year and won a World Series as a manager, etc.  I think a change in the relatively laid back Maddon culture would be a good thing, and I think Girardi could bring it. 

Honestly I'm fine that he's not a walking version of Fangraphs or Baseball Prospectus.  I think teams or managers can be too over analytical with that. 

He's pretty much already what you hope David Ross turns into if Ross begins a managerial career.  Ross would be fine by me, by the way, but Girardi's proven, already been well tested and wouldn't need any on the job training.

I don't know if I'm ready to say Girardi is my #1 choice, but the overwhelming negativity towards him baffles me.  He's not anti-advanced stats, he's got a hell of a track record as a manager (as measured both by wins/losses and managerial "advanced stats") and he has a history with the organization.  If you want to change the culture in the clubhouse and maximize chances of getting back to the WS in this window, you could make a damn good case Girardi gives you a better shot than any of the rookies for whom the training would be on-the-job.

My gut still tells me that Ibanez is the guy to watch, and there are other names who haven't been discussed much (like Farrell) who have a shot.  But I think Girardi is very much in the mix for Theo, and if he had reason to think otherwise he'd already be managing somewhere else.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 03, 2019, 01:35:55 am
craig - That part of the press conference got my attention as well. Seemed very cryptic. No idea what he was talking about though.

My guess is that there was some kind of club effort last off-season to get some players to step up and take more of a clubhouse leadership role for 2019—that didn’t really happen. Context of Theo’s remarks are about leadership. Must include dealing with Russell’s issues, among other things. Maybe teammates got involved. Theo says confidential, behind the scenes, so by definition we’re not supposed to know. But Theo could not be more clear regarding greater accountability for mistakes in 2020 and that probably includes players of course and ways to get them more involved in fixing things internally, I would think.

Regarding the manager, If Girardi wants the job he ought to stop lobbying for the position with Chicago media, which won’t impress Theo. Suggests to me that Girardi probably isn’t getting any feedback from within the Cubs and wants to keep his name alive from the outside. Good luck with that. Doubt that he’ll be a serious candidate, but who knows.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 03, 2019, 02:32:00 am
Yeah, he should do like Ross and lobby through the national media.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on October 03, 2019, 06:23:52 am
Girardi has teenagers. His oldest may even be in his early 20s now. I’m sure he is familiar with millennials.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on October 03, 2019, 07:33:08 am
Girardi has teenagers. His oldest may even be in his early 20s now. I’m sure he is familiar with millennials.

That would make his kids post millennials... Believe it or not the entire generation of millennials can now drink legally.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 03, 2019, 07:37:20 am
I thought those born in the 90's were considered to be millennials.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 03, 2019, 08:00:32 am
1995/mid-90's is the typical definition.  Cubs don't have any young talent and obviously have an older team, so Hoerner is the only "Gen Z" on this roster.  But yeah, baseball-wise guys who are old fossils who are retiring are formally millenials. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 03, 2019, 10:02:45 am
A lot of people are jumping to the conclusion that when Theo is talking about accountability and stuff that he's referring to Russell.  He might be, but I doubt it.  Everything I've read is that Russell has done almost everything the FO asked him to do.   I think there's something else going on.  Backstabbing, missing signals, swinging for the fences with winning run at third and one out, being clueless about game situations in one's hitting approach, nursing injuries...there's more to it.   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 03, 2019, 10:06:57 am
Girardi has teenagers. His oldest may even be in his early 20s now. I’m sure he is familiar with millennials.

Cashmen disagrees.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/sports/baseball/yankees-manager-search.html

"Girardi’s inability to communicate well with an increasingly young clubhouse was the primary factor that led to his dismissal, General Manager Brian Cashman said Monday."

"Cashman, who dismissed reports that hinted at increasing friction between him and Girardi this season or that Girardi did not work well with the analytics staff, also said that Girardi’s managerial gaffe in the postseason — neglecting to call for a replay challenge that may have prevented a loss to the Cleveland Indians in Game 2 of an American League division series — had nothing to do with his ouster."

Corey Freedman
@CFCubsRelated
The issue isn’t not using metrics. The binder thing was real.

The issue was him not listening to the front office whenever he felt like it.

The two entities have to be in sync with one another. Having a manager who disregards your R/D department on a whim is a NO from me, dog

The above guy does the Cubs related podcast and was an intern with the Yankees FO when Girardi was there.  Girardi is just a rehash of Madden with a different approach.  That isn't the way that the game is going.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 03, 2019, 10:09:36 am
1995/mid-90's is the typical definition.  Cubs don't have any young talent and obviously have an older team, so Hoerner is the only "Gen Z" on this roster.  But yeah, baseball-wise guys who are old fossils who are retiring are formally millenials. 

Millenials are 1981 to 1996. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on October 03, 2019, 10:13:30 am
I'm rooting for Girardi myself.  He's a smart guy, been part of a winning culture and a winning organization for a long time, averaged 91 wins a year and won a World Series as a manager, etc.  I think a change in the relatively laid back Maddon culture would be a good thing, and I think Girardi could bring it. 

Isn't Maddon a smart guy, and hasn't he been part of a winning culture and a winning organization for a long time?  I don't know if he has averaged 91 wins over the course of his career, but he certainly has bettered that number during the 5 years with the Cubs.  I haven't officially verified it, but I believe that Maddon has won a World Series as a manager.

Whoever we bring in, we will either win immediately with him, and ultimately the new manager will be fired, or we will immediately lose with him, and ultimately the new manager will be fired.  And I personally do not believe that which manager is chosen will have much effect on which of the two alternatives result.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 03, 2019, 10:31:06 am
I think Curt has identified a number of issues with the Cubs over the past couple of years, and the right manager is one who is well equipped to help correct these problems while also being a strong motivator.  If Girardi is such a guy, I would hire him without much concern about possible friction with the front office.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: BearHit on October 03, 2019, 10:35:50 am
That manager may not exist - players can collectively decide how things will go
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 03, 2019, 10:58:12 am
If Girardi is such a guy, I would hire him without much concern about possible friction with the front office.

What if the biggest issue was because Maddon was ignoring important data from the FO?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 03, 2019, 11:01:49 am
I think it may have been more that Maddon was inconsistent on his own rules, depending on the player.  I don't know.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: BearHit on October 03, 2019, 11:10:04 am
Maybe Maddon knew that the pitching staff was not going to dominate - and the offense cannot score 8 runs every game
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 03, 2019, 11:10:07 am
I was unaware Maddon had rules.....

If you read what is coming out from Sharma the Cubs realllly value coaches that work closely with the FO and they want to integrate that up from the minors to major league teams.  It is what the Astros, Yankees, Dodgers, Twins, etc... are doing. 

Refocusing the players is going to be part of the managers responsibility, but integrating the data for the players is a much bigger piece of the puzzle.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: BearHit on October 03, 2019, 11:11:54 am
How awesome is Davey Martinez that he resurrected the Nats bullpen form losers to winners
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 03, 2019, 11:18:07 am
I'm not necessarily advocating for Girardi.  But I wouldn't assume that he couldn't work well with a Theo-led front office just because he didn't get along well with Cashman.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dev on October 03, 2019, 11:25:08 am
callaway gone
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 03, 2019, 12:49:49 pm
.. when Theo is talking about accountability and stuff that he's referring to Russell.  He might be, but I doubt it.  Everything I've read is that Russell has done almost everything the FO asked him to do.   I think there's something else going on.  Backstabbing, missing signals, swinging for the fences with winning run at third and one out, being clueless about game situations in one's hitting approach, nursing injuries...there's more to it.   

Yes, I assume Russell did as asked for counseling, and yes to your main point that there's more to it.  If it's just Russell, they could let him go and and problem is solved. 

Russell is the face of the franchise for accountability issues, both on-field and off.  On field, there was the stuff about not being focused defensively, having mental errors, AND not even having complete command of the signs.  That's a professionalism/preparation issue.  And down to Iowa he went. 

Theo made a reference to "consequences", and used wording as if he thought everybody could see that somebody had been held accountable for something. What "consequences" was Theo alluding to in his head there?  Russell getting sent to the minors, but what else?  And if players experienced consequences, were they for performance, or for behavior issues of some other kind? Edwards, Almora, and Montgomery were bad players sent away; are those performance consequences that Theo was alluding to? 

I kinda don't think so, because great club leadership doesn't make bad players good.  What leadership is supposed to improve are issues of behavior, attitude, professionalism, preparation, practice habits, focus, etc..   

So agree with Curt, there's more to it than Russell, and you mention some possibilities. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 03, 2019, 01:37:56 pm
Yeah, he should do like Ross and lobby through the national media.

Theo has said Ross is a candidate. Has Theo said Girardi is a candidate?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on October 03, 2019, 02:00:30 pm
Quote
Quote from: craig on October 02, 2019, 09:47:52 am


Thanks, dihard.  That's helpful to hear.

Cubs admin have a reputation for being really smart/intellectual.  I'd like to get somebody who's really intelligent and smart.  Maddon is, no question there.  But I'm not sure all of their managerial hires, or batting-coach hires, have necessarily mirrored that.  Think they have maybe tended to go more for style.  Elan, the word Theo used several times.  Soft skills.

I hope they get somebody who's got good soft skills, but who's also an intelligent and thoughtful guy too.
Quote
That rules out WJ

Ouch.  That hurt.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 03, 2019, 03:17:15 pm
One thing I'd like to see the new manager do differently from Joe is to establish more of a set everyday lineup.  Not so much a set batting order as much as a set 8 who - outside of a straight platoon - are your "everyday" guys.

I think the superflexibility of the roster sometimes was overused and acted as a detriment to player development.

If you believe in a guy, you have to give him an extended opportunity at some point to prove whether he can or can't do it.  This playing once every 3-4 days is tough on anyone but much more so a young player.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on October 03, 2019, 05:15:27 pm
I couldn't agree more.

I hated the scheduled off days...and the idea of giving a player a day off after having a big game the day before just because "it was scheduled"...that's crap...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 03, 2019, 05:19:13 pm
In Maddon’s defense, it would have been easier to stick with a consistent lineup if he had more guys who were performing on a consistent basis.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 03, 2019, 05:54:29 pm
Deeg, there's truth in that, for sure.  On the other hand, he might have had more guys perform consistently if he had let them get into some kind of rhythm.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 03, 2019, 06:37:38 pm
Deeg, there's truth in that, for sure.  On the other hand, he might have had more guys perform consistently if he had let them get into some kind of rhythm.

Yeah, maybe it's a chicken and egg scenario to an extent but I think there's truth in both - they're not mutually exclusive.  It also seems like the Cubs built a roster that was more than usually matchup-dependent.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 03, 2019, 09:12:02 pm
One thing I'd like to see the new manager do differently from Joe is to establish more of a set everyday lineup.  Not so much a set batting order as much as a set 8 who - outside of a straight platoon - are your "everyday" guys.

I think the superflexibility of the roster sometimes was overused and acted as a detriment to player development.

If you believe in a guy, you have to give him an extended opportunity at some point to prove whether he can or can't do it.  This playing once every 3-4 days is tough on anyone but much more so a young player.

Who would you have played more as an “everyday” guy? 

Only guy I can think of is Bote but seemed to me his usage was fine.

We had five everyday guys: Rizzo, Bryant, Baez, Heyward, Schwarber (137 GS). Nobody would start Schwarber against certain lefties(at least until Aug/Sept). Then, there’s Contreras/Caratini, which is six.

When Castellanos arrived, he played everyday.

Seems to me that nobody Cubs had could be an “everyday” guy at the other two positions.

At 2B, Russell started season suspended,  Descalso didn't hit, and Zobrist went home. Happ was in minors and Russell too for a stretch after the suspension. Bote—see above.

In CF, Almora didn’t hit. Ideally, he would have been an everyday guy but don’t think anybody would argue Almora deserved to play more. So, Heyward had to play half-time in CF and almost all the time when Castellanos arrived.

What am I missing?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 03, 2019, 10:01:46 pm
Harpef
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 04, 2019, 08:20:06 am
I think I've probably been one of the more skeptical here with regard to Kyle Schwarber.  But the second half of this season has turned me around on him.  This is an interesting piece on Schwarber from cubsinsider.com that makes the case that he should be a core piece in 2020 and going forward.

https://www.cubsinsider.com/2019/10/03/kyle-schwarbers-second-half-turnaround-makes-him-lock-to-remain-with-cubs/

That piece references an earlier one that goes into more detail about his performance since the All Star Break.

https://www.cubsinsider.com/2019/09/18/kyle-schwarber-raking-entire-yard-with-balanced-batting-approach/

If the second half Schwarber is the "real" Schwarber, it seems like he should be the default LF going forward. His defensive lapses can be tolerated if the other two OF positions are filled with good defenders.  Heyward in RF would be one. This is all the more reason for the Cubs to focus on finding a good defensive CF who gets on base and is a contact guy this winter.

It will be interesting to see if the Cubs and Schwarber agree on an extension over the winter. If they do, I expect Schwarber to be penciled in as the regular LF, and I would not expect them to sign Castellanos.  If no deal is reached, then maybe Schwarber gets traded.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: jacey1 on October 04, 2019, 12:08:43 pm
Now is the time to move Schwarber, if you're going to do so. He's re-established some of his value and is one of those pieces you hate to trade, but if you want something of value....
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 04, 2019, 12:16:49 pm
So looking at 2016 Cubs
Heyward RF, 14 DRS, UZR/150 17.5
Fowler CF, 1 DRS, UZR/150 0
Cubs LF Combined 5 DRS, 12.9 UZR/150

Schawarber -1 DRS, UZR/150 -0.9 in 2019

Cubs 2019 45.6 GB%
Cubs 2016 46.9 GB%

Despite the fly ball revolution maybe OF Defense is overrated
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 04, 2019, 02:31:26 pm
Brendan Miller
@CubsRelated
Theo Epstein said that Willson Contreras' framing improved in the 2nd half.

It did in a BIG WAY.

Pitches at top border strike probability
First half = ~30%
Second half = ~70%

This improvement was/still is VITAL for Hottovy's game plan with Hendricks and Quintana (sinkers up).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 04, 2019, 02:50:40 pm
...Despite the fly ball revolution maybe OF Defense is overrated

Thanks blueJay, interesting data and interesting, significant point. 

I think Schwarber may play slightly better defense in future.  For example, I thought his throwing wasn't nearly as good or as accurate this year, and that his setups weren't nearly as intentional, in terms of setting up to catch the ball coming in and with weight prepared for a quick and strong throw.  He's obviously never going to have range; but if he could at least execute with skill what his speed allows, I think his numbers might improve a little bit. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on October 04, 2019, 02:52:43 pm
Cubs Insider with what seems like an off-the-wall possibility until you read the article

https://www.cubsinsider.com/2019/10/04/since-were-talking-former-cubs-for-manager-how-about-sam-fuld/

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 04, 2019, 03:09:13 pm
Not sure how to think about Schwarber.  Had a really good 2nd half.  If he could hit like that for the next 5 years, you've got a really valuable run producer, defense regardless.

I assume Theo/Hoyer and other potential trade partners have the same question:  will Schwarber future be the 2nd half .997-OPS 2nd half guy who batted .280?  Or the .777 first half guy with the .227 batting average? Or the .871 composite guy with the .250 batting average? Or last year's .235-.832  guy? 

If Theo anticipates 2nd-half but nobody else does, he won't get offers that he perceived as fair value in trade, and Kyle is back for sure.  If other teams project 2nd-half masher, but Theo doesn't, then somebody should make an offer that Theo views as good value.  If other teams and Theo have matching valuation, then a fair-value offer might be possible, and a trade might be made, since Schwarber seems to have the game-plannable vulnerabilities that typify the lineup.  Obviously that is too simplistic; nobody is going to be super confident that 2nd-half Kyle will project future, but there is calculated hope/risk that he might. 

My feeling is to keep him, and hope that 2nd-half Kyle wasn't all fluke.  Obviously nobody's going to anticipate that he's ever going to BABIP at .320 again, like Ron's article said he did late in the season.  Or hit .280, as he did over the last 70 games.  Making a conservative projection on Schwarber, and trading him for conservatively-fair-value return, is not going to help us catch up to the top teams. 

So I'd favor taking a shot that Schwarber will be able to hit ≥.250 into the future, and might be a >.870-OPS guy going forward.  Maybe even a >.900 OPS guy. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 04, 2019, 05:03:11 pm
I like Schwarber but if you do intend to move him now's the time to do it while his value's high.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 04, 2019, 05:29:20 pm
Dusty, that's where I'm not sure?  Is his value high, based on 70 games or whatever?  Or will offers be pretty modest, and not nearly what he might be worth *if* he can be anything like this going forward?  I just don't imagine anybody else is going to be more super-convinced yet than any of us are, so that he's not really going to bring back all that much.  Especially with only two years of club control. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on October 04, 2019, 05:30:18 pm
Real issue is the 2 years control left... his profile has value if he you have 5 years of control left, but when you are in the last 2 years of arb already its rough.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 04, 2019, 06:05:41 pm
Several tweets say Loretta was the first manager interview this week. Ross, Venabke, and Girardi will be interviewed next week.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 04, 2019, 06:49:00 pm
Several tweets say Loretta was the first manager interview this week. Ross, Venabke, and Girardi will be interviewed next week.

Can you share who the tweets were from?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on October 04, 2019, 06:51:22 pm
Can you share who the tweets were from?
Too many media members to count.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 04, 2019, 06:53:12 pm
All the standard beat writers (Sharma, Rogers, Levine, etc.)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 04, 2019, 06:54:57 pm
Yes.

Several of them tweeted it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 04, 2019, 07:05:09 pm
All the standard beat writers (Sharma, Rogers, Levine, etc.)

Thanks. I've been away from the internet all day.  Just saw Sharma's.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 04, 2019, 07:07:42 pm
Quote
Patrick Mooney

Verified account
 
@PJ_Mooney
Following Following @PJ_Mooney
More
The Cubs are scheduled to interview Joe Girardi, David Ross and Will Venable next week for their manager opening. Mark Loretta completed his interview yesterday.


I'm still on the fence about Girardi, but part of me wants to see him hired just to see how the never-wrong posters who claimed he never had a chance try to rationalize his hiring.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 04, 2019, 07:41:47 pm

I'm still on the fence about Girardi, but part of me wants to see him hired just to see how the never-wrong posters who claimed he never had a chance try to rationalize his hiring.

What poster said Girardi never had a chance?

Haven’t read that here but I’m sure Deeg will pinpoint those posts.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 04, 2019, 07:45:36 pm
Let the dance begin.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 04, 2019, 07:52:33 pm
How do we rate the Cubs manager job for desirability?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 04, 2019, 07:54:01 pm
10.

Big market that spends money with a strong core.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 04, 2019, 07:59:05 pm
Let the dance begin.

Is that an answer?

Seriously, who said Girardi never had a chance?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 04, 2019, 07:59:52 pm
How do we rate the Cubs manager job for desirability?

Not at the very top, but maybe at the top of what's available.  It's a franchise with a big payroll which limits flexibility, and where the performance has clearly not matched the dollars.  Lots of guys going to be FAs at the same time, so there's the potential for things to go off a cliff.  It's still a big-time gig, but you're placing a lot of faith in a front office that hasn't done much in the last three years to justify it.

That said, what's better?  Mets' ownership is a dumpster fire.  The Padres are a small market team, Manny or no.  The Giants are attractive based on location - gorgeous ballpark, great city - and a pretty generous ownership, but not exactly on the cusp of contending seriously.  Maybe the Angels, given that their core is basically the two most exciting players in the AL.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 04, 2019, 08:04:12 pm
San Francisco is a great city?

Definitely not to people where Im from.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 04, 2019, 08:05:33 pm
I think the Padres job is probably the most desirable this offseason. They have a bunch of young talent coming up, so they should be a winning team over the next few years. They've never won the World Series, so their next manager could be the first to do it. The weather is great, and the media/fan pressure won't be nearly as rough as some of the other more desirable jobs this offseason.

But the Cubs are probably still the second most desirable opening. Maybe the Phillies would be close if they fire Kapler.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 04, 2019, 08:13:15 pm
Here is my Cubs thought for the day: Not sure why this WOULD NOT be David Ross' job to lose. At last year's winter meetings, the Cubs front office said they were missing a 'David Ross' type in there. Well, now they can just hire him. Totally just my opinion, nothing more.--Rogers
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 04, 2019, 08:16:00 pm
Is that Fuckstick Phil or Dopey Jesse?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 04, 2019, 08:19:41 pm
Is that Fuckstick Phil or Dopey Jesse?

Does it really matter?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 04, 2019, 08:20:29 pm
No.  Just curious.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 04, 2019, 08:21:19 pm
I think the Padres job is probably the most desirable this offseason. They have a bunch of young talent coming up, so they should be a winning team over the next few years. They've never won the World Series, so their next manager could be the first to do it. The weather is great, and the media/fan pressure won't be nearly as rough as some of the other more desirable jobs this offseason.

But the Cubs are probably still the second most desirable opening. Maybe the Phillies would be close if they fire Kapler.

I'm not convinced.  In the end, you're committing yourself to manage in a small market (mid at best) where they've never won anything, and the fans just don't care that much either way.  For some serious baseball guys those are big drawbacks.  It's an attractive job but I think the Cubs job is still more attractive, warts and all.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 04, 2019, 08:36:16 pm
Jesse.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 04, 2019, 11:01:30 pm
Girardi is the only guy I don’t want to hire. I’m happy to be wrong if he wins a World Series.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 04, 2019, 11:12:57 pm
Girardi or Ross are the only ones Im interested in.

Girardi strikes me as the old school type who will demand accountability.

A man wont give his best until its forced out of him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 05, 2019, 08:41:20 am
San Francisco is a great city?

Definitely not to people where Im from.

Have you ever been to SF?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 05, 2019, 09:41:54 am
Have you ever been to SF?

We don't make a party out of lovin'
We like holdin' hands and pitchin' woo
We don't let our hair grow long and shaggy
Like the hippies out in San Francisco do
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on October 05, 2019, 09:47:52 am
I vi$ited $an Franci$co years ago.  Alcatraz wa$ very intere$ting and the cable car$ were fun to ride up and down the hill$.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 05, 2019, 10:15:47 am
We don't make a party out of lovin'
We like holdin' hands and pitchin' woo
We don't let our hair grow long and shaggy
Like the hippies out in San Francisco do

Merle Haggard, from his song "Okie from Muskogee," who ended up letting his hair grow long and shaggy and smoking pot.  As an aside the only person I knew in college who had used LSD was from ... Muskogee.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 05, 2019, 10:34:56 am
Fun book about our fair city:  https://www.amazon.com/Cool-Gray-City-Love-Francisco-ebook/dp/B00D78R550
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 05, 2019, 10:38:15 am
I am as interested as anyone in the managerial search. And I may have ideas about the qualities of the person who should manage the Cubs, but they are based on very little direct knowledge about the candidates (or exactly what Theo is looking for beyond the generalities he's given).

I will continue to read articles and posts out of curiosity, and a certain amount of baseball boredom. I may even end up having a real favorite based on what I read.

But my bottom line is that Theo will be in the best position to choose between the candidates.  So whether it's Girardi, Ross or anyone else, I'm going to be cool with it and hope it works out for the best.  Maybe it will or maybe it won't, but I am confident Theo and the gang are in a far better position to judge among the candidates than I am. So I will follow the search with deep interest and bated breath, but without any particular emotional investment in any of the candidates.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 05, 2019, 10:45:47 am
Downside of SF?  Just had an earthquake.  No idea how severe.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 05, 2019, 10:46:11 am
I vi$ited $an Franci$co years ago.  Alcatraz wa$ very intere$ting and the cable car$ were fun to ride up and down the hill$.

Yes, San Francisco is super expensive. Think maybe only those hippies who have become investment bankers can now afford.

Saw Cubs at Oracle Park in July (Sandoval walkoff homer game). Wonderful ballpark and city.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 05, 2019, 10:48:25 am
Magnitude 3.9 earthquake centered a few miles from my house.  One sharp shake and then calm.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on October 05, 2019, 12:54:14 pm
When I worked at Griffith years ago, there was a woman who worked in product development (her claim to fame was that she developed the Red Lobster cheese biscuits.  Anyone who has been to Red Lobster will remember them.)  She went to two out of town seminars while she worked at Griffith.  I forget which came first, but she went for a week to Mexico City, and was there when they had their mammoth earthquake, and she went to San Francisco just in time to be in the earthquake that interfered with the World Series one year.  Griffith never sent her to another seminar, perhaps saving another major city from disaster.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 05, 2019, 01:12:04 pm
Agree, Ron. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 05, 2019, 01:53:42 pm
Interesting first-four listing.  Wonder how many others they'll interview?  Three of those four are basically internal guys.  (Ross has external job, but feels "insider".)  Two of them were part of existing team that, using Theo's words, lacked "energy", was unsuccessful in "reaching" players, and was unsuccessful in getting guys to be the "best players they could be". 

Obviously none of Ross, Venable, or Loretta have managed before, I don't believe at any level?  Actually, Loretta has, Team Israel for World Baseball in 2012.  Otherwise, he was an admin guy for Padres since 2009, I think this was maybe his first year "coaching"?  Venable's had the 2 years coaching 1B, no managing?  Ross zero coaching, no managing? 

Ross is 42; Venable is only 36.

I wonder what kind of a cat Loretta is.  The recent story of stealing the umpire head phones and talking to the replay officials in New York was kind of both funny and kinda weird.  Maybe he'd be funny, impulsive, and high-energy?  Beats me. 

Venable as 1B coach seems relatively quiet and businesslike.  From TV shots he doesn't seem like a super non-stop talker or super rah-rah.  Princeton doesn't mean you're brilliant, but maybe he is?  Being the youngest at 36, that may have some advantages. 

Girardi is an outstanding individual with a ton of good qualities.  I wonder how hard it might be to establish rapport with Cub players who maybe don't have hard-work and max-preparation coded into their DNA? 
 
By reputation Ross is strong in terms of "reach" and "accountability" personality.  He seems to be one guy in recent Cubs history that expected things to be done right, and would call it out when it wasn't.  People skills guy who could connect.  Might be good from discipline, motivation, rapport, and work-hard standpoint.  I wonder if he's smart enough, or might struggle with issues of strategy and analysis and stuff? 

Anyway, seems like a nice group of candidates already.  And those are just the first four with ties to the club or the city. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 05, 2019, 02:26:28 pm
Joe Espada will be 44 next season. Speculation that he’s the guy Epstein may have meant when referenced a candidate with a playoff club.

Think that clubs are supposed to wait until end of WS to name a manager, right? So, could wait awhile to interview Espada. Seems like an impressive guy. Has had all kind of jobs in baseball.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dogstoothe on October 05, 2019, 03:58:14 pm
It's always so cold in San Francisco, like a bone.  Maybe Mike Maddux has a bone up his sleeve, like his brother as pitching coach.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 05, 2019, 05:40:45 pm
I'm betting on Pete Rose.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dogstoothe on October 05, 2019, 06:16:25 pm
I bet we steal some bases, try some hit and runs with Rose, I guess he's still on the blacklist, but at least he isn't too much on TV.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 05, 2019, 08:05:55 pm
Interesting first-four listing.  Wonder how many others they'll interview?  Three of those four are basically internal guys.  (Ross has external job, but feels "insider".)  Two of them were part of existing team that, using Theo's words, lacked "energy", was unsuccessful in "reaching" players, and was unsuccessful in getting guys to be the "best players they could be". 

Obviously none of Ross, Venable, or Loretta have managed before, I don't believe at any level?  Actually, Loretta has, Team Israel for World Baseball in 2012.  Otherwise, he was an admin guy for Padres since 2009, I think this was maybe his first year "coaching"?  Venable's had the 2 years coaching 1B, no managing?  Ross zero coaching, no managing? 

Ross is 42; Venable is only 36.

I wonder what kind of a cat Loretta is.  The recent story of stealing the umpire head phones and talking to the replay officials in New York was kind of both funny and kinda weird.  Maybe he'd be funny, impulsive, and high-energy?  Beats me. 

Venable as 1B coach seems relatively quiet and businesslike.  From TV shots he doesn't seem like a super non-stop talker or super rah-rah.  Princeton doesn't mean you're brilliant, but maybe he is?  Being the youngest at 36, that may have some advantages. 

Girardi is an outstanding individual with a ton of good qualities.  I wonder how hard it might be to establish rapport with Cub players who maybe don't have hard-work and max-preparation coded into their DNA? 
 
By reputation Ross is strong in terms of "reach" and "accountability" personality.  He seems to be one guy in recent Cubs history that expected things to be done right, and would call it out when it wasn't.  People skills guy who could connect.  Might be good from discipline, motivation, rapport, and work-hard standpoint.  I wonder if he's smart enough, or might struggle with issues of strategy and analysis and stuff? 

Anyway, seems like a nice group of candidates already.  And those are just the first four with ties to the club or the city. 

No rule against conducting interviews with guys on playoff teams on their days off - happens all the time.  If Theo wants to interview Espada he could do it between the ALDS and ALCS.

I don't think Venable is much more than a courtesy interview TBH, and if the aim is to change the culture promoting Maddon's bench coach hardly seems like the logical next step.  Of the names we're heard for official interviews Ross and Girardi clearly stand out, but Ibanez could certainly factor in at some point.  Maybe DeRosa too.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on October 05, 2019, 08:31:38 pm
Mookie Betts apparently will be on the trade block. If Epstein wants to make a big move, one is out there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 05, 2019, 08:57:43 pm
Also Jackie Bradley may be non-tendered, but I'm not sure I see a great fit there.  Ks a ton and his defense isn't what it was a few years ago.  If Boston is having a fire sale I'd certainly be shopping, but the fit has to be right.

If he seems remotely healthy I'd be very tempted to see whether you could get Ender Inciarte cheap and take a flyer on him.  Potential a very solid CF platoon guy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 05, 2019, 08:58:19 pm
Craig, Ross is a special assistant to Theo so he’d be an internal guy as well.

I think the break between LCS and WS is ok to announce stuff.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on October 05, 2019, 09:05:00 pm
No rule against conducting interviews with guys on playoff teams on their days off - happens all the time.  If Theo wants to interview Espada he could do it between the ALDS and ALCS.

But there is a rule that if someone is under contract, you can't contact him without the permission of his team.  Of course, they don't have to make the permission or the interview public, so it may have happened.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ben on October 05, 2019, 09:42:40 pm
My nephew was on the same Little League team with Will Venable one year (age 12) and they played on All-Star teams together.  We used to tell the other manager before the game to make sure his 1B played DEEP because Venable (then about 80 pounds) could just rip the ball down the RF line (LH hitter) before the infielders moved a muscle.  Saw him hit a ball in All-Stars at least 50' over the RF fence!

His Dad, Max, was a MLB player for many years and a really good guy.  You would never have known he was a MLB player.  He would ask if he could help when he was able to attend practice, but never acted as though he knew any more than any other guy.

Just a GREAT family and Will was articulate, rather quiet, always smiling, as a youngster.  Not a surprise when he went to Princeton and played basketball (fabulous athlete), not a surprise when he started playing baseball again as a junior there and not a surprise when Sandy Alderson (who lived nearby and knew Max) drafted Will in the 7th round.  Also not a surprise when Theo picked him up for the coaching staff.  Will is a class act!

Will almost certainly lacks the experience to get selected as manager by Theo and he seems more like a front-office type to me; however, I'm sure he has everyone's respect in the Cub org and I'll bet he communicates very well with players...maybe down the road.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 05, 2019, 10:13:51 pm
But there is a rule that if someone is under contract, you can't contact him without the permission of his team.  Of course, they don't have to make the permission or the interview public, so it may have happened.

Why would Houston deny permission?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on October 06, 2019, 06:09:15 pm
Normally they wouldn't, after the season, but they may well ask that they wait until it i
s over.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 06, 2019, 07:33:53 pm
Normally they wouldn't, after the season, but they may well ask that they wait until it i
s over.

That would be unusual to the point of being almost unheard of.  Playoff teams routinely give staff clearance to interview when a promotion is involved - they know other clubs aren't going to wait around.  To deny permission until after the WS is effectively to deny your employee a chance to advance his career.  Extremely poor for morale.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on October 06, 2019, 08:31:43 pm
I had no idea that playoff teams routinely gave permission to contact their staff while the playoffs were still going on.  Do you know of any that have done this?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 06, 2019, 09:09:29 pm
Well, off the top of my head Alex Cora (also the Astros bench coach) interviewed with Boston while the Astros were in the playoffs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on October 08, 2019, 03:00:03 pm
Quote
“Our inability to pitch in high-leverage situations was a clear problem,” Epstein said. “I think we had the third-worst record in baseball behind just the Tigers and Orioles in combined one- and two-run games. Our inability to pitch in high-leverage moments kind of haunted us throughout the year. That’s something I have to do a better job of finding options for.”

Wasn't there a question about the "clutch-ness" of the pitching staff, and whether that was really a thing?  Seems like the Cubs thought it was a real thing.

Athletic.  https://theathletic.com/1269907/2019/10/08/craig-kimbrel-couldnt-save-the-cubs-bullpen-and-they-cant-expect-him-to-in-2020-either/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 08, 2019, 07:09:55 pm
It's been speculated a few times here that Jose Espada might be the playoff team coach the Cubs are interested in interviewing, and Mooney seems to confirm that here:

https://theathletic.com/1278622/2019/10/08/as-cubs-go-full-speed-ahead-in-search-to-replace-joe-maddon-joe-espada-is-another-name-on-the-list/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 08, 2019, 08:20:26 pm
Espada being Brandon Hyde’s brother-in-law is kinda interesting piece of info. It gives the Cubs an extra source of info and gives Espada inside info on the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 08, 2019, 08:29:00 pm
Speaking of inside info, given that Theo and Cashman are quite friendly, I think one can safely assume they've discussed Girardi over the past few weeks.  If Cashman had given a sort of "steer clear at all costs!" message, we probably wouldn't even be seeing an interview.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 09, 2019, 09:43:33 am
Sharma has a new piece on the Cubs' bullpen issues and needs. 

https://theathletic.com/1269907/2019/10/08/craig-kimbrel-couldnt-save-the-cubs-bullpen-and-they-cant-expect-him-to-in-2020-either/

Within the article he addresses a question I had here on how Strope looked during the last few weeks of the season, given that his pitching line looked quite good.  Here is what Sharma said.  I wonder whether the Cubs might offer a team friendly deal with incentives  - based on comments he's made, it seems like he might open to that.

Strop, a free agent but leader and rock in the bullpen, battled injuries and command all year long. But his velocity started to tick up in September — his 38.9 percent strikeout rate was his best mark of the year, his nine innings pitched gave him his second-most productive month, and one scout commented that during a mid-September appearance, his sinker seemed to be moving like it was at its best.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 09, 2019, 09:55:25 am
Sharma with an informative article on Willson Contreras' work on improving his framing.

https://theathletic.com/1278623/2019/10/09/willson-contreras-did-a-better-job-framing-pitches-in-september-but-can-that-carry-over-to-2020/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 09, 2019, 09:55:48 am
Sharma had a deep dive on Contreras's framing as well today.

Strop on a team friendly deal would be something to really consider.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 09, 2019, 01:04:47 pm
Bleacher Nation looks at NPB free agent CF Shogo Akiyama's fit with the Cubs:

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/10/09/so-free-agent-center-fielder-shogo-akiyama-might-be-a-perfect-fit-for-the-cubs/

MLB Trade Rumors speculates the Cubs on one of seven possible destinations for Starling Marte:

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/10/finding-a-match-in-a-starling-marte-trade.html
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 09, 2019, 02:01:07 pm
Akiyama sounds really interesting.

I'm not sure I'd buy Marte getting traded to the Cubs, but he'd probably be more expensive than what I'd want to pay. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 09, 2019, 02:11:27 pm
MLBTR has their 2020 arb estimates out.

Kris Bryant – $18.5MM

Addison Russell – $5.1MM

Javier Baez – $9.3MM

Kyle Schwarber – $8.0MM

Willson Contreras – $4.5MM

Albert Almora – $1.8MM

Kyle Ryan – $1.1MM
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 09, 2019, 02:48:41 pm
MLBTR has their 2020 arb estimates out.

Kris Bryant – $18.5MM

Addison Russell – $5.1MM

Javier Baez – $9.3MM

Kyle Schwarber – $8.0MM

Willson Contreras – $4.5MM

Albert Almora – $1.8MM

Kyle Ryan – $1.1MM

Salary estimates Jeff JeffH Craig
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 09, 2019, 02:52:30 pm
An early look at the 2020 Chicago Cubs.

LF - Kyle Schwarber (eligible for arbitration) -  $7,500,000/$7,500,000
CF - Ian Happ (auto renewal) - $675,000/$675,000
RF - Jason Heyward (under contract) - $21,000,000/$23,000,000
3B - Kris Bryant (eligible for arbitration) - $20,000,000/$20,000,000
SS - Javier Baez (eligible for arbitration) - $14,000,000/$14,000,000
2B - Nico Hoerner (auto renewal) - $675,000/$675,000
1B - Anthony Rizzo (club option) - $16,500,000/$16,500,000
C - Willson Contreras (eligible for arbitration) - $4,000,000/$4,000,000
OF - Albert Almora (eligible for arbitration) - $1,000,000/$1,000,000
IF - David Bote (under contract) - $950,000/$3,000,000
UT - Tony Kemp (auto renewal) - $675,000/$675,000
C - Victor Caratini (auto renewal) - $675,000/$675,000
SP - Jon Lester (under contract) - $15,000,000/$25,833,333
SP - Yu Darvish (under contract) - $22,000,000/$21,000,000
SP - Kyle Hendricks (under contract) - $12,000,000/$13,875,000
SP - Jose Quintana (club option) - $10,500,000/$10,500,000
SP - Kendall Graveman (club option) - $3,000,000/$3,000,000
RP - Brad Wieck or Danny Hultzen (auto renewal) - $675,000/$675,000
RP - Kyle Ryan (eligible for arbitration) - $1,400,000/$1,400,000
RP - Tyler Chatwood (under contract) - $13,000,000/$12,666,667
RP - Alec Mills (auto renewal) - $675,000/$675,000
RP - Duane Underwood (auto renewal) - $675,000/$675,000
RP - Rowan Wick (auto renewal) - $675,000/$675,000
RP - David Phelps (club option) - $5,000,000/$5,000,000
RP - Craig Kimbrel (under contract) - $16,000,000/$14,333,333
Players on optional assignment (15 @ $150,000 each) - $2,250,000/$2,250,000
B&B - $15,000,000/$15,000,000

Total - $205,500,000/$219,258,333

The first salary number listed is the 2020 outlay.  The second salary number is the 2020 luxury tax figure.  The latter is key.

It seems as though the Cubs have set their limit at not exceeding the luxury tax limit by more than $40 million.  That would set their theoretical limit for 2020 at $248.

Obviously some of the names listed above will be replaced by salaried veterans.

Enjoy.

Contract Budget Payroll Luxury Tax Projected Salaries estimate by JeffH Jeff H Craig.

(I'm copying this and trying to put some keywords into it so I, and perhaps others, can find it more easily future!  :) :) :)

Thanks much, Jeff.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 09, 2019, 03:00:14 pm
MLBTR has their 2020 arb estimates out.
Kris Bryant – $18.5MM
Addison Russell – $5.1MM
Javier Baez – $9.3MM
Kyle Schwarber – $8.0MM
Willson Contreras – $4.5MM
Albert Almora – $1.8MM
Kyle Ryan – $1.1MM


They've got Baez lower than Jeff.  Their numbers would free up a few extra millions. 


Russell at $5, I just don't see how the budget-busting Cubs are going to want to commit $5 to Russell.  Maybe as Ben's guy he's finally due to break out and hit pretty decently for a plus-defense middle infielder.  So maybe he's going to end up being a much better all-around glove-bat defensive 2B than who we end up using there.  But I just can't imagine they'll want to retain him with arb leverage is they share this projection for an arb contract.....  To non-tender and offer him a non-roster split contract with a chance to win the job and incentives, I wouldn't doubt Theo being interested.  But to take on a $5M contract, even if you can release him in March and reduce that to $1M, I'm not thinking it's likely. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 09, 2019, 03:40:29 pm
I doubt Phelps gets brought back a $5 million so that could free up $9.7 million with the lower arb numbers from Jeff's.  That would 195.8/209.558.

If I'm reading Sportstrax right the Cubs luxury tax number $234 million with salary being $218 million.  CBT starts at $208 million with draft pick penalties at $248 million.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 09, 2019, 04:35:35 pm
Akiyama is a good fit for us and a pretty complete ballplayer.  Plus, Jiggy's dismay if we sign him has to be worth at least 2-3M.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 09, 2019, 04:44:47 pm
Bleacher Nation looks at NPB free agent CF Shogo Akiyama's fit with the Cubs:
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/10/09/so-free-agent-center-fielder-shogo-akiyama-might-be-a-perfect-fit-for-the-cubs/

Akiyama sounds really interesting.
I'm not sure I'd buy Marte getting traded to the Cubs, but he'd probably be more expensive than what I'd want to pay. 

Shogo sounds really significant.  As the article suggests, possibly perfect fit.  I'd wondered whether with our specific needs at CF and 2B, and with the reports that there really don't seem to be big-league CF's available in FA, whether there might perhaps be a Japanese option for CF or 2B. 

Even had there been a CF stud in FA, budget doesn't have space for that. 

Shogo doesn't sound like he'd be a huge star-power guy who'd command an overwhelming contract.  So seems like he could well fit within our budget landscape. 

And with Heyward, I'm not sure we need a 160-game starter for CF, either.  So if you sign him but he doesn't hit much, it's not like you'd have to see him Almora for 160 starts. 

So seems like he'd fit the budget; provide the needed defense; provide contact hitting that Theo wants; and maybe the Japanese guys are better situational guys than Americans and might help in that way?  Whether his Japanese leadoff profile would translate well here I don't know, but given the lack of options, perhaps he'd have a better chance to be good there than anybody else we can get from outside, or than anybody internal (other than Rizzo!)

I love the idea. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 09, 2019, 04:45:34 pm
The Japanese pitchers are the problem not the position players.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 09, 2019, 05:00:18 pm
One of the things I was wondering about is what Hoyer will want in terms of lefty-righty. 
For starters,
*LH:  Rizzo, Schwarber, and Heyward 
*RH:  Baez, Bryant, Contreras RH. 

Bench:
*LH:  Descalso,
*RH:  Hoerner, Bote, Almora, Russell
*Switch:  Caratini, Happ,

Gone is switch Zobrist, and long gone is lefty slugger LaStella. 

*IF* they were to trade Schwarber and keep Castellanos, as was considered at one point but has perhaps lost some consideration after Schwarber's strong finish, that would make them kinda thin on the lefty side for starters.  I think that might be yet another reason to NOT shop Schwarber too hard. 

Happ is another trade guy, and if reb was right that he'd be a value piece, that would really leave the bench RH-oriented. 

Shogo is lefty.  I wonder if that would be something they'd like, to keep the overall roster a little more lefty?  Or not really, since if Heyward and Schwarber are already lefty, plus Happ is better lefty than righty, if adding Shogo as a 4th outfield lefty would not really be an ideal platoon landscape?  So maybe they'd prefer a RH defensive CF?   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 09, 2019, 05:07:06 pm
If Theo really does want to get away from the HR-game and become more of a contact team, addressing 2B/CF with Hoerner and Shogo would really be two guys well shifted in that direction.  Shifted, at least; whether either guy would produce offensively I don't know.  Hoerner might hit .250 with no power and a million DP-groundouts, and Shogo might end up being a no-power mediocre-average loser too, who knows. 

But yeah, *IF* you kept most of the core in place, but replaced two spots with contact-oriented starters, 2/8 of the lineup could be a pretty significant change in flavor.  Even if Bryant, Baez, Contreras, and Schwarber didn't change their stripes very much.  And perhaps after a no-playoff season and two years without winning a playoff game, and with a new manager and new emphasis, possibly some of those core guys will shift a little bit towards more contact? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 09, 2019, 05:42:34 pm
Shogo being lefty certainly doesn’t hurt his appeal for us.  I would actually argue Schwarber’s strong finish makes it more likely he’ll be moved, but the idea of Happ as a big-time trade chip remains a fantasy.

If Theo wants a team more focused on smart, hard-nosed baseball, situational hitting and defense, signing Japanese ballplayers is a good way to go.  It’s the way the game is played here from little league on up.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 09, 2019, 07:13:11 pm
Let's define "core" position players as:

Bryant
Baez
Rizzo
Contreras

If I set the over/under on "core" players traded this winter at 0.5, do you take the over or the under?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 09, 2019, 07:23:02 pm
Over
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 09, 2019, 07:25:45 pm
.....but the idea of Happ as a big-time trade chip remains a fantasy.


Maybe I missed it but did anybody here, or anywhere else, say that Happ is a “big-time” trade chip? 

I said there would be interest in Happ and that he has real trade value. But, BIG-TIME??

Just curious where that’s from, Deeg?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 09, 2019, 07:27:30 pm
Jesus Suffering Holy **** Christ, STOP!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 09, 2019, 07:30:17 pm
Jesus Suffering Holy **** Christ, STOP!

Good luck with that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 09, 2019, 07:41:13 pm
If they're not going to get rid of Theo, there at least has to be a complete revamping of MLB's worst player procurement and development organization.


Jesus Suffering Holy **** Christ, STOP!

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on October 09, 2019, 07:56:49 pm
exasperated hyperbole is much easier to swallow than multi-post nitpicking over semantics.  YMMV
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 09, 2019, 08:13:15 pm
I like that:  “exasperated hyperbole.” Been trying to figure out Jeff's rants for years and now I get it.

So, Thanks.

HOT OFF THE PRESSES:

Theo interview at The Athletic today:

“As to Happ, we believe he has huge value. Big-Time value. Not only that, but BIG-TIME VALUE.”

There you go. Ask and you shall receive.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 09, 2019, 08:20:28 pm
Getting more Trump-like every day...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 09, 2019, 08:40:29 pm
Yeah, annoying when Theo talks like that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 09, 2019, 10:11:53 pm
Let's define "core" position players as:

Bryant
Baez
Rizzo
Contreras

If I set the over/under on "core" players traded this winter at 0.5, do you take the over or the under?
Under.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 09, 2019, 11:19:14 pm
Over.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on October 10, 2019, 01:46:45 pm
I will say “Well Over”. I will say a MINIMUM of 2 will be gone.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 10, 2019, 02:19:52 pm
Let's define "core" position players as:

Bryant
Baez
Rizzo
Contreras

If I set the over/under on "core" players traded this winter at 0.5, do you take the over or the under?
  I don't agree with the core.   I think the core is Baez, Rizzo, Hendricks, Darvish  (and I know he could opt out). 

I think a catcher of Contreras' caliber can bring a lot back in trade.  Cubs have an adequate replacement in Caratini: switch hitter, better framer, not as strong an arm)
Bryant is going to leave.  Trade him as much as you can get and go all in on Rendon.

 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 10, 2019, 03:23:02 pm
I expect Theo to be very aggressive in pursuing trades and my guess is that Bryant will be at the center of his discussions. I would also expect there to be plenty of strong interest in Bryant, enough that there will be a sufficiently attractive offer for a deal to be made.

But my guess is that Contreras is not likely to be traded, unless the Cubs do not find a sufficiently attractive deal for Bryant. In that event, I could see the Cubs trading Contreras in order to bring in enough to remake the lineup to something closer to the profile the Cubs seek.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 10, 2019, 03:30:48 pm
Under

Only 1 that has a chance of getting traded is Contreras.  Happ/Almora/Russell are the 3 guys most likely not to be with the team next year (Trade/Iowa/Just be gone).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 10, 2019, 03:32:39 pm
I will say “Well Over”. I will say a MINIMUM of 2 will be gone.

Really?  Can we agree that Rizzo will not be traded? If so, then you are suggesting that among Bryant, Baez and Contreras, only one (and maybe none) will remain a Cub? I do not expect both Bryant and Contreras to be traded, though I suppose it's not inconceivable. But in any event I would be shocked if the Cubs trade Baez.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 10, 2019, 04:08:59 pm
Going to be surprised if any of the "core" guys are traded for purposes of a reset.

Bryant is a bit different in the sense that he is a guy that the brass probably expects to lose in free agency.  Therefore, Theo may want to get a return for him as a "due diligence" type of move.  Otherwise, don't think they would move anybody other than the guys CBJ mentioned above.

AZ Phil has an interesting theory at Cub Reporter.  He speculates that Bryant gets traded in a deal that includes a young rotation pitcher coming back (speculates Padres' Lamet) and Cubs also don't exercise the Quintana club option (with that pitcher replacing Quintana) and the Bryant/Quintana payroll savings used to bring in another big bat (maybe Castellanos).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 10, 2019, 04:49:24 pm
Agree with Ron that Rizzo is going nowhere.  Situational hitting, adaptation, leadership, heart, Rizzo's the face of everything Theo wants. 

Theo talked a lot about "energy"; Baez and Contreras would seem the most high-energy guys on the team. 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 10, 2019, 04:50:47 pm
It would be nice to clarify the Japanese cf situation asap.   I would target Kiermeier and Yarborogh from the Ray's. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 10, 2019, 04:57:17 pm
Ive said it before but Bryant and Schwarber are who I'd expect to be moved and maybe Contreras if someone wants to pay a kings ransom.

No way on Javy and Rizzo.

It also wouldnt be awful if Darvish opts out.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 10, 2019, 05:03:17 pm
Bryant is a bit different in the sense that he is a guy that the brass probably expects to lose in free agency.  .....
AZ Phil has an interesting theory at Cub Reporter.  He speculates that Bryant gets traded in a deal that includes a young rotation pitcher coming back (speculates Padres' Lamet) and Cubs also don't exercise the Quintana club option (with that pitcher replacing Quintana) and the Bryant/Quintana payroll savings used to bring in another big bat (maybe Castellanos).

The concept of declining Q and using his money for other purpose has been made before!  :)  The idea of trading Bryant for younger club-control talent, while re-allocating his budget slot, makes lots of sense.  Particularly if you got back a talented controlled pitcher in exchange.  A challenge, of course, is creating a 3B-hole on offense.  That's where the idea of trading Bryant but pursuing Rendon make conceptual sense. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 10, 2019, 05:04:57 pm
I agree with CBJ.  Possibly Contreras, but not the others (including Bryant).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 10, 2019, 05:09:34 pm
It would be nice to clarify the Japanese cf situation asap.   I would target Kiermeier and Yarborogh from the Ray's. 

What needs to be clarified?  He's a FA and can sign where he wants and when he wants.

I agree that of the "core" as defined in the hypothetical, Contreras is the most logical (and likely) guy to be moved, with Bryant a longshot and the other two "no way in Hell".
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 10, 2019, 05:12:15 pm
Devil's advocate question: If Ross is such hot shlt, why are there 8 vacancies and no one else seems interested in even interviewing him?  Do they simply recognize that the Cubs are the only job he wants, or do they not think he's worth their time?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 10, 2019, 05:32:25 pm
Clarified?  Simple.  Get him signed or as soon as he signs elsewhere  determines if Kermeier has any interest for us.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 10, 2019, 05:35:46 pm
If Msddon is such hot sht  why didn't we keep him?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 10, 2019, 06:04:10 pm
Stupidity.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on October 10, 2019, 09:02:53 pm
Bryant is the most likely to be gone. While he may not be moved, you folks are wrong about Rizzo. He very well may be moved.

The lack of leadership on the team is a big issue. While the public perception of Rizzo is that of a leader, the truth of the matter is that there is no leader on the team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 10, 2019, 09:36:48 pm
If what you say is true, simply moving non-leaders out the door doesn’t exactly fix the problem.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on October 11, 2019, 07:08:35 am
Unless they are bringing leaders back with the returns on the trades.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 11, 2019, 08:37:44 am
Bryant is the most likely to be gone. While he may not be moved, you folks are wrong about Rizzo. He very well may be moved.

The lack of leadership on the team is a big issue. While the public perception of Rizzo is that of a leader, the truth of the matter is that there is no leader on the team.


Interesting.

Maybe it is my lack of imagination, I just don’t see a trade of Bryant where the Cubs come out as a better team.

The Cubs seem to have guys that could be leaders in the clubhouse like Schwarber, Contreras, Heyward or Javy. I wonder how much of Madison’s hands off approach led to this. Maybe just more team activities on the field and team building stuff is the answer. Otherwise it seems like a big reset is in order.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 11, 2019, 09:31:04 am
This is probably a dumb question, but I'm uncertain what "leadership" is supposed to impact or resolve on the team.  A hitter is supposed to hit the ball; a fielder is supposed to concentrate and field the ball; a pitcher is supposed to pitch.  What are we wanting leadership to improve in those areas, and how does that play between player versus manager/coaches? 

Is player-leadership going to add velocity and life to Lester's, Q's, Hendricks's, Hamels', Strop's, and Kimbrel's fastballs?  Would better leadership have given Edwards command and composure?  Would leadership have given Mike Montgomery's stuff more spin, and reduced his HR's-allowed?  Theo has prioritized assembling a really old, worn pitching staff with guys on the variably-steep decline-side of their careers.  Would better player-leadership have any impact there?  And the Professor, super tough and over-achiever Lester, and crafty veteran Hamels, their leadership is lacking? 

Would better player-leadership have helped Bote to make fewer errors, and have prevented his upper-body buildup from having cost a little bit of defensive flexibility?  If we had not only Heyward and Descalso but also had a Ross and Fowler providing better leadership, would that cause Almora to hit better, Baez to improve his plate discipline, Contreras to pitch-frame better, and Happ and Schwarber to have better command of the upper half of the strike zone?  Would better leadership make our assembly of baserunners not quite so pokey?   

I guess I'm kinda puzzled as to how much leadership is capable of impacting performance.  I get that there can be some indirects.  Maybe a better culture has guys more attentive and focused defensively, so that a Rizzo never forgets how many outs there are.  Maybe a better culture has guys talking and thinking baseball more, watching more film, getting to bed sooner, and reducing affairs and alcoholism, and somehow they play better as a result?

I guess I just don't really understand how much direct or indirect impact player leadership will have on baseball performance, in a game where each pitch is made by an individual pitcher; each at-bat is individual; and each defensive play is individually executed. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 11, 2019, 09:42:31 am
I do wonder whether Theo's emphasis on leadership isn't a talent-evaluation mistake?  Maybe the team just isn't that talented, and is overly dependent on guys overachieving their talent?  But Theo keeps thinking that the talent he believed in should be championship talent; so that when they aren't, he attributes that to lack of effort or energy or focus or leadership or something, rather than to just not being talented enough?  Maybe it has little to do with lack of heart or focus or leadership or energy, and it's just a case of having an 8th-place team because you've assembled 8th-place talent?   And it's not trending favorably because naturally your well-worn veteran pitchers are just naturally getting progressively older and naturally more worn by the year?

I guess I'm just wondering whether by Theo focusing on leadership/focus/energy/heart as the issue and the solution, whether he isn't somewhat misdiagnosing the primary disease?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 11, 2019, 10:35:22 am
In my personal experience, there are usually a few guys on every team that the others look up to because of their personalities and/or talent.  It creates a de facto pecking order that I believe makes everyone more comfortable.  It helps each player better understand their role and place on the team.

Of course, my personal experience is limited to teams of teenagers, and I don't know if this applies to adults in professional sports.  My guess is that it does.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on October 11, 2019, 02:03:54 pm
I think there's something to the leadership argument.  Since 2016, the team has seemed to slip deeper and deeper into complacency.  Sloppy defense, poor baserunning, unsound fundamentals--the kind of stuff Ross was there to yell at players about.  How many times have we heard the "we knew after making a mistake on the field that Ross would be waiting for us in the dugout" kind of story.  The guys viewed as leaders (Rizzo) aren't doing that sort of leadership.

Part of Maddon's thing was that he wasn't going to be that guy.  He said pretty clearly that he wanted that stuff addressed by the players, and so Ross and Maddon worked together well in 2016.  Then Ross left and no one filled the void.  My sense is that the team has been looking for that kind of player-accountability-manager since Ross left. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on October 11, 2019, 02:12:46 pm
This is probably a dumb question, but I'm uncertain what "leadership" is supposed to impact or resolve on the team.  A hitter is supposed to hit the ball; a fielder is supposed to concentrate and field the ball; a pitcher is supposed to pitch.  What are we wanting leadership to improve in those areas, and how does that play between player versus manager/coaches? 

Is player-leadership going to add velocity and life to Lester's, Q's, Hendricks's, Hamels', Strop's, and Kimbrel's fastballs?  Would better leadership have given Edwards command and composure?  Would leadership have given Mike Montgomery's stuff more spin, and reduced his HR's-allowed?  Theo has prioritized assembling a really old, worn pitching staff with guys on the variably-steep decline-side of their careers.  Would better player-leadership have any impact there?  And the Professor, super tough and over-achiever Lester, and crafty veteran Hamels, their leadership is lacking? 

Would better player-leadership have helped Bote to make fewer errors, and have prevented his upper-body buildup from having cost a little bit of defensive flexibility?  If we had not only Heyward and Descalso but also had a Ross and Fowler providing better leadership, would that cause Almora to hit better, Baez to improve his plate discipline, Contreras to pitch-frame better, and Happ and Schwarber to have better command of the upper half of the strike zone?  Would better leadership make our assembly of baserunners not quite so pokey?   

I guess I'm kinda puzzled as to how much leadership is capable of impacting performance.  I get that there can be some indirects.  Maybe a better culture has guys more attentive and focused defensively, so that a Rizzo never forgets how many outs there are.  Maybe a better culture has guys talking and thinking baseball more, watching more film, getting to bed sooner, and reducing affairs and alcoholism, and somehow they play better as a result?

I guess I just don't really understand how much direct or indirect impact player leadership will have on baseball performance, in a game where each pitch is made by an individual pitcher; each at-bat is individual; and each defensive play is individually executed.

I don't necessarily disagree.  To me baseball is an individual game within a team concept.  I'm merely passing along what I have heard.  Then again many have given credit to Heyward's rain delay speech as the driving force behind our win (I'm not one of those people).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 11, 2019, 02:22:18 pm
Thanks, delmar, that makes sense.  P2 mentioned "de facto pecking order that ... makes everyone more comfortable."  But in a sense you're talking about making people **less** comfortable, about making mistakes.  That makes sense to me. 

Maybe more "comfortable" in a different way, too?  Somebody is doing something dumb or thoughtless, and I know it... but I'm uncomfortable about whether I should say something about it, who am I to say anything, or how to say it, or when to say it, or how to put it into words...  Perhaps when Ross was there, everybody else could just relax and sit back because they knew Ross would say what needed to be said, and would always somehow would know how to say it right? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on October 11, 2019, 02:37:45 pm
Ross apparently wasn't afraid to get in guys' faces when they needed/deserved it without being an **** about it.  It's not an easy skill, and I don't think guys like Rizzo, Bryant, and Heyward have the inclination *or* the skill.

And it's been lacking.  The overall sloppiness has gotten worse, while Joe continued to try to keep the guys loose.  Maybe if they'd been able to replace Ross in the clubhouse, Joe would still be there.

I'm not sure I buy into it, but it's an argument.  And it wouldn't surprise me if it's the one driving Ross's candidacy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on October 11, 2019, 04:56:32 pm
I think there's something to the leadership argument.  Since 2016, the team has seemed to slip deeper and deeper into complacency.  Sloppy defense, poor baserunning, unsound fundamentals--the kind of stuff Ross was there to yell at players about.  How many times have we heard the "we knew after making a mistake on the field that Ross would be waiting for us in the dugout" kind of story.  The guys viewed as leaders (Rizzo) aren't doing that sort of leadership.

Part of Maddon's thing was that he wasn't going to be that guy.  He said pretty clearly that he wanted that stuff addressed by the players, and so Ross and Maddon worked together well in 2016.  Then Ross left and no one filled the void.  My sense is that the team has been looking for that kind of player-accountability-manager since Ross left.

Its the manager's job to lead the team... he's the manager. The manager has to set the tone. Maddon is great at dealing with kids that just got to the majors, and keeping them loose and playing to their talents. Distracting them from the grind and making things fun for them.

He did this with the Rays and the Cubs, and took both teams to the WS. His crappy BP management definitely cost him the WS win with they rays. Francona's idiotic move of sending the same RP back out after a 40 minute rain delay, bailed him out of another WS loss where he managed the BP terribly.

Maddon lost the job in Tampa, because even though he had an absolute crapload of talent after his WS appearance, he couldn't get back there with the same core. Rays won the 08 pennant, in 09 he had a roster that included Longo, Zobrist, Crawford, carlos pena (893 OPS version) Price, Shields, Garza, Wade Davis. The offense featured 4 players that posted a OPS over 130. 

There should be leadership from the players, but to say that Lester/Hamels are lacking in leadership would be contrary to their past reputations. At some point Maddon loses his players with his antics. IMO no amount of player leadership short of Brady/Jordan is going to overcome his passive style.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on October 11, 2019, 05:13:46 pm
He didn’t lose the job in Tampa. He had an out and he took it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on October 11, 2019, 06:10:35 pm
He didn’t lose the job in Tampa. He had an out and he took it.

Not entirely true, he was not going to be kept around... he took the out much like he didn't get fired from Chicago, his contract was over.

The Rays were going in a different direction, and he was not going to be kept if he didn't opt out. it was a convenient way to end the relationship. If Maddon had signed a 6 year deal with the cubs, do you think he would have been fired this year? or would the cubs have kept him for another year?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 11, 2019, 06:35:57 pm
The Rays owners reportedly wouldn’t trade with Cubs over Maddon using his opt out.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 11, 2019, 08:29:23 pm
Not entirely true, he was not going to be kept around... he took the out much like he didn't get fired from Chicago, his contract was over.

The Rays were going in a different direction, and he was not going to be kept if he didn't opt out. it was a convenient way to end the relationship. If Maddon had signed a 6 year deal with the cubs, do you think he would have been fired this year? or would the cubs have kept him for another year?

Just not true.

Rays offered Maddon an extension and Rays team president tried to retain him.

“I’m surprised by it and disappointed,” Silverman said, adding later, “I can only tell you what I know and what Joe and I spoke about, which was his desire to be a long-term Ray. I shared that desire and worked hard to make it a reality, and it didn’t happen.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on October 11, 2019, 09:53:46 pm
Just not true.

Rays offered Maddon an extension and Rays team president tried to retain him.

“I’m surprised by it and disappointed,” Silverman said, adding later, “I can only tell you what I know and what Joe and I spoke about, which was his desire to be a long-term Ray. I shared that desire and worked hard to make it a reality, and it didn’t happen.”

Y'all live in some sort of fantasy world where stu's fake public relation's are deemed as being genuine...

Stu has been doing his best to leave this community for the last 12 years.  These comments are literally fake news. Silverman works under a oppressive fiscal mandate. He's **** amazing at it. If you think he's willing to pay a mediocre manager 5 million a year... you are insane. Writing was on the wall for maddon, so he opted out. Much like the writing was on the wall for a 6th season for him to be the cubs manager.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on October 11, 2019, 09:59:11 pm
At the end of the day, the Rays are literally the most frugal and best run Franchise... and they did NOT retain Maddon. They "tried".... that is all. If you do not understand the dynamics of the Rays losing Price/Crawford et al.... And them not making a public relations effort at keeping him... i dont know what to say to you...

They are masters at it making their decisions seem like someone else's fault.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on October 11, 2019, 10:01:58 pm
Ron you should not have delete that comment.

"Just Wow". Indeed Just WOW.

The Rays are the best run franchise in baseball, and they go out of their way to cut costs and make fake public relations offers to players and others... if you think otherwise.. Stu wants you to help approve 900 Million in taxes for a new stadium in Tampa... That has been his goal for a solid 15 years.

Ron, bet you a cold beer, he will make it seem like Tampa failed him, much like he made it seem like he did his best to keep Maddon. The narrative will be that Tampa did not approve of paying for a stadium... when he is asking for Hillsborough county to pay for 900M of a 1.1B stadium. When the BOCC and the Mayor offered to pay 50% with a back stop.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 11, 2019, 10:03:14 pm
Y'all live in some sort of fantasy world where stu's fake public relation's are deemed as being genuine...

Stu has been doing his best to leave this community for the last 12 years.  These comments are literally fake news. Silverman works under a oppressive fiscal mandate. He's **** amazing at it. If you think he's willing to pay a mediocre manager 5 million a year... you are insane. Writing was on the wall for maddon, so he opted out. Much like the writing was on the wall for a 6th season for him to be the cubs manager.


Just wow. "Mediocre." 

That certainly enhances the credibility of your claim.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on October 11, 2019, 10:08:47 pm
Just wow. "Mediocre." 

That certainly enhances the credibility of your claim.

He is a mediocre tactician, he is a mediocre bullpen manager, HE IS AN AMAZING manager of young players. Read my posts again. He is on point with keeping youth unwound. He has NEVER shown an ability to take a veteran team to any heights. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 11, 2019, 10:57:27 pm
Y'all live in some sort of fantasy world where stu's fake public relation's are deemed as being genuine...

Stu has been doing his best to leave this community for the last 12 years.  These comments are literally fake news. Silverman works under a oppressive fiscal mandate. He's **** amazing at it. If you think he's willing to pay a mediocre manager 5 million a year... you are insane. Writing was on the wall for maddon, so he opted out. Much like the writing was on the wall for a 6th season for him to be the cubs manager.


First, Maddon was not seeking $5 from the Rays.

Second, Rays filed tampering charges upon Maddon’s departure. Obviously, that’s inconsistent with notion happy to see him leave.

Three, there are always unsubstantiated rumors/claims from some fandom elements about dire management intentions that circulate with just about every sports franchise. You are doing just that—and five years retroactively

Four, Maddon is not mediocre. He is a future Hall of Famer.

Five, when you claim “fake news” about well respected sourced reports, your credibility is diminished.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 11, 2019, 11:17:31 pm
The Rays have a .473 winning percentage. Back out Maddon’s record and they have .443 winning percentage and 2 winning records.

Maddon is literally the best manager for two teams in the modern era.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 12, 2019, 01:42:51 pm
I think all this about Maddon being mediocre and a future Hall of Famer are both over the top.  The Expos-Nationals have never been World Champion, so if the Nationals do it this year, is Dave Martinez going to the HOF too?  Maddon is a fine manager in the modern era, but not being able to succeed with a veteran lineup has some validity.  Be interesting if he gets the Angel job.  I think he would win another WS if he got the Padres job.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 12, 2019, 02:18:35 pm
Maddon's resume is getting kind of close to HOF worthy if he's not there yet.  40th all-time in wins, and only 17 managers in the Top 40 aren't in the Hall, including guys like Bochy, Leyland, and Francona who will likely get there.  Piniella could get in too.

A World Series title with Mike Trout probably would clinch it for Maddon. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 12, 2019, 02:36:31 pm
If Maddon manages another 3-5 years, he’s going to be in the 1500-1650 wins range. Just about essential to win a WS—which he has. Plus, a WS appearance with the Rays is remarkable. Has a pretty high probability for HOF, I think.

Piniella is expected to get in next year. Showalter has a ton of wins but no WS appearance. Dusty has not won a WS. Scioscia has ton of wins and won a WS but, for whatever reason, not widely considered outstanding. Maybe he gets in eventually too.

Maddon likely will have the wins, a WS, and has a sterling reputation around baseball. So, think chances are good.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 12, 2019, 02:50:05 pm
Cubs are naming Justin Stone director of hitting. He was a bio kinetic hitting consultant for the Cubs last year. This is according to Jessie Rogers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 13, 2019, 06:35:55 pm
Marly Rivera
ESPN Writer

Carlos Beltrán said he was approached by the Padres and Cubs to interview for their managerial vacancies, but that he declined because he's  focused on his job with the Yankees as special advisor to GM Brian Cashman.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 13, 2019, 06:52:59 pm
...Carlos Beltrán said he was approached by the Padres and Cubs to interview for their managerial vacancies, but that he declined because he's  focused on his job with the Yankees as special advisor to GM Brian Cashman.

rumors like this, in addition to interviewees like Ross and Venable, suggest that managerial experience may not be a high priority.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 13, 2019, 07:37:25 pm
rumors like this, in addition to interviewees like Ross and Venable, suggest that managerial experience may not be a high priority.

Phillies seem to be the only team prioritizing managerial experience with Dusty, Girardi and Showalter on the interview docket.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 13, 2019, 08:23:59 pm
I'm OK with that. 
1.  Don't think experience with organizational/administrative aspects is crucial.  Journeyman like Ross have seen bunches of different spring trainings; you can get notes on spring-training scheduling; and you can hire a veteran bench coach who's gone through a lot of the administrative stuff. 

2. I'm guessing front office is fine providing the analytics, sending them down, and let the manager apply and implement. 

3.  I suspect players are more likely to believe a younger manager can relate and is approachable, even if a more experienced guy might actually be just as good and open of a communicator.  But perception is a thing. 

4.  I expect a young, unproven, first-time manager is hugely energized and self-motivated to succeed, to win, and to prove himself. 

5.  Communication, people, and relational skills won't improve much with experience, and may be possessed by a rookie manager.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 13, 2019, 08:36:32 pm
The Cubs will choose the wrong manager.  Making bad decisions is what they do.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 13, 2019, 10:45:08 pm
2. I'm guessing front office is fine providing the analytics, sending them down, and let the manager apply and implement.

I think this is going to play a huge part of it. The manager has to understand it and then he and the coaching staff have to be able to take it and present it to the players in a way that it will be useful to them. The approach to Hendricks and Lester are likely to be vastly different. Hottvoy is supposed to be really amazing at this. I almost think having some front office experience is more important than the actual coaching experience. I also think it is hard to interview for because the coaches going in are going to know this is important.

Game decisions, setting up spring training, those can all be helped with having some veteran coaches. The team culture is also going to tricky. I think it exists and is important, but it is also hard to define. Some times it really seems that the team is doing well the culture is great. When the team isn’t going well the culture is bad. I think the coaching staff can help some here, but a lot of it is going to come from the players.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 13, 2019, 11:13:17 pm
The Cubs will choose the wrong manager.  Making bad decisions is what they do.

Falls short of exasperated hyperbole.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 13, 2019, 11:49:47 pm
I am afraid that they'll hire Ross just because he's loved by Cub fans for some reason.

In that respect they'd just as well hire Sandberg.

My preference would be Girardi.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 14, 2019, 10:40:43 am
The Cubs are interviewing Joe Espada today according to Mark Feinsand.

To me, he’s the most interesting name on the Cubs list. He seems to be a good balance between a no experience guy like Ross and a very established guy like Girardi.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 14, 2019, 10:41:53 am
And now all the beat writers are tweeting that Gabe Kapler will get an interview this week too.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 14, 2019, 10:44:21 am
When did he leave Welcome Back Kotter?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 14, 2019, 11:13:03 am
Espada on paper sounds really interesting.  Kapler is supposed to be a really bright guy as well.  The Phillies sure sound like a cluster from the front office on down so that might have been an issue is his failure their as well.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 14, 2019, 12:04:58 pm
These all seem like quality people, but I'm not sure I see the right fit yet. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 14, 2019, 12:56:57 pm
Gabe Kapler?  Holy crap, that’d easily be the worst decision we could make.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 14, 2019, 01:18:09 pm
These all seem like quality people, but I'm not sure I see the right fit yet. 

Curious what you are looking for.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 14, 2019, 01:19:49 pm
Someone more like me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 14, 2019, 01:49:40 pm
Someone more like me.

Morris Buttermaker?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 14, 2019, 02:48:43 pm
Someone more like me.

https://imgflip.com/i/2qbu5a

How I imagine Curt and DaveP.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 14, 2019, 03:16:20 pm
Gabe Kapler?  Holy crap, that’d easily be the worst decision we could make.

What was wrong with Kapler, actually?  Other than that he didn't have enough excellent players? 

I have no idea.  Bad with people?  Bad strategist?  Bad with bullpen?  vets only, no kids?  I have no idea....  I admit I wouldn't mind having somebody who was really smart.  (I don't know if he is, but just hypothetically.)  To some degree, Maddon has been; but I'm not sure either of Sveum or Renteria was particularly intellectual.  Ross might be smart in a practical way, but he's not exactly unusually smart either, I don't think.  (Base on his book, at least.) 

Whatever, glad it's not my hire! 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 14, 2019, 03:19:32 pm
https://theathletic.com/1289918/2019/10/14/winners-trap-how-did-a-cubs-dynasty-start-to-fall-apart-before-it-truly-began/?source=dailyemail

Lengthy article, both Mooney and Sharma
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 14, 2019, 03:42:42 pm
What was wrong with Kapler, actually?  Other than that he didn't have enough excellent players? 

I have no idea.  Bad with people?  Bad strategist?  Bad with bullpen?  vets only, no kids?  I have no idea....  I admit I wouldn't mind having somebody who was really smart.  (I don't know if he is, but just hypothetically.)  To some degree, Maddon has been; but I'm not sure either of Sveum or Renteria was particularly intellectual.  Ross might be smart in a practical way, but he's not exactly unusually smart either, I don't think.  (Base on his book, at least.) 

Whatever, glad it's not my hire! 

He's pretty well known for some of his strategic blunders, and he's apparently not that great in the clubhouse either.  He just seems like he'd be an all-around bad choice.

Put it this way, the Phillies think Dusty Baker may be an upgrade on him. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 14, 2019, 04:14:29 pm
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/10/sam-fuld-manager-rumors-cubs-mets-pirates.html
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 14, 2019, 05:12:08 pm
The Phillies F.O. was desperate to keep Kapler and the owner fired him over their objections.  He's not my first choice but I think he's a pretty good manager on the whole.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 14, 2019, 05:13:35 pm
Isn't one of their FO guys McPhail?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 14, 2019, 05:19:04 pm
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/10/sam-fuld-manager-rumors-cubs-mets-pirates.html

Fuld is yet another guy the Cubs were interested in, with ZERO managerial experience, and ZERO coaching experience.  Continues to reinforce the idea that whatever value the Cubs may place on managerial or coaching experience, it is not on the "required" versus "preferred" list of qualities. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 14, 2019, 05:22:57 pm
Isn't one of their FO guys McPhail?

Yep in Theo’s role.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on October 14, 2019, 05:24:16 pm
I wonder why Fuld declined.  I think it makes me more interested in him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 14, 2019, 05:37:34 pm
Fuld is yet another guy the Cubs were interested in, with ZERO managerial experience, and ZERO coaching experience.  Continues to reinforce the idea that whatever value the Cubs may place on managerial or coaching experience, it is not on the "required" versus "preferred" list of qualities. 
  Theo's just trying to drive us nuts.  He knows who we're going to get.   Soon they'll ask to interview Dusty, Schild, and Casey Stengel just to keep us guessing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 14, 2019, 05:39:43 pm
I saw Sam Fuld play quite a bit for the Smokies.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Eastcoastfan on October 14, 2019, 07:40:19 pm
Sam Fuld's dad was dean of the college of liberal arts at UNH.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 14, 2019, 10:27:44 pm
Gabe Kapler?  Holy crap, that’d easily be the worst decision we could make.

They are also the interviews to glean info on how other teams operate and Kepler was in charge of player development for the Dodgers. It isn’t a coincidence that the Cubs are interviewing outside guys with connections to the Yanks, Astros and Dodgers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 14, 2019, 11:29:48 pm
They are also the interviews to glean info on how other teams operate and Kepler was in charge of player development for the Dodgers. It isn’t a coincidence that the Cubs are interviewing outside guys with connections to the Yanks, Astros and Dodgers.

Pretty good point there.  And it doesn't hurt to cast a wide net.

Still, he's definitely the least appealing of all the names that have been out there so far.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on October 15, 2019, 04:09:06 pm
Someone more like me.

Don't be silly.  Both Laurel and Hardy are dead.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 15, 2019, 05:51:24 pm
So are Larry, Curley, and Moe, but they continue to post here under new usernames.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 15, 2019, 10:08:32 pm
Offseason predictions...

David Kaplan
1. Cubs are going to take a page out of the Yankees' book and retool on the fly rather than go all-in to contend in 2020.
2. Jose Quintana has thrown his last pitch as a Cub.
3. This will be the second-to-last offseason for Theo Epstein as the Cubs president of baseball operations.

Kelly Crull
1. Cubs re-sign Nick Castellanos and trade away Kyle Schwarber.
2. Tyler Chatwood will be in the 2020 rotation.
3. John Lackey will be named quality assurance coach on David Ross's coaching staff. (Kidding, but only kind of...)

Tony Andracki
1. Before the Cubs play a Spring Training game, Javy Baez will sign an extension that will keep him in Chicago through at least 2023.
2. Willson Contreras will be traded this winter and the Cubs will get some much-needed pitching help in return.
3. Cubs sign Howie Kendrick this winter as the professional bat and lefty-masher they craved in 2019.
4. Ben Zobrist will return on a one-year deal and finish his playing career in a Cubs uniform.
5. David Bote, Albert Almora Jr. and Addison Russell will all be traded or non-tendered this winter as the Cubs remake their bench/depth.

Jeff Nelson
1. Willson Contreras will sign a contract extension.
2. Ben Zobrist will return as a player/coach.
3. Jose Quintana will be traded for minor league depth.
4. Terrance Gore will be signed to be the 26th man on the roster under the new rules.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 15, 2019, 11:16:33 pm
Setting aside contract considerations, purely as a player who would you rather have - Bryant or Rendon?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 15, 2019, 11:17:28 pm
Bryant.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on October 16, 2019, 02:47:54 am
Rendon's the better hitter and defender. If his 34 homers this year is part of a trajectory then he projects as the more powerful hitter too taking doubles into consideration. He's also hit nearly 100 points higher w/ RISP the last three seasons (I know, random outcomes, yada, yada).

Think the question is what teams would be in on Bryant and what would they be willing to give up. Small market teams would only have him two seasons so not sure they'd be in play. Would a big-market contender give up a lot for him not knowing if they could re-sign him? Just not sure of his trade market value.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 16, 2019, 01:17:57 pm
....Think the question is what teams would be in on Bryant and what would they be willing to give up. Small market teams would only have him two seasons so not sure they'd be in play. Would a big-market contender give up a lot for him not knowing if they could re-sign him? Just not sure of his trade market value.

Yeah, I wonder the same thing and feel the same uncertainty.  Just not sure how much talent teams are going to push for a 2-year rental.  Don't think you're going to get close to equal talent value, unless you're basically trading him for other comparable guy, as in short-control and non-trivial contract. 


This is why I so strongly suspect that once Nowacrat Theo actually sees what the offers are, he'll elect to stick with Nowacrat Bryant over some not-nearly-as-good-for-2020 and not-really-that-great long-term-Buildican either.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on October 16, 2019, 01:31:25 pm
Setting aside contract considerations, purely as a player who would you rather have - Bryant or Rendon?

Rendon, he's the better hitter and they both now have had significant injury issues.

Padres' might have interest in him, their Farm is also stocked with high ceiling players. He would slot into their OF and likely be a + LF. 
Padres' showed last year they are going all in, they pushed tatis/paddack and signed Manny. Getting a semi cost controlled star like Bryant, who has significant play-off experience, would be an excellent short term move to take the next step.  ? is would the cubs be willing to accept a package of guys that are a bit further away.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dev on October 16, 2019, 01:57:34 pm
Zobrist will sign with the Angels.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 16, 2019, 02:17:46 pm
? is would the cubs be willing to accept a package of guys that are a bit further away.

Arizona Phil's trade of Bryant for Lamet, Urias and Patino doesn't do it for me.  Even if you bring in Rendon to replace Bryant the pitching staff is good enough and you won't have the money to fix it.  Would anybody really feel confident in Darvish, Hendricks, Lamet, Lester, Quintana?  Urias seems like a lesser version of Hoerner and Patino, while he has a great raw stuff, has a bit of Dylan Cease walk problem.  Even if you replaced Gore with Patino I'm not sure it is worth it for the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 16, 2019, 03:14:06 pm
Lamet is good.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 16, 2019, 03:34:38 pm
One of the telling comments that Theo made was how he would focus more in trade discussions on what was coming back than on what was being given up.

I can't find the quote right now.

I think we may see some deals which are, on paper, overpays, but get one or more targeted players in return.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on October 16, 2019, 05:11:09 pm
Arizona Phil's trade of Bryant for Lamet, Urias and Patino doesn't do it for me.  Even if you bring in Rendon to replace Bryant the pitching staff is good enough and you won't have the money to fix it.  Would anybody really feel confident in Darvish, Hendricks, Lamet, Lester, Quintana?  Urias seems like a lesser version of Hoerner and Patino, while he has a great raw stuff, has a bit of Dylan Cease walk problem.  Even if you replaced Gore with Patino I'm not sure it is worth it for the Cubs.

I think it would take a 3rd team. Prospects to KC for Merrifield, Bryant to padres, Merrifield and some combo of  Lament or Munoz to the cubs.

Would likely also cost the Cubs a Marquez or Amaya.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 16, 2019, 05:30:14 pm
Gordo says it’s down to Ross and Espada for the Cubs FWIW, with Ross as the favorite. Sign me up for Espada if thats the case.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 16, 2019, 07:17:45 pm
Gordo says it’s down to Ross and Espada for the Cubs FWIW, with Ross as the favorite. Sign me up for Espada if thats the case.

Wittenmyer may have the least access to the front office of any of the local guys, so it would be surprising if had more knowledge of the status of the search than anybody else.

But who knows?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 16, 2019, 08:37:28 pm
Mooney kinda implied those 2 guys were in the lead as well.  Espada is really interesting, but the FO will now exactly what they are getting in Ross. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 16, 2019, 09:22:00 pm
Mooney kinda implied those 2 guys were in the lead as well.  Espada is really interesting, but the FO will now exactly what they are getting in Ross. 

Interesting. I did not read it that way. They were the first two players discussed, but other than that, how did you conclude that Mooney implied they were "in the lead?"
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 16, 2019, 10:47:43 pm
They had the longest and most positive write ups.
Lorretta and Venable were briefly mentioned.
Kapler has more written about digging for info on the Dodgers and a job besides manager if he isn’t hired by another team.
What seemed remotely positive about Girardi’s chances in that piece?  He basically said he’s old and won’t mesh with Theo or the team.
Ross was mentioned as being groomed for for the job and Espada was called as a rising star and his negative was spun as a positive.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 16, 2019, 11:20:07 pm
Girardi has resigned his position with MLB-tv and expects a managing job somewhere.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 17, 2019, 12:24:57 am
I'd bet on the Mets but I wouldn't totally write us off there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 17, 2019, 08:29:56 am
Mets or Phillies for Girardi.

Girardi just doesn’t fit with the other candidates that the Cubs are interviewing or wanted too. It is like in football recruiting, if a kid lists SEC schools and Notre Dame he isn’t going to Notre Dame. My hunch is that Girardi was interviewed  to dig for info on how the Yankees do things and to keep Kaplan from blasting the Cubs for not interviewing him.

My opinion is that it will be Ross, unless Espada knocked their socks off in the interview.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 17, 2019, 10:53:29 am
Cubs reorganized player development


Craig Breslow was named Director of Pitching from Director of Strategic Initiatives.

Justin Stone was named Director of Hitting

Jaron Madison was moved from Director of Player Development to a Special Assistant role and that will be more of a scouting role.

Jeremy Farrell was moved from minor league coordinator to Assistant Director of Player Development

Matt Dorey moves from Director of Amateur scouting to Senior Director of Player Development

Bobby Basham was name Director of Player Development.  He was Director of Special Projects/Assistant Director of Player Development

Cubs are looking for a Biomechanics analyst as well to loop into the Hitting/Pitching development and they still need somebody for Director of Amateur Scouting to run the draft/IFA.

Eno Sarris
@enosarris
Justin Stone has worked with Mike Tauchman among others, Craig Breslow is a great director of pitching imo. Here’s the news.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 17, 2019, 10:57:44 am
Peter Principle
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 17, 2019, 11:26:02 am
Peter Principle

People are calling it just a reshuffling of deck chairs, but I'm not so sure.

Stone/Breslow/Basham seem to me more analytic/tech orientated with Dorey filling the more traditional scouting perspective in PD.  To me it seems that the Cubs are moving out guys that may not have embraced all the tech advances, but that they still value their scouting ability in McLoud and Madison.  It seems like the Cubs made huge strides in their pitching development and hopefully Stone can spur the same in hitting.  The ASD hire is likely coming from outside and I think that will be even more telling.  Is it going to be a scout or somebody that blends everything.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 17, 2019, 12:16:25 pm
Reading tea leaves is an interesting and challenging process.  I admit that I am no good at it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 17, 2019, 12:56:21 pm
Thanks for info on organizational changes, Blue.  That's a lot of repositioning; seems like they've been repositioning a lot of guys almost every year.  Not sure what to make of that.  I can't remember, but it seems like they've got a new scouting director almost every year.  One year McLeod, one year Dorey, one year Madison.  Very little continuity, it seems.  No idea why.  Guys excelling and getting promoted?  Guys failing and getting replaced?  Who knows.  Also unclear how many of the shuffles are meant for the welfare of the Cubs, versus personnel development in the front office?  A guy aspiring to become a GM may want to experience all kinds of different front-office roles, so maybe you bop guys around to diversify their experience? 

Blue, I'd like to think that smart guys ought to be able to learn new things.  *IF* Theo and Hoyer are hypothetically smart, and have hypothetically been able to attract smart guys, shouldn't those  smart guys be able to appreciate the value of tech advances, and train themselves up to optimally utilize every tool available?  If they aren't smart enough to do that, maybe Theo and his people just aren't smart enough to keep up? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 17, 2019, 01:13:23 pm
Another "not keeping up?" question....  The Cubs and Cubs-reporters seem really fired up about their pitch lab and it's value.  So, "if" the pitch lab is so valuable, why do they only have that in Arizona, where a limited fraction of pitchers have access?  Might it not be appropriate to have one in Chicago, where big-league Cubs could more easily visit it, and Hottovy?  Where Midwest-League Cub pitchers could more easily visit?  Maybe Southern-League and Midwest-League guys, too? 

I don't know how it works.  But it seems like for all the benefits they talk about, those have tended to apply to offseason stuff; to new pickups (Wieck comes over, spends a week in the pitch lab, and then starts to apply); to D-caliber prospects (Effross, etc..), etc..  Might it not be helpful to have one in Chicago?  If Edwards is in a slump, give him a one-week break to fool around in the pitch lab?  If Q's curve isn't working, what if you sent him over to pitch lab to try to figure out why?  Might The Professor like to do a between-starts throwing session in there, to do some experimenting? 

I guess I'm just thinking that having an on-site pitch lab where big-league players could do some maintenance checkups, or could get some quantification on some things they're playing with or wondering about, might that not be helpful?  I'm just thinking that whatever value it has, being able to visit a couple of times in February is one thing; but I assume finesse mechanical factors probably tend to drift over the ensuing 7 months.  So being able to pop in more conveniently to a Chicago-based lab and do some maintenance measurements might be helpful? 

Not sure how hard and competitively you need to throw for it to be useful?  Maybe Hendricks doing a between-starts throwing session doesn't help, because he's not throwing as seriously as in a real game?  And Lester can pump it up to 89-91 with game-day adrenaline; but the data in a pitch lab when he's at 83-84 might not be that valuable?  Beats me. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 17, 2019, 01:19:50 pm
Dorey was been the director of Amateur Scouting since 2014 and Madison has been the Director of Player Development since 2014.  The amount of freedom Dorey had under McLeod is an open question.

The player development heads have always seemed to have scouting background and that seems to be changing with this reshuffling and it isn't clear how the Director of Player Development is going to interact with Stone and Breslow. 

Appreciating and understanding and implementing are two different things.  I can still kick some butt in a general and organic chemistry class, but if you through me into a physical chemistry class it would be a struggle bus.  2 years ago this stuff was like general chemistry and now it is physical chemistry and moving fast into advanced physics.  It just requires a different skill set than what it used too.  I think the Cubs have made a huge gain in the pitching area and are just starting in the hitting arena, but they are playing catch up.  They have to catch and surpass the Astros, Yankees and Dodgers. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 17, 2019, 01:46:38 pm
Blue, I'd like to think that smart guys ought to be able to learn new things.  *IF* Theo and Hoyer are hypothetically smart, and have hypothetically been able to attract smart guys, shouldn't those  smart guys be able to appreciate the value of tech advances, and train themselves up to optimally utilize every tool available?  If they aren't smart enough to do that, maybe Theo and his people just aren't smart enough to keep up? 

This is certainly a new perspective. I don't recall anyone previously suggesting that Theo and those he has brought into the organization are not "smart enough."   As an aside, I just saw a tweet about one of these guys.

Paul Sullivan
@PWSullivan
Cubs' Director of Pitching, former pitcher Craig Breslow, has a 2000 degree from Yale in molecular biophysics and biochemistry.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 17, 2019, 02:41:59 pm
David Kaplan
@thekapman
Houston source tells me Astros coach Joe Espada had a sensational interview w/Cubs front office. “He gave Theo + Jed a lot to think about. They really liked him + came away exceptionally impressed. Was it enough to overcome David Ross’s relationship w/Theo and Jed? We’ll see.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 17, 2019, 02:46:17 pm
Another "not keeping up?" question....  The Cubs and Cubs-reporters seem really fired up about their pitch lab and it's value.  So, "if" the pitch lab is so valuable, why do they only have that in Arizona, where a limited fraction of pitchers have access?  Might it not be appropriate to have one in Chicago, where big-league Cubs could more easily visit it, and Hottovy?  Where Midwest-League Cub pitchers could more easily visit?  Maybe Southern-League and Midwest-League guys, too? 

I'm not 100% certain what is in the pitch lab, but the equipment is likely to be at the major league level.  I think the value of having it in Arizona having a place where guys can go and apply in low leverage situations.  I bet the slom-mo camera's, trackman etc are all available at each minor league team and traveling with the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 17, 2019, 03:29:24 pm
I'm not 100% certain what is in the pitch lab, but the equipment is likely to be at the major league level.  I think the value of having it in Arizona having a place where guys can go and apply in low leverage situations.  I bet the slom-mo camera's, trackman etc are all available at each minor league team and traveling with the Cubs.

Assuming the pitch lab integrates actual pitching, which I believe it does, being able to pitch outside year round is presumably an advantage. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 17, 2019, 05:27:06 pm
I'm not 100% certain what is in the pitch lab, but the equipment is likely to be at the major league level.  I think the value of having it in Arizona having a place where guys can go and apply in low leverage situations.  I bet the slom-mo camera's, trackman etc are all available at each minor league team and traveling with the Cubs.

Thanks, yeah, maybe that's all there is to it.  You're probably right.  I wonder, though?  It seems like the Athletic has included several articles within the last 10 months talking up pitch lab; the spin was that it was something "state of the art" and perhaps something whose insights guys like Wick and Wieck didn't have access to previously.  Maybe it's "state of the art" is no more cutting-edge than what's at every other minor-league stadium.  But I admit I kind of secretly hope that it offers some info that perhaps isn't already being used or being available to 25 other teams in the majors?  If that makes sense? 

Perhaps it's just the immediacy of feedback.  If I'm tinkering with grip in Eugene, and I don't get to see the data until a half hour later when I can look at my laptop, maybe that's not quite as responsive as throwing in pitch lab, and immediately seeing spin rate and movement data instantly?  Beats me. 

 if the pitch lab doesn't actually have anything more than what's available at every park in the system, and has been for years, why do the Athletic reporters have so many articles kind of
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 17, 2019, 05:53:07 pm
craig - I believe The Athletic has had some pretty detailed articles on the pitch lab, and while the Cubs are not about to reveal any proprietary information, those articles seemed to me to show that the lab is highly advanced technically. Here is the link to one article by Sharma:
https://theathletic.com/1220440/2019/09/18/weird-science-the-cubs-pitch-lab-is-turning-fringe-relievers-into-high-leverage-spin-rate-monsters/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 17, 2019, 07:08:58 pm
Thanks, Ron.  Yeah, there was that one, and at least one or two in spring training, suggesting it being highly advanced technically.  That implied the authors at least thought there was advancements perhaps beyond what's in every minor league stadium?  I guess I'm hoping it's got special stuff that is helpful and is beyond what's widely accessible!  (Which is why I think *if* it's got helpful, hard-to-access advantageous stuff, then it might be nice to enable our big-leaguers to access it and perhaps get advantaged....)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on October 17, 2019, 07:35:05 pm
I don't subscribe to the Athletic, so I have not read the articles, but I have seen rather general references by Kaplan and a couple of others.  I was under the impression that a pitcher had to be on premises in Arizona to benefit from the pitching lab.  Is this not accurate?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 17, 2019, 08:44:36 pm
Thanks, Ron.  Yeah, there was that one, and at least one or two in spring training, suggesting it being highly advanced technically.  That implied the authors at least thought there was advancements perhaps beyond what's in every minor league stadium?  I guess I'm hoping it's got special stuff that is helpful and is beyond what's widely accessible!  (Which is why I think *if* it's got helpful, hard-to-access advantageous stuff, then it might be nice to enable our big-leaguers to access it and perhaps get advantaged....)

Edgetronic camera’s and Raspedo’s can be moved pretty much anywhere. The Cubs had them out in spring training with pitchers throwing. KinaTrax seems a little more complicated of a setup, but it wouldn’t shock me if teams are setting it up in minor league stadiums. Pro clubs were paying to put Trackman systems in JUCO colleges just so they could get the scouting data and not share it with other teams.

The Pitching Lab is the instructors taking the data and working with the pitchers to implement it. Guys like Wick you could tinker with his curve grip in Arizona or Chicago. Lowering an arm slot or making somebody a side arm pitcher is going to a bigger project.  I sure hope that the Cubs have all these toys in their minor league stadiums.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 17, 2019, 09:34:47 pm
Most likely, the "pitching lab" is a scam perpetrated by Epstein and his cronies.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 17, 2019, 10:02:41 pm
Most likely, the "pitching lab" is a scam perpetrated by Epstein and his cronies.

Jeff Exasperated Hyperbole Meter Rating:

7.5
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 17, 2019, 11:32:06 pm
David Kaplan
@thekapman
Houston source tells me Astros coach Joe Espada had a sensational interview w/Cubs front office. “He gave Theo + Jed a lot to think about. They really liked him + came away exceptionally impressed. Was it enough to overcome David Ross’s relationship w/Theo and Jed? We’ll see.”

Yeah if he came across great, I think he's my choice over Ross.  Better experience, and there's part of me that's worried about the "buddy" factor with Ross.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 18, 2019, 10:12:30 am
From Sharma and Mooney on the status of the selection process for manager:

"David Ross and Joe Espada are highly thought of candidates, but it hasn’t yet reached a level where they’re the two finalists. Other names remain in play, and there’s a possibility one more candidate is interviewed."

https://theathletic.com/1303687/2019/10/18/in-the-next-phase-of-reckoning-theo-epstein-makes-big-changes-to-the-cubs-front-office/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 18, 2019, 10:26:35 am
The Sharma/Mooney article cite above provides an analysis of the staff changes the Cubs just announced, with particular emphasis on Justin Stone and Craig Breslow, the new directors of hitting and pitching, respectively. 


https://theathletic.com/1303687/2019/10/18/in-the-next-phase-of-reckoning-theo-epstein-makes-big-changes-to-the-cubs-front-office/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 18, 2019, 10:35:03 am
They also mentioned they could name a manager before the World Series. 

That piece was really interesting, especially for the player development stuff.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 18, 2019, 12:40:55 pm
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/10/18/lets-be-very-clear-the-cubs-have-completely-overhauled-their-player-development-system/

Here's a summary piece for those of you that don't have access.  The Mooney/Sharma article made it sound like like the guys in charge of player development are the one that were more open to the new technology and ways of doing things and the guys moved out were an impediment to getting something like the pitching lab more integrated.  The more I hear about the hitting coordinator the more impressed I am.


Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 18, 2019, 03:27:12 pm
A consideration I haven't noted so far.  To attract quality free agents, you need a manager players want to play for.  Would one of those guys appeal to Cole?  Other FAs?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 18, 2019, 06:31:09 pm
A consideration I haven't noted so far.  To attract quality free agents, you need a manager players want to play for.  Would one of those guys appeal to Cole?  Other FAs?

I would imagine Espada has more appeal to guys outside the organization than Ross.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dihard on October 19, 2019, 01:41:31 am
Yeah if he came across great, I think he's my choice over Ross.  Better experience, and there's part of me that's worried about the "buddy" factor with Ross.
I’m absolutely with you on this. I loved David Ross the Cubs catcher and team leader. And found/find him to be a great, humble, fun guy based on his interviews and broadcasting work since he retired. I worry (from his commentary) about how strategic and astute he is (though admittedly that’s not all that much to go on) and about the “buddy factor” w Rizzo, KB, Lester, and others.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 19, 2019, 06:17:19 am
It strikes me that hiring Ross would be a sort of last attempt to grasp onto the glory of 2016, whereas hiring Espada would be more of a forward thinking move.  2016 is something none of us will ever forget, but you can't go home again.  Given all the things that Theo publicly admits are broken about this team, hiring Ross seems in many ways like an illogical and unwise decision.

And I love the guy...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 19, 2019, 09:34:46 am
Not to be a contrarian, but I don't have the same concerns with Ross and anti-Ross-as-manager feelings that most of you posters seem to have. 

I don't care and am not concerned with his 2015-16 history.  I don't think that's relevant, for or against him.  I think he should be evaluated strictly on his projected managerial qualities. 
*I think some of those project very, very favorably; so I think he's got a chance to be possibly be a terrific manager. 
*There are other managerial aspects about Ross that I question, and may hypothetically prevent him from being a terrific guy. 
*But basically I think the Cubs should be evaluating him based on managerial aptitudes; WS history should not color the evaluation/projection.

2016 will be 4 years in the mirror when the next manager starts.  That's a long time in baseball,  and 2016 stuff will becomes increasingly distant in years 2 and 3.  There are only a handful of guys from 2016, and some suggest the Cubs will be further thinning that group.  So I'm not that concerned with buddy-buddy stuff, myself.  And for old guys like Lester and Heyward, will any manager impact who they are at this point? 

My questions/uncertainties with Ross: 
1.  Is he actually smart enough, and would he be a good decision-maker?  He's got a lot of other qualities, but I wonder if he's as smart as the smartest managers? 
2.  Will his people-skills be outstanding across the board?  Occasionally comfortable-confident extroverts don't appropriately understand or appreciate guys with different personas?
3.  Will he be a good evaluator? 
4.  Will he manager the bullpen well? 
5.  How will he balance veteran savvy/professionalism versus younger guys who may be more talented but may also perhaps be more mistake-prone? 
6.  How patient might he be with guys who don't necessarily come across as having great game-face?  (Maddon seemed to underutilize Chatwood this year, for example.) 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 19, 2019, 09:42:01 am
I pretty much agree with craig on this.  And I am confident that this is essentially the approach that Theo et al will use in evaluating Ross. Seems to me that Theo was pretty clear in his first discussion of Ross as a candidate that he considers the connection to 2016 and his friendship with some of the Cubs, in and of themselves, to be more negative than positive considerations.  He then went on to say that independent of those, Ross has impressive qualities and that would be the focus of evaluating him.

Espada certainly has a more impressive resume, but the hiring won't be based on a resume, it will be based on the front office's evaluation of which person is the best match for this team at this time.  Let's hope they get it right, whatever choice they make.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 19, 2019, 10:01:11 am
I think if the FO felt Ross wasn’t smart enough he wouldn’t be working in the FO or a candidate to be the manager. I have less concerns about that.

It does seem from articles that Ross and Espada kinda cover the concerns about the other one. To me it would be kinda an ideal world where Espada becomes the manager, Ross the bench coach and swap out Butterfield for Loretta.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on October 19, 2019, 10:14:21 am
To me it would be kinda an ideal world where Espada becomes the manager, Ross the bench coach and swap out Butterfield for Loretta.

Not sure I'd want Espada looking over his shoulder with fan and front office favorite Ross there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 19, 2019, 11:23:57 am
Solid point and Ross has shown no interest in being a bench coach either.

Mooney just posted a piece on Ross, Epstein’s interest in Ross as a coach goes back to 2008.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 19, 2019, 12:06:02 pm
The Mooney article on Ross provides some nice perspective on him as a managerial candidate, including the references to his peers and their trajectories.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 19, 2019, 09:25:22 pm
Over/under on 2020 Cubs victories:  77
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 19, 2019, 09:45:56 pm
How would you know without knowing the roster?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 19, 2019, 09:48:10 pm
You can tell by the leadership.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 19, 2019, 10:14:24 pm
The same leadership that broke a 108 year curse?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 20, 2019, 10:45:09 am
Espada is heading back to Chicago for a second interview. I don’t know if he has interviewed with any of the other teams that wanted to talk to him yet, but the managerial search should be done soon.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 20, 2019, 12:42:28 pm
Have we done any second interviews with anyone else yet?  Then again, we probably need to get Espada’s done right away with the World Seroes coming up, so that’s probably not the greatest sign that he’s the favorite.  Certainly a favorite so far though.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 20, 2019, 01:04:08 pm
Of the guys they interviewed would anyone outside of Girardi need a second interview? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 20, 2019, 04:47:03 pm
Quote
George Ofman

Verified account
 
@georgeofman
 5h5 hours ago
More
If the cubs decide to go with Espada,look for Ross to possibly join Maddon with the Angels.

That does seem likely.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 20, 2019, 07:48:59 pm
It may be an oversimplification, but to an extent this seems like a classic heart vs. head situation.  If you say no to Ross not only are you saying no, you're likely burning all bridges with a beloved organizational figure.  By hiring Espada you lose Ross from the organization, and I can certainly understand that emotion comes into play there.

That said, the truth is that if Ross had taken the bench coach job when Theo offered it, he'd probably already have been hired as the manager.  He made a choice - a perfectly legitimate one, but he needs to live with the consequences of that choice.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 20, 2019, 07:51:46 pm
Girardi is getting a second interview with the Mets and Phillies. No mention of the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on October 21, 2019, 11:36:47 am
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EHaeowXW4AAhFm7.jpg:small)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 21, 2019, 11:48:37 am
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EHaeowXW4AAhFm7.jpg:small)

Can you provide a link for this article?  Thanks
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: BearHit on October 21, 2019, 12:23:32 pm
Similar to where I work - working with idiots is also mind-blowing
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on October 21, 2019, 12:34:43 pm
Can you provide a link for this article?  Thanks

Tweeted by Bleacher Nation
https://www.mlb.com/news/joe-espada-preparing-to-be-manager
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 21, 2019, 01:47:06 pm
Tweeted by Bleacher Nation
https://www.mlb.com/news/joe-espada-preparing-to-be-manager


It is easy to understand why the Cubs are so interested in Espada.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 21, 2019, 02:08:38 pm
Yeah, those were good answers.  The Cubs have been pretty serious about not going overboard with stats, and including the human side.   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 21, 2019, 05:33:27 pm
The more I hear from - and about - Espada, the more I want the Cubs to hire him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 21, 2019, 06:17:30 pm
I would lean toward Espada as well.  Ross would probably be fine, but I really like what I have read about Espada.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 21, 2019, 06:23:25 pm
According to at least one report, Espada actually had his second interview on Sunday (I'm not sure if that's accurate though).  He apparently is scheduled to interview with at least two other teams (Detroit and San Francisco?). I would think that if they prefer Espada that they will make the offer before he interviews elsewhere (presumably before the World Series is over). It will be interesting to see if he actually has those other interviews.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 21, 2019, 10:48:44 pm
The Giants and Pirates have expressed interest in Espada, but from what I can google search he hasn’t interviewed at either place yet and won’t be able to until after the World Series now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 22, 2019, 09:59:53 am
Playing around with a google spreadsheet and dreams.

Rotation- Cole, Darvish, Hendricks, Lester, Graveman
Bullpen- Kimbrel, Leclerc, Strop, Ryan, Wick, Wieck/Hulzten, Mills/Alzolay, Maples/Norwood/Mekkes/etc..
C- Contreras, Caratini
INF- Rizzo, Hoerner, Baez, Bryant, Bote, Kemp
OF- Schwarber, Happ, Heyward, Chisenhall, Hamilton/Gore

FA
Cole- $32 million AAV, if he isn't interested you pivot hard to Wheeler.
Chisenhall- $4 million
Strop- $4 million
Hamilton- $1 million

Trades
Quintana for Leclerc.  It would be ideal if you add Chatwood and clear as much of his money as possible, if not he goes in a seperate trade.

Salary- $199,410,000
CBT- $209,609,196

I'm not sure which year option getting declined goes to, but I think the Cubs are only on the hook for $4 million.  I'd keep Almora in AAA so add another $1 million.  That and the $15 million in player benefits would put the Cubs at $229 million + whatever they retained on Chatwood, so there is still money for the trade deadline.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 22, 2019, 10:49:54 am
Bruce Levine
@MLBBruceLevine

Source confirms MLB will allow announcements like new manager hirings on off/ workout days during WS .Thursday or potentially next Monday are open dates.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 22, 2019, 11:02:43 am
We mentioned Shogo Akiyama as a potential Cubs acquisition here before. Bleacher Nation has another article on him today that says the Cubs were one of four teams to scout him this season (Mariners, Padres, and Diamondbacks were the others).

It has been reported that he has a 5 year, $23 million offer to stay in NPB.  Bleacher Nation concludes that giving him similar money over 4 years could potentially get him to come to MLB. That seems like a reasonable take (assuming he really is interested in MLB and isn't just dipping his toe in the water to gain leverage or to see if someone will blow him away).

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/10/22/cubs-were-reportedly-already-scouting-japanese-center-fielder-shogo-akiyama-this-season/

I've also seen it speculated that the Cubs could be one of the teams in on Jackie Bradley Jr. if the Red Sox decide to trade him. I have mixed feelings...he's a great defensive CF, which is something the Cubs could use. But I think his flaws as a hitter are basically the same as the flaws the Cubs already have up and down the lineup.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dev on October 22, 2019, 11:59:05 am
JBJr = Heyward
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 22, 2019, 03:55:29 pm
Yeah, not very interested in Bradley.  A guy who lives off HR to barely clear .700 OPS, while K-ing over 30% of his AB, and with a declining bad batting average (.245, .234, and .225 last three), that's not what I want. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 22, 2019, 04:10:19 pm
With all of the emphasis of the Cubs needing more contact guys, it would be pretty weird for the Cubs to bring in anyone significant who does not fit that profile.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 22, 2019, 04:32:15 pm
Yes on Akiyama, no on Bradley.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 22, 2019, 04:40:36 pm
SkullCountTommy💀🎃
@FullCountTommy
Jesse Rogers on the radio just now, “Do not be surprised if David Ross is announced as early as Thursday”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 22, 2019, 05:19:31 pm
Well that's what we all expected anyway.

I guess I prefer him over Espada.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 22, 2019, 05:30:27 pm
SkullCountTommy💀🎃
@FullCountTommy
Jesse Rogers on the radio just now, “Do not be surprised if David Ross is announced as early as Thursday”

On the other hand, don't be surprised if he is not.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 22, 2019, 05:57:48 pm
Having had most of a month to do due diligence, and to do 2nd or 3rd interviews with their best candidates, it wouldn't shock me if they weren't about ready to decide.  **IF** that decision is Ross, I'm not sure what they'd need to keep waiting to for.  **IF** it's Espada or some other outside guy, they'd more likely have reason to wait.   

But if Ross is NOT announced on Thursday, I wonder if that might not suggest they're looking elsewhere? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 22, 2019, 06:03:59 pm
Espada and Ross were the only two guys who had a second interview. Ross’s interview was more informal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 22, 2019, 06:04:35 pm
I would not be at all surprised if the Cubs make their announcement on Thursday. It seems likely that they will choose either Ross or Espada, and in either event there is ample reason to make the choice as soon as they are comfortable doing so.  In the case of Espada, I would think they would not want to wait until other teams have a chance to interview him.  But who knows what the internal deliberations are like?

Perhaps Reb can provide a verbatim scenario of that discussion?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 22, 2019, 07:34:49 pm
Not as formally announced as Espada, but David Ross is said to have also had a second interview with the #Cubs. Given his position with the team, I'm told they expanded conversations earlier this week. #MLB--Crull
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 22, 2019, 07:43:03 pm
Would the Cubs be allowed to officially announce Espada before the World Series ends? Since he’s participating, I wonder if it would be off limits.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 22, 2019, 07:56:13 pm
I think it's an off day.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 22, 2019, 08:07:47 pm
Yeah, I would assume Espada should not be on Thursday.  Doing that in the middle of his World Series doesn't seem appropriate.  Plus in Espada's second interview this weekend, personally I'd sure hope it was all about managing and baseball, rather than Human Resources stuff and contractual discussion. 

Of course, not announcing, or not having detailed contractual stuff would not preclude having already reached a mutual agreement that Cubs want to hire him and he wants to take it. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 22, 2019, 08:13:30 pm
Didn’t the Red Sox announce Cora while the Astros were still playing?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 23, 2019, 08:43:48 am
David Kaplan @thekapman
Highly placed source has confirmed to me David Ross is expected to be named Cubs manager this week. His agent has been discussing contractual terms with Theo Epstein. Deal is almost done. More on @ESPN1000 at 9 am. On @NBCSChicago + http://NBCsportschicago.com throughout the day.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 23, 2019, 08:45:41 am
I hope this isn't a terrible mistake.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 23, 2019, 08:46:17 am
Ross is so underrated on this board. He isn’t the character Grampa Rossy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 23, 2019, 08:53:13 am
Agree, Blue, he's got a lot of qualities that might make him an outstanding manager.  I think he's an excellent candidate and I look forward to seeing how it goes. 

But not sure that's going to help Heyward or Almora to hit well, or Lester or Kimbrel to pitch well, or Bote and Scharber and Happ to field well, or any of that stuff. 

And who knows how any new guy will handle the bullpen! 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 23, 2019, 08:55:23 am
I imagine Ross will be as good as a lot of these recent former players who became managers quickly after retiring.  Can't possibly see how he'd be a worse guy than Matheny, who had success pretty quickly, for example.

Hope he turns out to be the right call!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 23, 2019, 08:55:46 am
Didn't they tell us that it was Ross who was a key player in the Kimbrel pickup?  That Ross scouted him and said he looked in great shape, as good as ever, ready to rock and roll?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 23, 2019, 09:26:29 am
My worry with Ross (above and beyond his ability to be a manager to his pals and the fact that this seems like a desperation ploy to recapture a lost moment in time) is whether he’s actually all that knowledgeable a baseball guy.  One doesn’t get much of a sense that he is from his TV work (not that it would be a definitive indication).  The hipster view is to disparage the actual game management part of being a manager, but it still matters a whole lot.

Ross seems to have the soft skills part, but what about the analytical and strategic part?  Is he all intuitive/feel or is he hiding that side of himself so far?  Obviously the guy was a catcher for over a decade and he knows baseball in the broad sense, but it would be nice to have a manager who really understands the strategic side of the game and has an appreciation for advanced statistics (without a slavish dependence on them).  Maybe Ross does - I hope so.  I just don’t see much indication of it so far.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 23, 2019, 09:29:57 am
David Kaplan @thekapman
Here's another Cubs scoop. Cubs/MLB will be dealing with Kris Bryant's grievance this week from 2015 over service time + Cubs decision to delay his MLB debut until he fell 1 day short of being a free agent after the 2020 season. Could have MLB altering implications if he wins.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 23, 2019, 09:52:07 am
I admit that I have found myself hoping for Joe Espada to get the job. He seems to have been a really impressive candidate. I am actually a little surprised that he did not get the job.

I seem to trust Theo more than some others here, both in general and specifically in terms of his statements that Ross' role in 2016 and his relationship with players would, if anything, be a negative consideration because of the need to move on from the past.  I have to believe that Ross was convincing enough in his interviews (and his work with the Cubs over the last few years) that Theo became convinced that he was an even better match for this group than Espada.

None of us know whether or how much interaction Ross may have had over the last couple of years with the analytics guys, including the pitch lab.  It assume that Theo has reason to believe that he will work well with those guys and in implementing their work. I don't believe Ross would have gotten the job if Theo had not been convinced of his ability to merge the R&D and analytics work into the game planning and implementation.

In terms of his game management and specifically use of the bullpen, I recall that he expressed surprise at Joe's decisions during game 7 in 2016, but brushed off his disagreement by saying that the end result was what mattered. I remember finding that interesting at the time. Anybody else remember this?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 23, 2019, 10:10:28 am
But not sure that's going to help Heyward or Almora to hit well, or Lester or Kimbrel to pitch well, or Bote and Scharber and Happ to field well, or any of that stuff. 

And who knows how any new guy will handle the bullpen! 

The first sentence isn't the managers job.  That will be the revamped hitching and pitching as well as Butterfield's replacement.

He'll have an iPad full of data on who to pitch against which hitter.  Hopefully he'll use it and the bullpen guy won't hang a slider like Ottovino.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 23, 2019, 10:16:41 am
I admit that I have found myself hoping for Joe Espada to get the job. He seems to have been a really impressive candidate. I am actually a little surprised that he did not get the job.

I seem to trust Theo more than some others here, both in general and specifically in terms of his statements that Ross' role in 2016 and his relationship with players would, if anything, be a negative consideration because of the need to move on from the past.  I have to believe that Ross was convincing enough in his interviews (and his work with the Cubs over the last few years) that Theo became convinced that he was an even better match for this group than Espada.

None of us know whether or how much interaction Ross may have had over the last couple of years with the analytics guys, including the pitch lab.  It assume that Theo has reason to believe that he will work well with those guys and in implementing their work. I don't believe Ross would have gotten the job if Theo had not been convinced of his ability to merge the R&D and analytics work into the game planning and implementation.

In terms of his game management and specifically use of the bullpen, I recall that he expressed surprise at Joe's decisions during game 7 in 2016, but brushed off his disagreement by saying that the end result was what mattered. I remember finding that interesting at the time. Anybody else remember this?

I like both Espada and Ross and think they'll both would have been fine.

While as fans we don't know how Ross interacts with the analytics guys and stats, Theo and Jed do.  Since this off season focus is getting the Cubs caught up, I really doubt Theo is going to hire somebody that can't handle that part of the job.  Are we really at the point where we think Theo is dumb?

There are only 10 guys left on the Cubs from 2016 and that number could be smaller with trades.  This isn't the same team that Ross retired from.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 23, 2019, 10:45:32 am
David Kaplan @thekapman
Here's another Cubs scoop. Cubs/MLB will be dealing with Kris Bryant's grievance this week from 2015 over service time + Cubs decision to delay his MLB debut until he fell 1 day short of being a free agent after the 2020 season. Could have MLB altering implications if he wins.


He still needed to work on his base running, gosh darn it!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 23, 2019, 11:07:00 am
Sources confirm: David Ross is new #Cubs manager. First reported: @thekapman and @ESPNChiCubs.--Rosenthal
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 23, 2019, 12:35:55 pm
I already feel bad about firing him.  Tough to do to a hero.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 23, 2019, 12:44:54 pm
He wasnt much of a hero really.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 23, 2019, 12:45:02 pm
I already feel bad about firing him.  Tough to do to a hero.

Yeah but we'll get over it.  I mean Maddon was relatively easy for Theo to kick to the curb after this past season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 23, 2019, 12:54:05 pm
Yeah but we'll get over it.  I mean Maddon was relatively easy for Theo to kick to the curb after this past season.

Even easier for some of the folks here.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 23, 2019, 01:04:06 pm
HAS ROSS BEEN FIRED YET?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 23, 2019, 01:46:45 pm
David Kaplan @thekapman
Here's another Cubs scoop. Cubs/MLB will be dealing with Kris Bryant's grievance this week from 2015 over service time + Cubs decision to delay his MLB debut until he fell 1 day short of being a free agent after the 2020 season. Could have MLB altering implications if he wins.

Lots of big time Cub offseason implications too if Bryant wins.  He'll be a free agent after 2020, so we may be taking an even longer look at dealing him this offseason.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 23, 2019, 01:54:54 pm
Sometimes you over think things and some times the answer is obvious.

The choice for manager was obvious this time.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 23, 2019, 02:39:18 pm
Now that Ross is going to be the manager, one of the more interesting things to watch this offseason will be what they decide to do with Contreras.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 23, 2019, 02:42:06 pm
I agree,  too bad they didn't interview him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 23, 2019, 04:35:02 pm
Would love to see Farrell for bench coach.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 23, 2019, 05:32:31 pm
I’d like to find the next Espada.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on October 23, 2019, 05:32:38 pm
But not sure that's going to help Heyward or Almora to hit well, or Lester or Kimbrel to pitch well, or Bote and Scharber and Happ to field well, or any of that stuff. 

And who knows how any new guy will handle the bullpen! 

Wouldn't you be able to say this about anyone that became manager?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 23, 2019, 07:11:18 pm
Wouldn't you be able to say this about anyone that became manager?
Yup, for sure.  Neither Maddon, Ross, nor Espada or whomever, can create good players. Theo and his guys need to procure some better players, that's the big need. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 23, 2019, 07:26:38 pm
I am a little concerned that there's a slight resemblance between David Ross and the historically awful Matt Nagy.  I really hope that the Cubs have not hired the worst manager in franchise history.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 23, 2019, 07:51:44 pm
I am a little concerned that there's a slight resemblance between David Ross and the historically awful Matt Nagy.  I really hope that the Cubs have not hired the worst manager in franchise history.

Jim Essian, Mike Quade, Bruce Kim, the College of Coaches and many 1950's to 1970's era Cubs managers might take issue with the exasperated hyperbole expressed here.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 23, 2019, 07:59:53 pm
As long as he's not the Cubs equivalent of Nagy, we've passed the first hurdle.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 23, 2019, 08:12:13 pm
I am a little concerned that there's a slight resemblance between David Ross and the historically awful Matt Nagy.  I really hope that the Cubs have not hired the worst manager in franchise history.

Jeff Exasperated Hyperbole Meter Rating:

2.5
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 24, 2019, 10:14:06 am
Ross is now official.

https://www.mlb.com/cubs/news/david-ross-next-cubs-manager?partnerId=sf111165412&sf111165412=1&fbclid=IwAR1MjlbSWGbHk6C0LNj_oqZU6DxYWVLtVjqkZlZD-0YLP5GxyTKuOLNL61s
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 24, 2019, 12:29:33 pm
So we can rag on him now?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 24, 2019, 01:11:57 pm
Sharma:

“They [Cubs] won’t be in the Gerrit Cole sweepstakes”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dihard on October 24, 2019, 01:54:16 pm
My worry with Ross (above and beyond his ability to be a manager to his pals and the fact that this seems like a desperation ploy to recapture a lost moment in time) is whether he’s actually all that knowledgeable a baseball guy.  One doesn’t get much of a sense that he is from his TV work (not that it would be a definitive indication).  The hipster view is to disparage the actual game management part of being a manager, but it still matters a whole lot.

Ross seems to have the soft skills part, but what about the analytical and strategic part?  Is he all intuitive/feel or is he hiding that side of himself so far?  Obviously the guy was a catcher for over a decade and he knows baseball in the broad sense, but it would be nice to have a manager who really understands the strategic side of the game and has an appreciation for advanced statistics (without a slavish dependence on them).  Maybe Ross does - I hope so.  I just don’t see much indication of it so far.
This is exactly how I feel. Hope we’re wrong!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 24, 2019, 02:03:50 pm
I'm reasonably confident the Ross has the necessary strategic and analytic skills for the job.  I just hope that his established friendships with the core players don't get in the way.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 24, 2019, 04:25:23 pm
I'm reasonably confident the Ross has the necessary strategic and analytic skills for the job.  I just hope that his established friendships with the core players don't get in the way.

Why? Where does this confidence come from? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 24, 2019, 04:29:17 pm
....it would be nice to have a manager who really understands the strategic side of the game and has an appreciation for advanced statistics (without a slavish dependence on them).  Maybe Ross does - I hope so.  I just don’t see much indication of it so far.

Where does the skepticism about Ross come from?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 24, 2019, 04:43:17 pm
Where does the skepticism about Ross come from?
He was chosen by the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 24, 2019, 05:22:33 pm
From the little I have read about things he has said in the past, Ross seems to have a decent grasp of the nuts and bolts of in-game managing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 24, 2019, 05:51:28 pm
Oh good, cuz he's gonna have plenty of nuts and dolts.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 24, 2019, 05:58:45 pm
Sharma:

“They [Cubs] won’t be in the Gerrit Cole sweepstakes”

If the Cubs roll out a top four of Darvish, Hendricks, Quintana and Lester they might as well just tear it down.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 24, 2019, 06:10:45 pm
I'm thinking that there are probably other ways to improve the starting four than besides signing Cole.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 24, 2019, 06:16:12 pm
Like trading for Jason Vargas?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 24, 2019, 07:36:53 pm
From the little I have read about things he has said in the past, Ross seems to have a decent grasp of the nuts and bolts of in-game managing.

I hope so - I just don’t really see any evidence either way.  Absence of evidence is not proof of absence of course, but I think the jury is still very much out.

But hey - we know he can do the speech to the team, no problem.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 24, 2019, 07:38:57 pm
I'm thinking that there are probably other ways to improve the starting four than besides signing Cole.

Certainly possible  I don’t think the Cubs are going to be able to trade for an ace though. If Cole is out, Stausberg is likely out of the Cubs price range. Then you dealing with free agents like Zach Wheeler or trade possibilities. I really don’t want to trade any of the Cubs top minor leaguers for a non-ace. Trading from the core offense is just going to open up holes that will be filled with lesser players at a higher price.   So Cole is the easiest and best upgrade. Trading Happ for a pitcher is just rearranging deck chairs on the titanic.  Maybe there best hope is to get Lester and Quintana on a weighted ball program to get their fastballs back.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 24, 2019, 07:43:01 pm
How high a ceiling he has is debatable, but they need to work Alzolay into the major league picture next season.  He's going to turn 25 before the season starts.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 24, 2019, 08:41:01 pm
With all of his injuries he’s probably best served as a multi-inning reliever next year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on October 24, 2019, 09:15:54 pm
That would be fine.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 24, 2019, 11:46:07 pm
If the Cubs roll out a top four of Darvish, Hendricks, Quintana and Lester they might as well just tear it down.

Chatwood will be the #1.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 25, 2019, 09:17:23 am
Jon Heyman @JonHeyman
MLB arbitrator Mark Irvings heard the Kris Bryant grievance over last few days in NY; he’s expected to take months to rule. The union claim is the Cubs unfairly manipulated Bryant’s service time when they called him up after 12 days in minors in 2015. Boras, Theo both testified.


How could it possibly take months to rule on this grievance? This really makes it harder for the Cubs this offseason. If they were thinking of trading him, it's going to be difficult to get full value back if the other team knows they could lose half his service time.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 25, 2019, 09:36:28 am
It hard for me to see how the decision goes against the Cubs.  What they did was within the letter of the rules, and the injury to Olt gives them cover.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 25, 2019, 09:38:31 am
P2, a true Cub fan, actually remembers Olt.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 25, 2019, 10:17:38 am
https://theathletic.com/1321397/2019/10/25/will-david-ross-manage-by-his-book-reading-the-tea-leaves-in-teammate/?source=dailyemail

Interesting article zipping back through Ross's book for insights. 

A couple that I found interesting: 
"“Joe doesn’t have a whole lot of rules,” Ross wrote. “I think that’s the one thing Joe has nailed and I think you will see other teams following suit. … He didn’t believe we needed to take batting practice every day. I believe batting practice is one of the most overrated things in baseball.”

"Ross has played for a handful of successful managers and he writes in the book that Atlanta manager Bobby Cox had similar philosophies as Maddon. Cox didn’t even have a set time for players to stretch. He expected his players knew how to take care of their bodies.  “Atlanta was the first team I played for where the front office didn’t tell its players how to act,” he wrote."

"Ross writes approvingly of Maddon’s veteran-focused philosophy, which left the clubhouse to the players and allowed them to “enjoy their jobs and strive for success.”

“Joe often used the word authentic when he described me and the 2016 Cubs,” Ross wrote. “He also knew that I didn’t bullshit people. I was straight up with everyone. I was blunt, and at times, a sledgehammer. Joe told me that quality would benefit me if I were to become a manager. But he also always tried to impart on me that ‘honesty without compassion can equal cruelty at times.’ He believed that if I became a manager I would need to lighten the message a bit on occasion.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 25, 2019, 10:32:31 am
Interesting that Ross seems very supportive of relaxed, no set times, practice-is-overrated perspective.  Yet in post-season interview, Theo seemed pretty unhappy with all the relaxed, everybody-come-at-your-own-time landscape, AND seemed concerned with guys not having improved.  Not sure I see a superficially obvious sync there.  I imagine the need to strike a good balance probably applies for every manager, though.  Probably the same for striking a balance between being too blunt and critical, and saying too much so that guys tend to tune you out, versus perhaps providing too little input and saying too little. 

Hopefully Ross will strike those balances really well. 

Winning sure helps on all of that stuff, though.  All kinds of things are fine when you're winning, that don't look so OK when you're losing.   

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 25, 2019, 10:45:35 am
Baseball is different from football and basketball, because baseball is such an individual sport.  The pitcher pitches alone; the hitter is all by himself at bat; pretty much the individual fielder catches or misses the ball, and throws straight or throws wild.  Very little of the scheming that O or D-coordinators can do in football, or the team-work involved in basketball both O and D. 

But, based on my recent fandoms, I'm optimistic that Ross will make a real difference!  I'm a Wisconsin boy originally, so NFL and NBA Packers and Bucks fan. 
*Last year, Bucks replaced the horrific Jason Kidd with the smart Mike Budenholzer, and EVERYTHING changed and got dramatically night-and-day better, without changing the core players.  (Lots of the support guys changed...)  Totally different vibe/energy, and total change in W-L.   
*This year, Packers replaced Mike McCarthy with young Matt LaFleur, and things have gotten dramatically night-and-day better, completely different vibe and energy around the team. 
*So I'm hoping I'm in a coaching-change groove, so that Ross will pick up the pattern and the Cubs will have a much better vibe and energy, and a much better W-L too!  :)

With the Bucks and Packers changes, change in coach was also accompanied by some changes in personnel.  Not necessarily of the biggest core names, though (Giannis, Middleton, Bledsoe didn't change for Bucks; Rodgers and Adams for Packers, although Matthews finally gone.....).  Hopefully HOyer and Theo will likewise make some effective changes in personnel that will pay off for the Cubs? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on October 25, 2019, 11:05:06 am
Ross kinda sounds like Maddon 2.0 which isn't necessarily a bad thing but you'd figure the front office was looking for change.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 25, 2019, 11:51:58 am
https://theathletic.com/1321397/2019/10/25/will-david-ross-manage-by-his-book-reading-the-tea-leaves-in-teammate/?source=dailyemail

Interesting article zipping back through Ross's book for insights. 

A couple that I found interesting: 
"“Joe doesn’t have a whole lot of rules,” Ross wrote. “I think that’s the one thing Joe has nailed and I think you will see other teams following suit. … He didn’t believe we needed to take batting practice every day. I believe batting practice is one of the most overrated things in baseball.”

"Ross has played for a handful of successful managers and he writes in the book that Atlanta manager Bobby Cox had similar philosophies as Maddon. Cox didn’t even have a set time for players to stretch. He expected his players knew how to take care of their bodies.  “Atlanta was the first team I played for where the front office didn’t tell its players how to act,” he wrote."

"Ross writes approvingly of Maddon’s veteran-focused philosophy, which left the clubhouse to the players and allowed them to “enjoy their jobs and strive for success.”

“Joe often used the word authentic when he described me and the 2016 Cubs,” Ross wrote. “He also knew that I didn’t bullshit people. I was straight up with everyone. I was blunt, and at times, a sledgehammer. Joe told me that quality would benefit me if I were to become a manager. But he also always tried to impart on me that ‘honesty without compassion can equal cruelty at times.’ He believed that if I became a manager I would need to lighten the message a bit on occasion.”

Maybe there is a middle ground between no rules and BP and fielding practice every single day.  The Cubs just need to improve on what Joe, not reverse everything.  Maybe Ross just brings Joe with some tough love and a little more team activities.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 25, 2019, 12:19:33 pm
Maybe there is a middle ground ....  The Cubs just need to improve on what Joe, not reverse everything.  Maybe Ross just brings Joe with some tough love and a little more team activities.

Yup.  Of course I'm not Theo, who always seems to think his talent is great and it's about leadership untapping it.....  I suspect Joe-with a little more tough love and extra team-building activities, could do just fine...  Particularly with a more talented rotation, a more talented bullpen, and more talented hitters! 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 25, 2019, 12:48:02 pm
Yup.  Of course I'm not Theo, who always seems to think his talent is great and it's about leadership untapping it.....  I suspect Joe-with a little more tough love and extra team-building activities, could do just fine...  Particularly with a more talented rotation, a more talented bullpen, and more talented hitters! 

Perhaps you missed the times Theo has owned up to believing too much in some of the young guys who were part of the 2016 championship?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 25, 2019, 12:49:10 pm
Clear evidence of real change for the Cubs.  Fire Maddon and hire his clone.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 25, 2019, 12:57:55 pm
Clear evidence of real change for the Cubs.  Fire Maddon and hire his clone.

So now you are channeling Jeff?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on October 25, 2019, 01:19:56 pm
From a very distanced perspective, it seems to me that Ross is much more no-bullshit than Joe. "Sledgehammer" is probably never a word that would be used to describe Maddon, and the fault in Joe's temperament is likely being too nice.

From public comments (both from Ross and his contemporaries), it seems like that's not a problem for Ross, and that, for however much he buys into the idea that players are adults and don't need to be micro-managed, he was also very much an enforcer in the 2016 clubhouse.

That sounds pretty spot on for the kind of cultural change we need. In fact, trying to force wholesale cultural change through an organization can be *very* destructive. Upholding the low-pressure, respect-oriented culture while installing a leader whose natural instinct is to nip (sometimes forcefully) at the heels of guys who aren't keeping up their end of that arrangement sounds great to me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 25, 2019, 09:15:39 pm
Interesting.

Jordan Bastian
@MLBastian
After season, Theo cited individualized work/routines as an area that can be improved. Said it will be important to find time to work and assemble as a team.

Going through quotes from last game, Javy Baez had a similar sentiment when asked to compare ‘19 Cubs to past teams...

"We were still a unit as a team, but it was like everybody was respecting everybody's space more than just keeping getting better as a team and learning from each other. But it's something that we've got to make an adjustment."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 28, 2019, 11:57:21 am
The Cubs just posted the David Ross press conference on Facebook.  Just listening to some bits and pieces of it, he seems to appreciate a lot of the criticism that his hiring his brought on.  When asked about his relationships with former teammates and the "Grandpa Rossy" nickname, he talked about how that was a little bit of a misnomer at times, like a lot of the conversations he'd have on the mound with Lester.  He pretty much said if he'd gotten mic'ed up for a lot of those conversations, they were pretty far from friendly a lot of the time. 


On being a puppet for the front office, Theo recalled an anecdote where he wasn't happy about how Ross was calling pitches for a rookie pitcher that had been called up and set up a time to talk to him about it.  He came in with his data and minor league reports about what worked for that pitcher in the minors and he was expecting Ross to just go along with it.  Instead Ross pushed back on him pretty hard about why he was calling things the way for that pitcher.

Have to admit, I think Ross sounded like a guy who's ready to be a manager.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 28, 2019, 02:53:57 pm
I think another telling part was when Theo was talking about Spring Training and the analytic guys came down with a bunch of numbers and they had trouble integrating it into something useful for the players and they thought Ross would be better at making it into useful stuff for the players.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on October 29, 2019, 10:04:00 am
I think it's a mistake to view the Ross hiring as simply because he was a guy they liked from the 2016 team.

He was on the 2016 team because they liked him as a future manager.  This has been in the works for a long time.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 29, 2019, 11:38:05 am
DMF, are the fires any danger to you and yours?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 29, 2019, 01:47:42 pm
We heard over and over again that Ross will hold Cub players "accountable".  What does that mean in practice?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on October 29, 2019, 01:50:31 pm
We heard over and over again that Ross will hold Cub players "accountable".  What does that mean in practice?
Or in games.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 29, 2019, 01:56:03 pm
It means he is a registered gun owner and knows how to use it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 29, 2019, 01:59:36 pm
"I know it's my turn to buy the beer, but you didn't run out that fly ball, so no stein for you!"
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 29, 2019, 05:26:19 pm
We heard over and over again that Ross will hold Cub players "accountable".  What does that mean in practice?

It means Ross is dutifully spouting the company line.  Right now it doesn't mean much else - we'll see in time if that remains the case.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 29, 2019, 05:47:11 pm
Ross already is in Deeg Non-Fave purgatory.

Unfortunately for Ross, it's a Life Sentence.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 29, 2019, 05:55:03 pm
Fox News weighing in quickly, as always.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on October 29, 2019, 05:58:08 pm
Fox News weighing in quickly, as always.

That belongs in the Politics, Religion thread.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on October 29, 2019, 06:09:22 pm
Quote
DMF, are the fires any danger to you and yours?

Not that I know of, thanks.  I think the bad ones aren't in San Diego county, but I've been pretty busy lately, so I could be wrong.  I haven't seen or smelled smoke, though, and the Santa Ana conditions have definitely backed off.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 29, 2019, 06:52:00 pm
That belongs in the Politics, Religion thread.

Actually it belongs in the bizarro thread (if there were one), since I know you.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 29, 2019, 09:10:17 pm
We heard over and over again that Ross will hold Cub players "accountable".  What does that mean in practice?

I wonder the same thing.  What do you think, P2? 

I think it's probably lazy to just dismiss it as a meaningless leadership buzzword that Ross knows Theo wanted to hear, and that by saying it over and over and over again that it was going to help win himself the job. 

But what will that actually mean?  What difference will it make if any?   If it does make any difference, will it do more good than harm?  Beats me. 

Hard to know what kind of "accountability" players can be held to.  Like, are you going to bench Baez and Bryant and replace them with Bote and Hoerner?  If Rizzo does something lazy, are you going to bench him and go with Descalzo?  If Theo decides he's committed to Quintana and pays the $10 to bring him back, are you going to send him to the bullpen if he shakes off the catcher too often?   Just not sure what kind of professional consequences Ross can really apply. 

If it's going to make a positive impact, and I'm optimistic that it will, I'd assume it's more about professional respect?  I get the impression that Ross has been pretty OK with yelling at guys, sometimes in public, in a pretty straightforward way; or in speaking to them pretty directly.  "Accountability" might be mostly "calling to account".  Why did you do that?  What were you thinking?  You looked unprepared; why?  We've talked all spring about X, Y, and Z, and you did that?  Get your head in the game....  That's not the way we do things; get with the program....  I'm guess I'm just kind of imagining a lot more verbal accountability. Calling guys to account when they do things the wrong way or contrary to what they've been taught or coached. 

Guys tend to be pretty prideful and competitive, and internal respect and approval by the team could seem to be a pretty driving motivator, regardless of how many $$$ millions you've already made.  I'd guess that if a guy feels like a hard-driving manager is calling him to account unfairly, that can lead to a an angry clubhouse.  But if guys trust and know that what a hard-driving manager is saying is true, and is for the good of the player and the good of the team, I'd guess that wanting to please the manager and to earn the manager's trust and respect could be a great driving motivator. 

Even so, hard to guess how much impact that stuff would have on wins and losses.  Regardless of how hard-driving the manager might be, would that have improved Russell's ability to hit at all?  Will accountability do anything for  Happ, Almora, and Descalzo as hitters, or Bote as a fielder?  Can accountability in any way make Lester's stuff any better, or Quintana's fastball any faster, or Kimbrel's breaking ball any more likely to get near the strikezone?  Will accountability make our baserunners any less slow?  I'm just not sure what impact lots of accountability and leadership input will have on pitching good pitches, hitting good pitches, or playing good defense?

Will be fun to see.  I'm hopeful that it makes a lot of favorable difference.  Combined with adding some effective players; and having some existing players be much more effective. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 30, 2019, 05:32:47 am
I've been preaching it and preaching it, but I wish the Cubs would make a play for John Farrell.  He would have been a good manager candidate, but he'd be great as Ross' bench coach.  Managerial experience with success at the highest level, knows Ross, ties to the organization already.  Make it happen.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 30, 2019, 07:42:53 am
https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-managers-perspective-fredi-gonzalez-on-embracing-change/

Freddie Gonzalez is somebody to consider too.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 30, 2019, 10:46:06 am
In this article, Dempster provides his description of accountibility:

"Ross and Dempster were part of a group of free agents that former Boston general manager Ben Cherington targeted after the failed Bobby Valentine experiment in 2012. The Red Sox signed those veteran players for their on-field skills as well as their intangibles, hoping they would create a better work environment at Fenway Park and complement stars like David Ortiz, Dustin Pedroia and Jon Lester. Within one year, the Red Sox completed a worst-to-first turnaround, going from 93 losses to 97 wins.

“We had an understanding of the responsibilities,” Dempster said. “We made a conscious effort to really pull together and make sure that we were holding each other accountable. Everybody talks about that. What does that mean? ‘Hold each other accountable. Accountability.’ It’s things like running the ball out. It’s things like being on time. It’s things like paying attention to what’s given to you and then applying that. Instead of somebody gives you information: ‘This is what we’re doing.’ And then you just jump ship.

“There’s a standard that you’re held to, in bad times, but also in good times. When you’re going well, it can’t just be like, ‘Well, I’m not going to stretch today, I’m going good.’ Cool. And then eventually you’re not and you’re playing catch-up and having those moments. (David) was always really, really good about that, melding with players on an individual basis and connecting with them, but also collectively as a group. That’s hard to find.”"

https://theathletic.com/1334852/2019/10/30/ryan-dempster-knows-cubs-players-shouldnt-mistake-david-ross-kindness-for-weakness/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 30, 2019, 04:24:42 pm
Dempster's comments are helpful.  Interesting to see some specifics:
1.  Stretching
2.  Running the ball out
3.  Being on time
4.  "paying attention to what’s given to you and then applying that. Instead of somebody gives you information: ‘This is what we’re doing.’ And then you just jump ship."

Of those, I'd guess that running the ball out is the easiest to notice and police..., and the least W-L impactful.  I don't imagine we lost any games due to guys being late.  Stretching, maybe there were guys whose performance suffered for injury-reasons, and perhaps some of those might have been avoided with better stretching?  Maybe Kimbrel and Strop would be healthier and better with diligent stretching? 

I'm guessing #4 might be more of a thing, though?  The analytics and stuff have ideas about how Montgomery and Edwards could elevate their stuff, but they didn't implement?  Maybe ideas for Almora and Russell to implement, but they didn't stick with them long enough to actually have helpful adjustments click?  Beats me. 

I'm just not sure whether accountability has about as much impact as the 1st base coach or your #2 lefty reliever...  Or whether it might indirectly have a hugely favorable impact.  Beats me. 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 30, 2019, 05:15:44 pm
Craig, things like being on time and stretching may not win games, but they may win divisions because it's a measure of the players' commitment and resolve to be the best.  It's what makes the difference in being in being a professional.

JMO
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on October 30, 2019, 06:24:23 pm
Do professional athletes need to be told they need to stretch and be on time? what kinda clubhouse was HOFer Maddon running?

If i dared to show up late to work, i wouldnt hear the end of it, how do players that won the WS need to be told that?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 30, 2019, 06:27:14 pm
The baseball season is an unbelievable grind.  What's needed is an atmosphere that keeps things fresh and maintains player enthusiasm even during the dog days.  The fun derives from positive relationships in the clubhouse and team success. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on October 30, 2019, 06:49:31 pm
We heard over and over again that Ross will hold Cub players "accountable".  What does that mean in practice?

Very little.  However, the same applies to every manager in baseball.  How do you hold someone guaranteed to make 20 million per year for the next 5 years (or anything similar) accountable?  With the exception of a few fringe players, a manager has little to no ability to hold anyone "accountable".
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on October 30, 2019, 06:53:34 pm
The baseball season is an unbelievable grind.  What's needed is an atmosphere that keeps things fresh and maintains player enthusiasm even during the dog days.  The fun derives from positive relationships in the clubhouse and team success. 

That sounds like a description of the guy that the Cubs just decided not to rehire.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on October 30, 2019, 06:57:43 pm
Perhaps what's needed are fresh approaches to accomplish the same thing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 31, 2019, 01:05:27 pm
Sharma on what the Cubs expect from Ross that they believed could not be provided by Maddon.  With some new comments from Ross.


https://theathletic.com/1337190/2019/10/31/new-cubs-manager-david-ross-was-brought-in-to-bring-the-clubhouse-together-will-it-work/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on October 31, 2019, 01:31:49 pm
Jon Heyman  @JonHeyman  2h2 hours ago
Yu Darvish had a big 2nd half (0.81 WHIP, 2.76 ERA, .199 BAA) and 229 Ks fir year, but he will not opt out of his deal. Has $81M, 4 years to go. He likes Chicago and had previously suggested his plans to stay.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 31, 2019, 01:58:58 pm
Ben Zobrist, the 2 time World Series champion who missed most of 2019 while going through divorce, is talking about playing again in 2020, though it’s not definitive. Versatile player is a Maddon favorite.--Heyman

Seeing that he's going through a divorce I would strongly suggest he keep making money.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 31, 2019, 02:15:24 pm
I don't think they are getting divorced unless it just changed.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on October 31, 2019, 02:18:18 pm
Levine says Riggleman,Farrell,and Fredi Gonzalez are candidates to be Ross's bench coach.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 31, 2019, 03:05:55 pm
That’d be quite the homecoming for Riggleman to come back.

Has Riggleman been fired yet by the way?!?!?!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on October 31, 2019, 03:17:29 pm
I don't think it was SailorGirl who liked Riggleman from behind.  That was Karen, maybe?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 31, 2019, 04:23:31 pm
Most people liked seeing Riggleman from behind when he left.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on October 31, 2019, 04:34:22 pm
I don't think it was SailorGirl who liked Riggleman from behind.  That was Karen, maybe?

Yes, Karen!  :)  Wow, that's a lifetime ago, huh? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on October 31, 2019, 05:13:15 pm
Karen and her husband, Fergie...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 31, 2019, 05:58:04 pm
Farrell, Farrell, Farrell.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 31, 2019, 06:04:28 pm
Farrell, Farrell, Farrell.

Why are you so excited by Farrell?  I ask because I'm just not that familiar with him.  He does have a connection with the Cubs, through his son of course. I do know that he is an alumnus and former coach for Oklahoma State, my alma mater. But I assume your enthusiasm is based on how he performed as a manager for the Blue Jays and Red Sox.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on October 31, 2019, 06:09:24 pm
He would be a good manager when we fire Ross at the end of the season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on October 31, 2019, 07:21:00 pm
Why are you so excited by Farrell?  I ask because I'm just not that familiar with him.  He does have a connection with the Cubs, through his son of course. I do know that he is an alumnus and former coach for Oklahoma State, my alma mater. But I assume your enthusiasm is based on how he performed as a manager for the Blue Jays and Red Sox.

I believe he’s strong in the areas where Ross most needs help. Very good game manager and tough when he needs to be.  Good with the bullpen.  And knows Ross well enough to be totally comfortable disagreeing with him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on October 31, 2019, 07:42:09 pm
Also, the two other options are pretty terrible.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on October 31, 2019, 08:35:53 pm
I believe he’s strong in the areas where Ross most needs help. Very good game manager and tough when he needs to be.  Good with the bullpen.  And knows Ross well enough to be totally comfortable disagreeing with him.

Thanks.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on October 31, 2019, 11:32:56 pm
Buss and Butterfield are going to the Angels.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 31, 2019, 11:54:33 pm
Riggleman, Riggleman, Riggleman
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on October 31, 2019, 11:55:28 pm
I'm all in on Riggleman.   This board has been missing "Has Rigglemortis been fired yet?" posts for way too long, and we need to get back to that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 01, 2019, 12:17:51 am
Giving up on the season already, huh?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dev on November 01, 2019, 10:49:23 am
I'm all in on Riggleman.   This board has been missing "Has Rigglemortis been fired yet?" posts for way too long, and we need to get back to that.
He should be a bench coach in Seattle.  Free car washes.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 01, 2019, 11:30:03 am
Bruce Levine
@MLBBruceLevine
Sources indicate two members of Joe Maddon’s  Cub staff will follow him to the Angels . Brian Butterfield will coach  third base . Cubs Strength and conditioning coach Tim Buss will be in the Quality assurance role for Anaheim.The popular  Buss was with Cubs since 2001.

Cubs Prospects - Bryan Smith
I have heard the Cubs intend to modernize and become more data driven in their strength and conditioning programs, as beloved Tim Buss heads to follow Joe Maddon to Los Angeles (as
@MLBBruceLevine
 reported).

Cubs Prospects - Bryan Smith
@cubprospects
This modernization will occur system wide, as I expect the Cubs to change their processes in strength development on the minor league side, too. Think of this like what they’re doing with pitching and hitting infrastructures.


Mark Gonzales
Venerable strength/conditioning coach Tim Buss leaves Cubs for Angels, about 4 months after Mark O’Neal, Director of Medical Services, departs for U of Arkansas men’s hoops. More changes in Cubs medical/training staff, along with 3B coach Brian Butterfield to Angels.


I think the changes inside that we aren't going to get to see are going to be huge.  I was reading about Farrell when he got fired by the Red Sox.  Butterfield was involved with making the defensive shifts and Butterfield did it all with video work.  When Cora came he he turned it over to the analytics department and they game players wristbands and cards for their shifting. 

The whole wrist band thing had me thinking as well about when Ross caught he wore one.  Was Contreras wearing one this year?  I honestly don't remember.  I assume Butterfield was doing the defensive shift work with the Cubs and still using video.  That might explain the Cubs lack of shifting.  I really think that if you aren't into advanced stats and being able to get them into a useful presentation for the players the Cubs won't have any use for you.

Follow Justin Stone on Twitter if you are interested in what the Cubs are going to be doing with S&C.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on November 01, 2019, 02:31:47 pm
Quote
This board has been missing "Has Rigglemortis been fired yet?"

Curt's version is tongue-in-cheek.  We need the return of BEERFAN for the real deal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on November 01, 2019, 04:14:38 pm
Giving up on the season already, huh?

Nah, I'm just on a Rigglemoron nostalgia trip with this.  I think the nostalgia/entertainment value of having Riggleman back with the inevitable "Has Riggleman been fired yet?" posts trumps everything else. 

By the way, does a bench coach really make that much of a difference, even for an inexperienced guy like Ross?  I know bench coaches have been in vogue since the Don Zimmer days with the Yankees, but in the grand scheme of things, is the difference between a former mediocre/bad manager like Riggleman vs. a fairly better former manager in Farrell really that big of a deal? 

I'd also add that it doesn't seem like anyone's been running all over themselves trying to hire Farrell as a manager ever since he left Boston, so even if he is the best candidate for the job, is having someone as bench coach that nobody seems particularly interested in hiring as a manager really that important?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 01, 2019, 04:35:31 pm
By the way, does a bench coach really make that much of a difference, even for an inexperienced guy like Ross?  I know bench coaches have been in vogue since the Don Zimmer days with the Yankees, but in the grand scheme of things, is the difference between a former mediocre/bad manager like Riggleman vs. a fairly better former manager in Farrell really that big of a deal? 

https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2019/3/31/18285562/mlb-life-cleveland-indians-bench-coach

It is important, but it is more important to get the right guy.  Josh Bard was named Aaron Boone's bench coach and he had only been the Dodgers bullpen coach.  Alex Cora went with Ron Roenicke.  It isn't that you have to go with an experienced manager for a rookie coach.  Maybe the Cubs should be going after Hank White.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 01, 2019, 05:18:25 pm
That probably wouldnt be a bad idea.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 01, 2019, 05:36:35 pm
Whoever Cubs pick as bench coach, it’s important that they pick a guy who can do a better job of restraining David Ross when he goes berserk

Chip Hale, Nats bench coach, did a terrible job trying to restrain Davey Martinez in World Series Game 6—outmuscled badly by Martinez.

My bench coach pick is Trent Williams, All-Pro left tackle, currently in a bitter dispute with the Washington NFL team, who recently failed his physical because his helmet would not fit without pain due to recent surgery. Williams should be okay with a baseball cap and will likely have Ross on the ground within seconds.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 01, 2019, 05:58:48 pm
I'd go find Farnsworth.  Excellent form tackler.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on November 01, 2019, 06:30:04 pm
Quote
The move didn't blindside Maddon, however. In a recent interview, he noted that it was obvious he wouldn't be retained, but also that he didn't want to return, anyhow.

"When it got down to the last couple days it was really obvious to both sides," Maddon said to Marc Topkin of the Tampa Bay Times. "I didn't want to be back either. It was more of a bilateral than a unilateral decision.''

...


"I do want to play them in a World Series, because it would mean both sides are successful," Maddon said to Topkin. "And I want us to win the last game, which I think is only appropriate. … I love David, I think he's going to do a great job actually, and I love a lot of the players there. I've got more thought- provoking, tear-provoking outreach from some (Cubs players) at the end of this season than I've ever gotten before.''


https://sports.yahoo.com/joe-maddon-end-cubs-tenure-202027175.html
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 01, 2019, 06:36:41 pm
Bastian predicts Castellanos could come back to the Cubs.  He's a tough guy to figure out - a productive hitter to be sure, but I still say there's no fit unless Schwarber is traded (which isn't sounding that likely at the moment).  Castellanos and Schwarber on the same roster just makes no sense.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 01, 2019, 06:38:44 pm
Nobody—outside the organization— has much of a clue how well the bench coach is performing.

If someone asked your opinion late in the 2019 season about Mark Loretta’s performance as bench coach, on what would you base an opinion?

So, seems like a pointless exercise now to advocate for one guy over another. Cubs will pick someone who’s a fit with Ross and we’ll all have probably no idea how it’s working out until the guy is extended or fired or the like.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on November 01, 2019, 06:43:27 pm
A lively discussion over the importance of the new bench coach.  Must be the beginning of the off-season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 01, 2019, 07:10:24 pm
A lively discussion over the importance of the new bench coach.  Must be the beginning of the off-season.

Things will pick up on Monday

Quote
The first big clock strike comes on Monday, November 4, which now yields a trio of deadlines: options/opt-out decisions are due, qualifying offer decisions are due, and free agents can sign with new teams.

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/10/31/monday-november-4-is-now-set-as-the-first-big-day-of-the-offseason/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 01, 2019, 07:56:04 pm
Ross should name himself bench coach,  so after a  couple years of listening to himself he could be a better manager.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 01, 2019, 09:55:30 pm
Karen and her husband, Fergie...

Karen and Fergie have been adequately replaced by Otto.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on November 01, 2019, 11:09:52 pm
Karen and Fergie have been adequately replaced by Otto.

Were Karen and Fergie nuttier than trail mix too?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 01, 2019, 11:19:21 pm
Hmmm.  What about this guy for 2B?  Can you believe he's only 29?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 02, 2019, 08:02:14 am
Hmmm.  What about this guy for 2B?  Can you believe he's only 29?

????
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on November 02, 2019, 08:03:07 am
Starlin Castro, I presume.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 02, 2019, 06:24:16 pm
Quintana option picked up, Holland declined. No surprises there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 02, 2019, 06:45:52 pm
Quintana option picked up, Holland declined. No surprises there.

Quintana's team option was $10.5MM.  Holland had a 500K buyout.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 02, 2019, 07:48:25 pm
I hope I'm terribly wrong, and that Cubs' decision-makers know best.

But just to put it on record, I'm going to say I'm disappointed by that decision, and think it was unwise. (If during the season I regret committing $10 to Q, while leaving other aspects of the team un-addressed for $$$ reasons, it won't just be recentism then.)  The Cubs have a limited supply of discretionary budget to invest; burning the first $10 on 4.68-ERA Q, with his >10-hits-per-9IP stuff isn't the best investment.  That $10M would be better reallocated in other directions, such as perhaps:
1.  Good relief pitchers
2.  One good rotation pitcher
3.  Lineup help.  (Perhaps Rendon; perhaps Castellanos, Schwarber notwithstanding; or something/somebody else.) 

Q will be "only" 31, but he's pitched 1785 innings, and I think well-worn arm is in the decline-phase.  I don't expect his fastball/curveball stuff or velocity will get back to his White Sox prime. *If* the Cubs analytics/coaching/pitch-lab had a solution, I think they'd not have waited until year 4 to discover or implement it. 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 02, 2019, 08:23:26 pm
Craig, I took it another way.  Now that his salary is set, he is more tradeable.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 02, 2019, 08:58:03 pm
Quintana was better than his ERA showed this year. He's still an average-ish starter who can pitch 170+ innings. In the current environment, 1 year, $10 million is still a bargain. Cubs will have no problem trading him and getting something decent in return if they want to move on.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 02, 2019, 09:10:40 pm
OK, put me on the pro-trade-Q wagon!  :):) 

br, I agree he still has upside to be an average-ish guy.  But the Cubs were already a nice average-ish 8th-place team.  The budget probably had a handful of ten-millions to spend.  If we burn those signing average-ish guys, how does the team elevate above average-ish? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 02, 2019, 09:34:06 pm
I think it's probably more likely than not that Quintana is traded. So I think they'll probably get that $10 million back.

I'm not sure they're going to find a better way to spend that money, though. They're not going to be in the Cole, Rendon, or Strasburg markets. I guess their best bet is to go try to hit on a buy low guy...maybe Michael Pineda coming off the PED suspension?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 02, 2019, 11:02:48 pm
Quintana was better than his ERA showed this year. He's still an average-ish starter who can pitch 170+ innings. In the current environment, 1 year, $10 million is still a bargain. Cubs will have no problem trading him and getting something decent in return if they want to move on.

I agree.  The Cubs are not going to get a better pitcher than Quintana for 10 million dollars.  Like many others on the board, I hope that they trade him, and fill his position with someone else.  But in my opinion, it would have been foolish refuse to exercise his option.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 02, 2019, 11:48:55 pm
I think you guys overrate the trade value of a $10.5-million, might-hopefully-be-average guy, with below-average stuff who is already overachieving and getting by primarily on grit and veteran savvy. 

*Maybe* somebody will take that off our hands and we'll still unload that salary burden; but I don't think that's going to be perceived as such a valuable contract that teams are going to be offering meaningful talent value in order to take on that salary. 

Dave, there is no rule that says they have to buy their rotation starter for $10.  They could sign a cheaper guy with more upside; or they could buy a guy with similarly limited upside but pay less for it.  Or, they could have combined that $10 and added other discretionary dollars and gone after somebody more expensive than $10 because the guy is talented enough to be worth >$10.   

It's not like $10.5 is the going rate for every might-be-average-if-things-work-out-well #5/#4 starter; plenty are cheaper. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 03, 2019, 12:16:30 am
It's not like $10.5 is the going rate for every might-be-average-if-things-work-out-well #5/#4 starter; plenty are cheaper. 

Quintana is a likely-average-maybe-better-than-that #4/#3 starter who eats a lot of innings. He's better than you're giving him credit for.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on November 03, 2019, 12:19:58 am
Quintana is worth $10.5 million.  He may not be worth Eloy Jimenez and Dylan Cease, but he's worth $10.5 million.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 03, 2019, 04:04:50 am
Quintana is worth $10.5 million.  He may not be worth Eloy Jimenez and Dylan Cease, but he's worth $10.5 million.
I think we're beyond the "may" and are in the "is was" territory.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 03, 2019, 04:05:06 am
I’m with Craig here. Q is tradeable, but you’re not going to get anything decent back.  10.5 million is right at the level where he’s not a straight salary dump but there’s no meaningful surplus value.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 03, 2019, 06:10:30 am
Just for reference Matt Harvey signed a 1/$11 million contract last year. Quintana has some surplus value.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 03, 2019, 07:35:21 am
And remember what Chatwood cost, and the results he brought.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 03, 2019, 08:21:05 am
Just out of curiosity, is it possible to find out the record of the team when a particular pitcher starts?  It would be helpful to know the team's record for the various starting pitchers, such as Quintana.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on November 03, 2019, 08:29:45 am
Yes, it's possible.

Alzolay 0-2
Chatwood 4-1
Darvish 13-18
Hamels 16-11
Hendricks 15-15
Holland 0-1
Lester 17-14
Mills 2-2
Quintana 17-14
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 03, 2019, 11:55:37 am
Thanks, Jeff.  Can you tell me where and how you found it?

But it does look as if Quintana's record could be considered to be anti-awful, especially for a fifth starter.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on November 03, 2019, 12:07:59 pm
https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/2019-pitching.shtml

Scroll down to the section entitled "Team Starting Pitching".  Then look at the columns entitled "Wtm" and "Ltm".
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 03, 2019, 12:20:07 pm
Yes, it's possible.

Alzolay 0-2
Chatwood 4-1
Darvish 13-18
Hamels 16-11
Hendricks 15-15
Holland 0-1
Lester 17-14
Mills 2-2
Quintana 17-14
Thanks, Jeff.  Can you tell me where and how you found it?

But it does look as if Quintana's record could be considered to be anti-awful, especially for a fifth starter.
Statistics like this are only partially helpful.  How often did Hendricks pitch against the other team's #1?  If often, his 18 wins is impressive, if hardly ever, not so much.  If X pitches 10X against Cole, Verlander, and Strasberg is 2 and 7 that bad?  You get the idea.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 03, 2019, 12:32:45 pm
Statistics like this are only partially helpful.  How often did Hendricks pitch against the other team's #1?  If often, his 18 wins is impressive, if hardly ever, not so much.  If X pitches 10X against Cole, Verlander, and Strasberg is 2 and 7 that bad?  You get the idea.

I certainly get the idea.

However, I am not aware of any single stat that is more than partially helpful. 

And as a practical matter, after the first week of the season, and certainly after the first rain out, it is very difficult for any manager to match his best pitcher against other teams best pitcher.  Rotations seldom match up that perfectly, and very few managers would move back his ace more than perhaps a single game, and certainly would not move him up to three days rest to achieve such a match.

But even if teams were to achieve a perfect match, it still seems helpful to know if your # 5 starter is performing better or worse than the rest of the league's # 5 starter.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 03, 2019, 01:32:16 pm
Yes, we've discussed that before.  I was thinking of the poor schmuck who was unlucky enough to get matched up with every HOF-destined pitcher in the league.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 03, 2019, 03:18:27 pm
Jesse Rogers  @ESPNChiCubs  33m33 minutes ago
Cubs news: In the least surprising move of the off-season, a league source indicates the Cubs have picked up Anthony Rizzo's option for 2020 at $16.5 million. Team should announce it later today.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 03, 2019, 03:20:16 pm
Shocker
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dev on November 03, 2019, 07:29:53 pm
Too bd teh Cubs couldn't drop Q and Hamels and pay Strasburg that money.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 03, 2019, 07:53:01 pm
Rizzo won the gold glove.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 03, 2019, 09:54:42 pm
I appreciate the level of loyalty and faith the board has in Quintana.  I don't know that much and only watched a fraction of the games.  So I'm glad to defer to the greater wisdom of you smarter and better informed scouts and analysts. 

I'm sure I'm victim of the games I watched.  1.  I tended to see a lot of the games where Q pitched badly.  2.  And I'm totally not a scout; it often seemed to me that his stuff looked very pedestrian.  It often seemed that he got by on a lot of veteran savvy not by excellent stuff, and by depending on hitters chasing bad curveballs.  3.  I'm also sure that I'm just a dumb fan, and it qualitatively seemed like guys were whacking hard contact all the time; fangraphs or whomever probably have a much better quantification of how much hard contact he allowed, and recorded all the games.  4.  Plus I'm certainly impacted by recentism.  He was 11+ ERA in his last 5 games down the stretch, which sticks in my brain.  He was 5.25 ERA over the last four months.  Of the last 4 months, only one had a monthly ERA <5 (August; June, July, and September were all 5+).  So I'm a little nervous that his last four months are more representative of the recent and future Q than the first two months, or than his White Sox glory years. 

Fangraphs and some of the FIPs, which should be more predictive than ERA, don't show his season to have been as bad as his ERA reflects.  So I get the concept that he was kind of a victim of four months of bad luck, and could return toward his mean. 

I also get that I'm just a dumb fan, and haven't done the analytical or scouting eval on Q that many of you probably have, and are better qualified to do; and that I certainly haven't put in the time or analysis that the Cubs have. 

Maybe they know he ended the season pitching heroically hurt?  He posted a 2.3 WHIP, giving up 37 hits and 27 runs in 18 innings while average 3 innings per five September stretch-run starts.  Maybe they know there was a reason, and they love the heroic, gritty willingness to pitch hurt, even if doing so caused him to get shelled; but they figure Q will come back healthy, with all the grit and heroic veteran accountability but without the performance-compromising injury? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 03, 2019, 10:05:35 pm
Yes, we've discussed that before.  I was thinking of the poor schmuck who was unlucky enough to get matched up with every HOF-destined pitcher in the league.

The odds against that are astronomical.  But even if it should happen, no decision maker should rely on ANY stat without investigation of it's background circumstances.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 03, 2019, 10:18:23 pm
Quintana had a really good stretch of nine consecutive starts beginning in late June... that ended when the Nats came to Chicago in late August and knocked around the Cubs in a  3-games series. Quintana had 7 BB and 57 Ks in that stretch with a 25.9 K-rate and went 7-0 and 2.96 ERA. My recollection is that he was pitching effectively up in the zone at times (kind of like what Hendricks has learned to do) and using his change-up very effectively.

Also had a good start against the Brewers after Nats game——but then crashed and burned in September.

A good off-season homework assignment for Cubs analytical staff (and Quintana) is to figure out what the heck he was doing in that  strong stretch and what the heck happened thereafter. Two different guys.

Think his contract is still a good deal and Cubs need him to be more like that good Quintana we saw in that stretch—-and for more than a portion of the season. Think he has a chance to do that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 03, 2019, 10:47:56 pm
The "7 BB and 57 Ks in that stretch" included a 5.56 July with 6 walks in 4 July starts. 

Every pitcher has his ups and downs.  Obviously the hope is that he can better lock into the ups and minimize the downs.  Certainly health can be a factor there.  And hopefully pitch lab and analytics and stuff will figure something out better.  They've had three years of analytics to work on it; hopefully the next solution will work. 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 03, 2019, 11:26:07 pm
Don’t second-guess yourself, Craig, the picture you saw is the accurate one.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 04, 2019, 07:50:32 am
First surprise of the cycle: Cubs decline Graveman’s option.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 04, 2019, 08:38:21 am
I think that makes it less likely that Quintana gets moved and it means the Cubs will remain a majority finesse/pitch to contact rotation.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 04, 2019, 09:00:37 am
Yes.  I wonder if that doesn't also hint that they'll use another chunk of their limited discretionary budget to sign another veteran rotation guy?  (Maybe Hamels!) 

I'd envisioned committing little or no new discretionary budget on 5th starter, and letting Chatwood, Graveman, Alzolay, Abbott, Mills, Rae etc. compete for that.  While combining Q + Hamels $10 + $20 onto a single more-expensive-but-better-than-Q starter.  Basically focus the $30 budget on a single guy. 

But having re-committed to Q, and now clearing out Graveman from the "competition" group, that probably reflects a plan to again split the discretionary rotation dollars. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 04, 2019, 09:03:34 am
I think that makes it less likely that Quintana gets moved and it means the Cubs will remain a majority finesse/pitch to contact rotation.
  And the Cubs will remain a third or fourth place team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 04, 2019, 09:06:36 am
Quintana had a really good stretch of nine consecutive starts beginning in late June... that ended when the Nats came to Chicago in late August and knocked around the Cubs in a  3-games series. Quintana had 7 BB and 57 Ks in that stretch with a 25.9 K-rate and went 7-0 and 2.96 ERA. My recollection is that he was pitching effectively up in the zone at times (kind of like what Hendricks has learned to do) and using his change-up very effectively.

Also had a good start against the Brewers after Nats game——but then crashed and burned in September.

A good off-season homework assignment for Cubs analytical staff (and Quintana) is to figure out what the heck he was doing in that  strong stretch and what the heck happened thereafter. Two different guys.

Think his contract is still a good deal and Cubs need him to be more like that good Quintana we saw in that stretch—-and for more than a portion of the season. Think he has a chance to do that.

During that strong stretch Sharma had an article in TheAthletic that discussed what had made a difference in his performance.  The explanation involved specific mechanical adjustments, suggested by Hottovy, with an emphasis on executing his changeup more effectively.  Here is an excerpt.

On May 21, Quintana threw six shutout frames against the Philadelphia Phillies and lowered his ERA to 3.30. But he struggled mightily over his next seven starts, posting a 5.56 ERA while failing to complete five frames three times. It culminated in 4 1/3 dreadful innings against the New York Mets in which he gave up nine runs (eight earned) on nine hits, including three home runs. It was then that he and pitching coach Tommy Hottovy started working on some changes.

“We’re always looking at checkpoints with him mechanically,” Hottovy said. “Things we’ve talked about in the past. Like keeping his toe pointed down, staying over the rubber, all those things. Part of that is, too, there are times in the year where you feel like you’re a little fatigued. You get a lot of innings and your extension starts to get down. So we really focused on him getting back into a good long-toss routine where he’s getting his extension right on time. We’re also doing drills where you’re really focused on getting extension off the mound and seeing that release point where you want it.”

When pitchers are fatigued, they get out of their mechanics. They can also try to manufacture the natural action of a pitcher getting proper extension by putting more emphasis in their arm action when it’s behind their head, which leads to them shortening up. That leads to pitches that don’t move like they’re supposed to, and for Quintana, it means his fastball and changeup don’t have the proper velocity gap.

https://theathletic.com/1076460/?source=player


Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 04, 2019, 10:24:40 am
Jesse Rogers  @ESPNChiCubs  36s36 seconds ago
Cubs news. Source indicates the team has declined the option they held on reliever David Phelps. It would have paid him $5 million next season. He's a free agent
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 04, 2019, 10:36:30 am
Cubs exercise Rizzo's $16.5M option, decline Morrow, Barnett

http://www.espn.com/espn/wire?section=mlb&id=28003085
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 04, 2019, 10:42:13 am
Ron, what do you take from that?  Or maybe, what's wrong with the following take?
1.  Q, as with most pitchers, needs to have mechanics relatively optimized.  If his mechanics are off, things go wrong.  Location, deception, spin, movement, velocity, velocity-gap, all of those things deteriorate when mechanics aren't optimal.
2.  Hottovy and Q are well aware, and know the checkpoints.  Have for some time.
3.  Knowing and implementing aren't the same.
4.  Implementing is more difficult when fatigued.
5.  The mechanical understanding remained in H and Q's knowledge bank entering September, and were already there in April.  He just wasn't able to implement during his first half slump or his September disaster.

Sounds like H and Q have a good understanding.  When Q's locked into optimal, he's solid.  But no pitcher stays locked, and he's drifted into and out of optimal, perhaps particularly when fatigued.  His stuff doesn't allow him great margin for sub-optimal.  Hottovy knew the check points during the first half slump, during the strong August run, and during the disastrous September.  A dramatic new breakthrough insight is unlikely in year 4 with Cubs and 1700 pro innings in. So probably his upcoming season will hinge less on dramatic new analytics insights, and more on the ability to more consistently implement checkpoints he's been aware of for years.  Most likely he'll be a kind of similar guy, drifting in and out of optimal. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 04, 2019, 10:52:31 am
Ron, what do you take from that?  Or maybe, what's wrong with the following take?
1.  Q, as with most pitchers, needs to have mechanics relatively optimized.  If his mechanics are off, things go wrong.  Location, deception, spin, movement, velocity, velocity-gap, all of those things deteriorate when mechanics aren't optimal.
2.  Hottovy and Q are well aware, and know the checkpoints.  Have for some time.
3.  Knowing and implementing aren't the same.
4.  Implementing is more difficult when fatigued.
5.  The mechanical understanding remained in H and Q's knowledge bank entering September, and were already there in April.  He just wasn't able to implement during his first half slump or his September disaster.

Sounds like H and Q have a good understanding.  When Q's locked into optimal, he's solid.  But no pitcher stays locked, and he's drifted into and out of optimal, perhaps particularly when fatigued.  His stuff doesn't allow him great margin for sub-optimal.  Hottovy knew the check points during the first half slump, during the strong August run, and during the disastrous September.  A dramatic new breakthrough insight is unlikely in year 4 with Cubs and 1700 pro innings in. So probably his upcoming season will hinge less on dramatic new analytics insights, and more on the ability to more consistently implement checkpoints he's been aware of for years.  Most likely he'll be a kind of similar guy, drifting in and out of optimal. 


Seems about right to me. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 04, 2019, 11:03:23 am

Jesse Rogers
@ESPNChiCubs

So Cubs are done with their decisions on players with options for 2020. Rizzo and Quintana get picked up. Holland, Phelps, Graveman, Barnette and Morrow were declined.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 04, 2019, 11:44:14 am

...But having re-committed to Q, and now clearing out Graveman from the "competition" group, that probably reflects a plan to again split the discretionary rotation dollars.

Cubs have not “cleared out” Graveman—-at least not yet. He’s now arb eligible.

Maybe they already have an agreement in place for less than the $3 option, or maybe Cubs are willing to take their chances in the arb process, or maybe Cubs will non-tender Graveman. Remains to be seen.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on November 04, 2019, 12:12:57 pm
I guess the Cubs didn't totally like what they saw during Graveman's rehab? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 04, 2019, 12:15:01 pm
Cubs have not “cleared out” Graveman—-at least not yet. He’s now arb eligible.

Maybe they already have an agreement in place for less than the $3 option, or maybe Cubs are willing to take their chances in the arb process, or maybe Cubs will non-tender Graveman. Remains to be seen.

Part of his contract was that if the Cubs declined his option he becomes a free agent. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 04, 2019, 12:33:52 pm
Okay, thanks. Agreed to non-tender him if declined option.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 04, 2019, 12:38:12 pm
For Athletic subscribers, Jon Greenberg has a really good piece up there about David Ross—-mostly former teammates around baseball talking about him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on November 04, 2019, 02:04:26 pm
MLB Now just did a roundtable discussion on FA players who could end up re-signing with their '19 clubs...

When Castellanos was brought up, Rosenthal made it a point to mention that the Cubs were looking to get edgier, and that Castellanos was a player who certainly had some edge to him.

I was not aware of this. I can understand him not wanting to take that role on the '19 club, being the new guy and all...but a multi year deal might give him the "right" to be a voice in the clubhouse.

If he is indeed known as a fiery player, I want him re-signed even more than before...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 04, 2019, 03:14:01 pm
Jordan Bastian
@MLBastian
Per a source, the Cubs will add RHP Colin Rea to the 40-man roster today.

Rea went 14-4, 3.95 ERA in 148 IP for Triple-A Iowa last season. Was surprised he wasn't added at some point as a callup last year. Missed 2017 after TJ surgery.

Fangraphs has Rea with 2 minor league options left.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 04, 2019, 03:37:53 pm
RHP Allen Webster has been assigned outright to the Triple-A Iowa roster.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 04, 2019, 04:24:30 pm
We do need to try to keep Castellanos if at all possible and you couldnt get rid of Heyward if Lily Thai came with him so that's why I think we trade Schwarber especially since his value should be at an all time high.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 04, 2019, 04:39:28 pm
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  14m14 minutes ago
Source: Cubs did not make a qualifying offer (one year, $17.8M) to Cole Hamels. There will be no compensatory Draft pick linked to his signing elsewhere.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 04, 2019, 05:31:46 pm
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  14m14 minutes ago
Source: Cubs did not make a qualifying offer (one year, $17.8M) to Cole Hamels. There will be no compensatory Draft pick linked to his signing elsewhere.

Compensation pick for Hamels would have been at end of the 4th round, so not a premium pick in any case.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 04, 2019, 05:52:49 pm
Let Hamels go.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 04, 2019, 05:59:11 pm
More shocking news: Heyward opts in.

Get him a platoon partner, get a CF and leave him in RF full-time, and keep him out of the leadoff spot and he's really fine.  Not $21.5 fine, but fine (and that's a sunk cost so no point worrying about it now).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 04, 2019, 06:18:41 pm
The 40-man roster has been updated and now stands at 32

http://m.cubs.mlb.com/roster/40-man
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 04, 2019, 10:30:41 pm
I think they will try to sign Hamels to a Quintana-level contract.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 05, 2019, 12:07:25 am
Sharma/Mooney breaking Deeg’s heart, John Farrell isn’t a candidate for the bench coach.

Andy Green is getting an interview for the bench coach. The mental skills program is getting revamped along with strength and conditioning.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 05, 2019, 12:39:27 am
More deckchair shuffling so far.

Sharma's tagline pretty much says it all: "Change can be good sometimes but let's be honest: What the Cubs really need is more good players".
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 05, 2019, 05:59:34 am
Of all the major SP free agents out there, Wheeler may be the most intriguing as a value proposition.  Fangraphs predicts 4/$68 and that seems very reasonable to me.  Still probably too rich for Ricketts' blood with the re-election campaign to finance, but maybe at the very top end of what we could conceivably be willing to consider being involved in.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on November 05, 2019, 07:41:23 am
I don't see the Cubs going after Hamels.  They need to add a reliable #2/3.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 05, 2019, 12:48:45 pm
This seems like mostly speculation by Rosenthal, but maybe he's not usually the type to throw something out there if there's zero possibility of it happening. He discusses how the Red Sox might be able to get back under the luxury tax now that JD Martinez has opted in to the next three years.

A better path might be to move left-hander David Price, who is owed $96 million over the next three years, or righty Nathan Eovaldi, who is owed $51 million over the next three. Impossible, you say? Well, what if the Red Sox included cash in a trade and also attached left fielder Andrew Benintendi, who remains cost-effective as he enters his first year of arbitration?

If the Red Sox are willing to pay down Eovaldi's contract and throw in Benintendi, I'd like the Cubs to show some interest. Early Steamer projections show Eovaldi and Quintana having very similar value next year, so the Cubs could then move Quintana to get most of the money back for 2020.

https://theathletic.com/1350649/2019/11/05/rosenthal-storylines-to-watch-this-offseason-from-the-boras-brigade-to-the-red-soxs-decision-on-mookie-betts/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on November 05, 2019, 12:51:22 pm
JD has another opt out after next year. His salary also drops from 23M to 19M after 2020, so he will likely opt out after this year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 05, 2019, 03:55:21 pm
Somebody's wrong about this.

Quote
Bruce Levine

 
@MLBBruceLevine
 26m26 minutes ago
More
Told former managers are a high priority for David Ross and the Cubs choosing the next bench coach . Good names  to consider are John Farrell - Andy Green and Fredi  Gonzalez .
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 05, 2019, 04:15:39 pm
I don’t read the Levine blurb as saying Cubs are considering Farrell. Reads as Levine’s own thoughts as to who fits.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 05, 2019, 04:37:03 pm
If it comes down to a he said/he said, I'd take Mooney/Sharma over Levine.  I'd go with Reb's interpretation though.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 06, 2019, 10:14:58 am
This is kind of a surprise change to the coaching staff.  From Jesse Rogers:

The Cubs continue to make changes to their coaching staff as longtime bullpen coach, Lester Strode, won't be returning. Strode was the longest tenured in-uniform coach, having worked under 5 different Cubs managers since 2007. Among potential replacements is former Phillies pitching coach, Chris Young, who interviewed for the job recently.

After surviving five managers, I had assumed Strode had that role locked up until he was ready to retire. Also thought that the Cubs might be interested in grooming Strop for that job when his playing career ends.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on November 06, 2019, 10:19:13 am
It kind of seems like bullpen coach has been a pitching coach understudy role for more teams now, so if you're not on that career trajectory, it's time to make a change.  It always used to seem to me that bullpen coach up until a few years ago was more about keeping the bullpen guys company and keeping the sunflower seed and Gatorade buckets in the bullpen full.  That doesn't seem to be the case now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on November 06, 2019, 10:21:56 am
Strode has been an employee of the Cubs in some sort of capacity since 1989.  That's pretty amazing anyone in a coaching role in baseball could be in an organization for that long.  Hopefully he at least got a 30 year gold watch on the way out.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 06, 2019, 10:30:06 am
I recall the father of a Cubs minor-league prospect was very uncomplimentary of Strode back in his Midwest League coaching days.  Suggested back in those days that Strode didn't provide any strategic or mechanical instruction.  That his level of "coaching" was "throw it harder!!" 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 06, 2019, 10:47:13 am
Strode bio makes it sound like he knew something about teaching pitching

http://m.cubs.mlb.com/chc/roster/coach/506427/lester-strode
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 06, 2019, 11:20:42 am
Strode seemed like somebody the Cubs valued, but he's been around such a long time sometimes change is good.  I'd be more worried about Borzello.

Young is much more in the Tommy Hottovoy mold. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 06, 2019, 12:08:51 pm
Sharma has a new piece on what to expect from the Cubs over the winter.  Not really that much to it, but he does emphasize comments by both Theo and Ricketts to the effect that the focus over the winter will not simply be on the window that closes after 2021, but will very much be focused on the period beyond 2021.


https://theathletic.com/1353819/2019/11/06/sharma-cubs-seem-ready-to-make-big-moves-but-dont-count-on-them-spending-big-money/?source=twittered

The most obvious move that would contribute to a long term strategy would be trading Kris Bryant (assuming the right deal).  He almost certainly will not be a Cub after 2021 (2020, if his grievance against the Cubs is successful).  And presumably he would also bring the most back to the Cubs. I know this would pi ss off a lot of fans, but I would think there is a pretty good chance of that happening (again, assuming the right deal).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 06, 2019, 12:57:09 pm
Jon Heyman  @JonHeyman  47m47 minutes ago
Veteran Cubs bullpen coach Lester Strode won’t be back in that spot but has been offered another prominent position with the team. New manager David Ross is said to have someone else in mind for pen coach.


Prominent position?  The 3B coaching job is open
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on November 06, 2019, 01:45:56 pm
They might kick him upstairs to some special assistant to the GM type role. 

It'd be nice if they found a good role for him to stay in the organization.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 06, 2019, 02:07:01 pm
Sharma has a new piece on what to expect from the Cubs over the winter.  Not really that much to it, but he does emphasize comments by both Theo and Ricketts to the effect that the focus over the winter will not simply be on the window that closes after 2021, but will very much be focused on the period beyond 2021.


https://theathletic.com/1353819/2019/11/06/sharma-cubs-seem-ready-to-make-big-moves-but-dont-count-on-them-spending-big-money/?source=twittered

The most obvious move that would contribute to a long term strategy would be trading Kris Bryant (assuming the right deal).  He almost certainly will not be a Cub after 2021 (2020, if his grievance against the Cubs is successful).  And presumably he would also bring the most back to the Cubs. I know this would pi ss off a lot of fans, but I would think there is a pretty good chance of that happening (again, assuming the right deal).

If the Cubs trade Bryant people are going to be shocked on how little they get for him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 06, 2019, 02:56:41 pm
They'll **** regardless but I bet it won't be a bad haul.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 06, 2019, 03:10:35 pm
If the Cubs trade Bryant people are going to be shocked on how little they get for him.

Kiley McDaniel said today in his chat that the likely return for Bryant would be two back-end top 100 prospect guys. That would be the equivalent of somebody else's Miguel Amaya and Bralyn Marquez---except we might not know much of anything about those two guys in a different organization and probably would be equivalent guys closer to the majors.

Think that would qualify as a big disappointment/shock for Cubs fans as a return for Bryant.

Don't see Theo going that route if that's the return.  Cubs want to win the World Series in 2020 and hard to see how trading Bryant for that kind of return is helpful. To replace him at 3B with David Bote?  No.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 06, 2019, 03:26:06 pm
Sharma ....emphasize comments by both Theo and Ricketts to the effect that the focus over the winter will not simply be on the window that closes after 2021, but will very much be focused on the period beyond 2021....

The most obvious move that would contribute to a long term strategy would be trading Kris Bryant (assuming the right deal).  He almost certainly will not be a Cub after 2021 ... And presumably he would also bring the most back to the Cubs. ....I would think there is a pretty good chance of that happening (again, assuming the right deal

If the Cubs trade Bryant people are going to be shocked on how little they get for him.

*If* Bryant isn't interested in extending, Ron's idea of trading him for value that will endure beyond two years is logical.  (As Ron notes, "assuming the right deal".)  But Blue is right, "assuming the right deal" is the challenge.  We might be shocked at how little they get for him.  If you can't get that strong of an offer, does it still make sense to deal? 

As a 2-year rental with salary, I'm not sure how strong the trade value is.  *IF* the grievance thing has a real chance and he might actually be only a one-year rental, the value is less.  As a Boras baby, acquire-and-extend-at-hometown-discount doesn't apply.  He was 24th in offensive WAR last year, really good; but it's been three years since he was a top-10-offensive-WAR guy. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 06, 2019, 03:32:42 pm
Trading Bryant is effectively impossible as long as the grievance is unresolved, so for the moment at least this discussion is probably moot.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 06, 2019, 03:48:41 pm
It may be moot until several 3B FA's are determined.   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 06, 2019, 03:55:37 pm
Don't see Theo going that route if that's the return.  Cubs want to win the World Series in 2020 and hard to see how trading Bryant for that kind of return is helpful. To replace him at 3B with David Bote?  No.

I certainly agree with that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 06, 2019, 04:20:32 pm
On a Bryant trade, say for instance you want Jo Adell from the Angels.  Bryant is owed say $43 million for his 2 years of control.  If 1 WAR =$9 million, the Angels would have to value Bryant as a 6 WAR player.  If they do then the value of a 1:1 trade could line up.  The more likely scenario is Bryant is valued at 4-5 WAR player and his surplus value is $29-47 million.  So you could get a back-end top 100 guy and a 2-3 WAR player with control.  The Red Sox are going to be in the same bind trying to unload Betts. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 06, 2019, 05:20:06 pm
Bryant is likely going to have two years of control because don't see him winning the grievance absent some evidence we don't know about.  Cubs figure to be a legit contender for both those seasons.

With two years, makes no sense to me to trade him for an average regular and a back-end top 100 prospect.  If one year of control (like Betts), that would be different, maybe.

It's not like Indians and Lindor.  Indians have basically zero chance to re-sign him when he hits free agency in two years.  Cubs can make a competitive offer to keep Bryant in two years.  In the meantime, hard to see merits of weakening club in short-run for those two seasons when you're trying to win the WS. 

Would also be different if you could get a return of a plus major league ready guy(s) now for Bryant and fill 3B with another good player, either by trade or free agency, and gain some years of control in the Bryant package.  In the end, hard to evaluate without seeing who the actual players may be.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on November 06, 2019, 05:47:26 pm
On a Bryant trade, say for instance you want Jo Adell from the Angels.  Bryant is owed say $43 million for his 2 years of control.  If 1 WAR =$9 million, the Angels would have to value Bryant as a 6 WAR player.  If they do then the value of a 1:1 trade could line up.  The more likely scenario is Bryant is valued at 4-5 WAR player and his surplus value is $29-47 million.  So you could get a back-end top 100 guy and a 2-3 WAR player with control.  The Red Sox are going to be in the same bind trying to unload Betts.

Bryant hasn't accumulated 6 WAR the last two seasons combined.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 06, 2019, 07:05:58 pm
Bryant hasn't accumulated 6 WAR the last two seasons combined.

There isn’t 1 WAR stat and they are all calculated differently. Baseball reference uses a larger defensive weight than Fangraphs.

By Fangraphs Bryant has been worth 2.3 and 4.8 fWAR the last 2 years.

Which is why I also said he would likely be valued at 4-5 WAR year and going back into Kiley’s chat he had Bryant at $45 million in surplus value or about a 5 WAR player.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 06, 2019, 07:24:43 pm
So, teams now make trades based on WAR? I did not realize that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on November 06, 2019, 08:15:19 pm
To paraphrase Star Trek II, the Cubs need to create value from valuelessness.

The best way to do that is with a productive amateur player procurement and minor league development system.

Unfortunately, in both of those areas, the Cubs are among MLB's worst.

I 'm sure he knows this more than most, but Theo is ****.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 06, 2019, 08:40:40 pm
So, teams now make trades based on WAR? I did not realize that.

I could make a smart ass reply, but I’m turning over a new leaf. Do teams make trades off of public WAR values no. They make trades off of their own version of WAR and their own projection systems. They assign a dollar value and come up with a surplus value. Prospects get put through a similar projections and they get assigned a value. If the values are close to matching then a trade gets made. At the deadline a premium might/might not get paid.

The public WAR and prospect values will get you in a roughly the right area.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 06, 2019, 10:26:13 pm
I’m sure that a club’s analytics department presents numerical values to the top brass regarding trades and FA signings. That stuff is a tool, among many other things.

But, to say that when the numerical values are close to matching then a trade gets made——based on those numbers—well, I think way more goes into assessing whether to make a  transaction.

I doubt that Theo would embrace the notion that transactions are made based on matching numbers in that fashion, if it was put to him that way.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 06, 2019, 10:44:40 pm
I think GM's say to another GM, I need a centerfielder and a good pitcher, I can give you a good hitting catcher and a good bat at third.   What can we do?  Then after they cough up some names, they run the contracts, the WAR's, the intangibles and agree to a deal or pass on the deal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 07, 2019, 12:07:02 am
I agree Curt.

I dont think this game is anywhere near as complicated as some here would have you believe and I dont think this team is in anywhere near as bad of shape as those same folks would like for you to believe.

Do they need help?

Of course but it's nothing a good offseason wouldnt fix.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 07, 2019, 08:21:32 am
Sharma:

“Former Phillies pitching coach Chris Young will be the Cubs next bullpen coach. Before getting an in-uniform job with Philly, Young was a pro scout with the Astros and Padres.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 07, 2019, 08:21:39 am
I guess it is just a coincidence that most trades are falling close to surplus value and free agent contracts fall nicely into the $/WAR.  These GM L’s aren’t building analytic departments to just go ahh screw it.

Chris Young is going to be the bullpen coach.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on November 07, 2019, 08:59:17 am
How do we know that the Cubs development system is horrible?  Are there many examples where players that the Cubs failed to develop were subsequently developed successfully in other organizations  If so, how does that compare with similar examples in other organizations?  Could the big problem be in identification of future high quality ML players (pitchers in particular)?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 07, 2019, 09:21:18 am
How do we know that the Cubs development system is horrible?  Are there many examples where players that the Cubs failed to develop were subsequently developed successfully in other organizations  If so, how does that compare with similar examples in other organizations?  Could the big problem be in identification of future high quality ML players (pitchers in particular)?

Other teams have been able to add velocity to pitchers like the Yankees.  The Cubs haven't been able to (although that might be changing) so it could be the development or targeting or a combo of the too.  Another piece from the McDaniel chat yesterday is that there is speculation that the Cubs won't hire a scouting director and that higher ups will be more involved in drafting.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 07, 2019, 10:30:11 am
How do we know that the Cubs development system is horrible?  Are there many examples where players that the Cubs failed to develop were subsequently developed successfully in other organizations  If so, how does that compare with similar examples in other organizations?  Could the big problem be in identification of future high quality ML players (pitchers in particular)?

I think this is where D+D is better evaluated as a combination.  Otherwise, we don't know where failure lies.  Did the draft/IFA deliver zero talent, so that the development guys have no chance no matter how good they are?  Or is draft/IFA identifying and delivering reasonable talent, but development is wasting it?  Or both? 

Your question suggests perhaps the problem has been on the draft/IFA side, because there aren't many examples of guys who developed once they left the system?  Some of the left-the-system guys would be Soler, Gleyber, Eloy, Godfrey, Cease, Paredes, Candelario, Vizcaino.  Obviously several of them have developed greatly since leaving the Cubs, but don't see that reflecting on Cubs development system.  Theo really coveted Steve Wilson and Quintana and Davis, so he traded whatever minor-league talent he had to get them. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 07, 2019, 01:10:10 pm
Jon Heyman
@JonHeyman
Chris Denorfia won’t be back as quality assurance coach with the Cubs. With a new regime there are obviously changes. Denorfia, the former outfielder, is extremely well-respected throughout the game.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on November 07, 2019, 02:22:30 pm
Maybe they're bringing in Creed Bratton?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 07, 2019, 04:01:14 pm
I think they'd be more interested in Gilfoyle.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2019, 04:56:28 pm
Somehow all these changes so far is like dumping out the diaper and putting it back on the baby.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 07, 2019, 05:08:19 pm
Somehow all these changes so far is like dumping out the diaper and putting it back on the baby.

Exactly. They should have signed one or two free agents and made at least a couple of major trades by now!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 07, 2019, 05:24:18 pm
Exactly. They should have signed one or two free agents and made at least a couple of major trades by now!
  LOL, no.  But I catch the sarcasm.   I was only saying that none of them has exactly got me excited yet.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 07, 2019, 06:47:32 pm
  LOL, no.  But I catch the sarcasm.   I was only saying that none of them has exactly got me excited yet.

The memory of last offseason is a legitimate reason for skepticism.  It just seems in general that the last couple of years have been more about scapegoating than actually committing resources to fix problems.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on November 08, 2019, 07:57:24 am
Quote
They might kick him upstairs to some special assistant to the GM type role.

Isn't that position vacant?  Wasn't that Ross' old title?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 08, 2019, 08:35:13 am
Yu is without question the funniest man in baseball.

https://twitter.com/faridyu/status/1192494861225775105?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1192494861225775105&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bleachernation.com%2Fcubs%2F2019%2F11%2F08%2Frookies-of-the-year-cubs-second-base-weirdness-yankees-stretch-and-other-cubs-bullets%2F
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 08, 2019, 02:03:38 pm
From a Mark Gonzales Q&A:

Merrifield will be a priority this winter, and there’s a match with the Royals involving a combination of an outfielder and infielder.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/cubs/ct-chicago-cubs-kris-bryant-david-ross-20191030-zhhmkeqeqzffre4qvxpr7txvj4-story.html

If the outfielder/infielder combination is something like Almora and Bote, then sure, do it. But I hope they're not thinking of trading Hoerner for Merrifield at this point. That would be an all-in move for 2020--Merrifield improves the team in 2020, but is already 31...it's probably more likely than not that Hoerner is the better player by 2021 or 2022. With the team constructed as it is now and the limited money they have to spend, this offseason just isn't the time to go all in on next year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 08, 2019, 02:05:52 pm
Go for it.

Each year is another opportunity.

If you aint trying to win every year you're doing a disservice to your fans.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 08, 2019, 03:42:28 pm
If the outfielder/infielder combination is something like Almora and Bote,

I mean if they are going to give him away sure.  The cost is probably more Happ and Hoerner though.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 08, 2019, 04:09:56 pm
I mean if they are going to give him away sure.  The cost is probably more Happ and Hoerner though.

Not interested. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 08, 2019, 04:10:59 pm
...The cost is probably more Happ and Hoerner though.

That would be the ask.

But, don’t see Cubs doing that.

Happ yes, but doesn’t make sense to include Hoerner with all those years of control and some SS ability.

Could see Happ and Amaya, OR Happ, Bote, and one from Alzolay, Ademan, or Roederer. Don’t think Almora gets you very far but maybe throw him in to one of the above packages.

There is a risk with Merrifield because such a late bloomer but maybe similar to Zobrist career or at least more similar than anybody else around. We know what Zobrist meant to Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 08, 2019, 04:16:05 pm
Jeff Passan
@JeffPassan
Multiple teams in search of catching help believe Cubs catcher Willson Contreras will be available this winter. The Cubs will get creative this winter, and with a deep catching free agent market, they could trade Contreras and begin retooling under new manager David Ross.

That would be the ask.

But, don’t see Cubs doing that.

Happ yes, but doesn’t make sense to include Hoerner with all those years of control and some SS ability.

Could see Happ and Amaya, OR Happ, Bote, and one from Alzolay, Ademan, or Roederer. Don’t think Almora gets you very far but maybe throw him in to one of the above packages.

There is a risk with Merrifield because such a late bloomer but maybe similar to Zobrist career or at least more similar than anybody else around. We know what Zobrist meant to Cubs.

Zobrist was a significantly better player than Merrifield on offense and defense.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 08, 2019, 04:37:29 pm

Zobrist was a significantly better player than Merrifield on offense and defense.

Yes, at Zobrist’s peak seasons with Rays. With Cubs in 2006 and 2098, Zobrist was a 4 WAR guy and Merrifield has been a 4 WAR player averaging over last 3 seasons.

Bill James latest career rankings has Zobrist as #36 2B of all-time.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 08, 2019, 04:53:53 pm
Using fWAR Merrifield has been worth 2.8, 5.2, 2.9.  His wRC+ is 105, 119, 110 in those seasons.  At the same age Zobrist 8.7, 3.8, 6.4 with wRC+ 152, 100, 130.  2016 Zobrist in 4.0 with wRC+ 124.  Zobrist was just better. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 08, 2019, 04:54:43 pm
If you want Contreras Im gonna need an arm and 2 legs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 08, 2019, 05:29:06 pm
Using fWAR Merrifield has been worth 2.8, 5.2, 2.9.  His wRC+ is 105, 119, 110 in those seasons.  At the same age Zobrist 8.7, 3.8, 6.4 with wRC+ 152, 100, 130.  2016 Zobrist in 4.0 with wRC+ 124.  Zobrist was just better. 


Instead of cherry-picking the WAR method that better supports a conclusion, let’s both just average bWAR and fWAR.

If we do that, Merrifield has 12.15 WAR (13.4 and 10.9, respectively) over past 3 seasons. So, basically a 4 WAR per season player (as I noted in previous post).

Zobrist in Cubs 2016 and 2018 has 7.3 WAR (7.0 and 7.6, respectively) over those two seasons. So, basically 3.65 WAR per season. Let’s just bump him to 4 WAR (as I did in previous post).

So, if you liked Zobrist at his Cubs best, that’s Merrifield.

That’s the point.

Already agreed that Zobrist in his peak Rays seasons was better. That’s a non-issue and why I pointed out how highly Bill James ranks Zobrist career.

So, hop aboard.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 08, 2019, 05:39:33 pm
From a Mark Gonzales Q&A:

Merrifield will be a priority this winter, and there’s a match with the Royals involving a combination of an outfielder and infielder.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/cubs/ct-chicago-cubs-kris-bryant-david-ross-20191030-zhhmkeqeqzffre4qvxpr7txvj4-story.html

If the outfielder/infielder combination is something like Almora and Bote, then sure, do it. But I hope they're not thinking of trading Hoerner for Merrifield at this point. That would be an all-in move for 2020--Merrifield improves the team in 2020, but is already 31...it's probably more likely than not that Hoerner is the better player by 2021 or 2022. With the team constructed as it is now and the limited money they have to spend, this offseason just isn't the time to go all in on next year.

I think there's a lot of assumption in there.  I'm not convinced Hoerner will ever be a better player than Merrifield, certainly not a better player than he is now.  There's enough Almora in Hoerner's offensive approach to give anyone pause, and his minor league numbers don't suggest stardom is in his future.  And Merrifield got a late start, and has a lot of Zobrist in him both mentally and on the field - I could see him being very good well into his mid-30's.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 08, 2019, 05:45:20 pm
Javy 2nd in baseball in DRS at SS:

https://twitter.com/SportsInfo_SIS/status/1192552362885419008
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 08, 2019, 06:20:37 pm
Instead of cherry-picking the WAR method that better supports a conclusion, let’s both just average bWAR

I’ve always used fWAR so it isn’t cherry picking. The big difference is Merrifield is going to cost a significant trade cost, where Zobrist only cost money.

Merrifield and Zobrist aren’t similar players and the shouldn’t be expected to have the same aging curves.

Hoerner is Almora if he struck out less, hit for more power and walked and was way above league average in offense. Other than that the are totally similar if they make contact I guess. 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on November 08, 2019, 07:27:38 pm
Yeah, I see very little similarities between Hoerner and Almora...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 08, 2019, 07:31:53 pm
Former Padres manager Andy Green is the new Cubs bench coach.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 08, 2019, 07:43:57 pm
Go for it.

Each year is another opportunity.

If you aint trying to win every year you're doing a disservice to your fans.

If the Front Office followed that advice when they took over, we would still be waiting for our first World Series.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 08, 2019, 08:11:22 pm
If you don't see the similarities between Hoerner and Almora you're kidding yourself.  Lots of weak contact, not many walks, occasional power.  Hoerner has a .792 career OPS in the minors - it's not as if he can't be a good player, but this is not a Bryant or Schwarber or even Happ track record.  I think Nico can and probably will be a better hitter than Almora, but depending on him to be a starting-caliber hitter is a huge gambIe.  Of course Merrifield had a career .736 OPS in the minors so those numbers don't tell everything.  Not saying I'd necessarily give up Hoerner for him, but given how cheap Merrifield is and what he's already accomplished as a major league player, you would be nuts to dismiss it out of hand.

As for Andy Green, he'd probably have been my top choice if Farrell was (for some reason) not being considered, especially if the alternatives were Gonzalez and for fuch's sake Jim Riggleman.  I lived in SD part of the time he managed there and saw a lot of him, and he did OK considering the team was pretty much in full tank mode for most of his tenure.  Of course he failed dismally this past season when the Pads were actually trying to win, and there were reportedly communication issues between he and the players.  He is very pro-analytics at least, and a big believer in defensive shifting.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 08, 2019, 08:50:47 pm
Am I in some alternate reality where .792 is closer to Almora’s .734 OPS than Happ’s .823 in the minors? 

If you league adjust Hoerner was better in the minors than Happ.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 08, 2019, 08:56:20 pm
If you league adjust Hoerner was better in the minors than Happ.

If that makes you feel better.

You're conveniently omitting the fact that better than a third of Happ's minor league ABs were last year, when he was trying to implement a radical swing change, and those numbers drag his overall OPS down.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 08, 2019, 09:06:51 pm
If that makes you feel better.

You're conveniently omitting the fact that better than a third of Happ's minor league ABs were last year, when he was trying to implement a radical swing change, and those numbers drag his overall OPS down.

What if Hoerner had a higher wRC+ and wOBA than Happ at AA?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 08, 2019, 09:07:27 pm
Comedy gold.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 08, 2019, 09:14:09 pm
Hoerner .344/.399. .743 OPS wRC+ 117, wOBA .342
Happ     .318/.415. .733 OPS  .wRC+ 111, wOBA .337

Hoerner other league are all super small sample size and it wouldn’t be fair to Happ.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 08, 2019, 09:16:09 pm
It's hard to imagine anyone contorting to cherry pick stats more often and energetically than you do.  It doesn't make your arguments any less unpersuasive, but the effort is certainly notable.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 08, 2019, 09:55:25 pm
Just curious whether it matters that Hoerner has a total of 375 PA in the minors, part of them recovering from an injury), whereas Happ had 1407 PA in the minors?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 08, 2019, 10:20:44 pm
Aww that cute coming from you. Maybe next time look at the stats next time.

You're conveniently omitting the fact that better than a third of Happ's minor league ABs were last year, when he was trying to implement a radical swing change, and those numbers drag his overall OPS down.

Through a similar point in their careers (Draft +1) Happ had a .815 OPS. Excluding last year Happ’s minor league OPS was .835.  It’s cute when facts stare you straight in the face and you still go nope I’m right.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on November 08, 2019, 10:27:19 pm
I guess I’m kidding myself, then...I don’t find them similar at all.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 08, 2019, 10:31:10 pm
Almora is a light hitting centerfielder with no infield skills.  Hoerner is projected to be an average hitter with multiple position skills, particularly shortstop.  I don't care what stats say, you trade Almora.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 08, 2019, 10:53:12 pm
I had hopes for Almora but watching him he seems to have little intuitive sense of how pitchers are working him. Before you can adjust, think you have to think along with pitchers better than he does. Not sure how you get better at that. Almora’s offense has declined significantly two seasons in a row, as pitchers work him without much of an Almora adjustment. In 2019, he was basically a replacement level player.

Hoerner strikes me as a very different player at this point. If Dixon Machado doesn’t get hurt at Iowa, Hoerner isn’t even in majors in 2019. So, thought his performance in majors 2019 was admirable considering that wasn’t the plan and he has so little seasoning.

Not going to trade Hoerner this off-season. Don’t think Theo will.

Almora will be entering his age 26 season, so who knows. Maybe he’ll figure things out but that’s not my expectation and would be willing to trade him to close a good trade.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 08, 2019, 11:09:31 pm
I had hopes for Almora but watching him he seems to have little intuitive sense of how pitchers are working him. Before you can adjust, think you have to think along with pitchers better than he does. Not sure how you get better at that. Almora’s offense has declined significantly two seasons in a row, as pitchers work him without much of an Almora adjustment. In 2019, he was basically a replacement level player.

Hoerner strikes me as a very different player at this point. If Dixon Machado doesn’t get hurt at Iowa, Hoerner isn’t even in majors in 2019. So, thought his performance in majors 2019 was admirable considering that wasn’t the plan and he has so little seasoning.

Not going to trade Hoerner this off-season. Don’t think Theo will.

Almora will be entering his age 26 season, so who knows. Maybe he’ll figure things out but that’s not my expectation and would be willing to trade him to close a good trade.

I would like to see the Cubs try Hoerner in Center field.  I don't think he will be able to play shortstop on a full time basis, but center field may well be his ultimate destination.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 08, 2019, 11:15:36 pm
I’ve always used fWAR so it isn’t cherry picking. The big difference is Merrifield is going to cost a significant trade cost, where Zobrist only cost money.

Merrifield and Zobrist aren’t similar players and the shouldn’t be expected to have the same aging curves.


Yeah, would be better if Merrifield was a free agent, as Zobrist was, but once the guy is on the field, that becomes besides the point.

Suggest that you argue with Theo and Cubs brass about Merrifield because sure seems like Cubs decision-makers covet him, no?

For the third time noting that Zobrist was better than Merrifield when the former was with Rays but both are 4 WAR players (Zobrist with Cubs and Merrifield last 3 seasons). Very similar players in those periods. Just an irrefutable fact whether you acknowledge or not.

Also, Merrifield at end of his current control in three years could end up anywhere. So, if Cubs acquire him, irrelevant whether his career path turns out like Zobrist. In any case, in three years, Merrifield will be two years younger than when Zobrist signed with Cubs, but beside the point if he’s elsewhere by then.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 08, 2019, 11:34:28 pm
Zobrist was much better on offense in 2016 and 2018 than Merrifield has ever been.

Steamer is projecting .282/.337/.426 for wRC+ 99 for Merrifield and 1.8 WAR. His statcast expected numbers from last year are in line with that. He’s a high BABIP guy that doesn’t walk and doesn’t have much power. They don’t age well. Wake me up when he there are serious rumors about him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 09, 2019, 01:53:20 am
Zobrist was much better on offense in 2016 and 2018 than Merrifield has ever been.

Steamer is projecting .282/.337/.426 for wRC+ 99 for Merrifield and 1.8 WAR. His statcast expected numbers from last year are in line with that. He’s a high BABIP guy that doesn’t walk and doesn’t have much power. They don’t age well. Wake me up when he there are serious rumors about him.

Steamer has been miserable projecting Merrifield.

2019:  Steamer  .738 OPS    Actual OPS  .811

2018:  Steamer  .725 OPS    Actual OPS .805

You should be hesitant to rely on Steamer when it comes to Merrifield.  Pretty sure that Theo is a bit more sophisticated about that.

As to Merrifield and Zobrist, the average of fWAR and bWAR tell you that both were 4 WAR players in the relevant seasons.  You can parse, cherry-pick, whatever, but those are the facts.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 09, 2019, 02:29:57 am
Why are you comparing Zobrist to Merrifield when Zobrist is damn near ready to retire and Merrifield is only 31?

Merrifield can also play CF which is a position of need and Zobrist cant.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on November 09, 2019, 07:42:32 am
That's a good point about CF, DUSTY.  Acquisition of Merrifield would help solve 3 problems- 2B, CF, and leadoff.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 09, 2019, 08:11:30 am
He isn’t a good OF. He’s much better at 2B and the cost is going to be large in a trade.

Steamer shows what happens when his BAPIP goes down.

Speaking of somebody that might actually be available I wonder what Jon Grey would cost in a trade. If you could get him and replace Quintana with Wheeler the cost of the rotation would be just a little more expensive, but you would add a lot of velocity and strike outs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 09, 2019, 12:24:23 pm
He isn’t a good OF. He’s much better at 2B and the cost is going to be large in a trade.


Merrifield is +3 Defensive Runs Saved in 1200 career outfield innings. He’s an average OFer.

He’s a better 2B, yes, but can play several positions on a solid basis, including up-the-middle CF and 2B.

Theo also seems to like him because he’s a club leader-type that Cubs are coveting.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 09, 2019, 03:14:39 pm
Theo is a great statesman, so he's said stuff that appeal to everybody.  In his presser, he talked proudly of his willingness to trade and not overvalue prospects.  He's talked about contending every year.  So pretty strong appeal to Nowacrats.  But he's also made some Buildican comments, about looking beyond the next two years.  Of course he's also made comments that appeal to "shake it up, make major trade" listeners.  So pretty hard to guess what he may actually be willing to do, and how to balance Nowacrat and Buildican values.
 I imagine those pull at cross purposes for him, just like they do for some of us, myself included. 

Personally, I'm inclined to go relatively buildican.  If a guy like Merrifield is available for Happ, fine.  Or for Bote + Almora + some not-that-favorite minor leaguer, OK. 

But if Merrifield costs Hoerner + Brailyn, or something on that order, I'd pull out.  We've got so very little young, cost-controlled futures talent that I really don't want to sell much of any of it. 

I'd kinda rather just roll the dice, stick with Hoerner for 2b and hope he works, and just spend the money for maybe Shogo.  Take a shot that way, without sacrificing any futures for your shot.  If Hoerner and Shogo aren't good enough to support a contending team this year, bummer.  But as Jeff notes, we've got to create some talent, and there isn't safety/surety there.  Maybe Shogo and Hoerner will be quite capable, immediately; and combined with existing guys, the offense which scored a decent number of runs as is, will actually improve score more and score more situationally, and end up being good enough to get into the playoffs? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 09, 2019, 03:20:35 pm
I think one of the problems, of course, is that Theo is so prioritized on clubhouse leadership.  If you bring in Shogo, he might be the perfect player and a terrific value for price...  but probably as a new guy with English as 2nd language, I'd not imagine he's going to immediately take over as a a self-confident accountability guy.  Same from the pitching side; maybe Ryu is a good guy to pursue without being prohibitively expensive.  But is a craft Japanese guy going to take over the clubhouse leadership and accountability patrol?

I'm kinda guessing that if "edgy" leaderhip and accountability-patrol is what he's looking for, maybe the Japanese options might be really good baseball-player fits, but that's 2nd to clubhouse chemistry issues for Theo? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 09, 2019, 03:35:33 pm
There has been talk about Castellanos, because he can hit, make contact, and is less vulnerable to the upper-half pitches than the other Cubs.

I wonder whether signing BOTH Shogo AND Castellanos, AND keeping Schwarber too, would actually make sense?  Probably not monetarily.  But while that might seem like overkill (Shogo plus 3 corner outfielders....),having some surplus has a certain appeal to me.  Guys get hurt.  If Shogo isn't that good, Hayward could fill some center.   Castellanos could sit against some RHP.  Schwarber could sit against some tough LHP.  Heyward could sit some during his slumps and be late-inning defensive replacement.  Perhaps with the four of them, you'd actually end up with quite a very good offensive outfield, overall?  And on games or innings when both Shoto and Hayward played, perhaps the defense would be pretty decent, too? 

The other advantage of spending on OF and going surplus there, is that you'd not need to be sending infielders out there.  How many games this year (and prior) have we had Bryant playing OF, with Bote at 3rd?  Or Zobrist in OF?  Or Contreras in OF? 

Ron has expressed some concern with Bryant's 3B defense:  what if he just played 3B all the time, and practiced 3B, and focused on 3B?  He's been great in that he could go to left, center, right, or 1B, and play any of them reasonably well.  But might it not be best for both him and the team to just stay put at 3B?

Not sure if you want to ever see Happ play another inning at 2B, or Bote either.  But perhaps if you do keep one of those two guys, and 2B is the position with some available starts in combo with Hoerner, maybe doing less multi-position stuff and more practice and focus on a primary position might help those guys, too? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 09, 2019, 07:03:38 pm
I think one of the problems, of course, is that Theo is so prioritized on clubhouse leadership.  If you bring in Shogo, he might be the perfect player and a terrific value for price...  but probably as a new guy with English as 2nd language, I'd not imagine he's going to immediately take over as a a self-confident accountability guy.  Same from the pitching side; maybe Ryu is a good guy to pursue without being prohibitively expensive.  But is a craft Japanese guy going to take over the clubhouse leadership and accountability patrol?

I'm kinda guessing that if "edgy" leaderhip and accountability-patrol is what he's looking for, maybe the Japanese options might be really good baseball-player fits, but that's 2nd to clubhouse chemistry issues for Theo? 

Actually Akiyama is known as a great clubhouse guy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 09, 2019, 11:03:27 pm
I wouldn't count on Hoerner playing much for the Cubs.  He was rushed up this year, and I suspect he will start the season down in Iowa, where he can actually perfect his skills without hurting the MLB team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 10, 2019, 07:09:13 am
SABR 2019 defensive rankings for CF, NL:


Player   Team   SDI
Victor Robles   WSN   11.1
Lorenzo Cain   MIL   10.2
Harrison Bader   STL   9.3
Manuel Margot   SDP   4.1
Ronald Acuna Jr.   ATL   3.4
Alex Verdugo   LAD   2.3
Jarrod Dyson   ARI   1.6
Scott Kingery   PHI   0.0
Ketel Marte   ARI   -1.1
Nick Senzel   CIN   -2.6
Starling Marte   PIT   -3.4
Kevin Pillar   SFG   -4.9
Albert Almora   CHC   -5.8
Ian Desmond   COL   -14.7
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on November 10, 2019, 08:32:22 am
Schwarber and Hoerner for Merrifield?  Just say no.

https://www.cubsinsider.com/2019/11/09/cubs-trade-rumors-whit-merrifield-will-be-priority-match-exists-involving-infielder-and-outfielder/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 10, 2019, 08:42:42 am
Sharma has a piece up that pegs Willson as the guy the Cubs are most likely to trade.

Topkin has a piece that the Rays are looking for more offense and mentions catcher as an area of upgrade. They’d seem to match up well with the Cubs of you day pitching.

https://www.tampabay.com/sports/rays/2019/11/09/rays-head-to-gm-meetings-seeking-offense/?outputType=amp&__twitter_impression=true
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 10, 2019, 08:44:41 am
Schwarber and Hoerner for Merrifield?  Just say no.

https://www.cubsinsider.com/2019/11/09/cubs-trade-rumors-whit-merrifield-will-be-priority-match-exists-involving-infielder-and-outfielder/

Quote
Or maybe the Royals have had their eye on Daniel Descalso since hiring Mike Matheny as manager, thereby making ol’ Danny D the big trade chip. Or not.


If Matheny is interested in Descalso or not, accept whatever the Royals are offering.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 10, 2019, 10:56:18 am
Sharma makes a strong case for Contreras being the most likely core player to be traded.

https://theathletic.com/1363480/2019/11/10/why-trading-willson-contreras-could-help-the-cubs-extend-their-contention-window/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on November 10, 2019, 11:05:56 am
Schwarber and Hoerner for Merrifield?  Just say no.

https://www.cubsinsider.com/2019/11/09/cubs-trade-rumors-whit-merrifield-will-be-priority-match-exists-involving-infielder-and-outfielder/
If this happened, I would be on the “Fire Hoystein” bandwagon, effective immediately.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 10, 2019, 11:58:58 am
Sharma makes a strong case for Contreras being the most likely core player to be traded.


If Caratini is not a dramatic dropoff from Contreras, just trade Caratini instead. Perhaps other clubs have a similar opinion as Sharma about Caratini.

For a big chunk of 2019, Contreras and Baez were the Cubs players putting up dramatically better numbers than the NL average at his position. So, don’t see benefit of removing one of these guys.

Caratini would be a nice trade piece. Do that instead.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 10, 2019, 12:09:18 pm
I can't imagine that the Royals would have any interest in getting Schwarber in a Merrifield trade. He's only two years from free agency, and they're definitely not contending in that window. Schwarber only fits with a team that is trying to win now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brs2 on November 10, 2019, 12:22:56 pm
I can't imagine that the Royals would have any interest in getting Schwarber in a Merrifield trade. He's only two years from free agency, and they're definitely not contending in that window. Schwarber only fits with a team that is trying to win now.

Yeah, I thought Happ / Bote or Hoerner better fit their profile.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 10, 2019, 02:41:10 pm
Scott Harris was named the Giants GM.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 10, 2019, 05:45:33 pm
Sharma makes a strong case for Contreras being the most likely core player to be traded.

https://theathletic.com/1363480/2019/11/10/why-trading-willson-contreras-could-help-the-cubs-extend-their-contention-window/

He's right.  If the Cubs are going to trade from the core, Bryant, Contreras and Schwarber (if you consider him part of it) are the only real possibilities.  Schwarber won't bring much back, and Bryant is simply harder to match up in a trade.  By default Contreras is really the spotlight guy.  Plus the fact that you have what looks like a pretty solid alternative in Caratini, a loaded catcher FA market and your best position player in the minors at the position, and the math adds up.  Will anyone offer enough to make it worthwhile?  That's the key question.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 10, 2019, 09:37:59 pm
If the catcher free market is loaded, why would a team trade to get Contreras instead of signing a free agent?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 10, 2019, 09:42:44 pm
The free agent catcher market looks pretty terrible to me. Grandal is very good. But the next best catcher on the market is...d'Arnaud? Castro? Chirinos? It's Grandal as the only starter and a lot of pretty good back-ups.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/08/2019-20-mlb-free-agents.html
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 10, 2019, 09:50:48 pm
Damn I wouldnt trade Contreras.

He should be our Yadier Molina.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 10, 2019, 09:51:02 pm
On the other hand, catching is pretty bad around MLB right now. Maybe a free agent market with a top five catcher and several guys you don't mind starting in 80 games is a strong market.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 10, 2019, 10:25:22 pm
I think it is a strong market to get a back up. Getting Willson for $4.5 would be a steal vs what Grandal will get. Through in that Amaya could be ready in a year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 10, 2019, 11:48:29 pm
If the catcher free market is loaded, why would a team trade to get Contreras instead of signing a free agent?

$$$$$

Plus, most of those options are more relevant to us as complements to Caratini rather than premium frontline catchers.  The only one who probably fits that description is Grandal, and Contreras will be a lot cheaper (and younger) over the next three years.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on November 11, 2019, 10:51:25 am
Quote
Schwarber and Hoerner for Merrifield?  Just say no.

https://www.cubsinsider.com/2019/11/09/cubs-trade-rumors-whit-merrifield-will-be-priority-match-exists-involving-infielder-and-outfielder/

Does that guy actually know more than any of us?  Since it's the offseason, I'll ask:  where does he stand in terms of being a "real journalist?"
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on November 11, 2019, 11:01:30 am
His journalistic credentials are probably similar to mine.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 11, 2019, 11:12:46 am
Altman runs the blog and has done some work with the Pelicans, but that was clearly speculation riffing off of Gonzales. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 11, 2019, 11:25:28 am
From Around Baseball on Friday

Quote from: Bennett
The above betting lines were copied from a CubsInsider tweet.  If you go to the link that follows, what you see is quite a bit different. I'm about ready to stop looking at what CubsInsider has to say about anything.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 11, 2019, 04:20:10 pm
I kinda get it why somebody would speculate about Hoerner as trade bait but, in the real world, don’t expect Theo to do that—-even in a Merrifield deal, a guy that Cubs seem to covet.

With the core getting near free agency, makes little sense to deal a near-ready guy who projects as a solid regular. It’s robbing Peter to pay Paul. I don’t see it happening.

Also not keen about trading Contreras UNLESS Theo doesn’t really believe his recent Contreras comments. Suppose it’s possible that Cubs don’t really rate him that highly and figure good time to move him now. But, Theo said Contreras is a potential MVP caliber guy. Considering how few catchers have actually won a MVP, beats me why Cubs would trade a guy like that with three years of control and who seems to love playing for Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 11, 2019, 04:37:54 pm
1.) You are going to have to give up something to get something.  Willson could likely bring back an amount similar to what Bryant will.
2.) He's easier to replace than Bryant.  Caratini offense is legit and he's a better framer than Willson.  Sign a defensive catcher to be the back up and the Cubs will free up some money this year.  Amaya has Willson's offensive potential and is supposed be an excellent defensive catcher as well.  He'll be at AA this year and could be ready for next year.
3.) Caratini makes a ton more contact than Willson.  He was at 78.8% and doesn't have weakness with high fastball or breaking balls.  He diversifies the offense.
4.) The Rays need a catcher and right handed power and have a ton of major league ready arms that the Cubs need. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 11, 2019, 04:49:41 pm
...Also not keen about trading Contreras UNLESS Theo doesn’t really believe his recent Contreras comments. ... beats me why Cubs would trade a guy like that with three years of control and who seems to love playing for Cubs.

https://theathletic.com/1363480/2019/11/10/why-trading-willson-contreras-could-help-the-cubs-extend-their-contention-window/

The Athletic article which suggests Contreras trade might make sense. 

I'm not sure the article gives a super compelling reason to trade Contreras.  Basically the logic builds on several things:
1.  Process of elimination.  Theo said he wants to trade somebody and shake things up.  But Schwarber and Bryant won't bring much, and you don't want to trade Rizzo or Baez.  So, that leaves Contreras. 
2.  Contreras has much more trade value than the other four.  Because he's got 3 years of control instead of only two, and because of supply and demand for catchers. 
3.  Sharma likes Caratini, and thinks that offensively he'd not be that large a dropoff from Contreras.  Plus he's a different batting profile from Contreras and the other three non-Rizzos.   

I think your scouting question cuts to the heart of the issue, though.  Contreras has been a chronically awful framer; do Theo and Ross think he's really improved, and that he'll be only modestly bad in that his worst aspect?  Or is all the MVP-candidate, improved-framer stuff just salesmanship?  Who knows? 

I think Ross has to be a factor here.  He's a huge believer in the little things of catching, and is very detailed and stuff.  So perhaps he's not a fan of the Contreras profile?  If Ross is daily frustrated with Contreras, maybe they figure now is the time while he's still got 3 years. 

But yeah, the whole question just kind of puzzles me.  Theo talks up what he's going to do to improve the team, shake things up, etc..  But you've only got 5 guys, and I'm not sure it actually makes sense to trade ANY of them. 

I think it's entirely possible that once we get to spring training, the changes are on the margins, not at the core.  No major FA signings; no major trades of any of our five guys; just some changes on the edge.  Which, personally, I think might be the wisest and OK.  (Other than the keep-Q decision, which of course I don't like and think is a waste of discretionary budget.)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 11, 2019, 05:09:53 pm
1.) You are going to have to give up something to get something.  Willson could likely bring back an amount similar to what Bryant will.
2.) He's easier to replace than Bryant.  Caratini offense is legit and he's a better framer than Willson.  Sign a defensive catcher to be the back up and the Cubs will free up some money this year.  Amaya has Willson's offensive potential and is supposed be an excellent defensive catcher as well.  He'll be at AA this year and could be ready for next year.
3.) Caratini makes a ton more contact than Willson.  He was at 78.8% and doesn't have weakness with high fastball or breaking balls.  He diversifies the offense.
4.) The Rays need a catcher and right handed power and have a ton of major league ready arms that the Cubs need.

Yeah, I know that Bleacher Nation just ran a piece headlining Contreras and the Rays.

This is what Theo said about Contreras after this season:

“Shame on us if we can't continue his development at the big league level, because this is like the most tooled-out, athletic catcher who has a huge heart and cares and wants his pitcher to succeed as well...the best version of Willson Contreras is an MVP candidate, a difference making catcher.”

If Rays want a catcher, trade them Victor Caratini. Baseball Trade Values site rates Caratini as having almost as much trade value as Contreras—seems that you agree as you point out above all the Caratini pluses. I don’t buy that but perhaps Rays agree with you and Baseball Trade Values.

I’m more in the Contreras corner as in Theo’s comments above, assuming he means what he said.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 11, 2019, 05:27:52 pm

..I think Ross has to be a factor here.  He's a huge believer in the little things of catching, and is very detailed and stuff.  So perhaps he's not a fan of the Contreras profile?  If Ross is daily frustrated with Contreras, maybe they figure now is the time while he's still got 3 years.  But yeah, the whole question just kind of puzzles me.  Theo talks up what he's going to do to improve the team, shake things up, etc..  But you've only got 5 guys, and I'm not sure it actually makes sense to trade ANY of them...


Think that's a very good point. Ross obviously knows catching and he figures to have a lot to say about a catcher trade.

Cubs have Contreras and Caratini and perhaps that’s a luxury—given other club needs—and one has to go. Would be interesting to know how Ross rates these guys and what his recommendation to the brass will be.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 11, 2019, 06:01:46 pm
Caratini doesn’t really fit the Rays need for right handed power. Keeping both Contreras and Baez makes it much harder to improve the contact on the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on November 11, 2019, 06:40:02 pm
What is Contreras' value vis-a-vis acquiring controllable starting pitching?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 11, 2019, 07:29:05 pm
His surplus value is probably somewhere around $40 million or pretty close to what Realmuto brought back in trade.  You’d be looking a cost controlled MLB player and top pitching prospect.

So the Rays it would be like McKay/Honeywell and Baz/McClellan. The Padres it would be like Lamet and Patino. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 11, 2019, 07:41:49 pm
With McCann retiring, I’ve wondered if the Braves could be an option too. Max Fried seems like the most likely fit there, at least from the Cubs perspective. The Braves might disagree.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on November 11, 2019, 07:48:13 pm
With McCann retiring, I’ve wondered if the Braves could be an option too. Max Fried seems like the most likely fit there, at least from the Cubs perspective. The Braves might disagree.

Contreras's brother is there too, FWIW.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 11, 2019, 07:52:12 pm
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/willson-contreras-trade-rumors-ranking-all-30-mlb-teams-as-a-possible-landing-spot-for-the-cubs-catcher/amp/

You can make a strong argument for a lot of teams.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 11, 2019, 09:37:29 pm
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/willson-contreras-trade-rumors-ranking-all-30-mlb-teams-as-a-possible-landing-spot-for-the-cubs-catcher/amp/

You can make a strong argument for a lot of teams.


Interesting piece. Thanks for posting.

At top of the piece, it lists top catchers in bWAR over past three seasons.

Among others, article notes that Contreras had 9.8 WAR and Grandal had 8.0 WAR.

Here is the difference in the way Fangraphs now incorporates framing in catcher WAR:

Contreras 5.8 fWAR and Grandal 14.0 fWAR.

!!!!!!!

I know that Grandal  is a superb framer but, good grief, Contreras goes from slightly better than Grandal to Grandal having almost 2 1/2 times the value? I know that Grandal played more but still...just think that benefits of framing still in early stages of valuation.

One more thing. Steamer 2020 projections: Contreras 1.3 WAR (406 PAs) and Caratini 1.0 WAR (250 PAs). Basically identical adjusted, with Caratini slightly better. Are you buying?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on November 11, 2019, 09:42:58 pm
If we're trading Contreras, we need to get a #2/3 starter.  Is that not realistic?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 11, 2019, 09:50:40 pm
More thoughts on Fangraphs framing.

Available data only goes back so far, so historical catchers don’t get the adjusted benefit (or downgrade).

Russell Martin now has 54.0 fWAR. That puts Martin fWAR ahead of Gabby Hartnett fWAR and Mickey Cochrane fWAR.

Don’t think so.

Average HOF catcher has 54.3 WAR. That makes Martin a typical HOF catcher. Brian McGann too (53.4 fWAR).

Don’t think so.

Jonathan Lucroy has 18.0 bWAR and 37.6 fWAR. Wholly different career valuation.

Baseball historians go crazy about Rick Ferrell being in the HOF. But, Ferrell had 33.7 bWAR and everybody in his day thought he was a superb defensive catcher. Give him another 20 WAR for framing and Ferrell is an average HOF catcher!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 11, 2019, 10:03:03 pm
Steamer seems light on his power and BA.

If we're trading Contreras, we need to get a #2/3 starter.  Is that not realistic?

What is your definition of a #2/3 starter?  Are you talking current, potential?  I think it is certainly possible to get a guy with #2 upside if you are willing to take less control (Jon Grey) or a prospect. I don’t think you could get a guy that slots in ahead Darvish/Hendricks immediately.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 11, 2019, 10:19:35 pm
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/willson-contreras-trade-rumors-ranking-all-30-mlb-teams-as-a-possible-landing-spot-for-the-cubs-catcher/amp/
You can make a strong argument for a lot of teams.

This clip and paste from the above article pretty much gives my point of view.

"The Cubs don't have to trade Contreras. Victor Caratini is a nice enough player, but he's not Contreras, and the Cubbies are trying to win next season. Yeah, Chicago could benefit from the multiple young players they'd acquire in a Contreras trade, but they'd also be weaker behind the plate. I say keep him unless you're blown away with an offer."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 11, 2019, 11:55:04 pm
Gray is exactly the sort of pitcher I'd be looking for in a Contreras deal, but I'm skeptical that the Rockies would be a fit.  I don't think they'd see the logic in a Contreras deal from their perspective.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 12, 2019, 01:20:43 am
Gray would be a good pickup but will be less costly in terms of giving up value to sign a veteran free agent SP than trading away players/prospects.

An interesting guy is Kyle Gibson. Did not get a QO and has averaged 30 starts per season over last three years. Age 32 but actually ticked up in velocity in 2019, with good K rate and lots of grounders. A bit homer prone but, if no TORP addition as seems the case, could be a good pickup to replace Hamels or if Q is trade bait. Jon Heyman says 10 teams are interested in him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 12, 2019, 09:28:14 am
Gibson is an intersection guy for the reasons that mentioned. He’s also scary because he was diagnosed with Ulcerative Colitis. How extensive is his, how will his meds effect him, what are the chances he relapses?  Those are all questions the medical team is going o have to answer.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 12, 2019, 03:26:42 pm
SCOTTSDALE, Arizona — Maybe the Brandon Morrow Era with the Cubs isn’t over, after all.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/cubs/2019/11/12/20961822/chicago-cubs-bullpen-brandon-morrow
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 12, 2019, 03:55:29 pm
Well, I suggested that possibility during the season.  If Morrow has any sense of loyalty at all he'd certainly give the Cubs first crack at an incentive-laden minor league deal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 12, 2019, 04:21:08 pm
I was thinking a few days ago that I'd be down to bring him back for cheap and I mean real cheap.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 12, 2019, 05:34:42 pm
I'd rather just move on. He's probably going to get hurt again, so he's at least as big a crapshoot as anyone else you can bring in on an incentive-laden minor league contract. It's not like he has a long track record of being especially good when healthy anyway.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 12, 2019, 05:40:24 pm
Jon Heyman @JonHeyman
Cubs are clear that they will consider trading from their excellent core — Bryant, Contreras, Baez, Schwarber, etc. “We’ve had a stable core for 5 years ... We’re going to have change.” — Cubs GM Jed Hoyer
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 12, 2019, 08:22:44 pm
SCOTTSDALE, Arizona — Maybe the Brandon Morrow Era with the Cubs isn’t over, after all.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/cubs/2019/11/12/20961822/chicago-cubs-bullpen-brandon-morrow

Very cool.  I'd love to have him on a minor-league contract and give him a chance.  What's the harm?  I think those are some of the things that end up working out for teams that have unexpected success.  We need some things to break right; and I think unexpectedly having a really deep and effective bullpen would be front and foremost.  What if Kimbrel showed up and somehow magically was actually pretty good?  And if Morrow showed up and was quite good?  And why not Wick?  And Wieck?  And Alzolay? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 12, 2019, 08:30:05 pm
Jon Heyman @JonHeyman  Cubs are clear that they will consider trading from their excellent core — Bryant, Contreras, Baez, Schwarber, etc. “We’ve had a stable core for 5 years ... We’re going to have change.” — Cubs GM Jed Hoyer

Heyman's phrase is "will consider trading"....  Hoyer's is "We're going to have change."  The latter sounds more committed, beyond simply "considering". 

At the same time, whether Hoyer's reference to "core" assumes the same definition as Heyman's 5, who knows.  And whether Hoyer's "will have change" actually will involve the big 5, who knows.  Maybe his "change" is Almora, Russell, and Strop, beats me.

But I think there's a chance that they're going to make some change-for-change-sake, perhaps even if that means they'll make talent-negative move?   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 12, 2019, 08:45:46 pm
....“We’ve had a stable core for 5 years ... We’re going to have change.” — Cubs GM Jed Hoyer[/i]

Hayward hasn't been in the "5-year" core, he's only been for four.  Obviously he's never considered in the "change" group, because he's not good enough to be movable.  But one "core change" might be re-utilizing him as a "mix" guy rather than an every-day-starter commitment. What if they did sign Castellanos and Shogo, for example.... and Hayward was used as a 4th outfielder?  Might that be a "change"?   

I've probably written this before, but there is **always** change.  Suppose you went into the season with Shogo in center, Castellanos in the OF mix, 2B shared among Hoerner-Bote-Happ-Descalzo... would that not be quite a bit of change?  Changing >2/8 of the lineup, both 2B and CF, that seems like considerable change to me, no?  If Hayward was also re-appropriated, might not changing three starting positions be lots and lots and lots of change.... even if you did bring the other big 5 back?  Not likely, I realize. 

Hopefully if make some "change" deal involving one of the core 5, it ends up being very talent-fair and talent-advantageous for us. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 12, 2019, 10:16:25 pm
I'd rather just move on. He's probably going to get hurt again, so he's at least as big a crapshoot as anyone else you can bring in on an incentive-laden minor league contract. It's not like he has a long track record of being especially good when healthy anyway.

Disagree.  If it's a minor-league deal, what's the risk?  And at the end of his tenure in LA and his brief period of being healthy enough to pitch for us, he was dominant.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on November 12, 2019, 10:56:07 pm
Yeah I'd bring him back on a minor league or close to league minimum deal.  Besides he owes us for all the money he ran off with the last two years.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 12, 2019, 11:08:25 pm
If he makes the team, how likely is it that he breaks down again when the Cubs need him? Probably somewhere around 75%.

As thin as the Cubs payroll flexibility is, I'd rather see them spend their limited money on a lottery ticket who might stay healthy, not a 35 year old lottery ticket who has had one (mostly) healthy season since 2012.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 12, 2019, 11:29:58 pm
Morrow has thrown about 210 innings over the last 7 seasons...averaging 30 innings a year. And he spent the first three seasons as a starting pitcher. He's almost definitely going to break down again.

He'll sign a split contract and make something like $4 million if he makes the major league team (and he'll make the team if he can stay healthy in Spring Training). The Cubs aren't spending much this offseason. I don't really see the benefit in using a significant part of their limited payroll to bring back a guy who probably won't pitch after mid-June.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 13, 2019, 09:32:34 am
If he makes the team, how likely is it that he breaks down again when the Cubs need him? Probably somewhere around 75%.

As thin as the Cubs payroll flexibility is, I'd rather see them spend their limited money on a lottery ticket who might stay healthy, not a 35 year old lottery ticket who has had one (mostly) healthy season since 2012.

When he was healthy, he was one of the best relievers in baseball.  I would be happy to have a player on a minor league contract with a 25% chance to be outstanding.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 13, 2019, 10:08:53 am
I've been reading a lot of comments about major trades that confuse me a bit.  Trading for young pitchers and prospects doesn't seem to jibe with some of Theo and Hoyer's comments.  They want impact players who can help win before the window closes.  They need a 2B, a CF, pitching help.   So I envisioned something more along the lines of George Springer and Peacock for Contreras and Quintana.  (Yes, I know Springer is about to go FA)  Or Bryant and Quintana to Tampa for Kiermeier and Yarborough.   Now, somebody will start trying to be the smartest guy in the room pointing out why this doesn't work or that doesn't work and miss the point of finding a trading partner who has a need at catcher or 3B and has a good bat or arm to spare.  I don't think we trade from the core for pieces.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 13, 2019, 10:37:43 am
The Cubs are theoretically trying to extend the window beyond 2021 without a rebuild with a trade.  It isn't just about remaking the 2020 Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 13, 2019, 10:42:13 am
When he was healthy, he was one of the best relievers in baseball.  I would be happy to have a player on a minor league contract with a 25% chance to be outstanding.

Yeah, for a year and a half...followed immediately by a year and a half of injuries. It's not like he has a decade long track record of being great. Most of his career WAR came from a 3 year stretch from 2010-2012 when he was a semi-healthy starting pitcher. Then he contributed next to nothing until 2017 with the Dodgers.

Morrow will make the team if he's brought in on a minor league contract and makes it through Spring Training. He'll presumably make somewhere in the $3-$5 million range when he makes the team. Since they aren't going to spend much this offseason, I'd much rather see them save that money for a player who is younger than 35 and hasn't been injured in every season over the last 7 years.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 13, 2019, 10:52:29 am
The Cubs have $30-40 million to spend, possibly more depending on trades.

You can also structure the contract like Phelps. He gets the minimum if he makes the team and increase the salary depending on games plaid in multiple tiers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 13, 2019, 11:00:33 am
Cubs are naming Dan Kantrovitz VP of scouting from Bruce Levine.

Former Cardinals draft pick from Brown university in 2001.

2004-08 he worked for the Cardinals in the FO
2009-11 he was the A's directer of IFA
2012-15 Cardinals amateur scouting director
2016-current Assistant GM A's- primary focus on overseeing statistical analysis for evaluating and targeting players in the amateur draft, free agent and trade markets.

Brown University undergrad
Harvard masters in statistics.

2012 Draft- Wacha, Piscotty, Carson Kelly, Tim Cooney, Rowan Wick, Kyle Barraclough
2013- Marco Gonzales, Oscar Mercado, Mike Mayers, Luke Voight
2014- Luke Weaver, Jack Flaherty, Austin Gomber, Daniel Ponce De Leon,
2015- Bader, Hicks, DeJong
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 13, 2019, 11:20:04 am
Your conceptual point makes a lot of sense, Blue, thanks. 

I like the conceptual framework in both of your trades:  pitcher + player for pitcher + player.  Including Q as a potential rotation-filler allows the other team to replace the pitcher they are including.  Your concept also allows for variation in talent balance. 

The variant I'd prefer was if we got a lesser or negligible position player, but replaced Q with a better pitcher? 
For example, if we we sent out Q + Schwarber and improved on Q; maybe you'd sign Castellanos to replace Schwarber.  The 2nd-guy in trade could be either a prospect, or perhaps a roster-fill share-time 2B or something? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 13, 2019, 01:59:51 pm
Bob: BREAKING: Cubs will name Dan Kantrovitz VP of scouting. Thoughts?
12:58   
Kiley McDaniel: Sounded like CHC was looking for a new scouting czar more than a scouting director necessarily and that makes some sense. I would guess CHC generally pays better as well. Kantro had a pretty good track record running the draft with STL, has analytics and scouting background.

Kyle Boddy
@drivelinebases
·
1h
Kantrovitz is awesome with great vision. Happy for him. Has helped me quite in bit in the short period of time I've gotten to know him!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 13, 2019, 02:41:50 pm
Your conceptual point makes a lot of sense, Blue, thanks. 

I like the conceptual framework in both of your trades:  pitcher + player for pitcher + player.  Including Q as a potential rotation-filler allows the other team to replace the pitcher they are including.  Your concept also allows for variation in talent balance. 

The variant I'd prefer was if we got a lesser or negligible position player, but replaced Q with a better pitcher? 
For example, if we we sent out Q + Schwarber and improved on Q; maybe you'd sign Castellanos to replace Schwarber.  The 2nd-guy in trade could be either a prospect, or perhaps a roster-fill share-time 2B or something? 
Was that at Blue or me?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 13, 2019, 03:29:40 pm
I've been reading a lot of comments about major trades that confuse me a bit.  Trading for young pitchers and prospects doesn't seem to jibe with some of Theo and Hoyer's comments.  They want impact players who can help win before the window closes.  They need a 2B, a CF, pitching help.   So I envisioned something more along the lines of George Springer and Peacock for Contreras and Quintana.  (Yes, I know Springer is about to go FA)  Or Bryant and Quintana to Tampa for Kiermeier and Yarborough.   Now, somebody will start trying to be the smartest guy in the room pointing out why this doesn't work or that doesn't work and miss the point of finding a trading partner who has a need at catcher or 3B and has a good bat or arm to spare.  I don't think we trade from the core for pieces.

The Mantra is the 16-17 Yankees - "retool, not rebuild".  Easier said than done, but I don't expect the Cubs to deal talent controllable beyond '21 for talent not controllable beyond '21.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 13, 2019, 03:47:39 pm
Looks like Morrow's coming back...

Brandon Morrow is interested in re-signing with the Cubs, even if it's on a Minor League deal, per @GDubCub.

At GM Meetings, Theo told reporters, including @SteveGilbertMLB, "that certainly seems like the type of thing that should make sense for both sides down the road."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 13, 2019, 04:01:00 pm
Not re-signing Morrow to a minor league deal makes no sense.  Don't let misplaced anger over his injuries keep you from making a no-risk deal.  They're just waiting till after the Rule V draft to announce it, probably.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 13, 2019, 04:01:29 pm
Scott Boras on Nicholas Castellanos: “Ol’ St. Nick delivers once a year. Young St. Nick delivers all season.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 13, 2019, 04:07:33 pm
There’s a reason Theo says “down the road” here.

Players signed to minor lg contracts before the Rule 5 Draft are eligible for that draft.

There’s a good chance, based on the quotes, the Cubs and Morrow’s camp have agreement already and plan on waiting to sign until December.--Bleacher Nation
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on November 13, 2019, 04:11:05 pm
Yeah, for a year and a half...followed immediately by a year and a half of injuries. It's not like he has a decade long track record of being great. Most of his career WAR came from a 3 year stretch from 2010-2012 when he was a semi-healthy starting pitcher. Then he contributed next to nothing until 2017 with the Dodgers.

Morrow will make the team if he's brought in on a minor league contract and makes it through Spring Training. He'll presumably make somewhere in the $3-$5 million range when he makes the team. Since they aren't going to spend much this offseason, I'd much rather see them save that money for a player who is younger than 35 and hasn't been injured in every season over the last 7 years.

br, you're pointing out all of the (valid) reasons for why Morrow shouldn't get a contract like you describe.

I'll be shocked if Morrow gets a contract that guarantees him a full year's worth of pay just for making the Opening Day roster.

If that's what he insists on, so be it - just move on.  He'll be sitting out the 2020 season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 13, 2019, 05:23:49 pm
Agree, Jeff.  To some degree, I wonder if minor-league contracts aren't almost more complex than major-league ones?   The "split" between minor vs major league time?  Whether or not the player can opt out and take free agency if he doesn't make the April roster?  How long he might get before such a free-agency option kicks in, if he's not called up?  Appearance-based salary triggers. 

I'd like a deal where Morrow does not need to make the opening roster in order for the Cubs to control him.  Six exhibition-season innings against mostly minor-league hitters, how sure can you be?  Maybe he's throwing 98 and feeling great and he's an obvious "keep until injured".  But I'd not mind having him pitch another month in Tennessee and see how he's feeling and throwing, and bring him up if his health, velocity, and control seem to be healthy?  And then obviously have his contract depend on how many appearances he makes. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 13, 2019, 05:52:19 pm
Morrow, to his credit, seems to be trying to do the right thing here.  Acknowledging that he got a lot of money for almost no performance from the Cubs, and offering them basically a freebie this season.  No way he gets any kind of contract that guarantees him significant money just for making the opening day roster either way.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 13, 2019, 06:40:19 pm
Theo said today "it's certainly a possibility" the Cubs move Tyler Chatwood back into the starting rotation in 2020.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 13, 2019, 06:40:43 pm
Scott Boras said he is open to discussions on an extension for Kris Bryant . “ We have always said to them that has always been Kris’s philosophy with the team.” Boras said Bryant would expect fair market value in any deal agreed to.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 13, 2019, 07:07:02 pm
Theo said today "it's certainly a possibility" the Cubs move Tyler Chatwood back into the starting rotation in 2020.

I think they need to either commit to him in the rotation or trade him to free up maybe half of his contract. Not too interested in seeing another year as a swingman/low leverage reliever when the money saved could probably get a Cishek-level reliever in this market.

If they commit to him in the rotation, they should look to upgrade Quintana’s spot.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 13, 2019, 07:29:39 pm
From the GM meeting:

Epstein said there could be an opportunity to add to the rotation via the next tier of the free-agent pitching class. "The depth and volume of qualified Major League starters is normally a scarcity," Epstein said. "This year, there's quite a few."

• When asked if the Cubs might explore the international market in order to address any of the team's Major League needs, Epstein limited his response to saying, "We'll look and see if there's a fit on that front as well."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 13, 2019, 07:35:21 pm
Chatwood should be traded for as much salary relief as you can get.  If you can’t trade him without giving up a prospect leave him in the pen. He still walks too many people to be counted on in the rotation.  Having him and Lester back to back could really stress the Cubs bullpen with short outings.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 13, 2019, 08:02:21 pm
Are there any Cubs starters who are unlikely to stress the bullpen regularly? Maybe Hendricks.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 13, 2019, 09:18:12 pm
I actually don't think that good-version Chatwood is necessarily that stressful?  Because he's got a fastball and isn't too complicated, and gets groundballs, he can challenge guys unlike Q-Lester-Hendricks. 

So a lot of games he gets through 5-6 innings on less pitches than Lester or Q ever need. 

Obviously if he declines into bad-version Chatwood, that's a different story. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 13, 2019, 10:04:23 pm
Chatwood has gone 6+ innings with the Cubs 4 times in 2 years. Darvish and Hendricks seem to be solid. The Cubs could use 2 more starters or a mechanically stable Quintana + 1 more.  The rotation is holding this team back.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 13, 2019, 10:18:19 pm
I think they need to either commit to him in the rotation or trade him to free up maybe half of his contract. Not too interested in seeing another year as a swingman/low leverage reliever when the money saved could probably get a Cishek-level reliever in this market.

If they commit to him in the rotation, they should look to upgrade Quintana’s spot.

I agree.  Either seriously commit Chatwood to a starter's spot, or move him to another team.  There has never been a lot of question about his stuff.  Time to s**t or get off the pot.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 13, 2019, 11:11:41 pm
Chatwood has gone 6+ innings with the Cubs 4 times in 2 years. Darvish and Hendricks seem to be solid. The Cubs could use 2 more starters or a mechanically stable Quintana + 1 more.  The rotation is holding this team back.

Chatwood was really bad two years ago, get that.  He was pretty decent, relatively consistently so, this season, above average relative to the staff and certainly lots better than Q or Lester.  But, he wasn't in the rotation, so of course he wasn't going to be giving 7-inning games as a reliever and spot starter.  But when he did start this year, I think he was pretty consistently the guy who took the fewest pitches to get through 4-5 innings. 

I'm not saying he'll be a good bet.  But yeah, he might be the Cubs #3 starter, ahead of the finesse lefties.  Which probably speaks to your concern that the rotation is holding the club back. 

But still, what are you going to do?  We want 1-2 new good starters; we want 2B; we want CF; we want relief help.  We want to add all that without trading away Hoerner, Davis, Amaya, or Marquez.  With Q in the fold, we don't have all that much in FA budget to buy a bunch of such guys with $$$. 

So to me, it seems like the Cubs just need to take some risks.  They just don't have the resources to build a safely great team.  To end up being really good, they need some things to break their way, to get lucky on some iffy guys.  Maybe Kimbrel; maybe Q; maybe Morrow; maybe Hoerner; maybe Chatwood; maybe Alzolay; maybe Happ; maybe Schwarber.  I just don't think we've got the resources to add safe asset guys for all three of 2B, CF, 5th starter. 

So I kinda feel like it's a given that they need to take some risks.  I kind of like Chatwood as a take-a-risk guy.  And I won't be surprised if 2B is an assembly of take-a-risk guys. 

I also don't feel obligated to "commit" to Chatwood.  I think that spot should be a competition spot.  If he wins it and earns it, great.  If he's OK but somebody else emerges as better, great.  If he ends up getting used heavily in relief, that's OK too.  Getting a new guy other than Maddon might give him some fresh opportunities in relief, and you've already committed the money.  If you'd only get $4-5 in salary relief to move him, and not really any good talent back, I think you're better off just keeping him and seeing whether he might be pretty good this year. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 13, 2019, 11:23:22 pm
I kind of agree you need to either plan for Chatwood to start or shift him.  But the problem, of course, is you have to have a backup plan because he could show up in Arizona and not be able to throw a strike.  He's a tough one to work around at this point, but given how good his stuff is he does offer more upside than anyone currently in the rotation besides Yu.

Wheeler is the guy that makes so much sense to me but I haven't heard anything connecting us with him.  He's already good and to me, is one of the MORP most likely to make the jump to #1 or 2 starter.  The numbers being tossed around for him seem like an absolute bargain to me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 14, 2019, 08:14:19 am
Craig I don’t see it at all with Chatwood. His BB/9 was a full 1 higher than Hamels who was the worst Cubs starter. In 22 innings as a starter he had 21 K and 12 BB. He’s thrown 150 innings once in his career.  His walk rate wasn’t historically bad like in 2018, but it is still horrible for a starter.

The Cubs made a mistake thinking the spin rates would overcome his walk problems or thinking they could correct it. Chatwood is better of in short bursts where his walk rate is less of a problem.

I agree with Deeg, Wheeler is the bargain on the market. He has injury risk, but he still has upside.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 14, 2019, 08:45:06 am
I think Cole and Strasburg are risky.  Some of the lower tier guys offer better risk/reward payoffs.  I like Bumgarner but isn't he a bit of an asshat?  Ryu, Wheeler, and Wacha.  What's with Wacha's inconsistency? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on November 14, 2019, 09:12:25 am
Wacha is always hurt. Wheeler likely offers the best balance of cost vs upside. Ryu is a great gamble as well due to his age should b able to get him on a 2 year deal.

Personally I think Cole isn't much of a risk. He's elevated his game to a new level. He's max scherzer from 5 years ago.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 14, 2019, 09:24:56 am
Sharma has an informative piece on the new VP of Scouting, Dan Kantrovitz. Seems like an excellent acquisition.


https://theathletic.com/1376637/2019/11/13/what-new-vp-of-scouting-dan-kantrovitz-brings-to-the-cubs/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on November 14, 2019, 10:48:19 am
Yeah, I’m pumped about this guy. Really great draft record with StL.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 14, 2019, 10:48:35 am
Even the Cardinals beat writer likes the hire. The Cardinals where trying to bring him back to their front office as well.

https://www.stltoday.com/sports/baseball/professional/former-cardinals-exec-who-oversaw-their-pitching-rich-drafts-is/article_c46d1892-84d4-51d2-ac54-4f20eaaad67e.amp.html?__twitter_impression=true
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on November 14, 2019, 10:49:54 am
Count me in with the Wheeler fans, and if Contreras could bring back anything like the packages suggested by CBJ, we need to trade him, IMO. Drop off to Caratini won’t be enormous, and as others have said he diversifies the offense.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 14, 2019, 10:57:39 am
Kiley McDaniel thinks his trade value is less and would be more like a 2 WAR player than a 3.  I think Willson's improved framing might not have worked it way through the baseball grapevine yet and that was more pre-trade deadline vs now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on November 14, 2019, 11:00:41 am
One thing referenced in that Athletic article is that it’s something of a steal to get this guy as VP of Scouting, and that he could have been considered for a GM role in other places.

Theo has talked before about the shelf-life of leadership. Have to imagine that with a hire like this, there is some thought to succession planning, too...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 14, 2019, 11:01:19 am
Fangraphs predicts that Wheeler will get a contract somewhere in the 4 years, $70 million range. MLB Trade Rumors is predicting 5 years, $100 million. If either of those are close to what he gets, I don't see the Cubs spending that kind of money on one player this offseason.

If the Cubs sign a free agent starter this offseason, I bet it will be someone in the Tanner Roark or Wade Miley class. Or maybe Michael Pineda's PED suspension will drop his price into the Cubs range. But I'd be surprised to see the Cubs involved in the top of the free agent market.

If the Cubs get a difference making pitcher this offseason, he'll come in a Contreras or Bryant trade.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 14, 2019, 11:52:34 am
It’s not just the payroll hit with Wheeler but Cubs also would forfeit both their 2nd round and 5th round draft picks by signing a guy who turned down a QO.

Don’t see Cubs doing that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 14, 2019, 12:53:09 pm
Sharma on why Castellanos (almost certainly) will not be back with the Cubs and why fans should expect Schwarber will be occupying LF, with Heyward in RF, in 2020.


https://theathletic.com/1375584/2019/11/14/young-st-nick-castellanos-wont-be-stopping-on-the-north-side-but-keeping-kyle-schwarber-could-be-a-gift/?source=shared-article




Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 14, 2019, 12:55:59 pm
The Cubs pursued Mike Napoli last winter but he wanted to take a short break. He will be quality assurance coach for Cubs.--Heyman
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 14, 2019, 07:49:47 pm
Sharma has an informative piece on the new VP of Scouting, Dan Kantrovitz. Seems like an excellent acquisition.
https://theathletic.com/1376637/2019/11/13/what-new-vp-of-scouting-dan-kantrovitz-brings-to-the-cubs/

yeah, he sounds good.  Hope he's really effective!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 14, 2019, 09:33:33 pm
Jordan Bastian
@MLBastian

Terrmel Sledge will also be back as the assistant hitting coach for the Cubs. So, lone spot left on Ross' staff is a base coach -- a role the Cubs will be "patient" with finding the right hire, per a source
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 14, 2019, 11:20:00 pm
Jordan Bastian
@MLBastian

Terrmel Sledge will also be back as the assistant hitting coach for the Cubs. So, lone spot left on Ross' staff is a base coach -- a role the Cubs will be "patient" with finding the right hire, per a source
So where doe that leave Lester Strode?  Are the Cubs going to make up some new "assistant to" title?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 15, 2019, 08:42:47 am
All kinds of reports the Cubs are in on Akiyama, which only makes sense.  He checks a lot of boxes and most importantly given where the organization seems to be at the moment, he'll be pretty cheap.  There's risk there, but the cost should be reasonable enough to make it tolerable.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 15, 2019, 09:32:34 am
Deeg, thanks for that note.  That's encouraging.  It all depends on the scouting, of course; how good is he actually as a defensive CF?  And how good will he be hitting big-league pitching?  If you stick him at leadoff, will he be an asset, a liability, or another JAG guy who fits an 8th place team?  Beats me.  But yeah, the hypothetical concept of a good defensive CFer, a good leadoff guy, and a different style of hitter seems to line up A-B-C with what the Cubs want.  And doing so without costing present or future talent likes it up A-B-C-D.  I'm not sure on cost, but *IF* you wer right and the cost is reasonable rather than problematic, that would seem to be an A-B-C-D-E checklist all looking good.  I'm optimistic. 

• When asked if the Cubs might explore the international market in order to address any of the team's Major League needs, Epstein limited his response to saying, "We'll look and see if there's a fit on that front as well."

Theo is usually very glib and helpfully expansive with his answers.  I thought it interesting that the author used the phrase "limited his response".  Theo's answer is characteristically vague, nothing to suggest more than token due diligence.  Or perhaps the "limited response" was less expansive than usual specifically because Akiyama is a non-trivial possibility? 

https://theathletic.com/1375584/2019/11/14/young-st-nick-castellanos-wont-be-stopping-on-the-north-side-but-keeping-kyle-schwarber-could-be-a-gift/?redirected=1

Outfield article.  "their focus right now when it comes to the outfield is attempting to upgrade center field."
 
“That’s certainly an area where we’re looking to improve our performance,” Epstein said. “Whether it’s through players existing on the roster or from outside. There is a corresponding impact, especially defensively. Who you have playing center affects the other two outfielders a little bit and it affects your pitching staff. We’re also looking to reshape our offense a little bit, so center field will have an impact on that. Certainly it’s an area of need and we’re aware of it. There’s some players on the roster as it stands, who, with some adjustments, can perform better and help be part of the solution.”


Characteristically vague.  But I think the emphasis on the defense is perhaps not so vague?  That wouldn't seem to support Happ as a really significant option, or Heyward.  Yet at the same time he mentions "adjustments" converting internal guys into "part of the solution". 


Four guys on the existing roster, who might be "part" of the CF solution.  Heyward won't be a primary part, and not in mind with the "adjustment" comment.  Hoerner might be a part, and has lots of adjustments ahead, perhaps playing a little CF included.  But Sharma naturally went to Happ and Almora as the internal "adjustments" candidates.  Almora has always been a huge Theo favorite; and in past he was promising at least as a platoon guy.  Shogo is lefty; I wonder if Theo has hopes that Almora might adjust his way back towards being somewhat platoon-servicable?  The spin on Happ has been that he's already made adjustments and may have already turned a corner.  His defense doesn't seem to make him very likely to be much of the CF solution, but perhaps *if* he's hitting effectively RH, perhaps he might be part of the outfield solution. 


Schwarber, Shogo, and Heyward would be an all-lefty outfield.  Heyward is a career .648-OPS versus LHP, he's terrible; and it's gotten worse, he was .553 this past year.  Schwarber's career .658, and has >.200 split, although he wasn't as bad versus lefties this past year (.756).  No idea with Shogo, I'd guess a more skillful contact guy would be less vulnerable? 


But *IF* you're going to go with three lefties as starting outfielders, then *if* Shogo's your guy you better hope he's not awful versus lefties.  And you're going to want some platoon contingencies in case not just Heyward but also either Shogo or Schwarber, or both, stink versus lefties. 


Personally I'd just as soon not need to commit to Bote being a platoon starting 3B, and needing to have Bryant play outfield every time we face a lefty and need to bench our corner outfielders.  So having Schwarber somewhat playable versus lefties seems pretty desirable to me....
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 15, 2019, 09:35:04 am
All kinds of reports the Cubs are in on Akiyama, which only makes sense.  He checks a lot of boxes and most importantly given where the organization seems to be at the moment, he'll be pretty cheap.  There's risk there, but the cost should be reasonable enough to make it tolerable.

What are the reports on his defense?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 15, 2019, 09:58:45 am
Akiyama reports have been kinda all over the place.  I've seen a good defensive CF to adequate to corner OF.  I've seen he'd be an OK starter to more of 4th OF.  If he could be Fukudome with the ability to play CF I'd be happy.

 
Characteristically vague.  But I think the emphasis on the defense is perhaps not so vague?  That wouldn't seem to support Happ as a really significant option, or Heyward.  Yet at the same time he mentions "adjustments" converting internal guys into "part of the solution".   

Happ in addition to working on his contact at Iowa improved his defense in CF as well. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 15, 2019, 10:14:16 am
https://theathletic.com/1375584/2019/11/14/young-st-nick-castellanos-wont-be-stopping-on-the-north-side-but-keeping-kyle-schwarber-could-be-a-gift/?redirected=1

Quote
The Cubs are buying that version of Schwarber is here to stay. And even if they weren’t convinced, they don’t expect that any other organization would value Schwarber like they do. Other teams don’t have the same information the Cubs do on Schwarber, so they might just see a two-month hot streak. Even if the Cubs were to share what they know in trade negotiations, it could sound like nothing more than a sales job.

The message that the cubs are buying late-season Schwarber as sustainable is interesting.  As is the implication that they've got secret reaffirming "information".  I'd love to believe it's both true, that they have informed info projecting good-Schwarber for future, and that the late season "good" version of Schwarber better represents the future guy than the earlier ups-and-downs guy. 


I get the skeptical views:  That Sharma is being fed upbeat input by his "sources" to write gushy stuff and build up trade value.  That everybody has hots, but that whatever groove Schwarber had last September will be undone by cold wind-in week in Wrigley April.  And that even if the Cubs do sincerely believe their analytics confirms and projects good-Schwarber, that they'll be just as wrong as when their analytics believed Descalzo had adjusted himself into a good hitter, and that Almora's adjustments had him poised for a breakout 2019 season. 


But man, wouldn't it be cool if it was actually true that Schwarber has found something and has made some career and franchise-uplifting adjustments?  And that he's going to be a high-impact asset bat for the next couple of seasons?  that would be so great.  We know other teams have hit-labs and quants and stuff that result in significant player development; why couldn't it be true that it might happen for a Cub? 


Perhaps an irony is the following: 


Quote
To start the season, Schwarber decided to go back to what worked for him in college and the minors, when he was at his most comfortable and successful. That meant Schwarber was no longer overthinking things in the box. Instead of worrying about mechanical changes that hadn’t worked, he was more present in the box. By July, he started to turn a corner. And as success came, his confidence grew.


The irony is that other teams have coaching and quants and use practice to develop and improve players.  But for Schwarber, to read Sharma's account, the "solution" was to ditch and ignore the coaching and analytics and science that the Cubs had given him, and to return to his unscientific college swing. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on November 15, 2019, 10:38:23 am
Quote
The irony is that other teams have coaching and quants and use practice to develop and improve players.  But for Schwarber, to read Sharma's account, the "solution" was to ditch and ignore the coaching and analytics and science that the Cubs had given him, and to return to his unscientific college swing.

Isn't this the second time he's supposedly gone back to his old college approach?  I thought I read that about another time he was on a hot streak after a long slump.

I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time I've read that about someone on the Cubs in recent years.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 15, 2019, 10:39:52 am
Isn't this the second time he's supposedly gone back to his old college approach?  I thought I read that about another time he was on a hot streak after a long slump.

I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time I've read that about someone on the Cubs in recent years.

I believe Almora may have said something like that. Didn't turn out quite as well for him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 15, 2019, 10:53:56 am
Almora was doing well until he hit the kid with a line drive.  Then his offense/defense seemed to nose dive.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on November 15, 2019, 10:57:29 am
I believe Almora may have said something like that. Didn't turn out quite as well for him.

Yeah Ron, I think that's who I was trying to think of!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 15, 2019, 11:14:25 am
Almora was doing well until he hit the kid with a line drive.  Then his offense/defense seemed to nose dive.

Almora had a two week hot streak before the foul ball. He was bad for the first month and a half of the season, good for two weeks, then bad for 4 months.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on November 15, 2019, 11:17:54 am
I'm not sure that it's always possible to pinpoint why a young hitter takes a step forward in his development.  I frankly don't care why Schwarber was so successful in August and September.  Just keep on doing what you were doing, kid.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 15, 2019, 11:36:17 am
Almora had a two week hot streak before the foul ball. He was bad for the first month and a half of the season, good for two weeks, then bad for 4 months.
Almora through 5/30 had a wRC+ of 88 and was at 101 in the month of May in 100 PA.  lose to his career average, after the line drive he was wRC+ of 41 and his defense declined as well.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 15, 2019, 11:46:51 am
Through May 12, Almora had a wRC+ of 61. In 15 games between May 14 and and May 28 (the day before the foul ball), he had a wRC+ of 146. Then he was bad for the rest of the season (as you pointed out).

Almora had two good weeks that briefly inflated his small sample season stats in the second half of May. Even at that high point, his offense had been 12% worse than league average. The rest of his season was consistent with (well, slightly worse than) his awful first month and a half. His decent stats at the end of May look far more like a temporary blip than any kind of sustainable development, IMO.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 15, 2019, 12:38:38 pm
Thank you, guys, for those stats.  I often wondered what the splits were before and after that Houston incident.

So Almora's decline may have occurred because those cheap ass Astros didn't have an extended screen.  Damb bastards are at the root of all evel.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 15, 2019, 12:48:16 pm
Wittenmyer wrote that extension talks have started with Baez:

https://chicago.suntimes.com/cubs/2019/11/15/20966769/chicago-cubs-javy-baez-extension-talks-japanese-cf-shogo-akiyama-2020-insight

What kind of extension is he likely to get? Bogaerts seems like a pretty fair comp. He agreed to $12 million for his last year before free agency last offseason, then signed a 6 year, $120 million extension that starts in 2020 (so basically, the Red Sox had him under contract for 7/$132 million). Would something like 8/$140 million be fair for Baez? A total of $20 million in his last two years of arbitration, then the same 6/$120 extension on top of that? Bogaerts had slightly more leverage at the time (a year younger, a year closer to free agency, longer track record of being an All Star level player), so would it be too much to match that contract?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 15, 2019, 12:52:20 pm
Players will be hot and cold, but a CF with a wRC+ 88 would have ranked 13 in offense in that majors with enough AB to qualify.  If you take out guys you spent time more time on corner OF spots it would have been 9th.  Only 4 primary CF had a positive Fangraphs defensive value and a wRC+ above 100.

So Almora will his usual defense and below average offense would have been one of the better CF's last year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 15, 2019, 01:42:18 pm
Players will be hot and cold, but a CF with a wRC+ 88 would have ranked 13 in offense in that majors with enough AB to qualify.  If you take out guys you spent time more time on corner OF spots it would have been 9th.  Only 4 primary CF had a positive Fangraphs defensive value and a wRC+ above 100. So Almora will his usual defense and below average offense would have been one of the better CF's last year.


Yeah, Almora at 88 wRC+ would have ranked #13....but there were were only 16 qualifiers in CF.

So, #13 put of 17 (if we add Almora) is poor, any way we look at it. Of course, he was actually 64 wRC+ for the season. And the metrics say his defense declined too.

Almora has 2.1 career fWAR in 1282 career PAs. Very poor.

So, even with “his usual defense” it requires a big shot of Pure Faith to go into 2020 with any reasonable hope that Almora could be “one of the better CFs.”

We can move the numbers around any way we want but Almora has been a big disappointment. Still young enough to change things around but, for now, projects as a 4th OFer based on his “usual defense.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 15, 2019, 02:39:34 pm
Akiyama reports have been kinda all over the place.  I've seen a good defensive CF to adequate to corner OF.  I've seen he'd be an OK starter to more of 4th OF.  If he could be Fukudome with the ability to play CF I'd be happy.

Happ in addition to working on his contact at Iowa improved his defense in CF as well. 

Thanks, helpful.  *IF* the Cubs don't like Shogo's CF defense, then he doesn't seem like a good fit.  Or *IF* they do, and sign him, but he actually doesn't play it very well, that could be bad too. 

*IF* Happ has improved his CF defense so massively that he's now OK out there, or even fairly good, that could be helpful.  *IF* both his defense and his hitting have adjusted and improved, he might be a useful flex piece.  Even if the Cubs want to believe both are true, I can't imagine they'd be willing to move ahead with him as the primary intended CF, though.  I want to, but I'm hesitant to believe his Cub hitting was more than a short hot-stretch fluke.  But *IF* I'm wrong and he proves to have adjusted/improved himself enough to be a good hitter, he could be a very useful flex guy.

I'm still uncertain whether his trade value will be substantial to justify a trade in Theo's eyes.  Same as for what Sharma said about Schwarber.  Suppose the Cubs believe the adjustments are real and will result in sustained success for both Happ and Schwarber. If so, will other teams value Schwarber or Happ as much as Theo does, in order to offer what's perceived as fair value? 

Or maybe I'm totally wrong on that?  Maybe teams self-confident in analytics and hit-lab analyses are big believers that practice and adjustments can improve a guy...  Maybe they figure the Cubs obsolete development practices, or lack thereof, have left Happ with all kinds of untapped potential?  And that once they get him into their program, that they'll be able to tap into potential that Maddon and McLeod couldn't access?   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 15, 2019, 02:47:36 pm
It wouldn't shock me if the Cubs didn't go with CF as a competition position, rather than committing the resources to get a guy who they'll automatically commit 150+ starts to. 

Maybe they like Shogo's defense, but aren't 100% certain of his offense, or his capacity versus lefties?  They think he can be a main guy, but aren't 100% sure?  Maybe they're pretty confident that Happ is going to be more consistent and that he can be a .250 hitter or better; without being totally sure?  Maybe they think Almora will be able to get back to his 2017/18 profile versus LHP, but are not totally sure?  . 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 15, 2019, 02:52:34 pm
On Almora, I'm really doubtful that the foul ball in Houston would have really had a causal effect.  I think more coincidence.  I think most athletes are pretty well able to compartmentalize.  It's not his fault, he's got his own job to do. 

I don't imagine that was on his mind or distracting him very often during batting practice, or film study, much less during actual game AB.   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 15, 2019, 03:09:43 pm
Almora was among the best the league leaders in outs above average prior to Houston.  He finished the year with a lower number.  In 2018 he had an expected of 89 and he caught 93.  In 2019 it was 85% and 86%.  His speed is 82nd percentile for MLB players and his outfield jump in 88th percentile (it was 92nd percentile earlier).  He still has speed and greats great jumps.  His career wRC+ is 87.  Everything tanked for him after Houston.  They guy isn't a star but he can be Jackie Bradley Jr, who is a valuable enough to play CF.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 15, 2019, 03:47:30 pm
...They guy isn't a star but he can be Jackie Bradley Jr, who is a valuable enough to play CF.


I agree that Almora has a chance to be Jackie Bradley. But, Bradley started to show some pop after about 500 PAs in the majors and Almora has almost 1,300 PAs without such evidence. So, still think it takes a lot of faith to hope for that. There is nothing going on statistically to support that. We’ve seen little blips of hope and then he falls back. Matter of faith.

Think that Almora has the residual power to hit like Bradley. That is also true for an awful lot of guys who never end up showing it. But, Almora will play 2020 at age 26 and hope springs eternal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 15, 2019, 04:35:48 pm
Christian Yelich just humbled Yu Darvish on Twitter.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on November 15, 2019, 04:57:54 pm
Yelich acting like a baby.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 15, 2019, 05:12:31 pm
Christian Yelich just humbled Yu Darvish on Twitter.

I guess you could call it that. I'd call it being overly defensive about an innocuous comment where Darvish specifically said he wasn't accusing Yelich of stealing signs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 15, 2019, 05:16:35 pm
Almora was among the best the league leaders in outs above average prior to Houston.  He finished the year with a lower number.  In 2018 he had an expected of 89 and he caught 93.  In 2019 it was 85% and 86%.  His speed is 82nd percentile for MLB players and his outfield jump in 88th percentile (it was 92nd percentile earlier).  He still has speed and greats great jumps.  His career wRC+ is 87.  Everything tanked for him after Houston.  They guy isn't a star but he can be Jackie Bradley Jr, who is a valuable enough to play CF.

Blue, how do the speed and jump numbers compute/compare, to other CFers?  I'm not trying to be negative here, just sincerely curious.  CF is the most speed-oriented position in baseball, so we expect it to self-select for >90th percentile speedsters.  Is median for a CF around 82nd percentile, or 90th percentile, or 94th percentile, or 74th percentile?  I have no idea.  I'm guessing 82nd percentile is a little below average for a CF, but not grossly so? 
*Also, you mention 82nd percentile for MLB players.  Are pitchers MLB players, I assume not?  Or do MLB players include pitchers?  If the latter, then presumably ≤50th percentile is populated by pitchers. 
*Even with position players only, that's still including the Rizzos and Caratinis and Botes and Zobrists and Eloy and Soler guys, many of whom are not very fast. 
*So I'm curious where 82nd percentile would fall, relative to center fielders. 

Outfield jump is obviously relative to outfielders.  So that's a clear frame of reference.  Again, I assume CF selects for the better ones, so probably ≥60th-percentile jump guys are predominantly CFers.  But 88th percentile overall must certainly be in the upper half, perhaps even among the upper quartile, even amongst CFers. 

I guess it just seems unlikely to me that a foul ball incident would have a cause-and-effect impact on performance.  If so, do you think he'll still be compromised by that for the duration of his career?  Or for the upcoming season?  Or might that have a 5-month impact, but not endure beyond the winter? 

I'm not doubting the numbers you included.  And I'm not a psychiatrist.  It just seems unusual that a pro athlete, who is so used to focusing on things he can control, would have a season-long collapse over an incident for which he has no fault, and for whose followup he has no opportunity or responsibility.  To have that on your mind during batting practice, or during your AB, or when playing the field, or when chasing a fly ball, that just seems very unusual.  It may be that the timing was coincidence, that his decline is unrelated to the incident, and that his decline will not be remediated by an extra offseason of separation from the incident.   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 15, 2019, 05:35:24 pm
What are the reports on his defense?

As noted kind of a jumble, but in general he's been regarded as plus-plus defensively in CF.  This issue is he's 32, but I think the consensus is he'd still be at least average for the next couple of seasons.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 15, 2019, 05:54:05 pm
Christian Yelich just humbled Yu Darvish on Twitter.
share please
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on November 15, 2019, 06:16:52 pm
share please

https://mobile.twitter.com/ChristianYelich/status/1195462269594812417
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 15, 2019, 06:29:13 pm
Thanks
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 15, 2019, 06:29:47 pm
Here's more context...Bleacher Nation tells most of the lead up to Yelich's tweet:

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/11/15/must-read-of-the-day-yu-darvish-on-sign-stealing-the-world-series-and-a-prevalent-problem/

Quick summary: There was an article today about Darvish's bad start in the 2017 World Series and how it looks in hindsight with the Astros stealing signs controversy. Later in the article, he says he thinks sign stealing is widespread in baseball and shares a story where he noticed batters of an unnamed team glancing out to left center field when he was getting ready to throw a pitch, and so he stepped off the mound. Bleacher Nation did some detective work and tweeted out a video that appears to show Yelich glancing out to LCF, and then Darvish steps off. The video is at the end of the Bleacher Nation article.

Darvish saw this and seemed to confirm this was what he was talking about:

ダルビッシュ有(Yu Darvish) @faridyu
I'm not sure what is he trying to do. But to be clear his eyes move first. That's why I step off.


Then three minutes later, he tweeted this:
ダルビッシュ有(Yu Darvish) @faridyu
But that's not mean Brewers stealing signs.


Later in the afternoon, Yelich got defensive.

Christian Yelich @ChristianYelich
Be better than this. Nobody needs help facing you


Josh Donaldson and Darvish then had an entertaining back and forth:

Josh Donaldson @BringerOfRain20
Replying to @ChristianYelich and @Jared_Carrabis
💀 I could use some help off him whatcha got?

ダルビッシュ有(Yu Darvish) @faridyu
I don't think you need help either.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 15, 2019, 06:45:18 pm
ダルビッシュ有(Yu Darvish)

Verified account
 
@faridyu
Following Following @faridyu
Moreダルビッシュ有(Yu Darvish) Retweeted Trevor Plouffe
If there’s a person with an ear piece in the center field stands, it’ll be easy to do on the road too. Just saying...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on November 15, 2019, 06:52:08 pm
There has been a lot of chatter that the rangers and Brewers are also stealing signs.. that's kinda where this started for bleacher nation
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on November 15, 2019, 07:07:14 pm
Manfred needs to completely wipe this out.  The nuclear option should be on the table.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 15, 2019, 07:42:39 pm
Yelich certainly comes off as suspiciously defensive there.  A very Trumpian response.

Yu is a tremendous follow on twitter.  Guy always says what he thinks and doesn't give a ****.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on November 15, 2019, 07:51:11 pm
I have had a lot of respect for how the Brewers have been able to succeed with lesser players and limited resources.  Now there is doubt about the legitimacy of their accomplishments.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 15, 2019, 07:54:39 pm
Manfred needs to completely wipe this out.  The nuclear option should be on the table.

ROFL.  Manfred?  Dream on.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on November 15, 2019, 09:08:25 pm
What would Landis do?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 15, 2019, 09:32:43 pm
Blue, how do the speed and jump numbers compute/compare, to other CFers?  I'm not trying to be negative here, just sincerely curious.  CF is the most speed-oriented position in baseball, so we expect it to self-select for >90th percentile speedsters.  Is median for a CF around 82nd percentile, or 90th percentile, or 94th percentile, or 74th percentile?  I have no idea.  I'm guessing 82nd percentile is a little below average for a CF, but not grossly so? 
*Also, you mention 82nd percentile for MLB players.  Are pitchers MLB players, I assume not?  Or do MLB players include pitchers?  If the latter, then presumably ≤50th percentile is populated by pitchers. 
*Even with position players only, that's still including the Rizzos and Caratinis and Botes and Zobrists and Eloy and Soler guys, many of whom are not very fast. 
*So I'm curious where 82nd percentile would fall, relative to center fielders. 

Outfield jump is obviously relative to outfielders.  So that's a clear frame of reference.  Again, I assume CF selects for the better ones, so probably ≥60th-percentile jump guys are predominantly CFers.  But 88th percentile overall must certainly be in the upper half, perhaps even among the upper quartile, even amongst CFers. 

I guess it just seems unlikely to me that a foul ball incident would have a cause-and-effect impact on performance.  If so, do you think he'll still be compromised by that for the duration of his career?  Or for the upcoming season?  Or might that have a 5-month impact, but not endure beyond the winter? 

I'm not doubting the numbers you included.  And I'm not a psychiatrist.  It just seems unusual that a pro athlete, who is so used to focusing on things he can control, would have a season-long collapse over an incident for which he has no fault, and for whose followup he has no opportunity or responsibility.  To have that on your mind during batting practice, or during your AB, or when playing the field, or when chasing a fly ball, that just seems very unusual.  It may be that the timing was coincidence, that his decline is unrelated to the incident, and that his decline will not be remediated by an extra offseason of separation from the incident.   

For OF jump I couldn’t sort just CF, but Almora is 12th in baseball.

For sprint speed if you set it to 150 attempts to get rid of some of the scrubs he is 16/24 in CF, faster than Bradley and Inciarte.

In a 90 foot race around the bases he is 0.23 slower than Buxton and that translates into about 6 feet behind Buxton using their race function.

Almora has something go really wrong after he hit the kid, but he also needs to make adjustments. I prefer he start in Iowa and work on a swing adjustment to add loft and quit swinging at bad pitches that promote more of the weak contact. He can be useful just as a defensive replacement, but if they can figure out how to get his offense to league average at least he would be a good starter in CF. Especially with suckage that is currently playing there in all of baseball.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 15, 2019, 10:41:15 pm
I dont really even know the Japanese CFers name yet but Ive felt like we sorely needed a leadoff man since Fowler left and the dude seems like an ideal fit at a cheap price.

Im all for it.

My problem is with Japanese pitchers not position players.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 15, 2019, 11:00:28 pm

..Almora has something go really wrong after he hit the kid, but he also needs to make adjustments. I prefer he start in Iowa and work on a swing adjustment to add loft and quit swinging at bad pitches that promote more of the weak contact. He can be useful just as a defensive replacement, but if they can figure out how to get his offense to league average at least he would be a good starter in CF. Especially with suckage that is currently playing there in all of baseball.

Keep in mind that Almora has regressed badly for two seasons.  In his first two partial seasons (440 PAs), his OPS was about .770. Since then, he’s at about .680 OPS. I doubt that it's mostly about the Houston incident, if at all.

Offensively, 2019 was a typical year for major league CFers:  .745 OPS.

Starting in 2018 and going backwards, CF OPS has been 725-762-745-738-718-729-748-734-731.

2019 fits right in at CF.

If Almora could OPS at .750, he would be okay. But, think Cubs would be foolish to plan on that for 2020.



Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 15, 2019, 11:41:20 pm
The Cubs are reportedly in discussions for an extension with Javier Baez. Here is a compilation of his extraordinary tags.

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2334909530152813


Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 16, 2019, 02:00:46 am
The Cubs are reportedly in discussions for an extension with Javier Baez. Here is a compilation of his extraordinary tags.

Forgive me but going to toot my horn for a second on Baez tags. I was struck by this back in 2014 when Baez first came up.


Reb
Guest

Re: 2014 Today's Game (2/26/14 - 9/28/14)
« Reply #3931 on: September 16, 2014, 08:05:45 pm »
Would Castro have made the tag on Hamilton SB attempt in 4th inning that Baez just made? Uh, no.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 16, 2019, 08:28:32 am
ダルビッシュ有(Yu Darvish)

Verified account
 
@faridyu
 4m4 minutes ago
More
Yesterday, the Japanese media accidentally used my picture in a news report about a hit and run incident where I was apparently the victim of the hit and run.
Ah..now that I think about it, I certainly was a victim of a hit and run yesterday.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 16, 2019, 08:31:59 am
Offensively, 2019 was a typical year for major league CFers:  .745 OPS.

If Almora could OPS at .750, he would be okay. But, think Cubs would be foolish to plan on that for 2020.


1) Did you miss where I said he should start in AAA?
2) There are literally 6 full time CF that met your criteria for .750 OPS. Kepler, Heyward and Fowler are part time guys at best. So if you criteria for a CF being OK is being top 6 at their position you might want to reevaluate your idea of ok.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 16, 2019, 09:14:55 am
(https://media.giphy.com/media/2UvAUplPi4ESnKa3W0/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 16, 2019, 10:25:09 am
1) Did you miss where I said he should start in AAA?
2) There are literally 6 full time CF that met your criteria for .750 OPS. Kepler, Heyward and Fowler are part time guys at best. So if you criteria for a CF being OK is being top 6 at their position you might want to reevaluate your idea of ok.

Evidently you missed the part about .745 being the average OPS in CF throughout the majors last season. Not surprised you missed that because you described that as “suckage” when, in fact, it’s typical for at least the last 10 years.

There were 18 CFers in MLB with .745 OPS or better, with 400 PAs or more. It’s not important if Almora qualifies for the Batting Title or not. The Batting Title is not the benchmark here. It’s can Almora hit in the majors like an average CFer so he’s worthy of getting a substantial # of PAs.

You’re arguing that CF MLB AVERAGE is a high bar? Really?


Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 16, 2019, 12:18:53 pm
18 people that played some time in CF.  The people who played there for a majority of their time is less. 

15 guys had 400 PA and a wRC+ of 100.  Only 7 had a wRC+ and a postive defensive value playing at least some time in CF.

9 teams had a wRC+ of 100 in CF.  On 5 paired that with positive defensive value.

11 teams had a OPS >.745 from CF.  6 teams paired that with positive defensive value.

So yes league average offense with even some defensive value is hard to do.  Only 16 teams where able to get >2 WAR from CF. 

If league average offense and bad defense is acceptable than Heyward should be the CF.  The Nationals won the WS with a wRC+ 89 and plus defensive value in CF this year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 16, 2019, 02:37:33 pm
Every single player who played CF in the majors—in the aggregate—averaged .745 OPS in 2019.

You can parse, cherry-pick, cut, paste, twist, and contort any which way...but it does not change what is MLB average in CF.

.745.

So, that is what seems a reasonable hope for Almora: give us average offense for his position in a significant #of PAs and play at least average or better CF defense.

MLB average for your position is not too high a pedestal. Year in and year out, MLB average in CF is near that number. 2019 was not an outlier in the majors but a typical season for CF. Once you are aware of that, you should be able to see that Almora has quite a ways to go to reach average for his position.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 16, 2019, 07:46:26 pm
If you set it to 0 PA a grand total of 38 players had CF innings and an OPS above .745.  The mean OPS for CF is much, much less. So league average offense or even league average CF offense is rare. Adding average or better defense makes it even rarer. Mean is probably a better stat for the argument you are trying to make.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 16, 2019, 07:49:37 pm
Let's not forget that Almora was just as bad in the second half of 2018 as he was after the foul ball in 2019. He's been a 58 wRC+ hitter since the All Star Break in 2018. He's got a long way to go to get to being a .745 OPS hitter.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 16, 2019, 09:30:00 pm
My whole point is that CF that hit that well and play defense are rare. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 16, 2019, 10:20:53 pm
If you set it to 0 PA a grand total of 38 players had CF innings and an OPS above .745.  The mean OPS for CF is much, much less. So league average offense or even league average CF offense is rare. Adding average or better defense makes it even rarer. Mean is probably a better stat for the argument you are trying to make.

Using mean gives us the same thing.

At 400 PAs minimum, 18 of 31 CFers were at .745 OPS or better.

At 300 PAs, 20 of 40 CFers were at .745 or better.

0 PAs and up is the entire universe of CFers of course and that’s .745 OPS. It’s not rare, it’s average and at the mean.

As I noted first time around, this has been the general average for CFers for at least 10 seasons. The exact year-by-year from 2010 forward, I posted earlier.

So, when you say:

My whole point is that CF that hit that well and play defense are rare. 

....the data just does not support that. OPSing at .745 for CF is average/median for players with substantial PAs. It’s just a fact.

It’s not a high bar. It’s average for the position. Of course, performing at average is importantly anti-awful. Not easy but should be doable for Cubs. Would be nice if Almora is the guy who helps get us there.

I’m not really knocking Almora—-just pointing out that he’s been a disappointment and is regressing. Let’s agree that he still has upside and has a chance to be better than has been lately.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 16, 2019, 10:59:47 pm
....It’s not a high bar. It’s average for the position. Of course, performing at average is importantly anti-awful. Not easy ...

Key point on the anti-awful.  **IF** even our worst spot in the lineup was average, while our better ones were variably north of average, we'd have a really above-average offense.  Making progress on two of our three bad spots, CF and 2B, would help a lot.  Don't need to trade any of Rizzo-Contreras-Bryant-Baez-Schwarber to address those two black holes.  The ability to upgrade at those two spots is really central to 2020 hopes. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 17, 2019, 06:43:34 am
Evidently you missed the part about .745 being the average OPS in CF throughout the majors last season. Not surprised you missed that because you described that as “suckage” when, in fact, it’s typical for at least the last 10 years.

There were 18 CFers in MLB with .745 OPS or better, with 400 PAs or more. It’s not important if Almora qualifies for the Batting Title or not. The Batting Title is not the benchmark here. It’s can Almora hit in the majors like an average CFer so he’s worthy of getting a substantial # of PAs.

You’re arguing that CF MLB AVERAGE is a high bar? Really?




What would the average OPS for CF be if you removed Trout’s 1.083 and the lowest OPS of whatever cutoff you want to use?

The mean no longer holds at even 200 PA and you were the said it is the average OPS for EVERYONE that played CF.  Even at 300 PA there is enough PA for every team to have 1. 

Using 300 PA, and that includes Heyward, Folwer, Kepler, Canha, Verdurgo, Kingery, Dahl, Desmond and Goodwin that are more utlility guys or corner OF.

And if we are going to ignore defense like you have been.  We already have a CF with above average offense that in Heyward. If you want above average defense and above average offense that is a small pool of players. It is so small that very few teams are able to accomplish this.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 17, 2019, 12:39:22 pm
Your problem here is that, in your original post, you did not know that average CF OPS was .745. You thought the bar was much lower.

That explains the current detour to the mean, where 300, 400, 500, 600 PAs are inadequate to you and now you insist that 200 PAs is the way to go and you want to start eliminating players.

NL average is .739, without Trout. The difference is negligible. If you go back to the immediate seasons before Trout’s career, you will find similar range.

As to defense, it’s a non-issue. We’re on the same page. Almora’s latest defensive metrics probably don’t reflect his above average defense.

Let’s not obfuscate the point. Almora, in most recent two seasons, is nowhere near average offensively, has a significant way to go to get there, and the Cubs need to solve the CF problem and remains to be seen whether Almora is part of the solution.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 17, 2019, 04:31:34 pm
The suckage didn’t refer to OPS, which is still below league average. The suckage referred to the quality that teams are putting out. Only 16 where able to get to 2 WAR and 5 did it with above average offense and defense. Compare that to say RF, SS, 3B where it was 20+.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 17, 2019, 05:12:37 pm
Apparently Happ’s swing-and-miss issues are limited to baseball:

https://twitter.com/straightdown/status/1195855671981293568?s=21
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 17, 2019, 08:42:54 pm
The suckage didn’t refer to OPS, which is still below league average. The suckage referred to the quality that teams are putting out. Only 16 where able to get to 2 WAR and 5 did it with above average offense and defense. Compare that to say RF, SS, 3B where it was 20+.

Again, nothing new about up-the-middle position talent being harder to find than corner positions. This has been true since the modern era began in baseball, not just 2019. (SS has of course had a renaissance in recent years mostly because of the great SS Latino talents). It’s just that Almora recent performance farther away than you think, statistically, from what is average for the position.

Think we’re really mostly on the same page as to Almora. Not penciling him in to be the starter from the get-go in 2019 and at least some hope he can reach the potential we saw a bit of earlier in his career.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 18, 2019, 03:53:17 pm
Clay Davenport--who was one of the founders of Baseball Prospectus--still has his own website where he maintains projections and translations that produce major league equivalents for foreign and minor leagues. He posted 2019 translations from Japan today. Since there has been a lot of talk about Shogo Akiyama here, I think it's relevant that his translated slash line was .298/.368/.411 with a strikeout rate around 12.5%. So if that's the expectation of what he'd do the next couple of years, I'd take it.

http://claydavenport.com/stats/webpages/2019/2019pageJPLyearALL.shtml
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 18, 2019, 04:21:12 pm
Shogo Akiyama is asking for 3 years, $15 million:

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/11/18/shogo-akiyamas-reported-asking-price-three-years-and-15-million/

If the Cubs can't figure out how to fit that in, they should just tear down again and rebuild. They'll save most (all?) of that money in 2020 by just non-tendering Russell.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 18, 2019, 04:23:48 pm
Since there has been a lot of talk about Shogo Akiyama here, I think it's relevant that his translated slash line was .298/.368/.411 with a strikeout rate around 12.5%. So if that's the expectation of what he'd do the next couple of years, I'd take it.


Yeah, that would work.

Could see, maybe, an argument for giving a chance to an Akiyama/Almora platoon in CF.

Almora OPSed .532 against lefties in 2019 but, of course, was good against lefties before 2019 and maybe last season was fluky in that respect.

Shogo Akiyama is asking for 3 years, $15 million:..If the Cubs can't figure out how to fit that in, they should just tear down again and rebuild. They'll save most (all?) of that money in 2020 by just non-tendering Russell.

Don't think the $5 per would be a problem but 3 years seems too long.

 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 18, 2019, 04:41:17 pm
If the Cubs are willing to go 2/$10 million, they should be willing to go for the third year. By 2022, the only high salary players who are under contract/control are Darvish, Hendricks, and Contreras. The Cubs should be willing to absorb that hit in 2022 to buy in on his upside/fit with the team in 2020-21.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on November 18, 2019, 05:12:41 pm
If $5M three years from now is a big enough concern not to sign a guy who could be a very good fit, then the Ricketts should sell right now.  In the baseball economy, $5M is basically zero.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 18, 2019, 05:37:23 pm
Shogo Akiyama is asking for 3 years, $15 million:....

Clay Davenport--.... posted 2019 translations from Japan today. Since there has been a lot of talk about Shogo Akiyama here, I think it's relevant that his translated slash line was .298/.368/.411 with a strikeout rate around 12.5%. So if that's the expectation of what he'd do the next couple of years, I'd take it.

If Shogo is asking for $15/3, and hasn't gotten it yet, that would suggest that neither Shogo's agent nor Theo nor any baseball GM's believe Davenport's .298/.368/.411 translation. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 18, 2019, 05:59:52 pm
I think it's way too early in the offseason to make that conclusion. The free agent market moves very, very slowly now. Only one major free agent has signed, and he used his qualifying offer as leverage to set a deadline for 29 teams.

No team is just going to immediately say yes to his agent's first offer even if they're ultimately willing to pay that price.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 18, 2019, 06:25:42 pm
I like Shogo, but it would give us a lefthand hitting outfield.  I think that Theocracy will try to do some trading before filling slots with FA's.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 18, 2019, 07:20:56 pm
I like Shogo, but it would give us a lefthand hitting outfield.  I think that Theocracy will try to do some trading before filling slots with FA's.

They better not wait too long, because someone will sign Akiyama if that's the cost.

Obviously you need at least one RH platoon OF (not Almora - one who's decent) whether you sign Shogo for CF or not.  I don't have a problem with a lefty OF because our IF figures to be all righties except for Rizzo, as long as we have at least one and preferably two RH platoon options.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 18, 2019, 07:32:08 pm
I wonder what Cameron Maybin will cost. I’d feel pretty good about the OF if they could add Shogo and Maybin.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 18, 2019, 08:38:52 pm
I wonder what Cameron Maybin will cost. I’d feel pretty good about the OF if they could add Shogo and Maybin.

Maybin is a reverse splits hitter—-much better against righties, so not really a platoon guy with Akiyama.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 18, 2019, 08:57:23 pm
I wonder what Cameron Maybin will cost. I’d feel pretty good about the OF if they could add Shogo and Maybin.

Why is Maybin reassuring?

Shogo for 3/$15 seems like something the Cubs should do even if he is a 4th OF.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 18, 2019, 11:27:37 pm
Brock Holt would be an interesting bench addition, especially if you are going with Hoerner at second. He’s another lefty bat so he doesn’t really help in the OF.



Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 19, 2019, 09:41:16 am
I think it's way too early in the offseason to make that conclusion. The free agent market moves very, very slowly now. Only one major free agent has signed, and he used his qualifying offer as leverage to set a deadline for 29 teams. ...  No team is just going to immediately say yes to his agent's first offer even if they're ultimately willing to pay that price.

"No team is just going to immediately say yes to his agent's first offer even if they're ultimately willing to pay that price."  Things drag, because agents ask high.  Harper wanted half-billion, Kimbrel $100M, Arrieta $200M, etc. 

If Shogo's first-ask is $15/3 and *if* he's hypothetically willing to sign now, and *IF* the Cubs actually trusted that he's a .298/.368/.411 as Davenport translates, then there would be no logic for dragging it out.  Under that hypothetical, you'd want to grab him ASAP, before somebody else grabs that steal. 

That it isn't happening proves that one of the hypotheticals is false, probably two or more of them. 
*The Cubs don't really trust that he's Davenport's .298/.368/.411. 
*His agent doesn't really trust that he's Davenport's .298/.368/.411.  If he did, he'd be looking for more than $15/3. 
*Whether the agent is Japanese or American, just like any other American agent if you offer $15/3 today he still won't take the deal, and will just take that elsewhere to try to leverage for a higher deal. 

My basic point, though, was that Davenport's .298/.368/.411 is probably believed by nobody, gm's or agents.  *IF* it was, the agent would know he could get >$15/3, and teams would try to snap up a $15/3 bargain.  The .298/.368/.411 is not a safe translation or projection. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 19, 2019, 10:43:15 am
I like Shogo, but it would give us a lefthand hitting outfield.  I think that Theocracy will try to do some trading before filling slots with FA's.

Curt, not sure how to process the lefty factor.  But I'm not sure a lefty in center would be problematic; perhaps it would actually be preferred?  (Obviously that might be impacted by what they do at 2B, and by whether they replace Big-5 righties with lefties (Baez, Bryant, and Contreras). 

As it stands for the six current starters, it's 3 righties (Bryant, Baez, Contreras) and three lefties (Rizzo, Schwarber, Heyward.) 

Of the existing internal 2B candidates, Hoerner and Bote are both RH.  (I'm not really considering Russell or Descalzo).  So if we're 4/3 RH/LH, I don't think it's essential that the CF starter be RH and make it 5/3 RH/LH.  I'd be totally fine with getting a 4th lefty and being 4/4; in fact I might almost prefer it. 

Obviously that might change if they trade Baez and Bryant, or trade Hoerner/Bote for a lefty 2B, or whatever. But otherwise, I think a lefty CF will be OK. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on November 19, 2019, 10:54:21 am
I find Curt's attitude about lefties to be sinister.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 19, 2019, 11:03:50 am
Much too deep and obtuse for retired school teachers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dev on November 19, 2019, 11:17:31 am
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChristianYelich/status/1195462269594812417
wow...that universe exists?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 19, 2019, 11:30:54 am
Shogo I think does have an offer from a Japanese team, but I don't think it will be quick.  The opinions I've seen on him have been varied.

Edit: He also has a foot fracture so teams may want to make sure it is healing properly. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 19, 2019, 01:39:59 pm
Curt, not sure how to process the lefty factor.  But I'm not sure a lefty in center would be problematic; perhaps it would actually be preferred?  (Obviously that might be impacted by what they do at 2B, and by whether they replace Big-5 righties with lefties (Baez, Bryant, and Contreras). 

As it stands for the six current starters, it's 3 righties (Bryant, Baez, Contreras) and three lefties (Rizzo, Schwarber, Heyward.) 

Of the existing internal 2B candidates, Hoerner and Bote are both RH.  (I'm not really considering Russell or Descalzo).  So if we're 4/3 RH/LH, I don't think it's essential that the CF starter be RH and make it 5/3 RH/LH.  I'd be totally fine with getting a 4th lefty and being 4/4; in fact I might almost prefer it. 

Obviously that might change if they trade Baez and Bryant, or trade Hoerner/Bote for a lefty 2B, or whatever. But otherwise, I think a lefty CF will be OK. 

Simple.  I was just suggesting that the Cubs might wish to deal first before signing a FA who happens to be another LH hitting OF.  Not a big deal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 19, 2019, 09:41:32 pm
"I think what we're going to see is probably a significant trade. Possibly two."--Jeff Passan on Cubs offseason
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 19, 2019, 09:47:26 pm
I’ll be out of pocket for much of tomorrow, but don’t be surprised if Cubs swing a trade. Rule 5 Protection day is how the Cubs landed Rowan Wick, and the Cubs 40-man flexibility should allow them to acquire assets that are in a roster crunch in a different organization.--Bryan Smith Bleacher Nation
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 20, 2019, 09:03:52 am
https://theathletic.com/1386105/2019/11/20/sharma-why-did-the-cubs-hire-chris-young-and-what-did-he-learn-from-his-phillies-failure/?source=dailyemail

I found this interesting.   bit of a glimpse into both pitching coach and bullpen coach roles, and I enjoy reading comments from Hottovy.  He seems both smart and like a good guy.  I respect and appreciate him.

It's interesting that most of the talk is about game-planning.  Not making your stuff better (pitch development), but how to use your existing stuff.     

Sharma is a huge Cubs-admin fan.  Interesting in the article how he seemed to view the Cubs as having a much bigger pool of pitching analysts collaborating, whereas he portrayed the Phillies as basically having Chris Young doing all of that on his own.  I'm guessing he may have underestimated the resources the Phillies may have had in that regard? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 20, 2019, 01:57:05 pm
I'm sure he got the info about the Phillies pitching structure from Yound and maybe confirmed it with the Athletics Phillies reporter.  I believe she used to live in Chicago and do some coverage of the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 20, 2019, 05:55:57 pm
The deadline to add players to the 40-man is about an hour away and the Cubs haven't announced anything yet. Are they working up to the deadline to try to make a move or two?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 20, 2019, 07:20:52 pm
Still waiting for the Cubs to announce their final 40 man roster 20 minutes after the deadline. Yankees and Giants also have not announced.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 20, 2019, 07:31:46 pm
According to source, Class-A Myrtle Beach pitcher Manuel Rodriguez added to Cubs' 40-man roster. 65 K's in 47 innings last season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 20, 2019, 07:32:36 pm
Short, Miller, Amaya and Rodriguez. No trades. Hopefully Minch, Rucker and Mekkes make it through.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on November 20, 2019, 07:45:02 pm
Arizona Phil was sure that Higgins would be added, so that's a bit of a surprise.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on November 20, 2019, 07:46:30 pm
I'm actually a little surprised that Miller, a guy with minus-minus stuff, was rostered.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 20, 2019, 08:01:41 pm
According to source, Class-A Myrtle Beach pitcher Manuel Rodriguez added to Cubs' 40-man roster. 65 K's in 47 innings last season.

Always interesting that, periodically, there’s a significant surprise who gets rostered.

Manuel Rodriguez had a 7.59 ERA in 2018, still a Class A reliever, and AzPhil most recently rated him as the #36 most likely eligible player to be rostered.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on November 20, 2019, 08:07:40 pm
Reb, we have to factor in Cubs scouting and evaluation, known to be among MLB's worst.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 20, 2019, 08:14:40 pm
Rodriguez, 23 year old righty out of Mexico.

5-11 so he is short, but the Cubs prospects guy saw him I. Spring training sitting 95 with a plus curve.

12.45 K/9, 3.26 BB/9. 3.45 ER, 2.04 FIP/2.39 xFIP. 3% HR/FB.

Just guessing he is a high spin guy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 20, 2019, 08:21:22 pm
Honestly, with a system as shallow as ours this isn't exactly likely to be a string of momentous decisions.  None of the guys we exposed are good bets to be taken, and the last couple of guys to make the cut are unlikely to ever reach the majors.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on November 20, 2019, 08:26:37 pm
Always interesting that, periodically, there’s a significant surprise who gets rostered.

Manuel Rodriguez had a 7.59 ERA in 2018, still a Class A reliever, and AzPhil most recently rated him as the #36 most likely eligible player to be rostered.
[/quoteRHP

From Baseball America's Rule 5 preview:
Manuel Rodriguez can run his four-seamer and sinker into the upper 90s and counterbalances his fastballs with a power curveball. He struck out 65 in 47 innings this year with high Class A Myrtle Beach ... and you know better than to make a point with ERA (to tease a bit).  He struggled a bit early this year with control but was locked in from mid-season on. ... But his rostering was a surprise to me ... but not to BA.

With respect to Miller, I was hoping they'd roster him.  I have him #15.  Minus-minus FB would be a 40.  I've seen his FB rated as high as a 50 (Fangraphs) but 90-92 is in several of his scouting reports which is probably a minus-FB for a RHP although maybe that is Minus-minus these days.

AZPhil was high on Higgins but I believe Cubs Den pointed out that he began the year as a 3B/1B type in AA having lost out to Pereda for the starting job.  He worked his way into the catching rotation and really took off after promotion to Iowa.  I would have protected him ... but I have a blind spot for grinders.

With 26 man rosters next year, I suspect the Rule 5 draft will be more active than normal.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on November 20, 2019, 08:57:36 pm
Do the Cubs have the least talented roster in MLB?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 20, 2019, 09:04:45 pm
Jeff Exasperated Hyperbole Meter Rating:

Reb, we have to factor in Cubs scouting and evaluation, known to be among MLB's worst.

4.5

Do the Cubs have the least talented roster in MLB?

7.5
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 20, 2019, 09:44:31 pm
Short, Miller, Amaya and Rodriguez. No trades. Hopefully Minch, Rucker and Mekkes make it through.

Jeff probably wouldn't be hyperbolizing to consider that probably the Cubs worst group of new 40-man additions since the creation of the internet. 

I know, who can know now?  Maybe they'll all work out.  Maybe Miller is ready to blossom into a RH Quintana, and Short will have no downturn in the majors, and will be able to sustain his .211 Iowa batting average in the NL, too!  But man, I can't remember ever having such a low-ceiling group. 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 20, 2019, 09:53:04 pm
Rodriguez is a curious case.  His stuff is good enough for >12 K/IP.  But when he's not K'ing, they BABIP'd .372.  That's this year.  Probably fluky? 

Last year, when he had the >14 K/IP, he had a .481 BABIP, with no individual month <.423 BABIP. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 20, 2019, 10:03:24 pm
Amaya is a really good prospect so I think it would be some Jeff worthy hyperbole to compare this group to anything the Cubs put out in the 90’s or 00’s.

Rodriguez must have some really interesting stuff to get added coming off of high A as a reliever.


Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 20, 2019, 10:23:31 pm
Not sure in the early 90's, but by the mid-late 90's, the Cubs had lots of prospects.  I'm not sure you'd find another year this weak.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 20, 2019, 11:09:35 pm
For better or worse, I still have scouting manuals going back to the early 80s, most of which I don't know where I have them.  But, found the 1993 Stats, Inc. Scouting Report.  This is part of what it says about Cubs prospects.  If Jeff had written this, I would would give this a "9" on the Jeff meter.

I'm not making this up. The report:

"It probably isn't fair to evaluate the current state of the Cubs farm system, built as it was by Bozo the Clown, Barney Fife, and other mainstays of the Tribune television network.....Who knows?  One of these years, Luis Salazar might find himself out of a job."

As to top prospect Lance Dickson, it says that "Dickson has been a 'top Cubs pitching prospect' so long that he may have learned his curveball from Three Finger Brown. His left arm ought to be pretty well rested given that he worked only 2.1 innings at Iowa in 1992....lot of questions about his ability to stay healthy, arm problems, leg problems, foot problems, shoulder problems. He's had about everything go wrong.

Aside from Dickson, Cubs top prospect was AA reliever Jessie Hollins, a 40th round draft pick who was at AA most of 1992 and was converted to relief in 1992 after poor performances as a starter earlier.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 20, 2019, 11:15:20 pm
Heh heh, yeah, that was really a bad time.  I think kind of by the time the internet came along, they were beyond that, though....??  Once Hendry came on as draft director, they had a lot of good prospects, and never were as bad as that anymore.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 20, 2019, 11:22:24 pm
Draft started in 1965.

Cubs first round picks for first 12 years of the draft (and Cubs were typically picking very high most years): 

Rick James, Dean Burk, Terry Hughes, Ralph Rickey, Roger Metzger, Gene Hiser, Jeff Wehmeier, Brian Vernoy, Jerry Tabb, Scott Thompson (yea!), Brian Rosinski, Herman Segelke.

This is what we were dealing with back then. 

    

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 20, 2019, 11:33:19 pm
Several HOFers in there!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robb on November 21, 2019, 12:26:08 am
That list is super freaky.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on November 21, 2019, 06:58:53 am
MLB.com throws a wild hypothetical out there:

Quote
Cubs trade Kris Bryant to Braves for Max Fried, Drew Waters, Bryse Wilson and William Contreras

The second franchise player on our list, Bryant -- like Betts -- will continue to be the subject of trade talks throughout the offseason. The Braves are said to be interested in bringing back Josh Donaldson, but if he signs elsewhere, Atlanta could move Austin Riley (who has yet to prove himself as a reliable big leaguer) back to third base from left field -- or they could deal for a player like Bryant, who can play either left or third.

Bryant isn’t slated to become a free agent for two more years, so while he should earn more than $40 million in his two remaining years of arbitration eligibility, the 2016 National League MVP Award winner would help the Braves in their quest to advance deep into October. Fried, who won 17 games at age 25, would give the Cubs a young cost-controlled starter to add to a veteran rotation led by Jon Lester, Yu Darvish, Jose Quintana and Kyle Hendricks.

The switch-hitting Waters (Atlanta’s No. 2 prospect, per MLB Pipeline) would give the Cubs a budding star in the outfield, while Wilson (their No. 6 prospect) profiles as a future mid-rotation starter or possibly a late-inning reliever. Contreras -- the younger brother of Chicago catcher Willson and Atlanta’s No. 8 prospect -- could give the Cubs a succession plan behind the plate if the elder Contreras is traded or leaves after the 2021 season as a free agent.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 21, 2019, 07:15:20 am
Not sure in the early 90's, but by the mid-late 90's, the Cubs had lots of prospects.  I'm not sure you'd find another year this weak.

Just go look at the first round picks from 1990-2008. The Cubs had 4 first round picks with greater than 5 rWAR in their career.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 21, 2019, 07:23:03 am
Cubs prospects posted a video of Rodriguez. His fastball has a ton of movement, almost to the point of I think it would be hard to throw as a strike. His curve has a really sharp break as well. The guy looks interesting.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 21, 2019, 09:11:07 am
Honestly, with a system as shallow as ours this isn't exactly likely to be a string of momentous decisions.  None of the guys we exposed are good bets to be taken, and the last couple of guys to make the cut are unlikely to ever reach the majors.

Not so very long ago, Contreras fell into the above classification.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 22, 2019, 01:08:50 pm
MLB.com throws a wild hypothetical out there:

Cubs trade Kris Bryant to Braves for Max Fried, Drew Waters, Bryse Wilson and William Contreras...

I dismissed this yesterday because I thought it was wildly unrealistic in favor of the Cubs. But I was just reading Bleacher Nation and they seem to think it's somewhat reasonable. I've seen that take on other boards too. Am I wrong?

It's five years of a mid-rotation starter who might have more upside left, a top 25 prospect (according to MLB.com's current rankings), and two more guys who could be towards the back end of top 100 lists this offseason for two years of Bryant. It just seems like such a no-brainer for the Cubs if their goal is to extend their window past next year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 22, 2019, 01:19:51 pm
I found this fascinating.  As much as we're Cub fans and know we have good players, we didn't place anyone in the top 3 at any position.  Are you kidding me?

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28114533/espn-2019-all-mlb-team#C
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 22, 2019, 01:22:00 pm
I like the last three in the deal, but just looking at minor and major league stats, Fried looks to me like Quintana with one good year.  Does anyone have a scouting report on him?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 22, 2019, 01:43:49 pm
I dismissed this yesterday because I thought it was wildly unrealistic in favor of the Cubs. But I was just reading Bleacher Nation and they seem to think it's somewhat reasonable. I've seen that take on other boards too. Am I wrong?

It's five years of a mid-rotation starter who might have more upside left, a top 25 prospect (according to MLB.com's current rankings), and two more guys who could be towards the back end of top 100 lists this offseason for two years of Bryant. It just seems like such a no-brainer for the Cubs if their goal is to extend their window past next year.

Agree.  To get a decent cheap starter, a really good prospect and two other significant prospects, plus free up $20M per year to spend on free agent talents, I think that would very Cubs-favorable. 

But a common perspective on trades is that the team that gets the best individual player often wins that trade.  I'm not sure that might not actually be good for the Braves?  Adding one more really-really good regular player to their lineup right now, while their window-of-opportunity is open, might pay off.  Fried had a good year, but they may see his stuff as limited and that they can replace him, perhaps with a more-stuff-more-upside guy? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 22, 2019, 01:49:00 pm
I found this fascinating.  As much as we're Cub fans and know we have good players, we didn't place anyone in the top 3 at any position.  Are you kidding me?

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28114533/espn-2019-all-mlb-team#C
Also, not a single Cubs received even a 10th place MVP vote.  Javy's end of the year injury probably prevented their only chance.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 22, 2019, 02:09:17 pm
I dismissed this yesterday because I thought it was wildly unrealistic in favor of the Cubs. But I was just reading Bleacher Nation and they seem to think it's somewhat reasonable. I've seen that take on other boards too. Am I wrong?

It's five years of a mid-rotation starter who might have more upside left, a top 25 prospect (according to MLB.com's current rankings), and two more guys who could be towards the back end of top 100 lists this offseason for two years of Bryant. It just seems like such a no-brainer for the Cubs if their goal is to extend their window past next year.

I don't think they'd get that much, but is seems more realistic than Joel Sherman's Bryant and Heyward for Segura and Jay Bruce + 3 unnamed ML.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 22, 2019, 02:26:50 pm
Yeah...the Bryant trade seems like someone was valuing Bryant as if he had 4-5 years of control instead of 2 years of control. Sherman's trade seems like a Phillies fan's pipe dream.

If they want to discuss some kind of trade that only involves Heyward and Segura (and maybe some money), though, that could have some legs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 22, 2019, 02:50:48 pm
Could see Fried as centerpiece of a Bryant trade—-but not combined with the quality of prospects in that proposal.

When Cubs drafted Almora, reports were that Fried was the other guy Cubs were considering—went right after Almora in draft. Fried has dominated Cubs in his 3 starts against them. Has really excellent curve, 4-seamer at 94, cutter at 93, and pretty good cutter.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 22, 2019, 03:39:09 pm
I don't think Fried or Waters would be available to the in a trade for Bryant. 

The trade proposal is what the Cubs should want to trade Bryant, I just don't think they can come anywhere close to that.  That's why I think it is a strong possibility that Bryant, Betts and Lindor don't get traded.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 22, 2019, 05:33:36 pm
Fried now has five years of club control. But, MLBPA is going to seek lowering the years of control in next cba and maybe they will be able to achieve something like that. That probably is at least a background factor in any trade talks involving a guy like Fried, who already is a significant big league pitcher.

I would agree that Braves not keen to move him but if Braves feel internally that Riley not a 3B (maybe, who knows) and can’t resign/sign Donaldson or Moustakis and with all the young pitching they still have, think conceivable would move Fried to get Bryant, depending on other parts of a deal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 22, 2019, 05:37:54 pm
Is that pronounced Fryed or Freed?  If he's already fryed...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 22, 2019, 05:43:45 pm
Is that pronounced Fryed or Freed?  If he's already fryed...
Baseball Reference

Pronunciation: \FREED\
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 22, 2019, 06:10:01 pm
Fried now has five years of club control. But, MLBPA is going to seek lowering the years of control in next cba and maybe they will be able to achieve something like that. That probably is at least a background factor in any trade talks involving a guy like Fried, who already is a significant big league pitcher.

That would affect the value on any player/prospect not just Fried. This is purely hypothetical unless Bryant or Fried gets traded. If Fried projects at 15 WAR over 5 years his cost in real dollars is going to be less than what you pay Bryant over 2 for 10-12 WAR.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 22, 2019, 06:23:28 pm
That would affect the value on any player/prospect not just Fried. This is purely hypothetical unless Bryant or Fried gets traded. If Fried projects at 15 WAR over 5 years his cost in real dollars is going to be less than what you pay Bryant over 2 for 10-12 WAR.

It affects every player but it has more significance with a player with many years of control (5) who is the centerpiece of a trade for Kris Bryant.

On other hand, MLB and MLBPA can negotiate around this by phasing in any new rules in a successor cba. But, even with that, it could bring Fried a year earlier to free agency, which is a big deal if traded this off-season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on November 22, 2019, 07:38:51 pm
Are we at a point where Theo is so far behind other MLB executives that he'll never catch up?  Has he become irrelevant within modern baseball?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 22, 2019, 08:20:10 pm
It affects every player but it has more significance with a player with many years of control (5) who is the centerpiece of a trade for Kris Bryant.

On other hand, MLB and MLBPA can negotiate around this by phasing in any new rules in a successor cba. But, even with that, it could bring Fried a year earlier to free agency, which is a big deal if traded this off-season.

So since a prospect has 6-7 years of control it would effect their value too.  Prospects haven’t lost value in trades so the theoretical doesn’t really apply.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 22, 2019, 09:09:08 pm
So since a prospect has 6-7 years of control it would effect their value too.  Prospects haven’t lost value in trades so the theoretical doesn’t really apply.

What the heck are you arguing about? As I said, going to impact every player but quite obviously if trading a young, established major leaguer as the dominant piece for KRIS BRYANT, an extra year (or two) of control is a background factor, compared to moving a bunch of prospects.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 22, 2019, 10:44:47 pm
Are we at a point where Theo is so far behind other MLB executives that he'll never catch up?  Has he become irrelevant within modern baseball?

Jeff Exasperated Hyperbole Meter Rating:

8.5

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 23, 2019, 02:55:31 am
https://www.cubsinsider.com/2019/11/22/cubs-reportedly-showing-interest-in-korean-lhp-kwang-hyun-kim/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 23, 2019, 05:38:53 am
What the heck are you arguing about? As I said, going to impact every player but quite obviously if trading a young, established major leaguer as the dominant piece for KRIS BRYANT, an extra year (or two) of control is a background factor, compared to moving a bunch of prospects.

If what you are saying had any basis in reality it would cost more prospects to acquire players. Since this isn’t happening your made up scenario doesn’t exist.  Guys like Rosenthal, Passan would be talking about this if it was even a possibility outside of ai need this to happen for my ideal trade proposal to be a possibility.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 23, 2019, 12:30:24 pm
Cubs squires Cotton for cash.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 23, 2019, 12:35:11 pm
Morosi says the Cubs are still trying to trade for Whit Merrifield:

Cubs checking in on Merrifield

Nov. 22: Second baseman Whit Merrifield has been an under-the-radar star with the Royals for several years, but the Cubs might try to bring him into the spotlight.

MLB.com’s Jon Paul Morosi reports that Chicago is showing “continued interest” in trading for Merrifield, who just completed the first season of the four-year, $16.25 million extension he signed with Kansas City at the beginning of 2019. Merrifield remains cheap even after signing that extension (he’ll make $5 million in ’20), and the Cubs could be in the market for a middle infielder to slot next to Javier Báez.

Merrifield, 30, continued to be an accomplished hitter at the plate (Major League-most 206 hits and 10 triples) and versatile in the field this year, logging 77 games in the outfield along with 82 at second base. He’s also a consistent contact hitter, which is a skill the Cubs generally lacked during their 2019 offensive struggles.


https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-rumors-trades-and-signings
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 23, 2019, 12:38:30 pm
What is the price of cotton per bale?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 23, 2019, 12:48:57 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EKE9qt1WkAADYQU.jpg:small)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 23, 2019, 01:31:44 pm
This year's Graveman.  Sooner or later, we will hit on one of them.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 23, 2019, 01:34:28 pm
KC: not trading Whit
Reporters: Cubs interested in trading for Whit
KC: still not trading him
Reporters: Cubs interested in trading for Whit
Cubs: Is Brian Roberts retired?

Next thing we know Whit is going to be singing “Go Cubs Go” in a bar with Bryant.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 23, 2019, 01:56:32 pm
https://www.cubsinsider.com/2019/11/22/cubs-reportedly-showing-interest-in-korean-lhp-kwang-hyun-kim/

Kim sounds interesting.  Would love to see the Cubs create some new talent, getting some good value for modest price.

Seems like it's been a while:
1.  5 winters ago that traded for Fowler. 
2.  6.5 years since the Strop/Arrieta steal. 
3.  7 winters since the Rondon draft, which worked out really well. 
4.  5 winters ago they signed Chris Coghlan. 
5.  5 winters ago they signed Jason Hammel. 

Those were a bunch of low-cost moves that added a good closer (for a while), and added a bunch of guys who started a lot at a variably solid level.  All good-value-relative-to-cost pickups.

Think the Cubs somehow need to come through on some bargain-value pickups, somehow. 

Last year Rosario was probably their best low-cost pickup, and this year there was Wick, Wieck, Hultzen, and Ryan.  Hopefully those guys will carry over better in 2nd year than proved true with poor Rosario. 

But management just hasn't really had much success with talent creation over the past five years. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 23, 2019, 02:02:09 pm
Cotton looks like a scrub to me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 23, 2019, 02:02:36 pm
If what you are saying had any basis in reality it would cost more prospects to acquire players. Since this isn’t happening your made up scenario doesn’t exist.  Guys like Rosenthal, Passan would be talking about this if it was even a possibility outside of ai need this to happen for my ideal trade proposal to be a possibility.

Appreciate that you find this so interesting but it’s a narrow “background” point (noted for the third time) and not the kind of thing national baseball writers tend to write about. Really would only apply as a narrow, background matter (meaning not a huge factor, but some linited factor) in a Bryant-type deal where one player is the dominant return piece with 3-5 years service time. Otherwise, in other kind of deals (the vast majority), everyone is in the same boat. This is such a narrow point but fascinating to you I guess, which I appreciate.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 23, 2019, 02:04:26 pm
An option like Kim is another example where I regret the Quintana investment.  Wish we'd have saved Q's money, went after Wheeler, and then improvized for 5th starter with a guy like Kim competing with guys like Chatwood and maybe Alzolay. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 23, 2019, 02:15:30 pm
Morosi says the Cubs are still trying to trade for Whit Merrifield:

Cubs checking in on Merrifield...


Brett Taylor at Bleacher Report makes an interesting point on this. Notes that the continuing Merrifield/Cubs reports from credible media probably means that Royals actually are willing to trade Merrifield for a reasonable offer to their liking (for a lot). Otherwise, Cubs would be just wasting their time. Don’t think that Theo is going to waste his time. So, likely that there is an opening here for ongoing talks that both clubs believe is worth talking about.

In any case, pretty clear that Cubs very interested in Merrifield.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 23, 2019, 03:48:56 pm
Appreciate that you find this so interesting but it’s a narrow “background” point (noted for the third time) and not the kind of thing national baseball writers tend to write about. Really would only apply as a narrow, background matter (meaning not a huge factor, but some linited factor) in a Bryant-type deal where one player is the dominant return piece with 3-5 years service time.

Is this the new Jes Math, can I call it Reb Reality where Fried has variable service time. So if the Cubs are trading for Merrifield who has a guaranteed x number of years the Cubs prospects should be valued lower because the only have 4-7 years of service time?  I mean I think that would be a story that would get out at multiple outlets.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 23, 2019, 04:20:23 pm
Is this the new Jes Math, can I call it Reb Reality where Fried has variable service time. So if the Cubs are trading for Merrifield who has a guaranteed x number of years the Cubs prospects should be valued lower because the only have 4-7 years of service time?  I mean I think that would be a story that would get out at multiple outlets.

If we need a name for this, we should call all of this CUBluejays Obsession--kind of like those off-brand overpriced fragrances that are disappointing to the smell.

I'll say this one last time to address your "enthusiasm" for the point: from the hypothetical trade that somebody else posted and led to other variations of a trade, Max Fried would be the dominant player in a Bryant swap.  75% of Bryant value?  85%? 95%? 110%?  Whatever it might be, it's dominant, and, therefore, one less year of control lurks in the background.  That is a more significant background factor than a trade for a bunch of prospects, any one or more of which is less crucial to a trade.

It's a narrow point. It's background to a deal because nobody knows what a future cba will look like and is two years away anyway.  It would be a very small part of any trade discussion:  that's why "narrow" and "background" apply--which I've pointed out five times already.

It's a big deal to you, I get it.  Just splash on some of that off-brand fragrance and get over this.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 23, 2019, 04:31:12 pm
The next big deadline the Cubs have to make some big decisions is the non-tender deadline in 2 weeks.

I see the decisions the Cubs need to make centering around 5 players: Addison Russell, Albert Almora, Danny Hultzen, Tony Kemp and Duane Underwood.

How I expect this will play out:

Russell: non-tendered
Almora: kept, perhaps traded
Hultzen: non-tendered, re-signed to minor lg deal
Underwood: kept, perhaps traded
Kemp: kept--Bleacher Nation
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on November 23, 2019, 04:41:05 pm
Is this the new Jes Math, can I call it Reb Reality where Fried has variable service time. So if the Cubs are trading for Merrifield who has a guaranteed x number of years the Cubs prospects should be valued lower because the only have 4-7 years of service time?  I mean I think that would be a story that would get out at multiple outlets.
Yes.  **IF** in a future labor agreement the union wins earlier FA, absolutely every prospect in every trade has appropriately diminished value.  No question that would impact the value of a prospect.  Losing one year of the club-controlled service would make a prospect variably less valuable.  Certainly five cost-controlled years is still highly valuable, but less so than 6. 

Not sure how much value would be lost.  From one view, it might be the least valuable of the cost-controlled years, in that the player is already well paid.  Bryant's year 6 will cost >$15M, years 1-3 cost almost nothing.  So in a sense losing that year isn't quite as hurtful.  On the other hand, for many clubs their players develop while in the majors; so they may be much better player in year 6, with a much more valuable and significant role on the team in year 6, that was true in years 1 and 2.  Often year 6 might be around the apex of a player's career, so losing one of his career-peak seasons might be pretty hurtful after all, even if he's getting paid. 

A common and obviously logical team-building perspective is value-per-dollar.  But still it's baseball-essential to just have lots of really good players, even if they are paid well.  I assume Oakland and Tampa had better value-per-dollar than Yankees or Astros, but without actually having better players, and thus they lost. 

Bryant may be beyond his best value-per-dollar years, but there should still be teams who want him just because he's really good. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on November 23, 2019, 04:45:36 pm
AZ Phil on the Cotton acquisition:

Back when he was healthy, Cotton featured a swing & miss plus-screwball, a CT FB that sat 92-94 T 95-96, a SL, and a CV, so he has the full array of pitches needed to be a starting pitcher (again... - IF - healthy).

Cotton does have two minor league options left so the Cubs can stash him at AAA Iowa and (if healthy) he could ride the Iowa - Chicago shuttle in 2020, but because he has accrued more than three seasons of MLB Service Time, he has Article XX-D rights, which means he can elect free-agency if he were to be outrighted to the minors.

And because he has spent so much time on the A's MLB DL/IL over the past couple of seasons (two full seasons worth of MLB DL/IL time) Cotton is eligible for salary arbitration (which is probably why he got DFA'd by the A's), so he is a possible non-tender candidate on 12/2, especially if the Cubs don't want to risk going to arbitration with him if he and the club can't agree on a 2020 contract.

Keep in mind that a contract awarded via arbitration (by rule) could not include a minor league split salary or performance bonuses, both of which may be a deal-breaker for the Cubs if they suspect Cotton will likely spend at least part of the 2020 season at AAA. It's very possible that given Cotton's recent injury history, the Cubs would prefer to pay him a low MLB base salary (like the MLB minimum) but with easily-achievable performance bonuses if Cotton proves to be healthy and able to pitch in MLB in 2020, together with a minor league split salary (probably somewhere around $250K) if he is optioned to AAA and spends at least part of the 2020 season at Iowa. 

So the Cubs have about a week to work out something with Cotton if they are averse to possibly going to arbitration with him and potentially getting stuck with a contract they don't like.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 23, 2019, 07:01:18 pm
Another result of lowering protected years from 6 to 5 could be that teams keep players, especially high school-drafted players, in the minors longer.  Even when a 20 or 21 year old player does well when brought up to the majors, he usually doesn't do as well in his first year as he does in subsequent years, since the less time spent in the minors, the more OJT necessary in the majors, even when they are "almost" ready.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 23, 2019, 08:44:02 pm
Bryant may be beyond his best value-per-dollar years, but there should still be teams who want him just because he's really good. 

Teams will want Bryant. Teams won’t want to give up top prospects or controlled major leaguers and pay Bryant’s arbitration years.

Losing 1 year of Control will still affect a players value, especially if they aren’t a super two. If Fried isn’t a super 2 his last year of control as a 3 WAR player is worth around $27. In arbitration he’d be about $12 million in salary so that would be about $15 million in surplus value or a fringe top 100 player.  That $15 million is almost half of the value that Bryant has in a trade. People may not like surplus value, but that is how teams value players.

This is why players like Bryant are hard to trade. They are really good and they help their teams win. They also make a lot of money.  Teams would be better off signing Rendon/Donaldson vs trading for Bryant and paying just slightly less in AAV + giving up controllable players and or prospects.  I’ll be more shocked if Bryant/Lindor or Betts get traded in the off season than if the Royals trade Merrifield.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on November 23, 2019, 09:26:54 pm
Another result of lowering protected years from 6 to 5 could be that teams keep players, especially high school-drafted players, in the minors longer.  Even when a 20 or 21 year old player does well when brought up to the majors, he usually doesn't do as well in his first year as he does in subsequent years, since the less time spent in the minors, the more OJT necessary in the majors, even when they are "almost" ready.

Yes that makes sense although you have to believe the Union will want the start of the clock to be changed from the date a player hits the 40 man roster to x, y, and z seasons after a 16-yr old, HS, or college player signs. 9, 8, and 6 years?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 26, 2019, 09:04:47 am
Sharma has an article on Justin Stone, the Cubs' new Director of Hitting.

https://theathletic.com/1410157/2019/11/26/as-the-cubs-enhance-their-player-development-program-justin-stone-is-no-longer-the-man-behind-the-curtain/?source=dailyemail
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 26, 2019, 09:26:26 am
Cubs are going to discuss an extension with Baez over the Winter Meetings according to Heyman.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 27, 2019, 01:33:42 pm
Cubs claimed CD Pelham off of waivers from the Rangers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 27, 2019, 01:45:56 pm
The 40 man roster is now at 38 with the addition of Cotton and Pelham.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on November 27, 2019, 01:46:31 pm
Pelham had 11.97 ERA in 42 games between Double-A and Triple-A last year.  Surely there's room for some improvement there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on November 27, 2019, 05:16:19 pm
He’s a lefty that averages 96 with a ton of movement. His control is problematic, but he’s likely somebody that they try and sneak through waivers at some point.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 30, 2019, 07:31:18 am
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/11/29/non-tender-deadline-is-monday-cubs-have-decisions-on-eight-players-though-only-three-are-actual-decisions/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on November 30, 2019, 06:40:00 pm
I don't think I agree with Bleacher Nation that there is a real decision to be made with Almora and Cotton. If the Cubs non-tender anyone but Russell, that's a bad sign for spending this offseason.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 30, 2019, 06:46:59 pm
I know he's not up for arbitration, but one guy I could see them cut loose via DFA is Descalso.  Total zero last year.  Waste of space.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 30, 2019, 06:50:27 pm
Agree Curt.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on November 30, 2019, 07:53:59 pm
He is signed for next year.  How would cutting him loose save any money?

I still hope they cut him, but they will have to pay him unless someone is foolish enough to trade for him.  They might just wait to see if all of his problems last year were due to injury that gets healed over the winter.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on November 30, 2019, 08:05:08 pm
He has always sucked.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on November 30, 2019, 11:57:07 pm
He is signed for next year.  How would cutting him loose save any money?

I still hope they cut him, but they will have to pay him unless someone is foolish enough to trade for him.  They might just wait to see if all of his problems last year were due to injury that gets healed over the winter.
  Never said it would save money.  Read again.  All it will save is valuable air in the dugout.  It will provide an empty locker in the dressing room.  They could add another ballboy or bullpen catcher or guy who watches the camera and bangs on the garbage can and it would bring more value to the team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 01, 2019, 02:06:06 am
Conceivable that Cubs eventually could end up eating Descalso’s contract ($3.5 including 2021 buyout), but seems unlikely during offseason.

Sure, the off-season roster spot has some value, but probably makes more sense to see how he looks in the spring and if there’s a spot for him after whatever off-season Cubs moves. If not a spot then, that’s the time to make a move. But, keep in mind that rosters expand to 26 in 2020, so will have an extra bench guy.

Also possible he could be included in a trade to offset some other payroll guy coming back in a multi-player deal. He had an uncharacteristically good season in 2018—not that long ago. So, somebody might like him in that kind of deal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 01, 2019, 07:24:21 am
That's logical, I suppose, but I think that extra spot on the bench could be better served by an additional Gatorade cooler.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 01, 2019, 09:13:28 am
Cubs hired Craig Driver from the Phillies as a catching/1B coach. Borzello will be game planning and losing his catching duties.  Coaching staff is complete and much more tech forward.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 01, 2019, 04:13:20 pm
Is tomorrow the end of the Addison Russell era?

Im honestly not so sure but Im guessing probably.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 01, 2019, 04:13:29 pm
https://www.cubsinsider.com/2019/11/27/the-rundown-merrifield-could-cost-less-than-you-think-nl-execs-believe-bryant-will-be-traded-brennen-davis-stock-rising/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 01, 2019, 04:16:29 pm
MLBTR predicts the Cubs sign Will Harris and Kyle Gibson.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 01, 2019, 04:20:19 pm
Wouldn't that be tampering?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 01, 2019, 04:24:05 pm
I see now that Gibson signed.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 01, 2019, 05:46:19 pm
The Athletic has the Cubs targeting Alex Wood, McHough, and Tehran for the rotation.

Wood would be a risky gamble, but at least he has some upside.

McHough can strike people out, so that is better than Tehran.  Tehran would give the Cubs a rotation of 4 contact managers which would suck.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 01, 2019, 06:01:55 pm
I've always had a soft spot for McHugh since he's the only major leaguer ever to graduate from my college. He'd be my preference of those three--Wood is just injured so often (though to be fair, McHugh has had his share of injuries in the last couple of years too).

Teheran isn't even that good of a contact manager at this point, is he? I think he's far more of a Lester/Quintana-type question mark than a Hendricks. In fact, I think he had basically the same option that Quintana had and the Braves didn't pick it up. No interest in him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 01, 2019, 06:09:30 pm
Yes, McHugh would be the choice there for sure.  He's also proven that he can pitch pretty effectively out of the bullpen in the unlikely event that Alzolay, Abbott, or Pitcher X shows as a viable rotation option.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 01, 2019, 06:31:56 pm
I think Alzolay could be a very good reliever.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 01, 2019, 06:42:07 pm
McHugh lost his spot in the Astros rotation at the start of the year, because he was getting rocked. Despite needing a 4th and 5th starter the Astros never went back to him.

For me it would be Wood>>>>McHough>>>>Steve Trachsel>>>Tehran.  Tehran really doesn’t do anything well. He doesn’t strike people out, he walks people and relies on weak fly balls to get outs. The weak fly balls disappeared last year. I have a hard time thinking Cotton isn’t a better option than those 3. McHough I guess might be an upgrade over Chatwood and Mills, but with the mess the Cubs rotation is that is kinda a rough sell to me as being a competitive team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 01, 2019, 07:14:31 pm
The Athletic has the Cubs targeting Alex Wood, McHough, and Tehran for the rotation.

Wood would be a risky ****, but at least he has some upside.

McHough can strike people out, so that is better than Tehran.  Tehran would give the Cubs a rotation of 4 contact managers which would suck.

I do not read The Athletic article as saying the Cubs are targeting those guys. Mooney simply identifies these guys as being available and that the Cubs have had an interest in at least a couple of them in the past. Here is what it says:

"Julio Teheran (77-73, 3.67 ERA) was once a young Braves pitcher the Cubs evaluated as a trade target while trying to sort through their inventory of young hitters, and he still won’t turn 30 until 2021. Another ex-Brave — Alex Wood (53-43, 3.40 ERA) — is coming off an injury-plagued season with the Cincinnati Reds and will be only 29 next year.

The Cubs previously tried to trade for Collin McHugh, who also had a rough season heading into free agency. With the Houston Astros, McHugh won 19 games as a starter in 2015, earned a World Series ring in 2017 and posted a 1.99 ERA — with 94 strikeouts in 72.1 innings — across 58 appearances as a reliever in 2018."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 01, 2019, 07:42:01 pm
More often than not when the are specifically mentioning guys it is names they have heard. Even if they are examples they are coming from the bargain bin. The Cubs apparently aren’t shopping in the Cole, Strausburg, Wheeler, Kecheuel, Bumgarner, Ryu class of FA. I’ve heard that Hamels will likely be too pricey.  If they Cubs can’t trade for a pitcher it appears that a trade is the only chance at improving the rotation.

It doesn’t make sense though, because know there are rumblings that Russell is likely to get tenderer a contract. If money is so tight, can the Cubs really afford $5 million for a SS/2B that can’t hit or remember signs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 01, 2019, 07:56:11 pm
Regardless of what you may think of Russell as a person I dont think he's as much of a lost cause as some of you may think.

There's no way any of us have any clue what Theo and Jed have planned but if we can get a leadoff man out of CF I'd have no issue letting Russell,Bote,and Hoerner compete for the 2nd base job.

I just dont think the numbers match up and expect there to be a trade or two.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 01, 2019, 08:31:07 pm
If money is tight why would you pay him $5 million to find out if he can bounce back?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 01, 2019, 08:49:35 pm
CUBluejays...

Who's rumbling that Russell may get tendered?

I havent seen it anywhere.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 01, 2019, 08:59:37 pm
Russell would be a possible (probable?) non-tender without all the off the field problems. It would be a really bad decision to bring him back.

If they do tender him, that's a really bad sign for this offseason. If they can't bring themselves to move on from Russell at this point, can we really expect them to make the hard decision to improve the team by trading a player like Bryant or Contreras, or even Happ or Hoerner?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 01, 2019, 09:12:20 pm
I wonder the same thing, Blue.  The Athletic keeps suggesting that the Cubs are too cash-strapped to sign anybody good, and are instead shopping garage sales.  Limited-stuff low-ceiling back-end guys, or else very high-risk guys. 

So, *IF* they are so cash-strapped, why would you drop $10M on Quintana and $5 on Russell? 

Perhaps one possible factor is that Q and Russell would both be 1-year commitments?  Whereas even an wannabe-average starter might be able to command a multi-year commitment? 

Obviously also possible that Russell is NOT going to be retained, or at least not at $5M?  They could have some other lower-priced deal under discussion.  Perhaps another is that your new hitting-analytics guys think they know why Russell can't hit, and think they've got some mechanical tweak that might possibly make him salvageable and be able to help improve him and possibly make him relatively average?  If so, AND if he agrees to some $2.3 contract or something, they might have some logic in considering retaining him? 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 01, 2019, 09:19:05 pm
IF IF Russell is tendered, my take would be that brass has concluded that there are buyers for Russell in the trade market at a $5 arb salary.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 01, 2019, 09:22:47 pm
If there was a trade market for Russell, he would've been traded by now.

If Russell is tendered, he opens next season with the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 01, 2019, 09:28:35 pm
Occam's Razor.

Theo Epstein, et al are incompetent.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 01, 2019, 09:39:43 pm
If there was a trade market for Russell, he would've been traded by now. If Russell is tendered, he opens next season with the Cubs.

Why do you say that? Very few trades around baseball so far. Why would the timing as to Russell be any different than what’s (not) happening elsewhere? Not arguing to the contrary, just curious as to your reasoning.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 01, 2019, 10:14:56 pm
The Cubs would've traded Russell to anyone who was interested for the last year and a half, and they still have him. He had his worst MLB season this year. It was reported that one of the (many) reasons he was sent back to AAA was because he never learned their signs. His value is at an all time low--if no one wanted to give up anything for him a year ago or on July 31, why would they want him now?

If the Cubs tender him, he makes $5 million. If they non-tender him, I'd bet a lot that he'll go to Spring Training without a major league guarantee.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 01, 2019, 10:19:38 pm
Wood is alluring in the same way all never-healthy guys who put up a great season are.  But what strikes me is that his velocity spiked way up in 2017, and that was his one really good season.  Why who knows, but there's no reason to believe he'll ever throw that hard again, and thus no reason to believe he'll ever approach his 2017 numbers even if he was otherwise healthy.


Still, if the Cubs are destined for another winter of dumpster diving as most of the press reports suggests, those are the sorts of guys you end up looking at.  Vs. McHugh or Teheran, I'd take a flyer on Wood.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 01, 2019, 10:43:11 pm
IF IF Russell is tendered, my take would be that brass has concluded that there are buyers for Russell in the trade market at a $5 arb salary.

Your premise is that the Cubs don't want him themselves, at least at $5M.  I think that assumption is probably correct. 

If so, then your logic is correct.  **IF** they don't want him themselves at $5M, but they still tender him and obligate themselves to a $5M commitment, that would only be logical **IF** they think teams want him enough to trade value for his $5M contract. 

I think that hypothetical is unlikely.  I'm not saying trading him with $5M contract is impossible; after all, liability contracts are routinely involved in bad-contract-for-bad-contract liability exchanges.  But I just don't think Russell at $5M with his bat and his baggage would be valued enough to be worth any significant trade value.  **IF** you don't want him yourself, why would you want to obligate yourself to $5M contract when you might NOT be able to trade him; and even if you can, the talent return will be very minimal at best? 

So seems to me that *IF* the Cubs don't want him at $5M themselves, they'd be unwise to tender him. 

I see three options:
1.  Tender him tomorrow
2.  Non-tender him tomorrow.
3.  Come to a contract agreement at a less-than-tender price.  $2?  $3? 

2B is one of the Cubs three most pressing starter needs (CF and rotation starter being the others).  Theo loves Hoerner.  **IF** they were to bring Russell back, at a reduced salary, that might provide more coverage.  Maybe Hoerner has a good spring, and they just decide to commit to him.  Or maybe not, and they'd like him to spend some time in the minors; while still hoping that he's going to be the long-term answer, and might be so by June or July.  *IF* they hope he's the guy, but want to buy some stop-gap 2B roster-fill until he's ready, the existing alternatives are Descalzo, Bote, and Happ.  **IF** they were to bring Russell back, even if he wasn't good, he might still be well ahead of Descalzo on the anti-awful continuum.  And perhaps defense-considered (which of course it must be), he might be viewed as an overall decent competitor for Bote and Happ, both of which are variably below-average defensively.  So *IF* Russell agreed to a $2.5 contract, for example, on the pure baseball level that might make sense for the Cubs to sign him ?? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 01, 2019, 10:54:41 pm
The Cubs would've traded Russell to anyone who was interested for the last year and a half, and they still have him. He had his worst MLB season this year. It was reported that one of the (many) reasons he was sent back to AAA was because he never learned their signs. His value is at an all time low--if no one wanted to give up anything for him a year ago or on July 31, why would they want him now?

If the Cubs tender him, he makes $5 million. If they non-tender him, I'd bet a lot that he'll go to Spring Training without a major league guarantee.

Well, my expectation is that Russell will be non-tendered. If there are reports to the contrary (??) and turns out he IS tendered, that will be interesting.

Hypothetically, assuming a tender, don’t think it necessarily means he stays with Cubs. Would expect a trade, instead.

A year ago last off-season, Russell was toxic as a trade chip because of the off-field situation and impending suspension. Then, as season started, couldn’t play, suspended. Then in minors and, thereafter, back to minors just before July 31 trade deadline. Those were the lows for any trade value.

Now, he’s met the rehabilitation requirements, suspension served, and some clubs need a SS as we’re early in the off-season. So, could see the possibility that Theo has discovered that some clubs might have an interest in Russell at SS. For me, that would be most likely explanation IF IF IF Russell is tendered tomorrow. Not expecting that, but if happens, this would be my guess why.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 01, 2019, 11:11:01 pm
As to Craig’s post, think there could be more interest in Russell as a SS to other clubs than to Cubs at lower-than-$5 salary 2B utility type guy.

Years ago, I expected and posted several times that eventually either Baez or Russell would be traded because it’s exceedingly rare that a club plays a Plus defensive SS at another position for all that long. SS is of course a premier position on the field and only very unusual circumstances would you see a gold glove type guy there play at a lesser position for very long.

Of course, now Russell’s offensive stock is way down but he’s still a terrific defensive SS and clubs are always looking for that. So, could see possibility that Theo is hearing interest.

Or, Russell is non-tendered, as expected.

If Russell is non-tendered, I expect him to get a major league deal elsewhere. One-year major league deals are not guaranteed, in any case. But, guessing that there will be several openings and opportunities for him
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 01, 2019, 11:58:59 pm
There is nothing solid that Russell is getting tendered. Just some rumors and then Bleacher Nation tweeting about it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron Green on December 02, 2019, 04:22:34 pm
Cubs hired Craig Driver from the Phillies as a catching/1B coach. Borzello will be game planning and losing his catching duties.  Coaching staff is complete and much more tech forward.


This seems like the kind of relatively minor move which could be much more significant than is now apparent.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 02, 2019, 04:58:20 pm
Rosenthal says the Cubs have agreed to a $640K deal with Cotton.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 02, 2019, 05:01:13 pm
MLB minimum is $563,500.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 02, 2019, 05:49:32 pm
Russell non-tendered.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 02, 2019, 05:50:56 pm
Also Danny Hultzen
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 02, 2019, 06:04:14 pm
Also Danny Hultzen

Why?  Offloading a bad contract in Russell, I get that.  But why Hultzen, I wonder? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 02, 2019, 06:12:01 pm
Hultzen was a lost cause.

Best of luck to Addison.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 02, 2019, 06:20:48 pm
Why?  Offloading a bad contract in Russell, I get that.  But why Hultzen, I wonder? 

Craig, regarding Hultzen (courtesy of Arizona Phil):

2. There are presently four unsigned pre-arbitration (auto-renewal) players on the Cubs MLB 40-man roster who are out of minor league options:

DANNY HULTZEN
TONY KEMP
ALEC MILLS
DUANE UNDERWOOD JR
 
Any one of them could get non-tendered.

The way it's done is the club non-tenders the player on 12/2 (so that he can't be claimed off waivers), and then they wait until after the Rule 5 Draft (which will be on December 12th) to re-sign the player to a minor league contract (so that the player can't be selected in the Rule 5 Draft).

The reason why a club would non-tender a player who is out of minor league options is if the club values the player enough such that if there is a question about whether the player will be able to make the club's Opening Day MLB roster out of Spring Training, the player can be sent to AAA without the club taking the risk that the player could be claimed off waivers. The Cubs did this last year with Allen Webster (he was out of minor league options, he was non-tendered, signed a minor league contract with the Cubs after the Rule 5 Draft, came to Spring Training as an NRI and was very impressive but failed to make the Opening Day bullpen because the Cubs had too many veteran arms with guaranteed contracts in the pen at the start of the season, and then he was called-up in April once there was room for him in the pen).   

However, in the case of Hultzen and Mills (but maybe not so much with Kemp and Underwood), if they are non-tendered and agree (in advance) to sign a minor league contract after the Rule 5 Draft if they don't receive an MLB contract offer from another club in the interim, I suspect both will get a 2020 MLB contract offer from another club if non-tendered, and I don't think the Cubs want to risk losing either Hultzen or Mills that way.

Two other factors that pertain just to Danny Hultzen and could influence the Cubs in deciding to non-tender him is that he has both Draft-Excluded status (he was added to an MLB 40-man roster after August 15th) and Article XX-D rights (he has been outrighted previously in his career), so he can't be outrighted any earlier than 20 days prior to Opening Day and he has the right to elect free-agency even if waivers can be secured prior to OPening Day.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 02, 2019, 06:29:00 pm
It is quite possible that the Cubs will try to resign both of them after the draft is completed.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on December 02, 2019, 07:29:55 pm
Why do you say that? Very few trades around baseball so far. Why would the timing as to Russell be any different than what’s (not) happening elsewhere? Not arguing to the contrary, just curious as to your reasoning.

The Cubs had been trying to move Russell before the issue with his wife became public. He was considered a bad locker room guy among other things.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 03, 2019, 03:19:08 pm
We must not be broke...

https://www.mlb.com/news/nicholas-castellanos-rumors
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 03, 2019, 03:57:01 pm
Now I just got one of those Bleacher Report alerts about us wanting to keep Castellanos.

If we resign Castellanos then IMO Schwarber is gone.

What's it gonna cost to keep him?

100 million?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 03, 2019, 04:16:35 pm
Castellanos and Schwarber is certainly an either/or proposition for me. But if it costs a hundred million Castellanos won’t be back whether we trade Schwarber or not.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 03, 2019, 04:26:42 pm
Bleacher Nation is passing on speculation that the National League might adopt the designated hitter in the next collective bargaining agreement and the Cubs might be interested in keeping Castellanos around in case that happens in 2022.

It's not unusual for garbage like this to show up when there is no other offseason news to report about.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 03, 2019, 04:28:21 pm
Jon Morosi reported this.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 03, 2019, 04:33:07 pm
I'm still convinced that Cubs fans are really overestimating the size of Castellanos' contract. Players have been getting paid more than expected so far, so I wouldn't be surprised at this point if he got something like 4 years, $56 million. But he's not getting close to $100 million.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 03, 2019, 04:36:43 pm
Bleacher Nation is passing on speculation that the National League might adopt the designated hitter in the next collective bargaining agreement and the Cubs might be interested in keeping Castellanos around in case that happens in 2022.

It's not unusual for garbage like this to show up when there is no other offseason news to report about.

So we’d be taking the 20 and 21 seasons off?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: mO on December 03, 2019, 04:58:50 pm
So we’d be taking the 19, 20 and 21 seasons off?

Fixed that for you.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 03, 2019, 05:48:26 pm
Jon Morosi reported this.

Correct

There is also this from Bleacher Nation
Quote
BUT, if you’re still among the hopeful, Ken Rosenthal throws you a bone this morning in the form of a Designated Hitter conversation: “A long-term deal [for Castellanos] from a National League team might even make sense, if a club is willing to bank on the possibility that the NL will adopt the DH in the next collective-bargaining agreement. The current CBA expires on Dec. 1, 2021, meaning that Castellanos might only need to play the outfield for two seasons.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 03, 2019, 06:26:27 pm
DH in the NL definitely will be a goal for the Union in the next CBA talks. Indeed, union and MLB already have had preliminary discussions about it last off-season (see link below) but all the big negotiating stuff has been put off to later.

So, stands to reason could be a factor in NL clubs interest in Castellanos beyond 2021.

I really don’t see Cubs shelling out significant money for Castellanos but notable that Cubs still interested in bringing him back.

I thought we had “inside info” from a regular poster here that Cubs would not be pursuing Castellanos. Perhaps that was wrong?

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-rule-changes-the-universal-dh-makes-sense-and-its-time-for-the-national-league-to-make-the-switch/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 03, 2019, 07:03:19 pm
Anyone with "inside info" on a message board is usually an attention seeking liar.

They can throw anything against the wall and if it sticks they look like Ken Rosenthal and if it doesnt they can always say "things change".

The inside info I gave was pecker sizes and who was a SOB and who wasnt.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 03, 2019, 07:04:37 pm
I thought we had “inside info” from a regular poster here that Cubs would not be pursuing Castellanos. Perhaps that was wrong?

I’m pretty sure the poster later clarified that the Cubs weren’t pursuing at the price he initially asked for (I think it was 4 years, $80 million at the time).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 03, 2019, 07:05:50 pm
Jeff Passan says the Cubs are "aggressive" and "manic" to make trades.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 03, 2019, 08:35:55 pm
I’m pretty sure the poster later clarified that the Cubs weren’t pursuing at the price he initially asked for (I think it was 4 years, $80 million at the time).

That’s called:  negotiating.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on December 03, 2019, 08:43:27 pm
Situations are almost always fluid...that should go without saying...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 03, 2019, 10:03:12 pm
I’m pretty sure the poster later clarified that the Cubs weren’t pursuing at the price he initially asked for (I think it was 4 years, $80 million at the time).

As I said back then, it’s a non-story if Cubs weren’t interested in Castellanos’ initial September asking price. But, the initial post started at—“I have been told that keeping Castellanos isn’t going to happen”—-which is way too broad a brush. It’s a negotiation.

I still don’t think Castellanos comes back, but doubt it was ever accurate to claim “isn’t going to happen” based on anything told in September. Yeah, “it’s just a message board” so doesn’t matter what anybody says. I get it——that’s the general feeling here. End of story.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 03, 2019, 10:49:08 pm
If the Cubs are indeed "manic" to make a trade, Schwarber is surely not untouchable.  They're probably keeping contact with Castellanos just in case that happens, as he'd then be one of their logical options for LF.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 03, 2019, 11:06:49 pm
He clarified that it was the asking price and the Cubs didn’t think his price would come down to a level that they would pay him. He said if the Castellanos price dropped they would be interested.

Why you have a bug rumors on a message board is beyond me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 03, 2019, 11:48:46 pm
Jeff Passan says the Cubs are "aggressive" and "manic" to make trades.

I hope they don't trade any minor-league guys.  I'm kinda leaning Buildican right now. 

When's the last time they traded a major leaguer with an actual big-league role, as opposed to a prospect or a salary dump? 
*Obviously Soler (2016) had already played in the majors before they traded him, but he was really a prospect, not a guy who had a real role on the team.
*Castro (2015), but that was really a salary dump to make room for Zobrist.
*Otherwise, would it be back to the Samardz-for-Russell trade in 2014? 

It's been a long time.  Have they ever done a major-league talent exchange?  As opposed to prospect-for-veteran trades, or salary dump?   


Were either Strop or Arrieta major leaguers when we traded Feldman?  Or was Strop in the minors too, at that time? 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 04, 2019, 12:23:14 am
He was in the majors pitching like he should be in the minors.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 04, 2019, 12:55:33 pm
He clarified that it was the asking price and the Cubs didn’t think his price would come down to a level that they would pay him. He said if the Castellanos price dropped they would be interested.

Why you have a bug rumors on a message board is beyond me.

Bad or misleading ”inside” rumors with a faulty premise are not useful. I get it that you and many others have a very low bar and don’t care.  Fine for you, not fine for me.

The initial inside dope was that ”told” by an insider that keeping Castellanos not going to happen. As I’ve now said for the third time, the subsequent “clarification” became a total non-story that the club might be interested if the price comes down—-that happens in most situations for a good player.

And, you only got the “clarification” because the initial post was questioned. That was the only useful thing in the whole matter.

Not questioning that there is a source of some sort. But, non-journalists tend often to garble or overstate when relaying info or do a poor job evaluating the source. Get it that you don’t care about that. Should not be “beyond you” that somebody else does care.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 04, 2019, 01:28:06 pm
Dear Reb,

You don't run the board and can't control what other people post.  I suggest if the rumors bother you that much you just block the poster or ignore it.  I have no clue what his source is, but it can provide interesting discussion points even if it is bad info.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 04, 2019, 01:58:03 pm
Man, do I hesitate to jump into this. But Reb has repeatedly said he is not expecting others to share his view on "inside" sources/rumors. He isn't trying to control anybody else, not objecting to others expressing their views.

On the other hand, you seem to be objecting to him expressing his view. If not, please clarify
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on December 04, 2019, 02:15:27 pm
Once upon a time there was a young Dodgers fan whom we’ll call Rab.  One morning, Rab read in the newspaper that Don Drysdale would be signing autographs at a nearby car dealership for an hour that morning.  Rab was very excited, and he took his baseball glove and left the house to head for the car dealership.  He was partway there when he was approached by a mysterious stranger on a street corner.

“Hey, kid,” the man said.  “You a Dodgers fan?”

“Yes, sir, Mr. Mysterious Stranger,” Rab replied.

“That’s good,” the stranger said.  “You know, Sandy Koufax is over at Oceanside High School signing autographs.”

“Really?” Rab gushed, but then he grew skeptical.  “Wait, are you a credentialed member of the press?  From what institution of higher learning did you get your degree in journalism?”

“No, kid,” the stranger said.  “I have inside information.  I have it from a guy who knows a guy who works for the Dodgers.”

Rab wasn’t sure.  “I don’t know. . . .” he said.

“Plus ol’ Sandy is giving pitching lessons,” the nefarious stranger said.

“Wow,” said Rab, now convinced.  He took off for Oceanside High, only to find a local famers’ market set up offering organic fruits and vegetables as well as artisanal craft goods.
 
Rab hurried to the car dealership, but the signing event had already closed.  Rab had missed his chance.

Poor Rab was heartbroken.  He stood in the middle of the street with tears streaming down his face and shouted at the sky “Never!  Never again will I trust unsubstantiated rumors in lieu of the honest reporting of a journalist!”

He paused.

“A Real journalist!” Rab amended.  “Not just someone posting garbage as click-bait!  Never!”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 04, 2019, 02:37:11 pm
Lol

The rumors do give us something to discuss besides someone's friggin WAR and pecker sizes.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 04, 2019, 03:55:05 pm
Once upon a time there was a young Dodgers fan whom we’ll call Rab.  One morning, Rab read in the newspaper that Don Drysdale would be signing autographs at a nearby car dealership for an hour that morning....

Actually, in case you might be interested, I got Don Drysdale’s autograph many years ago (and Sandy Koufax and lots of other guys). It was not because of following a rumor. I asked around where the players parked at Dodger Stadium (and the visiting team’s bus) and waited for them to arrive. That is, it took a bit of effort and and time to get accurate information....and then there’s a reward for doing that.

Obviously, not interested in trying to “control what other people post”—-an astonishingly bad interpretation by CBJ of my comments. Obviously, the internet is full of unsourced baloney...and far worse.  There is a high tolerance level for that..I get that.

But, it’s fair game to point that out and to follow up later when it becomes clear that the inside report was faulty. Says something (not sure what) that some folks find it objectionable to do that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 04, 2019, 09:28:56 pm
Did I miss where Nick signed with the Cubs for $80 million?  If he didn’t how is it faulty?  Did he say the Cubs wouldn’t be in contact with Nick throughout the season?

Everyone on this board knows you don’t like rumors that aren’t from your approved journalist list. Instead of calling people out maybe just don’t hit the post key.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 05, 2019, 12:23:08 am
Did I miss where Nick signed with the Cubs for $80 million?  If he didn’t how is it faulty?  Did he say the Cubs wouldn’t be in contact with Nick throughout the season?

Everyone on this board knows you don’t like rumors that aren’t from your approved journalist list. Instead of calling people out maybe just don’t hit the post key.

Sounds like you’re telling me what I ought not to post—-after just saying a few posts ago that I’M the one trying to control what others post. LOL.

An “approved journalist list” ? Good grief. Calm down.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 05, 2019, 12:24:35 am
You guys don't need any of the rest of us, do you?  Hit the lights when you're done.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 05, 2019, 09:01:23 am
It has a long way to go to equal the Scotti-Reb debates of 01.

Of course, it isn't over yet, so there is still hope.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 05, 2019, 11:46:40 am
CBJ is way, way smarter and more astute about baseball than Scotti.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 05, 2019, 12:10:41 pm
Nice olive branch.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 05, 2019, 12:58:48 pm
According to Mooney and Sharma the Astros want Willson Contreras.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on December 05, 2019, 01:53:13 pm
According to Mooney and Sharma the Astros want Willson Contreras.

That might be good reason to hang on to him then.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on December 05, 2019, 01:53:39 pm
Unless we get something very good in return of course.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 05, 2019, 01:57:56 pm
I find the fit with the Astros difficult from the Cubs point of view.  If they aren't going to trade Whitley or Tucker then Uriquidy seems to be the only young pitcher left.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 05, 2019, 01:58:59 pm
I wouldn't trade Contreras unless an offer literally knocked our socks off, or unless the front office was almost certain that they could not resign him before free agency.

Baez and Contreras should be the core of the team.  They are both unique players.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 05, 2019, 02:27:00 pm
I looked at Houston early on.  They need a catcher.  They have guys capable of playing center coming out their ears.   Peacock would be good, plus a solid CF.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on December 05, 2019, 02:58:09 pm
Contreras and Schwarber for Tucker.  #fantasyGM
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 05, 2019, 03:01:06 pm
That's too much.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 05, 2019, 03:11:37 pm
I agree with DaveP.

Contreras and Baez should retire Cubs.

If Houston wants Willson tell them Tucker and Whitley.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on December 05, 2019, 03:28:16 pm
It's one thing for the Cubs to unload Contreras just to reshuffle the deck chairs, but if a team out there really *wants* him and we can extract appropriate value, I'd definitely listen. So hard to move any other meaningful asset and get real value back: given limited control trading KB will likely make the Cubs worse, Cubs value Schwarber more than other teams, and Baez isn't going anywhere.

That said, as I've continued to think about the roster, I have wondered more and more about a Rizzo trade... he's probably good for 8 WAR the next two years, and will cost $32M, giving surplus value of basically $32M. If you trade Rizzo, you can move Schwarber to 1B, and then bring back Castellanos for LF. That "diversifies" the Cubs offense in some of the ways Theo would like to, Cubs get a little younger, add additional years of control to the roster, reshuffle the "leadership" voices, add some "intensity", and the salary difference between Rizzo and Castellanos shouldn't be so large so as to impact other moves.

So what does $32M surplus value get you? Well, Merrifield is under contract for 3 years at about $16M (after considering likely incentives). He's probably worth about 7.5 WAR over those 3 years, which comes out to $44M surplus value. $44M - $32M leaves $12M in surplus value to make up, which is basically a prospect in the top 100-150 range. Royals have a black hole at 1B, and if Rizzo plus a marginal prospect brings back Merrifield, that's worth considering, IMO. Especially if it triggers a Castellanos signing. Further, the Royals' farm system is even worse than the Cubs', meaning the prospect we send back would instantly qualify as one of their "top prospects."

Cubs then go:

C - Contreras/Caratini
1B - Schwarber
2B - Hoerner/Bote/Happ
SS - Baez
3B - Bryant
LF - Castellanos
CF - Merrifield
RF - Heyward

Cubs don't really lose financial flexibility in 2020 and likely gain some long-term, get younger, and address CF/leadoff in a market that otherwise has no good options. Contreras is still available to acquire pitching, if the right deal comes along.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on December 05, 2019, 03:53:05 pm
Then go sign Michael Pineda and someone from the McHugh/Betances/Harris/Treinen group, and I think you begin to see meaningful changes to the roster within the budgetary restrictions the Cubs appear to be operating under.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 05, 2019, 03:53:54 pm
I'd think Kyle Tucker of Forest Whitley would be a must for the Cubs in a Contreras trade.  But the way the last couple of offseasons have gone for Theo, you worry he'll accidentally trade for Forest Tucker.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 05, 2019, 03:55:37 pm
I'd think Kyle Tucker of Forest Whitley would be a must for the Cubs in a Contreras trade.  But the way the last couple of offseasons have gone for Theo, you worry he'll accidentally trade for Forest Tucker.
Worse than that would be Tucker Carlson.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on December 05, 2019, 04:02:05 pm
The final thing I wonder about is if Theo can persuade Ricketts to free up some cash and/or get creative with contracts for one of Cole or Strasburg. The Cubs have ~$45M in SP payroll coming off the books after 2020, and that year's SP FA crop doesn't look nearly as strong at the top (Bauer, Paxton). Would be great to pull some of that 2021 cash into 2020, if possible. Something we've done in the past.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on December 05, 2019, 04:06:39 pm
I'd think Kyle Tucker of Forest Whitley would be a must for the Cubs in a Contreras trade.  But the way the last couple of offseasons have gone for Theo, you worry he'll accidentally trade for Forest Tucker.

I don't think there's any way that Houston trades Tucker or Whitley to the Cubs for Contreras, unless they're convinced the framing stuff is a nothingburger.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 05, 2019, 04:07:37 pm
It is a nothingburger though.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 05, 2019, 04:08:07 pm
https://670thescore.radio.com/key-storylines-cubs-winter-meetings-free-agency-leadoff-man-trade-options
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 05, 2019, 04:09:14 pm
I can't see the Cubs trading Rizzo. Of the core players he embodies the plate approach the Cubs want from the lineup.   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on December 05, 2019, 04:12:25 pm
I can't see the Cubs trading Rizzo. Of the core players he embodies the plate approach the Cubs want from the lineup.   

Agreed. Flip side, for all of the vague criticisms of "team leadership" from Theo, have to wonder if Rizzo is someone they've been expecting to fill a bigger void.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 05, 2019, 04:26:39 pm
I'm not sure the Royals would really want Rizzo though, but I guess they could sell their fans that they aren't rebuilding.

For the Cubs I'm not sure it solves problems.  The Cubs would be essentially the same with contact with the swap and lose a sigificant source of left handed power.  The other kicker is Merrifield is actually older than Rizzo.  Rizzo even with his back issues seems like the type of guy that will age better as well.  Castellanos has usually been below league average in contact.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 05, 2019, 04:27:33 pm
I'd think Kyle Tucker of Forest Whitley would be a must for the Cubs in a Contreras trade.  But the way the last couple of offseasons have gone for Theo, you worry he'll accidentally trade for Forest Tucker.

Spectacular post, Deeg!  Simply brilliant!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 05, 2019, 04:30:01 pm
I'd think Kyle Tucker of Forest Whitley would be a must for the Cubs in a Contreras trade.  But the way the last couple of offseasons have gone for Theo, you worry he'll accidentally trade for Forest Tucker.

Larry Storch as a PTBNL?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 05, 2019, 04:50:25 pm
Larry Storch as a PTBNL?

Mr. Whoopee is still around, you know. But word is he’s lost a step at 96 and would need to play a corner OF spot now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 05, 2019, 06:03:16 pm
I don't think there's any way that Houston trades Tucker or Whitley to the Cubs for Contreras, unless they're convinced the framing stuff is a nothingburger.

I wonder if Houston might think that they'd be able to develop Contreras as a framer in a way that the Cubs just didn't have the teaching/diagnostics/development resources to make happen? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on December 05, 2019, 06:49:22 pm
He would also hit better knowing what pitch was coming.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron Green on December 05, 2019, 07:01:04 pm
Unless we get something very good in return of course.

Any chance we could get their sign stealing equipment and those operating it?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on December 05, 2019, 08:32:09 pm
That's too much.

I don't know.  We always talk about these moves we want to make in the outfield, and it usually ends with "We can't have _______ and Schwarber in the outfield together."  A guy like Tucker would end a lot of those roadblocks.  It'd also help make a Castellanos re-signing make much more sense.

Not that we're going to trade for Tucker anyway, but if the Astros are interested in Contreras but wouldn't part with Tucker for him, maybe adding Schwarber sweetens the pot enough to do it and helps end a lot of our outfield logjam issues.


Also if it seems to much for us to pay for Tucker, it might mean that could be an appropriate enough trade after all for us.  To get something, you have to give something.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on December 05, 2019, 08:33:09 pm
Any chance we could get their sign stealing equipment and those operating it?

Ha!  Yeah that'd probably make it a fair up swap!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on December 05, 2019, 08:36:36 pm
By the way just an observation, but the Astros went much of the season with Robinson Chirinos as catcher, who finished near the bottom in pitch framing stats this year.  Perhaps the Astros don't care as much about pitch framing as a lot of stat-forward teams if they settled for that in '19 and are interested in a guy in Contreras who hasn't fared well in that for most of his career.  Having mediocre pitching framing last year didn't seem to hurt their stud pitchers last season either.


Again if the Astros want him, maybe we shouldn't be so quick to unload him ourselves unless we get something very good back.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on December 05, 2019, 08:44:43 pm
That’s because framing is bullshit.

Get pitchers who can throw strikes and hit their target.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 05, 2019, 10:52:24 pm
I don't know.  We always talk about these moves we want to make in the outfield, and it usually ends with "We can't have _______ and Schwarber in the outfield together."  A guy like Tucker would end a lot of those roadblocks.  It'd also help make a Castellanos re-signing make much more sense.

Not that we're going to trade for Tucker anyway, but if the Astros are interested in Contreras but wouldn't part with Tucker for him, maybe adding Schwarber sweetens the pot enough to do it and helps end a lot of our outfield logjam issues.


Also if it seems to much for us to pay for Tucker, it might mean that could be an appropriate enough trade after all for us.  To get something, you have to give something.
  What I meant was that giving up BOTH Contreras and Schwarber for what you proposed was too little a return.  I see us trading both, but we need a pile back.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 06, 2019, 08:10:29 am
Robert Murray @ByRobertMurray
Sources: #Cubs in agreement with free-agent reliever Daniel Winkler on one-year deal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 06, 2019, 08:41:26 am
Still in dumpster diving mode I see.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 06, 2019, 08:43:29 am
Cubs drafted him in 2010, 43rd round. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 06, 2019, 10:08:54 am
$750K guarantee on a major league deal for Winkler according to Heyman. Also has $750K in incentives.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 06, 2019, 10:15:17 am
Heyman revises his last tweet and says Winkler is on a split contract where he'll get paid $200K if he's in the minors and $750K plus incentives in MLB.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 06, 2019, 11:10:13 am
The Chicago Cubs working with relief specialist  Brandon Morrow on coming back. It would be a minor league deal . Most likely end of December conclusion.--Levine
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 06, 2019, 11:28:16 am
Winker isn't a bad option for the Iowa shuttle.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 06, 2019, 12:19:27 pm
Winker isn't a bad option for the Iowa shuttle.

What is his options status, I assume he's got at least a year, based on your comment?  And where is the best website for finding stuff like that?  True Iowa-shuttle requires not only that you can start him there and call him up as need arises, but also that you can send him back and call him back again later. 

He was pretty good two seasons ago.  Basically lost three to injury, 14-15 to 2014 TJ, and then broke his elbow and lost 16.  So who knows, maybe he's at a stage where he's ready to stay healthy and be pretty useful.  And hopefully the Cubs pitch-lab resources can help to facilitate that.  Or maybe not; I think the Braves are well ahead of the Cubs in those areas, so if they couldn't probably we can't either?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 06, 2019, 12:22:22 pm
The Chicago Cubs working with relief specialist  Brandon Morrow on coming back. It would be a minor league deal . Most likely end of December conclusion.--Levine

I like the idea.  Not sure I really get why a minor-league deal would take weeks and weeks to work out?  Unless there are comeback/health-considerations, and they want to have him keep throwing for a few more weeks to see if his arm holds up before signing the deal? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 06, 2019, 12:28:21 pm
Are players who sign a minor league contract before the Rule 5 draft are eligible to be drafted? I think I remember that happening once or twice.

If that can happen, then it makes sense to hold off on officially signing a guy who is basically a lock to make the team (if healthy) until after the Rule 5 draft.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 06, 2019, 12:31:16 pm
What is his options status, I assume he's got at least a year, based on your comment?  And where is the best website for finding stuff like that?  True Iowa-shuttle requires not only that you can start him there and call him up as need arises, but also that you can send him back and call him back again later. 

He was pretty good two seasons ago.  Basically lost three to injury, 14-15 to 2014 TJ, and then broke his elbow and lost 16.  So who knows, maybe he's at a stage where he's ready to stay healthy and be pretty useful.  And hopefully the Cubs pitch-lab resources can help to facilitate that.  Or maybe not; I think the Braves are well ahead of the Cubs in those areas, so if they couldn't probably we can't either?

Fangraphs lists him as having 3 options left and the fact that somebody mentioned he had a split deal as well would confirm an option.

I like the idea.  Not sure I really get why a minor-league deal would take weeks and weeks to work out?  Unless there are comeback/health-considerations, and they want to have him keep throwing for a few more weeks to see if his arm holds up before signing the deal? 

They likely wouldn't want to announce it until after the Rule 5 draft.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 06, 2019, 12:34:23 pm
Double thanks, for fangraphs as go-to for options, and for the Rule 5 factor.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 06, 2019, 12:59:20 pm
Winkler doesnt strike me as total dog ****.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 06, 2019, 01:12:11 pm
Apparently the Cubs are still paying Brad Brach next year.

Ken Rosenthal @Ken_Rosenthal
Free-agent RHP Brad Brach signs with #Mets, one year, $850K with a player option for $1.25M in 2021, sources tell The Athletic. Brach still owed $500K by #Cubs for 2020, so actually will earn total of $1.35M next season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 06, 2019, 01:18:26 pm
Why didn't the Mets just sign Brach for the minimum? It appears they saved the Cubs about $300K by paying him $850K instead.

Bleacher Nation @BleacherNation
For interested Cubs fans - they were already on the hook for $1.35M to Brach in 2020, so this deal actually winds up *saving* the Cubs $850K. Thanks, Mets!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 06, 2019, 01:19:48 pm
He has incentives for games pitched so I wonder if that could shrink it another $400,000.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 06, 2019, 01:38:00 pm
Maybe that's the reason--if they only paid him the minimum, he'd have to earn another $800K in incentives for them to matter. By paying the extra $300K, the incentives start to increase his actual take home pay sooner.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 06, 2019, 05:21:27 pm
What is his options status, I assume he's got at least a year, based on your comment?  And where is the best website for finding stuff like that?  True Iowa-shuttle requires not only that you can start him there and call him up as need arises, but also that you can send him back and call him back again later. 

He was pretty good two seasons ago.  Basically lost three to injury, 14-15 to 2014 TJ, and then broke his elbow and lost 16.  So who knows, maybe he's at a stage where he's ready to stay healthy and be pretty useful.  And hopefully the Cubs pitch-lab resources can help to facilitate that.  Or maybe not; I think the Braves are well ahead of the Cubs in those areas, so if they couldn't probably we can't either?

Craig, Arizona Phil is your man for all such matters.  Here's a link to his 40-man roster which he keeps updated in a pretty timely fashion.  And here's a link about Winkler specifically.

https://www.thecubreporter.com/cubs-40-man-roster

https://www.thecubreporter.com/12062019/cubs-give-wink-and-nod-righty-reliever

An important excerpt:

Winkler has two minor league options left, but because he spent so much time on the Braves MLB DL 2015-17 he has already accrued more than four years of MLB Service Time, and so once he acrues another 109 days he will hit five years of MLB ST and his remaining options will be effectively not usable since he would have to give his permission before he can be optioned once he reaches 5+000 MLB Service Time.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 06, 2019, 05:31:26 pm
once he acrues another 109 days he will hit five years of MLB ST and his remaining options will be effectively not usable since he would have to give his permission before he can be optioned once he reaches 5+000 MLB Service Time.

Thanks, Jeff.  Really helpful.  So 109 days of yo-yo control...  Not quite as nice as three option-years of yo-yo! 

Still, that's most of this year.  109 days in, it's July, and of course by september nobody gets yo-yo'd.  HOpefully by July he'll be good enough that they aren't wanting to send him down.  I suppose if he's kinda interchangeable with some other yo-yos, they could potentially send him down on day 108, then he can hang out at Iowa in case they do need him back after day 109.

 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 06, 2019, 07:19:15 pm
Is Theo too gutless and cowardly to make a major trade?  Discuss.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 06, 2019, 07:29:44 pm
I know you're just being inflammatory for its own sake, but the truth is Theo is fuched.  Every team knows his ownership won't let him spend any money and he's under tremendous pressure to shake things up via trade.  He looks desperate, because he is.  That means any potential trade partner is going to be shaking him down big-time.  And that could very well mean no major trades.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 06, 2019, 07:31:59 pm
I agree, but he's not ignorant - then don't say that you want to make trades.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 06, 2019, 07:34:29 pm
I find it funny that everyone is so certain they know exactly what's going to and not going to happen right up until they dont.

Im gonna let things play out before I judge the offseason.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 06, 2019, 10:17:20 pm
https://www.cubsinsider.com/2019/12/06/changing-dan-winklers-mechanics-could-unlock-potential-of-elite-spin-rate/amp/?p=76492&__twitter_impression=true

So it’s kinda of a fun article that goes into spin rates and effective spin rates. Basically Winkler’s arm slot makes his effective spin rate stink. If the Cubs can move his release point up and he retains his spin then he could really interesting.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 07, 2019, 04:34:49 pm
Jeff Lawson
@pastorjl
@ESPNChiCubs
Give us a prediction as to what you think the Cubs might do this week

Jesse Rogers
ESPNChiCubs
Big trade by end of the week. Bryant ? I think we’re getting closer to that reality. (Could be someone else)


Seems like a pretty bold prediction.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 07, 2019, 04:43:47 pm
If the Cubs are going to trade Bryant, they need to do it soon while Rendon and Donaldson are still out there. If they free up Bryant's money, surely they'd at least talk to those guys.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 07, 2019, 09:51:15 pm
They will probably talk to them regardless of any trades.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 08, 2019, 02:20:39 am
If the Cubs are going to trade Bryant, they need to do it soon while Rendon and Donaldson are still out there. If they free up Bryant's money, surely they'd at least talk to those guys.

The issue with doing it soon is the grievance.  No team is going to give up two years value until they're sure they're getting two years.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 08, 2019, 07:14:53 am
MLB.com's "11 bold predictions" for the winter meetings:

Quote
5) The Padres will trade for Willson Contreras

All the motivation lines up. The Cubs are motivated to improve their long-term outlook with a trade that brings in cost-controlled talent. The Padres are motivated to contend in 2020, because the front office has been put on notice.

General manager A.J. Preller has already done a lot of heavy lifting this winter with trades for outfielders Tommy Pham and Trent Grisham and infielder Jurickson Profar, and the bold free-agent signing of reliever Drew Pomeranz. But Contreras, who has three seasons of arbitration control remaining, would take the lineup to another level and erase the defensive catching concerns the Padres are carrying with Francisco Mejía behind the plate.

The Cubs don’t necessarily have to get a catcher in a Contreras trade, because they like Victor Caratini. But the switch-hitting Mejía would be an attractive piece and worthwhile risk here. If he doesn’t stick behind the plate, he could be a corner-outfield option. He’s under control for five more seasons and not eligible for arbitration for two more years.

History tells us the Padres have to do something at a Winter Meetings in their home city. In 2014, they traded for Matt Kemp. In 1985, they took Bip Roberts in the Rule 5 Draft. In 1963 ... they didn’t have a team yet.

OK, so that’s only two instances, but that’s good enough to guide us.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 08, 2019, 08:16:35 am
From Rosenthal:

A reunion with free-agent outfielder Nicholas Castellanos? Not a chance, at least for the moment. Club officials are telling representatives of even low-budget free agents that they need to clear money before engaging in serious negotiations.

https://theathletic.com/1441618/2019/12/08/rosenthal-signings-and-stories-that-could-make-for-decadent-drama-at-the-winter-meetings/

They're right around the lowest luxury tax threshold right now. I bet if they trade Bryant, we start hearing about how they're going to stay under the luxury tax this year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 08, 2019, 08:34:01 am
Bleacher Nation expands on Rosenthal's comment

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/12/08/cubs-reportedly-telling-agents-they-cant-negotiate-on-even-low-cost-free-agents-until-they-clear-salary/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 08, 2019, 09:53:44 am
If the Cubs trade Bryant I’m going to be cranky. If the Cubs trade Bryant and stay under the luxury tax I’m going to be picketing the governor’s mansion in Lincoln.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 08, 2019, 10:18:43 am
Pete Ricketts is the real power behind the Cubs?  Who knew?

From that article a couple years ago, the whole clan seems self-absorbed with getting credit for stuff that I'm not sure anybody is in control.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 08, 2019, 10:32:32 am
If the Cubs trade Bryant I’m going to be cranky. If the Cubs trade Bryant and stay under the luxury tax I’m going to be picketing the governor’s mansion in Lincoln.

Yeah, that’s pretty close to a worst case offseason. They make themselves worse next year, and they haven’t done enough to really change their post-2021 trajectory where they fall off a cliff.

If they trade Bryant, they need to follow that up by going all in on Rendon (or maybe Donaldson), or they need to trade other guys who won’t be around after 2021. Either replace him or do a mini-rebuild.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 08, 2019, 10:43:21 am
Pete Ricketts is the real power behind the Cubs?  Who knew?

From that article a couple years ago, the whole clan seems self-absorbed with getting credit for stuff that I'm not sure anybody is in control.

Pete gets the luck of me being 1/2 hour from my house.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 08, 2019, 11:12:57 am
Yeah, that’s pretty close to a worst case offseason. They make themselves worse next year, and they haven’t done enough to really change their post-2021 trajectory where they fall off a cliff.

If they trade Bryant, they need to follow that up by going all in on Rendon (or maybe Donaldson), or they need to trade other guys who won’t be around after 2021. Either replace him or do a mini-rebuild.

Sharma heavily implies that Bryant would be traded after Rendon and Donaldson are off the board. If they trade Bryant to the Dodgers just burn it all down.

Thanks to Tom’s interview if they stay under the luxury tax it will be because he doesn’t want to pay other owners money.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 08, 2019, 11:57:07 am
This whole mess appears to be tied to incompetence on the business side - massively over budget on the Wrigley renovation and not getting the kind of TV deal they were anticipating.  Hopefully Crane pays the price. That guy is an **** and apparently not good at his job.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 08, 2019, 12:31:19 pm
But, this does not let the front office and their horrible player development process off the hook. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 08, 2019, 03:59:43 pm
Early in the rebuild, Theo referred to spending being related to revenue.  Post-season was supposed to generate a lot of millions, which could cover season expenses and subsequent-year payroll. 

Early in rebuild, they tended to save up, for later.  (Tanaka story...) 

More recently, Theo has tended to use future-year money for Nowacrat signings.  (Heyward and Darvish signings both borrowed from the ensuing-year's discretionary spending.)  I wonder if perhaps he did that again this past summer, with both the Kimbrel and Castellanos pickups?  He hoped Kimbrel would get them into the playoffs and playoff-success would self-fund the contract? 

Second, popular team superstars were supposed to generate lots of jersey revenue.  When they were rising young stars, and we won the world series, I assume they made lots of sales.  But now that they've got an 8th place team, I'm not sure that there have been lots of Russell/Rizzo/Bryant/Schwarber/Lester/Quintana jersey sales outside of the Chicago area? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 08, 2019, 04:47:08 pm
This whole mess appears to be tied to incompetence on the business side - massively over budget on the Wrigley renovation and not getting the kind of TV deal they were anticipating.  Hopefully Crane pays the price. That guy is an **** and apparently not good at his job.

I haven't seen any reporting on that subject.  Do you have a link for it?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 08, 2019, 05:03:05 pm
I haven't seen any reporting on that subject.  Do you have a link for it?

https://theathletic.com/1441815/2019/12/08/remember-when-the-cubs-snagged-jon-lester-at-the-winter-meetings-dont-expect-anything-close-this-week?source=shared-article
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 08, 2019, 06:16:27 pm
Thanks, Jeff.  I am not a subscriber.  Does it give specific information about going over budget on the Wrigley renovation?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 08, 2019, 06:22:46 pm
During a recent panel discussion with Sports Business Journal, Cubs chairman Tom Ricketts acknowledged that the team missed its budget for the Wrigley Field renovations by “around 100 percent.” That aligns with what the Cubs had already confirmed publicly, from an initial projection of $545 million to an estimated $1 billion cost for the entire development.

Those construction costs — combined with the uncertainty of when Marquee Sports Network will realize its full economic impact with widespread distribution on the region’s cable systems — are factors in setting the baseball operations budget, which will ultimately benefit from those long-term investments.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 08, 2019, 10:39:28 pm
Thanks, Jeff.  I appreciate the information.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 09, 2019, 02:48:22 am
Source: #Cubs, free agent Josh Lindblom have had discussions this offseason, but it appears other clubs are more heavily involved now. Lindblom, the 2019 KBO MVP, grew up in West Lafayette, Ind., fewer than 150 miles from Wrigley Field. @MLB @MLBNetwork-@MLBNetwork--Morosi
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 09, 2019, 03:50:01 am
Too rich for our blood.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 09, 2019, 07:38:34 am
Besides, we all KNOW those Asian pitchers come here with worn out arms.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 09, 2019, 09:20:38 am
I'm worried some folks will use up their supply of angst and anger over the Cubs' winter before the time comes when there is any actual activity or lack of activity about which to be upset.  ;)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 09, 2019, 09:46:30 am
I'm worried some folks will use up their supply of angst and anger over the Cubs' winter before the time comes when there is any actual activity or lack of activity about which to be upset.  ;)

Don't be ridiculous.  We've got plenty.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 09, 2019, 09:47:46 am
Don't be ridiculous.  We've got plenty.

True, that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 09, 2019, 10:44:27 am
ANGST?  STRESS?  NOT ME!  GO TO HELL!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 09, 2019, 10:52:41 am
Jesse Rogers predicts a Bryant to Braves trade in the ESPN Winter Meetings predictions column:

Here's a prediction: The Cubs will trade Bryant to the Braves for Max Fried and top prospects.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28237547/2019-mlb-winter-meetings-rumors-dates-free-agent-updates-predictions

Fried + prospects should be a pretty good trade for the Cubs. And if they did that, I think they should probably turn around and trade Quintana to free up more money. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 09, 2019, 11:20:05 am
I think they should probably turn around and trade Quintana to free up more money. 

That would be about as good of a deal as the Cubs could hope for.  I'm just not sure the Cubs would be in on Rendon/Straus/Cole and that their would be anybody worth spending the money on.

Levine is speculating that Ricketts wants the Cubs below the Luxury tax.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 09, 2019, 12:07:09 pm
...if they did that, I think they should probably turn around and trade Quintana to free up more money. 

One story is that they need to "clear payroll" before they can even talk to mid/low-end FA's. 

If it's so tight and they're looking to offload salary, then why did they just commit $9.5 to Quintana?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 09, 2019, 12:10:27 pm
Because Quintana at $9.5 million is still a pretty big bargain. They’ll have no problem trading his entire salary if that’s what they want to do.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on December 09, 2019, 12:18:20 pm
Then trade him already, if you lose out on the players you wanted trying to clear salary, how does that help?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 09, 2019, 12:23:53 pm
Because Quintana at $9.5 million is still a pretty big bargain. They’ll have no problem trading his entire salary if that’s what they want to do.

Disagree.  But if so, then they should hurry up and trade his entire salary, **if** pursuing other FA's is being stalled until his salary that they just unnecessarily committed themselves to gets offloaded. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on December 09, 2019, 12:24:39 pm
I would have given Q's starts to Colin Rea and saved 9M, personally...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 09, 2019, 12:26:18 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ELXV-FGX0AEMjQu.jpg:small)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on December 09, 2019, 12:27:35 pm
I think the narrative of Q's option was picked up to trade him is incorrect. If they are this salary constrained, they likely need him to plug into the rotation for that $ amount. Not going to find much on the FA market cheaper then him.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 09, 2019, 12:27:50 pm
Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  5m5 minutes ago
White not on 40-man roster

Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  5m5 minutes ago
Cubs also acquire LHP Conor Lillis-White from Angels as player to be named later in Tommy La Stella deal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on December 09, 2019, 12:28:28 pm
26 years in the organization for Franklin Font?  Boy where does time go?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 09, 2019, 12:38:42 pm
I think the narrative of Q's option was picked up to trade him is incorrect.

Agree.  They picked up his option not to trade him, but because they still believe he's really good, and that a Q-Lester rotation is a good Nowacrat way to contend. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 09, 2019, 12:42:27 pm
Disagree.  But if so, then they should hurry up and trade his entire salary, **if** pursuing other FA's is being stalled until his salary that they just unnecessarily committed themselves to gets offloaded. 

I think the narrative of Q's option was picked up to trade him is incorrect. If they are this salary constrained, they likely need him to plug into the rotation for that $ amount. Not going to find much on the FA market cheaper then him.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying his option was picked up just so they could trade him...I'm just saying they could easily trade him if they wanted to. But I don't think they want to. I think they plan to move enough money so they can make some moves around the edges, and then try to compete next year. They still see Quintana the cheapest option for filling out their rotation adequately. Just look at Hamels--he got $18 million from the Braves. Quintana is five years younger and has been at least as good as (and probably better than) Hamels over the last three years. It's going to cost a lot more than $9.5 million to replace Quintana.

But if the Cubs did end up getting Fried (or someone like him) who they can reasonably count on to be at least a #3 starter for them next year, then Quintana's value to them changes. At that point, I think it's pretty likely that they'd rather have the $9.5 million to spend somewhere else.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on December 09, 2019, 01:00:11 pm
Q will be more valuable to the Cubs if they add a solid #3 or better starter to the rotation, allowing Q to effectively be the 4th starter.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 09, 2019, 01:23:59 pm
Q will be more valuable to the Cubs if they add a solid #3 or better starter to the rotation, allowing Q to effectively be the 4th starter.
So, adding a starter with a pulse moves Q to #4?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 09, 2019, 01:30:48 pm
If you had Darvish, Hendricks, Fried, #4,#5. 

I think you could make a decent argument that putting Lester at #4.  Signing Walker and letting him and Cotton battle it out at #5 and moving Quintana's money to the bullpen and CF would improve the team more.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on December 09, 2019, 01:31:46 pm
does that make up for losing bryant?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 09, 2019, 02:19:24 pm
No, trading Bryant is still stupid.  Trading Bryant to stay under the luxury tax is 10x worse.  If the Cubs got a really great return it would keep from stalking the Governor of Nebraska, but I'd still be ticked about it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 09, 2019, 02:57:16 pm
...Just look at Hamels--he got $18 million from the Braves. Quintana is five years younger and has been at least as good as (and probably better than) Hamels over the last three years. It's going to cost a lot more than $9.5 million to replace Quintana.....

Q hasn't been nearly as good as Hamels for either of the last two years.  Who cares about 3 years ago? 

"He's not that old" and "over X years" is part of the Q fallacy, I think.  We're not getting 2016 vintage Q; we're getting 2020 Q.  With almost 2000 pro innings, I think his arm is effectively "older" and more worn than is typical for his age.  Pitcher history is not the best predictor of future for a guy in physical decline; he's not the same guy anymore.  He's trying to get by with below-average, liability stuff, needing to survive on guts and veteran savvy .  He's been trending worse, and I'm hesitant to assume that's going to reverse. 

Going with a guts-and-savvy overachiever as an anti-awful back-end guy makes more sense if your defense, offense, and pen rock.  Settle for 4-5 anti-awful innings, and let the offense and pen win some of those mediocre starts for you.  But I'm kinda worried that a hypothetical post-Bryant offense with Bote starting at 3rd, Hoerner at 2nd, and some jag in center isn't going to consistently score a lot and win a ton of Q/Lester starts. 

O well, Theo is a big Q-fan, so I guess we'll just enjoy whatever he gives us, for better or for worse. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 09, 2019, 03:35:57 pm
O well, Theo is a big Q-fan, so I guess we'll just enjoy whatever he gives us, for better or for worse. 


I know which one of those I'd bet on.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 09, 2019, 03:44:25 pm
Agree.  They picked up his option not to trade him, but because they still believe he's really good, and that a Q-Lester rotation is a good Nowacrat way to contend. 

I'm not sure I understand the controversy here.  It seems to me that they picked up Quintana's option because they need someone in the rotation, and are not likely to get someone any near as good as Quintana for 9.5 million.  Craig - since you have often espoused the value of having an anti-awful player instead of an awful one, I assume you rate Quintana as awful.  If so, I don't agree.  He seems to me to be the very definition of an anti-awful fifth starter.

Nor do I see the logic in trading Quintana just to free up money for free agent players.  There isn't a chance in the world that the Cubs are going to be in on Rondon/Cole level players, and replacing him with another 9.5 million dollar pitcher probably wouldn't accomplish much.  And it is very likely that the Cubs are going to want to have about 15 - 15 million in reserve, just on the off chance that they need to bolster some area, as they did last season with Kimbrel.

The Cubs have made it clear that they are not going to go over the salary cap this year, and given the penalties involved, I think this is a reasonable decision.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 09, 2019, 04:06:43 pm
Jesse Rogers tweeted he was going to be on the radio, so I turned it on. He says the Cubs are going to get under the luxury tax. Also says they have been transparent about that, which is just a flat out lie.

Mentions that he thinks they could be a .500 team this year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 09, 2019, 04:12:25 pm
"Mentions that he thinks they could be a .500 team this year. "  They will probably be battling the Cards for 3rd place.  Reds and Brewers at the top.  But things can change dramatically.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 09, 2019, 04:22:36 pm
The Cardinals are the best team in the division, IMO. Reds are probably pretty close behind, and look like they're going to continue to be aggressive this offseason--I wouldn't be surprised if they were the clear favorite going into Spring Training.

The Brewers and Cubs are a distant 3rd/4th right now. The Brewers have already lost Grandal, Moustakas, and Pomeranz, and they don't seem to have a ton of money to add. And given that they will be monitored closely next year since they're one of the primary non-Astros teams who are suspected of stealing signs, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some "unexplained" team-wide regression from them next year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 09, 2019, 04:31:51 pm
The Cardinals, Reds, and Cubs as currently constructed are at the top of the division.  Any of those three with a few tweaks would be the clear favorite. 

The Cubs if they trade Bryant are with the Brewers in the also rans battling to become a .500 team unless they catch lighting in the bottle.  If the Cubs trade Willson too and then I think they struggle hard to become a .500 level team and I'd wonder why you don't just blow the whole thing up.  Getting below the luxury tax is just stupid.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 09, 2019, 04:33:52 pm
I'm not sure I understand the controversy here.  It seems to me that they picked up Quintana's option because they need someone in the rotation, and are not likely to get someone any near as good as Quintana for 9.5 million.  Craig - since you have often espoused the value of having an anti-awful player instead of an awful one, I assume you rate Quintana as awful.  If so, I don't agree.  He seems to me to be the very definition of an anti-awful fifth starter.

Nor do I see the logic in trading Quintana just to free up money for free agent players.  There isn't a chance in the world that the Cubs are going to be in on Rondon/Cole level players, and replacing him with another 9.5 million dollar pitcher probably wouldn't accomplish much.  And it is very likely that the Cubs are going to want to have about 15 - 15 million in reserve, just on the off chance that they need to bolster some area, as they did last season with Kimbrel.

The Cubs have made it clear that they are not going to go over the salary cap this year, and given the penalties involved, I think this is a reasonable decision.

Interesting Freudian slip there...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on December 09, 2019, 04:37:46 pm
Mentions that he thinks they could be a .500 team this year.

If that's the case, can we just go ahead and try to get as much of Heyward's and Darvish's contracts off the books as we can?  Those are the big contracts that are hindering us right now.  No sense fooling around trying to free up a spare $8-10 million here or there if that's the season we're looking at.  Just go ahead and start tearing it down and get rid of the albatross contracts while they're coming off reasonably productive seasons.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 09, 2019, 04:41:58 pm
If that's the case, can we just go ahead and try to get as much of Heyward's and Darvish's contracts off the books as we can?  Those are the big contracts that are hindering us right now.  No sense fooling around trying to free up a spare $8-10 million here or there if that's the season we're looking at.  Just go ahead and start tearing it down and get rid of the albatross contracts while they're coming off reasonably productive seasons.

Yes, if we’re trading Bryant and Contreras not to extend the competitive window but to get under the luxury tax, then blow it up and trade everything that’s not nailed down.  Who cares about winning 80 games as opposed to 70?  That approach is the Bulls of the mid 2010s.  Basically everybody with surplus value should go and let Theo start over at 2012, which he seems to be better at than trying to be a buyer.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 09, 2019, 04:44:25 pm
As much as pitchers are making this offseason, I think the Cubs could probably trade all of Darvish's contract if they wanted to.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 09, 2019, 04:57:29 pm
If the Cubs if the exceed the luxury tax threshold by $30,000,000 and think I might be overestimating the tax a bit by adding the 12% surcharge to the whole 30%.

Year 1- $9,600,000
Year 2- $12,600,000 (+$3,000,000)
Year 3- $18,600,000 (+9,000,000 over year 1)

The Cubs need to get rid of their best player to reset the luxury tax over a freaking $9,000,000 or less money than they paid Morrow to be on the IR..................
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 09, 2019, 05:06:47 pm
The Cubs aren't a World Series contender without Bryant.  Trade freaking everybody and let Ricketts hoard up enough money to properly fund the next contending team.  Darvish has value and I think you could get rid of everyone not named Heyward without including assets.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 09, 2019, 05:09:31 pm
If the Cubs if the exceed the luxury tax threshold by $30,000,000 and think I might be overestimating the tax a bit by adding the 12% surcharge to the whole 30%.

Year 1- $9,600,000
Year 2- $12,600,000 (+$3,000,000)
Year 3- $18,600,000 (+9,000,000 over year 1)

The Cubs need to get rid of their best player to reset the luxury tax over a freaking $9,000,000 or less money than they paid Morrow to be on the IR..................

Dumb Q's by me. But clarify for me:
1.  we were under tax in 18, right?  So, *IF* over this year, it would be year 2, the $3M tax?  Not $9M?
2.  You mention exceeding the tax by $30M.  Where is that tax level? 
3.  There are a couple of tax levels, no? 
4.  If there are lux-tax levels/thresholds, is Rogers taking about being under even the lowest of them all, and being totally tax free?  Or is he perhaps referring to a higher-penalty lux level? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 09, 2019, 05:28:18 pm
I had no idea that Jesse Rogers had the ability to determine the Cubs' off-season.  But apparently he does.  Yeah, let's just blow it all up based on what he's reporting (or speculating).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 09, 2019, 06:42:25 pm
Craig

The Cubs would be in year 2 so a $30,000,000 overage would cost $12.6 million or $3 million more than a first time payer. Going over for 3 years in a row would be $18.6 million.

There are 3 tax tiers.
0-$20 million 20% then 30% then 50% tax
$20-$40 million over has an additional 12% surcharge.
$40+ million  42.5% surcharge the first time and 45% in subsequent years + a loss of 10 picks on your first pick.

The third tier could get expensive and I could see teams making a case to avoid it. The first 2 tiers nope it doesn’t make sense.


Rogers has been one of the most accurate reporters the past we years. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 09, 2019, 07:02:42 pm
Deeg, what's Freudian in davep's post.  I'm missing it.  Not doubting you, just want to nail the Dutch dummy myself.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 09, 2019, 07:18:53 pm
Idiot.  You can't use the words Dutch and the word dummy in the same sentence.  Just ask Craig.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 09, 2019, 07:47:19 pm
Deeg, what's Freudian in davep's post.  I'm missing it.  Not doubting you, just want to nail the Dutch dummy myself.

He said “salary cap”.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 09, 2019, 07:56:39 pm
The idea that the Cubs have to trade Bryant to get under the luxury tax threshold is really not supported by the data.

Right now, the Cubs are at around $210 (lux tax basis), around $2 over the threshold.  And my calc is usually a little conservative.  And they can put together a legitimate, full 26 man roster with the players already here.  It may not be an "optimized" roster, but it would be a legitimate MLB roster.

I find it hard to believe that the Cubs would have done stuff like exercise the Quintana option and tender Almora if it meant that they had to trade Bryant.

If they trade Bryant (or Contreras or whoever), it will be a baseball decision.  It may not be with 2020 only in mind, but it will be a baseball decision.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on December 09, 2019, 08:08:01 pm
I would suggest the media is pretty accurate this year as it relates to the team. They are going all out to trade Bryant. They won’t give him away obviously but they do want to move him badly.

The original plan was to then go after Rendon but the World Series ended any chance of getting Rendon at a reasonable price.

Castellanos was never likely to be re-signed. He was deemed a one dimensional player who caught fire at the right time. The feeling is/was that while he is a good hitter, he isn’t the hitter that wore a Cubs uniform for a couple months.

Someone posed the over/under at 1 of the core players being moved. I took the over back then and will stick with that prediction. If it doesn’t happen it won’t be for lack of desire.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 09, 2019, 08:20:20 pm
This is going to turn out as well as Mike Morgan, Jose Guzman and Greg Hubbard.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 09, 2019, 08:29:23 pm
The idea that the Cubs have to trade Bryant to get under the luxury tax threshold is really not supported by the data.

Right now, the Cubs are at around $210 (lux tax basis), around $2 over the threshold.  And my calc is usually a little conservative.  And they can put together a legitimate, full 26 man roster with the players already here.  It may not be an "optimized" roster, but it would be a legitimate MLB roster.

I find it hard to believe that the Cubs would have done stuff like exercise the Quintana option and tender Almora if it meant that they had to trade Bryant.

If they trade Bryant (or Contreras or whoever), it will be a baseball decision.  It may not be with 2020 only in mind, but it will be a baseball decision.

I agree.  I suspect that if there were no luxury tax, they would still be trying to trade Bryant for many reasons. 

He is a free agent in, at most, two years, and he seems the least likely to be willing to sign at a number that is acceptable to the Cubs.  Allowing him to walk away with nothing but a draft choice would set the program back substantially.  And he can bring back a return that can still contribute to to team next year, and bring in a meaningful prospect or two that can help further down the line.  And the money they save from his salary next year can be used to bring in a useful free agent this season or next.

I doubt that the Cubs will trade him for less than what they feel is his fair value, but if they are going to trade someone, he seems to be the most logical.  But biggest question is whether or not they can get decent value for him until his free agency question is resolved.  One year of Bryant will bring back substantially less than two, and may make him more valuable in trade at trade deadline if there is someone that is in desperate need at that time.

By the way, DEEG is right.  I used the term salary cap rather than luxury tax.  I am not sure that there is a practical difference this winter, but it was not accurate.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 09, 2019, 08:38:50 pm
The original plan was to then go after Rendon but the World Series ended any chance of getting Rendon at a reasonable price.

Too bad...because trading Bryant for young players and then signing the one player better than him on the market would've been the perfect strategy for this team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 09, 2019, 08:56:08 pm
I agree.  I suspect that if there were no luxury tax, they would still be trying to trade Bryant for many reasons. 

He is a free agent in, at most, two years, and he seems the least likely to be willing to sign at a number that is acceptable to the Cubs.  Allowing him to walk away with nothing but a draft choice would set the program back substantially.  And he can bring back a return that can still contribute to to team next year, and bring in a meaningful prospect or two that can help further down the line.  And the money they save from his salary next year can be used to bring in a useful free agent this season or next.

I doubt that the Cubs will trade him for less than what they feel is his fair value, but if they are going to trade someone, he seems to be the most logical.  But biggest question is whether or not they can get decent value for him until his free agency question is resolved.  One year of Bryant will bring back substantially less than two, and may make him more valuable in trade at trade deadline if there is someone that is in desperate need at that time.

By the way, DEEG is right.  I used the term salary cap rather than luxury tax.  I am not sure that there is a practical difference this winter, but it was not accurate.



This is the replace Greg Maddux strategy all over again. You don’t replace your best player and hope to compete anytime soon. The 2020 Cubs are unlikely to make the playoffs without Bryant if they don’t sign Rendon or Cole, which isn’t happening.

2021 the Cubs rotation is Darvish and Hendricks and then nobody. You have to rebuild the rotation and unless you sign Betts they offense is still crap. Trading Bryant closes the window.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 09, 2019, 09:04:48 pm
I'm not convinced trading Bryant cancels 2020 until I see the return.  But if (and that's obviously a big if) Jesse Rogers' description is correct, I really do think it makes more sense to go whole hog with a rebuild.  If you're going to make payroll-driven trades for Bryant and Contreras which clearly won't feature any players as good right now coming back, and you aren't going to go out and spend in FA, the upcoming season is pretty much toast.  Truthfully it would be better to lose as many games as possible but they aren't going to go that far.  Trading Q and Darvish probably makes little sense as their salaries are pretty neutral at this point - the only way they'll get talent back is by eating a ton of salary and that's obviously not going to happen.  But Rizzo, Schwatber, Baez?  You can make the argument for keeping Javy and building around him but only if he signs an extension - and if the Cubs are blowing it up he's not going to do that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 09, 2019, 09:15:07 pm
I read early today that we were in on Keuchel.

Ive been busy so Im not sure who said it but it was one of the big name reporters.

That dont sound like we're poor.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 09, 2019, 09:15:35 pm
I'm not convinced trading Bryant cancels 2020 until I see the return.

Agree 100%.  The problem is that we have MLB's worst front office making the decisions.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 09, 2019, 09:27:42 pm
The Cubs aren’t going to get a player as talented as Bryant back in return. Whatever they get the Cubs are going to be subtracting wins, even if the return is all MLB talent. It didn’t work in 1994 and won’t work in 2020.

The Cubs to get better in 2020 or 21 just have to rebuild a pitching rotation and then find another star player. Seems simple enough.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 09, 2019, 09:29:15 pm
Maybe trading off some of our assets puts us under the luxury tax but doesnt it also rebuild our system?

It might suck but doesnt it also fix a problem?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 09, 2019, 09:34:28 pm
I just spoke to a well known agent in the Hyatt lobby and here is what he said to me: "Man, the Cubs are trying to move money and the White Sox are all in to try and compete. Talk about role reversal in the Windy City!"--Kaplan
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 09, 2019, 09:39:39 pm
“Fixing” the Cubs system would be finding another Bryant or Baez. They aren’t getting that for 2 years of Bryant. The Cubs either need to be extremely lucky/good picking later in the draft or they need to get a top pick. Trading Bryant increases you stock of Ian Happ type guys who might be useful 2-3 WAR guys.

If you trade a 5 WAR player you need to replace him with a 5 WAR player or better. Bringing in 3 3 WAR players doesn’t make your team better. The only way to salivate 2021 would be to sign Betts and hope you can piece together a rotation, bullpen.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 09, 2019, 09:48:56 pm
Jordan Bastian
@MLBastian
Theo said the Cubs are not close to any deals right now. Said patience could be beneficial while FA market moves. That could set stage for trade market.--Bastian
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 09, 2019, 09:49:17 pm
Levine posted the Keuchel rumor.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 09, 2019, 09:59:02 pm
Cubs trade Bryant and sign Keuchel. The Darkest Timeline.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 09, 2019, 10:08:31 pm
It's to imagine a worse Cubs target than Keuchel. A guy going into his mid-30s who pitches to contact and will be expensive....everything the Cubs don't need.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 10, 2019, 12:14:39 am
On MLB Network right now, @Ken_Rosenthal mentioned that he would be "shocked" if a Kris Bryant trade were to happen this week at the Winter Meetings but noted that it's still in play and the Cubs are in a unique situation.

Theo also said it was an offseason where they had to be patient.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 10, 2019, 12:21:52 am
Theo Epstein said he was preceding ahead and “fairly confident “that the grievance presented by the union on Kris Bryant’s service time will not be ground breaking result of free agent status being granted one year early.--Levine
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 10, 2019, 12:28:20 am
There is going to be a lot of speculation in the coming weeks, whether about Bryant, Contreras or others. Jesse Rogers predicted that there would be a major trade by the Cubs at the Winter Meetings, and specifically suggested that it might be Bryant.  Maybe the Cubs will make a major trade at the Winter Meetings, but Rogers was simply speculating. I don't plan on taking any of the speculation very seriously, even from legitimate reporters, because I'm pretty sure that not even Theo Epstein knows how any of this is going to turn out, and I seriously doubt that he's sharing much in the way of specifics regarding plans and expectations with anyone outside his inner circle. 

That doesn't mean there is anything wrong with speculation, whether by reporters or by internet fans - indeed, I will certainly check here and elsewhere to try to keep up with rumors. But I remember taking some of these things too seriously in past seasons, only to learn there was often nothing whatsoever to many of them. It should be an interesting winter - how interesting remains to be seen.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 10, 2019, 02:55:05 am
Joe Maddon surprised by the Kris Bryant trade speculation, calling it "weird."

Of Bryant and Willson Contreras, Maddon adds, "They are not done improving. They are all going to get better."

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 10, 2019, 07:12:43 am
Sharma had a piece talking about trades for Bryant. He discussed the Phillies saying that Bohm might be a trade target, but he isn’t sure the Phillies would trade him or that the Cubs would want him. He went heavily into the Dodgers as a target saying that Lux and May would be preferred trade targets but they are likely unobtainable. Instead he thinks a trade built around Alex Verdurgo as being the Cubs best option. Verdurgo has a lower wRC+ than Ian Happ, but he doesn’t strike out I guess.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 10, 2019, 07:31:43 am
Verdugo had an .817 OPS as a 22 year-old playing half his games at Dodger Stadium.  Doesn’t struggle against lefties and seems pretty decent everywhere in the outfield.  For one or two years of a Bryant with injury flags, he’s not a bad first piece.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 10, 2019, 08:24:05 am
Verdurgo is a solid player. Look at the Dodgers with Bryant.  Bellinger, Bryant, Seager, Muncy, Turner, Smith, Lux as positional talent. Buhler, Kershaw, May, Urias in the rotation. No shot the Cubs compete against that team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 10, 2019, 09:10:15 am
MLB Morning Lineup has a headline that the Nationals have asked about Bryant, but the link to the story doesn't work at the moment.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on December 10, 2019, 09:37:45 am
MLB Morning Lineup has a headline that the Nationals have asked about Bryant, but the link to the story doesn't work at the moment.

He'd certainly fit the bill as a replacement for Rendon for them.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 10, 2019, 09:39:24 am
I think that Soto kid would be a fair exchange.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 10, 2019, 11:10:11 am
Paraphrasing Jeff Passan on ESPN: Everyone in the lobby believes Kris Bryant is the guy who is gonna move. But the Cubs aren't going to trade him unless it's a huge offer.

More @JeffPassan on ESPN1000, he's heard the Padres connected to the Cubs on Willson Contreras, but the ask is absurd.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on December 10, 2019, 11:19:55 am
As it should be...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 10, 2019, 12:24:50 pm
I've seen suggestions on other boards that the Cubs should try to get Trea Turner for Bryant if they deal with the Nationals. They have Kieboom ready to take over at shortstop, and Robles or Eaton could hit leadoff for them. So if the Nationals are concerned about their payroll, I could see that working for them.

If the Cubs are going to try to trade Bryant and get under the luxury tax but still compete in 2020, a deal like that might be their best option.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 10, 2019, 12:42:39 pm
Paraphrasing Jeff Passan on ESPN: Everyone in the lobby believes Kris Bryant is the guy who is gonna move. But the Cubs aren't going to trade him unless it's a huge offer.....

Logical inconsistency. 

If the premise is that the Cubs require a "huge" offer for Bryant and an "absurd" offer for Willson, the conclusion that there will be a trade is not logical.

Of course it's possible that somebody will make a "huge" offer; or that the Cubs will settle for a less-than-huge, less-than-absurd offer. 

But I still think that it's more likely than not that we'll be back with all four of Bryant, Willson, Baez, and Schwarber.

 


Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 10, 2019, 12:49:15 pm
I've seen suggestions on other boards that the Cubs should try to get Trea Turner for Bryant if they deal with the Nationals. They have Kieboom ready to take over at shortstop, and Robles or Eaton could hit leadoff for them. So if the Nationals are concerned about their payroll, I could see that working for them.

If the Cubs are going to try to trade Bryant and get under the luxury tax but still compete in 2020, a deal like that might be their best option.

Is that a Cubs board or a Nationals board.  I can see the Cubs wanting Turner, I can't see the Nationals trading him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 10, 2019, 01:00:47 pm
I'm not convinced trading Bryant cancels 2020 until I see the return.  But if (and that's obviously a big if) Jesse Rogers' description is correct, I really do think it makes more sense to go whole hog with a rebuild.  If you're going to make payroll-driven trades for Bryant and Contreras which clearly won't feature any players as good right now coming back, and you aren't going to go out and spend in FA, the upcoming season is pretty much toast. 

You have to make a choice.  If you trade Bryant for someone exactly as good right now, you do not improve the team right now.  But to take the suggested trade to Atlanta for instance, getting back Max Fried would help the pitching staff, which is by far the weakest link of the team, as well as bringing back a couple of good prospects that can help the team after the upcoming free agent cliff after 2001. 

I don't subscribe that we must either win the World Series, or we are total failures.  There are times that it is appropriate to dismantle the team and start over on a new 5 year plan, but I don't see that as necessary at this time.  With minor adjustments in the free agent market, In my opinion the Cubs will have a high probability to make the playoffs.  That, to me, is a successful team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 10, 2019, 03:24:38 pm
Asked several times if the Cubs and Bryant have had serious talks about an extension, Scott Boras sidestepped the question: “We communicate with the Cubs constantly. Our doors are open…and more than willing to discuss anything like that on a long term basis.”

Boras on the idea of a player like Kris Bryant getting moved: “It’s hard to think how you ever replace them, and so when you get into those (elite) levels, historically, it’s normally not something that’s done.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 10, 2019, 03:31:58 pm

A lot of angst over Bryant who has dropped in the pecking order of 3B's.

Top 20 third basemen for 2020
1   
Nolan Arenado Colorado Rockies 3B
If we're talking more of a points-league context or any format that rewards walks or on-base percentage, it might be time to drop Nolan Arenado behind Alex Bregman and Anthony Rendon, who both have him beat in that regard. But in traditional 5x5 categories scoring, he can do no wrong playing half his games at Coors Field, remaining a perennial triple crown threat and four-category stud.
2   
Alex Bregman Houston Astros 3B
Now proven as a power hitter twice over, Bregman only lags behind Arenado in batting average, but given that he actually strikes out less, it won't take much for him to catch up there either. Hitters who walk more than they strike out are rare in today's game, and the gap between the two numbers seems to widen every year for Bregman, which makes him a no-doubt first-rounder in points leagues.
3   
Anthony Rendon Washington Nationals 3B
For a second straight year, Anthony Rendon was the top third baseman in terms of Head-to-Head points per game, but the reason it may come as a surprise to you is because he always seems to miss a chunk of games. Of course, the gap was so wide this year that those health concerns alone aren't reason enough to downgrade him, but the power increase at age 29 isn't something you can just assume he'll repeat.
4   
Rafael Devers Boston Red Sox 3B
Though 2019 was obviously a massive breakout for the 22-year-old, who could continue to get better from here, Rafael Devers' elite standing is in question after a bumpy finish. If the composition of the Red Sox roster changes a great deal this offseason, which is certainly possible with a regime change, it could chip away at his massive RBI and run totals, and I wouldn't say he's a surefire .300 hitter yet. But overall, you have to like the direction he's headed.
5   
Jose Ramirez Cleveland Indians 3B
Those who worship at the altar of the stolen base will most likely draft Jose Ramirez ahead of Devers, and there's a case to be made for going that route in a points league as well. Ramirez has incredible contact skills and was the consensus third overall pick heading into this year. But even though he appeared to return to that form in July, I can't help but downgrade him for the near year-long stretch in which he hit about .200, especially since it ended just as unpredictably as it began.
6   
Kris Bryant Chicago Cubs 3B
Kris Bryant has built up enough legacy points to retain this high ranking, but he's on thin ice at a position where about a dozen bats are angling to overtake him. It's not that he's bad now, but he's been playing banged up the past couple years and has struggled to regain the power production that seemed so natural at the start of his career, propelling him to NL MVP in Year 2. Particularly in formats that don't reward his on-base skills, he may not be anything special in this environment.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 10, 2019, 03:32:27 pm
Verdurgo is a solid player. Look at the Dodgers with Bryant.  Bellinger, Bryant, Seager, Muncy, Turner, Smith, Lux as positional talent. Buhler, Kershaw, May, Urias in the rotation. No shot the Cubs compete against that team.

We're not competing against the Dodgers whether we trade them Bryant or not - let's be honest.  This club can't be a real threat without some major spending which we pretty much know isn't coming.  So you can sit on all your guys and lose them for nothing after 2021, or get the best young talent you can for them now.  Considering his age, to conclude Verdugo will never be more than a solid player seems rash to me. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 10, 2019, 04:04:23 pm
I've seen suggestions on other boards that the Cubs should try to get Trea Turner for Bryant if they deal with the Nationals. They have Kieboom ready to take over at shortstop, and Robles or Eaton could hit leadoff for them. So if the Nationals are concerned about their payroll, I could see that working for them.

If the Cubs are going to try to trade Bryant and get under the luxury tax but still compete in 2020, a deal like that might be their best option.

Kieboom is not a major league SS--saw him play there early in the season and that's not where his future will be.  It's at 2B or maybe 3B.

So, highly unlikely that Nats would trade Trea Turner. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 10, 2019, 04:10:53 pm
We're not competing against the Dodgerd whether we trade them Bryant or not - let's be honest.  This club can't be a real threat without some major spending which we pretty much know isn't coming.  So you can sit on all your guys and lose them for nothing after 2021, or get the best young talent you can for them now.  Considering his age, to conclude Verdugo will never be more than a solid player seems rash to me. 

Cubs with Bryant, Baez, Rizzo, Schwarber et al. can keep you competition with most teams especially if you can improve the pitching.  If you can't compete with the Dodgers then just burn it to the ground.  I'd rather suck and hope for the future than bee stuck in .500 limbo.

Verdurgo in the minors expect for rookie ball and 96 PA in A+ ball has been 108 to 128 wRC+ guy.  His highest ISO above rookie ball .143, which is similar to Almora.  He started to walk a little more in 2017/18, but he had a 6.9% BB% last year.  He's a guy that doesn't strike out, hasn't hit for power other than last year with a juiced ball, and doesn't walk a ton.  His defense was ok in CF last year and he doesn't steal a ton.  He would have to hit a ton more power to become something more. 

On the Cubs talk podcast Tony Andracki thinks the Cubs need to cut $6-8 million before signing people plus additional money to sign people.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 10, 2019, 04:48:53 pm
Cubs with Bryant, Baez, Rizzo, Schwarber et al. can keep you competition with most teams especially if you can improve the pitching.  If you can't compete with the Dodgers then just burn it to the ground.  I'd rather suck and hope for the future than bee stuck in .500 limbo.

Verdurgo in the minors expect for rookie ball and 96 PA in A+ ball has been 108 to 128 wRC+ guy.  His highest ISO above rookie ball .143, which is similar to Almora.  He started to walk a little more in 2017/18, but he had a 6.9% BB% last year.  He's a guy that doesn't strike out, hasn't hit for power other than last year with a juiced ball, and doesn't walk a ton.  His defense was ok in CF last year and he doesn't steal a ton.  He would have to hit a ton more power to become something more. 

On the Cubs talk podcast Tony Andracki thinks the Cubs need to cut $6-8 million before signing people plus additional money to sign people.

Without dramatically improving the pitching you’re not going to compete for the WS with this everyday lineup as constructed.  And how are you going to dramatically improve the pitching without trading anybody or spending any money?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 10, 2019, 04:52:30 pm
Trade Contreras and spending money would be my plan.

Appearantly the Cubs aren't allowed to spend, so I'd just burn it down and restart from scratch.  Let Ricketts save up some money for the the next time the Cubs get good.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 10, 2019, 04:54:37 pm
Assuming Ricketts ever plans to spend big again is a big leap to me. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 10, 2019, 05:33:11 pm
God this place is depressing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 10, 2019, 05:55:30 pm
https://670thescore.radio.com/assessing-possible-kris-bryant-cubs-trade-partners
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 10, 2019, 06:04:24 pm
God this place is depressing.
Dusty, here on the board, it's okay just to call me Curt.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 10, 2019, 06:15:02 pm
https://670thescore.radio.com/assessing-possible-kris-bryant-cubs-trade-partners

Does Levine actually know anything in that article, or is he just throwing things against the wall? With the Nationals, he mentions Robles, who was a top 5 prospect a year ago, plus more. Seems unlikely the Nationals would trade him.

But then for the Phillies, he says their best prospects would probably be off limits. And for the Braves, he mentions Ender Inciarte (whose contract might be underwater at this point) and Austin Riley (who has all the flaws the Cubs are trying to move away from) as top targets--I can't imagine the Cubs would have much interest in either of them as anything more than a throw-in. He also has Max Fried off limits.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 10, 2019, 06:35:12 pm
If Ricketts doesn’t want to spend ever again than the $1.2 billion renovation is going to be a waste and the TV network which could print them money is going to flop.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on December 10, 2019, 06:57:25 pm
If Ricketts doesn’t want to spend ever again than the $1.2 billion renovation is going to be a waste and the TV network which could print them money is going to flop.

Lol. No it's not. They are still selling out every game. Will sell way more luxury and premium seats. Lots of **** bags willing to spend $$ to be seen at wrigley.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron Green on December 10, 2019, 07:10:59 pm
The Cardinals, Reds, and Cubs as currently constructed are at the top of the division.  Any of those three with a few tweaks would be the clear favorite. 

The Cubs if they trade Bryant are with the Brewers in the also rans battling to become a .500 team unless they catch lighting in the bottle.  If the Cubs trade Willson too and then I think they struggle hard to become a .500 level team and I'd wonder why you don't just blow the whole thing up.  Getting below the luxury tax is just stupid.

Might not the team's prospects after any such trade depend at least a bit on what the Cubs would get in return?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron Green on December 10, 2019, 07:21:42 pm
Asked several times if the Cubs and Bryant have had serious talks about an extension, Scott Boras sidestepped the question: “We communicate with the Cubs constantly. Our doors are open…and more than willing to discuss anything like that on a long term basis.”

Boras on the idea of a player like Kris Bryant getting moved: “It’s hard to think how you ever replace them, and so when you get into those (elite) levels, historically, it’s normally not something that’s done.”

Those comments from Boras to me sound as if Bryant wants to return to the Cubs, or at least that Boras believes he does.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on December 10, 2019, 07:30:34 pm
You guys at this point can basically expect to wait till the ricketts make back their 540 million overage on renovations before they spend. Just fire Theo and pay preller to rebuild it. Theo expects ownership go buy out his mistakes... And that's not happening.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 10, 2019, 07:39:51 pm
Might not the team's prospects after any such trade depend at least a bit on what the Cubs would get in return?

The players they get back won’t be as good as Bryant so the Cubs are going to be worse.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 10, 2019, 07:43:37 pm
You guys at this point can basically expect to wait till the ricketts make back their 540 million overage on renovations before they spend. Just fire Theo and pay preller to rebuild it. Theo expects ownership go buy out his mistakes... And that's not happening.

I am not sure what you mean by "before they spend".  How many teams are going to have a total salary larger then the Cubs next year?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 10, 2019, 07:47:08 pm
If Ricketts doesn’t want to spend ever again than the $1.2 billion renovation is going to be a waste and the TV network which could print them money is going to flop.

The Bulls were in the top 3 in attendance for years and years after becoming an embarrassment. I see no reason it would be different with the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on December 10, 2019, 07:48:51 pm
The fun in owning a team is winning championships.  Particularly for a fan like Ricketts.  I expect him to do everything he can to accomplish that again as soon as is possible.  I would be surprised if the game plan includes trading Bryant.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 10, 2019, 07:56:08 pm
I think they will trade Bryant if they can get a decent return.  Not because they don't want to try to win this year, but because they don't want the entire organization to fall off the cliff when Bryant, Baez, Schwarber, Rizzo and Contreras all enter free agency within a couple of years of each other.  A responsible owner and front office have to look beyond the immediate season if they are going to be successful over the long term.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 10, 2019, 08:25:10 pm
Or they could sign some of those guys to prevent them from falling off of a cliff.

The Bulls are having attendance problems. I think if the perception is that the a Ricketts are being cheap the declines will be noticeable.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 10, 2019, 08:56:32 pm
The Bulls may be having "attendance problems" right now (they're still 10th out of 30 teams).  Last year they were 2nd - and that was the first year in the 2010s that they weren't first.  And I don't know how any NBA owner could possibly act in way more conducive to being called cheap than Reinsdorf.

Blind faith in the Ricketts seems misplaced to me - the proof is in the pudding.  Having won the WS already they may well consider the franchise an ATM and nothing more. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 10, 2019, 09:08:48 pm
Or, being Cubs fans themselves, they may continue to be among the top 95 percent in salary expenditures.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 10, 2019, 09:10:44 pm
Or they could sign some of those guys to prevent them from falling off of a cliff.

I expect that they will sign some of them.  But that will merely leave them at the top end of the luxury tax and half a team to sign.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 10, 2019, 09:11:42 pm
The counter argument to that is that they've spent quite a bit of money post-WS.  Of course, with the woeful Theo in charge, it's been spent poorly.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron Green on December 10, 2019, 09:28:26 pm
The players they get back won’t be as good as Bryant so the Cubs are going to be worse.

Why assume they will not be as good?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 10, 2019, 09:33:27 pm
**IF** they need to clear $6M, it seems ironic that they want to trade Bryant to enable that.  I think I'd rather meet payroll by moving Q than by moving Bryant!  :):)  If they're in some crisis over-budget mode, seems pretty weird to have voluntarily put themselves there for the sake of Q. 

Or how about this:  how about conning somebody into taking Kimbrell, who Theo thought was worth $45?  He's going to cost about what Bryant costs, payroll-wise!  :):) 

The Cubs top 8 salaries:  Darvish ($22), Heyward ($21), Lester ($20), Bryant (~$19?), Rizzo ($16.5), Kimbrel ($16), Chatwood ($13), Hendricks ($12), Quintana ($10.5).  Five of those 8 salaries are pitchers, almost $100M on those 5 pitchers. 

I think it's hard to fault ownership when they entrusted Theo with so much money and so much authority.  If their guy spends a ton on busts, and spends a ton on front-office and scouting and development people who are ineffective at scouting, drafting, and developing. 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 10, 2019, 09:36:34 pm
**IF** they need to clear $6M, it seems ironic that they want to trade Bryant to enable that.  I think I'd rather meet payroll by moving Q than by moving Bryant!  :):)  If they're in some crisis over-budget mode, seems pretty weird to have voluntarily put themselves there for the sake of Q. 

Or how about this:  how about conning somebody into taking Kimbrell, who Theo thought was worth $45?  He's going to cost about what Bryant costs, payroll-wise!  :):) 

The Cubs top 8 salaries:  Darvish ($22), Heyward ($21), Lester ($20), Bryant (~$19?), Rizzo ($16.5), Kimbrel ($16), Chatwood ($13), Hendricks ($12), Quintana ($10.5).  Five of those 8 salaries are pitchers, almost $100M on those 5 pitchers. 

I think it's hard to fault ownership when they entrusted Theo with so much money and so much authority.  If their guy spends a ton on busts, and spends a ton on front-office and scouting and development people who are ineffective at scouting, drafting, and developing. 



Theo has made plenty of mistakes. But the main reason he had to overpay for Kimbrel is that Ricketts wouldn’t let him spend any money to fix the bullpen in the winter.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 10, 2019, 09:40:19 pm
David Ross said trade rumors about Bryant and others "makes the job real." Knows front office has a responsibility to explore everything. At same time...

"The rumors aren't always as true as they may seem and I see that even more now that I'm behind the curtain, so to speak."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 10, 2019, 09:43:22 pm
Because the Rays aren’t trading Wander Franco?

Getting 2-3 players that total up to Bryant’s WAR isn’t as good as having Bryant on the team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 10, 2019, 09:45:44 pm
https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/cubs-still-trying-break-through-extension-talks-current-players-baez-bryant-rizzo-trade?amp&__twitter_impression=true
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 10, 2019, 09:46:42 pm
Cubs GM Jed Hoyer indicated the team isn't likely to complete a significant deal before the end of the meetings on Thursday: "I'd lean no but that can change quickly. It's still early in the week. We're not at halftime yet, so to speak." Hoyer confirmed... https://t.co/YflN0oYC5M
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 10, 2019, 09:55:44 pm
**IF** they need to clear $6M, it seems ironic that they want to trade Bryant to enable that.  I think I'd rather meet payroll by moving Q than by moving Bryant!  :):)  If they're in some crisis over-budget mode, seems pretty weird to have voluntarily put themselves there for the sake of Q. 

Or how about this:  how about conning somebody into taking Kimbrell, who Theo thought was worth $45?  He's going to cost about what Bryant costs, payroll-wise!  :):) 

Is the 6 million they have to clear 6 million in salary, or 6 million in luxury tax money.  There can be quite a difference between them.

By the way, have we decided that Kimbrell will not be worth his salary next year?  That may be taking recentism a bit too far a bit too soon.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 10, 2019, 09:55:45 pm
https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/cubs-still-waiting-their-number-be-called-mlb-offseason-equation-trade-rumors-market?amp&__twitter_impression=true
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 10, 2019, 09:55:54 pm
It's really remarkable how quickly a "top" MLB front office can "jump the shark" and become one of the worst.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 10, 2019, 09:58:33 pm
https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/two-mlb-moves-changed-landscape-of-kris-bryant-trade-market?amp&__twitter_impression=true
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 10, 2019, 09:59:20 pm
Theo has made plenty of mistakes. But the main reason he had to overpay for Kimbrel is that Ricketts wouldn’t let him spend any money to fix the bullpen in the winter.

The reason it needed to be fixed in the first place was Theo's horrible signing of Morrow.  I'll always be grateful for 2016, but, let's be honest, Theo has become one of the worst executives in MLB.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 10, 2019, 09:59:51 pm
LMFAO
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 10, 2019, 10:19:36 pm
The Cubs leaving San Diego without a big trade or adding impact players to the 2020 roster is certainly frustrating for fans who are still trying to wrap their heads around how this team has gone from a potential dynasty to one that is now likely breaking up the core of players.--quote from above article posted by Dusty.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 10, 2019, 10:20:43 pm
What's the big surprise?  Bad leadership leads to bad results.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 10, 2019, 10:35:01 pm
Is the 6 million they have to clear 6 million in salary, or 6 million in luxury tax money.  There can be quite a difference between them.

By the way, have we decided that Kimbrell will not be worth his salary next year?  That may be taking recentism a bit too far a bit too soon.

The $6 million is to get below the luxury tax and then every dollar the Cubs spend needs to be matched by and additional amount of money cleared. So if Quintana and Conteras where traded that would leave the Cubs with around $8 million to spend to finish out the roster and account for additional spending during the year.

Rogers is saying the  ubs have to clear Bryant’s $18 million to be able to afford a second baseman that will cost around $2-4 million a year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 10, 2019, 10:38:08 pm
The $6 million is to get below the luxury tax and then every dollar the Cubs spend needs to be matched by and additional amount of money cleared. So if Quintana and Conteras where traded that would leave the Cubs with around $8 million to spend to finish out the roster and account for additional spending during the year.

Rogers is saying the  ubs have to clear Bryant’s $18 million to be able to afford a second baseman that will cost around $2-4 million a year.

I'm not sure Rogers actually said that, but he did predict that the Cubs would make a major trade this week. I recommend a high sodium diet for all of us during this period.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 10, 2019, 10:56:26 pm
He said it in ESPN radio and Kaplan’s NBC Show. His explanation for no Bryant trade this week is the Cubs waiting for Donaldson and Rendon to sign being something that he didn’t understand. I didn’t think the Bryant stuff last year had any merit. This year is different and pretty much every reporter is saying the Cubs are staying under the luxury because Ricketts wants them too.

I’ve been happy with Ricketts and Theo. This off-season is closing the window on the Cubs competing for a World Series, until they get another superstar to replace Bryant. Since the Cubs have no money and no farm system that should be pretty simple.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 11, 2019, 08:05:38 am
Just a reminder that the Cubs could afford Cole, Stras, and Rendon if they wanted those guys.  Do not confuse ability to pay with desire to pay.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 11, 2019, 09:50:57 am
Not sure this is actually news...Cubs are not talking to Rizzo about an extension this offseason:

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28274116/agent-cubs-working-anthony-rizzo-extension

It's probably a good idea to wait on an extension--he'll be 32 when his contract runs out, and he has chronic back problems. He's not the best candidate to extend early.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 11, 2019, 10:43:57 am
The Jesse Rogers story cited by brjones seems to suggest that the decision not to extend Rizzo with two years left on his contract is some sort of big deal, and the headline even suggests Rizzo might walk after those two years.

Rizzo, as his agent points out, has made it clear that he wants to be a Cub for life, and there is no other player who is more likely to make a team friendly deal when the time comes.  With the Cubs focused on the future of Baez, Bryant, Contreras, and even Schwarber, there is no reason to spend the time and effort on working out an extension for Rizzo at this time.

Some fans on twitter are already freaking out over this, along with other non-events.  It's just that time of year. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 11, 2019, 10:47:06 am
Just a reminder that the Cubs could afford Cole, Stras, and Rendon if they wanted those guys.  Do not confuse ability to pay with desire to pay.

And do not confuse the ability to pay with a rational decision of whether or not to pay.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 11, 2019, 10:49:11 am
Steve Phillips tweeted this in response to an MLB Network video saying that the Mets are willing to trade Nimmo:

Steve Phillips @StevePhillipsGM
The Cubs are desperate for an affordable center fielder who can be a leadoff hitter.  Nimmo would be a good fit.


Aren't the Mets willing to trade Nimmo specifically because he can't really play CF?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 11, 2019, 11:25:29 am
Steve Phillips tweeted this in response to an MLB Network video saying that the Mets are willing to trade Nimmo:

Steve Phillips @StevePhillipsGM
The Cubs are desperate for an affordable center fielder who can be a leadoff hitter.  Nimmo would be a good fit.


Aren't the Mets willing to trade Nimmo specifically because he can't really play CF?

Small details.........
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 11, 2019, 12:03:08 pm
If the Cubs locked up Rizzo for even 2-3 more years they might be able to get a lower AAV, helping free up even a tiny bit of money.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 11, 2019, 12:08:41 pm
I don't think we'd get a lower AAV for Rizzo than the $16.5 million he's making next year.  Paul Goldschmidt got $26 million a year in his extension last year...he's had a better career than Rizzo, but not by $10 million a year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 11, 2019, 02:29:51 pm
David O'Brien @DOBrienATL
Talking with someone close to #Cubs, sounds like 2 pitching prospects and a bat would get it done for Bryant. They're assuming he loses grievance & has 2 yrs left before free agency). #Braves match up better than other potential suitors if they're willing to part with prospects.


I like the Braves as a partner a lot better when Fried is in the mix and the Cubs would be getting someone who could provide immediate impact. But I guess maybe the Braves would be very reluctant to do that.

If Levine's article from yesterday was right and Victor Robles plus a prospect could be in play with the Nationals, I think I'd prefer that to any all-prospects package. But I'm pretty skeptical that he'd actually be available.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on December 11, 2019, 02:41:23 pm
Quote
They're assuming he loses grievance & has 2 yrs left before free agency

That's pretty surprising they expect to lose the grievance if this rumor is accurate.  That'll have some major ramifications around baseball if they lose it. 

Quite frankly if I was looking at this as a non-Cubs fan, I'd probably even say we'd deserve to lose the grievance, but I would have thought we'd be likely to win it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 11, 2019, 02:43:43 pm
That's pretty surprising they expect to lose the grievance if this rumor is accurate.  That'll have some major ramifications around baseball if they lose it. 

Quite frankly if I was looking at this as a non-Cubs fan, I'd probably even say we'd deserve to lose the grievance, but I would have thought we'd be likely to win it.

They expect Bryant to lose.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on December 11, 2019, 02:45:51 pm
They expect Bryant to lose.

Totally read that wrong.  Cue up CurtOne to make fun of my reading comprehension skills.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 11, 2019, 02:46:57 pm
David O'Brien
@DOBrienATL
You can't hang onto all your prospects. You got more than you can play just for this purpose -- to use some as trade capital and fill in gaps rather than have to rely on free agency. And we're not talking about trading Ian Anderson or Pache.

**** ***** **** **** **** ******* **** ***** ***** **** ***** ******* *******
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 11, 2019, 02:54:37 pm
Fried,Riley,and Inciarte would be fine by me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 11, 2019, 02:55:35 pm
JR, the three years spent in 4th grade didn't help your reading skills.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 11, 2019, 02:57:07 pm
Zero chance the Cubs have any interest in Inciarte and his contract.

I'm also pretty doubtful they'd want Riley unless he's the third player in the deal. Too much of the same swing-and-miss flaws the Cubs already have.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 11, 2019, 02:57:32 pm
I enjoy the buzz of the offseason damn near as much as I enjoy the season and I read these rumors on Twitter all day and Ive heard Theo say more than once that he expected to win the case against Bryant.

I wonder if that and his reluctance to sign an extension has caused any ill will with the Cubs.

Ive always expected that we would trade Bryant and Im not sure that's a bad move.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 11, 2019, 03:11:50 pm
I mean the Nationals must be real idiots letting Rendon walk for just draft picks.

Zero chance the Cubs have any interest in Inciarte and his contract.

I'm also pretty doubtful they'd want Riley unless he's the third player in the deal. Too much of the same swing-and-miss flaws the Cubs already have.

We are in the darkest timeline.  It is going to be Wright, Mueller and Inciarte for Bryant.  Willson gets traded for peanuts and the Cubs sign Brock Holt and Dallas Keuchel. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 11, 2019, 03:34:44 pm
Part of the schtick was that the Cubs were going to have such a great winning environment, and that Theo and management were going to treat players so well, and that there was going to be such a great culture, that players were going to WANT to stay, and that other teams would need to super-outbid to get guys to want to leave.  The Cardinals would acquire players, and have it be such a great place that guys would routinely sign extensions.  Doesn't appear that the Cubs have actually ended up creating that. 

Perhaps that will improve?  Back in 15 and 16, the Cubs felt like they were on the rise, the young happening thing with the great future, kind of unexpected, everything clicking.  Theo and Hoyer seemed to have a magic touch, clicking on deals like Arrieta and Fowler and Rondon, Schwarber being a quick hit, etc..
Since then, it seems like the burden of expectation has been heavy, and that nothing Theo/HOyer have done since has clicked, and that despite the many wins, 17 and 18 felt kinda disappointing. 

But now there will be zero burden-of-expectation.  Maybe this will be a year which is unexpectedly and refreshingly fun and exciting?  Unexpected cats like Wick and Wieck and Hultzen and Wickler emerging; Bryant getting back into MVP discussion; Schwarber and Happ emerging as good hitters; Hoerner not only sustaining but improving and looking like the real thing; some unexpected rotation pitchers emerging as really useful (Chatwood, Alzolay, Abbott....)  Being the thrilling underdog overachiever will be super fun, and with Lester and Q coming off payroll perhaps the payroll won't look nearly so burdensome next winter?  Plus Davis and Marquez will have super years, and suddenly the farm will look like we've got some winners on the way...  David Ross will have the team working hard and camaraderie being terrific.  All of the new analytics guys will be improving players and having players feel like this is the place to optimize their game. 

So perhaps next winter this will very much feel like a place where a Bryant very much does NOT want to leave, where it's NOT a collapsing sunset team but has a bright future, and where a fair-market extension will be both very appealing to him, and very accessible to the Cubs?  Why not? 

In terms of contracts, Bryant has two more years.  Lester, Q, Chatwood, Morrow, Kimbrel, all of those contracts will be gone.  Even the Heyward obligation will have only two more years left, the end in sight.  It's not like we've got so many stars that we won't be able to afford to pay market-price for the couple of them worth keeping.  Not sure why you couldn't fit all four of Bryant, Baez, Schwarber, and Contreras under the lux level, if you had some effective thrift-priced pitchers.  So the premise that the big-market Cubs can't possibly compete on the market if they let Bryant reach the market seems unnecessary. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 11, 2019, 03:36:10 pm
If the Braves agree to trade Fried+ but need to get Quintana back to fill out their rotation, then I could see the Cubs taking on Inciarte if the Braves need them to offset the money. Even then, though, they might be better off just paying Quintana's contract down--so they're not stuck with Inciarte's contract in 2021.

Other than that situation, though, I can't see the Cubs talking Inciarte as an important part of the trade.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on December 11, 2019, 03:40:24 pm
craig, I not sure what the evidence is that the Cubs environment is not one that players enjoy and want to stay with.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on December 11, 2019, 04:29:21 pm
One of Pache/Waters would be a must in the trade...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 11, 2019, 05:14:22 pm
I keep seeing comments, particularly on Twitter, that the Cubs should just extend Bryant instead of trading him.  That seems a little simplistic. I believe Bryant has made clear that he won't give the Cubs any hometown discount.  Not sure exactly what that means in terms of total dollars or length of contract, but based on other super stars, I'm not sure the Cubs should go there. He will be "only" 30 when he begins whatever contract he makes as a free agent, but that contract is going to probably take him at least into his mid-thirties, and could well include far less productive years than those the Cubs have had with him.

Personally, I would prefer Bryant remain a Cub for life. But unlike Rizzo (and maybe Baez), that does not seem to be his preference. His preference, apparently, is to make the most money he can (and presumably be on successful teams as well).  I don't blame him for that, but I do not believe his long term interests and the Cubs' long term interests align. So be it. If, and only if, the Cubs can get really good value for him before he leaves, I think that will make the most sense for the team. That will make me a little sad, but I've survived being a little sad before.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 11, 2019, 05:24:05 pm
Why should he be expected to give the Cubs any sort of discount?  How about they pay him what he's worth now and have fewer of the expensive less productive years at the end of the contract?  Pay him today what he's actually worth and you get his years 28-35 seasons where he'll probably give you production commensurate with his play.  They can afford it and he's better than anyone else they can get now so why **** around and lose him?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 11, 2019, 05:24:26 pm
Cubs and two other clubs have met with Japanese center fielder Shogo Akiyama according to industry source . He has attributes that have been missing on offense and defense . Career .376 OBP.--Levine

And yes Im horribly racist apparently because I dont like injured pitchers but Im all for this.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 11, 2019, 06:49:33 pm

Perhaps that will improve?  Back in 15 and 16, the Cubs felt like they were on the rise, the young happening thing with the great future, kind of unexpected, everything clicking.  Theo and Hoyer seemed to have a magic touch, clicking on deals like Arrieta and Fowler and Rondon, Schwarber being a quick hit, etc..
Since then, it seems like the burden of expectation has been heavy, and that nothing Theo/HOyer have done since has clicked, and that despite the many wins, 17 and 18 felt kinda disappointing. 

But now there will be zero burden-of-expectation.  Maybe this will be a year which is unexpectedly and refreshingly fun and exciting?  Unexpected cats like Wick and Wieck and Hultzen and Wickler emerging; Bryant getting back into MVP discussion; Schwarber and Happ emerging as good hitters; Hoerner not only sustaining but improving and looking like the real thing; some unexpected rotation pitchers emerging as really useful (Chatwood, Alzolay, Abbott....)  Being the thrilling underdog overachiever will be super fun, and with Lester and Q coming off payroll perhaps the payroll won't look nearly so burdensome next winter?  Plus Davis and Marquez will have super years, and suddenly the farm will look like we've got some winners on the way...  David Ross will have the team working hard and camaraderie being terrific.  All of the new analytics guys will be improving players and having players feel like this is the place to optimize their game. 

So perhaps next winter this will very much feel like a place where a Bryant very much does NOT want to leave, where it's NOT a collapsing sunset team but has a bright future, and where a fair-market extension will be both very appealing to him, and very accessible to the Cubs?  Why not? 


Uh-huh.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 11, 2019, 07:06:15 pm
Cubs and two other clubs have met with Japanese center fielder Shogo Akiyama according to industry source . He has attributes that have been missing on offense and defense . Career .376 OBP.--Levine

Levine’s article about Akiyama says he’ll probably get about 2 years, $10 million. If the Ricketts decide they can’t pay for that, they should sell the team.

https://670thescore.radio.com/cubs-meet-shogo-akiyama-winter-meetings-free-agency-pursuit
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 11, 2019, 07:35:16 pm
I'm envisioning our offer along the one of one being delivered by Wimpy from Popeye.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 11, 2019, 07:44:33 pm
Levine's article says that Akiyama "fits within the Cubs payroll constraints".

Looks like we might get him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 11, 2019, 07:57:27 pm
Theo said probably not much happening for the Cubs before the end of the meetings except perhaps being active in the Rule 5 draft tomorrow. However, some execs, including Theo, say next week will/could be busy.--Rogers
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 11, 2019, 08:35:57 pm
Would be nice to have our last Rule 5 pick in system. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 11, 2019, 08:44:09 pm
Lower your expectations even more.

Jordan Bastian @MLBastian
There have been reports that the Cubs have met with reps for OF Shogo Akiyama. He's limited right now by fracture in R foot. Even so, asking price might be north of Chicago's comfort zone. Per multiple MLB evaluators, Akiyama is more of a complementary OFer. But, fits Cubs needs.


And the backtracking begins. "For the second year in a row, we didn't really need to make the changes I said we really needed at the end-of-season press conference."

Tony Andracki @TonyAndracki23
How would Theo Epstein feel if the Cubs did very little this winter and showed up to spring training with essentially the same roster?

"Status quo is not a bad option, but we're obviously out there looking to make changes and change the dynamic and improve and grow."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 11, 2019, 08:59:47 pm
Yup, the pre-emptive excuse machine is already cranking up to high gear.

Status quo is indeed a very bad option.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 11, 2019, 09:02:29 pm
Status-quo>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Trading Bryant.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 11, 2019, 09:08:54 pm
Depends on what you get back.  It's the devil you know vs. the devil you don't.  This core clearly doesn't have enough as structured, so status quo is inherently a dumb idea.  Dumb moves are a dumb idea too, but smart ones might help.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 11, 2019, 09:18:23 pm
The worst news that came out this offseason is that Jason McLeod was going to have more input on the major league roster.

Of the Cubs' "top level" leadership, McLeod is clearly the dumbest and least effective (it's a low bar).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 11, 2019, 09:44:55 pm
Depends on what you get back. 

What return would be worth it to you?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 11, 2019, 09:56:40 pm
What return would be worth it to you?

Obviously an almost impossible question to answer, since we're dealing purely with the theoretical.  Fried, Waters and Anderson for example?  Sure.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 11, 2019, 10:48:42 pm
I think you are overestimating the return by a lot.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 11, 2019, 11:09:41 pm
I think you are overestimating the return by a lot.

That's not entirely impossible.  But we won't know until we hear some semi-reliable reports of what the market looks like.  So far we don't even have that, thus it seems silly and premature to dismiss the possibility that a Bryant trade could benefit the club.

Also - if that's overestimating the return, maybe it's because you're overestimating the value.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 12, 2019, 02:52:46 am
Four teams have met with Japanese outfielder Shogo Akiyama . Cubs - Dbacks-Rays -Reds . Price range 2 years $8 mil to $10 mil total . Recovering from broken ankle . .376 OBP  for career .9 years with Seibu Lions . No posting fee.--Levine
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 12, 2019, 06:53:59 am
Jesse Rogers continues to think a Bryant deal is in the offing, most likely to Atlanta:

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28280497/why-cubs-braves-kris-bryant-trade-makes-sense-now-anthony-rendon-signed
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 07:04:04 am
Rogers mentions Fried/Folty, Anderson/Wright, Riley/Carmango.

Those player combos aren’t the same in value.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 07:30:00 am
I’m coming to peace that I will hate this trade and what it means for the Cubs. My only bright spot will be Chris posting Bryant’s stats and finally realizing how good of a player he is.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 12, 2019, 08:44:39 am
Four teams have met with Japanese outfielder Shogo Akiyama . Cubs - Dbacks-Rays -Reds . Price range 2 years $8 mil to $10 mil total . Recovering from broken ankle . .376 OBP  for career .9 years with Seibu Lions . No posting fee.--Levine--Dusty

The only team in that list that really needs a CF is the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 12, 2019, 08:50:41 am
Four teams have met with Japanese outfielder Shogo Akiyama . Cubs - Dbacks-Rays -Reds . Price range 2 years $8 mil to $10 mil total . Recovering from broken ankle . .376 OBP  for career .9 years with Seibu Lions . No posting fee.--Levine--Dusty

The only team in that list that really needs a CF is the Cubs.

Maybe not one with a broken ankle though.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 12, 2019, 08:59:06 am
Wasn't it reported as a broken toe originally? Or broken foot? I think Levine might be wrong about the actual injury.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 10:22:15 am
If really wouldn't matter with healing time as long as he doesn't knee a surgery.  The foot or ankle would be healed by the start of season is plenty of time to spare.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 12, 2019, 10:43:15 am
Daryl Van Schouwen  @CST_soxvan  8m8 minutes ago
Bob Rosenberg, the long-time official scorer for White Sox and Cubs home games, will not return next season. An MLB decision. Rosey is an institution.


?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: BearHit on December 12, 2019, 10:59:21 am
Was he bangin on the trash can?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 11:13:24 am
Cubs select Trevor Megill from the Padres.  Michael Rucker went to the Orioles and Vimael Machin to the Phillies.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 12, 2019, 11:48:51 am
https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sports/padres/story/2019-06-13/padres-minor-league-report-trevor-megill-ty-france

26-year-old Megill was a 3rd round draft pick by St. Louis years back after an injury, went back for senior year, and went 7th round to Padres.  Has had 3 surgeries.  6'8" righty with relatively good control when he's on, although he had some yips in college, and control has come and gone at times.  Minor-league stats look fine; 12.4/2.8/0.9 K/BB/HR-per-9.  4.5/1 K/BB ratio is healthy.  Obviously he's always been old-for-his-leagues. 

Has a curveball and last year did some grip adjustments to add a slider.  Average/OK-velocity; above link said his 4-seamer tops at only 96.  I'm sure that average top-touch velocity for a RH-reliever is at least that much, but it's not like he needs to be Hendricks or Lester in craftiness; not going to overpower with average velocity, but average isn't bad.  No idea with spin-raters and stuff like that; I assume the Cubs know, and saw something to like.  I also assume the Padres have all his velocity and spin-rate data too, and didn't see enough to like to put him on their 40-man roster. 

We'll see if the Cubs pitch-lab stuff can help him a bit.  Having three surgeries and pitching relief, he's only pitched 157 pro innings, and barely 200 in college.  So despite being 26 already, he may still have some improvement to go. 

I imagine after some of the grip/pitch-lab tweaks they made with Wieck, perhaps   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 11:54:21 am
Padres have more interesting players than 40 man spots.

Megill is 6-8 so the fastball velocity can play up because of extension.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 12, 2019, 12:12:56 pm
Padres have more interesting players than 40 man spots.

Megill is 6-8 so the fastball velocity can play up because of extension.

Yup, the extension aspect can make a real difference.  And yeah, Padres have too many prospects to protect them all.  I think the Cubs experience with Wick and Wieck may also be that the Padres didn't do everything possible to optimize their guys?  They perhaps they left some development opportunities underutilized? 

Heh heh, Cubs could potentially stock almost half of the bullpen with Padres castoffs who couldn't make their 40-man:  Wick, Wieck, and Megill
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 12:34:51 pm
Padres seem to be behind the Cubs as well.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 02:27:56 pm
ZIPS projections and blurb

Trevor Megill   CHN   ERA   4.09   IP 55.0   H 50   9   BB 21   SO 67   ERA+ 106 WAR   0.3

Trevor Megill also strikes me as a pitcher with a chance to stick with his new team. The Cubs are going full-on thrift this offseason and Megill, a big righty who throws a fastball, curve, and slider, survived the Pacific Coast League relatively intact in 2019. A pitcher who can strike out 13 batters a game in Triple-A, even an older one believed to be past his prospect years, is going to get a chance unless their control is absolutely atrocious (it’s not).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 03:10:38 pm
https://www.mlb.com/breaking-news/trevor-megill-cubs-rule-5-draft

Cubs tried to trade for him before the draft.

Tony Andracki
@TonyAndracki23
Hoyer on free agent OF Shogo Akiyama:

"Yeah, we met with him. Listen, a lot of teams were involved. Obviously he's a very good player and he's gonna have a good role on a major-league team this year, but I can't comment beyond that."

The way Hoyer talks about him makes me think they view him as more of a 4th OF instead of just being unable to afford $5 million.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 12, 2019, 03:18:24 pm
If we are full on thrift mode as some say then I could understand giving Chatwood the #5 spot since you've already got a lot invested in him and seeing that we need to develop young pitching Alzolay should be fine as your #6/long man.

We already have a closer in Kimbrel who I still believe with a true Spring Training will be elite.

With that said with Strop,Cishek,and Kintzler leaving our setup men are non existent.

We have to sign a couple better than average relievers.

Position player wise one could see a situation where Contreras,Rizzo,Bote,Baez,Bryant,Schwarber,Happ,and Heyward could be your everyday 8 with Caratini,Hoerner,and Almora on the bench but IMO a leadoff man is a must.

Now none of us know if we do trade anyone and what we'd get in return and what holes that would cause or fill but if we are going to stand pat we AT LEAST have to sign a couple better than average relievers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 12, 2019, 03:32:48 pm
I dont believe we're in anywhere near as bad of shape as some here would love to believe and I dont think much money has to be spent to contend in the NL Central.

I also believe trading anyone that you dont expect to be able to keep is a smart baseball decision.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 03:37:01 pm
If they have to get under the CBT threshold this year, there isn't any money for the bullpen.  To add to the bullpen or position players you are going to have to trade players.  Bryant + Contreras would give you about $16 million to spend.  If the Cubs could spend to just close last years they would have close to the same amount.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 12, 2019, 03:37:02 pm
If you're already bogged down with a few bad contracts and your cornerstone players are about to need big time raises then how is spending another 100 million or so on one player smart?

I get it.

Im just surprised some here dont.

I dont believe we'll stand pat and go into next season not trying to compete.

We'll spend money just not crazy money.

How has that worked out with Jason Heyward?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 12, 2019, 03:41:48 pm
And I didnt leave out Darvish's contract on accident.

That contract now looks OK.

He's our ace.

We just need him to pitch like one.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 12, 2019, 03:50:57 pm
We have a Hall of Famer running our baseball operations.

We have an owner who has been willing to spend and has one of the highest payrolls in baseball.

We hired the obvious choice for manager.

We released the player everyone but me hated and wanted to see gone.

What decision has been made that has turned everyone so doom and gloom?

I didnt want to spend 350 million dollars on Gerrit Cole,oft injured Stephen Strasburg, or Anthony Rendon.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 03:55:31 pm
The Cubs had $400+ million in local revenues last year and that doesn't count the money coming in from Rickettsville.  They could easily afford many, many, many more bad contracts.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 12, 2019, 04:05:58 pm
The Yankees were not gonna be outbid for Cole so he wasnt an option,I wouldn't have paid what it took to get Strasburg,and why give Rendon that contract when you could probably keep Bryant for that money?

We havent lost out on anyone useful but maybe Treinan.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 04:19:19 pm
The Yankees were not gonna be outbid for Cole so he wasnt an option,I wouldn't have paid what it took to get Strasburg,and why give Rendon that contract when you could probably keep Bryant for that money?

We havent lost out on anyone useful but maybe Treinan.

Signing Bryant to an extension for similar money to Rendon would make me very, very happy.  Just keeping Bryant on the team will be a win for me.  I don't think either of these are a likely outcome.  I think more than likely you are subtracting Bryant and Willson and with their money bringing in Brock Holt and a CF/4th OF, Strop and a 5th starter.  This will allow Ricketts to avoid paying a few million to the other owners, because we have to reset the luxury tax for 2122.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 12, 2019, 04:41:03 pm
The status quo is a very, very bad option.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 12, 2019, 05:33:57 pm
**IF** the "must-get-under-any-lux-tax-threshold" premise is true, then I think the status quo is the best option.  Keep Bryant and Contreras and Baez and Schwarber.  Keep Chatwood. 

The Cubs have won a bunch of games with the existing cast, and almost got in last year too.  If some guys play better and improve, and they get some luck, and some guys develop somehow, they might get into the playoffs with the status-quo roster. 

I think it's much less likely that they compete for the 2020 playoffs if selling Bryant or Contreras for money-relief and futures prospects. 


Plus "status-quo" isn't really a thing.  Even if they don't trade any of the big 4, the roster will still be significantly adjusted from what they opened with last year. 


Plus even if guys are the same, that doesn't mean they'll play the same.  Maybe Schwarber will be better.  Maybe Hoerner will be a whole lot different than Russell.  Maybe Happ will be different and better.  Maybe Q won't be 4.68-ERA bad again?  Maybe the bullpen won't lose so many saves?  Maybe Kimbrel won't be the worst pitcher in the league? 


You can bring the same core personnel back, "status quo", but the season won't play out the same. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 12, 2019, 05:50:46 pm
The status quo is a very, very bad option.
unless you're okay with not winning in 2020.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 12, 2019, 05:51:40 pm
The market place for the Cubs and Kris Bryant can become robust after Josh Donaldson gets paid soon . Numerous teams love Bryant at 3B or the outfield . Don t forget his versatility and love for playing multiple positions.--Levine
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 06:00:15 pm
unless you're okay with not winning in 2020.

What happens to the Cubs without Bryant?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 12, 2019, 06:07:12 pm
Depends on what they get back.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 12, 2019, 06:20:07 pm
**IF** the "must-get-under-any-lux-tax-threshold" premise is true, then I think the status quo is the best option.  Keep Bryant and Contreras and Baez and Schwarber.  Keep Chatwood. 

The Cubs have won a bunch of games with the existing cast, and almost got in last year too.  If some guys play better and improve, and they get some luck, and some guys develop somehow, they might get into the playoffs with the status-quo roster. 

I think it's much less likely that they compete for the 2020 playoffs if selling Bryant or Contreras for money-relief and futures prospects. 


Plus "status-quo" isn't really a thing.  Even if they don't trade any of the big 4, the roster will still be significantly adjusted from what they opened with last year. 

Plus even if guys are the same, that doesn't mean they'll play the same.  Maybe Schwarber will be better.  Maybe Hoerner will be a whole lot different than Russell.  Maybe Happ will be different and better.  Maybe Q won't be 4.68-ERA bad again?  Maybe the bullpen won't lose so many saves?  Maybe Kimbrel won't be the worst pitcher in the league? 


You can bring the same core personnel back, "status quo", but the season won't play out the same. 

I don't accept any of the supposed givens (such as staying under the luxury tax threshold). They may be true, or they may not.  Who knows? Only Theo and his closest associates, I'm guessing. I'm inclined to think that others are speculating, even if it's somewhat informed speculation.

I do not expect the Cubs to stand pat over the winter. They won't trade Bryant (or Contreras) just to trade him. If they do not get a sufficiently attractive offer (whatever they believe that to be), he'll be back.  But it will be a different team, to some extent.

And if Darvish can be the pitcher for the full season he was for the second half (or something close), that would be a huge upgrade, even though Lester is likely to continue to decline. I think it's credible that Schwarber really did turn a corner and that he could repeat his second half, and that 2B and CF are reasonably likely to be better than last year (a relatively low bar). 

Big questions to me are whether the Cubs can strengthen their rotation after Darvish and Hendricks, how much of an improvement they can get at CF and 2B, how much they can improve their bullpen around the edges, and IF they trade Bryant, who will play 3B.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 12, 2019, 06:49:16 pm
The Cubs had $400+ million in local revenues last year and that doesn't count the money coming in from Rickettsville.  They could easily afford many, many, many more bad contracts.

You need to define your definition of "afford".  If you are talking about the owners personal money, they certainly could afford it.  But if you are talking about room under the luxury tax, you are just kidding yourself.

They purpose of the luxury tax is to make it prohibitive for a handful of teams with unlimited resources, such as those in Los Angeles, New York, Boston and Chicago to spend there way into dominance.  There are substantial penalties for exceeding the limits for more than a couple of years that essentially eliminate that teams ability to compete over the long run.  And since most humongous contracts are for humongous years, teams have to consider that limit not only for this and next year, but for several years beyond.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 12, 2019, 06:57:39 pm
What happens to the Cubs without Bryant?

Depends on what they get back.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 12, 2019, 07:01:23 pm
You need to define your definition of "afford".  If you are talking about the owners personal money, they certainly could afford it.  But if you are talking about room under the luxury tax, you are just kidding yourself.

They purpose of the luxury tax is to make it prohibitive for a handful of teams with unlimited resources, such as those in Los Angeles, New York, Boston and Chicago to spend there way into dominance.  There are substantial penalties for exceeding the limits for more than a couple of years that essentially eliminate that teams ability to compete over the long run.  And since most humongous contracts are for humongous years, teams have to consider that limit not only for this and next year, but for several years beyond.

The "substantial penalties" are so transparently a drop in the ocean that even an unrepentant shill like Bleacher Nation won't defend them as a reason not to spend.  The luxury tax is an artificial construct initiated by the owners to give themselves a pretext not to spend.  Between the antitrust exemption (which should have been removed decades ago) and the beaten dog players union, baseball owners got an incredibly sweetheart deal - an effective salary cap without even the salary floor the NBA and NFL have.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 12, 2019, 07:31:05 pm
Even if the penalties weren't so weak, the current luxury tax threshold is laughably low.

The Yankees had a $206 million payroll in 2005; the current luxury tax threshold is $208 million. League-wide revenues have increased from $4.7 billion in 2005 to $10.3 billion in 2018. Why is the luxury tax still set at a level that would've been appropriate 15 years ago when there was less than half as much money coming in to MLB every year?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 12, 2019, 08:17:10 pm
The Cubs also received inquiries on Yu Darvish, who has four years at $81 million remaining. Perhaps when the best of the remaining free-agent starters vanish, Chicago will hear steadier requests for the righty.

https://nypost.com/2019/12/12/cubs-set-up-to-be-darlings-of-january-after-winter-meetings/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 12, 2019, 08:20:09 pm
Hmmmmmmm...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on December 12, 2019, 08:24:38 pm
It makes no sense to trade Yu unless they're going to tear the whole thing down.  Which ain't happening (nor should it).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 12, 2019, 08:31:29 pm
Am I wrong in assuming you'd be lucky to get a pack of stale Reese Cups for Darvish since he's owed so much money?

Ill have to admit though that getting out from under some of our big contracts would be appealing.

If only someone wanted Heyward.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 12, 2019, 08:37:17 pm
Ill have to admit though that getting out from under some of our big contracts would be appealing.

It really wouldn't.  One of the best things about the supposed payroll "crunch" is that it keeps Theo from spending money.

Theo's pretty bad at most things, but the thing he's worst at is navigating the free agent market.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 12, 2019, 08:46:07 pm
Am I wrong in assuming you'd be lucky to get a pack of stale Reese Cups for Darvish since he's owed so much money?

Yes.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 09:49:06 pm
Depends on what they get back.

Go with your preferred trade.  Fried, Anderson and Waters.  Are they better in 2020?  2021?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 12, 2019, 10:02:44 pm
Are we better in 2020 because we traded Gleyber Torres for two months of Chapman?  Sometimes there's multiple levels to why you make or don't make a trade.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 10:41:28 pm
Trading a prospect to win a World Series is slightly different then trading your best player While your team is still competitive and not rebuilding.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 12, 2019, 11:18:02 pm
Go with your preferred trade.  Fried, Anderson and Waters.  Are they better in 2020?  2021?

I HATE the notion of trading Bryant this off- season. 

For me, I’d like to keep Bryant the next two seasons and try really hard to re-sign him when he hits free agency.

But, Cubs seem to be in a different place. It’s a unique situation they are facing with basically the virtual core of the club hits free agency around the same time. Don’t think that has ever happened, anywhere.

So, highly unusual circumstances make for difficult decisions.

Theo now talks about balancing near-term with long-term interests—not exactly a startling idea— but actually kind of  startling when we ponder what it could mean, as in trading Bryant and more.

If Theo could get all of Fried, Waters, Anderson—he’s going to do that. He won’t get that but he would take that in two seconds if he could, given the apparent current strategy above.

Would that make Cubs better in 2020?  Unlikely——maybe in 2021 when Waters and Anderson more ready.

In any case, will be interesting how this plays out. Naturally, full of gloom and doom here—-the most predictable thing about the whole situation.

Looks like Jesse Rogers prediction about Bryant getting traded at Winter meetings turned out wrong. Beats me how anybody actually expects Bryant to be traded before the grievance is resolved.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 12, 2019, 11:35:26 pm
Legal stuff like grievances usually take a long, long time?  Is there any reason to expect Bryant's to be resolved in time to clarify his status?  I have no idea, but don't thinks like that often take 6 months or more to get processed? 

I'm just wondering, because *IF* a trading team really thinks the grievance might have a chance, and is going to wait until that's resolved, might that not perhaps erase the whole discussion and preclude any Bryant trade from this offseason? 

Or is there already some scheduled date for that to be considered and judged? 
 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 12, 2019, 11:37:44 pm
Best guess is 2-3 weeks, but why it took this long to even get heard is beyond me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 13, 2019, 12:01:14 am
The Bryant grievance was timely filed in 2015.

Thereafter, the parties evidently felt it was in their mutual interest to just hold it in abeyance.

We can speculate why: maybe the grievance could have become moot by a contract extension; maybe neither side wanted to risk bad feelings by having a winner/loser earlier in the relationship; maybe the union wanted to see if other cases emerged. Take your guess.

Because arbitration is a private, non-judicial process, the parties can do whatever they want by mutual agreement. A court would be unlikely to allow this, for the above reasons, as a judge generally wants to move stuff off his/her docket. Delays happen for other reasons.

I guess the parties finally reached the point that a resolution became necessary. Seems like it will come before there’s any practical problems with the delay. Expectation is before end of the year, so no big deal waiting this long.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 13, 2019, 07:35:02 am
When will the Kris Bryant grievance be resolved?

When will there be a replacement for the current collective bargaining agreement between MLB and the MLBPA that expires on December 21, 2021?

Same answer to both questions.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 13, 2019, 09:00:36 am
In the Kris Bryant saga, I consider several things.  1. Theo's remarks about leadership and accountability.  Of all the positives about Bryant, I've never heard him described as a leader.  He seems to be very quiet and in Rizzo and Baez' shadows.  2. There have been numerous accounts that the Cubs lineup is flawed; too many of the same kind of hitters.  You need to break that up by shifting some people to other teams.  Bryant is one that makes sense.

What to do?  The Cubs need to get aggressive.  Go out and sign Donaldson.  3B would be double-covered.  If the move makes Bryant harder to move, he goes to the outfield.  It opens up trading a whole host of people from Schwarber to Bode to Happ to Contreras to Bryant without weakening the team.  Of course the Cubs won't do that because no one in the front office knows how to play chess.  Cashman knows how to play chess.  The dummy in St. Louis knows how to play.  The Reds GM is proving to be proficient.  But in Chicago, we cry about salary limitations instead of looking at all the puzzle pieces.  JMO

Sign the Japanese outfielder and another pitcher: Ryu, preferably over Bumgartner (not a quality, quality guy) or Kuechel, but someone who can eat innings.

Get into a position to trade from power instead of weakness.  We have a great nucleus, stop acting so damn helpless.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on December 13, 2019, 10:28:12 am
I agree that Bryant hasn't shown obvious leadership qualities.  But I don't agree that he is the kind of hitter that is emblematic of the Cubs' hitting woes.  In particular, he's not a big K guy, has a career OBP of .385, and is a fine baserunner.  Unless you're blowing the team up, you have to keep him unless you get a massive return.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on December 13, 2019, 10:28:46 am
Bidding for Donaldson is getting hotter. Rangers tapped out as its past their budget constraints. So i doubt cash strapped Cubs are in the hunt for him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 13, 2019, 10:53:23 am
I have not heard what Donaldson is likely to go for, but unless the Front Office has been just blowing smoke, they aren't likely to go after a big cost, long contract player, and are twice as unlikely without the trade of Bryant's salary.  Schwarber, Bote, Happ or even Contreras will not give them the salary relief they would need.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 13, 2019, 11:03:49 am
Michael Ernst's depth chart

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ELnlSzvW4AA71Dh.jpg:small)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 13, 2019, 11:39:10 am
The salary relief that the Ricketts want, not need. The Cubs revenue is up a ton since they bought the team. They could support a higher payroll than last year and still make money.

The Cubs hitters are prone to outside sliders and high fastballs. Bryant never had a problem with breaking balls and he has worked and improved against the high fastball. Bryant was one of the few Cubs that had an above average or near league average contact rate. Trading him and replacing him with Bote will make the problem worse not better.

If this is a baseball move about the offense and contact Contreras and Baez are the guys you replace. This is simply that the Ricketts family doesn’t want to pay Bryant/Rizzo/Baez so one has to go and they don’t want to give the other owners a few extra million.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 13, 2019, 12:13:50 pm
P2 and CBJ, nobody saying that Bryant's bag is theissue.  The issue is the lineup.  To change the lineup, some heart wrenching and tough choices need to be made.

Taking another big contract or two is not that challenging if you focus on making trades before March.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 13, 2019, 12:25:54 pm
The salary relief that the Ricketts want, not need. The Cubs revenue is up a ton since they bought the team. They could support a higher payroll than last year and still make money.

The Cubs hitters are prone to outside sliders and high fastballs. Bryant never had a problem with breaking balls and he has worked and improved against the high fastball. Bryant was one of the few Cubs that had an above average or near league average contact rate. Trading him and replacing him with Bote will make the problem worse not better.

If this is a baseball move about the offense and contact Contreras and Baez are the guys you replace. This is simply that the Ricketts family doesn’t want to pay Bryant/Rizzo/Baez so one has to go and they don’t want to give the other owners a few extra million.

I am not familiar with their income or expenses to make that judgement.  If you are, perhaps you can fill in the necessary details.

How much has their total income increased since the purchase?
How much has their total player salaries increased since the purchase?
How much has their total Front Office costs increased since the purchase?
How much has their Scouting department costs increased since the purchase?
How much has their total minor league salary and administrative costs increased, taking into account the two extra minor league teams?
How much have interest and depreciation costs increased due to the one billion dollar renovation of Wrigley Field.

If you clear up these details, we can easily make an informed judgement on whether or not they can "afford" to pay more.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 13, 2019, 12:33:24 pm
Cubs Revenue Via Forbes
2002 $131 
2007 $197
2008 $239
2009 $246
2010 $258
2011 $266
2012 $274
2013 $266
2014 $302
2015 $340
2016 $434
2017 $457
2018 $452

Cubs Player Expenses via Forbes
2002 $81
2007 $115
2008 $140
2009 $151
2010 $157
2011 $162
2012 $137
2013 $129
2014 $111
2015 $154
2016 $189
2017 $186
2018 $195

So pre-Ricketts the Cubs were spending 58-62% of revenue on the Cubs (WGN was hiding money so it was likely a lower percentage for the Tribune).
2008-2013 it was 58%, 61%, 61%, 50%, 48.4%
2014- 36%
2015- 45.2%
2016- 43.5%
2017- 40.7%
2018- 43.1%

So Revenues have jumped jumped $213 million since the Rickett's bought the team and salary has increased $50 million*.  The FO, Scouting department, and especially minor league pay (Most minor leaguers make $8-10,000/year) are rounding errors.

*Revenue doesn't include RSN profits, BAMTech money, rooftops, Rickettsville etc so the percentages are lower.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 13, 2019, 12:41:58 pm
They have increased administrative expenses drastically, as well as interest and depreciation expense due to renovation.  And in spite of that, they had the third highest player payroll last year.  Much as we would like it, no team functions without a reasonable budget that allows them to balance current needs with future needs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 13, 2019, 12:48:47 pm
They have increased administrative expenses drastically, as well as interest and depreciation expense due to renovation.  And in spite of that, they had the third highest player payroll last year.  Much as we would like it, no team functions without a reasonable budget that allows them to balance current needs with future needs.

They have at least *DOUBLED* revenue since buying the team.  The Cubs have plenty of money. The franchise has gone up $2,500,000,000 in value since they bought the team.  They sold like 10% of the team for $150,000,000.  They are doing ok.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 13, 2019, 12:57:27 pm
Have they more than doubled other costs?  They have already spent more in renovations of Wrigley than they paid for the entire team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: goblue007 on December 13, 2019, 02:04:14 pm
You guys are seriously shocked that DaveP is carrying the water for them?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 13, 2019, 02:48:11 pm
Im carrying it too then.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 13, 2019, 03:00:30 pm
Have they more than doubled other costs?  They have already spent more in renovations of Wrigley than they paid for the entire team.

They $1.2 billion includes Wrigley, offices, Hotel Zachery, rooftops, Gallager Way.  Alot of those projects the Ricketts have partners in and the revenues are outside of what Forbes is reporting.  Forbes includes local TV and radio, ballpark, concerts, etc...  It doesn't include the $50 million in national TV deals, BAM Techs $50 million.  Each baseball team has about $400+ million in value just from Baseball Advanced Media, MLB Network and investment an investment portfolio from the sale of the Expos.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 13, 2019, 04:18:48 pm
Bob Nightengale

The #Cubs are bringing back reliever Brandon Morrow, agreeing to a minor league contract that will pay him $1 million in #MLB with $1.25 million in incentives
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 13, 2019, 04:32:44 pm
Good decision for both sides.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 13, 2019, 05:41:12 pm
It never fails to amaze me how willing people are to shill for greedy billionaires trying to screw them over.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 13, 2019, 05:47:35 pm
It never fails to amaze me how willing people are to shill for greedy billionaires trying to screw them over.
Like the guy who walked out on a $400.00+ restaurant tab saying "don't worry about it, they'll more than make it up by saying I was there".
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 13, 2019, 06:24:55 pm
Bob Nightengale

The #Cubs are bringing back reliever Brandon Morrow, agreeing to a minor league contract that will pay him $1 million in #MLB with $1.25 million in incentives

WAR 2018-19:
Morrow: 1.4
Almora: 0.7
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 13, 2019, 07:41:00 pm
Jon Heyman @JonHeyman
Nats seem focused on Josh Donaldson right now. They love Kris Bryant but the belief is the Cubs want Victor Robles, likely a no go. Could go to 4th year. Also interested in JD: Braves, dodgers, twins, rangers


I like that Robles is the focus if the Cubs are going to trade with the Nationals, and I hope they don't back off that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 13, 2019, 08:33:01 pm
Jon Heyman @JonHeyman
Nats seem focused on Josh Donaldson right now. They love Kris Bryant but the belief is the Cubs want Victor Robles, likely a no go. Could go to 4th year. Also interested in JD: Braves, dodgers, twins, rangers


I like that Robles is the focus if the Cubs are going to trade with the Nationals, and I hope they don't back off that.

I could see something built around Carter Kieboom, though you'd obviously need more add-ons than with Robles.  Kieboom has a chance to be a stud offensively, and since he's a natural SS he has a chance to be plus defensively at 3B or 2B. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 13, 2019, 09:17:07 pm
Guessing that you’ve never seen Kieboom play SS.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 13, 2019, 09:33:32 pm
He improved substantially after he got sent down last year. Not saying he’s displacing Baez, but he can play the position.  No reason to think he wouldn’t be above average at 3B or 2B.

The callup was obviously a debacle.  The Nats did it knowing he wasn’t ready feeling that injuries were forcing their hand.  How did Baez’ first stint in the bigs go, I wonder?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 13, 2019, 09:55:02 pm
Baez was always solid defensively anywhere in the infield.

Kieboom is not a “natural” at SS.

Far from it. When we saw him here in DC, it was obvious he’s not a SS. When he went back to AAA, Nats started him almost as many games off of SS (50) than at SS (57). Not talking about his bat but his defense.

He will be fine at 2B. That’s his future. Doubt that Nats have any interest in trading him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 13, 2019, 10:35:54 pm
Gee, what possible reasons could the Nats have to push him off SS?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 13, 2019, 11:33:35 pm
In AAA?

None.

Guessing that you have never seen Kieboom play even one inning at SS. Yet, you say he’s a “natural” SS.

He’s going to hit but is not a SS.

Turner is better but is average defensively at best and, ideally, would be the 2B, not SS either.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 14, 2019, 01:00:32 am
Keep guessing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 14, 2019, 07:55:12 am
Shogo is apparently going to decide before Christmas between 4 teams.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 14, 2019, 09:20:04 am
Bruce Levine thinks the Bryant/Braves trade would be Riley, Inciarte, and a pitching prospect.

Dan Szymborski thinks Kyle Wright, Bryce Wilson, Alex Jackson/William Contreras, Greyson Jenista would get it done.

Would those hypothetical returns be enough for people here to trade him?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 14, 2019, 10:10:04 am
The Levine trade is laughable. Ended Inciarte has no surplus value at this point, and Austin Riley is a wild card who has a 36% strikeout rate in the majors. Luckily, Levine hasn’t seemed to be very tuned in to what the front office is doing at least since Hendry left.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 14, 2019, 10:16:32 am
I think the second trade is closer to what the Cubs would get with maybe another pitcher instead of the catchers and it just doesn’t move the needle for me.

I think the Levine trade is closer to what the Cubs are getting in offers now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 14, 2019, 11:24:39 am
The Levine trade is laughable. Ended Inciarte has no surplus value at this point, and Austin Riley is a wild card who has a 36% strikeout rate in the majors. Luckily, Levine hasn’t seemed to be very tuned in to what the front office is doing at least since Hendry left.
I would see Incarte as a throw-in right now.  Solves CF and they can check that box off.  I think Fried and 1 or 2 of the young pitchers would do it for me, Incarte a nothing burger added.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 14, 2019, 11:39:10 am
Bruce Levine thinks the Bryant/Braves trade would be Riley, Inciarte, and a pitching prospect.

Dan Szymborski thinks Kyle Wright, Bryce Wilson, Alex Jackson/William Contreras, Greyson Jenista would get it done.

Would those hypothetical returns be enough for people here to trade him?

No, but the second one is closer.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 14, 2019, 12:01:42 pm
Levine thinks the same way I do.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 14, 2019, 12:02:44 pm
Levine thinks the same way I do.

Terrible news for both parties.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: goblue007 on December 15, 2019, 06:12:17 am
Bruce Levine thinks the Bryant/Braves trade would be Riley, Inciarte, and a pitching prospect.

Dan Szymborski thinks Kyle Wright, Bryce Wilson, Alex Jackson/William Contreras, Greyson Jenista would get it done.

Would those hypothetical returns be enough for people here to trade him?

Hell no. Pache/Anderson, Wright and Langeliers. Or...just keep our best player.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 15, 2019, 07:06:53 am
Much rather have Waters than Pache.  Anderson is pretty much a must for me, though.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 15, 2019, 07:15:20 am
Any clue if Mike Murphy is a reliable source?  He said that the Cubs have agreed in principal with Castellanos, but the Cubs have asked him to wait?  It was on the ESPN 1000 Murphy and Fred show. I saw the rumor on twitter from a unreliable source. NSBB has a clip of it posted. The unreliable guy on Twitter said it had legs and that the hold up wasn’t a Bryant trade. He is less than 50% in stuff though.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: goblue007 on December 15, 2019, 07:32:02 am
No. He’s an oddball boomer who somehow is still on air.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 15, 2019, 08:13:54 am
Didn’t make much sense as I think other people would be reporting it if it had any truth to it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 15, 2019, 08:40:10 am
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/12/15/yes-i-heard-that-cubs-castellanos-report-and-im-sorry-for-the-cold-water/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 15, 2019, 02:09:31 pm
If we have resigned Castellanos you have to assume Schwarber's gone because nobody's gonna want Heyward.

I guess we could keep all 3 but I wouldnt think that's likely.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 16, 2019, 11:02:46 am
And just like that...

Yankees want Schwarber per the Athletic.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on December 16, 2019, 11:18:19 am
Luis Medina and Jordan Montgomery for Schwarber would work. Dump his salary and get a great SP prospect and capable but rehabbing arm in Montgomery.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 16, 2019, 11:55:04 am
The article in the Athletic said that there is no momentum towards a Schwarber to Yankees deal, just that the Yankees have wanted him since 2016. Seems like it's pretty unlikely to happen.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 16, 2019, 12:36:13 pm
For those who do not have Athletic access

NBC Sports: "Rosenthal points out that the Yankees already have Giancarlo Stanton locked up at DH for the next eight years. Beyond that, the Yankees could use a first baseman, but Schwarber has never played there. Left field at Yankee Stadium is more spacious than Wrigley Field and would present another challenge for Schwarber's defense out there."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 16, 2019, 12:38:52 pm
Rosenthal stated at the start it was just an example of how teams talk to each other, click bait at its best.

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/mlb-outlaws-amateur-trackman-data-exclusivity/

The Cubs and Yankees where the 2 teams out front on this.  Owners not wanting to spend money, killed it 29-1.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 16, 2019, 03:56:23 pm
HAS ROSS BEEN FIRED YET?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 16, 2019, 04:08:34 pm
Cubs trivia - which Cubs manager was fired during spring training?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 16, 2019, 04:16:43 pm
March 29, 1954
The Cubs fire skipper Phil Cavarretta after he tells reporters the team had little chance to finish in the first division. The 36 year-old player-manager, who compiled a 169-213 (.442) record during his three years at the helm, is the first person to lose a managerial position during spring training.

March 21, 1978
In a surprise move, Padres manager Alvin Dark becomes the second manager ever fired during spring training after being told that he was having difficulties communicating with his players. San Diego names Roger Craig, the club's pitching coach, as the interim skipper.

March 17, 1999
In a rare dismissal of a manager in spring training, the Blue Jays, after deciding he has lost all his credibility, fire Tim Johnson, replacing him with Jim Fregosi. In the offseason, the former Toronto skipper, after claiming he had seen combat in Vietnam, reveals he lied about his military service, causing many players on his team to lose all respect for him as their field boss.

March 5, 2002
Red Sox skipper Joe Kerrigan becomes the fourth manager to be fired during spring training. The team's former pitching coach, who guided the club to a 17-26 record after taking over for Jimy Williams last August, had signed a multi-year contract to be Boston's field boss with then-GM Dan Duquette, but was not favored by the new ownership that took control last month.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 16, 2019, 04:19:15 pm
Neat stuff, Bennett
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 16, 2019, 07:47:05 pm
Phillie reporter proposed Bryant for Bohm, Efflin (who didn’t like Chris Young at all) Segura +$4 million a year and Rafael Marchan ( 20 year old catcher who doesn’t strike and has no power).
 
The Cubs are looking to cut salary and this would only save them $6 million next year. Bohm is fine piece. Efflin doesn’t seem a fit for the way the Cubs are going and Marchan would be the Cubs 4th best catching prospect. It just seems underwhelming to me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 16, 2019, 08:23:00 pm
Outfielder Noel Cuevas to #Cubs on minor-league contract, source tells The Athletic. Salary of $575K if in majors.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 17, 2019, 06:24:27 pm
Heyman says the Cubs have signed Hernan Perez to a minor league contract.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on December 17, 2019, 07:25:31 pm
After all, Iowa has to defend their PCL Northern American Division Championship...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 17, 2019, 08:13:17 pm
 Cubs are sure acting like a team that wants to get below the CBT.   Too bad all these minor league free agents are going to end up in Chicago.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 17, 2019, 08:28:30 pm
Heyman says the Cubs have signed Hernan Perez to a minor league contract.

Nowhere to go but down from there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 17, 2019, 08:50:11 pm
It's time for Theo to go.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 17, 2019, 09:00:36 pm
A new GM under marching orders to get under the luxury tax is going to fix the problem?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 17, 2019, 09:03:10 pm
If the new GM can put into place an amateur player procurement and development organization that is not MLB's worst, yes.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 17, 2019, 10:00:41 pm
Perez isnt total dog ****.

I'd rather have him at his price than Descalso at his.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 18, 2019, 08:08:07 am
Sharma says the Cubs and Castellanos have mutual interest. But he mentions the issues they have (Cubs don't have the money to sign him or a position where he can play).

https://theathletic.com/1469289/2019/12/18/both-nicholas-castellanos-and-the-cubs-would-love-a-reunion-but-money-is-a-major-obstacle/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 18, 2019, 08:44:16 am
I’d like to own the Cubs, I just need $3.2 billion to buy them. Story at link....
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 18, 2019, 09:04:21 am
I'm 3.19 billion short. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on December 18, 2019, 09:10:19 am
I'm 3.19 billion short.

You left off some nines.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 18, 2019, 09:18:19 am
I rounded up.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 18, 2019, 11:42:12 am
Bleacher Nation discussing a recent Akiyama scouting report:

Specifically, on Akiyama, I’ll note that his scouted ceiling matches realistic outcome, which is both a compliment and a critique, since the ceiling is that of an average regular or above-average part-timer. I’ll also note that Shogo’s defense comes in for praise, even as it’s dropping from “other-worldly defender” to “plus defender in center.” Indeed, along with some other recent reports, any lingering concerns about his ability to stick in center field are outdated. And at the plate, he’s still expected to offer good on-base skills and generally good (albeit not quite base-stealing) speed.

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/12/18/lukewarm-stove-lad-really-in-on-betts-castellanos-meeting-ozuna-akiyamas-scouting-report-more/

The bit about him being a "plus defender in center" is encouraging. Basically, he sounds like he might have Nori Aoki's bat in MLB (career .350 OBP; 105 wRC+), but is a true centerfielder instead of an average-at-best corner outfielder. Aoki was roughly a 2 fWAR player in his full seasons...so seems like a guy with his bat who doesn't hurt you defensively in CF should be a 3-4 fWAR player.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 18, 2019, 11:52:18 am
He isn't getting priced as a 3-4 WAR player though, the rumors have $4-5 million a year for two years.  Even if a thought he could only do 3-4 WAR for a year he'd be getting way more money.  The FV they linked in that scouting report was 45 for ceiling and floor which is going to be sub 2 WAR player and part timer.  If that is the case he only works in a platoon with Almora, because Happ's strong side at the plate is left handed.  I think I'd rather go with Happ/righty than Shogo/Almora, especially if money is as tight as it appears.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 18, 2019, 12:00:30 pm
....his scouted ceiling matches realistic outcome, which is both a compliment and a critique, since the ceiling is that of an average regular or above-average part-timer. ...

Not sure if "expected outcome" really is "average regular".  But Cubs are shopping/hoping for anti-awful, not for star.  We were awful in CF last year, and at 2B. 
*If Shogo provided "average regular" performance in CF, that would provide a substantial upgrade.
*If Hoerner provided "average regular" performance at 2B, that too would be a substantial upgrade. 

Obviously you're stuck with Heyward.  But if the awful 2B/CF spots were perfectly average instead of awful, and the five spots that are supposed to be good (C, 1B, SS, 3B, LF) were REALLY good, you could still have a lineup that could contend for a winning record and perhaps a playoff spot.  **IF** Shogo and Hoerner could be "average", I think the lineup might be able to be a #4-5 type offense in the league. 

Whether rotation, relief, and defense can get you into the playoffs with a #5 offense, remains to be seen.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 18, 2019, 12:28:53 pm
Last year with pitchers included the Cubs where #11 in MLB and #5 in NL in wRC+. (#10 and #5 if you want to go by runs).  Remove the pitchers and it is tied for #7 in MLB and #4 in the NL for wRC+ with 2 black holes.  Improve those two positions to league average and the offense would closer to the Dodgers and Astros.  The pitching would still be a huge issue.

*Castellanos was great with Cubs, but he only moved the RF production for the year to a wRC+ 109.  Heyward had a wRC+ of 101 on the year, so improved the team, but it wasn't huge affect for the whole year.  For reference the Cubs CF was 87, 2B was 81. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on December 18, 2019, 01:22:04 pm
I'm going to have a hard time rooting for this team if they trade Bryant just as a salary dump.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 18, 2019, 01:45:22 pm
DMF. I'm struggling with the idea that the Cubs are content to revert to "the lovable losers"  Been there, done that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 18, 2019, 02:07:02 pm
I think the Bryant return will be fine, but it won’t be what people expect. The reason he is getting traded is to get under $208 million. It isn’t to extend the window, be more competitive in 2021, it is because the Ricketts don’t want to pay any CBT because they don’t want to.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 18, 2019, 02:07:33 pm
Eric Sogard is a scrub.

Ill wait till the offseason's over before I judge.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 18, 2019, 02:11:05 pm
The Cubs may or may not trade Bryant, but if they do I feel confident that it will not be a "salary dump."  They could dump salary in other ways without the same impact.

If they do trade Bryant, that will presumably have a significant effect on their budget, and while that will surely be a consideration, the return is going to be more important in determining whether he gets traded.

Theo isn't stupid and Ricketts is not the money hoarding boogeyman some have made him out to be. I suppose it was inevitable that a "what have you done for me lately" attitude would take over a few years after Theo and Ricketts completely turned around the franchise resulting in five consecutive trips to the playoffs, two visits to the NL Championship Series and a World Series championship (and the most victories of any NL team over a four year period).

That said, I doubt many (perhaps any) here will be pleased with whatever the Cubs get back if Bryant is traded.  It will be a sad day for Cub fans. But perhaps not as sad as him leaving as a free agent and getting nothing back in a couple of years.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 18, 2019, 02:16:09 pm
That said, I doubt many (perhaps any) here will be pleased with whatever the Cubs get back if Bryant is traded.  It will be a sad day for Cub fans. But perhaps not as sad as him leaving as a free agent and getting nothing back in a couple of years.

It'll be more sad when 84 wins becomes a good a year again instead of a bad year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 18, 2019, 02:18:55 pm
It'll be more sad when 84 wins becomes a good a year again instead of a bad year.

I don't disagree.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 18, 2019, 02:27:31 pm
The Cubs may or may not trade Bryant, but if they do I feel confident that it will not be a "salary dump."  They could dump salary in other ways without the same impact.

If they do trade Bryant, that will presumably have a significant effect on their budget, and while that will surely be a consideration, the return is going to be more important in determining whether he gets traded.

Theo isn't stupid and Ricketts is not the money hoarding boogeyman some have made him out to be. I suppose it was inevitable that a "what have you done for me lately" attitude would take over a few years after Theo and Ricketts completely turned around the franchise resulting in five consecutive trips to the playoffs, two visits to the NL Championship Series and a World Series championship (and the most victories of any NL team over a four year period).

That said, I doubt many (perhaps any) here will be pleased with whatever the Cubs get back if Bryant is traded.  It will be a sad day for Cub fans. But perhaps not as sad as him leaving as a free agent and getting nothing back in a couple of years.

Amen Brother.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 18, 2019, 03:37:32 pm
Cubs apparently have a minor league deal with Hultzen.  A rare bit of good news.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 18, 2019, 04:09:29 pm
Cubs apparently have a minor league deal with Hultzen.  A rare bit of good news.

As long as you don't count against the CBT or are willing to sign for less than $1 million, the Cubs have enough money to sign you.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 18, 2019, 04:31:17 pm
I'm 3.19 billion short. 

I'm 3.21 billion short.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on December 18, 2019, 05:50:45 pm
Quote
The Cubs may or may not trade Bryant, but if they do I feel confident that it will not be a "salary dump."

Maybe I should have said "for the primary reason of getting under the CBT" instead of salary dump, but I'm actually not sure there's a whole lot of difference.  Bryant isn't the kind of guy you trade unless you're completely blown away (unless it's for budgetary reasons).  If the return is underwhelming, it will use up quite a bit of the good will generated in 2016, at least for me personally.

I'm hoping Andy Dolan was right:  that Theo was just messing with us and that when Bryant doesn't get traded it will feel good enough to cover up for the fact they're not spending money on anyone else.  YMMV
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 18, 2019, 06:28:13 pm
I'm going to have a hard time rooting for this team if they trade Bryant just as a salary dump.

....If the return is underwhelming, it will use up quite a bit of the good will generated in 2016, at least for me personally.


I guess everybody has different approaches to their fandom.

I never thought of it as dependent on the club showing me “good will” or reaching a certain level of success.

If that were the case, I’m not sure why anybody at all would be a Cubs fan circa 1955 or 1965 or 1975 or 1983 or 1995 or 2005 or 2012.

So, for those who may have a hard time rooting for the 2020 Cubs, it’s been good to know you.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 18, 2019, 09:09:43 pm
I was a Cub fan for all those years mentioned above, so I doubt that I would switch at this point for any reason, let alone those mentioned.

As far as trading Bryant is concerned, I wouldn't dispute that it could make sense to keep him for one more year if the offers are considered too low, but I can't think of any practical reason not to trade him no later than the summer of 2021, if that is the year he becomes a free agent, or this summer, if he wins his current case and becomes a free agent after this year.  Letting him go with no return other than an unimpressive draft choice would be devastating to the team's future. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 18, 2019, 09:10:53 pm
The Cubs keep signing the stars.

Ken Rosenthal @Ken_Rosenthal
Free-agent outfielder Ian Miller signs minor-league deal with #Cubs, source says. Finished last season with #MNTwins.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 18, 2019, 09:15:53 pm
Miller signed to be the Cub’s post-season bass stealing threat. Maybe they’ll be able to flip him to a contender so they can afford a Rule 5 pick next year.

It is a minor league signing. These happen every year to fill out the AAA roster. The only problem is this is the only thing happening, because they can’t afford to even sign major league bench guys.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 18, 2019, 09:28:13 pm
Getting a speed guy for the playoffs when you're not trying to build a playoff team at the major league level. Seems like a good strategy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on December 18, 2019, 09:30:20 pm
Am I on ignore?

Iowa has a title to defend, dammit!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 18, 2019, 09:36:06 pm
The Cubs are still trying to win in 2020, every season is precious remember.

*except when the luxury tax cost a wing of cabins at the Cloisters on the Platte.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 18, 2019, 09:46:35 pm
Miller signed to be the Cub’s post-season bass stealing threat. Maybe they’ll be able to flip him to a contender so they can afford a Rule 5 pick next year.

It is a minor league signing. These happen every year to fill out the major league roster. The only problem is this is the only thing happening, because they can’t afford to even sign major league bench guys.
. Can the guy steal salmon and trout too?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 18, 2019, 09:55:56 pm
. Can the guy steal salmon and trout too?

That’s John Cromwell and he’s out of the Cubs price range.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 18, 2019, 10:01:44 pm
Two winters in a row of dumpster diving.  Well - that re-election campaign won't pay for itself.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 19, 2019, 08:44:07 am
The Cubs paid a franchise crippling $7.9 million luxury tax. To be over a similar amount next would cost them $10ish million.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on December 19, 2019, 09:10:23 am
Atleast you didnt trade away tatis to save 3 million on Shields salary.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 19, 2019, 10:38:26 am
Jon Morosi
@jonmorosi
Free agent Steven Souza Jr., a 30-HR hitter for the Rays in 2017, is running, hitting and throwing at 100% intensity following April surgery on his left knee. Source says he’s drawing interest from the Rangers, Rays, Cubs and Giants. Good bounce-back candidate.


*Insert too expensive joke*
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 19, 2019, 01:51:45 pm
It isn't clear to me why Souza would interest the Cubs. Very high strikeout guy, only one season with an OPS above .717.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 19, 2019, 01:53:45 pm
Good players cost more money?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 19, 2019, 02:55:32 pm
Brett Taylor has a well-researched piece up at BR that delves into the luxury tax implications for repeat offenders.

Bottom line: Cubs as a two-time in a row offender lose about $20-25 M in 2020 and about $50 M in 2021 if go over a third year in a row. So, staying under in 2020 and breaking the consecutive run could be pretty significant in dollars (aside from other penalties).

Taylor theorizes that getting under in 2020 makes it much easier for Cubs to be big spenders again in 2021.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 19, 2019, 03:54:00 pm
For the Cubs to be big spenders in 2021 one of these things has to happen
1.) The Ricketts family commits to going over the CBT for multiple years
2.) The new CBA dramatically alters the CBT in way the Ricketts no longer care about it.
3.) They gut the 2020 team so much that very few guys are left on the team.

Maybe #2 happens, but this isn't Star Wars and hope isn't a strategy.

I'm willing to bet money the Cubs could lose $50 million in revenue, run a $230 million pay roll and the Ricketts would still make money off of Rickettsville.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 19, 2019, 04:47:40 pm
I’m sure the one thing none of us could have predicted is Bleachernation writing a piece defending whatever action the Ricketts took.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 19, 2019, 04:59:21 pm
I don’t see baseball owners—-many of whom are richer than the Ricketts family—-running amok with spending on players.

Put another way, there is a context here: very rich people in baseball tend to be judicious how they spend. Actually, very rich people in most walks of life are pretty careful about their money.

Here in D.C., the Lerners—who are significantly richer than the Ricketts—are very careful how they spend on the Nats. Cubs have been right there with the Yankees spending in recent seasons and, of course, were the top NL spenders the last two seasons. Do the Dodgers have resources? Cubs outspend them lately.

So, not a question whether Cubs “still make money” at this spending level or that spending level. That is a unrealistic way to look at the baseball business and, frankly, a bit naive.

Yes, in the abstract and irrespective of how the industry actually works, all of us would like to see the Ricketts ignore how all their other peers operate and just spend, spend, spend on the best players. Disappointing they seem fixated on the CBT for 2020 but the Brett Taylor piece explains why it could be significant to them. it’s also disappointing that the post-2019 TV deal hasn’t immediately been a boost to player spending, although everybody knew that the delivery of entertainment is in a revolution compared to the simple cable deals of years past.

It’s  complicated and not simply a matter of rich people “still making money” if they are willing to spend more. Nobody in this business does that year after year, not even the Yankees. Or, the LA teams. Nobody.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 19, 2019, 05:08:42 pm
Recently ESPN ran a series with MLB's first team and second team: no Cubs on either team.  Then they did players of the decade: the only Cub was Kimbrel and it was for his service elsewhere.

My point is, how in hell did we get a payroll this high and not have any stars recognized by the press or the rest of baseball as being one of the best two players at a position in baseball?  Like in the past pre-Theo, it's becoming clear that it's not that we're not spending enough money, but not enough on the right people.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 19, 2019, 05:17:00 pm
cough...Jason Heyward...cough
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 19, 2019, 05:51:56 pm
The Yankees will be above the tax for the second year in a row. The Red Sox have been above the tax for 2 years now and actually went into the third tier for the year they won the World Series.

The Cubs have a choice as their players are no longer cheap. They can do what Yankees did and go for it or cut salary and pry for a .500 team. 2021 will role around and the Cubs will be unable to spend because of labor uncertainty. 2022 will be because they aren’t good enough, etc...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 19, 2019, 05:56:53 pm
It's like being owned by J. Wellington Wimpy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 19, 2019, 07:03:02 pm
I’m talking about self-imposed spending limitations even when the super-rich owner is still “making money,” not whether a club has to pay a CBT a couple years in a row. “Making money” is not a benchmark for anything in MLB. They make money.

Yankees had been holding back spending for years notwithstanding their incredible resources. Now, we’re seeing an attempted retrenchment by the Red Sox, kind of similar to what Cubs appear to be doing. Dodgers have been super-careful for some time.

Nobody just spends and spends, at least since the old Steinbrenner days.

Current cba provides disincentives to spending—-and it’s working. So, yes, there will be a labor fight after 2021 and there will be a pathway to changes in the current system negotiated. Not all at once, but a pathway.

Ricketts are making a decision about CBT for 2020. I think it’s unfortunate but look around—-even richer owners do the same thing.  Maybe it’s a short-term thing once the new network sorts itself out, among other things. These guys are business persons in a competitive business, not the tooth fairy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 19, 2019, 08:41:41 pm
Now I have visions of Tom Ricketts in a tooth fairy costume, thanks.

You can congratulate them on being business people, I’ll call them cheap and be ****** off about it. Good. Great. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 19, 2019, 10:03:51 pm
As I said, unfortunate that the Ricketts seem to be treating CBT as they are for 2020. I don’t like it. I don’t like the Bryant rumors either. Nobody is congratulating them.

But, the Taylor piece provided a bit of context and not very realistic to expect the Ricketts to be outliers among their MLB ownership brethren when it comes to spending. They’ve spent a lot in recent seasons, tops in NL, and we’ll see how the current (apparent) budget plays out.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on December 19, 2019, 11:49:08 pm
All these new messages and we didn't sign someone else for Iowa today?  Terribly disappointing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 19, 2019, 11:56:51 pm
The Cubs paid a franchise crippling $7.9 million luxury tax. To be over a similar amount next would cost them $10ish million.

According to AZ Phil, the amount of this tax means that Cubs were at $244 taxable payroll in 2019—just $2 under the top third tier ($246).

Third tier would have moved Cubs #1 draft pick down 10 spots, among other things.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 19, 2019, 11:58:47 pm
All these new messages and we didn't sign someone else for Iowa today?  Terribly disappointing.

Those Iowa signings add up, you know.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 20, 2019, 10:00:36 am
Sharma on the Cubs' ability to spend:

https://theathletic.com/1475012/2019/12/20/brother-can-you-spare-a-dime-for-the-cubs-bullpen-how-about-second-base/

The problem with last winter’s lack of activity was never about the Cubs not adding Bryce Harper or Manny Machado, just like this winter isn’t a failure because they didn’t try to sign Anthony Rendon or Gerrit Cole. But not being able to afford Alex Claudio is troubling.

Before Claudio signed with the Brewers for $1.75 million, the Cubs had made it clear they were interested. But they needed to clear money first, so he signed with Milwaukee.

...

This two-year non-spending trend has become a bit embarrassing for such a big-market team. It’s one thing for the Cubs to not throw their financial weight around during the winter. But to miss out on complementary pieces because the budget is so tight that upgrading the team requires trading players who make significant money? It’s not only laughable, it’s unacceptable.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 20, 2019, 10:35:38 am
All these new messages and we didn't sign someone else for Iowa today?  Terribly disappointing.

If you joined the Athletic Sharma just dropped a huge Joe Panic minor league rumor to scratch that itch.

Sharma on the Cubs' ability to spend:

Theo messed up with his big money deals and the Ricketts aren't going to let the Cubs spend.  This team should be blown up and just restart.  Trying to limp around the .500 level with an expensive team and middle of the road draft pick is just stupid.  This whole thing is just stupid.  I mean I think the Cubs will be better at it than the Bulls, but they are going to have to be near 100% on every move they make to ever be in the World Series talk again with the strategy they are going for.

Even if the Cubs are 100% this is still hard to pull off.  The Dodgers have drafted Buehler, Bellinger, Lux, Will Smith, May and Verdurgo and stay below the luxury tax and they still haven't won a WS since the 80's.  Stupid, stupid, stupid, cheap, stupid.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 20, 2019, 11:05:46 am
Don't hold back CBJ, tell us how you really feel.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 20, 2019, 12:27:50 pm
******* ****** ****** ***** ***** ***** stupid.  The Ricketts ***** **** ***** **** ***** **** ******** **** *** cheap ****** ******
****** ****** ***** in 3 years ****** ****** *** *****.  Theo ***** **** *** ***** ***** ******* ****** ******* is still smart, but **** ******** **** ******* ******** ******* ******* ****** **** the Ricketts ****** ******** ***** *********** ******* ********** ****** ****** ******.  ******* stupid.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on December 20, 2019, 03:02:41 pm
I think Mike Ehrmantraut would call our offseason strategy so far a “half measure”.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 20, 2019, 03:28:47 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6V_LNFnK30
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 20, 2019, 03:31:28 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qd8hy032uLc
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 20, 2019, 03:35:43 pm
******* ****** ****** ***** ***** ***** stupid.  The Ricketts ***** **** ***** **** ***** **** ******** **** *** cheap ****** ******
****** ****** ***** in 3 years ****** ****** *** *****.  Theo ***** **** *** ***** ***** ******* ****** ******* is still smart, but **** ******** **** ******* ******** ******* ******* ****** **** the Ricketts ****** ******** ***** *********** ******* ********** ****** ****** ******.  ******* stupid.
I think there's too many asterisks in the second sentence.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 20, 2019, 03:48:09 pm
Patrick Mooney @PJ_Mooney
The Cubs have agreed to a one-year, split contract with pitcher Ryan Tepera that would be worth $900,000 at the big-league level. Tepera has a 3.64 ERA in 216 career appearances with the Blue Jays as well as a minor-league option remaining.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 20, 2019, 03:50:47 pm
At this rate, Iowa will kick the shiite out of the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 20, 2019, 04:01:18 pm
Dudes not particularly good.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 20, 2019, 04:17:08 pm
Patrick Mooney @PJ_Mooney
The Cubs have agreed to a one-year, split contract with pitcher Ryan Tepera that would be worth $900,000 at the big-league level.


Saw him once with the Jays. He was battered with deep flies that game.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 20, 2019, 04:28:17 pm
Tepera was hurt last year and lost some velocity. Prior seasons he was averaging 95 mph on his fastball, which has a higher spin rate. He seems like a nice buy low guy for the Iowa shuttle when you can’t spend money.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 20, 2019, 04:36:55 pm
There was a time, people thought he had closer stuff.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 20, 2019, 07:18:37 pm
Evan Drellich @EvanDrellich
Briefs from both sides in the Kris Bryant service-time grievance were due today. A decision will come in the new year. Unclear if it will be as soon as January — hundreds of pages need to be sorted through by arbitrator Mark Irvings.


This is ridiculous. This should've been resolved four years ago. Why wasn't this grievance decided in 2015?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 20, 2019, 08:20:25 pm
Why are you complaining?  The longer it takes to decide, the less likely it is that Bryant's traded.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 20, 2019, 08:55:03 pm
There was a time, people thought he had closer stuff.

There was a time people thought we were pennant contenders.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 20, 2019, 09:32:53 pm
Evan Drellich @EvanDrellich
Briefs from both sides in the Kris Bryant service-time grievance were due today. A decision will come in the new year. Unclear if it will be as soon as January — hundreds of pages need to be sorted through by arbitrator Mark Irvings.


This is ridiculous. This should've been resolved four years ago. Why wasn't this grievance decided in 2015?

The union controls when these things get brought up. Since it wasn’t go to be an issue until next off season it really wasn’t a big deal until the Cubs decided that trading him was the way.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 20, 2019, 10:16:32 pm
Once a grievance is filed under the cba (the Bryant grievance was filed in 2015), there are strict time limits in the cba for each step of the process. The Union does not “control” the time requirements. The cba does.

But, the cba also states that: “Each of the time limits set forth herein may be extended by mutual agreement of the parties involved.”

That is certainly what happened here—-there was/were mutual agreements to hold the 2015 grievance in abeyance. I mentioned some of the possible reasons for the hold in a post several days ago. Maybe there were other reasons too.

Exactly when and how either side went about breaking the “hold” on the grievance, who knows. Again, all about mutual agreements when and how to do that. At some point this year, there was a reason to move on the grievance.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 20, 2019, 10:34:57 pm
I wonder if Bryant did it now, not to go FA a year early, but to complicate getting traded.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 20, 2019, 11:36:34 pm
The grievances are almost always heard over the off-season so they all go into abeyance and the union determines which grievances they want to have heard over which given off season. Since the earliest Bryant could be a free agent was next year there wasn’t a reason for it to get done earlier than this.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 21, 2019, 12:33:42 am
Arbitrations can be heard when all the parties are prepared to go forward. It’s not just an off-season thing. For example, the AROD suspension hearings began in early September. Lawyers can actually work and litigate between April and October.

When the Bryant case was put on hold by mutual agreement, either party could have gone forward way before October 2019. It is VERY unusual to hold a grievance that long, from spring 2015 to late 2019. Since the Union or player generally is the party that initiated the grievance in the first place, it would be expected they would be the party to initiate unlocking of the hold. But, not necessarily.

That Bryant did so would be my guess here too but possible that it was the Cubs that unlocked this to get a definitive ruling on Bryant control. Case might have been unlocked in 2019 long before the October hearings, as there is only one permanent arbitrator and can take months in advance to get a hearing date and litigants ready to go.

Lots of possible reasons for Bryant and Union to sit on this. One is that the industry expectation is that Bryant loses this grievance. When you have a likely losing case, you might not be in a hurry to get a ruling. And, Cubs/MLB probably just wanted it to go away. Guessing that Theo did not enjoy getting cross-examined about Bryant needing to work on his baserunning at AAA in 2015.

Again, the Union does not control or determine the timing—the cba does. Ordinarily, the Union/Player, as the grievant, would have more incentive to move on a grievance than management does.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 21, 2019, 01:05:27 am
No one cares.   What I posted was from Sharma or Mooney when the talked about the timing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on December 21, 2019, 08:26:31 am
Apologies if this was already posted...


https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryandavis/2019/12/20/the-5-biggest-mistakes-theo-epstein-has-made-with-the-cubs/#1c163d3c365e
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 21, 2019, 09:26:59 am
Callis was on Kaplan’s podcast regular sing the 2012 draft and said that the Cubs had a predraft deal with Correa for the 6th pick and didn’t have a clue that he was going to the Astros at #1 until it was announced and then scrambled to pick somebody and went with Almora.

http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/onairtalent/cole-wright

Rumor is the guy above is going to be the head studio guy for Marquee.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 21, 2019, 10:38:02 am
Apologies if this was already posted...


https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryandavis/2019/12/20/the-5-biggest-mistakes-theo-epstein-has-made-with-the-cubs/#1c163d3c365e

It's an interesting article with valid points. I have to say that the Bryant section is questionable however.

Kris Bryant was and is going to go for the most money he can get (with a contending team) when he becomes a free agent. He has made clear there won't be a hometown discount, and being a Boras client underscores that he is going to focus on the money and length of contract. To suggest he is more likely to leave the Cubs because of being held back in the minors or some other slight is, to say the least, highly speculative. I'd say naive.  The fact is if the Cubs had brought up Bryant earlier, he would be leaving after this coming season, instead of the following one.  And if he is going to get traded, his trade value would be way less at this point as a result.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on December 21, 2019, 12:40:25 pm
Callis was on Kaplan’s podcast regular sing the 2012 draft and said that the Cubs had a predraft deal with Correa for the 6th pick and didn’t have a clue that he was going to the Astros at #1 until it was announced and then scrambled to pick somebody and went with Almora.


As Kaplan noted in the podcast, everybody knew about Correa’s great workout at Wrigley. Well known that Cubs were blown away but also well known that Cubs were focusing on Almora too. My impression at the time, when read about the workout, was that the workout might have moved Correa past Almora for Cubs. Had Correa got past Astros, he likely would have been there for Cubs. Didn’t know Cubs had a pre-draft deal with Correa until Callis said that.

I didn’t hear Callis say in podcast that Cubs had to “scramble” to pick somebody after the Astros pick—-just that Hoyer, McLeod and Theo had to discuss with Correa now off the board. Almora-to-Cubs was projected by several draft projecters. I remember that the Almora pick was no surprise to observers and Callis said in podcast that #6 was in the range where he was expected to go. Yeah, he was a fallback in the sense that Correa would otherwise have been the pick. Also read that Cubs were also focused on Max Fried, who went to Braves very next pick.

It’s too bad that Almora didn’t pan out. Astros grabbed away Correa but could have grabbed away Bryant too, later, and passed. So, there’s that. This kind of stuff happens a lot, of course.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 23, 2019, 12:04:30 pm
Quote
Call it “The Plan,” circa 2020:

Trade away pieces that have huge value to aid in 2021 and beyond, and also to diversify the lineup.

But also focus on trading the guys who have a large enough salary that it could get the Cubs under luxury tax in 2020 to reset penalties.

Sign cheap, short-term pieces to fill any gaps and hope that one or two surprise to the upside.

Try to compete with what you have, but hold the bar a little higher on what “competitive” looks like come June and July.

If it’s not a huge lead in the division, sell off some more with a particular eye on pieces that would help as soon as 2021.

With luxury tax penalties reset, proceed with the flexibility to have a “normal” offseason after 2020 in order to compete in 2021 and beyond.

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/12/20/do-we-finally-understand-the-plan-chicago-cubs-2020-edition/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 23, 2019, 12:22:20 pm
Jon Becker @jonbecker_
With Cleveland signing its first fully-guaranteed FA contract (i.e., not a split contract), only four teams remain without one:

BAL
CHC
COL
PIT
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 23, 2019, 12:25:07 pm
Jon Becker
@jonbecker_
With Cleveland signing its first fully-guaranteed FA contract (i.e., not a split contract), only four teams remain without one:

BAL
CHC
COL
PIT

Jon Becker
@jonbecker_
The Cubs are totally gonna get outbid for Akiyama, BTW. Just want to mentally prepare you all

He works with MLB Depth Charts no clue on the last bit, but it fits with the 2020 "Plan"

The problem with Bleacher Nations 2021 spending spree is the Cubs have $109.5 million on the CBT with just Darvish, Hendricks, Kimbrel, Rizzo, Bote, Heyward + 40 man charges and player benefits.  So the Cubs would have $100 million for Baez (assume Willson and Bryant get traded) 3 starters, bullpen, arbitration guys, and finding starters.  Unless the Cubs are going to commit to going over the CBT or it gets raised a lot in the next CBA there is no way this plan works.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on December 23, 2019, 12:29:52 pm
Have the Cubs explicitly indicated that they plan to get below the CBT?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 23, 2019, 12:42:36 pm
Theo has said he won't comment on the Cubs spending plans.

1.) Kaplan, Rogers, Sharma, Mooney are all hearing the Cubs would like to get under the CBT
2.) Rogers said until the Cubs move money they can't sign anyone for more than $1 million guaranteed, which has been the case so far.
3.) If the Cubs where going to stay over the CBT they could go after cheap veteran adds before they move salary.  If the goal is to stay below the CBT they currently have multiple ways to do it that are less painful then trading Bryant.  If they added the money then the could get into a situation where they have to move Bryant or deplete the farm to move Heyward.  Getting locked into to having to move Bryant could hurt the return a lot.

To me it is a if it quacks like a duck it is a duck situation.  The Cubs are acting like a team that is motivated to get below the CBT.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on December 23, 2019, 12:50:55 pm
There doesn't seem to be any realistic way for the Cubs to be seriously competitive without exceeding the CBT.  I expect them to try to be seriously competitive. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 23, 2019, 12:53:12 pm
What about this off season makes you think that Cubs have any desire to be even sorta competitive this year?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on December 23, 2019, 12:55:07 pm
Seems like that's been the goal each of the last five years.  I expect it to continue to be the goal again this season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on December 23, 2019, 12:56:06 pm
I don't believe everything I read, particularly when it comes to the Cubs' plans.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on December 23, 2019, 01:19:22 pm
There are increasing penalties for being over spend threshold for a certain number of years, correct?

At the risk of being shunned off the board, perhaps the Cubs have a window to reset this year they have to capitalize on based on planned future expenditure? Yanks did something similar recently, based on escalating penalties.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on December 23, 2019, 01:24:52 pm
There are increasing penalties for being over spend threshold for a certain number of years, correct?

At the risk of being shunned off the board, perhaps the Cubs have a window to reset this year they have to capitalize on based on planned future expenditure? Yanks did something similar recently, based on escalating penalties.

Ding, ding ding!!!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 23, 2019, 01:37:25 pm
There are increasing penalties for being over spend threshold for a certain number of years, correct?

At the risk of being shunned off the board, perhaps the Cubs have a window to reset this year they have to capitalize on based on planned future expenditure? Yanks did something similar recently, based on escalating penalties.

The CBT penalities are minimal even though they increase.  Going over more than 1 year causes the Cubs to lose more of the revenue sharing money refunds.  The Cubs are either going to have to be ok losing that money or a change in the CBA will have to happen otherwise it is going to be 1 year and then a step back.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 23, 2019, 01:39:37 pm
Ron or anybody going to the Cubs Convention January 17-19?  There could be some interesting questions asked.

https://www.mlb.com/cubs/fans/cubs-convention
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 23, 2019, 01:41:27 pm
Maybe even gunplay!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 23, 2019, 01:47:15 pm
I would be shocked if the Ricketts family doesn't skip the convention again this year. They ducked the fans last year during a no-spend offseason/after a disappointing season, so why wouldn't they do the same this year?

If the Cubs are going to be unwilling to go over the luxury tax threshold multiple years in a row, then I don't think there's any time in the next 3-4 years that they're going to be able to do anything more than tinker around the edges. Between money already guaranteed, raises, and potential extensions, they're not going to have the flexibility to be players for Mookie Betts or anyone close to that level. Well, unless they extend no one...in which case the core of this team is too weak in two years to seriously compete.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 23, 2019, 02:58:58 pm
Ron or anybody going to the Cubs Convention January 17-19?  There could be some interesting questions asked.

https://www.mlb.com/cubs/fans/cubs-convention

Not me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 23, 2019, 03:18:31 pm
We are on the brink of renewing MacFaiure's 105 year plan.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 23, 2019, 03:18:45 pm
Quote from: Tom Ricketts on not appearing at the 2019 convention
"We had the lowest-rated panel last year, so the guys cut us. It's true," Ricketts said with a laugh. "I think people would rather watch the mascot play bingo than listen to the owners speak. The fact is that we had a low-rated panel. It got kind of dull over the years, because a lot of the questions were the same. It's funny to me. I saw a headline, somebody wrote like, 'Ricketts family cancels popular panel at Cubs Convention.' And the fact is we were the lowest-rated panel.

"If people want us to come back next year throughout the forums, we'd be happy to do it again. But, we just were boring people, honestly. We're happy to do it again. I like talking to people. I think I'm the most accessible owner in sports."
Sounds like an alternative fact to me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 23, 2019, 04:53:03 pm
There are increasing penalties for being over spend threshold for a certain number of years, correct?

At the risk of being shunned off the board, perhaps the Cubs have a window to reset this year they have to capitalize on based on planned future expenditure? Yanks did something similar recently, based on escalating penalties.

With one major difference being that the Yankees were aggressively trading for talent while their players were at max value.  So far we haven't done squat.  When we successfully turn Bryant and Contreras into the sort of impact prospects the Yankees acquired, I'll believe in this theory.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 23, 2019, 05:24:35 pm
I am not that familiar with the Yankees.  What trades for impact talent did they make?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 23, 2019, 10:00:49 pm
The Yankees trading Chapman and Miller is no where close to the Cubs trading Bryant and Contreras.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 23, 2019, 10:10:58 pm
The Yankees trading Chapman and Miller is no where close to the Cubs trading Bryant and Contreras.

Wow! How did I miss the Cubs making those trades?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 23, 2019, 10:30:13 pm
The Yankees trading Chapman and Miller is no where close to the Cubs trading Bryant and Contreras.

Do you think the Cubs will get a Torres level prospect for either?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 24, 2019, 09:05:47 am
I think that the Cubs will certainly get prospects that are rated equal to how Torres was rated at the time.  If not, they shouldn't make the trade.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 24, 2019, 11:42:44 am
Do you think the Cubs will get a Torres level prospect for either?

I guess it depends on how you view Torres at the prospect. So Torres was 19 at the 30ish prospect in baseball. I think the best case scenario for a Bryant trade is getting 1 of Waters or Anderson from the Braves who would be ranked similar to Torres at the time of the trade. Now Torres continued to climb the prospect rankings and became a top 10 or 5 prospect in baseball. I don’t think the Cubs will get a guy with type of upside. I think Frazier/Sheffield is probably a closer analog to what Bryant brings back, but I think Bryant’s return should be better. Willson will bring back less.

The Yankees traded a guy that they were going to resign and a very good relief pitcher. Willson could be a closer analog to trading a Miller I guess. That return didn’t change the Yankees trajectory.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 24, 2019, 12:05:54 pm
I would expect it a little differently.  I think that Contreras will bring back a somewhat better return than Bryant.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 24, 2019, 12:20:43 pm
If he's traded, I think Contreras gets more back, but I'm not sure he should in a vacuum. Trading Bryant is at least partially about freeing up money. So as long as they get a reasonable package for him, he's probably going to be traded.

Contreras doesn't really save money (especially when you factor in that they'd have to pay for a replacement on the free agent market), so trading him is all about getting valuable players back. If they don't get an offer that blows them away for him, he's probably staying.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 24, 2019, 12:53:32 pm
Freeing up money for what?  Certainly not for spending on a FA.  That would put them right back in the same pickle.  This season is stacking up to be a partial rebuild, partial tank, part lovable loser season.  Do the Cubs have a chance?  Sure, if almost everybody has a career year and lots of luck.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 24, 2019, 01:33:02 pm
If he's traded, I think Contreras gets more back, but I'm not sure he should in a vacuum. Trading Bryant is at least partially about freeing up money. So as long as they get a reasonable package for him, he's probably going to be traded.

Contreras doesn't really save money (especially when you factor in that they'd have to pay for a replacement on the free agent market), so trading him is all about getting valuable players back. If they don't get an offer that blows them away for him, he's probably staying.

I agree.  I don't see the advantage of trading Contreras unless someone blows their socks off.  I would hate to see Caratini as the full time catcher, and even if he is, they would still need to reduce salary somewhere else if the reporting is accurate. 

Trading Bryant fills three separate purposes - reducing salary by about 20 million this season and even more in 2021, bringing back a return for someone that they will almost certainly lose by the end of 2021, and cushioning the effects of everyone becoming free agents in 2021 and 2022.

Contreras should be their second priority to resign to a long term contract, after Baez.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 24, 2019, 02:46:23 pm
Willson is the last guy that should get a long term deal and be the first guy that is traded if they actually want to compete. Trading Bryant means the Cubs are ok with trying to be a .500 team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 24, 2019, 09:31:27 pm
My opinion is 100 percent the opposite.  I think that Contreras is the second most valuable position player on the team, and will continue to be for several years to come.  Third baseman and outfielders are a dime a dozen.  Catchers that can do what Contreras does are extremely rare and valuable.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 24, 2019, 10:48:03 pm
Look at the Cubs catching depth and compare that to 3B in the system. Bryant is the best player on the team and is the guy that is going to age the best. Catchers take a beating and don’t age well. 

Bleacher Nation linked a google translate article out of Japan that the Cubs are out on Shogo because they can’t afford $5 million/year and that the Padres are now the leader for his services.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on December 24, 2019, 11:11:47 pm
Catching depth in the system is far down the line.  I am still not sold on Amaya as anything more than a light hitting defensive catcher, and even that seems to be a long shot.

Some catchers do not age well, but I don't see that happening to Contreras for the next 5 or 6 years.  I believe that over that period of time, Contreras will be a more valuable player than Bryant will, and Bryant is almost certain to be gone in 2 years, while Contreras is likely to sign a reasonable contract extension.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 24, 2019, 11:23:35 pm
Willson in his age 20 season hit .673 at Boise vs Amaya .753 at MB. Amaya fly ball distance has increased every year he takes walks and strikes out less than 20% of the time. The Cubs are pushing Amaya and they have Caratini at the major league level.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 26, 2019, 08:53:54 am
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/12/26/whoa-is-shogo-a-no-go-fo-the-dough-po-cubs-doh/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 26, 2019, 02:03:59 pm
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/12/26/rumor-out-of-atlanta-cubs-want-three-of-anderson-waters-riley-and-wright-from-braves-for-kris-bryant/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 26, 2019, 02:26:23 pm
That rumor doesn't really make a lot of sense to me because it implies that all those players are interchangeable. I think of Anderson and Waters as being a step or two above the others. If they get both Anderson and Waters, I think there's a potential trade there. But I wouldn't be too excited if Wright and Riley were 2/3 of the deal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 26, 2019, 02:51:37 pm
The way I looked in the rumor is 1 of Waters/Anderson and the Riley and Wright.  I'd rather have another pitcher instead of Riley, but the Cubs like their strike out guys.  I really would be shocked if the Cubs could get a better deal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 26, 2019, 03:27:17 pm
If you trade Bryant to Atlanta you have to get Riley back IMO.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 26, 2019, 03:34:38 pm
To me, Riley is the fourth most valuable guy on that list of four at this point, and it's not that close.  I have minimal interest in him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 26, 2019, 05:01:40 pm
If you trade Bryant to free up money and you dont get a 3rd baseman back then the money you saved goes to finding another 3rd baseman.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 26, 2019, 05:02:14 pm
So you didnt save enough money to fill other needs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 26, 2019, 05:17:02 pm
If this were the Yankees or Dodgers, and if they were intent at trading Bryant at some point, they would pursue Donaldson, and then begin seriously offering Schwarber and Contreras for a pitcher and cf, because you've got a lot covered.  They can go way over the cap for a bit, as long as they're committed to being under it by March some time.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 26, 2019, 05:17:33 pm
I don’t see Riley as a likely solution at third base, so you’re probably looking for a new third baseman before the next championship window anyway. Trade for the best players, not the weaker player who might fill a short term need. Riley just gives me Mike Olt vibes.

If the Cubs trade Bryant, competing in 2020 isn’t their primary focus. Might as well see what Bote and Happ can do over a full season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 26, 2019, 05:23:55 pm
If this were the Yankees or Dodgers, forget Donaldson...they would’ve gone hard after Rendon or would be trying to trade for Arenado.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 26, 2019, 05:41:31 pm
The Yankees sure. The Dodgers haven’t been over the CBT since 2017. The ownership group was soliciting additional funds and the letter they sent out said that they wouldn’t be going over the tax for 3 years. The TV contract might not be a lucrative as they thought.

If the Cubs trade Bryant they aren’t competing in 2020. Trying to compete in 2021 is going to require perfect off-seasons.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 26, 2019, 07:56:13 pm
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/12/26/rumor-out-of-atlanta-cubs-want-three-of-anderson-waters-riley-and-wright-from-braves-for-kris-bryant/

That would be “Anderson and any two” for me.

As for why Pache isn’t included, it’s because he’s massively overrated and the Cubs have probably figured that out.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on December 26, 2019, 08:00:43 pm
I don’t see Riley as a likely solution at third base, so you’re probably looking for a new third baseman before the next championship window anyway. Trade for the best players, not the weaker player who might fill a short term need. Riley just gives me Mike Olt vibes.

If the Cubs trade Bryant, competing in 2020 isn’t their primary focus. Might as well see what Bote and Happ can do over a full season.

While I agree with the “trade for the best players” philosophy generally and I do rank Riley 4th in that group, I’m not as down on him as you.  I do think he’s a potential long-term answer at 3B even if he comes with high risk.

I’d be fine with Riley if Anderson and Waters were the first two pieces.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on December 26, 2019, 08:09:20 pm
In the unlikely event that you could get both Anderson and Waters, you really wouldn't even need a third piece, so Riley would be a nifty lottery ticket.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on December 26, 2019, 08:25:52 pm
Yeah, Riley is fine if you get Anderson and Waters. As the third player in a deal with two top 30-ish prospects, he’s a nice guy to take a chance on. He’s more than you expect to get as a third player in that situation.

I’m just not that interested if he’s a bigger part of the deal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 26, 2019, 08:44:09 pm
Whole lotta people gonna be joking me on the trading Bryant is stupid train when they see the return.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 26, 2019, 08:49:56 pm
And you know this how?

You dont.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 26, 2019, 09:00:57 pm
You can come up with a rough estimate of what Bryant is going to bring back and 2 top 30 prospects isn’t it. Plus most people on this board smart enough to realize when something is stupid.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 26, 2019, 10:07:58 pm
If this were the Yankees or Dodgers, forget Donaldson...they would’ve gone hard after Rendon or would be trying to trade for Arenado.
  Not the point.  I'm talking about philosophy and mindset for the last 30 years.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on December 27, 2019, 12:08:11 pm
NBC Sports passes on the Bryant to the Braves rumor started by Bleacher Nation and adds a couple comments on the Braves prospects

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/kris-bryant-braves-trade-rumor-gives-view-his-potential-value
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 28, 2019, 10:00:13 am
Shogo is apparently down to the Reds and Padres because the Cubs are broke.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 29, 2019, 05:46:09 pm
Sahadev Sharma with a distinctively Sharmaesk piece on his time at Justin Stone’s Elite Baseball Training facility.

https://theathletic.com/1492379/2019/12/29/sahadev-swings-behind-the-scenes-with-cubs-director-of-hitting-justin-stone/?source=shared-article
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 29, 2019, 11:40:37 pm
Thanks, Ron.  Very helpful and interesting. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 31, 2019, 11:52:45 am
Sharma's Top 10 predictions for 2020

Kris Bryant will be traded to the NL East
Bryant will be replaced by Bote/Garcia
Cubs left handed 2B add will be Carlos Asuaje, who was released by a Korean team last year
Kimbrel will be traded at the deadline.

I wish this was sarcasm....
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on December 31, 2019, 12:33:15 pm
Sharma's Top 10 predictions for 2020

Kris Bryant will be traded to the NL East
Bryant will be replaced by Bote/Garcia
Cubs left handed 2B add will be Carlos Asuaje, who was released by a Korean team last year
Kimbrel will be traded at the deadline.

I wish this was sarcasm....

Sharma's prediction piece is certainly not optimistic about the 2020 season.  One might even call it grim.

However he did not actually predict Bote/Garcia will occupy 3B. What he said was "Without knowing their return in trading Bryant, the Cubs’ options for third would likely be David Bote and Robel García."  Nor did he predict Asuaje would be the Cubs' LH 2B.  What he actually said was "the Cubs will have to get creative to fill that hole. One option they’re pursuing is infielder Carlos Asuaje."

He also predicted a terrific year for Darvish, that Heywood would have his best offensive year as a Cub and that Brennan Davis would be a "consensus top 20 prospect in baseball."

But yeah, he did also predict that the Cubs would finish 3rd in the division (with more victories than 2019). So overall it's a gloomy overall prediction.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 31, 2019, 12:41:37 pm
Third in the division is optimistic
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 31, 2019, 12:59:10 pm
I wonder what the Cubs and their analytics and hitting coordinator and stuff feel about Happ's capacity to adapt and hit in the majors?  My guess is that he's got limitations that are noncorrectible.  Perhaps he'll always be a high-K guy, a low average guy, an inconsistent hot-and-cold guy, a guy whose swing and biomechanics will never be able to handle high heat; and perhaps defensively he'll never have the tools to be good at any of CF, 3B, or 2B. 

It's also possible that his future is strongly unknown.  Maybe he'll never be able to sustain success; or maybe he'll be a great "development" story, of a guy where analytics and training and swing adjustment and hard work will turn him into a huge developmental success story? 

Obviously his hitting is part of his question.  If he's hitting .205 and K'ing 35% of the time, you're not going to want him playing much anywhere.  But *IF* he's the .260 hitter he was last year, and the .816-OPS career or .894-OPS in his small Cubs sample last year, then maybe he might be a key regular piece in a lineup? 

And *IF* he's a key hitter that you WANT in the lineup regularly, I wonder where defensively he might be fit to play?  He may not be good, or good enough at ANY of them, but to some degree he be a possible variably-bad-defensive fit at any of the three key roster spots:
1.  CF, assuming they don't add anybody significant.  He's played some CF before, and BlueJay says he's supposedly improved there at Iowa.  Some defensive stats suggested he was actually better than Almora in 2017 defensively in center.  So perhaps with training and improvement, *IF* he was an asset bat his CF defense would be average enough to be the primary guy there? 
2.  3B, in Sharma's hypothetical that they trade Bryant.  Sure, Happ's not going to be Arenado or anything there.  But if Sharma is mentioning Bote and Garcia as present internal options, those guys are poor defensively too.  Might Happ not perhaps be on par, or perhaps somewhat better, defensively than those types of cats?  Maybe Happ would be the primary 3B, if Bryant got traded for pitching and/or CF? 
3.  2b:  I can't imagine Happ will ever be better than bad defensively at 2b.  And even relative to bad Bote, or Garcia or Zobrist, Happ looked even worse in my brief glimpses.  But, maybe I'm wrong, and maybe that was small sample and he'd practices there almost never in recent years?  Or maybe if the option is Bote, Happ with practice and some committed physiological restructuring might reshape himself a little bit and become variably anti-awful even at 2B?  Maybe if he hit well enough he might play some 2B in the Cub tradition of Todd Walker and Daniel Walker? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 31, 2019, 01:31:36 pm
I've tended to be a Happ skeptic, with an old-school view.  That a guy kind of is what he is, and that if he's got swing-and-miss problems, or problems with upper-half velocity, he'll always have swing-and-miss problems and upper-half-velocity problems.  That to large extend you can't fix those things very much.  And that he's just got too much to fix to ever be that consistently good of a hitter. 

I recently finished reading a really interesting book "The MVP Machine", which takes a different view.  It's all about development, and analytics in enabling development.  Kind of worships Trevor Bauer; Kyle Boddy of Driveline; the Houston development system, etc..  I recommend the book very much, I found it really interesting. 

But the perspective there is that with cutting edge measurements and stuff, guys who want to can really work hard and "solve" problems.  Pitchers can learn to throw new pitches, hitters can make adjustments in their upper-half swing plane to better handle top-half spin rates, etc..  That tools are there to understand and to improve and to develop greatly. 

Obviously Theo and McLeod were way, way, way behind on all of this, and are now starting to try to catch up.  But it would be cool if the Cubs could somehow use some of these tools to help a guy like Happ. 

Or Maples?  I thought it odd that the Cubs understand that Maples fastball, while very fast, had poor spin rate and lacked desirable movement.  Yet that knowledge didn't trigger a solution.  I understand perhaps not wanting to revise an arm slot.  His slider spin/movement is fabulous, so you don't want to mess your arm slot to compromise his slider, nor do you want different arm slots between the two pitches.  But you'd think you could experiment a bunch in the pitch lab with some different seam/grips on the fastball, and find something that performs better.   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 31, 2019, 01:47:32 pm
One of the other things in the MVP Machine book were statistics about hitting.  Basically said slugging and exit velocity are statistically maximized when balls are hit in the air pull-side.  That the common coaching philosophy to wait back isn't conducive. 

I found that interesting, because Theo in several of his post-season conferences has talked up the desire to increase opposite-field hitting. Following the 2018 season he spoke favorably about how they'd gone opposite more often than in 16 and 17.  This season there was a strong fraction of Baez/Schwarber HR's that were opposite-field, and for an extended portion of the season Schwarber's stroke seemed completely committed to opposite-field.  (When he got hotter down the stretch, he drove a number of HR's to RF, which was nice.)

Another item of interest, I thought, was the issue of practice.  Bauer and the MVP-Machine book were strong advocates of practicing a lot, and of "deliberate practice".  Not sure that traditional batting practice qualifies as useful, effective "deliberate practice".  So perhaps the Cubs new manager David Ross is is correct in thinking that batting practice is not very useful, and the previous manager Joe Maddon who didn't believe much in batting practice are in agreement.  But there may be a set of "development is possible" people who are pretty big believers that intentional, deliberate practice can have massive impact. 

So I think it will be interesting to see whether with Ross, he'll be a "practice" guy; or a "relax, don't practice too much" guy; or whether he'll have some perspective where practice is valued and emphasized and useful, but depending on how it's done.  (For example, hitting 50-mph bp-lobs from a 55-year-old coach may not be the most helpful....  Or perhaps using a pitch-machine that can't vary the spin or the movement on an upper-half fastball might not be that great either?)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on December 31, 2019, 02:13:13 pm
Craig, Maples has a high spin rate on his fastball around 2800 RPM which would be top 25 in MLB.  His affective spin rate might be lower, but I don’t think that data is available.
 
Happ CF>3B.

Ron I’m not sure what you think the Cubs are going to get back in a trade that is better than Bote and the Cubs aversion to spending sure makes minor league options more likely than getting somebody like Holt. Just think what the Cubs could have done if they would keep Bryant and spend near their payroll last year, but Tom Ricketts can’t be expected to actually spend revenues on the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on December 31, 2019, 03:31:52 pm
Im not sure now's the time to drop Ian Happ.

If you honestly had me choose between Akiyama and Happ it'd be hard not to choose Happ.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on December 31, 2019, 04:26:50 pm
Craig, Maples has a high spin rate on his fastball around 2800 RPM which would be top 25 in MLB.  His affective spin rate might be lower, but I don’t think that data is available.
 
Happ CF>3B. ....

Thanks Blue, for clarification on Maples spin rate.  My memory was mixed/off.  Last spring, there was a pitch-lab article, not sure if it was a long pitch-lab article in which Maples was an example of the interesting info that pitch-lab provides, versus an article explicitly about Maples that had some pitch-lab data. 

Your reminder that his spin rate was high helps my memory; I think the issue wasn't his spin rate but his spin axis.  Something about his arm slot and spin axis was such that his spin rate didn't make his fastball that effective.  Something with the transverse spin or gyrospin component or something.  My point is that some adjustments in grip might allow his velocity and spin rate to allow better movement and better effectiveness more in line with his velocity.  I got the impression that Maples was OK with status quo, and the Cubs hadn't persuaded him that modifying his grip might enable his spin to provide better movement that could make his fastball more effective. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on December 31, 2019, 05:01:31 pm
Im not sure now's the time to drop Ian Happ.

If you honestly had me choose between Akiyama and Happ it'd be hard not to choose Happ.
   The more I read on Akiyama that he projects more as a corner outfielder and that's what the Reds intend for him, the more I'm glad we didn't pursue him harder.  I'm hoping when Theo pulls the trigger on this HUGE trade, we might find one in our Christmas stocking.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 01, 2020, 12:06:34 pm
The most recent report I read on Akiyama is that he can definitely play CF.

Akiyama hasn't played in MLB, so there's some risk there. But if he does work out, there was no one else on the free agent market who has the potential to address as many of the Cubs' biggest needs (CF, OBP at the top of the lineup, a lot of contact). The roster needs some changes on a limited budget, and he had the potential to have an impact that teams usually have to pay much more to get. IMO, he was a risk the Cubs really needed to take.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 01, 2020, 12:15:05 pm
I can’t believe that, of all years, this is the one that the Cubs decide not to try.  The new TV station, which still does not have the most important carrier, Comcast, signed up really could use a good team to ensure that people are watching.  And, a bunch of guys are about to be FA and I can’t imagine they are very excited about a team and ownership that is tanking in their most productive years.  This may be the most important post WS year and they actively blowing it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robb on January 02, 2020, 08:17:08 am
I wonder if Lester has a bounce back year and Cubs are still floundering if he would approve a deadline trade. Could be a good way to further add talent for the next window.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on January 02, 2020, 08:53:31 am
Has Bryant been traded yet?  Has anyone been traded yet?  Have the Cubs front office been informed that the season is over and the off-season has begun?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 02, 2020, 08:57:38 am
Has Bryant been traded yet?  Has anyone been traded yet?  Have the Cubs front office been informed that the season is over and the off-season has begun?
Maybe somebody will ask that question at the Cubs convention
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on January 02, 2020, 09:27:07 am
LOL!  That would be an awesome question to ask.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 02, 2020, 10:13:54 am
I wonder if Lester has a bounce back year and Cubs are still floundering if he would approve a deadline trade. Could be a good way to further add talent for the next window.

Absolute best case scenario would be Lester getting some velocity back and the Cubs could likely trade him and money to cover his option and get back a back end top 100 guy, but in that case I'd almost think the Cubs would be better off keeping him and picking up his option.

The most likely case is that the Cubs will get back something like what they gave up for Hamels while covering his option if it is declined and saving the Ricketts some of his 2020 salary.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 02, 2020, 10:34:25 am
Jon Morosi @jonmorosi
#Nats pursuing trade options in case Josh Donaldson signs elsewhere, but sources say they’ve been reluctant to make Victor Robles available in discussions with #Rockies on Arenado and #Cubs on Bryant. @MLBNetwork @MLB
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 02, 2020, 06:06:57 pm
If the Cubs are out of it in July the best-case scenario would be to do what they probably should be doing now and embrace a full-on tear-down - the example of the Bulls looms as a gruesome reminder of what happens when you don't try to win but are afraid to commit to a rebuild.  Trade everything that isn't nailed down - Kimbrel, Rizzo, Quintana, Lester, Darvish, even Baez if he hasn't extended - everybody who has any surplus prospect value and wasn't dealt this winter.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on January 02, 2020, 06:43:59 pm
I understand the Nats don't want to move him, but is Robles actually a reasonable target in a KB trade?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 02, 2020, 07:13:03 pm
I understand the Nats don't want to move him, but is Robles actually a reasonable target in a KB trade?

If he's not, they can trade for Aranado and his $234 million.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 03, 2020, 10:41:49 am
Crawly's Cubs Kingdom  @crawlyscubs  21h21 hours ago
So I went to Wrigley the other day and they had the first of the #Cubs Nike jerseys. If you haven’t heard, MLB is switching from Majestic to Nike. Keep in mind these are not the authentic jerseys, more like the step down, heat pressed, no stitching. Thoughts Cubs fans?

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENTQapmWsAIjGQ2.jpg:small)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENTQapnW4AAddKf.jpg:small)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENTQapvWkAAatRJ.jpg:small)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on January 05, 2020, 12:00:38 pm
Some of you may recall that I have a friend whose son was contacted by the Cubs prior to their 3rd round pick.  I don't think I mentioned his name, but I will now as the next portion somewhat requires a name (and since he posted it on Facebook I don't think it is intended to be private).  So the player was closer Matt Cronin from Arkansas.  He wound up being selected by the Nats in the 4th round, 20 picks after the Cubs 3rd round selection of Michael McAvene.

The father posted on Facebook "I've seen this idea floated in a few articles. If Kris Bryant should lose his time service grievance case against the Cubs, some sports analysts believe Matt could be part of a trade package between the Nats and the Cubs. " 

I'm not sure if this is simply stuff that he is reading or he possibly knows a bit more.  The dad does have some Chicago connections so he would seemingly be pleased to have his son come to the Cubs. 

I am getting way ahead of myself (but the Cubs aren't do anything else so why not toss something out there) but Cronin was a fantastic Lefthanded closer for Arkansas and was dominant in the Sally League for the 22 innings he pitched (41 Ks, 11 Hits allowed and a 0.82 ERA) though he did walk 11 so control wasn't a strength.

Apparently the Bryant ruling is holding up any possible trades so once we get a ruling perhaps there will be some action.  With the quiet off season shall we start salivating about Oscar Colas, the Cuban Ohtani (but better)?  Would signing him make the masses a littler happier about the offseason?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on January 05, 2020, 03:42:50 pm
Apparently the Bryant ruling is holding up any possible trades so once we get a ruling perhaps there will be some action.  With the quiet off season shall we start salivating about Oscar Colas, the Cuban Ohtani (but better)?  Would signing him make the masses a littler happier about the offseason?

I don't know a thing about Oscar Colas, so what follows is merely a hypothetical question.

If the Cubs (or anyone else) signed him to a minor league contract, regardless of the amount, I assume that the money would not be applied to their MLB payroll until he was placed on the 40 man roster, if not the 25 man roster.  Let's say, to pick a number at random, that they signed him to a minor league contract for 5 years for 50 million total, and left him at Iowa for the upcoming year.  Would that count against the salary luxury tax for this year, or not until next year?  Does anyone know exactly how that would work?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 05, 2020, 07:30:26 pm
Colas is subject the IFA caps and the Cubs are tapped out this year and are signing one of the better kids next year. If the Cubs are going to have a chance at signing him they likely need to acquire IFA space in trades.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 05, 2020, 07:44:26 pm
I hear Colas has a lot of pop as a hitter.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on January 05, 2020, 08:29:54 pm
Colas is irrelevant.  Theo Epstein has become MLB's worst executive.

Until he's gone, the Cubs will be a bottom feeder.

We will always be grateful for 2016.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 05, 2020, 08:49:32 pm
Relax.  ESPN predicts that the Cubbies will be back in the mix by 2028!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on January 05, 2020, 08:52:03 pm
ESPN also predicts that Matt Nagy is not a ****.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 06, 2020, 04:36:02 pm
(((Joshua Kusnick)))
@JoshuaKusnick
Have a signing to announce this week. Theres a hint in this photo.  (Photo is him at Wrigley and he's Carlos Asuaje's agent)

With Donaldson likely headed to the Braves and the Nationals seeming to fill up their roster I'm going to laugh if the Cubs can't trade Bryant and can't get below the CBT threshold, but just sit out the off season. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 06, 2020, 04:57:02 pm
(((Joshua Kusnick)))
@JoshuaKusnick
Have a signing to announce this week. Theres a hint in this photo.  (Photo is him at Wrigley and he's Carlos Asuaje's agent)

With Donaldson likely headed to the Braves and the Nationals seeming to fill up their roster I'm going to laugh if the Cubs can't trade Bryant and can't get below the CBT threshold, but just sit out the off season. 

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENkLDTsVAAA58Ki.jpg:small)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 06, 2020, 04:59:16 pm
Are those Japanese characters on the hat above his left eye?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on January 06, 2020, 05:08:10 pm
Shouldn't that photo be at Principal Park in Des Moines if he's really giving us a hint about Asuaje? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 06, 2020, 05:35:01 pm
...I'm going to laugh if the Cubs can't ....get below the CBT threshold....

Just for review:
1.   how far above the CBT threshold are they? 
2.  I assume arb agreements will impact that?
3.  Had they not voluntarily taken on Q's contract, how much under would they be?
4.  Given spendings over the winter, is it still common wisdom that they can easily offload Q's excellent contract whenever they want, yes? 
5.  CBT threshold is dictated by end-of-year spending, not by initial payroll, yes?  So if, for example, they were to trade one of Q, Lester, or Chatwood in July, might that be enough to get them under? 

6.  Is it possible that their is NOT a firm commitment to get under the CBT, but they want to defer that decision for a few months of W-L?  For example, might the following be a possible approach? 
a.  Offseason, stay within reach of threshold.  So, limit cash commitment to the voluntary Q signing.  Stay within reach of threshold.
b.  If it's June 5th and we're in 9th place and not looking very competitive, maybe you shop Q, Lester, Chatwood, and Kimbrel, and get under then. 
c.  But it's June and we're a top-5 wildcard, maybe winning the division, so maybe you play it out into/through July to see how it's doing? 
d.  What if July plays out, and maybe Q, Lester, and Chatwood are all pitching like a 95-win contenders? What if Kimbrel is closing like a 100-win closer?  What if the lineup is all healthy, and Ross has the team hitting and winning and having a blast?  Maybe Schwarber and Happ are both hitting .260+ with .900-OPS, are defending fine, and both look like middle-of-the-order winners?  What if Hoerner is batting .285 with a .760-OPS?  What if at end of July we're ahead of all three of Brewers, Reds, and Cardinals?  Wick, Wieck, Hultzen, and Alzolay are all looking like keepers in the pen?  What if Maples spent the offseason in the pitch lab, and they've touched up his fastball grip so that his spin rate is still great, but now his fastball spin axis and his gyro spin is suddenly new and wonderfully effective?  Maybe *IF* all this Hope-Springs-Eternal fun were to happen, maybe then lux tax will lose it's priority, and they'll just go for it with the guys they've got, lux tax regardless? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 06, 2020, 06:12:32 pm
Trading Quintana alone might get you below the tax and allow you to sign a cheap replacement if you won’t call up anyone off of the 40 man the whole year, make no other additions and don’t let the minor league free agents make the team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 06, 2020, 06:27:26 pm
Are those Japanese characters on the hat above his left eye?

C'mon, that's Ren and Stimpy.

(((Joshua Kusnick)))
@JoshuaKusnick
Have a signing to announce this week. Theres a hint in this photo.  (Photo is him at Wrigley and he's Carlos Asuaje's agent)

With Donaldson likely headed to the Braves and the Nationals seeming to fill up their roster I'm going to laugh if the Cubs can't trade Bryant and can't get below the CBT threshold, but just sit out the off season.

They'll straight-out salary dump Bryant before they let that happen.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 06, 2020, 06:28:53 pm
Sharma says the Cubs did sign Asuaje to a minor league contract. So they've still spent nothing guaranteed on the major league team yet.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 06, 2020, 08:51:33 pm
C'mon, that's Ren and Stimpy.
I've seen those names but that's about all I can say.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2020, 01:08:17 pm
Passan talks about a potential Arenado/Cubs fit:

The Cubs would make sense if they move Bryant. They are not primed for some sort of a rebuild as much as a refresh or reboot -- an always-difficult needle to thread, particularly if they hope to dip under the luxury-tax threshold. One source characterized the Cubs as doing due diligence, as they've done throughout the winter with myriad trade conversations, but the notion of trading catcher Willson Contreras and a higher-priced, underperforming player in an Arenado deal, then flipping Bryant to revitalize a mediocre farm system, squares in the short and long term. The Nationals' best trade piece, middle infielder Carter Kieboom, would be a perfect anchor for a Bryant deal if the Cubs didn't already have Javier Baez at shortstop and rookie Nico Hoerner at second base.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28430628/mlb-superstar-trades-sign-stealing-punishment-more-passan-answers-20-questions-2020
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 07, 2020, 01:16:34 pm
Passan talks about a potential Arenado/Cubs fit:

"but the notion of trading catcher Willson Contreras and a higher-priced, underperforming player in an Arenado deal"

How does this make sense for the Rockies?

Bleacher Nation mention Willson and Heyward, but that really seems light for Arenado, unless the Cubs are sending over minor leaguers.  I guess if the Cubs could trade Willson, Chatwood and send Bryant and Quintana out in another trade they could possibly get below the luxury tax, but the Rockies would essentially have to want to salary dump Arenado.  I can't imagine that would go over well in Colorado.  His opt out in 2 years could also be an issue for the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on January 07, 2020, 01:18:49 pm
How does this make sense for the Rockies?

I don't know, but then again, I'm not sure why the Rockies even bothered to extend Arenado in the first place if they were thinking about dealing him so soon after signing the deal.  I'm not sure if a lot of what they're doing with Arenado makes sense right now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2020, 01:21:52 pm
Yeah, I don't think it makes a ton of sense. But Passan is generally one of the best (if not the best) news/rumors guys, so I think it's worth considering.

The Rockies do have one of the two or three worst/least modern front offices in baseball, so it wouldn't be that surprising for them to do something inexplicable.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 07, 2020, 01:23:12 pm
The Rockies do have one of the two or three worst/least modern front offices in baseball, so it wouldn't be that surprising for them to do something inexplicable.

True but this would be like a bad 80/90's trade and they aren't that stupid.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2020, 01:28:03 pm
Yeah, but the Ian Desmond contract was bad by 80s/90s standards when it was signed. I can't think of a more obviously bad contract at the moment it was signed in recent history. Maybe the Ryan Howard extension years before he was a free agent when he was already declining...but other than that, I can't think of anything close.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on January 07, 2020, 01:50:16 pm
Does anyone think Kieboom could play 3B?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 07, 2020, 02:01:06 pm
It sounds like he has the arm for third.  Fangraphs states in addition to being slow he has issues with his hands on defense, if he hits well enough then it doesn't really matter though.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 07, 2020, 06:20:24 pm
Does anyone think Kieboom could play 3B?

I just assumed that was where he was going to end up if he went to the Cubs.

As for Arenado, I think the truth of it is he probably has little to no surplus value with that contract.  I don't think the Rockies would have to eat anything to dump the contract but that's what they'd be doing - they won't get much meaningful talent back.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 07, 2020, 07:32:18 pm
How much crow will this board have to eat when we fleece Atlanta for Bryant and then get Arenado?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 07, 2020, 07:48:03 pm
It would be one way to save the offseason, but I’m not holding my breath.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 07, 2020, 07:57:41 pm
But...but...fans buy those seats because they want foul balls. Bullshit...

https://wgntv.com/2020/01/07/attorney-toddlers-brain-injury-from-foul-ball-during-cubs-astros-game-is-permanent/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 07, 2020, 11:27:17 pm
Almora went farther downhill after that incident.  Can't believe this won't make it worse.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on January 07, 2020, 11:44:47 pm
How much crow will this board have to eat when we fleece Atlanta for Bryant and then get Arenado?

If it happens, I'd love to see it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on January 08, 2020, 09:25:27 am
Sharma and Mooney have what seems to me to be a fair, balanced perspective on the state of the team at this point of the winter.  Hopefully there will still be changes that will improve the team before spring training gets here.  Fingers crossed, but David Ross looks to have a very challenging season as a rookie manager.


https://theathletic.com/1517562/2020/01/08/is-this-it-where-the-cubs-roster-stands-in-the-middle-of-another-slow-winter/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 08, 2020, 11:16:12 am
Cubs as currently constructed have the best projected WAR so far.  Doing nothing seems to be the best idea, unless the Rockies are really looking to salary dump Arenado.  Doing nothing to improve the team falls directly on the Ricketts and if the go below the cap the Ricketts should be doubly blamed.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 08, 2020, 01:05:41 pm
Cubs as currently constructed have the best projected WAR so far. ....

"best projected" relative to what?  Within the division, are you saying, that as things stand we still project to win the division?

Seems to me the prevailing desperate hopelessness of the board regarding the untouched roster may prove to be exaggerated.   The Cubs as currently constructed may yet possibly challenge for the division or for a wildcard spot. 

I also think the Ricketts bashing is perhaps justified, but also perhaps somewhat imbalanced?  All the criticism goes towards Ricketts, but Cubs had top payroll in the league last year, despite their quiet winter 2018?  And they're still north of the luxury tax at present. 

Seems to me that perhaps the fault-finding is exaggerated.  Or if it's **mandatory** to fault-find, then perhaps the heavier weight of that should perhaps be geared more towards Theo and his staff and less towards Ricketts?  They've had massive budgets the last couple of years, and still have a payroll which is probably more above-average than is the actual team likely to be.  If anything, it's seemed like Theo has underperformed relative to his budget resources for the last couple of years.   Theo's been entrusted with a lot of discretionary resources, but his procurement productivity has been recently low, both in recent free agency (Kimbrel, Heyward, Morrow, Chatwood,...) in draft-and-development, and perhaps also in recency trade-impact.  (Obviously his 2016-2017 trades were entirely short-term Nowacrat deals, and there is no lasting on-field value from the Chapman, Davis, Wilson, or Quintana deals, beyond the valued memories....)   

It's easy to regret some of those in retrospect.  But Theo went all-in for the moment, and that moment is past.  He did a lot of high-risk Nowacrat gambling, and Heyward and Chatwood and Morrow and Kimbrel and Quintana didn't pay off, that's the way it goes.  Not sure any of those gambles were inappropriate, so not sure faulting is appropriate.  Teams that win big tend to hit on some gambles; Theo did with David Ortiz, and with the Cubs with both Arrieta and also Rondon, for example.  You win some, you lose some, that's the way it goes.  Maybe we're due to win a couple, and we'll have a couple of guys who perform at an unpredictably high level this year, and perhaps beyond? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on January 08, 2020, 01:17:32 pm
I have no idea how seriously to take these new(?) Statcast defensive ratings, so I look forward to other more knowledgeable folks here to provide their own comments.  There seem to be some surprising results.

https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/infield-defense?year=2019&team=&range=year&min=q&pos=&roles=

Among infielders, Javier Baez is rated the best defensive infielder, as measured by Outs Above Average. Arenado is second. Lindor is #11. Starlin Castro is #14 (as 2B)

Among 3B (after Arenado):
Matt Chapman #6
Josh Donaldson #18
Rafael Devers #19
David Fletcher #24
Yoan Moncada #31
Justin Turner #36
Brandon Drury #42
Daniel Robertson #46
Evan Longoria #47
Tommy Edman #48
Jeimer Candelario #49
Alex Bregman #50
David Bote #51
Kyle Seager #53
Anthony Rendon #56
Kris Bryant #65
Brian Anderson #66
Eugenio Suarez #69
Scott Kingery #72
Gio Urshela #75
Jose Ramirez #76
Mike Moustakas #79
Hunter Dozier #84
Todd Frazier #90
Manny Machado #96
Dawel Lugo #97
etc.

I was surprised to see Bryant so far down in the list, including behind Bote.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 08, 2020, 01:25:45 pm
Bryant's fielding at 3rd hasn't gotten good reviews by scouting or advance fielding metrics for 2 years.  Maybe it is injuries or decline, but it fits.  Errors seem to be a big factor as well, which is why Tatis is so far down.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on January 08, 2020, 01:30:33 pm
Startling to me, Rizzo is rated a lowly #35 out of 40 1B using this metric.  I have a lot of trouble believing that.  Doesn't smell right.

https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/infield-defense?year=2019&team=&range=year&min=q&pos=3&roles=&viz=show
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on January 08, 2020, 01:38:32 pm
Here is Mike Petriello's comments on the Statcast Outs Above Average Leader Board.

https://twitter.com/mike_petriello/status/1214947971583873030

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 08, 2020, 02:24:49 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENxo1nFWoAEwY3U.jpg:small)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 08, 2020, 03:27:47 pm
Yeah, but he's no Addision Russell defensively.  So we've been repeatedly assured.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 08, 2020, 03:47:18 pm
If no one offers Addison much I'd rather have him back than Asuaje.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 08, 2020, 04:53:44 pm
Yeah, but he's no Addision Russell defensively.  So we've been repeatedly assured.
2017-2019 Russell 32, Baez 25 and Russell regressed a lot on defense.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 08, 2020, 05:00:21 pm
Startling to me, Rizzo is rated a lowly #35 out of 40 1B using this metric.  I have a lot of trouble believing that.  Doesn't smell right.

https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/infield-defense?year=2019&team=&range=year&min=q&pos=3&roles=&viz=show

The bunt plays aren't tracked it appears and it is only balls in play so it isn't close to the total value what a 1B does.  In 2018 he was 9th and 2017 he was 8th.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 08, 2020, 05:03:50 pm
I also read on one of the follow-up tweets that scooping the ball out of the dirt isn't counted either, which is something else Rizzo does very well. So I think right now, this stat isn't a great measure for first basemen.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 08, 2020, 05:16:15 pm
Rizzo is sometimes a 2B on bunt plays.  That's why he has to switch gloves.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 08, 2020, 05:18:40 pm
2017-2019 Russell 32, Baez 25 and Russell regressed a lot on defense.

Through 2018, Baez played more 2B than SS. Indeed, he also played a lot at 3B—-about 40% as much as at SS.

Russell was the better SS then. Obviously, Cubs thought so too. We can see who played where.

Fielding Bible just selected Baez as the top multi-position player of the last decade. That is well deserved. He was excellent everywhere he played.

Russell has fallen off in every aspect. Everybody knows that.  But, doesn’t change how outstanding and superb defensively Russell was as Cubs SS. Baez is a worthy successor at the position.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 08, 2020, 05:22:29 pm
Vogelbach and Thames ahead of Rizzo. Don’t think so.

But, overall, the top guys at most positions are where they should be, so useful.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 08, 2020, 06:59:00 pm
It’s just tracking how guys field balls that are hit at them. Rizzo fields less than 200 tracked balls in the 3 years they have Statcast data so the error bars are going to be kinda high for 1B.

For 2B/SS/3B it is going to be a better measure but it won’t take into account turning double plays, tags so it isn’t perfect either. What it does though it good at. Taking balls hit at guys and turning them into outs. It’ll get better as time goes on and more data is available to compare guys against.

Edit:
I took the time to dig into a little more and it is really cool.
1) Shifted plays don’t matter because they have precise positioning
2) Hit probability is factored in
3) Speed of the runner on average

It isn’t perfect, but for what it measure it is much better than UZR or DRS.

http://tangotiger.com/images/uploads/History_of_the_Fielding.pdf
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 08, 2020, 11:23:46 pm
Got my info for buying season tickets this year.  Odd that they don't offer a discount this year seeing as they're only shooting for third.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 09, 2020, 09:28:20 am
New Rosenthal column that seems to be mostly speculation suggests that the Dodgers might be the best fit for a Bryant trade:

https://theathletic.com/1521198/2020/01/09/rosenthal-with-four-superstars-on-the-trade-market-the-hot-stove-is-still-sizzling-and-more-notes/

Bryant, with his ability to play third, first and both corner-outfield positions, seems ideal for the Dodgers, who relish such versatility. His right-handed bat also would fit the team’s predominantly left-handed lineup. The Cubs’ ask, though, would not be inconsequential. Nor would the finances, with Bryant projecting to make at least $40 million over the next two years.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on January 09, 2020, 09:30:20 am
Is Chris Bryant still on the team?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 09, 2020, 09:45:46 am
Chris Bryant was never on this team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 09, 2020, 10:30:21 am
If the Cubs trade Bryant to the Dodgers they should just do a full rebuild.  "Trying" to win the Central and possibly get into the playoffs to get destroyed by Dodgers wouldn't be fun.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on January 09, 2020, 10:49:27 am
I don’t necessarily subscribe to being concerned about non-division teams. Once the baseball playoffs start anyone (that makes the playoffs) can win a series. A lesser team won’t make the playoffs over a 162 game season, but anything can happen in a playoff series as multiple Wild Card teams have made or won the World Series over the years.

Make the playoffs and hope to get hot.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 09, 2020, 11:22:32 am
Agree.  A variably lesser team can win a series.  The Nats were very, very good.  Not necessarily **better** than the Dodgers, Braves, Cardinals, Astros, Yankees...  But they were legit good. 

I don't think it's just random.  A playoff team with Kevin Tapani and Jeff Blauser didn't really have the same chances as the top teams.  If the Cubs had snuck into the wildcard spot, and then tried to throw Lester and Quintana and Heyward and Almora up against the other playoff teams, not a random shot.  You've got to win three series. 

I think that "wildcard teams can win" is a little misleading.  Sometimes wildcard teams aren't that good, but often they are. Injuries or slumps or underperforming for a while (the Nationals early...) can put a really good team's full-season record as wildcard, without meaning the team isn't really good. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 09, 2020, 12:52:29 pm
For reference the Nationals had
Rendon 7 fWAR, Soto 4.8 fWAR, Turner 3.5 fWAR (122g), Kendrick 2.9 fWAR, Robles 2.5 fWAR
Scherzer 6.5 fWAR, Strasberg 5.7 fWAR, Corbin 4.8 fWAR, Sanchez 2.5 fWAR

Without Bryant the Cubs had
Baez 4.4, Rizzo 4, Contreras 2.7, Schwarber 2.6
Hendricks 4.1, Quintana 3.5, Lester 2.8, Darvish 2.6

The Cubs don't have the talent to compete against top tier teams without Bryant and even with him it is stretch.  That is what makes this off season so frustrating.  The Cubs are close and even a few cheap additions and some luck would make this team competitive with any team.  Instead they've done nothing.  Nothing is better than getting rid of Bryant, but it is still a bad outcome.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 09, 2020, 01:04:46 pm
Bleacher Nation   @BleacherNation  28m28 minutes ago
#CubsCon press release includes no mention of a Ricketts Family panel, which had been a mainstay at the Convention until last year. If they do not have that panel again this year, that would be very disappointing.

Even Koyie Hill and Mike Fontenot will be there
https://www.mlb.com/cubs/fans/cubs-convention/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 09, 2020, 05:37:16 pm
If the Cubs trade Bryant to the Dodgers they should just do a full rebuild.  "Trying" to win the Central and possibly get into the playoffs to get destroyed by Dodgers wouldn't be fun.

Get the best deal you can, I don't care who it's with.  We aren't beating the Dodgers in 2020 whether we trade them Bryant or not.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 09, 2020, 06:35:37 pm
Then trade everybody. I have zero interest in shooting to be a .500 team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 09, 2020, 06:40:31 pm
You can pout about it, but I don't see how it helps.  If we're going to trade Bryant anyway it makes more sense to do it now than wait till the deadline or next winter.  And it makes more sense to trade him for the best package of players you can get back, irrespective of whether it's the Dodgers or not.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 09, 2020, 06:56:45 pm
I refuse to accept the idiotic notion that trading Bryant helps the Cubs in any way. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 09, 2020, 06:58:39 pm
I refuse to accept the idiotic notion that trading Bryant helps the Cubs in any way. 

Well, it helps Cubs ownership take home more profits...so I guess that's one way it's "helping."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 09, 2020, 07:24:51 pm
Well, it helps Cubs ownership take home more profits...so I guess that's one way it's "helping."

Hey it is just down Cubs and Rockies as teams unwilling to spend money this offseason.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on January 09, 2020, 08:52:25 pm
In two years, perhaps only one year, Bryant is gone.  It would be foolish to let him go without a return, especially since others of their core have the same team life expectancy.  I I were doing the trading, I would go for all prospects, but I expect that the Cubs, if they get a good enough offer, will want some immediate return, as well as potential future help.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on January 09, 2020, 08:55:35 pm
Like Dave says, trading Bryant is not necessarily the wrong thing to do.

The problem is that the decision lies with a leadership team that has been proven to be largely incompetent.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 09, 2020, 08:56:44 pm
Was it foolish for the Nationals to let Rendon walk for nothing or should they have traded him and Harper 2 years ago?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on January 09, 2020, 09:17:18 pm
Was it foolish for the Nationals to let Rendon walk for nothing or should they have traded him and Harper 2 years ago?

Apples and oranges.  The Nationals were legitimate contenders.  The Cubs are a bottom feeder.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on January 10, 2020, 06:36:11 am
Is Chris Bryant still on the team?

Is Kris Bryant still on the team?

Have the Cubs done anything this off-season of note?

Is March madness here yet?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 10, 2020, 07:15:56 am
No, Yes, No, No
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 10, 2020, 09:04:52 am
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  1h1 hour ago
11 a.m. CT today is the deadline for arb-eligible players to exchange proposed salary figures with their teams. The Cubs typically have used this as an artificial deadline for signing to avoid arb. Here's a look at the Cubs' situation with this arb class:

https://www.mlb.com/cubs/news/cubs-2020-arbitration-preview
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 10, 2020, 09:54:39 am
Carrie Muskat  @CarrieMuskat
#Cubs pitchers/catchers will have 1st spring workout Feb. 12 in Mesa. 1st full squad workout under new manager David Ross scheduled for Feb. 17. Sunshine and baseball.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on January 10, 2020, 11:26:16 am
Thanks CUBluejays.  I will continue to check in regularly.

:)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 10, 2020, 11:34:11 am
Bryant agrees to a 1 year, $18.6 million contract.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 10, 2020, 12:04:26 pm
Almora gets $1.575 million.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on January 10, 2020, 12:24:15 pm
Was it foolish for the Nationals to let Rendon walk for nothing or should they have traded him and Harper 2 years ago?

Can't answer that without knowing what they believed their chances were of resigning them and what they could have gotten for them. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 10, 2020, 12:31:33 pm
Can't answer that without knowing what they believed their chances were of resigning them and what they could have gotten for them. 

Rendon had declined all previous contract extensions and was a Boras client.  The Nationals lost to the Cubs as a wild card (2 years of Rendon) and missed the playoffs (1 year of Rendon).   The return for 2 years of Rendon would be similar to Bryant. 

Big kicker is trading Rendon at either point likely means no WS win in 2019.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 10, 2020, 01:57:52 pm
Kyle Ryan gets $975K.

Still waiting to hear what is going to happen with Baez, Contreras, and Schwarber.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 10, 2020, 02:07:11 pm
You can make a decent argument that Cubs right now are sitting in similar situation to pre-2019 Nats who, of course, went on to win WS in 2019.

Nats went from 97 wins the year before to 82 wins in 2018 and missed the playoffs. Nats then lost Harper to FA. I can tell you that lots of Nats fans were moaning and groaning going into 2019. Bullpen looked bad on paper and was even worse than that when season started. True, Nats made major FA signing bringing in Corbin and improved catching and bench. But, Nats had a good core from previous seasons. Don’t recall any talk about trading Rendon even with one season of control to go. Obviously, Nats don’t win WS in 2019 without Rendon.

Strongly dislike notion of trading Bryant for whatever his actual value is and think Cubs are legit 2020 contender, even with the no-activity off-season so far, disappointing as it is.  Think the general tone of the Board as Cubs with little or no chance for 2020 is off the mark. It’s a good club that can win. Don’t want to see anything by front office going forward that weakens the 2020 club.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 10, 2020, 02:30:54 pm
As currently constructed they probably are contenders for the Central.

The bullpen is an issue though.

Im not certain that they wont do anything and Im not certain they wont trade Bryant though either so who knows?

Theo still has another month before ST and 2 months or so till opening day.

I dont know and no one here does either.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 10, 2020, 02:53:27 pm
This is an ignorant question, but with Bryant contract in, and obviously still pending Willson and Baez and stuff, who far do we project to be OVER the lux tax? 

I'd made a post earlier this week that I don't think got a response.  But are we close enough to the lux line that they may be considering both contending, AND considering cutting to get under lux?  And will let 2-4 month of season play out to make that determination? 

For example:  It's summer, and the team is actually looking really good.  Go for it, lux regardless, and stay over or add salaries then?   Versus the team is really struggling; might it be possible to trade off some salary then and still sneak under the lux line? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 10, 2020, 03:04:15 pm
The possibility of sneaking under the lux line with July trades hinges on details, I'm sure.  1st, how much salary do we need to move?  And 2nd, do we have salaried guys performing at an attractive level?  If Q looks really locked in and has a 3.8 ERA, for sure you can trade him.  And if Lester is savvying along at a 4.1 ERA, maybe some team will be interested, like when the Cubs traded for Dan Haren.  Or maybe Kimbrel is pitching quite well, and some contender with a closer disaster will be desperate, like Theo was last summer? 

I guess I'm just curious whether we're barely enough over the line such that even a single July 31 trade of anybody with a $10 salary (whether that be Q, Lester, Kimbrel, or Chatwood), whether that would be enough to get the Cubs under?  Or whether moving Q or Chatwood that late wouldn't be enough, and you'd either need to move two guys, or else have moved Q or Chatwood in June already?  Or did the Q signing put us so far over that we've got no shot mid-season?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 10, 2020, 03:07:56 pm
Baez gets $10 million.
Schwarber gets $7.01 million.
Contreras gets $4.5 million.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 10, 2020, 03:27:00 pm
This is an ignorant question, but with Bryant contract in, and obviously still pending Willson and Baez and stuff, who far do we project to be OVER the lux tax? 

I'd made a post earlier this week that I don't think got a response.  But are we close enough to the lux line that they may be considering both contending, AND considering cutting to get under lux?  And will let 2-4 month of season play out to make that determination? 

For example:  It's summer, and the team is actually looking really good.  Go for it, lux regardless, and stay over or add salaries then?   Versus the team is really struggling; might it be possible to trade off some salary then and still sneak under the lux line?

Roster Resource has Cubs at $213.8 luxury tax payroll (including new payroll adjustments for today’s settlements).

First CBT tier is $208 for 2020.

So, Cubs estimated to be $5.8 over right now.

Actual out of pocket payroll is $194.3, according to Roster Resource.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 10, 2020, 03:30:44 pm
How does Lester's buyout count for luxury tax purposes? Does it count against this year or 2021? Do buyouts even count towards the luxury tax?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 10, 2020, 03:31:34 pm
You need to factor in guys getting called up too.  If they just trade Quintana and don't replace him they could be under by enough of margin.  If they go in over of the CBT by just a little bit, this offseason was a failure of epic proportions.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on January 10, 2020, 03:45:20 pm
So how do these arb reports today compare to Jeff's projections on his roster payroll spreadsheet?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on January 10, 2020, 03:57:58 pm
How does Lester's buyout count for luxury tax purposes? Does it count against this year or 2021? Do buyouts even count towards the luxury tax?

br, a buyout is part of the guaranteed value of the contract.  It's in the $155.  Lester's luxury tax hit is $155/6.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on January 10, 2020, 04:00:31 pm
So how do these arb reports today compare to Jeff's projections on his roster payroll spreadsheet?

We save $540,000.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 10, 2020, 04:10:17 pm
JeffH, we need an update from you! 

Al Yellon:  https://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2019/12/9/21000232/cubs-2020-payroll-luxury-tax-estimate
Spotrac:  https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/chicago-cubs/contracts/ (with today's numbers already entered!  They are fast)

The lux line for 2020 is $208. 

Yellon calculation came out to around $211 in lux. 
Spotrac also comes to around $211, with the new salaries already entered. 

But *IF* Yellon and spotrac estimates are good, and **IF** the Cubs are only $3M over, then even a single July31 trade of anybody with a ≥$10M salary could still get them under. 

And who knows, perhaps the Cubs benefits or something are actually less than is being calculated, and they're actually already under?  Perhaps they'd calculated it all out down to the penny, prior to taking on Q's salary...., and knew he wouldn't actually put them over?  Looking at Spotrac, they seem to be just putting in ~$17 on everybody. 

But yeah, *IF* these numbers are decent, then dumping any single individual from the Q-and-higher contract collection, even waiting till July 31, would be sufficient to slide under the line. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 10, 2020, 04:50:06 pm
Roster Resource has Cubs at $213.8 luxury tax payroll (including new payroll adjustments for today’s settlements)....
So, Cubs estimated to be $5.8 over right now.      Actual out of pocket payroll is $194.3, according to Roster Resource.

Thanks, reb.  So, Roster Resources is $3 higher than spotrac.  I'm guessing RR may be more detailed? Spotrac has $193.7 between "payroll" + "retained", with $17.5 extra.  RR has $19.5 extra.   

RR is enough higher that **IF** RR is more correct, now you'd need to move Q  by the start of June to get under; spotrac's numbers would allow you to wait till the end of July and still get under with a single trade.  (Of Q or any of the other six $10M+ pitchers).  HOpefully RR is overestimating slightly, and the Cubs really will have through July to still get under.   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 10, 2020, 07:28:02 pm
You also have to factor in DL time. When some gets called up they make the major league minimum or what their contract salary is if they have a split contract. So you need to be well under the luxury tax number. 

The major money loss with luxury tax is from lost revenue sharing. If the Cubs are going to get below they should do it now. Going in over the tax puts them Is a sucky place to be. If the Cubs are competing in the central then they should trade off pieces, but then the Cubs have screwed themselves. They could have made the team better because they penalty for being $208 over isn’t much more than $220. Are they going to punt a third off season to try and get under in 2021? 

If Lester’s option is declined the Cubs CBT doesn’t change. If they pick it up they will get $1.67 million credit to their CBT from 2015-2020.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 10, 2020, 08:27:28 pm
There's no way the Cubs aren't going to get under the cap at this point.  They'll give guys away if they have to.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 10, 2020, 08:30:36 pm
You also have to factor in DL time. When some gets called up they make the major league minimum or what their contract salary is if they have a split contract. So you need to be well under the luxury tax number. 


Roster Resource payroll calculation includes the equivalent of four full-season service time 40-man call-ups from minors on the 40-man. Think that, in most seasons, that probably covers your DL time call-ups. $2.25 M.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 10, 2020, 08:32:22 pm
Split contracts don't count against the luxury tax unless they end up on the major league roster, right? So there's likely a few million between Morrow, Winkler, and Tepera that will end up on the opening day payroll.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 10, 2020, 08:35:21 pm
There's no way the Cubs aren't going to get under the cap at this point.  They'll give guys away if they have to.

Who do you think they would be willing to give away OR could give away to a taker?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 10, 2020, 08:46:55 pm
Quintana for starters.  Bryant relatively speaking - they won't literally give him away, but they'll take less if that's the only way they get under the cap.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 10, 2020, 09:00:28 pm
Got some "experts" around these parts I see.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on January 10, 2020, 09:01:18 pm
MLB's worst front office.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 10, 2020, 09:20:29 pm
Quintana for starters.  Bryant relatively speaking - they won't literally give him away, but they'll take less if that's the only way they get under the cap.

Not sure why Cubs would tender Quintana and then plan to give him away? If didn’t want him, all Cubs had to do was not offer him a contract in the first place.

Of course, things could change—with every player—as the season develops but seems like Quintana is part of the 2020 plan for now.

As to Bryant, reports are that Cubs asking for an exorbitant price for him—-which seems inconsistent with just trying to move him. In any case, hard to know what kind of return would even be 100 cents on the dollar. If he’s traded, guessing we’ll be discussing whether was a good “baseball trade” or more of a dump.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 10, 2020, 09:32:33 pm
Why non-tender Quintana if there's no problem giving him away later?  I'm sure they wanted to keep their options open, with the caveat that getting under the LT was the priority.  They probably thought the Bryant grievance would be settled by now, and/or that they'd find teams lining up to pay their asking price for him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 10, 2020, 10:05:56 pm
Meant to say exercised Quintana option (rather than tender him contract).

Yes, conceivable that Cubs felt the option salary was low enough that likely could find a taker later. But, more likely that club felt rotation was too thin without Q to decline the option.

If can get a MLB-ready young SP in a trade, then chances of dumping Q go up.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 10, 2020, 11:00:16 pm
reb, I think my hypothetical works, too, in terms of trying to explain the curious decision to choose Q's salary.  cubs want to win, and think Q gives them the possibility.  But if they don't win, then perhaps they figure they can still move him and get under in the summer. 

Will be interesting to see how it plays out. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 10, 2020, 11:25:42 pm
If they want to win making zero additions to the team makes no sense. They lost 3 relievers, 1 starter on the pitching staff. On offense you don’t have a bench or for sure starter at second or CF.  Just signing so relievers and bench guys could be a huge help to this team and it wouldn’t cost much. They haven’t even done that. The Red Sox want to get below the luxury tax too and they’ve actually spent some money so far. They are sitting at $18 million over by Cots.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 10, 2020, 11:45:07 pm
Think that Craig’s point is that, yes, Cubs want to win (and think they CAN win with current roster) but want to retain flexibility to get under the luxury threshold if things don’t pan out during the season. A balance of interests, with a fallback option.

I suppose it follows that if things go well during the season, they can add during the season—-just as they did in 2019: Descalso-only in off-season and major additions later.

If already over threshold anyway after off-season concludes and team playing well later, why not? (so long as not in third CBT category).

Don’t like notion of trading Bryant but, hypothetically, what if Cubs really did get a big “exorbitant” haul for him, as they are currently demanding?  Then it gets complicated.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on January 10, 2020, 11:46:58 pm
Am I the only one here who is much more concerned about the rotation than the bullpen?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 11, 2020, 02:45:25 am
Am I the only one here who is much more concerned about the rotation than the bullpen?

It's an embarrassment of riches, really.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 11, 2020, 02:53:24 am
Relax.  We'll be sending Bryant to the  Cardinals  and fleecing them out of Wainwright.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 11, 2020, 08:38:49 am
Am I the only one here who is much more concerned about the rotation than the bullpen?

Agree.  There's a chance that this will be a pretty good rotation and support a good run at 90 wins.  But any of Lester, Q, and Chatwood might be variably far below average, perhaps much so in several or all three of their cases.  And while Darvish and Hendricks should be pretty good and variably above average, they aren't exactly Cole/Verlander or Scherzer/Strassburg as a 1/2 punch. 

The 5 starters collect $84M in lux-tax, $17M average. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 11, 2020, 08:46:28 am
It might turn out well.  Perhaps Q was just a fluke and a tweak and a pitch-lab adjustment away, and he'll be modestly above average?  Maybe Lester is a tweak and some BABIP-luck away, and he'll be only modestly below average, perhaps as good or better than the #5 for most contenders?  Chatwood has an excellent arm, perhaps he's poised to lock in his control, and have the arm/stuff to allow him to be an asset starter rather than a liability?  Maybe Darvish is ready to put it all together, and somehow limit the HR's, and with some offensive support and a good start he'll emerge as a real #1 ace?  And Hendricks will be Hendricks? 

The Cubs offense finished 5th in the league in runs, not compelling but 5 teams make playoffs.  **IF** they can sustain or improve on that, the run-scoring can give them a chance to reach the playoffs.  **IF** the rotation can play up a little bit, and each guy work out relatively well, the rotation could have a chance to support a top-5 team too. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on January 11, 2020, 10:18:44 am
Am I the only one here who is much more concerned about the rotation than the bullpen?

No.  The bull pen should be in fair shape if Kimbrel performs up to his previous standards, and I see no reason why that would be unlikely, with a full spring training to get into shape.  And I expect them to sign at least one more decent middle reliever before spring training.  The rotation, however, I believe is going to struggle unless they can bring in a decent starter in return for Bryant.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 11, 2020, 02:31:05 pm
Well this would change the offseason. The last time Levine had his finger on the pulse of anything Cubs-related was during the Lynch regime, though.

Bleacher Nation @BleacherNation
What in the what ... @MLBBruceLevine just dropped an insane rumor on @670TheScore: the Cubs are considering trying to trade for Nolan Arenado AND KEEP Kris Bryant as the everyday center fielder.

My god ...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on January 11, 2020, 03:06:03 pm
For me, the best possible scenario involving Kris Bryant would be to somehow sign him to an extension. But sadly, seems extremely unlikely that Bryant has any interest in doing that.

I don't believe the Levine rumor for a minute, given all that has been said about the Cubs' budget.  It would be humorous if that stuff was simply a smokescreen and the Cubs are actually not committed to getting under the cap - but that is surely someone's fantasy and nothing more.

On the other hand the idea of using Bryant in CF is intriguing.  It seems likely he would be a better OF, at least at the corners, given his speed and athleticism than a 3B.


Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 11, 2020, 03:19:58 pm
BN has a piece up about the Levine thing.

As BN notes, Levine is not the first “report” about Cubs and Arenado.

And, noted that a deal like that would have to include Heyward and either Chatwood or Q. Heyward plus one of the pitchers actually have a higher luxury tax hit than Arenado.

Let’s say Contreras, Heyward, and Chatwood for Arenado??

If you keep Bryant, he would play RF, not CF. Adding Castellanos for RF would put you back over the tax threshold.

Obviously, very complicated and there are no-trade clauses too.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: jacey1 on January 13, 2020, 12:25:55 pm
No way in HECK does COL trade Nolan for Chatwood/Qunitana, Heyward, Contreras
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 13, 2020, 12:49:49 pm
It was apparently two different rumors that got confused into 1.

Rumor #1) Bryant moves to CF, Bote plays 3B
Rumor #2) Cubs acquire Arenando.

Levine said it back to back and whoever posted it for Bleacher Nation thought it was just 1 rumor.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 13, 2020, 12:59:08 pm
No way in HECK does COL trade Nolan for Chatwood/Qunitana, Heyward, Contreras

Yeah...if they're taking on Heyward, they're going to get a lot more value in the package the Cubs send back. But if they don't take Heyward, the money just doesn't work out on the Cubs end. It would take Contreras plus at least a couple of pretty good prospects to get Arenado while dumping Heyward.

Since this would mean a definite rebuild in Colorado, I wouldn't be surprised if they insisted on Caratini or Amaya instead of Contreras to get the extra service time.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 13, 2020, 01:51:25 pm
Susan Slusser @susanslusser
Tony Kemp has been traded to the A’s, source says.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on January 13, 2020, 02:00:53 pm
No word on return?  I wonder if it is IFA money?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 13, 2020, 02:02:36 pm
He wasnt worth anything anyway.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 13, 2020, 02:22:43 pm
Could be bigger than just Kemp:

Susan Slusser @susanslusser
It’s a multiplayer deal that brings Tony Kemp to Oakland, I’m told.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 13, 2020, 02:23:57 pm
Here's the full deal:

Jordan Bastian @MLBastian
Cubs announce that they have acquired INF Alfonso Rivas from the A's for UTIL Tony Kemp. Rivas is not on the 40. Currently at 38. He's ranked as Oakland's 26th-best prospect per MLB Pipeline.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 13, 2020, 02:26:26 pm
Write up from Fangraphs from last year
24. Alfonso Rivas, 1BVideo
Drafted: 4th Round, 2018 from Arizona (OAK)
Age   22.5   Height   5′ 11″   Weight   180   Bat / Thr   L / L   FV   35+
At 6-foot-1, 180, Rivas would look out of place in a team photo of big league first basemen, full of big-bodied mashers and explosive rotational athletes. He lacks prototypical first base pop but there’s a non-zero chance he makes enough contact to balance the offensive scales sufficiently to profile as a platoon 1B/LF or low-end regular. His 2018 post-draft showing in the NYPL was impressive from a bat-to-ball standpoint and he took great at-bats and made hard contact during instructional league, though that was all against pitching comparable to what he saw in college. He’s a sleeper bat we like but it’s a tough profile, one he’ll have to hit his way to.

2019 Stats
A+ .283/.383/.408 wOBA .361 ISO .125 wRC+ 123  13% BB%, 22.2K% 509 PA
AAA .406/.441/.635 wOBA .448, wRC+ 161 5.9% BB%, 20.6% K%, ISO .219 34 PA
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 13, 2020, 02:26:32 pm
Rivas looks like a pretty good get for a guy that is a 26th man at best.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=rivas-001alf
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 13, 2020, 02:33:32 pm
He might be a nice lefty bat off the bench so day.  The lack of power is going to be a limiting factor for him.  So I guess this means Perez or Asicanthitworthadamn is making the team.

Edit: The new scouting director was with the A's when he was drafted and BA mentioned something about there possibly being more power in his swing, maybe he is a Justin Stone/new hitting structure pickup. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on January 13, 2020, 02:39:11 pm
Rivas looks like a pretty good get for a guy that is a 26th man at best.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=rivas-001alf

I was just about to say that.  2018 4th round pick who hasn't been overmatched in the minors so far?  That is a nice get for Tony Kemp.


Power is often the last thing to develop for a hitter.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on January 13, 2020, 11:00:27 pm
No word on return?  I wonder if it is IFA money?

A box of leftover orange baseballs from the Charlie Finley era.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 14, 2020, 07:48:32 am
Rivas looks like a pretty good get for a guy that is a 26th man at best.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=rivas-001alf

Bleacher Nation’s prospect guy looked at his spray chart and he was much better hitting the ball to LF and CF vs pulling the ball to RF. If the Cubs can unlock his pull power he might get really interesting. Right now though a guy with plus defense at first and ok corner OF defense that hits left handed is a pretty good 4th or 5th OF candidate even if he doesn’t improve.

Eno Saris did a piece looking at OOA. In the piece he got into UZR vs OOA. UZR basically throws out shifted plays and positioning. He theorized that teams with a better UZR than OOA where excellent at defensive positioning and teams that where had a better OOA than UZR where poor at positioning. He explains it better in the article, but it makes sense to me. The Padres, led by Andy Green, where the most positive team in MLB last year. The Cubs where among the the teams with a negative score. Maybe Green can help with that and more attention will be paid to the analytic guys charts.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on January 14, 2020, 09:45:11 am
I have no idea if my perception is correct, but it seems to me that the Cubs did a lot more shifting in 2015 and 2016, and then seemed to cut it down substantially since then.  I got the feeling that Maddon was required to do the shift early on, and after the success of winning the World Series, he cut back quite a bit.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 14, 2020, 10:38:43 am
Yeah, that was my impression too.  That Sveum was supposed to be a cutting-edge leader in defensive positioning and shifting when he came over, and early Maddon too.  But this last year or two the Cubs were statistically one of the most shiftless teams in baseball. 

I wonder if we actually shift less than earlier?  Or if it's more a case of relativity?  In 2012 or 2015, maybe even a little shifting seemed novel and progressive, cutting edge, and also stuck in our memory?  But now when everybody else shifts a ton, they've moved past us?  So maybe we shifted no less in 18-19 than in 15-16, but since that's now routine we didn't notice as much; and since everybody else does it even more, we looked comparatively shiftless? 

To some degree, I kinda wonder whether that movement of the progressive/cutting-edge might be somewhat symptomatic of Theo and the organization, perhaps Maddon too?  Perhaps what Theo and his guys were doing in 2004 was progressive and on the cutting edge of analytics and smarts.  And perhaps Maddon too was on the progressive cutting edge in use and application of analytics and creativity in 2006...  But the frame of reference in the 2004-2006 era was totally different.  I wonder if to some degree Maddon and Theo got a little stuck in what had worked so relatively well in the 2000's, while the rest of baseball was rapidly moving past them?  Progressive/cutting-edge 2004 is NOT progressive/cutting-edge 2020....   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 14, 2020, 10:47:28 am
Most teams use their analytic departments to print out defensive positioning.  Butterfield was supposed to be in charge of it for the Cubs and at least with the Red Sox he did it by viewing video himself.  When you have peak Russell defensively and Baez up the middle shifting is a lot less important.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 14, 2020, 10:55:57 am
I still think a more fundamental conceptual question is how much players can develop and improve.  Maddon had an emphasis on relaxing, letting your natural talents take over.  Batting practice is overrated.  Iupati also emphasized natural talent, it seemed much of his message this spring was to let your natural talents play out, for Almora/Schwarber/Bryant/Baez/Russell/Heyward/Happ, you were 1st-round picks, and highly-regarded prospects, let your natural talent flow.   

I think there is tons of truth to the notion that overthinking and overanalyzing can probably be paralyzing to a hitter.  But I do wonder how much balance there should be between "relax, be yourself, let your natural talent flow, don't practice too much" versus some kind of intentional practice that can lead to developmental improvement?  No idea whether perhaps a more proactive and perhaps practice-intensive development process might not help some of the hitters? 

I imagine some of the issues are different for pitchers.  Certainly a pitcher needs to be able to relax and let it rip, and again overthinking and overanalyzing can probably paralyze, that's part of the Blass disease I assume.  But in other ways batters are so responsive, and have no control over what pitches they'll see...  A pitcher has complete control over everything about his delivery, and can practice as many pitches as he wants, arm permitting.  The outside corner is no different in high school than in Wrigley.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on January 14, 2020, 12:24:25 pm
But this last year or two the Cubs were statistically one of the most shiftless teams in baseball.

Craig is awesome even when he doesn't intend to be.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on January 14, 2020, 12:30:58 pm
The outside corner is no different in high school than in Wrigley.

LOL!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 14, 2020, 08:19:14 pm
Cubs continue to shop in the "never heard of him" part of the market:

Robert Murray @ByRobertMurray
Source: #Cubs in agreement with free-agent reliever Jason Adam. 2.91 ERA in 21.2 innings pitched with Blue Jays last season. Physical is complete.


The Blue Jays had the 21st best bullpen in MLB last year by ERA and fWAR. Two of the four "biggest" moves by the Cubs have been to sign Tepera and Adam, who the Blue Jays could've held on to for cheap.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on January 14, 2020, 08:23:05 pm
What do you expect from MLB's worst front office?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on January 14, 2020, 09:00:04 pm
The Blue Jays had the 21st best bullpen in MLB last year by ERA and fWAR. Two of the four "biggest" moves by the Cubs have been to sign Tepera and Adam, who the Blue Jays could've held on to for cheap.

Maybe the reason why the Jays have such a crappy bullpen is they can't recognize the good talent they have right under their noses, and we're taking advantage of their shortsightedness by signing the good pitchers they're foolishly letting go.

Optimism, right? :)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 14, 2020, 09:14:06 pm
I hate the Cubs off season with a white hot passion. I love what the Cubs are doing with bullpen. The are getting a bunch of cheap guys with options and above average stuff and will sort it out as the season goes on. Even if the Cubs could spend money I’d prefer this to spending on non-elite closers.

Adam has a 94.4 mph fastball with a spin rate of 2500. That is better than the spin on a lot of major league breaking balls. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 14, 2020, 09:20:57 pm
Bob Nightengale
@BNightengale
·
The Atlanta #Braves had trade talks earlier with the #Cubs on Kris Bryant, but considered the asking price too steep. Those talks are expected to be revisited
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 14, 2020, 09:38:09 pm
Nightengale is past his prime, but at least he's not carrying water for the Braves like so many other writers tonight. Of course they're going to try to trade for Bryant.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on January 15, 2020, 06:05:25 am
Checking in...

Is Bryant still a Cub? 
Is Schwarber still a Cub?
Is Contreras still a Cub?
Has Ross been fired for cheating yet?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robb on January 16, 2020, 05:15:31 am
With Donaldson and Tendon heading to the AL there path to the NLCS has gotten easier, too bad the Cubs sat out the off-season. Anyway, this site is an interesting pastime. www.baseballtradevalues.com
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 16, 2020, 08:13:09 am
Is Theo and the FO doing a panel at Cubs con or are they pulling a Ricketts too?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 16, 2020, 12:46:59 pm
Jesse Rogers
@ESPNChiCubs
Anthony Rizzo said he’ll keep his reaction to not getting an extension this off season ‘in-house.’ Called the business end of baseball as ‘cut throat’ as ever. An example: “We’re talking about trading the MVP of the league a couple years ago.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 16, 2020, 01:14:16 pm
Below is AZ Phil’s take on possibly moving Bryant to the Braves, along with moving Q so Cubs can sign Castellanos:

“ATL: RHSPs Ian Anderson, Kyle Wright, and/or Bryce Wilson (Braves keep one - ATL choice), and 3B Austin Riley, plus CF Albert Almora for CF Ender Inciarte (Bryant/Almora 2020 combined AAV about $20M offset by Inciarte's $6M AAV for a $14M AAV reduction for Cubs, and then if Cubs can trade Quintana without salary offset they can sign Castellanos). Braves would have no use for Austin Riley if they acquire Bryant and they have more young SP than they need, and they save about $5.5M off Bryant's 2020 $18.6M salary by exchanging Inciarte's7M 2020 salary for Almora;s $1.575M (Inciarte's 2020 AAV is $1M lower than his actual 2020 salary because his contract has annual salary escalators).”

Not crazy about this but realistically this is probably what Cubs could get from Braves and with MLB ready SP coming back can then trade Q.  Phil has other detailed trade scenarios with other clubs for Bryant.

Just keep Bryant.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on January 16, 2020, 01:50:04 pm
Link?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 16, 2020, 02:11:42 pm
Anderson, Wright and Wilson all have widely different values.  If the Braves got to choose it would be Wright and Wilson which is underwhelming.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 16, 2020, 03:02:08 pm
Anthony Rizzo doesnt seem like a happy man.

I strongly suspect we aint letting him go anywhere.

I still understand us trading Bryant if he wont sign an extension.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 16, 2020, 03:13:30 pm
Anderson, Wright and Wilson all have widely different values.  If the Braves got to choose it would be Wright and Wilson which is underwhelming.

BA (2020) and Pipeline (mid-season 2019) both have Anderson, Wright, Wilson at 3, 4, 6 in Braves system. So, Wilson seems definitely 3rd of the bunch—-BA calls him a back-end guy.

But, Anderson and Wright are close. Pipeline has Anderson at #31 and Wright at #35 overall and BA says both Anderson and Wright now project as mid-rotation starters, after less-than-huge 2019 seasons. So, not really clear there is a “widely different value” between these two. Agree that, if Braves get to pick, Cubs get only one of these guys.

Would be interested in Austin Riley BIG IF Cubs believe he can be a capable defensive 3B, which is perhaps doubtful. More likely a corner OF.

Not enthusiastic about this either.

If have to deal with Braves, would like to get a package with Waters for CF. And Anderson or Wright, plus Riley if Cubs see him as a 3B. Not going to happen——more likely what AZPhil talking about.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 16, 2020, 05:10:22 pm
....Not crazy about this but realistically this is probably what Cubs could get from Braves and with MLB ready SP coming back can then trade Q.  Phil has other detailed trade scenarios with other clubs for Bryant.

Just keep Bryant.

The notion that Bryant is available is widespread and I believe it.  But it's also been widespread that the Cubs are asking for "exorbitant" return.  The Wright + Wilson suggestion doesn't seem exorbitant and thus doesn't seem realistic. 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 16, 2020, 05:26:48 pm
I question the presumption that the Cubs need to trade Bryant because he'll leave in FA and we'll get nothing but a draft choice.  The Cubs are budget-challenged now, but it's not clear that they will always be.  In two years, Heyward, Darvish, and Hendricks will have only two years left, while Lester, Hamel, Q, Chatwood, and Kimbrel will be off the books.  Maybe a new miniwave of low-salaried young talent will be supporting a good team without costing tons (Hoerner, Davis, Brailyn...????) .

The Cubs may have the capacity to resign Bryant at fair and worthwhile market price.  He may end up being a very good free agent worthy of a very good contract that fits the cubs needs and budget very well. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 16, 2020, 07:30:22 pm
BA (2020) and Pipeline (mid-season 2019) both have Anderson, Wright, Wilson at 3, 4, 6 in Braves system. So, Wilson seems definitely 3rd of the bunch—-BA calls him a back-end guy.

But, Anderson and Wright are close. Pipeline has Anderson at #31 and Wright at #35 overall and BA says both Anderson and Wright now project as mid-rotation starters, after less-than-huge 2019 seasons. So, not really clear there is a “widely different value” between these two. Agree that, if Braves get to pick, Cubs get only one of these guys.


Anderson is 21 and did well in AA.  Wright is 24 with bad numbers in limited MLB innings and a 4+ ERA in AAA last year.  He isn't going to go ranked near Anderson coming up and this is his make or break year as a prospect. 

Waters, Anderson+ isn't a horrible package, but it still won't cover for the loss of Bryant.  The only way trading Bryant makes sense is bringing in Arenado in a trade or signing Betts next year. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on January 16, 2020, 07:44:13 pm
Did anyone have a good era in AAA last year other then gallen?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 16, 2020, 07:57:09 pm
Did anyone have a good era in AAA last year other then gallen?
Bryse Wilson had a 3.42 ERA on the same team.......
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on January 16, 2020, 08:16:53 pm
Bryse Wilson had a 3.42 ERA on the same team.......

How is that possible? Wilson is in the Braves system, Gallen was in the Marlins followed by the diabmondbacks.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 16, 2020, 08:19:52 pm
How is that possible? Wilson is in the Braves system, Gallen was in the Marlins followed by the diabmondbacks.
Same team as Wright.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 16, 2020, 08:23:39 pm
Rickett's speak, sorta.

https://theathletic.com/1540450/2020/01/16/theres-no-magic-free-agent-out-there-tom-ricketts-on-a-slow-winter-and-the-cubs-future/

Are you going to go under the CBT?  Not going to answer.
Why haven't you signed a free agent? Ask Theo
Will Theo stick around? I don't know
Will you sign a free agent? Ask Theo and magic free agents don't exist.

That gave me all kinds of warm feelings for the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on January 16, 2020, 08:44:18 pm
Did anyone have a good era in AAA last year other then gallen?
Colin Rea
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 16, 2020, 08:46:53 pm
Rickett's speak, sorta.

https://theathletic.com/1540450/2020/01/16/theres-no-magic-free-agent-out-there-tom-ricketts-on-a-slow-winter-and-the-cubs-future/

Are you going to go under the CBT?  Not going to answer.
Why haven't you signed a free agent? Ask Theo
Will Theo stick around? I don't know
Will you sign a free agent? Ask Theo and magic free agents don't exist.

That gave me all kinds of warm feelings for the Cubs.

From the article:

Yet on and off the field, the Cubs have used up some of the goodwill generated during that unforgettable World Series run in 2016.

Can't believe The Athletic editors let such a bad misspelling of the word "all" get through.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 17, 2020, 09:30:33 am
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  15h15 hours ago
At his charity event, Anthony Rizzo said he “won’t be lobbying” for leadoff role this spring. Says his ankle should hopefully be back to 100% by time he reports to camp next month. Still doing rehab work to strengthen it.

Unusual to hear that ankle sprain suffered in September could still not be 100%
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 17, 2020, 10:49:44 am
Imagine the reaction this guy is going to get at the convention when the Cubs announce him tonight:

Mark Feinsand @Feinsand
Per source, LHP Tyler Olson has agreed to a minor league deal with the Cubs. He’ll earn $650K if he makes the team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on January 17, 2020, 12:20:09 pm
If you look hard enough on the internet you can find anything.  For instance after a little digging around, I managed to find some video footage of the Cubs offseason planning meeting...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpZ3LODBK7E
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 17, 2020, 01:19:46 pm
Jon Heyman
@JonHeyman

Cubs have considered/discussed Jacoby Ellsbury. Probably a long shot but Cubs have a leadoff issue and Ellsbury is a surprise free agent after being released. JE hasn’t played in 2 years so before moving forward they’d want to gauge his interest/mindset
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 17, 2020, 01:32:36 pm
Seems like something the Cubs would be looking to do. He still has a year on his Yankees contract that he was released from, so he'll only cost the major league minimum.

I wouldn't be surprised if they also looked into Zack Cozart, who was just released by the Giants.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 17, 2020, 03:20:26 pm
Tony Andracki
@TonyAndracki23
Cubs acquired 29-yr-old RHP Casey Sadler from the Dodgers today in exchange for a minor-league INF (Clayton Daniel).

Sadler was DFA'd by the Dodgers earlier this week. He's pitched in 42 career MLB games and posted a 2.14 ERA last year with the Rays and Dodgers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 17, 2020, 03:47:57 pm
Seems like something the Cubs would be looking to do. He still has a year on his Yankees contract that he was released from, so he'll only cost the major league minimum.

I wouldn't be surprised if they also looked into Zack Cozart, who was just released by the Giants.

That’s a real winning approach. I can only hope Todd has the same BS loser approach to the trump campaign.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 17, 2020, 04:28:15 pm
Jesse Rogers @ESPNChiCubs
Kris Bryant has the flu. For real. No conspiracy. He’ll be at the convention but not doing a lot.


Pretty suspicious that the star player they are likely to trade in the next couple of weeks is suddenly "sick."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 17, 2020, 04:31:09 pm
So the Cubs medical staff is going to let him go into a room with a whole lotta people?  Sure, seems plausible.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 17, 2020, 04:32:31 pm
Sharma says he might make a short appearance at the opening ceremonies, and that will probably be all for him this weekend.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 17, 2020, 04:47:26 pm
Gordon Wittenmyer @GDubCub
Just saw Big Z at CubsCon. Done trying to play, he said. But wants to manage. Nothing imminent on that effort.


Zambrano as manager...that would be fun to watch for the (likely) short time it lasted, at least.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 17, 2020, 04:49:29 pm
Again letting a guy with a highly contagious airborne illness go into a crowded room seems like a bad idea. Saying he has the flu to avoid a ton of uncomfortable questions for him and the Cubs seems much, much more fun plausible.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 17, 2020, 05:12:31 pm
Kris and Jessica Bryant's first child is due in April.  I hope all stays well on that front.

(https://media.nbcchicago.com/2019/09/GettyImages-1154807212.jpg?resize=850%2C478:small)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 17, 2020, 05:38:55 pm
Cubs sign catcher Josh Phegley to a minor league contract.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 17, 2020, 06:04:07 pm
Iowa continues to load up.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 17, 2020, 06:05:31 pm
So the Cubs medical staff is going to let him go into a room with a whole lotta people?  Sure, seems plausible.
  Unlike you, Doc, 50% of the doctors in this country graduated in the bottom half of their class.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 17, 2020, 06:21:56 pm
Quote
Paul Sullivan

Verified account
 
@PWSullivan
 20s21 seconds ago
More
Ricketts tells Cubs fans no one realizes the “millions” we spend on technology. When he mentions Marquee Network they start booing. He tells them they won’t be booing in a year. #CubsCon


Wrong.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 17, 2020, 06:24:36 pm
Not living in Chicago, what's the Marques Network?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 17, 2020, 06:45:08 pm
  Unlike you, Doc, 50% of the doctors in this country graduated in the bottom half of their class.

I wish I was as smart as my first grade son. The little guy taught himself multiplication off of a YouTube video and today just asked me about the subdivisions of the small intestine.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 17, 2020, 07:32:54 pm
Ricketts should have been booed louder after watching it on YouTube.

Bryant didn’t look great. It could be a stomach virus that people call the flu and not influenza that you get the vaccine for.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 17, 2020, 08:25:01 pm
Tony Andracki on Twitter

Theo on Cubs roster:

"What's most likely is status quo - it's hard to get long-term extensions done; it's hard to get trades done. We have what we feel is a pretty good club. We're trying to compete this year and we're not in a position where we *have* to do anything."

The pitching and bench suck. Fix that.

Hottvoy thinks Marrow is healthy FWIW.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 17, 2020, 08:38:37 pm
Thanks for notes!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on January 17, 2020, 08:47:53 pm
Poor Theo.  Once a HOF-caliber executive.  Now one of the worst in MLB.  It's really a sad thing to witness.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on January 17, 2020, 08:48:55 pm
Hottvoy thinks Marrow is healthy FWIW.

Tommy's either delusional or stupid.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on January 17, 2020, 09:09:57 pm
Xofluza is a miracle drug.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 17, 2020, 10:33:25 pm
I wish I was as smart as my first grade son. The little guy taught himself multiplication off of a YouTube video and today just asked me about the subdivisions of the small intestine.
  Tell me, you just learned that sons are all smarter than their dads?  Really?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 17, 2020, 10:33:49 pm
Good thing Marrow is okay.  Won't need a transplant.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 17, 2020, 10:36:08 pm
Tony Andracki @TonyAndracki23
Theo on Cubs roster:

"What's most likely is status quo - it's hard to get long-term extensions done; it's hard to get trades done. We have what we feel is a pretty good club. We're trying to compete this year and we're not in a position where we *have* to do anything."


Two years in a row, his end-of-season press conference says the Cubs need big changes. Three months later in both years, he's saying status quo is fine at the convention. The Cubs need new owners.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 17, 2020, 10:44:11 pm
Tony Andracki @TonyAndracki23
Theo on Cubs roster:

"What's most likely is status quo - it's hard to get long-term extensions done; it's hard to get trades done. We have what we feel is a pretty good club. We're trying to compete this year and we're not in a position where we *have* to do anything."


Two years in a row, his end-of-season press conference says the Cubs need big changes. Three months later in both years, he's saying status quo is fine at the convention. The Cubs need new owners.
  Translation:  Look, would you jerks get off my back?  I have an owner who won't let me spend more money, I have a front office team that weren't paying attention to the budget years ago and now we're caught in a spiral.  I know the team sucks, you know the team sucks, put there ain't no magic wand to fix it.  I'm p issed off but this is the hand we're dealt.  Don't you just adore these lovable losers?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 17, 2020, 10:57:35 pm
I have a front office team that weren't paying attention to the budget years ago and now we're caught in a spiral. 

I agree with most of your translation. But I think they were paying attention to the budget. After signing Darvish, Theo talked about how they structured the contract in a way that would allow them to spend in the future. Then they suddenly didn't have any money to spend.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 17, 2020, 11:18:31 pm
  Translation:  Look, would you jerks get off my back?  I have an owner who won't let me spend more money, I have a front office team that weren't paying attention to the budget years ago and now we're caught in a spiral.  I know the team sucks, you know the team sucks, put there ain't no magic wand to fix it.  I'm p issed off but this is the hand we're dealt.  Don't you just adore these lovable losers?

Maybe alternative translation: 
1.  I burned all my money and resources on Heyward and Morrow and Chatwood and Quintana and other busts.  Oops, my bad!
2.  I thought we'd make a bunch of money winning playoff games and selling lots of merchandise because we were great and popular.  Oops, my bad!  We weren't good enough to generate much playoff revenue or merchandise revenue.
3.  I thought the guys I loved and believed in were winners and champions, and that all the other GM's would give anything and everything in trade to acquire them.  Oops, my bad!  Nobody wants them enough to give me any worthwhile offers.  Sorry!
4.  I thought my scouts and Cubs-way development was going to be awesome and keep pumping out quality young talent.  Oops, my evaluation and development people haven't been any good and haven't drafted or developed anybody!   Oops, sorry!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 18, 2020, 03:56:18 am
Jeff? Is that you?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on January 18, 2020, 08:45:20 am
No.  Theo would never apologize for his poor performance.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on January 18, 2020, 09:24:06 am
David Kaplan Retweeted
Jessica Bryant
@Jess__bryant

Because it makes so much sense to fly all the way to Chicago to fake the flu. Not to mention leaving his pregnant wife who also has the flu at home because he truly loves being at the convention every year. But yep totally faking it
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 18, 2020, 09:45:15 am
The look on Tom Ricketts’ face last night when he got booed was wonderful. It looked like the first time that stupid douche realized he had done the impossible and blown all the WS goodwill.  I think turning the fans against him and his family post-WS was less likely and harder to do than actually winning the WS. Well done fuckface.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 18, 2020, 09:50:03 am
Thanks Ron.  Great point. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 18, 2020, 10:08:37 am
Maybe alternative translation: 
1.  I burned all my money and resources on Heyward and Morrow and Chatwood and Quintana and other busts.  Oops, my bad!
2.  I thought we'd make a bunch of money winning playoff games and selling lots of merchandise because we were great and popular.  Oops, my bad!  We weren't good enough to generate much playoff revenue or merchandise revenue.
3.  I thought the guys I loved and believed in were winners and champions, and that all the other GM's would give anything and everything in trade to acquire them.  Oops, my bad!  Nobody wants them enough to give me any worthwhile offers.  Sorry!
4.  I thought my scouts and Cubs-way development was going to be awesome and keep pumping out quality young talent.  Oops, my evaluation and development people haven't been any good and haven't drafted or developed anybody!   Oops, sorry!
5.) The owner cut the budget and we can't spend on things that we can afford and need. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 18, 2020, 10:10:23 am
Rickett's new excuse, pitch labs are expensive people.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 18, 2020, 11:10:14 am
Theo claimed in so many words that they might start spending and that no one really knows.

This aint the team we'll take to opening day.

I ran into Casey Coleman this morning and he said Joe Maddon did have a massive ego and it was about the Maddon brand above all.

Hand to God thats the truth.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 18, 2020, 11:21:29 am
Who are they going to spend on to make meaningful changes? There is nobody left.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 18, 2020, 11:39:11 am
I ran into Casey Coleman this morning and he said Joe Maddon did have a massive ego and it was about the Maddon brand above all.
That confirms what I've said all along (if you don't know how good he is, just ask him).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 18, 2020, 11:47:34 am
Who are they going to spend on to make meaningful changes? There is nobody left.

Big changes would be hard, but they could still improve the team cheaply. Waiting this long to do it seems to make it much, much more difficult. I still doubt the Cubs give out a major league deal until they are safely under the CBT threshold.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 18, 2020, 12:52:24 pm
Marquee Network

Ryan Dempster
Rick Sutcliffe
Carlos Pena
Doug Glanville
Dan Plesac
Mark DeRosa
Jason Hammel
Chris Myers
Lou Piniella
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 18, 2020, 12:55:03 pm
Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  25m25 minutes ago
McCarthy says Marquee programming will feature "Cubs, Cubs and more Cubs." 28 spring training games. Pre and post-games one hour. Cubs Classics, including Harry Caray games "in a very clever way." Documentaries on Sandberg game, Harry Caray. Cubs All-Access like Hard Knocks.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 18, 2020, 12:56:02 pm
Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  25m25 minutes ago
McCarthy says Marquee programming will feature "Cubs, Cubs and more Cubs." 28 spring training games. Pre and post-games one hour. Cubs Classics, including Harry Caray games "in a very clever way." Documentaries on Sandberg game, Harry Caray. Cubs All-Access like Hard Knocks.

This is going to be terrible. They are going to regret not brining the Hawks along. Nobody on earth wants that much Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 18, 2020, 12:56:24 pm
Carrie Muskat  @CarrieMuskat  16m16 minutes ago
 #Cubs announce Marquee Network on air talent: @JimDeshaies and @LenKasper plus reporters Cole Wright (former NFL Network) and Taylor McGregor (who covered Rockies).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 18, 2020, 01:00:27 pm
Kelly Crull's replacement?
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EOlZW26X0AcqkPd.jpg)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 18, 2020, 01:06:42 pm
That confirms what I've said all along (if you don't know how good he is, just ask him).

Casey Coleman never played for Maddon. Had a cup of coffee at Iowa in 2018.

And you find Coleman an authority on Maddon that “confirms” something?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 20, 2020, 01:51:39 pm
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/01/20/cubs-reportedly-among-a-group-of-teams-interested-in-pedro-strop-also-brewers/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 20, 2020, 05:27:52 pm
I've had opportunity to listen to a bunch of the Convention weekend interviews.  Really interesting, and gets me increasingly optimistic.  Hope springs eternal, for sure!  At least for me. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 20, 2020, 05:33:38 pm
I thought Hoyer, Theo, and Ricketts all sounded totally reasonable in their comments.  Yes, I thought Ricketts sounded pretty rational. 

Theo and HOyer both talked about windows and stuff.  I think the idea of trying to have one eye on the future seems pretty sensible and appropriate to me.  As Blue alluded to, Ricketts did talk about how they spent more on baseball operations than any team in baseball, not just payroll but in terms of pitch-lab developments.  I don't know how much that stuff costs, but I'm inclined to be glad of investing and trying to get back on the cutting edge and optimize player development. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 20, 2020, 06:06:34 pm
Heyward pretty much attributes any disappointments last year to injuries and issues of health. 

Schwarber says launch angle and all that stuff is BS and is just trying to make hitting harder, he's not interested in any of that. 

Hottovy sees Mills and Alzolay as the two primary names to possibly compete with Chatwood for 5th starter.  He says Chatwood did a lot of work last year offseason to clean up mechanics, ended up feeling great with things, so has taken this winter off.  I sometimes wonder about that, a guy with mechanical challenges, might he do well to keep throwing to some degree, and keeping his mechanics locked in and muscle-memorized?  will be interesting to see whether he can lock back in this spring, or not. 

Hendricks says that Laster and Q are "studs", who "get the job done".  Most of us board posters haven't perceived them as "studs" entering the season!  :):) Hopefully Hendricks's perception proves more accurate.  :):):) 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 20, 2020, 06:08:41 pm
Hendricks may have been misquoted.  He said something about Lester and Q ought to be put out to stud.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 20, 2020, 09:16:58 pm
The Cubs improving their developmental staff is a good thing. Investing in tech is a good thing. Doing nothing to improve the major league club for 2 off seasons and cutting payroll $30-40 million in your best competitive window is bad, stupid,
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 20, 2020, 09:30:18 pm
Does the new tech include buzzers and trash cans?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 20, 2020, 09:32:01 pm
Does the new tech include buzzers and trash cans?

The ones where the Cubs are shopping for players?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 21, 2020, 02:55:14 pm
The #Cubs today acquired RHP Travis Lakins from the Red Sox for a player to be named or cash consideration.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on January 21, 2020, 03:10:40 pm
The #Cubs today acquired RHP Travis Lakins from the Red Sox for a player to be named or cash consideration.

This has been quite the offseason of learning about fringe major leaguers who I had no idea even existed.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 21, 2020, 03:22:26 pm
This has been quite the offseason of learning about fringe major leaguers who I had no idea even existed, who all posses high spin rates.
Fixed it for you.  I think this is a perfectly fine bullpen approach.  They have to be about to about 10 guys now.  If they get 2 guys that hit and 1 or 2 that can be useful up and down guys the bullpen will be fine.  If Kimbrel returns to normal and/or Morrow is healthy then the bullpen can be a strength.

Cubs also brought Rex Brothers back on a minor league deal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 21, 2020, 03:26:42 pm
I just read Lakins touches 98 in relief.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 21, 2020, 03:27:25 pm
We've apparently signed Rex Brothers too.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 21, 2020, 03:30:53 pm
Think a decent chance bullpen will be good but there is real potential for a very low floor. A bit scary.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on January 21, 2020, 03:40:07 pm
So much for us trading for Arenado...

According to Jeff Passan of ESPN, Nolan Arenado's frustration with the Rockies is rooted in the team's inactivity this offseason.

After Rockies GM Jeff Bridich downplayed the chances of a trade involving the All-Star third baseman, Arenado said via text message Monday that he has felt "a lot of disrespect" from the Rockies' front office. It wasn't the trade talks that have frayed the relationship as much as the team's reluctance to improve this offseason. In fact, Passan hears that Arenado "expressed betrayal" when the Rockies said they didn't intend to expand their payroll. Even an in-person meeting with Rockies owner Dick Monfort didn't cool tensions. It's an awkward situation which could put the possibility of a trade back in focus. Arenado can control his destiny in such a scenario, as he holds a full no-trade clause. His contract also includes an opt-out after the 2021 season.

Source: ESPN.com
Jan 21, 2020, 11:22 AM ET
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 21, 2020, 03:49:42 pm
We've apparently signed Rex Brothers too.

Wow, seems a long time ago that he was a 1st round pick and a really gifted reliever for the Rockies.  Last year in AAA, 45 innings, he had a 16K/9 ratio!  Nice.  81K/45.2IP.  Also had 36 walks, 7.1 BB/9.   So kind of an older version of Dillon Maples, I guess? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 21, 2020, 05:09:19 pm
Wow, seems a long time ago that he was a 1st round pick and a really gifted reliever for the Rockies.  Last year in AAA, 45 innings, he had a 16K/9 ratio!  Nice.  81K/45.2IP.  Also had 36 walks, 7.1 BB/9.   So kind of an older version of Dillon Maples, I guess? 

Just going to forget his previous stint with Cubs are we.....
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 21, 2020, 05:14:33 pm
I remember he was a bad MFer on The Show.

It was like having Billy Wagner.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on January 21, 2020, 05:20:09 pm
Just going to forget his previous stint with Cubs are we.....

When was Rex Brothers on the Cubs?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 21, 2020, 05:24:07 pm
A few years ago.

During the rebuild I believe.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 21, 2020, 05:27:18 pm
I just found it.

Released in Spring Training of '16.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 21, 2020, 05:28:03 pm
Ron, Brothers was with the Cubs during the World Series season.  Kind of...  got released on March 10 of that camp.  Cubs traded Wander Cabrera for Brothers in winter of 2015. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on January 21, 2020, 06:17:07 pm
I see. So Brothers never actually played for the Cubs, eh?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on January 21, 2020, 06:23:45 pm
I see. So Brothers never actually played for the Cubs, eh?

Sure.  Jim and Wayne Tyrone were Brothers that played for the Cubs.

But not the Smothers Brothers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 21, 2020, 06:26:21 pm
It looks like MLB Extra Innings will go from $29.65/mo in 2019 to $32.99/mo in 2020 or from $177.90 to $197.94.

Comcast will charge an extra $6.00/month for Marquee.  DirectTV will surely find a way to charge about that much extra for Marquee.    Am I correct that many of us won't need Extra Innings?  MLB must somehow be getting compensated.

The only losers will be those who relied on the over-the-air channels in Chicago?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on January 21, 2020, 06:38:51 pm
It looks like MLB Extra Innings will go from $29.65/mo in 2019 to $32.99/mo in 2020 or from $177.90 to $197.94.

Comcast will charge an extra $6.00/month for Marquee.  DirectTV will surely find a way to charge about that much extra for Marquee.    Am I correct that many of us won't need Extra Innings?  MLB must somehow be getting compensated.

The only losers will be those who relied on the over-the-air channels in Chicago?

Or presumably people who get their cable from other suppliers such as RCN (like me).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 21, 2020, 06:56:30 pm
Does marquee have a deal with Comcast?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on January 22, 2020, 10:07:49 am
Fixed it for you.  I think this is a perfectly fine bullpen approach.  They have to be about to about 10 guys now.  If they get 2 guys that hit and 1 or 2 that can be useful up and down guys the bullpen will be fine.  If Kimbrel returns to normal and/or Morrow is healthy then the bullpen can be a strength.

Very valid point there, sir. :)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 22, 2020, 11:41:53 am
Current 40-man roster and depth chart

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EO1vzqaXkAEVx_U.jpg)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 22, 2020, 12:36:48 pm
... I think this is a perfectly fine bullpen approach.  They have to be about to about 10 guys now.  If they get 2 guys that hit and 1 or 2 that can be useful up and down guys the bullpen will be fine.  If Kimbrel returns to normal and/or Morrow is healthy then the bullpen can be a strength....

I agree that it's an OK approach.  I think it will be really interesting, actually.  I'm kinda fascinated to see all the new arms, most/all of whom I assume will have very playable stuff.  As you've noted, they probably aren't signing guys without some spin-rate and velocity or whatever.  And the pitch-lab successes with Wick and Wieck last year make me optimistic that they can spin some more happy outcomes like that. 

I do think the possibility is real that it might end up being really a disaster, too.  Back in some frustrating Hendry years, there were guys with good arms who never really had command or consistency.  (When Rafael Dolis was pushing 100 mph, it seemed less common then....)  Last year Maples had an occasional inning when he wasn't too wild and he looked awesome.  Underwood had an outing where he looked terrific and K'd almost everybody.  So it's possible we'll have some guys with good spin or good velocity, but will never be able to be very consistent.  Part of the challenge, too, will be figuring out which guys are worth keeping.  A reliever throws what, maybe 10 innings in spring training?  So it could be kind of an adventure, hopefully for fun. 

Kimbrel is obviously a huge variable.  I don't imagine he'll probably ever be amazing again.  But if he can be solid, not perfect but a least good, that's a huge hinge issue.  With him being a Ross buddy, and with the money, and with the inexperienced alternatives, Kimbrel is going to get a VERY long leash.   I hate to imagine him being bad again. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 22, 2020, 01:08:07 pm
Would feel a little better about bullpen if could bring back Strop or at least Kintzler.  Strop looked good in September—-think he has something left.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 22, 2020, 01:08:49 pm
We should resign Strop.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on January 22, 2020, 02:17:01 pm
Agreed…I want Strop back as well...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 22, 2020, 06:47:21 pm
I’d bring back Strop just because he seems to calm Javy down at times and if he’s healthy he can still be a late inning guy. The guy they got from the Dodgers seems like the Kintzler replacement.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on January 22, 2020, 06:55:03 pm
Like most on the board, I would like to see Strop come back.  And I think he would be willing to give a small home town discount.  He seemed to like pitching in Chicago.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on January 22, 2020, 08:08:46 pm
And he can help the other pitchers hone their skills.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 22, 2020, 11:10:31 pm
Mixed interested in Strop; think it depends on health/arm. 

When he was good, he had a really good fastball.  If there is medical or pitch-lab reason to think that was anomoly and he'll have it back, I've interested, love the guy. 

But last year, I'm convinced that he lost fastball.  And in effect lost more fastball effectiveness than the velocity drop shows.  For example, Fangraphs shows his fastball velocity down only 2.5mph from 2017 and only 1.5mph from 2018.  But I think the effective decline was actually greater; I think he didn't want his velocity to drop even further, so ended up often overthrowing or selling out harder to keep his velocity from being worse; whereas two years ago I felt like he was mostly cruising and holding something back, and whenever he wanted to or was pumped, he could add an extra couple of mph on.  Last year, I felt like he just had to work a lot harder to keep his velocity from getting worse, and he lost his control and deception in the process? 

I'm interested, but not so much if I expect his fastball to be last year's version, or perhaps decline further. 

My other hesitation is that I'm not confident regarding Ross and how much of a vet-lover he might be?  Often when there's an experienced vet, they tend to get a much longer leash than a younger guy would.  I worry a little that with vets in the bullpen, that meritocracy is sometimes threatened?  I'd love to get good-Strop back, and I'd be fine to give him a shot on a low-commitment contract.  But kinda hesitant to guarantee more than you'll be willing to release, if that makes sense?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 23, 2020, 08:31:47 am
He started the year averaging 95 and then the hamstring became an issue again. At the end on Sept the velocity was coming back. I think the hamstring was the issue, but it could be a chicken and egg argument.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 23, 2020, 11:59:49 am
Yeah, if it's an explainable thing like that, and there is reason to assume it's been fully healed and resolved by now, I'd love to have him back.  Realizing of course that he's 2-3 years older than 2018-2017 prime, even apart from hamstring stuff....  Would be fun to have a pretty-good version of Strop back. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 23, 2020, 12:06:13 pm
https://youtu.be/KHW5sZoyc7Q
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 24, 2020, 09:02:02 am
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2019/12/21/how-the-2020-plan-and-the-kris-bryant-service-time-grievance-ground-the-cubs-offseason-to-a-halt/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on January 24, 2020, 12:20:16 pm
I don't understand why the league hasn't decided on the Bryant case.  Is the delay meant to be punitive (it clearly makes it more difficult to estimate Bryant's value)?  Are they focused on the cheating scandals and just haven't allocated time to resolve the case?  It's weird.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 24, 2020, 01:21:55 pm
Ken Rosenthal @Ken_Rosenthal
Free-agent outfielder Steven Souza close to deal with #Cubs, source tells The Athletic.


It was announced that CD Pelham was outrighted to AAA about an hour ago, so I guess they were clearing a 40 man spot for Souza.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 24, 2020, 01:47:24 pm
Ken Rosenthal @Ken_Rosenthal
Free-agent outfielder Steven Souza close to deal with #Cubs, source tells The Athletic.


It was announced that CD Pelham was outrighted to AAA about an hour ago, so I guess they were clearing a 40 man spot for Souza.

As a right handed platoon with Heyward and possibly Schwarber it isn't a bad idea.  If Happ bombs or ends up at second it gives Heyward in CF another possibility.

I don't understand why the league hasn't decided on the Bryant case.  Is the delay meant to be punitive (it clearly makes it more difficult to estimate Bryant's value)?  Are they focused on the cheating scandals and just haven't allocated time to resolve the case?  It's weird.

It is being decided by arbitration and isn't effected by any of that stuff.  I have no clue on how long this stuff takes, I just think it is getting funny when guys start reporting this will be the week. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 24, 2020, 01:55:36 pm
Looking at the bright side, Souza was a 4 WAR player in 2017.

Would seem to mean that no chance on Castellanos. Souza is a poor man’s Castellanos.

Maybe, without having to pay Castellanos, a hint that Cubs not clearing Bryant salary in any deal (to pay Castellanos).

As to timing of Bryant decision, nothing improper for arbitrator to inform parties of general time frame to expect a decision. Maybe that’s where that coming from.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 24, 2020, 02:04:01 pm
Maybe, without having to pay Castellanos, a hint that Cubs not clearing Bryant salary in any deal (to pay Castellanos).

Trading Bryant was never leading to Castellanos coming back, the salaries would be close to a wash.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 24, 2020, 02:15:24 pm
Souza's not particularly good.

He's a career .233 hitter and is injury prone.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 24, 2020, 02:16:08 pm
Maybe a little speed/power mix but not a ton of either.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 24, 2020, 02:16:24 pm
Trading Bryant was never leading to Castellanos coming back, the salaries would be close to a wash.

The idea floated (BN and others) was that Cubs get major league ready starting pitching in a Bryant deal—-and then trade Quintana and his salary, just to move him—with the receipt from Bryant deal taking Q’s place. Then, sign Castellanos. That gets you under CBT.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 24, 2020, 02:19:25 pm
Bryan Foster
@ESPNChiCubs
 If the Cubs sign Sousa Jr., can we end hope of a Nick Castellanos reunion?
Jesse Rogers
@bryfoster2
There was never hope. About the same as Harper last year.

Trading Bryant and Quintana and bringing in young pitcher +Castellanos makes the Cubs worse in 2020 and limits any future flexibility with the payroll.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 24, 2020, 02:23:28 pm
Bryan Foster
@ESPNChiCubs
 If the Cubs sign Sousa Jr., can we end hope of a Nick Castellanos reunion?
Jesse Rogers
@bryfoster2
There was never hope. About the same as Harper last year.

Trading Bryant and Quintana and bringing in young pitcher +Castellanos makes the Cubs worse in 2020 and limits any future flexibility with the payroll.

Yeah, but the Ricketts will save some cash now and that's what a real fan wants.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 24, 2020, 02:29:51 pm
Heh heh, not sure Souza was exactly what I imagined when Theo talked about wanting to improve contact. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 24, 2020, 02:31:37 pm
Heh heh, not sure Souza was exactly what I imagined when Theo talked about wanting to improve contact.

I doubt this is what Theo had in mind, either.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 24, 2020, 03:18:34 pm
Heh heh, not sure Souza was exactly what I imagined when Theo talked about wanting to improve contact. 

The right handed hitting OF canidates aren't exactly great since Nick Castellanos is too expensive because reasons.  The best of the rest is Pence and Santana.

The last time Souza played he had a 74.5% contact percentage which is the same as Castellanos last year (Nick was 70% with the Cubs) and better than Pence or Santana.  Souza's 2018 numbers, admittedly a career high, would have ranked sixth on the Cubs returning in 2020 behind Almora.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 24, 2020, 05:31:57 pm

Trading Bryant and Quintana and bringing in young pitcher +Castellanos makes the Cubs worse in 2020 and limits any future flexibility with the payroll.

Yeah, not advocating for that but was noting how trading Bryant might be connected to signing Castellanos and getting under the CBT---which was the topic.

With Souza, almost certainly now a moot point regarding Castellanos.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on January 24, 2020, 05:34:25 pm
Anyone hear what his salary will be, if he signs?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 24, 2020, 05:41:26 pm
Isn't arbitration supposed to lead to speedier and more fair conclusions?  Why is this taking so long?  Seems that by the first of December, a decision should have been rendered.  Did the Cubs unfairly or not cheat Bryant out of a year of free agency?  If the arbiter was a doctor determining whether he should operate or not, Bryant would be dead by now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 24, 2020, 05:43:46 pm
Looking up Souza's splits he's not particularly strong vs. lefties either.

Is this cat any better than Robel Garcia?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 24, 2020, 05:45:18 pm
Souza career K's over 35% of his AB (AB, not PA).
2018 he reduced it modestly, to a career 31%. 
Combined, K+BB comprise 42% of his PA. 

2017 was nice year for him: 
30HR (rest ≤17)
.351 OBP (rest ≤.318)
.810 OPS (rest ≤.717)
.459 slugging (rest ≤.409)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 24, 2020, 06:24:37 pm
Nothingburger.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 24, 2020, 06:33:41 pm
As a bench player and potential platoon mate for Heyward and/or Schwarber, Souza is fine.

But he's still basically status quo--he doesn't check any of the boxes the Cubs have supposedly been targeting all offseason. He doesn't make a ton of contact. He doesn't diversify the lineup. He doesn't play CF or 2B where the Cubs have holes. He's not a leadoff guy. He's just another piece that doesn't really compliment what the Cubs already have. It doesn't move the needle at all on solving the dysfunction and less-than-the-sum-of-its-parts nature of the lineup.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 24, 2020, 07:15:20 pm
I wonder if Ross will want the same 13-pitchers 12-player roster? 

So, current roster/depth-chart assumes Hoerner and Happ as the primary 2B/CF. 
That would leave Caratini, Bote, Almora, Souza, and Descalso,  competing for the four backup spots?  Am I missing some other serious possibilities?  Could be awful, or could be variably anti-awful bench. 

I wonder how committed Theo and Ross are to Descalso, as a veteran leader on the roster? 

Obviously may be other fringe pickups. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 24, 2020, 07:19:06 pm
26-man roster for 2020, so will be 5 bench guys.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 24, 2020, 07:23:17 pm
I still can't even get that into my head!  :):):) .

Thanks.  :)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 24, 2020, 07:31:44 pm
As a bench player and potential platoon mate for Heyward and/or Schwarber, Souza is fine.

But he's still basically status quo--he doesn't check any of the boxes the Cubs have supposedly been targeting all offseason. He doesn't make a ton of contact. He doesn't diversify the lineup. He doesn't play CF or 2B where the Cubs have holes. He's not a leadoff guy. He's just another piece that doesn't really compliment what the Cubs already have. It doesn't move the needle at all on solving the dysfunction and less-than-the-sum-of-its-parts nature of the lineup.

The Cubs had wRC+ of 94 against lefties last year so Souza helps with that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on January 24, 2020, 09:28:29 pm
I'm eagerly awaiting a march pun from P2.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 24, 2020, 09:29:42 pm
.756 career OPS vs. lefties with a 30% K-rate.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 24, 2020, 09:45:27 pm
108 wRC+ vs. LHP, so yeah, he's an upgrade for 250 PA. Probably a downgrade on defense, but maybe adds a win overall. He's fine.

Souza would be a nice addition if the Cubs had already spent maybe $20 million (AAV) on Akiyama, an established reliever or two, and someone like Brock Holt who could compete for the second base job. But since they didn't address their bigger needs, this move doesn't change anything. They might win 80 games instead of 79 now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on January 25, 2020, 06:33:15 am
The Nationals once traded Stephen Souza and Travis Ott in a 3 team deal for Trea Turner and Joe Ross. 

That one might have had something to do with them winning the World Series this past season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on January 25, 2020, 07:44:27 am
The Cub brass must see something in him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on January 25, 2020, 10:07:55 am
That may be too subtle for some.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 25, 2020, 10:31:20 am
We're getting Trea Turner?  Cool.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on January 25, 2020, 01:43:38 pm
The Cub brass must see something in him.

If he shows any leadership qualities, he might end up as the Leader of the Band.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 27, 2020, 01:13:00 pm
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/01/27/cubs-reportedly-interested-in-free-agent-second-baseman-scooter-gennett/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 27, 2020, 01:28:03 pm
You beat me.

Levine reported it as well.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 28, 2020, 11:37:50 am
Jeremy Jeffress to the Cubs, 1 year, $850K.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on January 28, 2020, 11:45:45 am
Not a bad flyer.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 28, 2020, 11:49:00 am
Yeah...although as limited as their money is, it probably means there's no chance they're bringing back Strop.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 28, 2020, 11:55:43 am
Also, the 40 man was at 39 before Souza and Jeffress, so they have to make a move there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 28, 2020, 11:59:37 am
Len Kasper  @LenKasper  27m
For those wondering (aside from my parents), I am adding some FOX Saturday work to my schedule this season & will miss a small handful of Cubs telecasts. I also will do some radio games when Pat Hughes takes some off-days just to keep things fresh. Looking forward to the season.


So who will fill in for Len?


Somebody on this list
https://chicago.suntimes.com/cubs/2020/1/18/21072151/meet-the-lineup-for-marquee-sports-network-which-includes-former-cubs-manager-to-lou-piniella


Rick Sutcliffe has been mostly an analyst but he'd be my guess.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 28, 2020, 12:17:40 pm
At least Jeffress will be cheap when they have to cut him.  Hopefully the fastball velocity can come back.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on January 28, 2020, 12:51:42 pm
He has good stuff when healthy...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 28, 2020, 03:38:30 pm

Jesse Rogers
@ESPNChiCubs
Steve Souza deal with Cubs is done now. One year. Unclear on exact terms but what you would expect based on this off season for the team and him missing a year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robb on January 28, 2020, 03:41:31 pm
Jeffress is a nice buy low guy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 28, 2020, 04:16:18 pm
Souza terms according to Jordan Bastian: 1 year, $1 million with $2 million available in incentives ($1 million based on staying off the IL, and $1 million based on performance).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on January 28, 2020, 05:34:56 pm
so at least 1 mill of that is saved for sure. He will be on the DL... probably before ST is over.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 28, 2020, 05:47:08 pm
Probably not a good idea to bank on much from Souza.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 28, 2020, 05:51:54 pm
so at least 1 mill of that is saved for sure. He will be on the DL... probably before ST is over.

I'm guessing that the incentive is broken up by days on the roster...maybe he gets $250K for every 40 days on the roster or something.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 28, 2020, 06:23:45 pm
Wittenmyer with the full incentive breakdown:

Gordon Wittenmyer @GDubCub
Souza contract official:

Worth $1 million base salary
Plus potential bonuses for:
200 PA ($50k)
250 PA ($75k)
300 PA ($125k)
350 PA ($150k)
400 PA ($200k)
450 PA ($200k)
500 PA ($200k)

And $200k for each of the following: 30, 60, 90, 120 and 150 days on active roster.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on January 28, 2020, 06:37:31 pm
So we signed Souza and Jeffress in the same day? 

This has been the most exciting day of the offseason so far!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 28, 2020, 07:14:14 pm
I don’t hate the Jeffress signing, but that velocity drop is harrowing. I’m guessing the medicals must be pretty bad if the Cubs were able to afford him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 28, 2020, 07:34:24 pm
It’s basically the Brach signing over again—a guy with past success who is worth taking a chance on, but there’s a good reason he’s not getting paid.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 28, 2020, 07:36:12 pm
I think the key with deals like this is being willing to release a guy *IF* the lost-velocity bad variant is what you have.  Don't spend months carrying a guy who's bad. 

An opportunity is sign-and-trade.  As we've seen as contenders and buyers, we were wanting more relief help every summer.  *IF* Jeffress is healthy and throwing well, but the Cubs are hanging out in 11th place, some buyer might give you something for an experienced, decent minimum wage reliever.   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on January 28, 2020, 07:58:50 pm
So 1/1 for Souza then...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 28, 2020, 09:15:26 pm
Gordo was claiming earlier in the day that Jeffers deal isn’t guaranteed for the full year and that the Cubs could release him in spring training for termination pay like an arbitration contract. I suppose it could be correct, but I doubt it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 29, 2020, 09:04:33 am
It's finally decided:

Jeff Passan @JeffPassan
BREAKING: Chicago Cubs third baseman Kris Bryant has lost his grievance against the team seeking an extra year of service, sources familiar with the ruling tell ESPN.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 29, 2020, 09:06:10 am
These additions of John Philip Souza whose stirring brass ensembles will entertain the crowds at Wrigley and divert their attention to the ass-whipping they're getting on a reguler basis and Jeffress' intrigue of when will they dump him will be unbearable.   I'm ready to be a fan again!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 29, 2020, 09:06:43 am
It's finally decided:

Jeff Passan @JeffPassan
BREAKING: Chicago Cubs third baseman Kris Bryant has lost his grievance against the team seeking an extra year of service, sources familiar with the ruling tell ESPN.


https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28591644/sources-kris-bryant-loses-grievance-cubs-free-agent-2021-season
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on January 29, 2020, 09:24:57 am
Has Kris Bryant been traded yet?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 29, 2020, 10:36:09 am
Wow.  I'm maybe the only one, but I'm kinda surprised this was decided and announced already! 

Glad it's settled, and glad we've got him for two more years of control.  Nice. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on January 29, 2020, 10:45:00 am
Wow.  I'm maybe the only one, but I'm kinda surprised this was decided and announced already! 

You're not alone.  I was convinced that the resolution would be part of agreeing on the new collective bargaining agreement in December 2021.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on January 29, 2020, 11:59:21 am
Take this for what it's worth (whatever that is):

Cubs Live
@Cubs_Live
The Cubs and Rockies have discussed a trade swapping Kris Bryant and Nolan Arenado, per
@ESPNChiCubs
The Rockies would pick up some of Arenado’s salary
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 29, 2020, 12:44:45 pm
Not sure why the Rockies would want to do that—they need to rebuild, not trade for a different star third baseman who can leave in two years. But it would be good for the Cubs, especially if they could find a way to get Arenado to drop the opt out.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on January 29, 2020, 12:49:05 pm
Based on Arenado's stats away from Coors, it's clear to me that Bryant is a superior offensive player and it's not particularly close.  I'm dubious that Arenado is so much better defensively that it balances their offensive skills.  Particularly if you factor in Bryant's baseball versatility, team-oriented attitude, and base-running skill.  Arenado's contract runs through 2026, but he has an opt out after 2021.  If you trade Bryant for him now, you downgrade the team offensively, save no money, and risk losing him after two season if he performs well.  I don't see the logic in trading Bryant for Arenado.  I would do everything possible (despite the obstacles) to extend Bryant now.  Failing that, I would consider a deal that would garner us controlled starting pitching for now and the future.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 29, 2020, 01:09:23 pm
I think you're overestimating the difference in offense if you're just looking at his road stats. There has been a lot written over the last few years about a Coors hangover effect where they have to adjust to pitch movement when they go on the road. Coors doesn't just result in better numbers at home--it also contributes to worse numbers on the road. Truly good hitters--Walker, Holliday, Fowler, among others--have all performed much better than their road stats once they left Denver.

On top of that, the Rockies probably have the hardest road schedule for hitters in MLB. About one third of their road schedule is in San Diego, San Francisco, and Los Angeles--three of the best pitcher's parks in baseball.

If the Cubs can come to some kind of agreement to drop the opt out (or push it off a couple more years) in exchange for something that benefits Arenado, trading Bryant for Arenado would be a big win for the Cubs. IMO. Especially if the Rockies are throwing in money...Arenado is getting paid about what he's worth right now, so Arenado would effectively be underpaid by whatever the Rockies threw in.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on January 29, 2020, 01:15:13 pm
I love Arenado, and I think he is, overall, better than Bryant.  But I agree, I don't see any advantage in swapping the two.  They would still be in the situation where they fall over a cliff when everyone leaves after the 2021-2022 seasons, with little to show for it.

If they could sign Baez and Contreras to long term contracts, and extend Rizzo for a couple of years, it would make sense.  But not with things as they stand now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on January 29, 2020, 01:15:27 pm
I'm not convinced, br, and I hope the Cub brass aren't either.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 29, 2020, 01:22:07 pm
Arenado has also been more durable for the last two years, FWIW. Two straight years of nagging injuries is a little concerning.

If the Cubs traded Bryant for Arenado, I'm convinced they'd come to some kind of agreement with him that changes the opt out situation. The trade doesn't really make sense for either side if it's just a straight up swap, so I don't think the Cubs front office would do it. But if they can ensure Arenado would be around past 2021, it would be a good trade for the Cubs to make.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 29, 2020, 01:31:19 pm
GE Principle:  Change, even bad change, is good.   A swap of Arenado for Bryant brings about the change in leadership and all that other stuff Theo has been espousing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on January 29, 2020, 02:12:35 pm
Change for the sake of change is a form of laziness.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 29, 2020, 02:15:44 pm
Plenty of evidence that Rockies hitters don’t have much of a decline in their league adjusted stats after leaving Colorado.

The Rockies would be interested because Bryant is a cheaper and easier to trade. He doesn’t have a no trade or an opt out so he’d be easier to get prospects for.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 29, 2020, 02:40:13 pm
Sign me up.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 29, 2020, 02:46:12 pm
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2020/01/29/kris-bryant-loses-grievance-against-cubs/4608151002/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 29, 2020, 03:21:30 pm
So whether its for Arenado or not are we thinking Bryant's days as a Cub are about over?

Im thinking yes.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 29, 2020, 03:26:36 pm
Bryant and Heyward for Arenado.  Who says no?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 29, 2020, 03:28:24 pm
Passan says the Rockies.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on January 29, 2020, 04:49:36 pm
Bryant and Heyward for Arenado.  Who says no?

I was actually thinking about something like that. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 29, 2020, 04:50:52 pm
Make that happen please, Theo. Give them Happ as a sweetener if needed.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on January 29, 2020, 04:56:36 pm
They would probably ask us to take Desmond off their hands in such a deal...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: mO on January 29, 2020, 04:58:01 pm
Can we get Dahl while we're at it?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 29, 2020, 05:00:50 pm
I doubt the Rockies would do that. The rumor Rogers reported was that the Rockies would thrown in $7-$8 million a year, so I doubt they'd take on much more than that much of Heyward's contract. Although Arenado is signed for about twice as long as Heyward...so if they're going to pay out $56 million over 7 years for Arenado, maybe they'd be fine just taking on $56 million of Heyward's contract over the next 4 years instead? Of course, that requires that the Cubs convince Arenado to void the opt out.

I also wonder if they'd take Chatwood back and send the Cubs $6 million a year instead of $8 million a year. That would be roughly the same amount of total savings for the Cubs, but it would help a lot with the luxury tax this year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 29, 2020, 05:08:13 pm
Rogers at the end said he doubts the Cubs can get Arenado because it would be too complicated.  He thinks the Braves are still interested in Bryant.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on January 29, 2020, 05:28:47 pm
I’m assuming Jesse and not Phil?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 29, 2020, 05:30:36 pm
I think he goes to Atlanta and soon.

They've had all offseason to swap names and now we know what Bryant's contract status is.

What Ive read today implied that Bryant felt unwanted and under appreciated.

Seems like the writings on the wall.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 29, 2020, 07:19:16 pm
If we end up not even getting below the cap after another disastrous offseason and having to repeat this clusterfrick again next winter, that would be worse than even a so-so Bryant trade.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 29, 2020, 07:55:20 pm
Unless the Cubs are getting Wander Franco (Rays), Arenado or signing Betts in the off season trading Bryant is still the worst outcome for the Cubs being good again.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 29, 2020, 08:38:54 pm
https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/cubs-offers-extend-kris-bryant-below-market-no-luxury-tax-mandate-exists
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 29, 2020, 09:25:35 pm
I don't think the article totally makes sense.  "Sources close to Bryant confirmed he is willing to listen to a long-term extension but the Cubs' offers were not anywhere close to what other top third baseman in baseball have recently signed for."

Basically Kaplan suggests that Bryant should get as much or more in an extension as Rendon got.  I don't think it makes sense to expect FA money guaranteed two years before you're a FA.  Sure, I don't blame Kris for wanting that, nor for being willing to take his $40 in arb cash, trusting that he'll stay healthy and good, and take his shot for max money as FA.  It's the Cubs who want him long-term committed early, not necessarily Kris or Boras. 

But yeah, it never really makes sense for a club to pay full FA market two years early, or for the player or agent to expect that.  Guys get injured and their career trajectory can decline; it's fine for the guy to risk that, but the team probably shouldn't pay full price to absorb that risk.

2nd, Kaplan acts like Bryant's "versatility" is worth more defensively than the superior 3b defense of Arenado and Rendon.  I think I'd prefer an excellent defensive 3B over an average 3B who can play LF/RF/1B (but unexceptionally).  Particularly if the presently so-so defensive 3B may not even remain so-so enough through the next 7 years to stay there, and may turn into a corner outfielder instead. 

I love Bryant and his versatility, for sure.  But I'd prefer a top-end 3B. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on January 29, 2020, 09:59:21 pm
Rendon is a superior hitter.  Arenado is not.  If the rumor is true that the Cubs are not limited by the luxury tax, keep Bryant and spend some money to improve the team.  Trading Bryant for Arenado does not seem like the right move to me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 29, 2020, 10:18:06 pm
I think the Cubs not being limited by the cap is probably BS.  It's the only way to explain their otherwise inexplicable offseason.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 29, 2020, 10:22:37 pm
Rendon is a superior hitter.  Arenado is not.  If the rumor is true that the Cubs are not limited by the luxury tax, keep Bryant and spend some money to improve the team.  Trading Bryant for Arenado does not seem like the right move to me.

Arenado has certainly been the superior hitter the last three seasons.  It just depends how heavily you weight the Coors effect.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 29, 2020, 10:48:57 pm
Unless Arenado waived his option, I don't see any merit in discussing Bryant for Arenado. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 29, 2020, 10:58:27 pm
Unless Arenado waived his option, I don't see any merit in discussing Bryant for Arenado. 

To do that, Arenado would have to get some other benefit in return. Players don’t just give up a contractual right. But, lots of ways to do that depending on a negotiation. Maybe pushes back the option for a year or two and gets something back in return. Makes little sense for Cubs to trade two years of Bryant for two years of a more expensive Arenado. For three or four years of Arenado, that could be different.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 29, 2020, 11:08:49 pm
I don't see Arenado exercising that opt-out, personally.  But sure, if you can work out some sort of protection try and do it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 30, 2020, 09:27:13 am
Nice obituary (read the last paragraph):


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EPiY6WZUYAA2mgK?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on January 30, 2020, 09:42:51 am
That 2016 goodwill is just about gone when people are starting to make fun of you in their obituaries.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on January 30, 2020, 10:03:52 am
There are potentially great things happening on the South side if you get dismayed by the product on the field.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 30, 2020, 12:52:34 pm
Héctor Gómez @hgomez27
BREAKING: Pedro Strop has reached an agreement for a year and US$ $1,825,00 with the Cincinatti Reds. Strop could earn around 1.5US$ Milions on performance bonuses.


At that price, I'm pretty disgusted that the Cubs didn't bring him back.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 30, 2020, 01:33:23 pm
Héctor Gómez @hgomez27
BREAKING: Pedro Strop has reached an agreement for a year and US$ $1,825,00 with the Cincinatti Reds. Strop could earn around 1.5US$ Milions on performance bonuses.


At that price, I'm pretty disgusted that the Cubs didn't bring him back.

Insert inappropriate Joanne joke.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on January 30, 2020, 01:40:26 pm
Héctor Gómez @hgomez27
BREAKING: Pedro Strop has reached an agreement for a year and US$ $1,825,00 with the Cincinatti Reds. Strop could earn around 1.5US$ Milions on performance bonuses.


At that price, I'm pretty disgusted that the Cubs didn't bring him back.

While I agree from the outside looking in, I do know one thing to be certain.  The Cubs will NOT pay for past performance for players they don't feel will duplicate their prior success.  The thinking relative to Castellanos was that we got the best couple months of his career and he isn't going to continue to hit like that.  His end of the season drove his price up.  His bat may merit big money, but the Cubs didn't feel his bat combined with his defense was meritorious.  There were plenty of people complaining when we didn't re-sign Arrietta.  Probably not too many of them any more.

Theo has proven to be average at best when identifying big name free agents, but I think he does a solid job of cutting the cord when a player has either exhausted his talent, or has exhausted his talent relative to the contract he was going to find.

With all of that said, I am pretty sure I mentioned toward the end of the season that Castellanos would not be back as the Cubs weren't going to pay him what he was going to get on the open market.  I'm not going to pound my chest and say "I told you so" as I also told you that I was of the understanding that we were trying to move 3 of Rizzo, Baez, Bryant, Contreras and Schwarber.  I'm not ready to say that we won't move 3 of them, but it is getting late in the game to pull off that many big deals.  I mentioned that the Bryant service time was a hold up.  Now that we have gotten past that I'm thinking a deal will be pretty imminent. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 30, 2020, 03:22:08 pm
Don't sleep on the Padres as a Bryant destination.  If Betts (who they wanted) goes to LA, Bryant makes a lot of sense.  They have the pieces to get it done and it would be a huge PR coup for them to bring back the guy who had a great college career there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 30, 2020, 08:15:20 pm
Per Driveline Baseball’s Stuff metric (which will be under the hood on my starting pitcher ranks coming out Monday), the top relievers by stuff:
1) J Karinchak
2) E Clase
3) M Barnes
4) D Maples
5) J Hicks
6) C Roe
7) B Abreu
8) B Graterol
9) P Fairbanks
10) R Pressly
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 30, 2020, 08:22:38 pm
https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/cubs-offers-extend-kris-bryant-below-market-no-luxury-tax-mandate-exists

Quote
Another perception about the 2020 Cubs is the existence of a mandate from ownership to be under the luxury tax. Sources confirmed no such mandate from ownership exists. While the Cubs would like to reset under the luxury tax threshold for strategic reasons, ownership is well aware of the financial challenges they are currently dealing with in player payroll. Ownership is also prepared to navigate another year in the luxury tax if the club remains in the playoff picture in 2020.

While this is a new public perspective on ownership’s stance on the luxury tax, the Cubs of 2020 will be defined by their actions and not their words. If they truly want to win they must try to improve their roster.
 
Luxury tax is not computed on Opening Day but rather at the end of the season, giving management the opportunity to move players during the season if the team falls out of the playoff race.

I believe this is true, and matches the explanatory hypothesis I've suggested earlier.
1.   They don't have to get under the luxury tax (yet),
2.  If the existing collection is looking like a real contender, they'll add salary to supplement, and be willing to suffer lux consequences.
3.  But if the existing collection looks uncompetitive, they can take action to get under the tax in summer. 
4.  They haven't been needing to dump salary, yet; but have wanted to basically freeze spending so they're within practical reach of getting under later.  If necessary. 

I'm not sure how the recent signings have impacted lux tax status if at all.  But I believe the Cubs have been situated so close to the line that a summer sell-off of even one salary (Q or more) would get them under, even a late July sell.  Had they added even a little more, it would get harder. 

I don't actually think it's that dumb. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on January 30, 2020, 08:27:44 pm
Sharma has an article on the Cubs' hopes/plans for the bundle of relievers they've been adding.

https://theathletic.com/1568308/2020/01/29/how-the-cubs-plan-to-make-their-bullpen-gambles-pay-off/?source=dailyemail
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on January 30, 2020, 08:59:31 pm
Per Driveline Baseball’s Stuff metric (which will be under the hood on my starting pitcher ranks coming out Monday), the top relievers by stuff:
1) J Karinchak
2) E Clase
3) M Barnes
4) D Maples
5) J Hicks
6) C Roe
7) B Abreu
8) B Graterol
9) P Fairbanks
10) R Pressly

The tweet is from Eno Saris. Maples also ranks the worst of the top 10 in control metric.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 30, 2020, 09:30:54 pm
I believe this is true, and matches the explanatory hypothesis I've suggested earlier.
1.   They don't have to get under the luxury tax (yet),
2.  If the existing collection is looking like a real contender, they'll add salary to supplement, and be willing to suffer lux consequences.
3.  But if the existing collection looks uncompetitive, they can take action to get under the tax in summer. 
4.  They haven't been needing to dump salary, yet; but have wanted to basically freeze spending so they're within practical reach of getting under later.  If necessary. 

I'm not sure how the recent signings have impacted lux tax status if at all.  But I believe the Cubs have been situated so close to the line that a summer sell-off of even one salary (Q or more) would get them under, even a late July sell.  Had they added even a little more, it would get harder. 

I don't actually think it's that dumb. 

Oh, I think it’s pretty dumb.

Any team you try and deal with under those circumstances knows you’re desperate and has you completely over a barrel. Good luck getting anything back on players with value, or not having to give up prospects to unload anything else.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 30, 2020, 10:23:40 pm
Disagree.  10 teams make the playoffs.  In July, more than 10 still aspire to do so.  If a pitcher is pitching well, contenders or wannabes plural may be interested.  So a buyer is bidding against the other buyers, not underbidding based on the Cubs desire to sell.   If July has ~15 contending teams or wannabes, some of them will want to stabilize their 13-man pitching staffs. 

I also think that the season, injuries included, exposes needs, needs that during January teams hoped wouldn't exist.  So the urgency to acquire can be more intense in summer than in January.  (Last January, the Cubs hoped Strop, Morrow, Edwards and Montgomery would be main contributors to a contending bullpen...)

The key, of course, is to have pitchers who are actually desirable.  Q, Chatwood, Lester, and Kimbrel are guys who'd get you under lux; but will any of them be desirable enough for a contender to want any of them?  And in Kimbrel's case, given that he's also guaranteed for 2021 as well?  Having some of those salaried guys pitch well enough to be sellable is really desirable. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on January 30, 2020, 10:31:53 pm
I believe this is true, and matches the explanatory hypothesis I've suggested earlier.
1.   They don't have to get under the luxury tax (yet),
2.  If the existing collection is looking like a real contender, they'll add salary to supplement, and be willing to suffer lux consequences.
3.  But if the existing collection looks uncompetitive, they can take action to get under the tax in summer. 
4.  They haven't been needing to dump salary, yet; but have wanted to basically freeze spending so they're within practical reach of getting under later.  If necessary. 

I'm not sure how the recent signings have impacted lux tax status if at all.  But I believe the Cubs have been situated so close to the line that a summer sell-off of even one salary (Q or more) would get them under, even a late July sell.  Had they added even a little more, it would get harder. 

I don't actually think it's that dumb.

It’s the dumbest thing ever. If they want to be good and are willing to go over to get there, why would they wait until the last minute to add salary when the options are limited and potentially expensive in terms of both money and players? If you are going to try to make a run and are willing to pay the tax, improve in the offseason when the options are nearly endless and just cost money.

I can’t believe anyone is falling for this bullshit.  Getting under the tax is the only thing that matters. If they are any good this year, it will just be a happy accident.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 30, 2020, 10:41:55 pm
I also think Theo believes the urgency of the season elevates prices, compared to winter trades.  Maybe you trade Gleyber for 2 months of Chapman during the summer race?  I'm not sure how right he is, but Theo seems to believe the GM culture justifies overpays in the heat of a pennant, more so than it does offseason. 

So, maybe the Braves are leading the league in July, but struggling at 3B; and would give more for Bryant in July than they would now?  But nobody would fault them for it, given the cultural acceptance of summer overpays? 

My sense, consistent with what several media voices have suggested, is that while Theo has discussed trading Bryant or Contreras, that the Cubs have been asking for a killing and a pretty extreme overpay.  Which they have naturally not been offered.  I don't believe they'll get any such offers in the last couple of weeks before camp.  So I'll be shocked if they don't just go into the season with the existing core. 

But Theo may hope that *IF* we do unfortunately end up in seller mode come July, that he might get some more extravagant offers then than have been offered thus far. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on January 30, 2020, 11:49:22 pm
In which case Theo has punted the last two offseasons for no reason.  On what planet is that not dumb?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on January 30, 2020, 11:58:17 pm
Sounds like a CYA to me.  "Hey, these folks are really pissed and our goodwill is running out, let's run with, we don't care about no stinkin' cap."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on January 31, 2020, 12:50:29 pm
Sharma has an article on the Cubs' hopes/plans for the bundle of relievers they've been adding.

https://theathletic.com/1568308/2020/01/29/how-the-cubs-plan-to-make-their-bullpen-gambles-pay-off/?source=dailyemail

I like the Cubs' bullpen strategy, frankly. Bullpens are *so* volatile to begin with, that I don't think you lose a lot by taking this approach. And the upside is *much* higher outcomes for a lot less money. For a team looking to preserve payroll... flexibility, shall we say... the handling of the bullpen is entirely appropriate.

If the LIAB approach were not as data/tech/sabre-driven, I'd have a much bigger problem with it, but I trust the Cubs' pitching lab guys, and this is exactly the way that department should be leveraged.

Now the rotation itself, and the lineup, that's a different story.

Count me among those who would be very happy to trade Bryant for Arenado. The best data suggests that, overall, Rockies' hitters numbers are *depressed* in aggregate, due to having to adjust to very different breaking pitch mechanics at home vs on the road. I would fully expect Arenado to be a great hitter in Wrigley, and absolutely love the idea of pairing him and Baez on the left side of the diamond. That's an all-time-great left-side defense.

Arenado has been vocally dissatisfied with the Rockies' front office, I believe going so far as to say he's felt "betrayed." I don't think getting him to waive the no-trade will be the issue, if there is actually a deal to be made.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on January 31, 2020, 01:59:13 pm
I guess this is how they're getting Jeffress on the roster.

Jesse Rogers @ESPNChiCubs
Cubs righty Travis Lakins claimed off waivers by Baltimore. Team has 39 on its 40 man roster now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on January 31, 2020, 02:01:47 pm
This makes us even after the trade for Arietta and Strop.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 31, 2020, 02:19:04 pm
I like the Cubs' bullpen strategy, frankly. Bullpens are *so* volatile to begin with, that I don't think you lose a lot by taking this approach. And the upside is *much* higher outcomes for a lot less money. For a team looking to preserve payroll... flexibility, shall we say... the handling of the bullpen is entirely appropriate. If the LIAB approach were not as data/tech/sabre-driven, I'd have a much bigger problem with it, but I trust the Cubs' pitching lab guys, and this is exactly the way that department should be leveraged.


So, one of the high spin curveball relievers—for the pitching lab—highlighted in the Sharma bullpen piece, Travis Lakins, turns out to be waived....and now claimed by Orioles.

This strategy would be fine for one bullpen spot or maybe two. But, looks like perhaps 1/2 of the bullpen has to be filled by lightening in the bottle guys. Good luck with that. Yes, bullpens are volatile and maybe a bunch of these guys will be good but the bullpen floor is very deep and could be a disaster. Even the more established guys have significant question marks.

Going to take so much good luck to have a good bullpen. This is happening only because of the financial constraints. Nobody takes this approach, for so much of the bullpen, primarily for baseball reasons.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on January 31, 2020, 02:23:00 pm
Cubs showed great success with Ryan, Wieck, and Wick last year. If the pitching lab was unproven, I'd be much more concerned.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on January 31, 2020, 02:32:43 pm
Wieck only threw 10 innings for Cubs, so I’m not ready to pronounce him a success just yet.

Wick and Ryan were really very good but, historically going way back, it’s not terribly unusual for a couple guys to come out of nowhere for some bullpen success for a year (or partial year) and.... then regress. It just happens sometimes.

We’ll see if this is a game changer. Hoping that’s the case but for so many spots?

Hate to say this, but think big comeback from Morrow is probably necessary to even think about having a good bullpen. Good luck with that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 31, 2020, 03:18:19 pm
We need Morrow and Jeffress to have productive years.

Im not counting Kimbrel because Im fairly certain he'll be good.

Alzolay,Ryan,Wick,Morrow,Jeffress,Tepera,and Kimbrel is probably the current pen.

Im not sure that's awful.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on January 31, 2020, 03:23:29 pm
I have much more confidence in the bullpen than I do in the rotation.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on January 31, 2020, 03:32:15 pm
Darvish,Hendricks,Lester,Quintana,Chatwood shouldnt be awful if Darvish can be a legitimate #1.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on January 31, 2020, 03:40:19 pm
'Shouldn't be awful' could be the team's motto.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on January 31, 2020, 06:23:44 pm
I think Kimbrel is really critical.  He was one of the very worst pitchers in all of the baseball last season.  If he's awful again, or just merely bad as opposed to average, the pen could be in deep trouble.

I'm hopeful, hope springs eternal.  I know, I know, players are slaves to routine, and without spring training his routine was disrupted, and he tried to pitch hurt.  I know, he's super motivated.  With the rhythm and routine of a normal spring training, absolutely I hope he'll be good.  Or at least so-so, as opposed to horrible. 

But I'm not totally confident that he'll be OK.   Maybe his fastball was well off for reasons other than spring training, and won't come back another year older?  He knew he wanted to pitch last season, so he had all the time in the world to pitch and get himself ready; then the Cubs gave him multiple weeks to pitch before activating him.  Maybe "missed spring training" is a nice excuse, but we'll find that he's almost as bad this year even with a spring training, and the problems source from other reasons?  I hope not, but it's a huge risk. 

Part of the thing with the AAAA pitch-lab guys, is that if they're going well, they'll get used; but if they go bad, they'll not get used and won't be on the team much. But with Kimbrel, his history and his contract, Ross is going to allow him to fail for a long time. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 01, 2020, 12:38:55 am
I think Kimbrel is really critical....

Not to worry:   Craig Kimbrel will be switching from #24 (the number he wore with the Cubs in 2019) to his long-time #46 (which was worn by Pedro Strop for the previous seven seasons), per Arizona Phil.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 01, 2020, 08:24:44 am
Aha.  So that's why they didn't resign Strop!  It's Kimbrel's fault!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on February 01, 2020, 06:05:14 pm
CHICAGO -- The Chicago Cubs and reliever Jeremy Jeffress finalized an $850,000, one-year contract on Saturday.

The 32-year-old Jeffress can earn $200,000 in performance bonuses: $50,000 each for 40, 45, 50 and 55 games pitched.

Jeffress was one of baseball's most dominant relievers in 2018, going 8-1 with a 1.29 ERA and 15 saves in 73 games for Milwaukee. But the right-hander struggled with injuries last season before he was cut by the Brewers on Sept. 1.

He finished 2019 with a 3-4 record and a 5.02 ERA in 48 games.

Jeffress was selected by Milwaukee in the first round of the 2006 amateur draft and made his big league debut with the Brewers in 2010. He is 28-11 with a 3.16 ERA and 44 saves in 392 career games with Milwaukee, Texas, Kansas City and Toronto.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 04, 2020, 12:55:08 pm
One week till all the camps open.  Heh heh, no Bryant trade yet.  Maybe it really wasn't about a deal being done, contingent on service time resolution? 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 04, 2020, 01:16:28 pm
I wonder if they're held up some now because of the Betts trade rumors. I'd imagine that the loser in the Betts sweepstakes (Dodgers or Padres) might turn to Bryant. Some of the players the Dodgers are rumored to be offering for Betts would be good fits for the Cubs too.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 04, 2020, 02:08:41 pm
I still bet he gets traded.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on February 04, 2020, 02:11:45 pm
I still bet he gets traded.
All Betts are off.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 04, 2020, 02:17:30 pm
I still bet he gets traded.
. Mr. Rose, is that you?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 04, 2020, 03:53:57 pm
Via Nightengale on Twitter
Taijuan Walker, 27, the former prized pitching prospect who has pitched just 14 innings the last two years, worked out in front of about 20 scouts today in hopes of landing a major-league contract. His fastball was clocked at 85-88 mph as he's coming back from Tommy John surgery.

Seems less than ideal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 04, 2020, 03:58:28 pm
Cubs ZiPS depth chart:


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EP9nCosXsAE0HBn?format=jpg&name=small)


The full projections will be released tomorrow.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 04, 2020, 04:15:54 pm
The MLBPA has released a statement on Bryant's grievance, so I'm assuming that means it's officially done.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 04, 2020, 04:28:10 pm

Jordan Bastian
@MLBastian
·
44s
With a potential opening at second base, Cubs have been in contact with free-agent 2B (and Chicago native) Jason Kipnis. Had .446 SLG vs RHP last season, compared to .342 vs LHP. Former teammate of new Cubs coach Mike Napoli.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on February 04, 2020, 05:11:05 pm
Via Nightengale on Twitter
Taijuan Walker, 27, the former prized pitching prospect who has pitched just 14 innings the last two years, worked out in front of about 20 scouts today in hopes of landing a major-league contract. His fastball was clocked at 85-88 mph as he's coming back from Tommy John surgery.

Seems less than ideal.

Yeah 85-88 for Walker isn’t going to get it done.  Guess that explains why he’s still on the market.

Good news is that it probably makes him cheap enough for the Cubs!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 04, 2020, 05:45:22 pm
Yeah 85-88 for Walker isn’t going to get it done.  Guess that explains why he’s still on the market.

Good news is that it probably makes him cheap enough for the Cubs!

Every drink we're offered this offseason is a poisoned chalice.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 04, 2020, 06:12:39 pm
If he wants a MLB contract, I would say no.  If he is willing to accept a minor league contract with a minimum salary, I can't think of any reason to refuse.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 04, 2020, 07:47:45 pm
Jordan Bastian @MLBastian
With a potential opening at second base, Cubs have been in contact with free-agent 2B (and Chicago native) Jason Kipnis. Had .446 SLG vs RHP last season, compared to .342 vs LHP. Former teammate of new Cubs coach Mike Napoli.

Bleacher Nation pointed out something relevant on this rumor: Jordan Bastian doesn’t normally pass along many rumors. He also was a beat writer in Cleveland before covering the Cubs. So he might be in a position to have good information on former Indians players.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 04, 2020, 08:11:55 pm
I’d much rather have Gennett. Kipnis hasn’t even been a league average platoon player since 2016.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 04, 2020, 10:52:45 pm
I’d much rather have Gennett. Kipnis hasn’t even been a league average platoon player since 2016.

Two years in a row, Theo has had an end-of-season press conference where he made it clear the team needs big changes. Two years in a row, they make no major moves. It's Februrary, and we're talking about middle infielders who are barely holding on to major league careers.

The Ricketts need to sell the team if they're not going to even try.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 04, 2020, 11:06:45 pm
Just to play apologist as usual: the Cubs have a good chance to have such awful pitching that they'll be drafting in the top-10 next year.  The rotation might be bad, and the bullpen horrible. 

But, they've also got a chance to possibly be pretty competitive and to compete for the division, if a lot of things go right. 

Not making any big trades might be a whole lot better for their chance to compete this year than having made a bad one.  (Short term Nowacrat, at least.) 

 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 04, 2020, 11:07:12 pm
The Ricketts claiming they are poor sucks. At least they aren’t making Theo dump Heyward in a trade with Bryant.

The Ricketts even though they suck right know are still the best Cubs owners since the William Wrigley. The are spending money in player development to improve things. The whole luxury tax as being too expensive sucks.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 04, 2020, 11:30:32 pm
Just to play apologist as usual: the Cubs have a good chance to have such awful pitching that they'll be drafting in the top-10 next year.  The rotation might be bad, and the bullpen horrible. 

But, they've also got a chance to possibly be pretty competitive and to compete for the division, if a lot of things go right. 

Not making any big trades might be a whole lot better for their chance to compete this year than having made a bad one.  (Short term Nowacrat, at least.) 

The fact that this is now the apologist position is reflective of just how bad things have gotten.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 05, 2020, 12:19:30 am
Hilarious.

I bet the one's saying this are the same one's who said Trump didnt have a prayer of being elected.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 05, 2020, 02:56:07 am

Bob Nightengale
@BNightengale
·
4h
Now, #Cubs third baseman Kris Bryant is on the trade clock with the #Phillies and #Nats showing at least exploratory interest.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 05, 2020, 03:03:55 am

Jon Heyman
@JonHeyman
As for Kris Bryant rumors out there, there is to this point no talk between the Cubs and Braves about the star 3B.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Tuffy on February 05, 2020, 03:33:34 am
Speaking of second base, what is Zobrist doing this season?  Has he even decided?

I'd love to have Kipnis, though.  He'd be a fan favorite, having grown up loving the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 05, 2020, 06:01:26 am
He's a nice Jewish boy from Northbrook and I'd love to see him get a chance to play for his hometown team, but at this stage of his career not much of a player.  Probably adequate with the bat in a strict platoon but the defense is on the decline.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 05, 2020, 07:45:23 am
Kipnis had a wRC+ of 91 against righties last year.  He has no business being the strong side of a platoon at 2B.

Zobrist hasn’t officially said anything, but everything is pointing to retirement.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on February 05, 2020, 08:24:47 am
Had Bryant been traded yet?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 05, 2020, 09:32:18 am
Had Bryant been traded yet?

David Kaplan
@thekapman
With Mookie Betts now traded I have confirmed multiple NL teams have contacted Cubs offering packages of prospects/young players. Unsure if a deal gets done before Opening Day. If one doesn't Cubs will probably hang on to him until July trade deadline. Tune in NOW on
@ESPN1000
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 05, 2020, 10:19:52 am
If you think this offseason has been bad, just wait until the deadline. I can see where it's going--the Cubs are in the middle of the race at about 86 win pace (because no one in the NL Central is good enough to run away with it). But they still want to get under the luxury tax threshold...so instead of adding to their team at the deadline like a big market team should when they're contending, they dump a couple of players to save money.

I'm sure that would go over really well.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on February 05, 2020, 10:25:15 am
An 86 win pace isn't contending for anything. I would hope they would sell if that's the case.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on February 05, 2020, 10:47:48 am
An 86 win pace isn't contending for anything. I would hope they would sell if that's the case.


You can sneak into the one game wildcard with 89 wins... if you are on a 86 win pace, you should be adding to your team to get into that game.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 05, 2020, 11:11:15 am
If you think this offseason has been bad, just wait until the deadline. I can see where it's going--the Cubs are in the middle of the race at about 86 win pace (because no one in the NL Central is good enough to run away with it). But they still want to get under the luxury tax threshold...so instead of adding to their team at the deadline like a big market team should when they're contending, they dump a couple of players to save money.

I'm sure that would go over really well.

I'd prefer a sell off to the Cubs shooting to be a .500 team. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 05, 2020, 12:53:27 pm
Bryant now linked to the Yankees.

Miguel Andujar would be a nice start.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 05, 2020, 12:55:32 pm
Gleybar!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 05, 2020, 01:31:23 pm
CHICAGO – The Chicago Cubs have invited the following 21 non-roster players to Major League Spring Training, which begins Wednesday, Feb. 12, when pitchers and catchers have their first formal workout at the club’s Nike Performance Center in Mesa, Ariz. The team’s first full squad workout will take place Monday, Feb. 17.

The following 12 pitchers have been invited to Major League camp: right-handed pitchers Jason Adam, Oscar De La Cruz, Dakota Mekkes, Brandon Morrow, Caleb Simpson, Brock Stewart and Ben Taylor, as well as left-handed pitchers Rex Brothers, Danny Hultzen, Tyler Olson, C.D. Pelham and Wyatt Short.

Four infielders have been invited to Major League camp: Carlos Asuaje, Trent Giambrone, Corban Joseph and Hernán Pérez.

Two outfielders have been invited to big league camp: Noel Cuevas and Ian Miller.

Three catchers have been invited to big league camp: P.J. Higgins, Jhonny Pereda and Josh Phegley
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on February 05, 2020, 01:37:48 pm
Breaking news:

Manager David Ross gets his #3 back so David Descalso has to switch to #33.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 05, 2020, 01:41:24 pm
Breaking news:

Manager David Ross gets his #3 back so David Descalso has to switch to #33.
#33 on which team? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 05, 2020, 02:27:14 pm
Bryant now linked to the Yankees.

Miguel Andujar would be a nice start.

Is there anyone actually reporting this or is it all twitter rumors? 

Andujar could barely play 3B before he shredded his shoulder.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 05, 2020, 02:58:31 pm
99% of what I post is from Twitter.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 05, 2020, 03:06:53 pm
I saw an article about the Yankees potentially interested in Bryant on Twitter yesterday, but it ended up being all speculation. Not sure if this is something new or different.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 05, 2020, 03:35:13 pm
If you think this offseason has been bad, just wait until the deadline. I can see where it's going--the Cubs are in the middle of the race at about 86 win pace (because no one in the NL Central is good enough to run away with it). But they still want to get under the luxury tax threshold...so instead of adding to their team at the deadline like a big market team should when they're contending, they dump a couple of players to save money.

I'm sure that would go over really well.

This is my expectation too.  Except the Cubs hang around .500 all season, a few games over maybe.  There are probably three better teams in the Central but no one dominating like the Dodgers or Nats, so the Cubs are in that purgatorial zone between contending and selling, and end up doing nothing.  Yet again.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on February 06, 2020, 11:10:54 am
Will the Under Armour logos at Wrigley soon be replaced by the Nike Swoosh?

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/02/06/cubs-reportedly-have-a-new-sponsor-in-arizona-the-nike-performance-center/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on February 07, 2020, 02:27:45 pm

Kris Bryant says he would like to play in Las Vegas

https://d29xw9s9x32j3w.cloudfront.net/videos/video_mp4/300k/50525o757rq14n326ro00oo84388so7p.mp4
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 07, 2020, 04:03:12 pm
Kris Bryant says he would like to play in Las Vegas

https://d29xw9s9x32j3w.cloudfront.net/videos/video_mp4/300k/50525o757rq14n326ro00oo84388so7p.mp4

Does this means he wants to be traded to the A's so that he can play in their AAA team?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 07, 2020, 04:09:27 pm
Its almost baseball season folks.

Thank God.

I still expect a hand full of changes before opening day.

I suspect whether we trade Bryant or not that Theo and Jed will be players in the market of cheap FA's that are left.

The Giants got Billy Hamilton on a minor league deal today.

I would have liked to have been in on that action.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 07, 2020, 05:46:35 pm
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/02/07/kris-bryant-trade-rumors-deal-still-possible-but-unlikely-padres-interest-bryant-still-all-class-more/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: mike on February 07, 2020, 10:33:42 pm
I would assume Bryant will sign as a free agent with whomever offers him the most money. That’s been his plan since the day he was drafted with the cubs and hired boras as his agent. He tried to get out of Chicago a year early and lost.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on February 08, 2020, 11:58:37 am
This requires some studying

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/02/08/turns-out-the-cubs-always-knew-financial-limitations-were-coming/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 08, 2020, 12:42:41 pm
This requires some studying

https://www.the.com/cubs/2020/02/08/turns-out-the-cubs-always-knew-financial-limitations-were-coming/

BN wrote about this, in detail, back in December. That piece is linked in the new piece above.

If you don’t reset the CBT penalties, you get crushed the third year over—-to the tune of $50 M or more taken away from baseball operations. The key part of the piece:  “when you’re in your third year over the luxury tax (that would be the Cubs in 2021 if they don’t reset in 2020), the financial considerations increase dramatically – that extra $20 to $25 million [lost in 2020] could easily exceed $50 million in a third year over the luxury tax (more if you were planning on really pushing payroll) – because of the exponential increases in the tax rate and losing 50% of your revenue-sharing refund.”

Losing a big chunk of revenue sharing isn’t mentioned much in most articles about CBT penalties, but it’s a lot of money.

Of course, some will say that the Ricketts are rich, so they don’t need the money. But, most every club is doing the same. It’s not just the Ricketts. It’s the whole industry—-thanks to the CBA that governs the game in so many respects.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 08, 2020, 01:57:58 pm
Thanks, Bennett.  I think that's a helpful read and helpful perspective.  It's kinda ironic that the article goes through a lot, but ultimately comes down to the Cubs being one voluntarily-paid Quintana over the line. 

Although unstated, I think the article seems to assume the Cubs are trying to trade Bryant to get underneath the lux line. 

I suspect that assumption is untrue, on two grounds.  Have they discussed trades, and perhaps even "shopped" or initiated trade discussions?  I have no reason to dispute that.  But the rumors have always described the Cubs asking/requiring a huge haul.  There really isn't any rumor evidence that the Cubs have been pursuing or considering sub-market value-exchange.  And obviously the fact is that he hasn't been traded, and with camps now about to open, it seems increasingly unlikely that he will be, at least before summer. 

Second, it doesn't take a lot of brains to tally up their detailed lux-line responsibilities.  The Cubs wouldn't have voluntarily taken on Q's contract if they knew that doing so would necessitate dumping Bryant's contract, even if at unfavorable exchange.  I think the actions indicate they know can get under without great difficulty, and don't "need" to trade him if they don't get a good-value offer. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 08, 2020, 02:04:43 pm
...If you don’t reset the CBT penalties, you get crushed the third year over—-to the tune of $50 M or more taken away from baseball operations. The key part of the piece:  “when you’re in your third year over the luxury tax (that would be the Cubs in 2021 if they don’t reset in 2020), the financial considerations increase dramatically – that extra $20 to $25 million [lost in 2020] could easily exceed $50 million in a third year over the luxury tax (more if you were planning on really pushing payroll) – because of the exponential increases in the tax rate and losing 50% of your revenue-sharing refund.”  Losing a big chunk of revenue sharing isn’t mentioned much in most articles about CBT penalties, but it’s a lot of money....

Thanks for succinct review.  Helpful reminder. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 08, 2020, 02:46:30 pm
...l It's kinda ironic that the article goes through a lot, but ultimately comes down to the Cubs being one voluntarily-paid Quintana over the line... 


Yeah, this has come up before here but Cubs probably exercised Q’s option in part because club figured they could always trade him to get under the CBT threshold.

With Twins backing out of Maeda trade, maybe Twins would have interest in Q if imperative for Cubs to get under before the season. 

Of course, that leaves a hole in the rotation. No easy solution.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on February 08, 2020, 03:03:05 pm
One shovelful of dirt should take care of that hole...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 08, 2020, 03:40:29 pm
....maybe Twins would have interest in Q if imperative for Cubs to get under before the season.  ...


This is where the EXACT numbers are so critical. 


Bleacher Nation suggested "at least" $5-10. 


**IF** it's really $10.0, then dumping Q before the season would be needed.  (Or perhaps not even sufficient, $10.5 out replaced by a minimum $0.563 doesn't even reduce by a full $10.0). 


If it's actually only $3.25, then you could still dump Q on July 31st and sneak under.  This is where I assume from the actions that the Cubs accounting has calculated the **exact** numbers; that they aren't super close to $10M; and that they figured that a mid-season trade of Q (or of the more expensive Lester or Kimbrel) would suffice to still get them under. 


Many teams are interested in using $$ to add talent.  **IF** Q and Lester and Kimbrel all stink as badly as the September versions, and Chatwood like it's 2018, then the Cubs may be in a jam even if a July 31 trade or any one of them is enough to get under the line.  In that case, the Cubs might need to sacrifice a variably valuable prospect in order to unload one of those salaries.  But probably some team would be willing to absorb two months of Q's salary, *if* you gave them a prospect they liked as compensation.  Obviously Theo hopes he doesn't have to do that, and that performance doesn't lead to that kind of necessity.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 08, 2020, 03:47:04 pm
Cubs 2009 $246 revenue, payroll $135 million
Cubs 2018 revenue $452, payroll $195 million

That is local revenue estimates, which I do not think includes their national TV money, profits from RSN ownership, $50 million from Disney, MLB network or the owners investment portfolio from the profits of owning the Expos, the rooftops, hotel or restaurants.

All that is a nice way of saying the Cubs could afford $50 million tax payment and still make the Ricketts a nice profit. The Ricketts are choosing to not want to pay the $50 million, which is different than asking papa Joe to cough up an additional $50 million from his own pocket.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 08, 2020, 04:07:40 pm
Cubs 2009 $246 revenue, payroll $135 million
Cubs 2018 revenue $452, payroll $195 million

That is local revenue estimates, which I do not think includes their national TV money, profits from RSN ownership, $50 million from Disney, MLB network or the owners investment portfolio from the profits of owning the Expos, the rooftops, hotel or restaurants.

All that is a nice way of saying the Cubs could afford $50 million tax payment and still make the Ricketts a nice profit. The Ricketts are choosing to not want to pay the $50 million, which is different than asking papa Joe to cough up an additional $50 million from his own pocket.

The $452 is $100 less than the Dodgers and what are Dodgers doing? Even with Betts and Price, they’re under the CBT threshold. Cubs have been outspending the Dodgers.

Yankees revenues were a whopping $200 more than Cubs—and Yanks spending has been similar or even less at times than Cubs.

It is an industry-wide phenomenon that clubs are careful with the CBT threshold and try to avoid going over two/three years in a row.

You can ask the Ricketts to be outliers among their peers but we don’t see that much in all walks of life, not just baseball ownership.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 08, 2020, 04:19:58 pm
Another factor, of course, are the huge, costly overruns on the Wrigley development projects.

If you like or love Wrigley, that’s a lot of baseball-related money to preserve the park and, to some extent, improve the fan experience.

Yes, the personnel inaction past couple of off-seasons is disappointing (although Cubs were busy DURING 2019 season) but it would have been helpful to develop some low-cost impact players lately and some are things like the Lester contract that helped get us a World Series and the peculiar Heyward regression at an age when most guys are reaching their prime. That’s almost $50 AAV for CBT purposes for those two guys. Don’t recall anybody here opposing those signings at the time.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 08, 2020, 04:56:43 pm
The Dodgers in 2015 spent $353 million in payroll and taxes with $453 million in revenue.  They also spent $96 million in IFA that year in signings and penalties.

The Dodgers, Yankees not wanting to pay a tax or give up revenue sharing dollars is different than those teams losing money from giving it up.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 08, 2020, 05:35:25 pm
All this speaks of Cirque de Soleil level contortionism (which BN specializes in) to try and justify the fact that Ricketts and the FO have totally bungled the last two offseasons and screwed the franchise in the process.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on February 08, 2020, 05:45:51 pm
If you are going to over the threshold... do it like the dodgers did, BLOW past it for a couple of years and stack up a ridiculous team, then cut under.  Ricketts got to that point and took their foot off the gas.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 08, 2020, 05:46:37 pm
I don't buy that Theo had any idea that they were going to have limitations to this extent. Theo is a smart guy and a good communicator. If he knew he was going to have no money, he wouldn't have set fan expectations that there would be big changes in each of his last two end-of-season press conferences. He even said after the Darvish signing that the way the contract was structured meant they would still be able to add on in future years.

Theo might have had expectations that they'd have to shop in the Akiyama/Daniel Hudson type markets instead of going after Rendon or Cole. But I can't imagine he had any idea that they were going to have to struggle to fit Daniel Descalso and Steven Souza into the budget.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 08, 2020, 06:03:46 pm
The Dodgers in 2015 spent $353 million in payroll and taxes with $453 million in revenue.  They also spent $96 million in IFA that year in signings and penalties.

The Dodgers, Yankees not wanting to pay a tax or give up revenue sharing dollars is different than those teams losing money from giving it up.

As I’m sure that you know, your citation to 2015 Dodgers is before the current cba, with its penalties for consecutive years CBT spending. What did the Dodgers do three years later under the cba? Drastically cut spending to get under the tax threshold.

In any case, even aside from the cba, 2015 Dodgers payroll was highest in baseball history. It’s an outlier, as you know, and has next to nothing to do with what clubs are doing today.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 08, 2020, 06:13:33 pm
As I’m sure that you know, your citation to 2015 Dodgers is before the current cba, with its penalties for consecutive years CBT spending. What did the Dodgers do three years later under the cba? Drastically cut spending to get under the tax threshold.

In any case, even aside from the cba, 2015 Dodgers payroll was highest in baseball history. It’s an outlier, as you know, and has next to nothing to do with what clubs are doing today.



The point is very simple the Dodgers spent $353 million and didn't lose money with a similar amount of local revenue..  No one is saying the Cubs need to spend that much.  The point is the Cubs easily spend $240 in payroll and absorb $50 million in taxes and the Cubs ownership wouldn't be losing money.  The Rickett's don't WANT to do that.  It isn't a case of the Rickett's CAN'T afford to that because of a lack of payroll. 

I can afford to replace my old Honda Accord, I choose not to because it is getting me work everyday.  That is what the Cubs are doing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 08, 2020, 06:16:59 pm
The point is very simple the Dodgers spent $353 million and didn't lose money with a similar amount of local revenue..  No one is saying the Cubs need to spend that much.  The point is the Cubs easily spend $240 in payroll and absorb $50 million in taxes and the Cubs ownership wouldn't be losing money.  The Rickett's don't WANT to do that.  It isn't a case of the Rickett's CAN'T afford to that because of a lack of payroll. 

I can afford to replace my old Honda Accord, I choose not to because it is getting me work everyday.  That is what the Cubs are doing.

That analogy doesn't really work unless the baseball equivalent of "getting to work" is just showing up and playing 162 games.  If you believe the point is actually winning something, it's like your Accord is breaking down halfway there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 08, 2020, 06:21:01 pm
That analogy doesn't really work unless the baseball equivalent of "getting to work" is just showing up and playing 162 games.  If you believe the point is actually winning something, it's like your Accord is breaking down halfway there.

The Cubs aren't a bad team.  They'll be competitive like the have been the last 2 years.  They just aren't the 2016 Cubs, best team in baseball. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 08, 2020, 07:46:17 pm
reb is right, it's industry normal, the other big-market teams are staying off the 3-year-lux as well.  Faulting ownership sport-wide is fine.  As reb notes fans of the Dodgers and Yankees should complain even more rightfully than we do. 

The Cubs had the top payroll in the league last year, and have the top payroll in the league again (until the Dodgers pick up Price).  (https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/payroll/)

When you're finishing 8th place with the top payroll in the league, it seems to me that some fault might be better directed towards payroll usage. 

 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 08, 2020, 07:58:24 pm
Theo has had some bad contracts, but don’t a big market should allow you to spend over them.

The Yankees and Dodgers for all their great spending habits have zero World Series trophies to show for it. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 08, 2020, 08:10:54 pm
They were only a trash can away
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 08, 2020, 08:40:21 pm
The point is very simple the Dodgers spent $353 million and didn't lose money with a similar amount of local revenue..  No one is saying the Cubs need to spend that much.  The point is the Cubs easily spend $240 in payroll and absorb $50 million in taxes and the Cubs ownership wouldn't be losing money.  The Rickett's don't WANT to do that.  It isn't a case of the Rickett's CAN'T afford to that because of a lack of payroll. 

I can afford to replace my old Honda Accord, I choose not to because it is getting me work everyday.  That is what the Cubs are doing.

You are talking about an ownership approach to payroll spending that is dead.

Apples and oranges compared to the new rubric under the current cba.

Dodgers abandoned that pre-cba approach after a relatively brief period of big spending. Maybe if George Steinbrenner was still around, he’d buck the current system. Ewing Kaufman took money from his own pocket to keep Royals viable some years ago. These are outlier, rare circumstances.

I would note in passing that, in a union setting, management NEVER claims “can’t afford” to pay. If they say that, it opens up all kinds of obligations to reveal otherwise private economic information under labor law.

Seems that 2020 is the “reset” CBT year for the Cubs. Nobody knows that for certain—-maybe Bryant is still here opening day, Cubs get off to great start and continue to play well, and Cubs go for it. Remains to be seen even if doesn’t seem very likely. Baseball is full of surprises.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 08, 2020, 08:58:54 pm
The Yankees are already $50 million over the CBT threshold. This will be their second year paying the tax in a row.

Next year they have 7 player accounting for $135 million in CBT payroll and 15 arbitration eligible players. They are going to be over the tax for 3 straight years next year.  Unless the Red Sox complete their Betts/Price dump they will be over for 3 years in a row. Teams can do it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 08, 2020, 09:21:13 pm
...-maybe Bryant is still here opening day, Cubs get off to great start and continue to play well, and Cubs go for it. Remains to be seen even if doesn’t seem very likely.....

I think that's entirely possible.  The Cubs may be one of the worst ten teams in baseball this season, with their pitching, so there's obviously a lot of scenarios where they'll want to be selling come July. 

But it's also possible that their pitching will be surprisingly competitive, they'll be in the playoff hunt, and they won't sell.  Q and Lester had 3.80 and 4.26 FIP, maybe they'll be anti-awful enough to support a 90-win season? 

They'll have another chance to get under next winter, no?  Quintana, $10.5.  Chatwood, $13.5, Lester $20. 

The ideal, of course, would be to BOTH win this year AND get under.  Perhaps Q will pitch well enough early to trade him and get under.  But if things go right, perhaps Alzolay will emerge and be an upgrade on Q anyway?  Trade Q, and both upgrade the rotation AND get under the lux line all in the same move!   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 08, 2020, 09:37:33 pm
I think that's entirely possible.  The Cubs may be one of the worst ten teams in baseball this season, with their pitching, so there's obviously a lot of scenarios where they'll want to be selling come July. 

Last year the Cubs were an 84 win team. Their run differential was roughly that of a 90 win team.
The 10th worst team last year was tied for 72 wins. The Cubs aren’t 12 games worse than last year and a lot had to go wrong to make them an 84 win team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 08, 2020, 09:42:52 pm
How does Lester's $10 buyout work for lux calc?  Now and later? 

1.  Will the $10 buyout still count against? 

2.  Or will the buyout reduce the Cubs payroll by $20 next year, with the $10 buyout having already been averaged out over the guaranteed years? 

3.  Put yet another way: do current estimates of the Cubs 2020 lux-line payroll already include $1.7M to account for Lester's buyout being averaged over the guaranteed seasons? 

(I can't remember if I'm mixing NFL rules into mlb...)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 08, 2020, 09:56:43 pm
Last year the Cubs were an 84 win team. ...The Cubs aren’t 12 games worse than last year ..

Probably not.  But yeah, who knows?   Q wasn't as bad all year as he was in September, or Lester either.  But what if that's just the new normal for them, they're just washed at this point, and those two guys are just really bad right out of the gate, and all the way through?  What if Chatwood quickly Steve-Blasses his way back to the 2018 version?  What if Kimbrel's horrific-ness wasn't really only about missing spring training, what if he's just washed and pretty bad now, and we get 6 months of him being one of the worst pitchers in baseball, instead of only 20 innings?  What if Wieck's 10 innings were a fluke, and he reverts to a guy who belongs in the minors, etc.??  There are a lot of scenarios where both the rotation and the bullpen end up being both really bad.  Which can of course proliferate.  So, if we're obviously out of it, maybe then you end up trading Bryant in July, so now you've got Bote starting every day? 

As reb would say, who knows?  The actual season could play out in a whole lot of different ways. 

This is why I think management is holding their decisions, and allowing first-half performance to dictate.  **IF** the team is good, they'll spend and add.  **IF** the team is bad, they can sell a contract or two, and get under the line. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 08, 2020, 10:03:18 pm
The Yankees are already $50 million over the CBT threshold. This will be their second year paying the tax in a row.

Next year they have 7 player accounting for $135 million in CBT payroll and 15 arbitration eligible players. They are going to be over the tax for 3 straight years next year.  Unless the Red Sox complete their Betts/Price dump they will be over for 3 years in a row. Teams can do it.

According to Forbes, Yankees revenues exceed Cubs revenues by over $200 M a season.  It’s just not a comp at all. Just as in the Steinbrenner era, Yankees occasionally will go all in. Their revenues allow for that in a way different than anybody else. They’re the Yankees.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 08, 2020, 10:11:56 pm
That's true, reb.  But the argument, "Nobody goes over 3-straight" will not remain true next year.  The Yankees surely will. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on February 08, 2020, 10:25:10 pm
How does Lester's $10 buyout work for lux calc?  Now and later? 

1.  Will the $10 buyout still count against? 

2.  Or will the buyout reduce the Cubs payroll by $20 next year, with the $10 buyout having already been averaged out over the guaranteed years? 

3.  Put yet another way: do current estimates of the Cubs 2020 lux-line payroll already include $1.7M to account for Lester's buyout being averaged over the guaranteed seasons? 

(I can't remember if I'm mixing NFL rules into mlb...)

Craig, buyouts are part of the guaranteed value of the contract.  They are taken into account in the average annual value of the contract.

Lester's deal was $155/6.  The $10 buyout is part of the $155.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 08, 2020, 10:40:03 pm
If the Cubs pick up his option they would get a $1.7 million credit against the CBT in his previous years with the Cubs and his AAV for the CBT would be whatever the option is for.  If they decline it nothing changes.

That's true, reb.  But the argument, "Nobody goes over 3-straight" will not remain true next year.  The Yankees surely will. 

The whole point of this is the Cubs could afford it. The Red Sox are set to go over for 3 straight years this year if the don’t dump Betts and Price. Teams can do it. Teams have chosen not to because owners want to make more money.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 09, 2020, 08:30:25 am
Thanks, Jeff and Blue. 

3 options:
1.  Go over both 20 and 21.  Go for it.  Suffer the $50M consequence in 21 (and presumably etc. in subsequent seasons.)

2.  Go over in 20, but then get under in 21.  Lux payroll drops by $26M with Lester gone.  Q and Chatwood (and Descalso) also come off.  So there is capacity to get under the line and not pay the extra $50.   

3.  Get under in 20, then go back over in 21.  Suppose trading Q on July 31 doesn't quite get you under,  but gets within <$1.6 . They could then pay Lester's $25 contract for 2021.  Pay the extra $15M cash but reset the lux clock, versus losing $50M/year in lux consequences for 21 and etc..
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 09, 2020, 05:36:25 pm
Theo Epstein, via Barry Rozner:

It has been quite a while since the Cubs headed for Arizona after such a quiet winter -- and on the heels of missing the playoffs.

And the man who rescued the franchise from a shocking lack of competence on the way to ending the worst title drought in sports history, has gone from Chicago hero to the focus of fan wrath after moving on from Joe Maddon and shopping the faithful's most beloved stars.

"The key is you don't listen when they're saying nice things about you, and then you don't have to listen when they're not," Cubs president Theo Epstein said recently. "You can't define your self-worth based on people being reactive to a moment of success -- or not.

"I'm proud that we hired Joe. And I'm proud of the five years we had together, and I also know it was the right thing to do for the organization.

"Things change. Just like your manager can be the perfect guy at one moment in time, and then become not the right guy for another moment in time, you know going into an offseason -- or a period of the CBA -- that you're going to be really aggressive, that you're going to acquire through trade or free agency some big-name players, and you're going to be lauded, hopefully, not just in the offseason, but when your team wins.

"You're going to be well thought of."

The flip side is ...

"There's going to be times when you have to get rid of guys maybe a year before people think you have to," Epstein said, "or you're gonna have to reset the roster, or you're going to run out of financial flexibility and be less active for a couple seasons, and you know you're not going to be as well thought of.

"That's just the reality."


"There's going to be times when you have to get rid of guys maybe a year before people think you have to," Epstein said, "or you're gonna have to reset the roster, or you're going to run out of financial flexibility and be less active for a couple seasons, and you know you're not going to be as well thought of.

"We knew once this CBA came out," Epstein said of luxury and repeater taxes, "there would be some real challenges toward the end of it for big market teams that had developed a lot of good players getting more expensive through arbitration, had added free agents on top and had won.

"If you look at the three teams that won in '16, '17, '18 (Chicago, Houston and Boston), it hasn't been a real active winter for any of us in terms of adding players.[/size]"Part of that is the reality of the CBA. We knew it would be challenging and ultimately there would be a choice between maximizing the moment in '20 and '21 or taking a longer-term view and trading out of that position a little bit while still trying to win."

In other words, Epstein did not want to drive the big blue bus off a cliff.

"It's pretty clear in talking to everyone in the organization, including ownership, that no one wants to follow a good run of five or six years and be out of it for five or six years," Epstein said. "We wanted a smoother transition.

"There's going to be change whether you like it or not, so better to make it -- if possible -- on your terms, and try not to have a real falloff where you have to put your fans through a long period of non-competitiveness."


https://www.dailyherald.com/sports/20200207/rozner-cubs-epstein-not-surprised-hes-gone-from-hero-to-target-of-fans-wrath?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on February 09, 2020, 05:40:53 pm
"There's going to be times when you have to get rid of guys maybe a year before people think you have to," Epstein said

There's probably a more polite way of saying that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 09, 2020, 05:45:29 pm
"There's going to be times when you have to get rid of guys maybe a year before people think you have to," Epstein said

There's probably a more polite way of saying that.
  Kick their asses to the curb?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 09, 2020, 06:53:19 pm
Taking Theo at face value the last two offseasons certainly represent an interesting strategy - change thru inaction.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 09, 2020, 07:43:28 pm
Cubs talked to the Dodgers about Verdugo, which probably means they were talking about Bryant.

Jon Heyman @JonHeyman
Jeter Downs is the best part of Boston haul. Verdugo is very talented both ways but he has a lot of well-known makeup questions. LA talked about him in trades with a few teams, including Cubs and Rays — tho with that ability, they knew it had to be for something big. And it was.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 09, 2020, 07:49:17 pm
Br beat me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 09, 2020, 08:52:16 pm
..."There's going to be times when you have to get rid of guys maybe a year before people think you have to," Epstein said, "or you're gonna have to reset the roster, or you're going to run out of financial flexibility and be less active for a couple seasons, and you know you're not going to be as well thought of.   "That's just the reality."...

I wonder about this.  This seemed to be a logical projection back in 2016, when you maybe thought that not only would Bryant and Contreras and Baez be superstars deserving top dollar, but Schwarber and Russell might too, and Almora might become really good and really expensive too.  *IF* you pretty-much had young stars across the lineup, I can see the necessity of trading some big contracts away. 

But for the Cubs now, would paying Bryant, Contreras, Baez, and Schwarber their market price become prohibitive?  Don't other big-market contenders fit 4 good-player-contracts onto a roster? 

If your D+D could produce supporting pieces? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 09, 2020, 09:38:05 pm
Is it common knowledge that there are makeup issues with Verdugo?  I hadn't heard that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 10, 2020, 08:12:38 am
Yes. I’ve heard it from multiple podcasts as well. None of them said what the make up concerns where.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 10, 2020, 09:21:17 am
Maeda +$10 million+ prospect to the Twins for Comp B pick [+ Gaterol]....

Lux line question.  If the Dodgers send $10M, is that invisible on their payroll as accounted towards lux penalties?  Or will that count as $10 against them? 

I ask this in the context of the Cubs.  Suppose it's July 31, can the Cubs send cash to help move Lester or Q, at no lux penalty? 
*Lester would presumably have like $7M + $10M buyout left to be paid.
*His lux-calculation, I think, is $26 for the season.
*Could the Cubs give $16M to cover all expenses; add in Roederer (or whomever) to compensate the buying team for wasting a roster spot on Lester and for helping us out; effectively knock off $8+ in lux payroll (2/6 of the $26 for the year...); get under the cap for this year; and save $50M in lux-3 consequences next year? 

Or, what *IF* the Cubs are competing for the playoffs, might unloading Lester both get you under the lux line AND improve the roster?
*Perhaps replacing Lester with Alzolay/Mills/Rea/Marquez might possibly upgrade the rotation? 
*Or, maybe you only need to drop $3M to get under the line, but moving Lester reduced by $8M.  Might moving Lester effectively free up $5M to acquire talent to help for the playoff run, while stills staying under the lux line?  For example, if you picked up a guy with a $12M contract for just the last two months of the season, that would only count $4M against lux calculations?  So by adding a good new piece, while moving Lester, you both improve AND get under the line and save $50M next year and etc.?  Or maybe, if moving Lester gets you under the line by $5M, you could pick up a couple of relief pitchers for the stretch, or whatever? 

Given that Q will only have $3.5 in remaining contract when July ends, then *IF* that's all the Cubs need to get under, it would probably take a lesser cash payment, and/or perhaps a lesser prospect included, to facilitate unloading Q? 

I'm just trying to process what capacity the Cubs will have to make mid-season moves to get themselves under the lux line. 
1.  Obviously one route is to have Q or Lester or Kimbrel or Chatwood performing at a high level, so that a buyer **wants** to acquire them, and will perhaps give you a prospect to get them.
2.  Second route is to sacrifice prospect talent in order to motivate a buyer to take on our contract.
3.  Third is to use money to facilitate a contract transfer.   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 10, 2020, 10:22:06 am
Any money sent to cover salary would count against the CBT. Any money to cover a buy out of an option would not count.

The Dodgers are now another team that will be over the CBT for 2 years in a row unless they can move money. The where barely over last year and are just over now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on February 10, 2020, 11:56:05 am
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EQbnfmKWkAE1H0g?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 10, 2020, 01:23:40 pm
Hottovy says Chatwood is being prepped for the fifth starter job, suggests favorite. “He’s put himself in a good spot to be in that role.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 10, 2020, 02:09:45 pm
Any money sent to cover salary would count against the CBT. Any money to cover a buy out of an option would not count.

Thanks!  Really helpful, although unfortunate for the Cubs.  That makes it way harder to get any lux relief by moving Lester . So to move Lester, you could at least cover the $10 buyout; but otherwise you'd need to move him as a talent exchange that the buyer wanted. 
1.  I kinda doubt any contender is going to want to add Lester to strengthen their pennant-run rotation;
2.  No non-contender wants two months of expiring. 
3.  So pretty much the only way to get a buyer to take on Lester's 2020 salary will be to give them a prospect worth their cost. 

I wonder what the price of prospects is these days?  For a team to take on $4M of Lester's contract, would that be a fair price for a top-10 prospect?  Or would you need to give up somebody in the 4-5-6 range to get a team to bite?  Obviously the Cubs aren't going to give Davis or Marquez or Amaya, probably not Jensen either, to offload Lester. 

Doesn't seem like a desirable sacrifice to depend on. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 10, 2020, 02:26:25 pm
Morrow's apparently slinging it well too.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 10, 2020, 02:43:04 pm
I would expect Morrow to throw pretty good unless or until he re-injures his arm.  If he can somehow stay healthy, I would expect him to be pretty good.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on February 10, 2020, 03:25:08 pm
As of right now Comcast isn't carrying the Marquee Network.  I'm guessing they will cave prior to opening day or shortly thereafter, but any thoughts on what to do if Comcast doesn't cave?  That might just be the impetus to cut the cable cord as the younger generation is doing.  Any of you get rid of cable?  If so, what are you streaming and how is it working out thus far?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on February 10, 2020, 03:39:32 pm
As of right now Comcast isn't carrying the Marquee Network.  I'm guessing they will cave prior to opening day or shortly thereafter, but any thoughts on what to do if Comcast doesn't cave?  That might just be the impetus to cut the cable cord as the younger generation is doing.  Any of you get rid of cable?  If so, what are you streaming and how is it working out thus far?

I'm streaming YouTube TV, and at least in Nashville, I think that's the best.  It carries all the local channels plus Fox Sports Tennessee for the Predators games.  I also add MLB.tv for baseball season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on February 10, 2020, 03:41:00 pm
The Cubs are finally taking a look at Taijuan Walker.  If he's only throwing 83-85, though, he has a long way to go before he can help anyone out.

Quote
TAIJUAN WALKER

SP, ARIZONA DIAMONDBACKS

Free agent right-hander Taijuan Walker is throwing in Cubs' camp on Monday.

The two sides don't have a deal in place, as the Cubs merely plan to take a look at him. Things could progress depending on how things go. Walker has barely pitched the past two seasons and reportedly struggled with his velocity in a recent workout, but that hasn't stopped teams from calling. The Mariners reportedly have a one-year "standing offer" on the table.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 10, 2020, 04:42:58 pm
I'm streaming YouTube TV, and at least in Nashville, I think that's the best.  It carries all the local channels plus Fox Sports Tennessee for the Predators games.  I also add MLB.tv for baseball season.

I have YouTube TV too.  I signed up with my office address and get all the Chicago, KC/St Louis, Minnesota sports networks.  I'm hoping that they will pick up Marquee too and then I can get rid of MLB TV.  The unlimited DVR is nice and I can't really think of any channels that I miss without cable.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 10, 2020, 04:55:04 pm
Thanks!  Really helpful, although unfortunate for the Cubs.  That makes it way harder to get any lux relief by moving Lester . So to move Lester, you could at least cover the $10 buyout; but otherwise you'd need to move him as a talent exchange that the buyer wanted. 
1.  I kinda doubt any contender is going to want to add Lester to strengthen their pennant-run rotation;
2.  No non-contender wants two months of expiring. 
3.  So pretty much the only way to get a buyer to take on Lester's 2020 salary will be to give them a prospect worth their cost. 

I wonder what the price of prospects is these days?  For a team to take on $4M of Lester's contract, would that be a fair price for a top-10 prospect?  Or would you need to give up somebody in the 4-5-6 range to get a team to bite?  Obviously the Cubs aren't going to give Davis or Marquez or Amaya, probably not Jensen either, to offload Lester. 

Doesn't seem like a desirable sacrifice to depend on. 

Going off of Fangraphs ratings and prospect trade values it would be Ademan or Abbott level of prospect for $4 million or so of value.  I could see a contender looking at him as a guy with playoff experience that could be a 5th type of starter.  You won't get much, but contenders make those types of trades all the time.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 10, 2020, 05:47:01 pm
Thanks, blue.  Somehow selling Ademan to get under the lux seems less problematic than trading Bryant for below value! 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robert L on February 10, 2020, 05:57:51 pm
YouTube TV is just as good as cable and half the price
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 10, 2020, 08:03:56 pm
Hottovy says Chatwood is being prepped for the fifth starter job, suggests favorite. “He’s put himself in a good spot to be in that role.”

Thanks, Dusty.  Fun to get some comments about baseball and players!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 10, 2020, 08:12:57 pm
Morrow's apparently slinging it well too.

That's good, Dusty.  Thanks for passing that along. 

I would expect Morrow to throw pretty good unless or until he re-injures his arm.  If he can somehow stay healthy, I would expect him to be pretty good.

I feel kinda different.  Morrow to my knowledge had never gotten healthy and was never "slinging it well" since early 2018.  So my  default has been to assume he's not really right, and will be unable to throw hard and well, until he shows that he can.  So *if* his arm was to show up just fine in camp and he's throwing it well, I'll be pretty enthused.  And will then assume that he'll stay healthy until he isn't.  Yes, I agree it's fair to assume that even if he's healthy for a while, that doesn't mean he'll remain so for the full season, or much of it. But I'd love to have him showing in camp like he's a healthy contributor. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on February 10, 2020, 08:26:40 pm
I'm putting the over/under on Morrow 2020 MLB innings at 1.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robb on February 10, 2020, 09:20:21 pm
He did have impingement surgery Sept 3. Maybe that gives him a few months before he breaks down again.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 10, 2020, 11:05:34 pm
If anybody sees Morrow at Starbucks this spring, let us know.

Jesse Rogers
@ESPNChiCubs
Reliever Brandon Morrow attempting a comeback after missing the last 1.5 years. He says he’s healthy: “My stuff was still good last year when I was throwing live BP...I just couldn’t pick up my cup of coffee the next day.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 10, 2020, 11:14:16 pm
Glad those last five words were there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 11, 2020, 08:49:01 am
https://theathletic.com/1598090/2020/02/10/sharma-with-open-spots-in-the-bullpen-cubs-camp-is-already-buzzing-with-hungry-pitchers/

Sharma article, for those with subscription.  It has extensive commentary re Morrow.  It doesn't present him as being proven healthy yet, or as ready as the next guy to compete for the opening day roster.  More in the cautious, conservative rehab mode.  Still, no setbacks yet. 

He says he's "cautiously optimistic", and "so far I'm good".  But he and Hottovy speak to moving very slowly and cautiously.  "Morrow said that while most pitchers have two or sometimes only one day in between bullpen sessions, the Cubs are keeping it conservative with him and giving it three days."

"While he remains optimistic that he can make the Opening Day roster — ... — the likelihood of that happening remains minimal.....  'I think we could talk about him being ready to go at that point,' Hottovy said. 'Whether or not it’s full-go in games in the regular season — I think we’ll ease him into games this spring. I don’t foresee a whole lot of shackles on him. If he feels good, we’ll let him take that next step.'  Pushing Morrow to be ready for April doesn’t seem wise. They need him healthy later in the summer, whether they’re in the race or, for the first time since 2014, looking to deal non-essential players at the deadline."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 11, 2020, 09:23:13 am
https://theathletic.com/1595364/2020/02/10/cubs-roster-projection-2-0-who-is-safe-and-who-needs-a-solid-spring-training-to-break-camp/

Sharma on roster.  Very cut-and-dried for position guys, pretty much, barring injuries. 
Two catchers.  Only possible wildcard would be choosing to keep Josh Phegley as a 3rd. 
Five outfielders
Six infielders.  Those six could include all three of Hoerner, Descalso, and Bote. 

The only real position question, I think, is whether Hoerner locks down 2B, or shows enough Q's that they maybe send him back. 
*He got called up on sept 10, not a full month.  Bryant-ing him to defer FA for an extra year would require waiting till early May. 
*Not that I ever imagine Hoerner being some star whose free agency is going to be a budget buster, so I'm not sure how much that should drive the decision-making.

Pitching:
Obvious 5 starters, including Chatwood. 
Sharma suggests 5 sure relievers:  Kimbrel, Wick, Ryan, Jeffress, Mills
*Note:  Sharma lists Chatwood and Mills as competing for the 5th starter spot, with the loser going to pen.  It's possible Mills will look excellent, for rotation, and the pen will look like it would benefit greatly from Chatwood, so maybe they'll be better utilized that way.  But I think it's simplest to just assume Chatwood for rotation, and Mills for long relief.

Competition for 3 relief spots:  Brad Wieck, Danny Hultzen (NR), Dan Winkler, Ryan Tepera, Casey Sadler, Dillon Maples,
Duane Underwood, Trevor Megill, James Norwood, Justin Steele, Manuel Rodriguez, ;
and Adbert Alzolay, Jharel Cotton, Tyson Miller (note:  Sharma lists Cotton and Alzolay as starters, and assumes they'll start at Iowa to get themselves available as rotation recall.  But I wouldn't rule them out for relief work, sooner or later.)

NRIs: Brandon Morrow, Jason Adam, Brock Stewart, Ben Taylor, Tyler Olson,
Oscar De La Cruz, Dakota Mekkes, Caleb Simpson, Rex Brothers, C.D. Pelham, and Wyatt Short .
*(Hultzen is also NRI, but I put him in with the roster guys because I think he looked very competitive last September, so I don't see him as long a shot as other NRIs. 

 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 11, 2020, 09:27:24 am
I agree with Sharma that Wieck is "competing", rather than "sure".  He's been an inconsistent wildman in the past, and could easily pitch his way off.  But I certainly do feel like he's kind of a default to make it, barring a bad camp.  If he's mostly pretty good during camp, I think he's in as the 2nd lefty.

Underwood is out of options.  so he's got maybe a better shot than I tend to remember. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 11, 2020, 11:14:34 am
Weick has an option.  Sadler, Underwood, Megill would be lost if they don't make the team.  Sadler, Underwood and Megill would be the 3 favorites for the back end of bullpen if the results are close.  If they don't perform obviously the Cubs will cut them.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 11, 2020, 11:32:09 am
As of right now Comcast isn't carrying the Marquee Network.  I'm guessing they will cave prior to opening day or shortly thereafter, but any thoughts on what to do if Comcast doesn't cave?  That might just be the impetus to cut the cable cord as the younger generation is doing.  Any of you get rid of cable?  If so, what are you streaming and how is it working out thus far?

If you live in near Chicago, or in a blacked out area like Iowa, MLBTV won't help you, but in most parts of the country, MLBTV is outstanding.  You can watch all broadcasts live, other than the national broadcasts such as ESPN sundays and the Saturday summer broadcasts.  On those, if you can't get them in your region, you can watch it on MLBTV starting about an hour after the game ends.  I think it costs about 130 dollars for every game for every team during the season.  You could even watch every Cub game of the 2016 season if you wish.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 11, 2020, 11:49:44 am
Weick has an option.  Sadler, Underwood, Megill would be lost if they don't make the team.  Sadler, Underwood and Megill would be the 3 favorites for the back end of bullpen if the results are close.  If they don't perform obviously the Cubs will cut them.

Thanks. 

That's really helpful to keep in mind.  Agree that tiebreaker defaults to no-options guys. 

My guess is that not all three of these guys will be able to hold those spots, but helpful first-guess. 

Ryan and Wick, of course, have roster locks based on last year.  But given the unpredictability of relief guys, it will be interesting to see how they hold up or whether they relapse.   


Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 11, 2020, 12:59:17 pm
That's good, Dusty.  Thanks for passing that along. 

"I would expect Morrow to throw pretty good unless or until he re-injures his arm.  If he can somehow stay healthy, I would expect him to be pretty good."

I feel kinda different.  Morrow to my knowledge had never gotten healthy and was never "slinging it well" since early 2018.  So my  default has been to assume he's not really right, and will be unable to throw hard and well, until he shows that he can.  So *if* his arm was to show up just fine in camp and he's throwing it well, I'll be pretty enthused.  And will then assume that he'll stay healthy until he isn't.  Yes, I agree it's fair to assume that even if he's healthy for a while, that doesn't mean he'll remain so for the full season, or much of it. But I'd love to have him showing in camp like he's a healthy contributor. 

Craig - I think we are saying the same thing.  When I say "throw well if healthy", I mean 2018 healthy.  After that, although he occasionally pitched, I don't think he was healthy, hence the poor performance.

I agree that the odds of Morrow being totally healthy are small.  But the 2017/2018 would make an excellent set up man, or even an acceptable closer if Kimbrel is unable to return to top form, which is probably a 50 - 50 chance at best.  But a million dollars is a small gamble for what could be a large reward.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 11, 2020, 02:14:55 pm
Jordan Bastian @MLBastian
Theo says the “offseason narrative” of making big changes to roster will “stay upstairs.” Said some minor tweaks coule happen, isn’t sure on major trades. Trying to turn the page to 2020.


What an awful offseason. Added nothing, so they're not any better than they were last year. Didn't get under the luxury tax, so they either dump someone at all costs at the deadline or they stay over and have to have another terrible do-nothing offseason next year. Still on pace to fall off a cliff after 2021.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 11, 2020, 03:09:57 pm
Jesse Rogers @ESPNChiCubs
Theo: “We’ll probably have a couple small moves, adding guys on minor league deals. "

Expect Glenbrook North's very own Jason Kipnis to be one of them. Cubs zeroing in. The second most famous alum from there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 11, 2020, 03:29:18 pm
Theo: "We have made several significant moves this winter.  I bought a new Beamer, and my wife refurnished the whole house.  We also repainted my office.  I'm tuckered out."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on February 11, 2020, 04:31:27 pm
Platooning Hoerner and Kipnis feels like a very current Cubs thing to do.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 11, 2020, 05:17:52 pm
Kipnis is officially a Cub.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 11, 2020, 05:18:26 pm
Minor league deal via Heyman.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on February 11, 2020, 05:50:53 pm
Who is the most famous?  John Hughes?  Scott Sanderson? Doug Rader?  Chris Collins?  Jon Scheyer?  Countless figure skaters or speed skaters?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 11, 2020, 06:01:57 pm
Cubs cornering the market on crappy hitting and fielding second basemen that hit left handed.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Coach on February 11, 2020, 06:07:51 pm
Who is the most famous?  John Hughes?  Scott Sanderson? Doug Rader?  Chris Collins?  Jon Scheyer?  Countless figure skaters or speed skaters?

Probably jokingly referring to himself.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 11, 2020, 07:37:43 pm
Jordan Bastian @MLBastian
Theo says the “offseason narrative” of making big changes to roster will “stay upstairs.” Said some minor tweaks coule happen, isn’t sure on major trades. Trying to turn the page to 2020.


What an awful offseason. Added nothing, so they're not any better than they were last year. Didn't get under the luxury tax, so they either dump someone at all costs at the deadline or they stay over and have to have another terrible do-nothing offseason next year. Still on pace to fall off a cliff after 2021.

I don't know how you can spin the last two offseasons as anything but a colossal failure by the front office - whatever the root cause.  Went into both spouting all kinds of talk about what needed to change and ended up changing none of it.  And whatever the goals were for this offseason, be they publicly acknowledged or not, none of them were accomplished.  We're still above the cap, still positioned to crater after 2021 and in a worse position to compete in 2020 than we were in October.  Maybe we pull an inside straight and compete in a weak division, but it will have been in spite of the offseason and not because of it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 11, 2020, 08:37:11 pm
https://theathletic.com/1601120/2020/02/11/theres-three-sides-to-every-story-including-joe-maddons-cubs-departure/

Joe:  “There was just, you can say, philosophical differences,” while adding that the front office, “wanted to control more of what was occurring in just about everything.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 11, 2020, 10:04:42 pm
Kipnis isnt better than Bote or Hoerner.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 12, 2020, 10:39:51 am
I think that if Kipnis makes the team, it is because he is a left handed hitter with some power off the bench.  But he will need a very good spring to make the 25 man roster.

Unless Bryant is traded and Bote is the third baseman.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on February 12, 2020, 10:48:54 am
Good to see a Central Suburban League alum have a shot with the Cubs.  I'm an alum of rival Niles North.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 12, 2020, 11:08:30 am
I think that if Kipnis makes the team, it is because he is a left handed hitter with some power off the bench.  ...

Rizzo and Descalso are the only lefty infielders on the 40-man. 

There are two ways for Kipnis to win a job:
1.  Beat out Descalso
2.  Hoerner to Iowa, at least into early May.

Both pathways are plausible.
1. Descalso was terrible.  Kipnis isn't likely to be average or good.  But on the anti-awful continuum, he's got a shot to be less awful than Descalso.   
*Descalso: career he's OPS'd slightly worse versus righties.  Anti-split is unusual.  Kipnis has a more normal split, with OPS's vs RHP in the low-mid .700's for each of last several years.  Not sure how awful his defense is, but as a platoon-style guy, he seems better suited to share some starts with Hoerner. 

2.  To Bryant Hoerner, that would maybe go about a week into May.  *IF* Hoerner doesn't have a compelling spring, it wouldn't shock if he got sent to Iowa, or at least for the month.  If so, they could perhaps keep BOTH Kipnis and Descalso, and give them a month to sort themselves. 

One of the realities with the new Cubs situation is that there are pretty good avenues to both making the roster and to earning playing time.  An appealing situation for fringe or rehab guys.   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 12, 2020, 11:28:00 am
Is there really a significant chance Hoerner will start on the MLB roster? If he hadn't been forced onto the roster in September because of injuries to both Baez and Russell, we wouldn't even be thinking of that as even a remote possibility. He has played 70 games at AA and none at AAA and didn't dominate AA while he was there (though a lot of that was probably injury related). He was good but rarely walked once he got to MLB.

They arguably brought up Russell, Happ, and Almora up too soon, which set them back in their development. I'd hate to see them do the same thing with Hoerner, especially when it's not clear he helps them win this year right now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 12, 2020, 12:00:04 pm
They arguably brought up Russell, Happ, and Almora up too soon, which set them back in their development. I'd hate to see them do the same thing with Hoerner, especially when it's not clear he helps them win this year right now.

Russell was clearly better at the start of his career though.  Almora's flaws aren't something that more time in the minors would fix.  Happ might have been rushed, but he's been above average at the MLB level as a hitter and maybe the K problems at the major league level got fixed because he came up early vs reinforcing bad habits in the minors.

Hoerner is a gut that walks in the minors and doesn't strike out.  He might be a guy that figures it out by playing in the majors.

If the let Bote play second and just use their lefty crap guys hit against only certain righties that Bote doesn't match up well against.  If Descalso/Kipinis/Asujaecanthit are getting a bunch of playing time it is going to be rough.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 12, 2020, 12:11:04 pm
Given the alternatives, I wish they'd give Bote an extended opportunity to run with the job. In 566 MLB PA, he has hit .251/.346/.417, which is good for a 102 wRC+. He's been worth 2.5 fWAR in roughly a season's worth of PA. He's not a bad player.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 12, 2020, 12:15:24 pm
Given the alternatives, I wish they'd give Bote an extended opportunity to run with the job. In 566 MLB PA, he has hit .251/.346/.417, which is good for a 102 wRC+. He's been worth 2.5 fWAR in roughly a season's worth of PA. He's not a bad player.

He needs a lefty platoon option.  My guess is his numbers vs righties are carefully picked to limit his swing issues.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 12, 2020, 12:20:51 pm
Maybe it is selective use...but he's shown no platoon split so far (103 wRC+ vs. LHP; 102 vs. RHP). And 73% of his career PA have come against RHP, so they're not limiting him that much.

I don't see any real good reason to not at least try him as an everyday guy at 2B for a couple months (assuming Hoerner is at AAA). At worst, he's as bad as Kipnis/Descalso/Asuaje and they've lost nothing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 12, 2020, 12:27:05 pm
Disagree, br. Given what the Cubs have NOT done about 2B, it seems pretty obvious that Hoerner is viewed as the future 2B.  And given the options, that he's pretty much the favorite, other than service-time issue. 

1.  I think if he'd ended with his AA numbers; given the options of Bote/Descalso; plus if the Cubs continued to enthusiastically talk about his future; then I think he'd have been very much on-our-minds.  Even if not as the opening-day favorite, then at least as a guy who, given a good start in Iowa, we'd be eager to have him replace Descalso.

2.  But he did get called up, and he did fine.  .282/.301/.744, not great; but *IF* he could sustain that, won't that be better on the anti-awful continuum than what you'll get from Bote/Descalso/Kipnis?

3.  He's not Baez arm-wise.  But his defense looked good; MUCH better than Bote or Happ.  I think he's way ahead of the options on the defensive spectrum.

4.  I think the other thing here is that young guys can get stronger and get better.  He's 22, with 415 pro AB.  It's not just simplistic Cubs fan.  Doesn't every team hope that 22-year-old 1st-rounders have talent and will continue to improve beyond their first 400 AB, and will emerge as useful support players?

Sure, I totally get that it's a new season and he might be terrible and opponents may quickly enough ID his weaknesses and grind him.  But I think it's alright to hope that isn't the outcome. 

If it wasn't for the question of whether he gets the Bryant treatment, I think he'd be the strong favorite. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 12, 2020, 12:31:39 pm
I think it's unlikely and premature to hope for.  But *IF* Hoerner did emerge as a capable offensive guy, he does seem like a guy who might eventually profile in as an anti-awful leadoff guy, if his offense emerges the way the Cubs hope. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 12, 2020, 12:34:26 pm
Hoerner may be viewed as the future at 2B, but not necessarily immediately when the season starts.

I believe that Bote is likely to be a significantly better hitter at the major league level than Hoerner is right now. I think the gap on offense is bigger than the gap on defense. That doesn't mean I think Bote is always going to be a better hitter, but I think he helps them win more now.

If Russell or Baez had stayed healthy through September last year, Hoerner would've gone to the Arizona Fall League as planned, and he'd definitely be opening up the season at AAA. I don't see why an emergency call-up last year should change that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on February 12, 2020, 12:36:32 pm
I've changed my opinion and am leaning towards the view that the Cubs would be better off having Hoerner start the season at AAA.  He could work on his defense at 2B and CF as well as trying to "dominate" offensively.  Let Bote/Kipnis handle 2B at least early in the season.  Depending on how Happ/Bote/Kipnis work out (and how Hoerner performs at AAA), it might turn out to make sense to bring up Hoerner during the season to play 2B or CF.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on February 12, 2020, 12:42:55 pm
Jon Heyman  @JonHeyman  1h
Ben Zobrist hasn’t announced anything but is at home and has no plans to play. Very nice career: started versatility trend and was rewarded for it, won 2 rings
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 12, 2020, 01:23:25 pm
....Depending on how Happ/Bote/Kipnis work out (and how Hoerner performs at AAA), it might turn out to make sense to bring up Hoerner during the season to play 2B or CF.

That makes a lot of sense, Play.  Gives some extra time to sort things out at both 2B/CF, and gives Hoerner time to implement whatever adjustments; and gives the extra year of club control.  Very reasonable.

...I believe that Bote is likely to be a significantly better hitter at the major league level than Hoerner is right now. I think the gap on offense is bigger than the gap on defense. That doesn't mean I think Bote is always going to be a better hitter, but I think he helps them win more now.

If Russell or Baez had stayed healthy through September last year, Hoerner would've gone to the Arizona Fall League as planned, and he'd definitely be opening up the season at AAA. I don't see why an emergency call-up last year should change that.

Yeah, you may be right.  Who knows.  I admit I'm not much of a Bote believer; I think he was very bad on defense last year, and is very limited as a hitter.  But, I'd love to have him pleasantly surprise me.  I wonder if he'll have made any adjustments to improve himself defensively?  Last spring, a story was on how much Bote had bulked up at the chest/shoulders, to add HR power.  But I wonder if that didn't contribute to his lousy defense, body balance not the same for getting down on ground balls?  Perhaps he slimmed back somewhat this year, and his defense will improve a bit in the anti-awful direction? 

I'm fine with taking a shot with Bote/Descalso/Kipnis for a month, and then readjusting then as needed, if that's the decision.  I'm just saying that Hoerner might just be so far ahead defensively, and have an obviously better swing, so that Ross just sees him as the obviously superior player.  And perhaps there will be more commitment to infield defense this year, too.  A possibility that if Hoerner is the guy, and if Bryant just focuses totally on 3B instead of playing outfield, that the infield defense will play a LOT better this year. 

BR, as for the unplanned September emergency callup, it happened.  And they saw what they saw, which was a guy who wasn't overwhelmed or under-qualified.  So it's appropriate that those observations are entered into the data bank and the perception. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 12, 2020, 01:29:09 pm
Has Russell signed anywhere?  Surprises me that some team like KC or Seattle doesn't take a flyer on him.  New scenery could help him re-blossom.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 12, 2020, 01:31:11 pm
No one wants the PR hit for taking on the domestic abuser.

I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up in Japan for a couple of years then tries to make a comeback.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on February 12, 2020, 01:45:47 pm
He's also just not a very good or smart baseball player.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 12, 2020, 01:49:39 pm
But if he had the talent of Osuna, Chapman, and Miggie Cabrera, he'd have signed?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on February 12, 2020, 01:59:47 pm
Brandon Morrow has his first setback.  His bullpen session scheduled for Thursday has been pushed back due to food poisoning.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 12, 2020, 02:53:42 pm
Is there really a significant chance Hoerner will start on the MLB roster? If he hadn't been forced onto the roster in September because of injuries to both Baez and Russell, we wouldn't even be thinking of that as even a remote possibility. He has played 70 games at AA and none at AAA and didn't dominate AA while he was there (though a lot of that was probably injury related). He was good but rarely walked once he got to MLB.

They arguably brought up Russell, Happ, and Almora up too soon, which set them back in their development. I'd hate to see them do the same thing with Hoerner, especially when it's not clear he helps them win this year right now.

Like you, I have mostly assumed that Hoerner would start out in the minors, probably AAA.  His numbers were good in September last year, but remember, like many rookies, he had a very good start, but performance dropped once he had been up long enough to have a scouting record.  I hope they do not rush him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dihard on February 12, 2020, 07:11:00 pm
Good to see a Central Suburban League alum have a shot with the Cubs.  I'm an alum of rival Niles North.
I’m an alum of Glenbrook North.  Same class as Chris Collins. But my big brother went to North Carolina a few years earlier, so once Chris became a Dookie, I never rooted for him again.

I came home for the WS in 2016 and it was funny seeing W flags all over Northbrook, except one house with Indians stuff...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 12, 2020, 08:00:50 pm
Nico hit the gym in the off season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on February 12, 2020, 08:13:33 pm
I'm class of '67, Di.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 13, 2020, 09:45:47 am
Cubs still interested in Arenado?

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/02/13/cubs-reportedly-are-absolutely-motivated-to-try-to-acquire-nolan-arenado/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 13, 2020, 09:48:28 am
Jesse Rogers

Albert Almora, coming off a bad year, says he wasn’t in a good place mentally at the end of last season. Also, he’s revamped his swing: “Its visibly different.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on February 13, 2020, 09:56:49 am
Isn't this the third offseason Almora has changed his swing or something like that?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 13, 2020, 10:05:15 am
He's changed his leg kick, but the swing has always stayed the same.  If he actually changed the swing path it would be far more interesting to me to change is profile from GB heavy to getting balls in the air.  I think a lot of his problems was after hitting the girl though.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 13, 2020, 11:00:47 am
As I recall, he used to leg-kick a lot, but had trouble with balance against breaking stuff.  Adaption was to reduced the leg-kick, but at some cost to exit-velocity.  Last spring he brought back the leg kick; early camp reports had him driving balls very well.  (BP coaches don't throw the most balance-disrupting breaking pitches, I guess?)  But the balance problems obviously returned. 

To me as an outsider, I can be super simplistic:  "No leg-kick, no power; yes leg-kick, no balance.  Lose-lose either way."  I wonder to what extend the new analytics guy Stone and the "hit-lab" analyses are involved?  Somehow I'm hoping there can be more nuance, and Stone and the swing analytics can find a better optimal? 

Hard to guess with the mental framework.  Being a .271-OBP auto-out (coming after a 2nd-half 2018 as a .267-OBP auto-out), and being helpless to solve it, would drain any man.  Hitting the poor girl can't have helped.   

Almora's had a career with two halves.  Would be great if Almora, Iapoce, Stone, and Ross were somehow able to get him back to the 2016-2017-2018-first-half version.  He wasn't always the auto-out he's been since 2018-second half.  OPS values:
*2016: .761 (117PA, smallish sample)
*2017: .782
*2018-first-half:  .795
*2018-2nd-half:  .546 (.267 OBP)
*2019:  .651 (.271 OBP)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 13, 2020, 12:03:39 pm
There is pitch recognition problems as well.  He can make contact on a lot of bad pitches to hit which leads to bad contact.  It isn't just a swing, leg kick problem.  A swing that gives him more loft would be a nice start.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 13, 2020, 03:39:34 pm
“I was on the phone with somebody in Colorado last night who covers the Rockies, and he said to me, ‘Hey dude, let me just tell you, these discussions are real. Nolan Arenado … absolutely wants out of the Colorado Rockies organization, and he’s made it clear to ownership. I don’t want to be here. Get me outta here.’ He said, ‘I’m telling you, the Cubs are absolutely motivated to try to get him. Absolutely, 100%.'”--Kaplan
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 13, 2020, 04:26:15 pm
Patrick Saunders
@psaundersdp

Lots of #Rockies Nolan Arenado for #Cubs Kris Bryant rumors floating out there.
But one source told me that the Cubs might be creating media noise to make a better deal with #Phillies, #Nationals or #Braves
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on February 13, 2020, 04:30:58 pm
Patrick Saunders
@psaundersdp

Lots of #Rockies Nolan Arenado for #Cubs Kris Bryant rumors floating out there.
But one source told me that the Cubs might be creating media noise to make a better deal with #Phillies, #Nationals or #Braves

I've been wondering how long it would be before the Kris Bryant/Bryce Harper rumors resumed.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on February 13, 2020, 04:42:01 pm
Good to see a Central Suburban League alum have a shot with the Cubs.  I'm an alum of rival Niles North.

I'm a Fightin' Titan from GBS.  Loved playing at NN.  No fence and the highway behind the pitcher but for some reason I always did well there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 13, 2020, 04:51:48 pm
“I was on the phone with somebody in Colorado last night who covers the Rockies, and he said to me, ‘Hey dude, let me just tell you, these discussions are real. Nolan Arenado … absolutely wants out of the Colorado Rockies organization, and he’s made it clear to ownership. I don’t want to be here. Get me outta here.’ He said, ‘I’m telling you, the Cubs are absolutely motivated to try to get him. Absolutely, 100%.'”--Kaplan

Thanks, Dusty, interesting. 
1.  Arenado signed his deal less than 12 months ago, and now he's stomping to get out?  Weird. 
2.  Is he a jerk who will be a clubhouse cancer?  Or an impassioned winner with some edge who is exactly what Theo wishes he had more of?  Bryant is pure class; would Theo prefer a different persona? 
3.  If the Cubs are obsessed about lux line, how does picking up an extra $7.5 in Arenado help?  They just pay that, or more, and that would factor into discussions?  Or they take Lester off our hands?  Or they give up a younger pitcher and take Q?  Or Chatwood?  They give $6 but take Descalso? 
4.  Would Nolan just give away his opt-out?  Otherwise, where's the club-control advantage?   
5.  In an alleged discussion like this, who says no?  Or what's under discussion? 
a.  Straight up, Cubs say no?  Or Rockies?
b.  If Cubs, then it's about how much $$ Rockies throw in?   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 13, 2020, 05:11:01 pm
Ill wake up one morning to news that Bryant has signed a 8 year extension.

We truly have no clue how or when this comes to a conclusion.

I strongly suspect Bryant's days as a Cub are about over.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 13, 2020, 05:20:12 pm
craig - I think you've mused several times about possibly trading Lester to get under the luxury tax. Theo loves everything that Lester brings to the Cubs. He's clearly the leader of the pitching staff. I think there is zero chance of Lester being traded.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 13, 2020, 06:22:13 pm
Ron, true now.  July more than zero, since the chance that the Cubs aren't contending then might be more than zero. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 13, 2020, 07:04:53 pm
You'd have to pay someone to take Lester right now.  Maybe a lot.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 13, 2020, 08:07:34 pm
You'd also have to convince Lester to waive his 10/5 rights, and he'd probably want his 2021 option picked up to do that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 13, 2020, 08:17:31 pm
Obviously, Lester isn’t going anywhere.

His free agent deal is one of the best in Cubs history—-a key guy helping turn the Cubs into a contender, a WS championship, class act all the way.

Like plenty of successful signings, the salary at the back end of the deal isn’t commensurate with current production. Still, he’s a solid SP. If he goes somewhere late in the season, it’ll be because he’s been good and Cubs not good. So, let’s hope Cubs are good and Lester stays for the duration.



Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 13, 2020, 09:25:33 pm
No question that deal has been great for both sides.  But the idea that anyone would want the back end of it is a non-starter.  Paying bad Lester good Lester money is just the toll to be paid for signing a top FA at their peak.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on February 13, 2020, 09:52:31 pm
Craig, regarding why Arenado would want out so soon after signing his big deal, reports are that he’s felt betrayed by ownership. Likely there were certain goals represented to Arenado when he signed about how the Rockies would work to become competitive that he now doesn’t see happening in payroll, etc. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 13, 2020, 10:11:44 pm
Part of that betrayal was that they told him they wanted him to be face of the team for years to come which encouraged him to sign the extension.  Then the next year he hears trade rumors.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 13, 2020, 10:23:26 pm
You'd also have to convince Lester to waive his 10/5 rights, and he'd probably want his 2021 option picked up to do that.

I can understand not wanting to get traded in July.  But some guys might enjoy getting a shot at a pennant race and the World Series, so might welcome rather than block a trade, from a non-contender to a contender?

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on February 14, 2020, 06:20:20 am
Is that bum 3rd baseman Kris Bryant still on the team or has he been traded yet?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 14, 2020, 10:17:39 am
Part of that betrayal was that they told him they wanted him to be face of the team for years to come which encouraged him to sign the extension.  Then the next year he hears trade rumors.

Were there trade rumors before the reports that he was unhappy?  I don't follow the Rockies at all, but the first reports I heard in the Chicago papers was that Colorado wanted to trade him BECAUSE he was unhappy and wanted to be traded, not the other way around.  Did he have no other problem with the Colorado front office before the trade rumors surfaced?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 14, 2020, 10:31:22 am
Were there trade rumors before the reports that he was unhappy?  I don't follow the Rockies at all, but the first reports I heard in the Chicago papers was that Colorado wanted to trade him BECAUSE he was unhappy and wanted to be traded, not the other way around.  Did he have no other problem with the Colorado front office before the trade rumors surfaced?
  Yes, that's what all seemed to start.   IF the rumors are true between the Cubs and Rockies are true, it's probably a matter of two clubs deciding to swap "malcontents" before the season.  Unfortunately those may be "malcontents" of the clubs' own making.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 14, 2020, 11:04:57 am
I have not seen a single report that suggested Kris Bryant is a "malcontent."  Have I missed something?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 14, 2020, 11:07:03 am
Sharma has a piece on Kimbrel that includes the following:

Kimbrel said the right knee issue (his back knee while pitching) forced him to not stay on his back side when he wanted; he would fly open. Hottovy pointed out how that can impact the torque and drive necessary to perform at a high level.

“That’s what we’re really focused on,” Hottovy said. “The pitch data is going to tell us how the ball is spinning, but I’m watching him mechanically and making sure we’re accomplishing what we want physically. But then again, if the pitch data says it’s good, we’re going to trust how it’s coming out. We’re not worried about location as much as getting him moving the right way, let the pitch qualities be right and then we’ll take the next step.”


https://theathletic.com/1606744/2020/02/13/terrible-is-kind-of-an-understatement-is-a-full-spring-enough-for-a-craig-kimbrel-comeback/?source=shared-article
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 14, 2020, 11:07:59 am
Yes.  You have missed my wording, IF (IF in capitals) the Cubs view him as a potential malcontent because of the trade rumors and his failed arb case, they might want to shed the problem before it festers.  Colorado may feel the same way about Arenado.  MAY.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 14, 2020, 11:27:21 am
Yes.  You have missed my wording, IF (IF in capitals) the Cubs view him as a potential malcontent because of the trade rumors and his failed arb case, they might want to shed the problem before it festers.  Colorado may feel the same way about Arenado.  MAY.

I suppose that if there is a trade, that might be one factor.  But I doubt that there is ever a trade of that magnitude made where there is ONLY one reason for it.

I think the major reasons behind a desired trade are twofold. 

1. The Cubs want to avoid future penalties that they believe will hurt the team in the long run, by getting under the luxury tax penalties level, (which penalties include much more than just money).

2. Bryant, Baez, Rizzo, Schwarber and Contreras will be free agents in the next three years, and there seems to be no way that the Cubs can afford to pay all of them.  It would be a disaster if they all leave with no compensation for the Team, so someone has to go.  They seem to believe that trading Bryant is the best choice, based on the common belief that they will not be able to re-sign him to a long term contract.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 14, 2020, 12:36:43 pm
Curt, that hypothetical "IF" seems untrue.  Bryant is as classy as you can get, the last guy to make problems fester.  I also read him as a relatively private and non-effusive guy; might not spout and influence other guys as much as some others do?  (Whether as a complainer, or as a motivational leader either.  Theo is always talking about leaders, and there are reference he wants more "edge"; Kris probably isn't that guy...)   But Kris seems like the last guy who'd cause problems in a situation like this. 

Not wanting to "get rid of" Bryant.  Only wanting to extend value beyond two years. 

Hard to see how KB for Arenado would help at all for lux line.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 14, 2020, 12:43:50 pm
Re Arenado and lux line, a mechanics question.  *IF* the Rockies were to pitch in some cash, how would the lux calculation be impacted?  Would that payment be prorated over the remaining duration of the contract, analogous to how a signing bonus or guaranteed buyout-option does?  So *if* the Rockies kicked in say $12M, that would just reduce each year's lux count by <$2M? 

Or could the Cubs hypothetically finagle it so that any cash payment could be applied immediately toward this year's lux payroll?  So that *IF* the Rockies kicked in $12M, just for this year Arenado would account as $26-12=$14?  And the Cubs could end up actually reducing by $4M relative to KB's lux value? 

Again, any such finagle kind of depends on the Cubs knowing EXACTLY how far over the line they are.  Different landscape if it's $3.8 versus $8.6. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 14, 2020, 12:44:42 pm
Hard to see how KB for Arenado would help at all for lux line.

I've been wondering if one of the requirements for a deal to happen might be the Rockies taking on Chatwood's contract. Bryant's and Chatwood's combined salaries are pretty equivalent to Arenado's luxury tax salary of $32.5 million (slightly less than the $35 million he'll actually be paid each year). So if that offsets and the Rockies are willing to pay down Arenado's salary by $6-$7 million (as has been rumored), it could get the Cubs just under the tax.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 14, 2020, 12:48:22 pm
Re Arenado and lux line, a mechanics question.  *IF* the Rockies were to pitch in some cash, how would the lux calculation be impacted?  Would that payment be prorated over the remaining duration of the contract, analogous to how a signing bonus or guaranteed buyout-option does?  So *if* the Rockies kicked in say $12M, that would just reduce each year's lux count by <$2M? 

Or could the Cubs hypothetically finagle it so that any cash payment could be applied immediately toward this year's lux payroll?  So that *IF* the Rockies kicked in $12M, just for this year Arenado would account as $26-12=$14?  And the Cubs could end up actually reducing by $4M relative to KB's lux value? 

Again, any such finagle kind of depends on the Cubs knowing EXACTLY how far over the line they are.  Different landscape if it's $3.8 versus $8.6. 

If the Rockies paid all the money over 1 year I think it could be applied to only 1 year. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 14, 2020, 12:49:31 pm
Curt, that hypothetical "IF" seems untrue.  Bryant is as classy as you can get, the last guy to make problems fester.  I also read him as a relatively private and non-effusive guy; might not spout and influence other guys as much as some others do?  (Whether as a complainer, or as a motivational leader either.  Theo is always talking about leaders, and there are reference he wants more "edge"; Kris probably isn't that guy...)   But Kris seems like the last guy who'd cause problems in a situation like this. 

Not wanting to "get rid of" Bryant.  Only wanting to extend value beyond two years. 

Hard to see how KB for Arenado would help at all for lux line.
The "IF" applies equally to the Cubs' thinking.  Bryant is a class act as you say.  I believe that too.  I doubt he would pout.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 14, 2020, 01:13:41 pm
.Kimbrel said the right knee issue (his back knee while pitching) forced him to not stay on his back side when he wanted; he would fly open. Hottovy pointed out how that can impact the torque and drive necessary to perform at a high level."
https://theathletic.com/1606744/2020/02/13/terrible-is-kind-of-an-understatement-is-a-full-spring-enough-for-a-craig-kimbrel-comeback/?source=shared-article

Thanks, Ron.  That's helpful and hopeful. Nice to have something physical to explain why he was so awful, and why that might not carry over.  Man, that would change everything if he ended up being healthy and good.   

Curious to see what the Q explanation will be, whether an injury or a mechanical issue?  I love these hope stories in spring! 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 14, 2020, 09:39:26 pm
https://theathletic.com/1609345/2020/02/14/i-lost-that-confidence-last-year-can-cubs-of-albert-almora-jr-rebound-from-a-tough-season/

Almora has always seemed like a really nice, classy guy.  It would be a fun good-guys-win human-interest story for him to bounce back and be a productive player.  The article is a good reminder, though, of how hard the game is.  What a tough life it must be for  players who have always been successful; who are super competitive; and who are trying their very best; but their best effort just isn't quite good enough to compete effectively against big-league pitching. 

Best wishes for Almora.  His mindset seems really good now, and hopefully his failure last year and 2018 2nd-half will somehow benefit him in the long run in some ways, both as a baseball player and as a man.  But yeah, I hope his mindset can stay strong when he starts facing real-season pitching.  Getting off to a pretty good start would be really helpful for him.  Having some spring-training swing-adjustments and stuff is all great.  But if he goes through cold April in Wrigley hitting .220, pretty tough to avoid losing confidence again. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 15, 2020, 10:14:58 am
No longer mild-mannered, Kris Bryant on the Astros:

Jesse Rogers
@ESPNChiCubs
Bryant rips the Astros including their apologies: “Its really a disgrace.”

Mark Gonzales
@MDGonzales
Bryant on whether players should have been punished, “absolutely.” Believes $5 million team fine weak, can be made up quickly through beer sales. “I think it’s worse than steroids” on sign stealing scandal.

Gordon Wittenmyer
@GDubCub
Bryant on Astros cheating: “What a disgrace that was. Watching the apologies there was no sincerity, no genuineness. ... they’re only doing anything because the got caught.” Says players “absolutely” should have been punished.



Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 15, 2020, 10:15:59 am
And Bryant on being a Cub:

Mark Gonzales
@MDGonzales
Bryant: “yes, I want to play here. I love the city.” Upset at narrative he wants to leave. “Never once I said I didn’t want to play here. ... we have it so good here.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 15, 2020, 10:16:05 am
Malcontent!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 15, 2020, 10:22:21 am
Bryant on his relation with the Cubs front office (but what does he know?):

Sahadev Sharma
@sahadevsharma
KB on relationship w/ FO: There’s definitely no hard feelings, so let’s put that narrative to bed. I saw a lot of things saying, “Oh, there’s ill will towards the team.” And then there’s another saying, “There’s absolutely no ill will.” Ok, so where are we getting this from?

Patrick Mooney
@PJ_Mooney
Kris Bryant after losing grievance: “There’s definitely no hard feelings, so let’s definitely put that narrative to bed. The only person whose opinion matters here is mine. And I’m right here in front of the microphone telling you guys that there is no hard feelings whatsoever.”

Sahadev Sharma
@sahadevsharma
Bryant on the grievance: That took forever. It really did. At the beginning of it, I was told that it would take maybe a couple weeks. So I was ready for it. And then the offseason just kept going on and I was like, “All right, just come out with it. Let’s go.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 15, 2020, 10:48:44 am
A liear AND a malcontent!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 15, 2020, 11:04:34 am
Patrick Mooney
@PJ_Mooney
Kris Bryant: “Of course, you want to be here, but I don’t hold those cards. I just go out there and play third base...and left field and right field and center field and first base and do what I do.”


I love KB, but who is it, exactly, who is holding the cards except him? Boras, maybe? Certainly the Cubs are holding one set of cards, but Bryant isn't a non-participant here.  Can't help but wonder if Bryant has given any direction to Boras about his priorities (such as preferring to stay with the Cubs). If not, then Boras' default will be to get the maximum money and years he can from whatever team will provide them.

Jesse Rogers
@ESPNChiCubs
Bryant on Boras: “Scott is the best at what he does. As much as people hate him, he really fights for you. You might be the worst baseball player ever but he’s going to tell you you’re the best.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 15, 2020, 11:16:24 am

Jesse Rogers
@ESPNChiCubs
Bryant, on his place in the batting order: “I don’t care. I mean. Maybe I care a little.”


Heh, heh. Great answer. This has to be the best press conference Bryant has ever had.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 15, 2020, 01:34:21 pm
Patrick Mooney  Kris Bryant: “Of course, you want to be here, but I don’t hold those cards. I just go out there and play third base...and left field and right field and center field and first base and do what I do.”
Bryant on Boras: “Scott is the best at what he does. As much as people hate him, he really fights for you.”

I love KB, but who is it, exactly, who is holding the cards except him? Boras, maybe? Certainly the Cubs are holding one set of cards, but Bryant isn't a non-participant here.  Can't help but wonder if Bryant has given any direction to Boras about his priorities (such as preferring to stay with the Cubs). If not, then Boras' default will be to get the maximum money and years he can from whatever team will provide them.

Great question, Ron.  I agree with you, Bryant could hold cards if he wanted to.  *IF* he's not holding cards, it's largely because he's voluntarily entrusted them to Boras, as you say with or without direction on wanting to stay. 

From the other side, though, Kris is NOT a free agent right now, determining who he plays with. 
1.  From his perspective, he's basically under 2-year control.
2.  It's entirely the Cubs who have the trade-or-no-trade cards. 
3.  Kris would probably like to be here for at least those two years. 
4.  It's the Cubs who want the extension now, not Kris; and at sub-market price. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 15, 2020, 01:44:40 pm
*Bryant rips the Astros including their apologies: “Its really a disgrace.”
*Bryant on whether players should have been punished, “absolutely.” Believes $5 million team fine weak, can be made up quickly through beer sales. “I think it’s worse than steroids” on sign stealing scandal.
*Bryant on Astros cheating: “What a disgrace that was. Watching the apologies there was no sincerity, no genuineness. ... they’re only doing anything because the got caught.” Says players “absolutely” should have been punished.[/i]

Way to go, Kris!  Glad to finally have SOMEBODY within the game express a clear and decisive right-vs-wrong determination. 

I agree, that the "apologies" I've seen have been shockingly insincere and weak, no clear repentance.  I saw one from Keuchel the other day; kinda-sorta acknowledges that they probably shouldn't have done it, but then adds a "but we were the ones who got caught" comment, implying that they're on the same moral ground as the rest of mlb. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 15, 2020, 01:55:21 pm
I'm beginning to wonder if some of these guys: Fiers, Kuechel, Kemp, Morton, Giles, Marwin Gonzalez, Cole, Harris...guys the Astros let go FA, traded or whatever, all have expressed varying degrees of disapproval of the sign-stealing.  Wonder if that's why the Astros were unenthusiastic to keep them.  Just wonderin'.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 15, 2020, 02:24:41 pm
Correa is trying to defend Altuve saying Altuve, Reddick and Kemp didn’t participate. Correa is saying people don’t have the facts and they should shut up as well. Only problem is an Astros fan documented bangs in some of the 2017 games and the only Astros with no bangs during any league f the PA was Kemp.

My guess is Correa is going to have a spike in HBP this year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 15, 2020, 02:25:33 pm
Lester is looking Schwarber skinny pick this year as well.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 15, 2020, 03:12:35 pm
Cubs Insider has a short piece on Bryant tweaks to his swing, including a recent one.

https://www.cubsinsider.com/2020/02/15/kris-bryant-displays-new-batting-stance-aimed-at-countering-high-fastballs/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 15, 2020, 03:30:16 pm
Regarding Bryant and Cubs, seems that he is in the camp of highly paid players who are very aware of their market-setting  “responsibility” to other players/MLBPA.

Some other players—-not so much.

And (as a Boras client too), it’s not Bryant's task to give Cubs any market favors or discounts.

I imagine he’d be pleased if Cubs are the high bidders for his services after 2021—think he’d like to stay if serves the interests of those he cares about and himself.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 15, 2020, 04:11:53 pm
Regarding Bryant and Cubs, seems that he is in the camp of highly paid players who are very aware of their market-setting  “responsibility” to other players/MLBPA.

Some other players—-not so much.

And (as a Boras client too), it’s not Bryant's task to give Cubs any market favors or discounts.

I imagine he’d be pleased if Cubs are the high bidders for his services after 2021—think he’d like to stay if serves the interests of those he cares about and himself.

Yeah, I get that Bryant feels some sense of responsibility to his fellow members of the Players Union. I'm a big supporter of unions. Among other things, my wife used to work for one.  And I think it's right and fair for professional athletes to have concerns for the financial interests of their colleagues.

But for a guy like Bryant to want to make sure that he protects the chances of his fellow superstars to get upwards of $30 million a year for an extended contract is not like protecting the interests of relatively lower paid major league players. And it is certainly nothing like guys with regular jobs looking out for the interests of their colleagues in other unions in the world we all live in. 

There is no meaningful harm to Bryant's fellow athletes if he accepts a deal with the Cubs, for whom he has such appreciation and fondness, for less than he could get elsewhere.  I'm not ragging on Bryant for making the choice he's apparently making, but I do think he should be honest and accept responsibility for his role in not agreeing to a long term contract with the Cubs.  This "I don't hold the cards" stuff is silly.

If he and other superstars want to use their leverage to help spread the wealth around to their colleagues, whether in the major leagues or minor leagues there are probably other ways to do that than demanding the highest possible salaries for themselves. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 15, 2020, 04:53:52 pm
The MLBPA’s philosophy—since the days of Marvin Miller—is that the top-end contracts very much influence the contracts below.

I think that’s mostly right.

What Tom Cruise gets to make a movie probably has little impact on what a 10th banana makes on a small picture but baseball is a smaller world and there is kind of a slotting system all the way down to the guaranteed minimum. I know that folks who have worked at the MLBPA believe that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on February 15, 2020, 05:17:34 pm
I think it's possible that Bryant will give the Cubs a small discount if they give him a reasonable offer to extend.  It's not reasonable to expect him to do more than that
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on February 15, 2020, 06:57:11 pm
I think if you are fortunate enough to be making tens of millions of dollars to play a game, and if you are happy in your current city...with your current team and teammates and staff, you should be under no obligation to sell yourself to the highest bidder if you deem your current employers offer to be competitive  enough.

Not everyone should commit to Camp Samardzija...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 15, 2020, 07:54:23 pm
Considering how heavily the deck is stacked in the owners' favor and how aggressively they screw the players every chance they get, I don't begrudge big-time players from feeling like they have a responsibility to the other guys in the union.  I don't think they necessarily have to "sell themselves to the highest bidder" but I do think it needs to be reasonably close - and the larger point is that if they don't go to FA at all, there is no bidding in the first place (which is arguably bad for player salaries on the whole).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 15, 2020, 08:30:23 pm
Yeah, I get that Bryant feels some sense of responsibility to his fellow members of the Players Union. ..

.. not like protecting the interests of relatively lower paid major league players.

.... I'm not ragging on Bryant for making the choice he's apparently making, but I do think he should be honest and accept responsibility for his role in not agreeing to a long term contract with the Cubs.  This "I don't hold the cards" stuff is silly...

Agree, Ron.  If you feel a moral obligation to get max salary for altruistic reasons, be honest and straightforward and take responsibility.  "I don't hold the cards" is indeed kind of silly. 

As I mentioned earlier, though, he doesn't hold any trade cards, the Cubs hold all of those.  He holds early-extension cards. 

reb, you mention Miller's view that high-end guys raise salary for everybody.  I wonder what he'd say today?  That always proved true before the lux line.  But as you've observed, teams have been really avoidant of the 3-lux consequences. 

In the NFL with cap, high-end does NOT raise salary.  When QB gets $40, that's just cap that can't be spent on other guys.  With a capped payroll, the more the big tickets get, the less there is for the lesser players. 

I wonder whether with the 3-lux consequences resulting in most mlb teams avoiding 3-lux, whether the situation isn't now somewhat more like the NFL than the Miller days in baseball? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 15, 2020, 08:49:08 pm
https://theathletic.com/1609508/2020/02/15/kyle-hendricks-explains-the-cubs-transition-to-david-ross-this-is-what-needed-to-be-done/

Hendricks really enthusiastic about the Ross transition. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 15, 2020, 09:08:59 pm
Regarding Bryant and Cubs, seems that he is in the camp of highly paid players who are very aware of their market-setting  “responsibility” to other players/MLBPA. ...

https://theathletic.com/1610545/2020/02/15/the-only-person-whose-opinion-matters-here-is-mine-kris-bryant-breaks-his-silence-and-has-much-to-say/

I'd forgotten that Bryant is the Cubs union rep.  He's very interested and informed about labor issues.  Much of his interview appears to have been about labor issues, more so perhaps than about the Cubs or the upcoming season. 

Seems that this 3-lux framework is not going to exist the next time around, that seems pretty obvious that Bryant and the union are going to fight that really hard next time. 

I think that will be a complex deal, too.  This winter, the talk is that considering a deal for Bryant was hard without having his grievance settled. 

I wonder what that will be like for Bryant and the other 2021 free agents when there is no CBA at all?  I assume FA agreements will be hard to settle until the next cba is established.  Likewise I imagine Boras probably doesn't want his clients extending under the current cba constraints, when hypothetically the next cba might allow salaries to spiral again?  Perhaps hard for anybody to make good plans going forward with an unknown landscape beyond 21. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 15, 2020, 10:06:20 pm
Kyle Hendricks on the transition to David Ross as manager (he seems enthusiastic about it).

https://theathletic.com/1609508/2020/02/15/kyle-hendricks-explains-the-cubs-transition-to-david-ross-this-is-what-needed-to-be-done/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 15, 2020, 10:46:57 pm
Yeah, Ron, I thought that was cool. 

I love the spring enthusiasm. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 16, 2020, 01:46:32 am
Yeah, that's hugely significant...  ::)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 16, 2020, 11:50:55 am
Lots of tweets like this coming out of the Baez press conference...sounds like Baez isn't too upset about a managerial style change.

Jesse Rogers @ESPNChiCubs
Baez on last year: “It wasn’t something bad but we have a lot of optional things. Not mandatory. Everyone kind of sat back on that, including me. I wasn’t really going out there and preparing for the game. I was getting ready during the game, which is not good.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 16, 2020, 11:59:16 am
More about Baez talking about the lack of cohesiveness and preparation last year:

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/02/16/javy-baez-talks-about-player-preparedness-and-togetherness-the-last-two-years-it-doesnt-sound-great/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 16, 2020, 12:56:54 pm
Billy Martin made a living on taking over a team with "hands off" managers, and whipping them into playing at their talent level, with substantial results.

For a while.

In three or four years, his management style engendered resentment among the players, and a drop off in performance.  Then management would bring in a "hands off" manager, who would have increased performance.

For a while.

I saw this over and over again in the military.  A "hardass commander would be replaced by a "nce guy" commander, and morale would soar, as well as performance.  Then things would slack off and performance would drop.

Then the "nice guy" would be replaced by another "hardass" and things would pick up again, for a while.

People say that a manager gets fired because "you can't fire 25 players all at once".  And this is true.  But it is also true that firing a manager, regardless of the manager, and regardless of the replacement, results in improved performance by some players for a period of time.

Firing a manager is not a cure all, and will not turn a bad team into World Champions in and of itself.  But it often DOES result in improved performance by those left behind.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 18, 2020, 09:43:41 am
Kris Bryant is a happy Cub. And more vocal.


https://theathletic.com/1615838/2020/02/18/kris-bryant-is-in-a-good-place-after-meeting-with-theo-epstein-and-listening-to-david-ross/

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 18, 2020, 10:26:33 am
Thanks, Ron.  it's kind of fun to hear how fired up the guys are.  I love all that stuff.  I do feel like it sounds different this spring, more intense, more motivation, more urgency, more emotional.  As fans we all felt like 2018 was pretty disappointing; so shouldn't they have been ultra-motivated coming into last spring?   But I wonder, maybe for a lot of guys there was still a sense of fluke; they'd played too many consecutive games so just got tired; Bryant was gone and that's why; we won 95 games.  So maybe there really wasn't a broad urgency that each guy needs to somehow be better. 

I found the following comment by Kris to be interesting:  "Obviously, there were just some misunderstandings on both sides, which of course is going to happen. But it’s just good to clear things up with one another, one on one."

Totally agree that talking is great.  Interesting, though, that he thinks misunderstandings.  Theo is always talking about his great relationship and stuff; surprising to have a great relationship but still have had misunderstandings that needed to clear up.  Id' have thought that would have been all talked through months ago.  Anyway, not sure whether clearing up understandings changes anything about feasibility of an extension, now or later or after free agency arrives.  But hopefully a good sign. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 18, 2020, 05:05:54 pm
Kris Bryant, asked if he believes he'll be with the Cubs for Opening Day after his conversation with Epstein:

"Yes. I do."

Through the July 31 Trade Deadline?

"Yep. I'm a Chicago Cub."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 18, 2020, 06:23:39 pm
I hope it doesn't work out that way, unless he plans to extend his contract before expiration.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on February 19, 2020, 09:55:59 am
Ugh....not a fan of this.

Quote
Kris Bryant 3B | CHC

Cubs' Kris Bryant: Slated to lead off in 2020

(12 mins ago) Cubs manager David Ross are expected to install Bryant as the team's leadoff hitter this season, Bruce Levine of 670TheScore.com reports.

Though he's endured a fairly turbulent offseason in which he's been the subject of trade rumors, Bryant reaffirmed his commitment to the Cubs upon reporting to camp this week. According to Paul Sullivan of the Chicago Tribune, Bryant said Wednesday that he told Ross he's willing to do what's best for the team, and that he's amendable to filling the opening at the top of the order. Bryant has most commonly slotted in the Nos. 2 or 3 slot the past four seasons, but his career .385 on-base percentage should make him a quality table-setting option, too. The leadoff assignment would likely result in Bryant exchanging more RBI for runs, so those considering drafting the 28-year-old would need to bear that in mind. At this stage, Ross hasn't formally committed to Bryant as the club's leadoff man, so there's still a chance the Cubs' plans could change as spring training rolls along.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on February 19, 2020, 10:10:30 am
I thought they fired joe maddon?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 19, 2020, 10:28:21 am
I actually like Bryant at leadoff. He gets on base and runs the bases well, which is what you want out of a leadoff guy. It would be nice if they had made an effort to address that externally this offseason...but as the roster stands, I think he's the best fit on the team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron Green on February 19, 2020, 11:18:00 am
I actually like Bryant at leadoff. He gets on base and runs the bases well, which is what you want out of a leadoff guy. It would be nice if they had made an effort to address that externally this offseason...but as the roster stands, I think he's the best fit on the team.


Now perhaps fans can better appreciate the delay in bringing him up in 2015.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 19, 2020, 12:01:23 pm
It is very helpful to have power hitters in the third, fourth and fifth spot in the order.  But the Cubs have Rizzo, Baez and Schwarber in those three slots.  That means that the Cubs have the luxury of placing Bryant somewhere else.

If it comes down to having Bryant bat either second or leadoff, I have no problem with leadoff, where we currently have no one else with the OBA necessary for that slot, then second, where neither his power nor his OBA abilities are fully utilized.  If Hoerner begins the season in the majors (and I hope he doesn't) he is probably best used in the second slot.  If not, Kipnis is probably most useful there.

Now that it looks like Bryant will begin the season with the Cubs, their lineup seems to have the potential to be very good.

1. Bryant
2. Hoerner/Kipnis/Bote
3. Rizzo
4. Baez
5. Schwarber
6. Contreras
7. Happ
8. Heyward

I think the season (barring injuries) will come down to the starting pitchers, specifically Lester and Quintana.  If they can perform one more year in a reasonable manner, the Cubs should be competitive with anyone in the Central Division.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 19, 2020, 12:16:14 pm
Hoerner was .284/.349/.399 in AA last year.  If he develops fabulously this year, it would be really helpful if he could emerge as a .280/.340/.430 kind of guy by 2021 and beyond, and become a regular capable leadoff guy for the Cubs.  Not yet, of course.  But long term that would be really helpful, so that we maybe didn't have this recurring leadoff discussion next winter and beyond. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 19, 2020, 12:19:21 pm
Just FWIW...Bryant's most similar player on Baseball Reference is George Springer, who (Astros cheating aside) has been a very, very good non-traditional leadoff hitter in his career.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 19, 2020, 12:38:19 pm
Cubs in 2019 PA by spot in torder
1.) 758
2.)735
3.) 717
4.) 705
5.) 689
6.) 677
7.) 656
8.) 639
9.) 619

Give me
1.) Bryant
2.) Rizzo
3.) Baez
4) Schwarber
5.) Contreras
6.) Happ
7.) Heyward/Souza
8.) Bote/Hoerner/whatever crap lefty the choose

Give your best hitters the most PA.  With new 3 batter minimum your are also going L/R until at least the 7th spot in order.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 19, 2020, 12:47:46 pm
Jordan Bastian

Kris Bryant has led off an inning in 548 career plate appearances. His production: .291/.385/.531, 24 HR, 34 2B, 144 K (26.3%) and 59 BB (10.8%).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 19, 2020, 02:11:34 pm
As off the wall as Bryant hitting leadoff originally would have been my preferred leadoff man would have been Javy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on February 19, 2020, 04:05:22 pm
I'm happy with KB at leadoff, and like the Springer comp, as well as CBJ's note that you're going to want to alter lefty/righty batting order as much as possible.

Frankly, I think it's the best choice for this roster.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 19, 2020, 04:17:17 pm
I wonder what FO think about the pitcher-batting-8th bit these days?  I thought it was supposedly numbers-savvy people who talked them into the pitcher-8th logic; but that normally flies against the better-batters-more-AB's principle.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 19, 2020, 04:27:41 pm
I hate it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 19, 2020, 04:28:23 pm
...Give me
1.) Bryant
2.) Rizzo
3.) Baez
4) Schwarber
5.) Contreras
6.) Happ
7.) Heyward/Souza
8.) Bote/Hoerner/whatever crap lefty the choose...

I've got spring fever.  But yeah, I think that lineup could end up being good. 

Obviously hope-springs-eternal and realities don't always sync.  If Descalso/Bote/Kipnis are batting .200, and Heyward is in a funk, and Happ is hitting .215 and K'ing 1/3 of the time, and Schwarber settles back to batting .230, and Baez is OBP'ing at .316 or whatever, and then Quintana has to bat, too, there may be a lot of easy outs. 

But man, if the late-season Schwarber and Happ come back, 1-6 could be really productive.  That would be really fun.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron Green on February 19, 2020, 06:45:31 pm
I hate it.

In what way would Baez be preferable at leadoff to Bryant?

What qualities do you want most in a leadoff hitter, and how do each compare in those qualities?

Most people want OBP and an base running, with OBP more important than the baserunning.

Last year, Bryant had a OBP of .382.  Baez .316.

Last year Baez was 11/7 in steals, while Bryant was 4/0.  Baez reached base 177 times, scoring 89; subtract the number of times he scored with a HR (29) and he scored 60 of 148 times he reached base, or 40.5% of the time.  Bryant reached base 227 times, scoring 108 with 31 HR, meaning he scored 77 of the 196 times he reach base without a HR, or 39.2% of the time.  So while Bryant may well be a marginally better baserunner, the data doesn't support the conclusion he is much better, and certainly not enough better to offset the major OBP advantage Bryant would offer.

So, in what way would Baez be preferable at leadoff to Bryant?  What qualities do you want most in a leadoff hitter, and how do each compare in those qualities?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 19, 2020, 07:02:19 pm
If you're going to use a non-traditional power hitter as your leadoff guy, why not just stay with Rizzo - who's done it, clearly loves it, and had great success doing it?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 19, 2020, 07:11:16 pm
Bryant is a faster and better base runner than Rizzo. It sounds like Bryant asked to lead off too, so he seems to be happy doing it.

I think some of the Cubs’ lineup problems are exacerbated when Rizzo leads off. One of the main problems that has been cited is that too many of the hitters have the same vulnerabilities and can be pitched to in key situations. Rizzo is a major exception to that, so it’s nice to have him up with runners on base as often as possible.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 19, 2020, 07:16:06 pm
Ron Green- I dont hate batting Bryant leadoff. I kinda get it. I hate batting the pitcher 8th.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 19, 2020, 11:17:33 pm
We may have an opening in the BBFL.  If anyone is interested email me, fischerone@msn.com.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 20, 2020, 09:34:12 am
Jon Heyman @JonHeyman
Nats are giving top prospect Carter Kieboom a shot to replace a Rendon at 3B. No current talks on Bryant. Cubs wanted either Robles or some combo of RHP Rutledge, SS Garcia and Kieboom. Not an unreasonable ask but considering price (tax) and potential ultimately decided no.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 20, 2020, 01:45:55 pm
There's a telling and humorous exchange between Ken Rosenthal and Harold Reynolds regarding Bryant in the leadoff spot.  Not surprisingly, Reynolds "hates" it.  Enjoy.


https://twitter.com/MLBNetwork/status/1230515703540781057
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 20, 2020, 02:22:08 pm
I dont think its ideal but its probably our best option.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on February 20, 2020, 04:54:55 pm
Jesse Rogers  @ESPNChiCubs   3h
Alec Mills, Tyler Chatwood and Adbert Alzolay will start the first three Cubs spring games.

The first exhibition game is Saturday when Oakland visits Sloan Park.

A Today's Game topic will be needed at that time.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 20, 2020, 05:38:41 pm
There's a telling and humorous exchange between Ken Rosenthal and Harold Reynolds regarding Bryant in the leadoff spot.  Not surprisingly, Reynolds "hates" it.  Enjoy.


https://twitter.com/MLBNetwork/status/1230515703540781057

Yeah, for Reynolds, a leadoff guy is a guy like him: a .250 hitter who hits two homers a season but can bunt, run, and doesn’t strike out.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 20, 2020, 08:03:15 pm
Fangraphs has Cubs winning the NL Central....with 84.4 wins.

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/a-quick-look-at-our-playoff-odds/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 20, 2020, 08:15:34 pm
Now all they have to do is find out how to win .4 of a game.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 20, 2020, 08:51:39 pm
Now all they have to do is find out how to win .4 of a game.

Not a problem.

Brewers are projected second at 81.66. So, they have the same issue as the Cubs coming up with a fractional win.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 20, 2020, 10:32:39 pm
Alec Mills, Tyler Chatwood and Adbert Alzolay will start the first three Cubs spring games.

Three interesting guys, for sure.  Would sure love to see Alzolay have a complete and impressive camp, and look like a guy we might be excited to see come up.  And would love for him to be healthy start to finish, and settle in as a good pitcher, perhaps one who could fill in effectively late season or effectively take Lester or Q's spot in the 2021 rotation, and free up $10 or $20. 

Mills seems like he's got a straight opportunity to make the roster as a long-man.  I'm not confident his solid numbers from last season are repeatable, including the 42K/11BB ratio.  But man it would be nice if he emerged as a legit major-league pitcher, who could do the kind of long-relief role that Chatwood did so well last year.  Or who could perhaps move from that to being a guy who could pitch the 5th-6th or 6th-7th innings of a game relatively effectively, perhaps even in games we were winning? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on February 21, 2020, 02:31:43 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ERU2HhqU0AEijcX?format=jpg&name=small)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ERU2HhqU0AAeLRH?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on February 22, 2020, 03:59:57 pm
Jesse Rogers  @ESPNChiCubs  13m
Brandon Morrow's latest setback: Mild, upper right chest strain. He'll back off his workload.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 22, 2020, 05:33:06 pm
I'm not even sure how you could strain that.  But certainly not a good sign.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 22, 2020, 05:52:02 pm
I know its taboo to question a players heart but you definitely get the feeling that certain ones like to get paid and give as little as they can in return.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 24, 2020, 09:44:33 am
https://theathletic.com/1629306/2020/02/24/can-tyler-chatwood-finally-translate-spin-rate-into-success/

Very interesting.  I'm very optimistic, and Chatwood looked really good 2nd half.  So I've probably been more hopeful than anybody on the board that Chatwood is going to play out as one of our top three strarters this year. 

For the many of you who don't have access, the article discusses how Chatwood heavily used his curveball during the last months last year, with favorable results and a spike in K-rate.  The view going forward is that his hard sinker can continue to get groundouts, but that the combination of 4-seam fastball up with his high-spin curve could result in lots of K's and a lot of success.  The confidence and comfort with that is probably higher than it's ever been for him, so if confidence is the key, he's probably in a sweet spot.  The article also suggests that the Cubs had this kind of fastball/curve combination in mind when they signed him.  But 2018, when he couldn't throw anything for a strike, throwing a less-familiar hard-to-control curve didn't really play.  And that early last year when his usage was pretty inconsistent and he was still trying to reestablish that at least he could throw the fastball with kinda consistent control, that lots of use of the curve, which is kind of a "touch" pitch, didn't happen at first.  I love the framework, and I think it could play out exactly as they envision, with really good success. 

Several things that may challenge:
1.  The curve is perhaps the most difficult pitch in the game to command.  For a guy with variable control problems, throwing lots of curves consistently may be difficult. 

2.  It's not just control of the curve, it's control of the fastball, too.  Lots easier to get guys to chase a curve if you've gotten ahead 1-2; less so if it's 3-1.  And easier to take a shot with a curve on 2-2 if I'm confident that I can get a fastball over even if my curve bounces and I go to 3-2.  But if I'm struggling to throw either curve OR fastball for a strike, I may be increasingly reluctant to put myself into a lot of 3-ball counts. 

3.  Pitching tired.  Chatwood was healthy last season.  Relatively easy to stay healthy and strong, with fastball reaching 98, when pitching once a week.  Who gets tired doing that?  But if he's grinding out 100+ pitches every 5 days, might his arm not tire?  With resulting impact on velocity, spin-rate, mechanical consistency, location?  The 4-seam-fastball-up might not play quite as well the 2nd and 3rd time through the order when it's 93-94 instead of 98; especially if the tired arm can't locate it quite as well; or if you need to kind of overthrow a little just to keep it from dropping below even 93-94?     

Questions:  I wonder how confident the Cubs are about Chatwood? 
1.  Unrealistic hypothetical:  So **if** the Cubs were to offer Chatwood a $25/2 extension today, who'd say no?  The Cubs or Chatwood? 
2.  And what would you say? 
3.  If no, at what point would it be low enough for you to say "yes" right now?  And if you'd say "yes" now, how high would it need to go before you'd say "no"? 

I actually think I'd say "yes" at $25/2, and certainly at something less.  With Lester and Q expiring, I'm not super enthused about trying to replace not just one, not just two, but three of the rotation spots.  So *if* Chatwood did work out pretty well, then with Chatwood, Darvish, and Hendricks, you'd have three spots lined up.  And *if* Chatwood worked out pretty well, $12.5/year isn't close to what Lester and Hamels have gotten paid.  *IF* I could get that down for <$10/year, I'd definitely like the gamble.  I think there could be some bargain-potential there, probably unlike what they'll need to do in free agency otherwise. 

I also think that *if* Chatwood had a good first half, and *if* you're trying to get under the lux this July, that *if* Chatwood had emerged as an asset pitcher, and had two additional years of club control, he might be much more valuable in trade?  Now hopefully that's not a thing.  If Chatwood is doing great, maybe that means you're much more likely to be contending.  If Chatwood is good, and Q is decent, and Lester isn't bad, you might be buyers, not sellers. 

But it's not impossible that even if Chatwood is exellent, that you'll still be in sell mode.  If so, it's possible that you can't trade Lester (no-trade control, and maybe nobody wants him); and maybe trading Q doesn't work (maybe you're too far over the cap for a Q trade to get you under; or maybe he's not pitching well enough for anybody to want him).  But maybe *if* Chatwood would have emerged as a desirable property, maybe trading him would get them under?  Or, maybe he'd be so desirable that a team would allow you to add in Descalso, and between the two of them that would then be enough to get you under, or something?  Perhaps *IF* Chatwood had emerged as a valuable property, then if he had a couple extra years of decent-priced club control, you could not only move his contract for lux-line purposes, but maybe a couple of years of control would get you significant minor leaguer in return besides? 

Spring is so great, it's fun to be able to hope lots of good outcomes!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 24, 2020, 09:58:45 am
I would extend Chatwood for a couple of years at 12.5.  Anyone better than him will cost more than that amount next winter, when we have to redo the staff.

I think the Cubs really want to see if there is any chance to replace Lester and Quintana with in-house assets.  I suspect that Rea, whom they seem to think highly of, will have to pitch himself off the roster during spring training.  And if Alzolay does well, I think they will find a spot for him also, perhaps even in the rotation as the season goes on.  I don't think they can wait until winter to make decisions on Rea, Alzolay and Chatwood.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 24, 2020, 10:01:07 am
The Athletic piece by Sharma on Chatwood is pretty compelling. Fingers are crossed that he has really turned a corner and could be much more than a #5 starter, given his stuff.

"After using the curve minimally in April and May last year, Chatwood started to lean on the pitch more. In September, his curveball usage jumped to 26 percent, a monthly career-high and only the second month he’d ever reached 20 percent. The result? Chatwood saw more swing and miss than he’d ever had in his career.

"In July, Chatwood posted a 22.2 percent strikeout rate. It was just one of a handful of times he’d gotten strikeouts at such a high clip for a full month. In August and September, it only got better as he set career highs in consecutive months with 29.8 and 32.7 percent rates, respectively. His previous career-high in a month was 25.4 percent in May 2013."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dev on February 24, 2020, 10:44:43 am
I'm not even sure how you could strain that.  But certainly not a good sign.
Throwing up from the food poisoning
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 24, 2020, 12:09:28 pm
The Athletic piece by Sharma on Chatwood is pretty compelling. Fingers are crossed that he has really turned a corner and could be much more than a #5 starter, given his stuff.

"After using the curve minimally in April and May last year, Chatwood started to lean on the pitch more. In September, his curveball usage jumped to 26 percent, a monthly career-high and only the second month he’d ever reached 20 percent. The result? Chatwood saw more swing and miss than he’d ever had in his career.

"In July, Chatwood posted a 22.2 percent strikeout rate. It was just one of a handful of times he’d gotten strikeouts at such a high clip for a full month. In August and September, it only got better as he set career highs in consecutive months with 29.8 and 32.7 percent rates, respectively. His previous career-high in a month was 25.4 percent in May 2013."

Yeah, Ron, that stuff was really interesting.  *IF* everything is working together, he could be really effective.  He mentioned the curve being a "touch" pitch.  Maybe regular rotation work is exactly what will be optimal for getting locked in and staying locked in. 

I do wonder whether relievers have some advantage in terms of debugging issues that arise?  If a starter struggles on Sunday, and maybe has a throwing session on Wednesday; does he actually throw very hard, enough to kind of practice game-speed throwing?  I'd think a reliever can come back and work with the pitching coach on Monday or Tuesday, and be pretty much practicing at real-speed. 

Of course if a starter is pretty much locked in, he may have no debugging to do; or else he can perhaps self-identify how to fix it in-game.  Often enough where a good pitcher's curve isn't that on-spot in the first inning, but by the 3rd/4th they're locating and locked in. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on February 27, 2020, 10:16:36 am
Mark Gonzales @MDGonzales
Brad Wieck diagnosed with abnormal heartbeat on EKG during pre-spring physical. Underwent cardiac ablation Monday at Northwestern Memorial Hospital, returned to AZ on Wednesday. Rest and rehab this week.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 28, 2020, 07:25:53 am
https://theathletic.com/1641387/2020/02/27/i-hated-it-fighting-for-a-roster-spot-trevor-megill-learns-to-love-the-curve/

Nice.  This cites the faster-gun velocity readings that Az Phil alluded too, rather than the lower velocity readings mlb.tv showed.

Very enthusiastic about the pitch lab modifications, and the Cubs/Hottovy's ability to teach it.  Megill sounds smart and receptive, sounds like a good pickup and like the Cubs will have good interest in keeping him, one way or another. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 28, 2020, 08:46:25 am
Next time the Cubs claim they can’t sign Baez and Bryant, Marquee is paying them $132 million this year which is double what they got from their TV deal last year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 28, 2020, 12:10:26 pm
Next time the Cubs claim they can’t sign Baez and Bryant, Marquee is paying them $132 million this year which is double what they got from their TV deal last year.

You got that from The Athletic but you left out the next sentence in that article, which says:

“What was unclear is how that money is divvied up between the Cubs and Sinclair and whether it’s just an accounting trick for the former. Last season, I was told the Cubs were looking at a year-to-year increase of less than 10 percent in rights fees in 2020“
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 28, 2020, 12:23:24 pm
Maples hasn't pitched yet, I don't think?  Wonder what's up with him?  I'd thought he might be a guy who'd be pitch-lab adjusted in some way to good effect.  Or maybe that's why he's not in games, they want him working on adjustments under more controlled or pitch-lab conditions, and to hopefully gain more consistency or comfort-level with some delivery adjustments? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 28, 2020, 12:32:13 pm
And you left out that the Athletic got it from Bloomberg.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-27/cubs-channel-that-fans-can-t-see-symbolizes-sports-network-woes

The $132 million is the average that Marquee is paying the Cubs for right fees.  The Cubs are going to get less money this year and more in the future sure. Bloomberg cites the Comcast deal being worth $100 million in subscriber fees for Marquee. That to me would mean the Chicago market is worth $200 million for around 9 million people in the metro. Illinois gets another 3 million and Iowa 3 million and almost 7 million in Indiana and Marquee could bring almost $500 million in subscriber fees before you add in ad revenue. Any profit gets split between the Cubs and Sinclair and that doesn’t get put towards revenue splitting.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 28, 2020, 01:02:54 pm
Yes, BOTH The Athletic AND Bloomberg made the salient point that you neglected to mention even though you apparently read both pieces: that Cubs are not pocketing twice what they got last year.

You said:
“Marquee is paying them $132 million this year which is double what they got from their TV deal last year.”

That was grossly misleading because you left out salient parts of BOTH articles.

What happens beyond this season remains to be seen based on the success/failure of Marquee/Sinclair.

Is it possible that Cubs are being prudent given unknowns about the marketplace??
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on February 28, 2020, 02:08:53 pm
I watched a bit of the game from yesterday.  (I just like to check out some of the pitchers.) .
They said Winkler had a couple 95 and 96 on the stadium gun. 
Manuel Rodriguez, they mentioned a 97, then later a 99.  He's got a pretty good curveball that's around the plate, he looks like he could be a pretty good relief prospect.  Or at least like he could K a whole bunch of minor leaguers.

Justin steele looked fast, too, although kinda wild looking. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 28, 2020, 02:45:35 pm
Yes, BOTH The Athletic AND Bloomberg made the salient point that you neglected to mention even though you apparently read both pieces: that Cubs are not pocketing twice what they got last year.

You said:
“Marquee is paying them $132 million this year which is double what they got from their TV deal last year.”


The $132 million is the average that Marquee is paying the Cubs for right fees.  The Cubs are going to get less money this year and more in the future sure.

I changed what I said in the second post.  The rights fees get paid to the Cubs unless they go bankrupt.  Seeing as how the Dodgers have only been on Spectrum and that hasn't gone bankrupt yet, I don't see Marquee failing anytime soon. 

Liberty media just released the Braves numbers and the Braves from baseball only made about $100 million more in revenues than what Forbes reported.  This the Cubs have no money stance is just weird that you want to stake out.  You do you I guess.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on February 28, 2020, 03:52:54 pm
I haven't heard that the Cubs have no money. 

I have heard that the Cubs do not wish to exceed the luxury tax level and have to deal with the associated monetary and other penalties that they would incur if they do not get under it by next year.

The amount of money they receive from broadcasting rights has no effect on the luxury tax penalties, one way or the other.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 28, 2020, 04:09:13 pm
So Cubs fans are arguing that the Rickett's family should make $100 million in profit instead of only $50 million?  The amount of money that the Cubs bring in directly relates to the amount of money that the Cubs can spend on players and field a quality product.  $50 million in luxury tax is just another expense to deduct from revenues.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 28, 2020, 05:16:18 pm
I changed what I said in the second post.  The rights fees get paid to the Cubs unless they go bankrupt.  Seeing as how the Dodgers have only been on Spectrum and that hasn't gone bankrupt yet, I don't see Marquee failing anytime soon. 

Liberty media just released the Braves numbers and the Braves from baseball only made about $100 million more in revenues than what Forbes reported.  This the Cubs have no money stance is just weird that you want to stake out.  You do you I guess.


Of course, I did not say that Cubs have no money.

It is possible that Marquee might produce significantly less money for the cubs than hoped for. That is an unknown. This season, it is apparently much less than your misleading initial post, which I guess you’re now acknowledging. Good that is out of the way.

What I raised and asked was: maybe Cubs are being prudent given unknowns in the marketplace. Is that conceivable?

All of us are on the outside looking in on that question. There is no real answer to that from the outside. What I know is that the Ricketts have had hefty Cubs payrolls compared to their peers for several years running and that there are complex luxury tax/revenue sharing issues (see Brett Taylor on this) that involve a lot of money, not to mention the Wrigleyville overruns. And, yes, all baseball owners are very rich.

Really unfair to characterize asking those questions as taking a “Cubs have no money stance.” Way more complicated.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 28, 2020, 08:03:49 pm
Poor Craig, foolishly trying to talk baseball.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 28, 2020, 09:23:39 pm
The true shill knows no holiday.  It really is a tireless vocation.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on February 28, 2020, 09:47:19 pm
The true shill knows no holiday.  It really is a tireless vocation.

You should not be so hard on Curt.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 28, 2020, 09:59:26 pm
You should not be so hard on Curt.

I never want to hear "hard on" and "Curt" in the same sentence again, thank you very much.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on February 28, 2020, 10:21:23 pm
Very unfair to call Curt a "shill" even if both of you get a hard on about it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 28, 2020, 10:35:40 pm
I'll have you idiots know that I take a **** generic, dixaphlopin.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 28, 2020, 10:36:43 pm
V i a g r a is a banned word?  Somebody has a real hard on.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 28, 2020, 11:01:15 pm
I had you pegged as somebody who took Cialis once a day, you know for BPH.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on February 29, 2020, 01:33:11 pm
Morrow threw and felt good. Went running the next day and has a Grade 1 calf strain. Out 10-14 days.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on February 29, 2020, 03:15:12 pm
No F'n way.

We'd have been better off signing DaveP.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on February 29, 2020, 04:03:10 pm
I had you pegged as somebody who took Cialis once a day, you know for BPH.
I wouldn't just Cialis, I'd see Julie, I'd see Wendy, I'd see Linda, ...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Tuffy on February 29, 2020, 04:59:11 pm
Morrow threw and felt good. Went running the next day and has a Grade 1 calf strain. Out 10-14 days.

Over-under on future innings pitched by Morrow in a Cubs uniform: 1/3?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on February 29, 2020, 07:10:45 pm
Under
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on March 02, 2020, 12:44:36 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESH9oOeWoAYBdSs?format=png&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on March 03, 2020, 09:29:18 am
https://theathletic.com/1646674/2020/03/02/pitch-lab-index-what-every-pitcher-in-cubs-camp-is-working-on-in-the-lab/

I love this article, basically talked to the 31 pitchers other than the 4 locked rotation guys.  Some interesting things:
1.  Most guys have done pitch-lab just once, largely as a baseline.  And to get a look at some different grips and pitches, and visualizing the difference between the good ones and the bad ones. 
2.  Most of the pitchers in camp are new.  Some of the longer-term guys (Alzolay, DelaCruz) had like "3" or "a bunch of times" in the lab.  (Not clear whether all this spring, or probably over the years.)
3.  Maples and Hultzen both were included.  Maples, who's a smart guy, had the longest paragraph.  As we know, his fastball is fast and his spin rate is good; but his spin rate has lacked efficiency.  Unfortunately the pitch lab input had not found some change in grip or perhaps in arm slot to resolve that.  He said it's about manipulating the wrist.  Given his velocity, slider, and spin rates, I still have a remotely unlikely but still-alive imagination that pitch-lab will help him adjust something, with the result of both improved fastball efficiency and improved command. 
4.  I mention both Maples and Hultzen because to my knowledge, neither has pitched in a game thus far.  So I'd wondered if they might perhaps be hurt or something.  I now wonder whether perhaps Maples is throwing a lot of fastballs on the side with cameras and stuff to work on the adjusted fastball, and to try to get that locked in, before going into game. 

I'm partly reminded of of how finesse all the pitching is.  So many guys who the margin between being very effective and being not-good-enough is so narrow.  Guys like Mekkes, Maples, Underwood, Megill, Winkler, Wick, Wieck, they've all got stuff that can work and make them productive major-league relievers; but the ability to locate consistently enough, and with enough motion, that's so subtle.  Hopefully the pitch-lab stuff can help them shift in the positive direction.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 03, 2020, 09:33:00 am
Maples has been throwing live batting practice.  The Tribune guy posted video and it looked like he had lowered his arm slot.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on March 03, 2020, 09:37:12 am
Maples has been throwing live batting practice.  The Tribune guy posted video and it looked like he had lowered his arm slot.

Thanks, interesting!  Maybe the arm slot and the "manipulating the wrist" differently work together, and could jazz up his fastball efficiency.  That would be pretty awesome.  Obviously a trick might be tweaking the arm slot/wrist to help the fastball, without compromising the deadly slider. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on March 03, 2020, 09:46:56 am
Before camp really started, Sharma suggested 5 sure relievers:  Kimbrel, Wick, Ryan, Jeffress, Mills

Suggested competition for 3 relief spots:  Brad Wieck, Dan Winkler, Ryan Tepera, Casey Sadler, Dillon Maples,
Duane Underwood, Trevor Megill,
*non-factors for roster:  James Norwood, Justin Steele, Rodriguez
NRIs: Danny Hultzen, Brandon Morrow, Jason Adam, Brock Stewart, Ben Taylor, Tyler Olson,
Oscar De La Cruz, Dakota Mekkes, Caleb Simpson, Rex Brothers, C.D. Pelham, and Wyatt Short .

First eleven games have looked favorable for the relievers.   
1.  Haven't seen Kimbrell or much of Jeffress yet. 
2.  But no indication immediately of anybody who has lost 3 mph off their fastball, or who has known bad arm, or anything yet. 
3.  Of the deepish crowd of thrifty pickups, most have looked like you'd hope they'd look.  (Winkler, Tepera, Sadler, Megill, Adam, Brothers)

So for the moment I'm encouraged that the three "competition" spots will be filled effectively, plus with some surplus at Iowa. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on March 03, 2020, 10:41:11 am
https://www.dailyherald.com/article/20200226/sports/302269905/

Souza said the Cubs asked him about playing center, and he feels very comfortable there. 

Obviously hoping there's little need for that.  That Happ is perfectly solid defensively, and hopefully is productive hitting both left and right, and emerges as a good every-day guy.  But over his brief, small-sample career, Happ has .855/.707-OPS splits lefty-righty.  So there might be good reason to rest him versus many/most/all LHP, *IF* one of our RH options is hitting well.  HOpefully Almora will be hitting well, more like his first two seasons than his last two.  But if both Happ and Almora struggle versus LHP, Souza is career .759 vs LHP, so *if* he's doing that or perhaps having a good year and doing somewhat better, perhaps he'd be useful to get some CF starts.  Particulary in Wrigley with it's small CF. 

Obviously the better hope is that between Souza, Almora, and Happ, two or maybe even all three of them hit pretty well versus LHP, so taht you can sit Heyward against most LHP, and get decent production from both CF and RF against lefties.  (.553 OPS versus lefties last year.) .
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on March 03, 2020, 02:55:52 pm
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  1h
Ross said pitching prospect Manny Rodriguez's injury is a "Grade 2" biceps strain. No timetable given. Medical/training staff still mapping out a rehab plan.

Michael Ernst  @mj_ernst   57m
Had this been a season-ending elbow injury it would have cost the Cubs an additional half a million against the luxury tax threshold because he would have been on MLB IL all season.

He'll still need to go on MLB IL in the meantime, but once healthy can be re-assigned to Minors.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on March 03, 2020, 05:40:22 pm
Anyone know what a grade 2 strain is, as opposed to a grade 1 or 3?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on March 03, 2020, 05:48:46 pm
That's the grade you had to repeat 3 times.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 03, 2020, 06:04:22 pm
It is based on what percentage if muscle fibers are torn. Grade 1 is a small number, grade 2 is a majority with loss of function. Grade 3 is a rapture of the tendon. Grade 1 and 2 are weeks, grade 3 is surgery and months.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on March 03, 2020, 07:31:18 pm
Is there usually a full recovery?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 03, 2020, 07:49:34 pm
Yes, but any injury near the elbow is concerning.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on March 03, 2020, 07:50:18 pm
Thanks.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 04, 2020, 08:05:08 am
Sharma was on his podcast discussing the pitch lab article. Their wasn’t much new info about the pitchers. Sharma’s view is that the info the Cubs allow him to get is more of a recruiting tool aimed at baseball players. The Cubs have tech that other teams don’t have and that they aren’t discussing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 04, 2020, 12:10:13 pm
Sharma with an excellent piece on Darvish reworking his 4-seamer to improve against lefties.

https://theathletic.com/1652010/2020/03/04/big-data-darvish-yu-goes-into-the-cubs-ivy-to-find-answers/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on March 04, 2020, 12:34:38 pm
Thanks, reb, that was really interesting.  Really good. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on March 04, 2020, 12:51:57 pm
Particular interesting in that article as a table showing Darvish's "active spin" rate (on his 4-seamer) ranked 595th among mlb RHP who threw ≥50 4-seamers.

I assume it is correct, but I almost wonder whether that might be an error?

With 30 teams, 595/30 would be 19.8. Would the average team really have had 19.8 RHP pitching enough enough innings to get ≥50-4-seamers with better 4-seam active spin effectiveness than Yu?

I wouldn't have even been sure the average team even used 20 RHP for enough innings to even throw 50 4-seamers! The Cubs certainly didn't.

Last year, the Cubs had:
*12 RHP who reached 13 innings. 
*5 RHP pitched 9.1-12.1 innings [Alzolay, Underwood, Maples, Webster, Norwood (12.1, 11.2, 11.2, 11.0, 9.1)]. 
*5 RHP pitched 1-2 innings (Tony Barnette  and 4 position players, Caratini, Descalso, Zobrist, and Taylor Davis). 

For Yu to be 19.8th, that's kinda hard to do! 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on March 04, 2020, 12:55:34 pm
Sharma with an excellent piece on Darvish reworking his 4-seamer to improve against lefties.

https://theathletic.com/1652010/2020/03/04/big-data-darvish-yu-goes-into-the-cubs-ivy-to-find-answers/

To think how recently the signing of Yu looked really questionable to so many of us. Wow. I think Deeg had commented early on how intelligent Yu is, and that is certainly beginning to show.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on March 04, 2020, 01:03:36 pm
Rumors have started that the Cubs/Cardinals games in London in June might not happen.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on March 04, 2020, 03:40:23 pm
To think how recently the signing of Yu looked really questionable to so many of us. Wow. I think Deeg had commented early on how intelligent Yu is, and that is certainly beginning to show.

If anything he sometimes gets himself into trouble by thinking too much.  But there's not a smarter or more thoughtful pitcher in the game.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on March 04, 2020, 03:47:39 pm
Rumors have started that the Cubs/Cardinals games in London in June might not happen.

The entire start of the season might not happen.  At least not with fans in attendance.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on March 04, 2020, 03:58:01 pm
Quote
Submitted by Arizona Phil  on Mon, 03/02/2020 - 9:53am  Permalink
Even with their frugal off-season the Cubs are still about $4M over the CBT threshold, and they will go over at least a million or two more once one or more of the NRI (Kipnis, Brothers, H. Perez, Phegley, and/or Miller) are added to the 40. The Cubs will also need an extra $2M or so in payroll to cover the difference between minor league & MLB split salaries for temporary injury replacements recalled from the minors during the course of the season. And that's presuming the Cubs don't add any payroll at the trade deadline.

In retrospect, if the Cubs had not picked up Jose Quintana's $10.5M club option but instead picked up Kendall Graveman's $3.5M club option, they would have saved $8M in 2020 payroll, and that would mean they would be $4M under the CBT threshold right now instead of $4M over.

I suspect the Cubs Master Plan post-2019 was to trade Kris Bryant and get back at least one MLB-ready young SP in the deal, then trade Quintana, and then sign Javy Baez to a contract extension, but the delay in the Bryant grievance put a crimp in that plan, and so now they're stuck with Quintana and are $4M over the CBT threshold, and they don't have the payroll space they feel they would need to sign Baez long-term. 


Phil is very detailed, so I trust his numbers.  *IF* they're $4 over already, and are likely to add $3 more in bills, dumping Q's contract in July is not going to be enough.  Unloading just 2 months of Q will save not even $4M, not sufficient. 


Phil was mentioning this because he said Graveman was 94-96 mph in outing versus Cubs the other day, and he was trying to process why the Cubs had unexpectedly released Graveman.


Man we'll never know, but it would be sure fascinating to know how the discussion and argumentation went when they talked themselves into voluntarily taking on Q's contract and going well over the lux line to do so.  Hopefully he'll be a 4-WAR guy this season, the Cubs will go far, and those who argued to keep him will look like geniuses. 


Alzolay hasn't exactly been winning that spot thus far.  Mills has been good thus far, but otherwise the internal options had they let Q go haven't exactly been looking awesome.



Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 04, 2020, 04:27:47 pm
Dan Szymborski
@DSzymborski

Reminder: In 2018, every team received $118 million from the local revenue sharing pot and and additional ~$91 million in shared national revenues.****

*The Cubs and every MLB are printing money
** The Cubs could go over the CBT tax and still make a crap ton of money.  The Rickett's family doesn't want to pay the tax.
***Que Dave and Reb about how the Cubs are being prudent to not spend money on the team.
****Not accounted for in Forbes estimates of revenue.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on March 04, 2020, 06:47:13 pm
The Cubs are being prudent to not spend money on the team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 04, 2020, 10:55:07 pm
Cubs lose 50% of their revenue sharing money if go over luxury tax a third year in a row in 2021.

As Brett Taylor has explained: “when you’re in your third year over the luxury tax (that would be the Cubs in 2021 if they don’t reset in 2020), the financial considerations increase dramatically – that extra $20 to $25 million could easily exceed $50 million in a third year over the luxury tax (more if you were planning on really pushing payroll) – because of the exponential increases in the tax rate and losing 50% of your revenue-sharing refund.”

It’s significant money. Yes, rich people make a lot of money. That includes 29 of Ricketts peers. Still, Cubs are one of a tiny group of teams currently over the tax for a second year in a row. Bryant is still here. Contreras is here. Q option exercised. What are you crying about?

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on March 04, 2020, 11:00:33 pm
***Que Dave and Reb about how the Cubs are being prudent to not spend money on the team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on March 05, 2020, 11:27:16 am

***Que Dave and Reb about how the Cubs are being prudent to not spend money on the team.


It is hard to refute an argument as powerful as that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 05, 2020, 12:30:46 pm
How would the Ricketts' survive only getting $150 million in national and local TV sharing before counting Marquee money, Marquee profits, attendance, concessions, merchandise, Rooftops, Rickettsville profitis, ad sales, etc... 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on March 05, 2020, 12:52:56 pm
How would the Ricketts' survive only getting $150 million in national and local TV sharing before counting Marquee money, Marquee profits, attendance, concessions, merchandise, Rooftops, Rickettsville profitis, ad sales, etc... 

Exactly. The Ricketts can obviously do whatever they want. But the notion that this is somehow an important/necessary/prudent business decision and therefore appropriate is absolute nonsense, and endemic to problems of our economy at large.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 05, 2020, 12:53:47 pm
They’re RICH, RICH, RICH. That’s the answer to everything, right?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on March 05, 2020, 12:55:40 pm
They’re RICH, RICH, RICH. That’s the answer to everything, right?

Way to oversimplify to the point of obviating the argument. No point trying to engage in a discussion if this is the tactic.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 05, 2020, 01:06:53 pm
They’re RICH, RICH, RICH. That’s the answer to everything, right?

This might be the dumbest thing you've ever posted.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 05, 2020, 01:40:16 pm
Your argument isn’t based on what other clubs are doing—they’re all careful about the CBT and MLBPA/players are furious about it. Your argument isn’t based on Ricketts spending history—they’ve been big spenders for several years compared to their peers. Your argument isn’t based on the revenues flowing from Marquee—that’s still an unknown and unforeseeable at this point.

Your argument is based on rich owners with lots of money and applies to all the rich owners. It’s an industry that has spending standards that the industry works around. Ricketts are part of that industry.

The biggest cliche in all of sports are fans complaining about their fave club not spending enough—-Rich guys not spending enough. It’s lame.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 05, 2020, 01:47:28 pm
The Cubs are lowering payroll to avoid paying a penalty that the Cubs can afford from their revenues.  Acting like the Cubs can't afford it or it would require the Rickett's spend additional money is lame.  They can afford it.  The Rickett's don't want to and are ok with Cubs not being as competitive as the can be.

The Rickett's family is likely making close to $100 million a year off of a business that they purchased for under $900 million and has increased almost 400% since they purchased it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 05, 2020, 02:11:04 pm
Once again, you’re repeating a cliche. Ad nauseam.

Every sports league puts constraints on how its clubs spend, no matter how rich they are, no matter how the worth of franchises rise, no matter how annual revenues rise.

Others sports have hard caps that limit spending of even the richest owners and clubs. They have a formula.

In MLB, clubs have a soft cap but it’s a formula—like the other leagues—to restrain spending of each club. Blame the cba negotiated by MLBPA if you want, but it’s there and it’s the industry standard.

So, Cubs operate within that formula...and all we can do is compare them to their peers. If you do that, it’s very clear Cubs are elite spenders for a bunch of years. 2020 club is still over the threshold for now. As Brett Taylor has explained—which you ignore—the constraints are substantial re. revenue sharing, among other things. All part of the formula that the industry works under.

I think what you need for your own emotional Cubs fandom is a hard salary cap in MLB and then you can stop the incessant lame complaining about Cubs spending—-it will all be settled by that kind of industry standard. The more loose industry standard that MLB operates under evidently is driving you nuts. It’s lame.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on March 05, 2020, 02:17:06 pm
Where's Okie when you need him?


(https://ca.res.keymedia.com/files/image/deadhorse.jpg)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 05, 2020, 02:31:40 pm
Once again, you’re repeating a cliche. Ad nauseam.

Every sports league puts constraints on how its clubs spend, no matter how rich they are, no matter how the worth of franchises rise, no matter how annual revenues rise.

Others sports have hard caps that limit spending of even the richest owners and clubs. They have a formula.

In MLB, clubs have a soft cap but it’s a formula—like the other leagues—to restrain spending of each club. Blame the cba negotiated by MLBPA if you want, but it’s there and it’s the industry standard.

So, Cubs operate within that formula...and all we can do is compare them to their peers. If you do that, it’s very clear Cubs are elite spenders for a bunch of years. 2020 club is still over the threshold for now. As Brett Taylor has explained—which you ignore—the constraints are substantial re. revenue sharing, among other things. All part of the formula that the industry works under.

I think what you need for your own emotional Cubs fandom is a hard salary cap in MLB and then you can stop the incessant lame complaining about Cubs spending—-it will all be settled by that kind of industry standard. The more loose industry standard that MLB operates under evidently is driving you nuts. It’s lame.



The Cubs can do whatever they want and I can choose to support them or not.

What drives me nuts is fans of team doing mental gymnastics to convince themselves that it makes sense not to send on the team in a middle of competitive window because of a tax that they can easily afford. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on March 05, 2020, 02:53:05 pm
Where's Okie when you need him?

Is Cat Osterman in the Witness Protection Program? I'd start there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on March 05, 2020, 02:55:14 pm
Quote
Is Cat Osterman in the Witness Protection Program? I'd start there.

Early nominee for Post of the Year
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on March 05, 2020, 03:32:56 pm
Okie went to Montana.  Most people that go to that part of the country are never seen or heard from again.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on March 05, 2020, 03:36:24 pm
Okie went to Montana.  Most people that go to that part of the country are never seen or heard from again.

Can we send CurtOne there?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on March 05, 2020, 03:47:52 pm
Whether you think the focus on the luxury tax is a legit reason not to spend or a pretext for excessive greed by an owner of an incredibly profitable franchise (hint: it's that one) the way the Cubs have gone about this offseason is objectively a complete failure.  They did nothing to improve the team and still left themselves over the cap.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on March 05, 2020, 04:42:31 pm
Is the season over already?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on March 05, 2020, 04:48:32 pm
Is the season over already?

If the Cubs are a contender in 2020 it’s in spite of their offseason, not because of it. The very definition of “dumb luck”.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robb on March 05, 2020, 05:02:31 pm
Regardless of how much money a team makes it's still a business.  Every business has to weigh expenditures vs ROI. It might make sense to get 2 extra players while paying 20 million in luxury tax because the return in gate receipts, concessions, ratings, merchandise will increase by more than that number.  But at 50 million it's a new equation.  I don't care if you have Jeff Bezos kind of money.  If you run your business like that you'd never be in a position to buy a baseball team in the first place.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 05, 2020, 05:24:56 pm
Attendance has fallen every year since 2016. They are launching a new network. Ricketsville is better off with a good Cubs team. What the Cubs got was an off season of we are going to trade are best player and the owner getting booed at Cubs convention.  Ricketts has blown through all the good will of winning a World Series in 3 years. That is a freaking skill.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 05, 2020, 05:25:55 pm
Ricketts has blown through all the good will of winning a World Series in 3 years. That is a freaking skill.

this was a much harder and more unlikely feat than winning the WS.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 05, 2020, 05:42:09 pm
The main reason that some Cubs fans are upset is that expectations are infinitesimally higher for Cubs fans that ever before.

That is a great, fantastic occurrence.  I waited for that for decades.

Expectations are way higher because Cubs are now perennial contenders and actually won a World Series recently.

You can thank the Ricketts for a big chunk of that.

Now, Cubs are coming off two contending but disappointing seasons:  a wild card elimination and a no post-season season. 

This is the primary reason some Cubs fans are upset:  high expectations and two disappointing seasons in a row.

Some Cubs fan forget that most teams have had far less successful seasons lately.  Some Cubs fan forget that the Cubs had a bad 70 year stretch before the current run.

It's not the off-season.  No games are played in the off-season.  Some teams make a lot of off-season moves and are not better....but turn out worse.

We live in a world of what have you done for me lately.  There is a strategy.  There is a business to be run.  Fans are fans. 

Have fun if you can.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 05, 2020, 06:03:24 pm
One can enjoy watching the Cubs play baseball while also be disappointed that Ricketts won’t spend money to actually try and compete with the Dodgers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on March 05, 2020, 06:37:56 pm
If the Cubs had made better decisions with their prospects and drafted less crappily, they might be in a position to challenge the Dodgers anyway. Complain about finances all you like but there are other roadblocks the Cubs put in their own way.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 05, 2020, 06:41:25 pm
If the Cubs had made better decisions with their prospects and drafted less crappily, they might be in a position to challenge the Dodgers anyway. Complain about finances all you like but there are other roadblocks the Cubs put in their own way.

It seems like this should give them more incentive to use their massive cash war chest not less.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on March 05, 2020, 06:41:29 pm
Exactly what players within reasonable cost could the Cubs signed in order to compete with the Dodgers.  I'm assuming Cole and Stras would be off the table.   What terrific CF, 2B, and/or SP was out there that would give us a comparable roster?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 05, 2020, 06:42:07 pm
I think that maybe Cubs fans tend to have a better understanding (or tolerance level) of the business side on a micro level than do on a macro level.

On a macro level, there is "Ricketts won’t spend money to actually try and compete with the Dodgers." Let's put aside the fact that Cubs year-end 40-man roster payroll was higher than the Dodgers both in 2018 and 2019.

On a micro level, however, it's rare for somebody to say Cubs should just pay Bryant and Baez whatever the heck is necessary to sign them before free agency.  They can "afford" to do that--unusual to hear that.  For some reason, when we get down to particulars, folks understand there is a market salary structure and teams rarely just go out and spend whatever it takes.  Clubs weigh this and that and have a strategy.

But, macro level, the cliches come out about all the revenues and "can afford" to do this and that and not trying to compete, etc, etc.  It's lame.

Glad that folks can still enjoy watching the Cubs play.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 05, 2020, 07:01:07 pm
Getting Price and Betts for peanuts would have been a nice start to compete with the Dodgers. Part of being a big market team is throwing money at your problems.

Defending the team as they can’t do anything wrong and fans should just be happy that the team isn’t a national embarrassment is what led to the loveable losers to begin with. I know Cubs fans have a hard time expecting more from this team after a lifetime of beat downs.  The Cubs getting bad press and losing attendance might lead the Cubs to believe that by trying to avoid $50 million in penalties it might cost them $100 million in revenue.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 05, 2020, 07:15:23 pm
Exactly what players within reasonable cost could the Cubs signed in order to compete with the Dodgers.  I'm assuming Cole and Stras would be off the table.   What terrific CF, 2B, and/or SP was out there that would give us a comparable roster?

Why assume that Cole was off the table? They could have paid up for him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on March 05, 2020, 07:27:55 pm
Because I don't the Yankees were going to be outbid and Stras and the Nats were in love.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ben on March 05, 2020, 08:31:14 pm
Ricketts has been as good an owner as any fan, certainly a Cub fan, could have reasonably asked for!

From the bottom of the shitbarrel (virtually every decade for decades) to hiring Theo, to a WS Championship, to a top-spending club.

Our owners haven't been perfect, but whose owners have?

The case can rather easily be made that the Dodgers' front office/owners have outperformed ours in recent years; of course, they've outperformed every other franchise, too, in recent years and there's this: we have a 2016 Championship; LA hasn't had one in decades!

Having waited for SIXTY-plus years of Cub fandom for our WS, I'll always feel grateful to Tom Ricketts, Theo and others for, somehow, achieving the Holy Grail of sports! 

I'd encourage those who are open to it to choose gratitude - it works SO much better than any other alternative!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 05, 2020, 11:23:18 pm

Defending the team as they can’t do anything wrong and fans should just be happy that the team isn’t a national embarrassment is what led to the loveable losers to begin with. I know Cubs fans have a hard time expecting more from this team after a lifetime of beat downs.  The Cubs getting bad press and losing attendance might lead the Cubs to believe that by trying to avoid $50 million in penalties it might cost them $100 million in revenue.

Another gross distortion when you say that anybody is “defending the team as they can’t do anything wrong.”

Nobody is saying that, obviously. When you have to resort to that, speaks loudly about whatever it is you are contending.

Also a distortion to overlook fact that Cubs have been big spenders under Ricketts. And, they haven’t traded Bryant and are still over luxury tax now going into 2020.

There was a time when folks running the Cubs were baseball stupid. Now, folks running Cubs are baseball smarter than you and me. Of course, even baseball-smart folks make mistakes and miscalculate at times and, yes, do some things wrong in retrospect.

You don’t want to hear it, I know, but balancing short-term and long-term expenditures in the CBT era when in first year of a new broadcast network and when your top stars are nearing free agency— is complicated. It’s way, way above your pay grade.

Have an opinion, fine, but we all know very little about the details that underpin these decisions. But, of course, you know absolutely, right now, how they should allocate resources because, after all, these are rich guys with lots of revenues.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 06, 2020, 06:33:11 am
You should have quoted Ed Lynch. It would have saved you time.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on March 06, 2020, 07:34:26 am
Maples pitched his first inning yesterday.  Blue may have put the idea into my head, but it did look like his arm slot was a little lower.  I saw one fastball that got his hard, another where a guy swung/missed under.  Perhaps the latter was a spin-efficiency manifestation?   

His stuff was kinda overwhelming to Contreras; three balls got away, maybe formally two PB and one WP? 

My hope is that he'll settle in to his adjusted delivery, in time make fewer mistakes, and end up being a useful yo-yo reliever in due time. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 06, 2020, 07:44:35 am
I got it from somebody on Twitter. Cubs Insider should have something today if he actually dropped his arm slot.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on March 06, 2020, 12:47:13 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EScTe1kXsAM2hFP?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on March 06, 2020, 01:40:59 pm
Exactly what players within reasonable cost could the Cubs signed in order to compete with the Dodgers.  I'm assuming Cole and Stras would be off the table.   What terrific CF, 2B, and/or SP was out there that would give us a comparable roster?

CBJ already made the point, but Price & Betts would have been a huge upgrade to this team.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on March 06, 2020, 02:52:01 pm
CBJ already made the point, but Price & Betts would have been a huge upgrade to this team.

Who could we have given Boston that would have come anywhere close in value to Verdugo?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 06, 2020, 02:58:49 pm
Verdurgo has a stress fracture in his back and make up questions. I'm not sure how much value he has to be honest.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 06, 2020, 03:10:19 pm
Dodgers also gave up a prospect, Jeter Downs, ranked higher (#44) on Pipeline than ANY Cubs prospect.

And, Dodgers 2020 CBT threshold was more than $20 below the Cubs, before that deal.

Cubs do not want to be in position of trading for a high-priced free agent eligible 2020 guy. Cubs should be trying to re-sign our own soon-to-be pending free agents, nor should Cubs be taking on a massively overpaid player like Price.

If Cubs want to pursue Betts as a FA next off-season, great, but giving up a lot of value for a rental, no.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 06, 2020, 03:21:46 pm
Verdurgo has a stress fracture in his back and make up questions. I'm not sure how much value he has to be honest.

You like to cite Steamer when it suits you.

Steamer has Verdugo at 307-367-475 slash line for 2020 and 119 wRC+

As a comp, Schwarber was 120 wRC+ in 2019.

And, Red Sox have five years of control with Verdugo.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 06, 2020, 03:31:50 pm
Dodgers also gave up a prospect, Jeter Downs, ranked higher (#44) on Pipeline than ANY Cubs prospect.
You might want to check out the new rankings for Pipeline, Jeter is #87.  The value difference between #44 and Amaya at #90 is not really a difference though.  Jeter was only sent after the trade was reworked.  It was originally Graterol and Verdurgo.

And, Dodgers 2020 CBT threshold was more than $20 below the Cubs, before that deal.

Whole point of this discussion was if the Cubs actually spent money how could they have improved the team. 

If Cubs want to pursue Betts as a FA next off-season, great, but giving up a lot of value for a rental, no.
That would but the Cubs above the CBT 3 years in a row though and it wouldn't be prudent.  No big money guys next year either.

You like to cite Steamer when it suits you.

Steamer has Verdugo at 307-367-475 slash line for 2020 and 119 wRC+

As a comp, Schwarber was 120 wRC+ in 2019.

And, Red Sox have five years of control with Verdugo.

And none of that matters to my point about is make up or bad back.  Steamer is also the highest projection system for him.  Zips has him at 101, BAT 103.  ATC is an average at 114, which is due to steamer.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 06, 2020, 03:49:28 pm
You might want to check out the new rankings for Pipeline, Jeter is #87.  The value difference between #44 and Amaya at #90 is not really a difference though.  Jeter was only sent after the trade was reworked.  It was originally Graterol and Verdurgo.

Whole point of this discussion was if the Cubs actually spent money how could they have improved the team. 
That would but the Cubs above the CBT 3 years in a row though and it wouldn't be prudent.  No big money guys next year either.

And none of that matters to my point about is make up or bad back.  Steamer is also the highest projection system for him.  Zips has him at 101, BAT 103.  ATC is an average at 114, which is due to steamer.

First, you are wrong about Pipeline and Downs. He is #44 in the new rankings. He is also a top 50 prospect with ESPN/McDaniel.

Second, maybe Red Sox had world-class orthopedists in metropolitan Boston with first-hand knowledge about Verdugo’s health that trumps whatever your medical judgment from far away may be???

Third, cited Steamer because you refer to it when it suits you— far more than those you seem to prefer today. Today, it’s not so hot I guess.

Fourth, unlike you, I’m not presumptuous enough to know what Theo and Ricketts may do a year from now when circumstances might be different. For most, remains to be seen.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 06, 2020, 04:06:58 pm
First, you are wrong about Pipeline and Downs. He is #44 in the new rankings. He is also a top 50 prospect with ESPN/McDaniel.
Aww my bookmark takes me to 2019 instead of the current list.  My point still stands the value difference between #44 and #51, 68, 78, 95 is a lot less than you seem to think.
Second, maybe Red Sox had world-class orthopedists in metropolitan Boston with first-hand knowledge about Verdugo’s health that trumps whatever your medical judgment from far away may be???

I never offered a medical opinion other than he has a reported stress fracture in his back.  Injuries affect player values and I said I wouldn't now how to value him because of it.  Trying reading next time.

Third, cited Steamer because you refer to it when it suits you— far more than those you seem to prefer today. Today, it’s not so hot I guess.
Steamer is usually the first projection system out, so if I'm citing it is because the other haven't been released.  So please tell me how I take them as gospel.

Fourth, unlike you, I’m not presumptuous enough to know what Theo and Ricketts may do a year from now when circumstances might be different. For most, remains to be seen.

Then maybe typing multiple paragraph posts about how bad the CBT is and how people don't understand the dynamics of baseball is a waste of your time.  Back to the ignore list you go.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 06, 2020, 04:39:09 pm
Look, you are downplaying Verdugo’s value in multiple ways. Don’t pretend otherwise.

Never said you take Steamer as “gospel.”  Said you cite it more than other sources. There is no gospel in baseball.

Never said “people don’t understand the dynamics of baseball.” Is it asking too much from you to be fair when addressing a point?

Finally, let me suggest that you refrain from calling posts from others as “dumbest thing you ever said” or the like...and then maybe you won’t find it necessary to go into Ignore mode soon thereafter. Suit yourself.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on March 06, 2020, 05:06:44 pm
My point still stands the value difference between #44 and #51, 68, 78, 95 is a lot less than you seem to think.

This.

Generally speaking, the value of prospects tilts heavily towards a very small bunch at the very top, and then begins to level out pretty quickly. It’s like a limit graph.

Tiers might roughly frame out as follows:

Top 3-5: Off the charts valuable
5ish to 15-20ish: Extremely valuable
20ish to 50ish: Very valuable
50ish to 150ish: Valuable
150ish and beyond: Total lottery ticket

Most prospect rankings have Downs in close enough proximity to Hoerner, Davis, Amaya, etc., that they’re relatively interchangeable, and it’s down to each individual organization’s scouting practices/philosophies as to which player they might prefer. Of course everyone here is going to have their personal favorite, but any poster who thinks they have the ability to objectively, factually differentiate between the value of these players is simply wrong (unless we have secret professional scouts among us).

As to Verdugo’s value, he’s extremely talented, but tarnished for the reasons noted by CBJ. Further, Dodgers also got I believe about $45M in the trade, effectively making Price about a $15M/yr pitcher. That’s a valuable piece. 

Don’t know that I have the insight or the smarts to figure out what all that means about Verdugo’s value, but I’ll throw out there that Fangraphs had him in the 120-range last time Verdugo was list-eligible. Basically, I have no doubt that the Cubs could absolutely have matched up with the Dodgers if they wanted to. And of course the Cubs could have also improved in less dramatic ways.

Most projection systems rank Cubs as *narrowly* the best team in the NL Central, and I’m inclined to agree. Unfortunately, that makes Deeg’s assessment of this offseason completely accurate, IMO: it was a miserable failure.

When you’re narrowly the best in a tightly bunched field, each additional win is EXTREMELY valuable. Adding 3 wins to 85 DRAMATICALLY impacts playoff odds. Adding 3 wins to 95 barely moves the needle. Perhaps more than any winter since Theo has been club pres, this winter the Cubs would have netted extraordinary marginal value from each and every dollar invested in improving the ML team. Conversely, given how tightly the NL Central is bunched around a very mediocre win total (i.e. win the division or miss the playoffs; wild card unlikely to come from NL Central) if the Cubs *must* reset lux tax calculator, this was the winter to do it.

But we did neither. We stood pat. I don’t think that was Theo’s intention, but it’s the current outcome, and it’s a shame.

My one hope is that they’ve outlined an ability to execute this very strategy mid-season, if necessary. Obviously it’s much harder to cut annual payroll when you’re already halfway through the year, but I have to believe that Theo has a list of “must-trade” players if the Cubs are not in it at the deadline, and I hope he has a commitment from ownership to release addt’l resources if the Cubs are looking very competitive at the break.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on March 06, 2020, 05:16:45 pm
I'm pretty confident most of the baseball world were shocked that verdugo go was the main piece to get Betts.

Brennan Davis is a better prospect now than verdugo ever was and is a better trade piece than verdugo just was.

Verdugo is Addison russel in the of. A dumb human being and also a very dumb baseball player. Albeit talented in some regards.

I've set this once before here... if you go over for two years you might as well go way over for the third year and gain any advantage you can before your treat... Going just a little bit over is not helpful in any way shape or form.  Cubs have opened the door for the White Sox now.

The White Sox are locking down all of their players moncada just signed... Giving up one year of free agency that means their core is together for at least six more seasons... Name one core player the Cubs have managed to extend or even get one free agency year from?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 06, 2020, 05:27:38 pm
Rizzo and Hendricks.

I’m not for the future of the Cubs this was a horrible off season. According to rumors out of San Diego the Cubs got turned down on Bryant for Lamet and Campusano. I like both of this guys for the Padres, but the board would have been a mess if that is all the Cubs got.

The best outcome is Ricketts opens up the pocket books year or they just blow the whole thing up.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on March 06, 2020, 05:34:32 pm
Ben Zobrist has decided to retire. Zobrist played four seasons with the Chicago Cubs.

(Via
@MLBBruceLevine
)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 06, 2020, 05:53:57 pm
Pre-2019 prospect rankings, Verdugo was #25 BA, #25 Pipeline, #19 BP overall prospect.

So, let’s be clear where he stood. Claiming he was in the #120s by industry standards is really misleading. By Tico’s described standards, “very valuable” or even “extremely valuable” (BP) is more accurate.

As to Price, he was untradeable absent being attached to another valuable piece. He is now similar to a imagine-a-less-durable Quintana but at $16 for three more seasons, with more years and more money.  Really hard to find that to be a “valuable piece.” Maybe Price will have a big comeback, who knows. Maybe Q will too.

For Cubs to add $45 to their CBT for 2020 AND give up Hoerner and a quality OFer (Schwarber?) but with FIVE years of control, no thank you.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on March 06, 2020, 07:24:18 pm
Yes, let’s indeed be clear. I did not claim that Verdugo is a 120-rank prospect by industry standards, and to suggest as much is the truly misleading thing. I quite literally said:

“Don’t know that I have the insight or the smarts to figure out what all that means about Verdugo’s value, but I’ll throw out there that Fangraphs had him in the 120-range last time Verdugo was list-eligible.“

To anyone capable of basic reading comprehension, that is quite obviously very conditional, uncertain language, allowing room for disagreement, and not a statement claiming any kind of “industry standard.” You’re erecting your own strawman to spar with.

The other rankings you mention are valid data points, too! But they do not nullify the Fangraphs ranking, and you don’t get to simply dispose of it . Further, all rankings, whether 19 or 117, were given before Verdugo sustained a stress fracture in his back while on a rehab assignment for a different injury.

Verdugo is a talented player with some serious question marks, both makeup and injury-related. ZIPS, which doesn’t know about the makeup problems, projects him as about a 2 WAR player for each of the next 5 years. That’s valuable, but not outside the range of what the Cubs could have offered.

You like Verdugo a lot more than me. Great. Opinions are like **** and everyone has them. I don’t pretend to know who is right, but I do know that people more informed than either of us disagree with your assessment, and you have no basis to simply write that off.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on March 06, 2020, 08:15:39 pm
Quote
With a minimum of 200 BBE, Kyle Schwarber had the highest exit velocity on fielded outs out of any player in baseball (89.5) in 2019.

His launch angle and perceived exit velocity on these events is higher than all doubles and triples in 2019.

https://twitter.com/GoCubs49/status/1236036239708565504
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 06, 2020, 11:40:08 pm
Yes, let’s indeed be clear. I did not claim that Verdugo is a 120-rank prospect by industry standards, and to suggest as much is the truly misleading thing. I quite literally said:

“Don’t know that I have the insight or the smarts to figure out what all that means about Verdugo’s value, but I’ll throw out there that Fangraphs had him in the 120-range last time Verdugo was list-eligible.“

To anyone capable of basic reading comprehension, that is quite obviously very conditional, uncertain language, allowing room for disagreement, and not a statement claiming any kind of “industry standard.” You’re erecting your own strawman to spar with.

The other rankings you mention are valid data points, too! But they do not nullify the Fangraphs ranking, and you don’t get to simply dispose of it . Further, all rankings, whether 19 or 117, were given before Verdugo sustained a stress fracture in his back while on a rehab assignment for a different injury.....


It took about 15 seconds to go to BR and see where Verdugo was ranked by BA, Pipeline, and BP. When you cite one source to note he was supposedly in the 120s–without taking the 15 seconds to look at easily found sources which you are well aware of—it’s not much of a foundation to criticize anybody else for lacking reading comprehension ability.

When I see that kind of thing by a smart person, as here, in a legal brief, op-ed column, or anywhere else, it is usually evident that the writer is well aware of what they are doing. And, it doesn’t help any to claim you’re just “throwing it out there.” You threw that out there in a post with 10 paragraphs (!) and plenty of detail in other respects. Obviously, the citation to Fangraphs was intended to be a reflection of Verdugo’s prospect status generally.

As to Verdugo’s health (or future), who knows. It’s baseball. But, what we do know is that the Sox nixed another part of the deal for health issues, went ahead with the Verdugo part, and that there are very good orthopedists in Boston who evaluated Verdugo. You will also find plenty of articles that there is an expectation he’ll be fine and back in the near future.

Hope it’s okay to note the irony of raising Verdugo’s health as a concern while, in the same post, extolling the value of David Price at $48 M and big-time health issues.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron Green on March 07, 2020, 08:58:39 am
What drives me nuts is fans of team doing mental gymnastics to convince themselves that it makes sense not to send on the team in a middle of competitive window because of a tax that they can easily afford.

What of the mental gymnastics involved in believing that you are more likely to make the right personnel/roster/lineup decisions than highly successful, highly intelligent people who have much better information on what is involved and a much greater incentive to make the right decision because they have skin in the game?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on March 07, 2020, 09:02:29 am
Actually, I literally never use baseball reference as I don’t like their WAR calculations and instead always use Fangraphs for statistical reference.

As a result, I had no idea that br shows historical prospect rankings from a variety of sources.

So congrats on the assumption, and thanks for the unkind projections you make about me.

You’re wrong on both accounts, and there’s literally no point in having a discussion with someone who thinks they know my position better than I do myself, and who makes unfounded projections about my motives and honesty.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron Green on March 07, 2020, 09:06:40 am
Is Cat Osterman in the Witness Protection Program? I'd start there.

https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/mike-flynns-lawyer-says-government-will-interview#.XmKhTNfy-GU.twitter
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on March 07, 2020, 09:08:01 am
What of the mental gymnastics involved in believing that you are more likely to make the right personnel/roster/lineup decisions than highly successful, highly intelligent people who have much better information on what is involved and a much greater incentive to make the right decision because they have skin in the game?

I missed where CBJ said he knew how to better run the team than Theo. He simply commented on the fact that the Cubs aren’t spending because of financial restrictions. Theo himself has said as much. This is neither opinion nor breaking news. The Cubs’ decision not to spend is not some super-secret competitive strategy. It’s fiscal prudence or cheapskatery, depending on your view.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron Green on March 07, 2020, 09:18:35 am
Defending the team as they can’t do anything wrong and fans should just be happy that the team isn’t a national embarrassment is what led to the loveable losers to begin with.

The "loveable losers" idea, of the Cubs reliably filling the stands and being a consistent attendance leader despite how bad the team was did not even begin until the late 80's, and the team had decades of front office mis-management before that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on March 07, 2020, 09:19:42 am
The fans don't care about fiscal prudence, they want their teams to win and the owners to spend as much as it takes.  Objectively, it's hard for me to get upset with Ricketts for being cheap.  Their payroll is high enough that the team ought to be in a better competitive situation than it is.  Theo has come up a bit short after brilliantly guiding our ascent to the Championship.   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron Green on March 07, 2020, 09:42:51 am
Aww my bookmark takes me to 2019 instead of the current list.  My point still stands the value difference between #44 and #51, 68, 78, 95 is a lot less than you seem to think.

And the certainty and universality of such rankings would seem to be a lot less than you seem to think.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron Green on March 07, 2020, 09:45:50 am
I do know that people more informed than either of us disagree with your assessment, and you have no basis to simply write that off.


No basis to write off the disagreement... and no reason not to write off the disagreement.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 07, 2020, 09:49:24 am
Where did I ever imply there was certainty to these rankings or that people rank each prospect the same?  I have prospects guys I prefer over others, but that is my preference. Other people can like other prospects guys. I can also think the prospect guys are wrong about guys I like more than them, but that doesn’t make me right. It is all an opinion and when I type something on here it is 100% my opinion which isn’t worth a whole heck of a lot. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron Green on March 07, 2020, 10:16:18 am
Where did I ever imply there was certainty to these rankings or that people rank each prospect the same?  I have prospects guys I prefer over others, but that is my preference. Other people can like other prospects guys. I can also think the prospect guys are wrong about guys I like more than them, but that doesn’t make me right. It is all an opinion and when I type something on here it is 100% my opinion which isn’t worth a whole heck of a lot.

The degree of stink and criticism which you raise here, both toward the Cubs and those who you seem to believe are defending them when you have chosen to be critical of them, regarding personnel decisions would seem to indicate you are giving those rankings considerable weight, despite the fact that it would appear clear that a different evaluation was reached by either the Cubs' front office or the front office of the other team or teams involved, folks who in fact have skin in the game and likely much superior information.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on March 07, 2020, 10:18:15 am
The fans don't care about fiscal prudence, they want their teams to win and the owners to spend as much as it takes.  Objectively, it's hard for me to get upset with Ricketts for being cheap.  Their payroll is high enough that the team ought to be in a better competitive situation than it is.  Theo has come up a bit short after brilliantly guiding our ascent to the Championship.   

Exactly. 
1.  We want to win. 
2.  The revenue factor is not unique to the Cubs.
3.  The Cubs led the league in spending last year and are second this year. 
4.  The board, and Cub fans in general, (justifiably) reason that the Cubs could and should spend more.
5.  Fans of every other team in the league, Dodgers included, feel the same way.  (Justifiably).
6.  Theo used a first-place payroll to field an 8th-place team last year.
7.  We had one of the worst wins-per-payroll ratios in baseball.  (Boston and Giants were even worse.)
8.  This year he's got a second-place payroll (by a large separation from #3). 
9.  Let's hope the team can come in better than 8th place this year.
10.  Let's hope we can escape from the pits in terms of wins-per-payroll.
11.  We can justifiably join fans of every other team in the league in faulting their ownership for not spending more. 
12.  With payroll 1st-or-2nd-best in league, hopefully wins-per-payroll will no longer be 1st-or-2nd-worst in league, in future. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 07, 2020, 12:07:04 pm
Actually, I literally never use baseball reference as I don’t like their WAR calculations and instead always use Fangraphs for statistical reference.

As a result, I had no idea that br shows historical prospect rankings from a variety of sources.

So congrats on the assumption, and thanks for the unkind projections you make about me.

You’re wrong on both accounts, and there’s literally no point in having a discussion with someone who thinks they know my position better than I do myself, and who makes unfounded projections about my motives and honesty.

Yes, I assumed you at least occasionally access BR, among other sources.  Given your informative posts, I find that surprising. It was not my intention to question motives or honesty but rather to point out the incongruity between what was posted and easily available information. But, in retrospect, I should have phrased my post differently. My bad.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on March 07, 2020, 12:19:00 pm
Ben Zobrist has decided to retire. Zobrist played four seasons with the Chicago Cubs.

(Via
@MLBBruceLevine
)

Bill James’ latest rankings has Zobrist as the #36 all-time 2B in MLB history. Zobrist has 45.2 career bWAR—-really impressive.

And, of course, an integral player on two World Series winners—-and with franchises without a ton of championships.

What a career.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 07, 2020, 12:19:26 pm
The degree of stink and criticism which you raise here, both toward the Cubs and those who you seem to believe are defending them when you have chosen to be critical of them, regarding personnel decisions would seem to indicate you are giving those rankings considerable weight, despite the fact that it would appear clear that a different evaluation was reached by either the Cubs' front office or the front office of the other team or teams involved, folks who in fact have skin in the game and likely much superior information.


That is more understandable that a team isn’t going to trade a minor leaguer that has the talented to turn into Bryant than reliance on a public list.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ben on March 07, 2020, 01:22:25 pm
Craig, your points are true and well taken. Your points do not paint a very good picture of the 2019 season. Rightfully so.

However, I believe a larger (more like 5-year) context is in order when one realistically assesses how any front office has performed.

I believe that's true for the Yankees, true for the Cardinals and true for the Cubs (or any other team).  MLB is ULTRA competitive!!

Many who wish to constantly rag on our front office (and owner) seem to forget that we won the WS in '16 and played in the NLCS in '17 (and '15). 

Our FO still has a really strong track record over 5 years.  That's no guarantee for 2020, of course.   

Yet, particularly considering what they inherited, I still believe that, overall, our ownership and front office have done one helluva job!

If history is an indicator (as it usually is), Cubs should continue to be VERY competitive going forward in the foreseeable future (which is about all any fan base can realistically hope for given how competitive MLB is today)!

in our lifetimes, in what decade could any of us say the Cubs have been very competitive the last 5 years and that should continue in the foreseeable future?



Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on March 09, 2020, 10:30:49 am
https://theathletic.com/1662984/2020/03/09/cubs-roster-projection-3-0-a-bullpen-best-case-scenario-and-remaining-questions/

Nice thorough roster analysis by Sharma.

Not much competition or suspense, really.  2B and bullpen.
2b:  He suspect Hoerner and Kipnis make it.  But notes that keeping a backup SS isn't an April priority.  Lots of off-days, so Baez can start every game when he's healthy.  If he gets injured mid-game, Bote can get by and call up a SS by next game.  So "backup SS" isn't going to drive the opening-day roster. 

RP, current outlook:  Craig Kimbrel, Jeremy Jeffress, Rowan Wick, Kyle Ryan, Alec Mills, Dan Winkler, Ryan Tepera and Casey Sadler

This is obviously the most fluid and hard to predict, and subject to shift as the remaining weeks and performances play out. 

Two notes on Sharma's list:
1.  Ryan would be the only lefty.  Wieck has had late start, plus has options.  For whatever reason Hultzen only debuted yesterday, I think, and is NRI status.  Brothers is NRI. 
*Personally, I'm OK with going with a 1-lefty pen, at least to start. 
*Let righties pitch full-innings and not get yanked every time a lefty bats. 
*And perhaps the 3-batter thing factors, too.
*Pull up a 2nd lefty after one or more of the righties pitch themself off the roster, and after one of the lefties extends some effectiveness at Iowa.
 
2.  Not included on Sharma's list, without club-control:  Underwood (out of options) and Megill (Rule 5).  We'll see, a bunch of appearances left.  Underwood obviously has been inconsistent always, but he's got high velocity, a sometimes good change, and sometimes a usable curve.  *IF* he pitches well through camp, I assume they'll make a way to keep him.  Megill, he's got a couple of weeks to show whether he can have any consistency, too.  And maybe they can work a trade or something to keep him without burning a roster spot, yet, who knows. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on March 09, 2020, 10:45:19 am
Other notes:
1.  Az Phil had Q maxing at 90-92 yesterday.  Said he was really laboring, command problems.

Sharma noted that as is reported every spring, Q is trying to come up with a useful changeup.  This time, it's a grip change.  I recall a story two springs ago; how he was going to use his existing change more.  Didn't work.  Last spring, that he was making an adjustment on his mound position and his delivery to make his change more useful; didn't work.  This spring it's a grip change.  Hopefully it works this time. 

2.  Sharma notes Kimbrell was 94-95 with fastball.  There's a lot of big-league relievers that pitch 94-95, so it's not like Hendricks or Lester.  But that's not really particularly fast for a RH reliever, Cubs will cut a handful of guys who throw harder than that.  That's a concern for Kimbrell, given that his fastball doesn't have good command, never has; and that the recent version may not have excellent life, either.  Hopefully as camp plays out, he'll get locked in and will throw at least a little harder than that. As Sharma notes, real-game adrenalin might help a little, too. 

But so far, nothing good on the Kimbrel or Q fronts.  Hopefully both will improve at least somewhat over the upcoming weeks. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on March 10, 2020, 12:09:22 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESwvm7QXQAE8krq?format=png&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on March 11, 2020, 07:16:39 am
Yu with a distinctly Japanese talent:

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28877560/cubs-pitcher-yu-darvish-guess-your-blood-type
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on March 11, 2020, 09:38:39 am
He's one goofball.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on March 11, 2020, 10:21:10 am
Cubs.com has a video of Jason Heyward defensive highlights.  Pretty good.


https://www.facebook.com/Cubs/videos/1259469397584924/?v=858898714520451&__ft__=AZXL4hVpf7HGibmZDe8ouR_Y8PtIwldfgpt2wDe8t6AMDJJzhL-54xHr5GHQvLcim82levscQFy0KpNhoQq9OSNItmJkkpfk_rmLMmo5fdYR0MVI_xVftN0XcGWJMqGISxzaXIXXyTQUhvtTPeYBxh2oMIDyW6STA1Po3GV7Hy2wzegcaxuNqrcRg7We38fMukTKT45nYqON_q0TMMbxXZ11ehj9BhTpFypMPDiIQZi1qLyiBcTdY8JL3mbObYfG8i0WhRnpgk5oZGqfUciAOrGgSBhJPA18MvJFEdObP5Te7sBdcb5XCPMyYdrn8ZjEoWZPNA5xfuQKxaIZB2_EPzGJ-XRoKnKihuoHGYNWGXFad2eYK0CkJCQXlufkGivB54VJ3yamohbA51XPWuz5vU6euiQndctAkd6s8bBB7OWqvxwSIp6hfgar9pMX8MINWQlkK5wy5ZSYPtVv6KWKPLoFEOlKDiLIrh-Tn2LwXyRn-xqArpWlE1nnzmY0gna3Nuio_GvlHwNaEPHt3vbPoYGjPyxUVEFmD2GkDgr0c1dGQy3hfJkTjACvFjxZJnS33fdLd1vw-n07o7o8SvM2NzL_M0KeHpEQMtMnxBQI0N60ZDju4WvW_Ph55zc2fwx8xqIO8bDZxMQswHJGi-COeszEsrwzlvUmsBmfeFJSeLV4H4PcHVP0m3jG6q9_ZCB0N-HJ30KE38Hods60F3HcH64TYWsdm2Jc4PM4B9f0jR3r13CKu2Pjnbl88IOrlJ9e7Yo7ttrXqWjwTcFMPbNew453ROKQV9xSs1jxflzYYxEGEfe8jx6jCHpJu6zcyv_yHUE15-uiQN7cP5gS8fEgPmg_j2C3T32oQWLzAjZNcZtqmVmhOcRhFXSjK8W74jV_geVfiBSFR3EUXEXGwhe5xNvGUQ2vgfQtiBWoE3l02SaQIHVKGLWvaRUUeUiFC5zB98r6ApB0yorN5S2WBw_55vV9kXwXUlfmIF7HFMZHWZgAaIGuYThPyUEpm_L4ojJLK7A9sSvZDdAPrJtqYjFoqrJcAQ_Yh5ZRKapXJvRpKwQ0E5iyhGRPTylX8s8MZvWydz-zONSH7yBFCp0K-6rRstwx-OuqZwtwr-bT-D3lY7H4-KdSIrZDOZxuQbEy0Dfz2j8_P_lPZIBOKjLazRZ_HNcEQWS9w8Ow6ixzwdSoQthNUL4w7I2IIHxr3dZTXuA9_FyVTfbGR8Ztj7qnOCDA77KnJDXM_nUTKx0OBURIiUCMVA
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: BearHit on March 11, 2020, 01:09:13 pm
Ooh yah - Outfield assists in baseball are like Sacks in football
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on March 11, 2020, 04:33:26 pm
Ross says that either Hendricks or Darvish will start opening day.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on March 12, 2020, 12:00:13 pm
Craig Mish is hearing spring training is closing and players are going home in the next 48 hours.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on March 12, 2020, 12:21:42 pm
Suspending spring training is inevitable, but Heyman says the players could remain in Arizona/Florida and continue to practice.

Jon Heyman @JonHeyman
Even with the expected suspension of spring games, teams/players could remain practicing at their own spring sites.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chiman on March 12, 2020, 02:12:31 pm
I am hearing MLB teams could be sending players home starting tomorrow. More to come.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on March 12, 2020, 02:17:23 pm

Spring training officially cancelled; regular season delayed at least two weeks.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ES7mpEWWkAAmxSX?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 12, 2020, 02:19:09 pm
I wonder when the London series will be cancelled?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on March 12, 2020, 02:33:10 pm
At least The Show comes out Monday.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on March 12, 2020, 02:50:13 pm
I know all of this is wise and good.  But it's kind of a bummer while being all isolated to not have Cubs games and Milwaukee Bucks games and perhaps March Madness games to enjoy during and to fill some of the isolation. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on March 12, 2020, 06:45:45 pm
Any one of us could have written this statement for him:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ES8XwxVWAAIEENm?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on March 12, 2020, 06:51:43 pm
Well I'm glad something's a top priority for them because putting a true World Series contender on the field this season sure hasn't.

[/angrydisgruntledfanfont]
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on March 12, 2020, 07:29:32 pm
Well I'm glad something's a top priority for them because putting a true World Series contender on the field this season sure hasn't.

[/angrydisgruntledfanfont]

Seriously?  I'm hoping this was an attempt at dark humor.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on March 12, 2020, 07:47:49 pm
Seriously?  I'm hoping this was an attempt at dark humor.

Yep dark humor.  😃

Honestly I don’t have a dog in that fight one way or the other at this point.  Got to just support the team we have and hope everyone steps up this year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on March 16, 2020, 10:24:55 am
Today, Sharma shared this oldie but goodie column from 2018.  It is the story about how Kyle Hendricks was convinced to take Mike Borzello's advice on changing his approach to pitching, with a huge assist from Tommy Hottovy.  I found it to be a fun read.


https://theathletic.com/21039/2016/10/06/the-true-story-of-how-kyle-hendricks-became-a-cy-young-candidate/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on March 16, 2020, 02:02:25 pm
Well it looks like we're going to be without baseball for a long while...

Quote
ROB MANFRED
C, COLLEGE PLAYER

MLB announced Monday that the start of the season will be pushed back in accordance with The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's recommendations.
This comes after the CDC's recommendation on Sunday that organizers cancel or postpone in-person events that consist of 50 or more people throughout the United States for the next eight weeks. If that holds true, we're likely looking at mid-to-late May as a best-case scenario of when games could be played. Of course, there's already been plenty of speculation that it could be an even longer delay. The announcement from MLB said that "clubs remain committed to playing as many games as possible" when the season begins, but even venturing a guess of what "when" means is futile right now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on March 16, 2020, 02:15:54 pm
Quote
cancel or postpone in-person events that consist of 50 or more people throughout the United States for the next eight weeks.

Except stopping sporting events isn't changing much. Anyone run by or into a shopping center lately?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on March 16, 2020, 02:18:28 pm
Except stopping sporting events isn't changing much. Anyone run by or into a shopping center lately?

I was just at the grocery store, and I'll just say that was a less than pleasant experience.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on March 16, 2020, 02:21:28 pm
Well it looks like we're going to be without baseball for a long while...

Quote
ROB MANFRED
C, COLLEGE PLAYER

MLB announced Monday that the start of the season will be pushed back in accordance with The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's recommendations.
This comes after the CDC's recommendation on Sunday that organizers cancel or postpone in-person events that consist of 50 or more people throughout the United States for the next eight weeks. If that holds true, we're likely looking at mid-to-late May as a best-case scenario of when games could be played. Of course, there's already been plenty of speculation that it could be an even longer delay. The announcement from MLB said that "clubs remain committed to playing as many games as possible" when the season begins, but even venturing a guess of what "when" means is futile right now.

Good and necessary decision. This is deeply serious. Hope everyone here is taking the appropriate measures.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on March 16, 2020, 02:23:18 pm
I'm surprised London hasn't been cancelled yet.  I can't decide if I'm still going to go even if the games are off.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on March 16, 2020, 02:26:19 pm
Well my MLB THE SHOW Cubs are 13-0 after a strong outing from Jose Quintana last night.

At least Ive got that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on March 17, 2020, 06:09:59 am
Who else has the damn game?  I want to know how the Brewers and the rest of the division is doing!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on March 17, 2020, 03:00:47 pm
Ill post the standings tonight when I get home.

I do know the Cardinals are something like 3-15.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on March 17, 2020, 03:09:19 pm
The MLB 20 THE SHOW Cubs are off to a sizzling hot 18-0 start but Im not feeling that so the difficulty is about to get another boost.

I want the records and stats to be realistic and on this difficulty they're not so I can guarantee you a losing streak is coming.

David Bote busted up the platoon at 2nd with Kipnis and now Bote's playing every day and Ian Happ did the same with the CF platoon with Almora so other than the Souza/Heyward platoon in RF we have an every day set lineup.

The offense is hitting like slow pitch softball currently.

The pitching staff has yet to have a non quality start other than me having to pull Chatwood in the 5th a few days ago because he hit his pitch count.

I dont have a starter with an ERA over 2.00 I believe.

The bullpen has also been strong as Morrow and Kimbrel are locking down the late innings and Kimbrel has yet to blow a save.

When asked about his teams current performance new manager David Ross had this to say...

"We're gonna go yard 6 times a game and throw a shutout. Beat that if you can MFers."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on March 17, 2020, 03:15:17 pm
Ive enjoyed doing this for you all so as long as you request it Ill do it and Ill tell the truth about what happens.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on March 17, 2020, 03:19:14 pm
One request...could you move it to the Today's Game topic?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on March 17, 2020, 03:28:21 pm
Yes.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on March 17, 2020, 03:32:20 pm
Good deal, might as well use that topic for something...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Boris From Downunder on March 17, 2020, 03:48:40 pm
DDKs take Yandy Diaz
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on March 17, 2020, 04:07:48 pm
DDKs take Yandy Diaz
drunken Aussie
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on March 17, 2020, 06:51:33 pm
Curt - no reason to repeat yourself.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on March 18, 2020, 08:46:18 am
https://youtu.be/l9kVd6a3ajc
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on March 20, 2020, 05:23:38 pm
Sharma and Moody have conspired for a welcome, these days rare, article on the Cubs.


https://theathletic.com/1688168/2020/03/20/sharma-and-mooney-10-cubs-thoughts-one-week-after-the-shutdown/?source=dailyemail
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robb on March 20, 2020, 10:48:13 pm
(http://)Thought you guys might like this.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on March 20, 2020, 10:55:03 pm
Can we send CurtOne out there?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on March 20, 2020, 10:57:41 pm
Can we send CurtOne out there?
Been there, done that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on March 21, 2020, 12:59:00 pm
Besides, they won't take him back.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on March 25, 2020, 02:03:12 pm
Gordon Wittenmyer is switching from the Chicago Sun-Times to NBC Sports Chicago.

Not meant to be a self-promoting article but some might see it that way
https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/what-its-switching-spots-cubs-beat-during-coronavirus-pandemic
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on March 25, 2020, 03:41:21 pm
Gordon Wittenmyer is switching from the Chicago Sun-Times to NBC Sports Chicago.

Not meant to be a self-promoting article but some might see it that way
https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/what-its-switching-spots-cubs-beat-during-coronavirus-pandemic

I was expecting to write something snarky about Wittenmeyer before reading his article, as I'm definitely not a fan.  But it's an excellent, thoughtful piece, and I compliment him on it.  Bravo.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on March 25, 2020, 03:50:40 pm
Wonder who wrote it for him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on March 26, 2020, 10:50:51 pm
There's a report that the Cubs/Cardinals London series has been officially cancelled.

https://670thescore.radio.com/cubs-cardinals-london-series-canceled-coronavirus-pandemic

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on March 26, 2020, 11:18:14 pm
There's a report that the Cubs/Cardinals London series has been officially cancelled.

https://670thescore.radio.com/cubs-cardinals-london-series-canceled-coronavirus-pandemic

For a while there, I was talking about going to those games with some Cubs fan friends of mine in Nashville.  Hopefully they reschedule that for 2021.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on March 26, 2020, 11:25:30 pm
Classic.  JR trying to con us into believing he has friends.  LOL
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on March 26, 2020, 11:54:57 pm
Just because nobody can see them and everyone tells me they're imaginary doesn't make them any less real to me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on March 27, 2020, 08:35:22 am
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/03/26/the-fourth-cut-is-the-strangest-dillon-maples-optioned-to-aaa/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on March 27, 2020, 12:30:47 pm
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/03/27/new-mlb-mlbpa-deal-reportedly-wont-help-the-cubs-on-luxury-tax-could-actually-make-things-worse/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on April 01, 2020, 10:49:59 am
Not that this really needed official confirmation, but Cubs-Cardinals in London has officially been canceled for 2020.

https://www.mlb.com/cubs/news/london-series-cubs-cardinals-canceled
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on April 01, 2020, 04:35:10 pm
For those of you who aren't aware, baseball-reference.com is running a sim of the 2020 season using OOTP software...

The Cubs are 3-3 so far...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on April 01, 2020, 04:51:42 pm
I think Dusty's MLB the Show 2020 simulation is much more accurate than that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on April 01, 2020, 05:06:32 pm
For those of you who aren't aware, baseball-reference.com is running a sim of the 2020 season using OOTP software...

The Cubs are 3-3 so far...

I stopped following once i realized they dont have Luis Robert starting in CF for the sox... wtf?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on April 01, 2020, 07:16:04 pm
I think Dusty's MLB the Show 2020 simulation is much more accurate than that.

I think Im something like 40-6.

I havent played it much lately.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on April 01, 2020, 07:24:47 pm
40-6.  That sounds pretty accurate.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on April 01, 2020, 07:30:43 pm
How in the hell did they lose 6?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on April 01, 2020, 08:31:17 pm
Sooner or later, the bull pen has to pitch.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on April 01, 2020, 08:52:06 pm
How in the hell did they lose 6?

Has Dusty been fired yet???
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on April 01, 2020, 11:30:30 pm
Im hitting a ton.

Ian Happ is a switch hitting Mike Trout,Kris Bryant is Ted Williams,and Kyle Schwarber is Babe Ruth.

I dont think Ive had but maybe 2 non quality starts and Craig Kimbrel hasnt blown a save and has an ERA under 1.00.

Brandon Morrow did hurt his shoulder though...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on April 01, 2020, 11:32:58 pm
Javy's on the cover of the game so you can assume for yourself how good he is.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on April 02, 2020, 12:35:48 am
I want to be accurate so I might have had 4 or 5 bad starts.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on April 07, 2020, 06:24:49 pm
What about the rest of the division?  Did we clinch yet?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on April 07, 2020, 06:49:48 pm
Im not supposed to post it here.

Look in the bleachers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on April 07, 2020, 08:38:45 pm
Stolen from twitter, but Steve Trachsel’s 23.2 seconds between pitches in 2019 would have ranked in the top 20% of fastest pitchers in 2019.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on April 07, 2020, 08:54:11 pm
Stolen from twitter, but Steve Trachsel’s 23.2 seconds between pitches in 2019 would have ranked in the top 20% of fastest pitchers in 2019.

I actually made that point in Cubs History a while back after watching an old Trachsel start.  Although I thought he'd be about average in modern baseball, it looks like he was plenty above average! 

Baseball needs to get that fixed.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on April 07, 2020, 08:56:41 pm
You know, part of why Steve Stone always made a point about Trachsel's slowness is because he felt it didn't allow for the defense behind him to stay aware and on their toes. 

Since in the modern game, it's more about strikeouts and pitchers are trying not to let the ball go into play at all, I guess that lessens the need for speedy pitching to keep the defense up and aware.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on April 10, 2020, 12:43:01 pm
The Cubs are valued at $3.2B - a 5x increase on the 2009 purchase price and a much larger gain on the equity invested. And, this does not include any of the Wrigleyville real estate the family now owns.  It's even harder than before to have any sympathy for this race to get under the lux tax.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2020/04/09/despite-lockdown-mlb-teams-gain-value-in-2020/#42dbffe42010
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on April 12, 2020, 03:41:44 pm

And now for something completely different.  Mike Bryant (Kris' dad), bored with being stuck in Las Vegas with no baseball wrote a song about being unable to watch the Cubs. Enjoy.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1249407912906067972
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on April 14, 2020, 10:26:10 pm
Greg Maddux is still a bro.

https://twitter.com/gregmaddux/status/1250079559577296898?s=21
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on April 14, 2020, 10:55:40 pm
Greg Maddux is still a bro.

https://twitter.com/gregmaddux/status/1250079559577296898?s=21

I am glad he's doing this. But as much as I hate to quibble, matching other gifts up to $54,000 is a pittance in comparison to what other athletes and celebrities are doing.  I loved Maddux as a pitcher, but not so much as a philanthropist or humanitarian.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on April 14, 2020, 11:26:18 pm
Are there that many athletes giving more than $54K?  Maddux us obviously rich but it's not like he ever made A-Rod money.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on April 15, 2020, 10:43:42 am
Are there that many athletes giving more than $54K?  Maddux us obviously rich but it's not like he ever made A-Rod money.

Here's an article from nearly a month ago.  Jason Heyward has committed $200,000 and Freddie Freeman $125,000 and they are straight gifts, not requiring any match.  Not that there is anything wrong with matching gifts per se.
https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/freddie-freeman-jason-heyward-latest-mlb-stars-to-donate-to-coronavirus-relief-causes/


And Justin Verlander is donating all of his paychecks during the MLB shutdown. Over two months, that's estimated to approach $300,000.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/astros/2020/04/04/pitcher-justin-verlander-donate-paycheck-coronavirus/2947766001/


Maddux is #41 in MLB player career earnings ($153,845,000). Heyward is #71 ($136,411,500).
https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/leaders_salaries.shtml

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on April 15, 2020, 02:19:30 pm
Do we know if this is all Maddux is donating or has donated? Not that he has to donate anything. Maybe he's given elsewhere and it hasn't been made public?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on April 18, 2020, 12:50:10 pm

Some things are happening at Wrigley Field. Just not baseball.

https://theathletic.com/1753137/2020/04/16/wrigley-field-transforms-as-cubs-wait-to-play-ball-again-with-or-without-fans/?source=weeklyemail
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on April 23, 2020, 08:24:28 am
Posted since there is not much else going on regarding baseball

Cubs foursome sharing house, experiences awaiting baseball

http://www.espn.com/espn/wire?section=mlb&id=29085565
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ben on April 29, 2020, 07:14:27 am
60 Moments: No. 58, Javy Báez tags out Nelson Cruz in the World Baseball Classic

By Joe Posnanski (The Athletic) 
While we wait for baseball to return, Joe Posnanski will count down his top 60 moments in baseball history — think of it as a companion piece to The Baseball 100 — with a series of essays on the most memorable, remarkable and joyous scenes of the game.
This project will not contain more words than “Moby Dick,” but we hope you enjoy it.
Javy Báez tags out Nelson Cruz in World Baseball Classic (March 14, 2017)
"There are few things in this world quite as joyful as listening to actor, writer and woodworker Nick Offerman talk about Javier Báez. Nick is a rare creature; his words travel directly from heart to mouth and, as such, when he talks about Báez, he talks about sunshine and rainbows and awe and splendor and the feeling of being a child again.
“It’s indescribable, really, how happy he makes me,” Nick says.
Yes, that’s it, exactly.
Here’s something you might know: Javy Báez has a tattoo of the MLB logo on the back of his neck. But do you know why? He and his two brothers got the tattoo not long after the death of their father, Angel. It was Angel who brought baseball into their lives as they grew up in Puerto Rico. He worked all day as a landscaper doing backbreaking work. But every evening without fail, when he got home, he would take the boys to a nearby field to play baseball.
And these were exuberant baseball games, carefree, pure exhilaration.
When Angel died, Javy was just 10 years old. Years later, he and his brothers each got the tattoo in part to celebrate their father and in part to celebrate what Báez calls “this game that is inside us.”
Báez hit .771 his senior year in high school. Yes, that’s right, he hit .771 and, by my best calculations, he slugged about 1.800. This was in Jacksonville, Fla., — the family had moved to Florida to be closer to doctors for Javy’s sister Noely, who was born with spina bifida. Javy’s absurd bat speed drew comparisons to Gary Sheffield. His easy power drew comparisons to Sammy Sosa. One scout told Baseball America that just watching Báez take batting practice was the highlight of his summer.
The Cubs took him with the ninth pick in 2011 — one pick after Cleveland took his friend and rival Francisco Lindor — and he almost immediately became the Cubs’ No. 1 prospect.
But here’s the thing: Even then people didn’t see Báez. They saw the bat, sure. But they didn’t see the whole picture. He played with spirit and cockiness; so much so that he got hit by 37 pitches in the minor leagues. Scouts wondered whether or not he would develop as a defensive player. He struck out an awful lot.
When he got to the big leagues, he homered in his first game and then hit two homers in his third. After that, though, he was entirely overmatched, hitting just .169 in 229 plate appearances. He struck out in almost half his at-bats. He was sent back to the minor leagues the next year. Báez also struggled with a personal tragedy off the field in 2015; his sister Noely died from complications related to her condition that spring.
Then came 2016 and … it was like a confetti cannon of delight. He was no longer a promising hitting prospect. He was “El Mago,” the magician, and he did everything. He was certainly not the best player in that Cubs season for the ages. But he was in the middle of everything. He played every infield position (and a little outfield, too). He was a brilliant defender at all of them. He smacked doubles. He belted home runs. He played with this crackling energy that could power the lights at Wrigley Field.
And come playoff time, he lit up even brighter. He hit .375 with a homer in the Division Series against the Giants. Then in the NLCS against the Dodgers, with the Cubs trying to reach their first World Series in 13 trillion years, he did impossible things. He stole home. He made absurd defensive plays. He hit .318. He was named co-MVP along with Jon Lester, not so much for his numbers as for his spirit. He willed the Cubs to the World Series.
Báez has since developed into one of the game’s great players. In 2018, he hit 34 homers, led the league with 111 RBIs, and finished second in the MVP balloting to Christian Yelich. Last year, for the first time, he played shortstop full-time, and he was impossibly great. He could have won the Gold Glove, and he also banged 38 doubles and 29 home runs.
The bat is impressive (even as he continues to work on his plate discipline) but it is the defense that makes Báez magical. He makes extraordinary diving plays. He makes absurd bare-handed plays. He turns the double play like it’s a scene out of “The Matrix.”
And, mostly, there’s his tagging. That’s how we get to the 58th greatest moment in baseball history: Before Báez came along, you rarely ever heard about a player being a great tagger. I honestly could not tell you who the greatest tagger was before Báez — he invented the category. It’s hard to pick a favorite.
There was the time when the Giants’ Denard Span tried to steal. Cubs catcher David Ross’ throw bounced about 15 feet in front of second base. Báez caught it while in mid-air and slapped a no-look tag on Span. It was ballet.
There was the time Trevor Story tried to steal second and Ross’ throw was in the dirt on the first-base side of second base. Báez scooped the ball like it was nothing and made a behind-the-bag tag for the out.
There was the time that he fielded a groundball and in one motion tagged Cincinnati’s Joey Votto, then spun around, and while falling down, threw to first for the double play. There was the time he caught a ball high over his right shoulder and, in an instant, karate-chopped down and tagged out Milwaukee’s Kirk Nieuwenhuis. There was the time that he tagged out Yasiel Puig, who actually slid between his legs.
You can go on and on — Báez tags like this all the time.
But the one chosen here is from the second round of the World Baseball Classic in 2017. Puerto Rico led the Dominican Republic 3-1 with two outs in the eighth inning when Nelson Cruz tried to get something going by attempting to steal second. Yadier Molina fired a perfect throw.
And, as you’ve surely seen, Báez began the party before the ball even got to him. No matter how many times you watch the replay, it is mesmerizing. An instant before the ball arrives, Báez points at Molina as if to say, “I celebrate you!” He then caught the ball and without ever looking down (and without ever moving his right arm, which was still pointing at Molina) he slapped the tag on Cruz while shouting “Yeah!”
He then ran happily off the field without ever looking back.
It may not be his best tag. But it’s his most enjoyable. It’s his most wonderful. I have never seen a happier moment on a baseball diamond. Heck, it’s bigger than baseball. It’s a kid riding a bicycle with no hands for the first time. It’s the scene outside an ice cream truck that has just stopped in the neighborhood. It’s a child opening a big box and having a puppy jump out.
Nick Offerman is right. It’s indescribable how happy he makes us!”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on May 03, 2020, 11:29:43 am
Since there is no Cubs in 2022 topic, I'm placing this here, for anyone who has not already seen it.

Sharma and Mooney combine their imaginations for an article titled "Letter from the Future: What will opening day 2022 be like for the Cubs."

https://theathletic.com/1781978/2020/04/29/a-letter-from-the-future-what-will-opening-day-2022-be-like-for-the-cubs/?source=twittered
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on May 04, 2020, 07:08:09 pm
Ok, I’ve talked with multiple sources and can confirm a June 10th spring training 2 with a July 1 opening day proposal is expected to be on the table soon. Trevor Plouffe had it first. I had it 2nd. Someone else will have it 3rd.--Phil Hughes
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on May 04, 2020, 07:12:20 pm
Ok, I’ve talked with multiple sources and can confirm a June 10th spring training 2 with a July 1 opening day proposal is expected to be on the table soon. Trevor Plouffe had it first. I had it 2nd. Someone else will have it 3rd.--Phil Hughes

I saw the original Trevor Plouffe tweet, and deleted it from Around Baseball when it seemed like it was no good.  I saw where Phil Hughes replied to that tweet he was only joking, but I guess now that he's added that tweet saying it's true, maybe he's actually on board too.  Maybe it's for real after all?

Keith Law and Jack Flaherty didn't seem convinced though.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on May 04, 2020, 07:21:51 pm
Original Trevor Plouffe tweet...

Quote
Trevor Plouffe
@trevorplouffe
·
2h
Want some good baseball news??

I just heard from multiple sources that on June 10th,  Spring Training 2 will start. July 1st will be Opening Day and all teams will be playing at their home ballparks.

We’ll be discussing it in full on the next
@TalkinBaseball_
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on May 04, 2020, 08:59:04 pm
Over/Under on the death toll before MLB decides that's an unwise decision:

150K
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robb on May 05, 2020, 12:01:55 pm
I'll take the under and bet you $10,000 on it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on May 05, 2020, 09:06:07 pm
For what it's worth (likely not much), Trevor Plouffe is sticking by multiple people saying spring training will start on June 10.  He might be full of it and trying to promote a podcast he has, but he hasn't backed down from it yet either.

It's almost certainly not worth passing along, but since we don't have much else better to talk about...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on May 06, 2020, 10:13:18 am
Well I'm taking the bait and listening to the Talkin' Baseball podcast where Trevor Plouffe is discussing his scoop, for lack of a better term.  Basically Talkin' Baseball has kind of a Barstool Sports type of vibe to it to give you a little flavor of it.  He said one day recently he got separate texts from two people involved with MLB, not necessarily in corporate MLB, but involved in the game at varying levels who both mentioned the June 10 and July 1 dates.  He debated tweeting it out knowing what the reaction would be once he did it, but the main host of the podcast encouraged him to do it.   About 30 seconds after he tweeted it out, his phone started blowing up, and afterwards another 7 people involved in baseball also more or less confirmed the June 10 and July 1 dates to him.  He's catching a lot of hell for it, but since he's had a good number of people sticking with those dates, he's standing behind his story. 

They also addressed why Jeff Passan and Keith Law (Plouffe didn't know who Law even was.) shot this down so quickly.  Plouffe acknowledged that this has not been formally proposed to MLBPA, which has been the main source of contention from mainstream baseball media types, but he believes once this is formally proposed to the players, they're almost certainly going to accept barring "unforseen circumstances" (which include ironing out salary disputes and if there is another spike in COVID-19 cases).  Plouffe and the podcast host believe the media types disputing this have almost certainly heard about those dates, and Plouffe also says players are actually prepping for these specific dates.  Plouffe says at least in six organizations, these are the dates being discussed.  (As an aside, the Indians have already acknowledged they have told their players to keep those dates in mind as targets.)   

This might not be quite the breakthrough Plouffe quite made it to be when it tweeted it out, but I'm starting to think there might be a little more smoke going on here than the media types are making it out to be.  The main source of contention from the mainstream baseball writers is that a formal proposal hasn't been made to the players, but quite frankly, I think it is pretty newsworthy if this is the formal proposal that gets made.  That the Indians have come out and at least said June 10/July 1 are the target dates they're giving their players also seems fairly newsworthy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on May 06, 2020, 10:37:48 am
Also when Phil Hughes responded to Plouffe's original tweet that he was "just joking" about those dates, Hughes had several people reach out after him after that tweet who also confirmed the dates to him, so that's why he wound up seconding Plouffe's original tweet.

One other thing, Plouffe hears that spring training could take place in the teams' home ballparks, and teams would train with intersquad games.  Apparently there's still a split on that plan, but that's being discussed.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on May 06, 2020, 01:47:14 pm

Quote
[size=78%]Trevor Plouffe[/size]@trevorplouffe
·
24m
I have texts from players in 6 different orgs telling me that they are being told to be ready for those dates.

Quote Tweet

Ken Rosenthal
@Ken_Rosenthal
 · 5h

The latest: Though one team has discussed baseball possibly returning on July 1, no plan is close to firm. https://theathletic.com/1796879/2020/05/06/rosenthal-though-one-team-has-discussed-a-july-1-mlb-return-no-plan-is-close-to-firm/

Trevor Plouffe
@trevorplouffe
·
8m
This is not a shot at Ken! He was the only guy to reach out to me about all this. I’ve always respected him immensely. All I’m doing is relaying info to the fans.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on May 06, 2020, 01:56:58 pm
Cubs News!

Quote
JAVIER BAEZ
SS, CHICAGO CUBS

Javier Baez told ESPN's Marly Rivera that his contract extension negotiations with the Cubs have been put on hold.

Baez said he and the Cubs had multiple "really good" conversations about a long-term deal this spring, but the parties involved have not reconvened on the topic since camps were shut down in March amid the coronavirus outbreak. "Obviously, we want to reach an agreement, but right now everything is on hiatus," said Baez, who is currently under contract through 2021. "Just like it happened with baseball, we decided to leave it there. We haven't talked about it anymore." The dynamic 27-year-old shortstop batted .281/.316/.531 with 29 home runs, 85 RBI, 11 stolen bases, and 89 runs scored over 138 games for Chicago in 2019.

SOURCE: ESPN.com

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/29142921
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on May 15, 2020, 04:46:35 pm
Jesse Rogers  @JesseRogersESPN

Have a new twitter handle. Thanks for following everyone! Stay safe.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on May 15, 2020, 08:55:44 pm
Jesse Rogers  @JesseRogersESPN

Have a new twitter handle. Thanks for following everyone! Stay safe.

I'd been wondering all offseason if Rogers was transitioning away from the Cubs beat to be more of a national ESPN writer. He seemed to take over some of the types of articles Crasnick and Stark used to write with ESPN. This seems to confirm that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on May 15, 2020, 10:03:39 pm
Good for him, he’s been a really good beat writer for the Cubs.  Well deserved promotion if it is.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on May 15, 2020, 10:05:43 pm
By the way, something I didn’t mention when Jeff Passan went on Talkin’ Baseball to tell Trevor Plouffe what he did wrong, but Passan is a really entertaining guy when he’s not acting all professional and stuff on ESPN. Hopefully between Passan and Rogers they’re starting to beef up their baseball coverage again.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on May 17, 2020, 05:11:14 pm
The current MLB proposal calls for a 30 man ML roster and 20 man taxi squad. 

Who would you choose for this squad balancing this year's needs and the teams future?

Here is one possible squad (note: I list 52 because "spring" training injuries are inevitable.

C (6) Contreras, Caratini, Phegley, Higgins, Amaya, & Hearn
1B (2) Rizzo & Rivas
2B (5) Hoerner, Bote, Kipnis, & Descalso, Strumpf 
SS (2) Baez, Z. Short
3B (2) K Bryant, R. Garcia
LF (1) K Schwarber
CF (4 ) I Happ, A Almora, I Miller, C Roederer
RF (3) J Heyward, S Souza, B Davis, 

RHSP (9) Y Darvish, K Hendricks, T Chatwood, A Mills, C. Rea, R. Jensen, R. Thompson, K Franklin, J Cotton
LHSP (4) J Lester, J Quintana, J Steele, B Marquez
RHRP (12) C Kimbrel, J Jeffress, R Wick, C Sadler, T Megill, Underwood, Tepera, Winkler, Maples, Norwood, Alzolay, T. Miller 
LHRP (2) K Ryan, B Wieck 

Additional options include UT H. Perez, LF M. Zagunis, LHRP R. Brothers, and RHRP B. Morrow
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on May 17, 2020, 05:39:16 pm
Do we know if there is going to be minor league baseball this year?  If there is, I would rather see guys like Amaya and Roederer play full time in the minors than once a week in the majors.  Or will the taxi squad be playing in the minors and used as shuttle players the way some Iowa pitchers have been used?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on May 18, 2020, 05:37:26 pm
I have no idea.

Yes the list would be much different if there is limited minor league baseball this year.   Amaya and Hearn could be replaced by Phegley and Payne for example

IMO the financial and mental/physical health expenses of holding a MiL season makes a fanless MiL opening a non-starter unless the games are played at the complexes.  But this would only work if all of the ML teams are able to base their operations out of their normal home fields.  Unlikely at this point.

Perhaps an abbreviated MiL season with one or two MiL teams per organization could begin in August if the ML restart goes well.  Could even have a few fans later in the year

Obviously, there are infinite possibilities hopefully some are workable.

The taxi-squad idea sounds good.  On my son's HS team a few players worked out with the Varsity but played with the JV
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on May 19, 2020, 12:09:42 am
In 2019, Cubs used 52 different players during the season.

So, even in 1/2 as many games for 2020–if all goes well—you are going to need plenty of guys available and ready to play as needed.

These additional guys are going to be players that are more or less ready to play in the majors and are not going to be lower level prospects. So, say, Brennen Davis is not going to be playing in the minors this season. Maybe there will be some kind of organized workouts for a guy like that or maybe they can play on a fall league but doubtful for anything else in the summer.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on May 22, 2020, 01:55:43 pm
The Cubs rank 5th in baseball in ESPN's Universal DH rankings.  Actually one aspect I didn't think about is how much our defense would improve if the universal DH is implemented.  No need to play Schwarber or Souza every day in the outfield if the universal DH is adopted.

Quote
5. Chicago Cubs

103.8 park-neutral runs created

Top options: Kyle Schwarber, Steven Souza Jr.

Like the Cardinals, Brewers and Reds, the Cubs are set up to use the DH spot to bolster both their offense and defense. In fact, given that even most AL teams don't deploy an everyday, star-level designated hitter, Chicago can slot Kyle Schwarber there on most days and have one of the more productive DH situations in baseball. Whatever you think about Schwarber's glove, a combination of Jason Heyward, Albert Almora Jr., Ian Happ, Steven Souza Jr. and a little Kris Bryant should give the Cubs a better team defense than one deploying Schwarber. Just as important, it's also possible that forgoing defense could allow Schwarber to reach a level on offense it has always seemed he could get to.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/29200646/universal-dh-power-rankings-all-30-mlb-teams
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on May 22, 2020, 06:43:41 pm
Think I would mostly use the DH spot to (1) get Caratini more ABs and (2) DH ABs for Contreras to ease his catching load.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on May 22, 2020, 09:25:02 pm
Think I would mostly use the DH spot to (1) get Caratini more ABs and (2) DH ABs for Contreras to ease his catching load.

Yeah that's some solid thinking right there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on May 26, 2020, 02:03:09 pm
Sharma and Mooney have a new article on the Cubs. It focuses on Ross and his preparations, but also includes some interesting comments on specific issues the Cubs (players as well as front office) had with Maddon.  Some interesting observations from Nick Castellanos.


https://theathletic.com/1835761/2020/05/26/why-the-cubs-believe-david-ross-can-lead-them-through-an-uncertain-season/?source=emp_shared_article
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on May 26, 2020, 03:04:55 pm
Thanks for link, Ron.  Good read.  I liked the stuff about Ross spending lots of time with the R+D guys discussing and listening to analysis, and increasingly getting a bunch of his coaches involved.  I also liked the bit about having Ross watch some games, then getting back together and analyzing specific strategic decisions made during those games.  I'm enthusiastic about Ross the man and the leader; I admit I was hesitant about whether he's be smart or make good strategic decisions.  But this gives the impression that he's worked as hard as possible to listen and continue to learn, and to hopefully invite a culture where while he makes the final decision, that he's doing a lot of listening and cultivating a landscape where people can give input to him. 

I thought this part was funny, about Ross's first spring training speech:  "That air of authority also felt different from the way Joe Maddon framed the 2018 season for pitchers and catchers — with surrealistic paintings of Salvador Dalí wearing a catcher’s mask and Michelangelo’s David sculpture standing on the Wrigley Field mound in a jockstrap."

With all of the negativity, it seems kinda iffy that there will be any real baseball this summer.  So I admit they've done a pretty good job of keeping my baseball interest and optimism depressed.  But it will be pretty fun and interesting *IF* the Cubs do get to play a partial season. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on May 26, 2020, 03:15:58 pm
According to reports, the players refused the owners first proposal today, and the owners are currently meeting to prepare a revised proposal, one which does not resemble a salary cap scenario.  Owners are reported to be optimistic about the season starting by July 4.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on May 26, 2020, 03:17:41 pm
To some degree, I think some of the pressures of a partial season probably aren't super Cubs-friendly.  With no farm system and no pitchers in the upper minors, the cubs are probably less well suited to an expanded pitching staff and reduced fraction of innings being absorbed by the salaried guys?  But who knows? 

Theo, Ross, and Maddon all talk as if the Cubs have top-end talent, and Theo assumed that finishing 8th place was more about leadership and urgency than talent.  I admit I have my doubts; my guess is that Ross might be the best tough-love motivator in baseball, and guys might be as focused and trying as hard as they know how; but we may find out that it's really less about leadership and more about talent.

Also possible that we've got a lot of guys who try as hard as they know how, but they just aren't the smartest for improving themselves or processing helpful improvement ideas.  Guys like Schwarber, Almora, and Willson may just not have the same capacity to get coached into more productive launch angles or pitch framing?   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on May 26, 2020, 03:19:51 pm
According to reports, the players refused the owners first proposal today, and the owners are currently meeting to prepare a revised proposal, one which does not resemble a salary cap scenario.  Owners are reported to be optimistic about the season starting by July 4.

Thanks, that's interesting and encouraging.  July 4 isn't that far away.  They'd need to come to some kind of an agreement pretty quickly for that to be possible, wouldn't they?  How is that even possible?  That's barely 5 weeks away. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on May 26, 2020, 07:29:09 pm
I have no idea.  It was reported on the Fox Business Channel.  I saw a similar report on Bloomberg news Channel, but without the July 4 estimate.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on May 26, 2020, 09:32:21 pm
The players at the top will see a huge reduction. A player making $35 million will be cut to $7 million. The entry level contacts will be cut just a hair over 50%.

The A’s also announced that they will quit paying their minor leaguers $400/week, but will continue their benefits. This will save the A’s $1 million.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on May 28, 2020, 04:01:19 pm
One proposal being bandied around is that the players would be paid a pro-rated salary appropriate for an 82 game season but would agree to play ~100 games.  Could work but a near-Thanksgiving ending could be problematic for a number of reasons
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on May 29, 2020, 05:45:39 pm
Hard to believe Len has been around as long as Harry Caray was.

Cubs Live @Cubs_Live
Fun fact: @LenKasper  will be entering his 16th season as the Cubs television play by play announcer. That’s the same amount of years (16) that Harry Caray spent broadcasting with the Cubs.

Two professionals that have provided Cubs fans with many exciting moments for their ears.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on June 01, 2020, 02:58:51 pm
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/06/01/cubs-reportedly-looking-for-training-sites-love-for-lee-nationals-players-step-up-and-other-cubs-bullets/

Quote
Bruce Levine reports that, in advance of any possible deal between the players and the owners (latest here), the Cubs have been checking in with local colleges and minor league teams about the possible use of their facilities for Spring Training Part Two in June. Curtis Granderson Stadium at UIC and North Park College come in for mention. More than most, Wrigley Field is not really set up to accommodate large groups of players training simultaneously, so getting some other places nearby lined up makes a lot of sense if you’re going to train in Chicago. That’s especially true when there will be social distancing considerations and a group that could be upwards of 50 players (up to 30 players might make the big league roster, and up to 20 players might be trained up as a taxi squad to fill in when there are needs/injuries/etc.).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on June 02, 2020, 05:57:29 pm
Ricketts continues to work to use up any good will his family has left...Cubs owner disputes MLB teams 'hoard' cash:

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/29257106

A couple quotes:

"The scale of losses across the league is biblical," Ricketts said.

and...

"He (Boras) doesn't have any insight into our balance sheet...

That's why no one believes you. Open your books and prove it. I do believe that maybe they can show that they've been putting a significant part of their profits into renovating Wrigley the last few years...but that's over now. The money they were spending on the renovations is now going right into their pockets.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on June 02, 2020, 07:28:06 pm
If you go by what owners have said and the 1 team that is part of a publicly trader company the Braves a responsible for 33% of MLB profits the last 2 years.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on June 06, 2020, 01:11:22 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1269274655694688257/xxAFVirj?format=jpg&name=900x900)

https://theathletic.com/1857654/2020/06/06/murphys-bleachers-is-back-will-cubs-baseball-be-far-behind/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on June 08, 2020, 11:37:03 pm
Theo Epstein:

“I’d like to start just by offering my condolences to the families of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery and the countless victims who keep losing their lives to racist violence in this country year after year, decade after decade, century after century,” Epstein said. “I join my colleagues at the Cubs in standing up in support of the Black Lives Matter movement and the protesters who are doing their best to make this a real inflection point in our history. At this moment in time, silence is complicity and it’s important that all of our voices are heard. Thank you for allowing me the time to stand up in order to do that.”

https://theathletic.com/1861109/2020/06/08/silence-is-complicity-theo-epstein-speaks-out-on-racism-and-inclusivity/?source=emp_shared_article
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on June 09, 2020, 12:49:12 pm
The annual Air and Water show has been canceled so there is little chance of any baseball being played at Wrigley Field in 2020.

(https://media.defense.gov/2018/Jul/06/2001939984/1088/820/0/180706-F-XX000-0003.JPG)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on June 21, 2020, 01:54:16 pm
2:14 PM · Jun 20, 2020

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ea_B5afXQAMTvdq?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on June 21, 2020, 02:03:44 pm
Looks like a lovely day in Chitown.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on June 21, 2020, 02:38:21 pm
It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on June 23, 2020, 09:12:53 pm
Local news in Fort Myers is reporting that the MLB and players have reached an agreement and there will be a season beginning in July.  No details at this time.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on June 23, 2020, 09:13:57 pm
https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-announces-2020-regular-season
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on June 24, 2020, 06:50:30 am
https://twitter.com/Cubs/status/1275615049898496002?s=09
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on June 24, 2020, 01:05:26 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EbSJbYXXQAAxUcD?format=png&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on June 24, 2020, 01:42:55 pm
I like the looks of that!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on June 24, 2020, 02:59:49 pm
Do the Cubs actually have to play the games now, or can they go directly to the playoffs?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on June 24, 2020, 03:06:41 pm
ZiPS Mean Projected Standings – NL Central - 2019
Team                       W     L   GB    PCT   DIV%   
Chicago Cubs           87   75   —   .537   35.7%   
St. Louis Cardinals    86   76   1    .531   30.3%   
Milwaukee Brewers   85   77   2    .525   24.7%   
Cincinnati Reds        80   82   7    .494     5.7%   
Pittsburgh Pirates     78   84   9    .481    3.6%   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on June 25, 2020, 09:42:13 am
Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  7m
Kenney said pace of negotiations have picked up regarding Marquee and Comcast. Term sheets exchanged Friday. expects to reach an agreement with exhibition game telecasts in mix.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on June 25, 2020, 10:15:47 am
Nice article on South Bend and how the facilities there might be utilized.

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/where-cubs-could-find-position-strength-2020-south-bend
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on June 25, 2020, 01:34:47 pm
The Cubs are planning on having a limited number of fans in the stands not long after the season starts, and planning on having fans on the rooftops at the start of the season. 

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/29364589/cubs-president-crane-kenney-envisions-fans-stands-rooftops
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on June 25, 2020, 01:45:23 pm
Amazing how several teams suddenly think they can have a limited number of fans now that the agreement to start the season is done. A week ago, they were using the fact that they'd be without fans all year as leverage in their negotiations.

I'm shocked to learn that the owners were being dishonest again.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on June 25, 2020, 02:28:12 pm
The Cubs are planning on having a limited number of fans in the stands not long after the season starts, and planning on having fans on the rooftops at the start of the season. 

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/29364589/cubs-president-crane-kenney-envisions-fans-stands-rooftops

Foul balls could be interesting.  Would fans not be allowed to go after one that ended up in the section where the extra players were seated?

Are the netting extensions down to the foul poles in place?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on June 25, 2020, 02:52:50 pm
Covid-19 along right field line.  Healthy people along left.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on June 25, 2020, 02:53:56 pm
Foul balls could be interesting.  Would fans not be allowed to go after one that ended up in the section where the extra players were seated?

Good question on that...seems like that almost certainly would have to be banned.

Perhaps with only 8,000 fans, they can keep track of anyone who goes after one if it's not allowed.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on June 25, 2020, 03:00:40 pm
And if that's the case, too bad we didn't have Covid foul ball rules in 2003. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on June 25, 2020, 08:07:52 pm
According to the Athletic Brandon Morrow will likely not be a contributor to the Cubs this year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on June 25, 2020, 08:19:53 pm
According to the Athletic Brandon Morrow will likely not be a contributor to the Cubs this year.

Sharma/Mooney:

Outside of Brandon Morrow’s painstakingly slow recovery from arm troubles and various players (and Ross) dealing with the flu, the Cubs’ spring was rather uneventful when it came to the injury report. That remains the case, but sources indicate that Morrow won’t be an option for the team this year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on June 25, 2020, 09:22:17 pm
So, how's that different than last year?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on June 25, 2020, 09:55:52 pm
...the Cubs’ spring was rather uneventful when it came to the injury report. That remains the case, but sources indicate that Morrow won’t be an option for the team this year.

The implication here is because his arm is damaged?  Or does perhaps the health agreement not allow for high risk personnel, usually those being older coaches?  But since Morrow is T1 diabetic, which is a high-risk category, is he not even allowed to participate. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on June 25, 2020, 10:46:08 pm
He can choose to participate if he wants. Since he is high risk he is able to be paid if he opts out.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on June 25, 2020, 10:48:06 pm
He can choose to participate if he wants. Since he is high risk he is able to be paid if he opts out.

Thanks.  I assume that means that if he's not an option, that his arm still isn't feeling good.  I don't imagine that he'd voluntarily opt out at this stage in his career. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on June 27, 2020, 12:37:44 am
If the 2020 season ever does get off to an unlikely start, look for the radio and TV announcers to work from home when the team is on the road.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on June 27, 2020, 03:02:55 pm
If the 2020 season ever does get off to an unlikely start, look for the radio and TV announcers to work from home when the team is on the road.
When did radio announcers first start traveling with the teams?

Here is one possible 60 man roster: Hopefully, several on this list are healthier than they were in March.
We'll find out sometime tomorrow what the actual list is.

C (6) Contreras, Caratini, Phegley, Higgins, Amaya, & Hearn
1B (2) A. Rizzo & A. Rivas
2B (4) Bote, Kipnis, D. Descalso, T. Giambrone
SS (3) Baez, N. Hoerner, Z. Short
3B (3) K Bryant, R. Garcia, Hernan Perez
LF (3) K Schwarber, M Zagunis, D. Dewees
CF (4 ) I Happ, A Almora, I Miller, Z Davis
RF (3) J Heyward, S Souza, B Davis

RHSP (8) Y Darvish, K Hendricks, T Chatwood, A Mills, A. Alzolay, C. Rea, C. Abbott, T Miller
LHSP (4) J Lester, J Quintana, J Steele, B Marquez
RHRP (14) C Kimbrel, J Jeffress, R Wick, C Sadler, T Megill, R Tepera, D. Winkler, D. Maples, J. Norwood, D. Underwood, J. Cotton, M. Rodriguez, M Rucker, J. Adam 
LHRP (6) K Ryan, B Wieck, R Brothers, B. Carraway, D. Hultzen, C. D. Pelham

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on June 28, 2020, 07:01:11 pm
Gordon Wittenmyer  @GDubCub  6m
Cubs appear to be readying publis release of 60-man pool tonight, after all.

Teams were required to submit the lists to MLB at 3 p.m. today.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: guest61 on June 28, 2020, 07:07:55 pm
https://twitter.com/tim_stebbins/status/1277392105103646721?s=19
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on June 28, 2020, 07:10:29 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ebo1WPoX0Ac0yQS?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on June 28, 2020, 07:22:43 pm
Jordan Minch wasn’t happy to have been left off the taxi squad or be among the minor league free agents released earlier.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on June 28, 2020, 07:33:03 pm
I was half expecting we’d seed Carraway on the roster.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on June 28, 2020, 07:41:31 pm
I was half expecting we’d seed Carraway on the roster.
Me too but the options are more limited if you only choose 50
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Tuffy on June 28, 2020, 07:48:20 pm
I had been fearing many more ridiculous jersey numbers with these massively expanded rosters but props to our clubhouse manager (used to be Kawano; who is it now?) for squeezing most of the players into reasonable-looking numbers.  Phegley wearing #4 is a surprise.  Sadler, Higgins, and Miller need to change if they get called up.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on June 28, 2020, 08:07:24 pm
One reason to limit the prospects on the 60 man and maintain some flexibility is that if somebody isn’t on the 40 man roster, but is on the 60 man roster they have to be released to remove them from the 60 man.

Juan Gamez was a free agent signing out of Mexico. He was a former Twins draft pick that throws a ton of ground balls and can hit 100 mph. He didn’t have many K’s in the Mexican league last year.   He is a former catcher that the Twins switched to pitching. His numbers in the Winter League of 2019 where much better with almost a K/9.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on June 28, 2020, 10:39:42 pm
Jordan Minch wasn’t happy to have been left off the taxi squad or be among the minor league free agents released earlier.

Well wouldn't we all be angry if that happened to us with the career numbers he's had (4.39 career ERA as a Double-A reliever)?

Actually I was wondering who Jordan Minch even was when I first saw your post.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on June 28, 2020, 10:41:02 pm
Well wouldn't we all be angry if that happened to us with the career numbers he's had (4.39 career ERA as a Double-A reliever)?

Actually I was wondering how Jordan Minch even was when I first saw your post.
Not only did I wonder how he was, hell, I wondered WHO he was.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on June 28, 2020, 10:55:08 pm
Not only did I wonder how he was, hell, I wondered WHO he was.

Ha!  I was just a little too quick on the keyboard there.

Judging by his Twitter feed, though, it does not appear he is doing particularly well at the moment.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on June 29, 2020, 08:26:09 am
After Carraway and Littke is hardest throwing lefty reliever in the system and the FO apparently told him he had a spot on the taxi squad.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on June 29, 2020, 09:03:12 am
.... the FO apparently told him he had a spot on the taxi squad.

If true, then he's got a legit gripe for sure, and that would be pretty bad on Hoyer's part.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on June 29, 2020, 09:28:57 am
The Cubs signed Brandon Morrow to a minor league deal in December.  It looks like that was nothing more than a shot in the dark at getting something from him in 2020.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on June 29, 2020, 11:24:07 am
Jordan Minch statement

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EboopqZWAAIpbKz?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on June 29, 2020, 11:47:12 am

Copied verbatim from Baseball America article analyzing "60-man" pools

The amount of Top 10 Prospects left off both of the Cubs' groups—Wrigley Field and the Alternate Training Site of low Class A South Bend's Four Winds Field—is more than a little surprising. No. 5 prospect Chase Strumpf, No. 6 Cole Roederer, No. 7 Ryan Jensen, No. 8 Ethan Hearn, No. 9 Riley Thompson and No. 10 Cory Abbott are all missing from either list despite 10 vacancies between the two.

Adbert Alzolay, the team's No. 11 prospect, who has big league experience, is on the group at South Bend. Just one player from the rest of the Cubs' Top 30 Prospects list—No. 27 Christopher Morel, who will report to South Bend with Alzolay and top prospect Brailyn Marquez—is among Chicago's Player Pool.

Miguel Amaya, one of the game's best catching prospects, will also report to South Bend.



It is also notable that the Cubs have 10 spots to play with between sites, so any number of prospects could be added.

PARTING THOUGHTS

The group in the big leagues is pretty straightforward. It is designed to compete in this year's sprint to the finish line. But in a year when there is likely to be very little in the way of a minor league season, it's hard to understand why so many of the team's prospects are being left at home initially.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 29, 2020, 11:48:39 am
Copied verbatim from Baseball America article analyzing "60-man" pools

The amount of Top 10 Prospects left off both of the Cubs' groups—Wrigley Field and the Alternate Training Site of low Class A South Bend's Four Winds Field—is more than a little surprising. No. 5 prospect Chase Strumpf, No. 6 Cole Roederer, No. 7 Ryan Jensen, No. 8 Ethan Hearn, No. 9 Riley Thompson and No. 10 Cory Abbott are all missing from either list despite 10 vacancies between the two.

Adbert Alzolay, the team's No. 11 prospect, who has big league experience, is on the group at South Bend. Just one player from the rest of the Cubs' Top 30 Prospects list—No. 27 Christopher Morel, who will report to South Bend with Alzolay and top prospect Brailyn Marquez—is among Chicago's Player Pool.

Miguel Amaya, one of the game's best catching prospects, will also report to South Bend.



It is also notable that the Cubs have 10 spots to play with between sites, so any number of prospects could be added.

PARTING THOUGHTS

The group in the big leagues is pretty straightforward. It is designed to compete in this year's sprint to the finish line. But in a year when there is likely to be very little in the way of a minor league season, it's hard to understand why so many of the team's prospects are being left at home initially.

It probably saves the Ricketts a couple hundred bucks so, for those ****, the choice was easy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on June 29, 2020, 11:53:52 am
After Carraway and Littke is hardest throwing lefty reliever in the system and the FO apparently told him he had a spot on the taxi squad.
I read somewhere that he was timed at 92-94 (T95-96) in the AFL this fall.  Slider also looked good. He may have been a better choice than the other oft-injured options for LH reliever.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on June 29, 2020, 12:09:16 pm
It probably saves the Ricketts a couple hundred bucks so, for those ****, the choice was easy.

Non-40 man roster guys don't get paid anything extra for being on the 60 man list.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on June 29, 2020, 12:11:46 pm
Non-40 man roster guys don't get paid anything extra for being on the 60 man list.

What about the cost of housing them in Chicago or South Bend? What are the guys who are not on the list doing during the season? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on June 29, 2020, 01:24:41 pm
The Minch account is pretty disappointing.  A guy maybe near the end of his pro baseball career, with some other job opportunities.... I think getting an honest and accurate input as to whether or not he should take them is pretty appropriate.  Having some dope in the front office giving him input that wasn't accurate seems really irresponsible and blameworthy. 

I think the Cubs have generally had a reputation for treating their players really well, if anything perhaps coddling and spoiling them to some degree.  Sounds like somebody blew it pretty badly on this one. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on June 29, 2020, 01:46:55 pm
Minch's underlying numbers aren't bad and he had a 60% LOB% throwing off his ERA.  He isn't a for sure major leaguer, but I think with his velocity he's worth having around.

Alzolay just liked his tweet as well, so definitely not a good look for the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on June 29, 2020, 02:02:50 pm
One reply to Minch's tirade mentioned the fact that the Cubs still had 10 slots to play with, and suggested that perhaps Minch was shooting himself in the foot, so to speak.

Minch's reply implied that he and the Cubs had already discussed that, and that the Cubs were saving those 10 vacant spots for possible guys who were released from other teams.

Minch is from Purdue, and he also mentioned that he had been a Cubs fan all of his life, so that makes it that much more disappointing for him, I'm sure...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on June 29, 2020, 02:10:23 pm
If they were debating on him based on attitude and humility, he not only shot himself in the foot, but he unloaded the clip into various other parts of his body.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on June 29, 2020, 02:18:03 pm
You just never know, though...Tommy Lasorda had a nice long career with the Dodgers...even after his remarks about Koufax and the team's decision to go with him over Lasorda...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on June 29, 2020, 02:33:28 pm
Saving 10 spots to pick up guys released by other teams, that seems kinda many, but might be a clever way to add some players to the Cubs weak system.  Not sure it's smart, but not sure it's dumb either. 

Nor sure Minch might not have been an interesting guy to place on the taxi, but I also can appreciate that some other guys might say the same thing.  Not sure I'm faulting that particular Cubs decision. 

But *IF* Minch's story is true, and I assume it probably is, because why would he fabricate something like that for no reason, I've got to fault somebody in the Cubs organization for miscommunicating.  I realize there might be some communication error on Minch's part:  maybe some guy says "well, I'd recommend not committing to that job offer.  I can't promise you anything, and I don't make those decisions, that's Jed and Theo's decision not mine; but I think there's probably a chance that you might be placed on the 60, so if it was me I'd probably try to keep myself available if possible.  but I'm not promising or anything...".  And then Minch comes out of a very well-cautioned communication saying "Heh, the guy said I'll be on the taxi squad!" when no such thing was even remotely communicated. 

But if Jed said "you'll be on it", and then he didn't actually put him on, that's really a big-time failure on Jed's part.  Or if McLeod or somebody lower down the chain, somebody who had no authority to decide who is or isn't on, and who obviously was wrong in suggesting that he would be on, if somebody like that said "you'll be on it", then that person is really a turkey and pulled a bit-time fail in making promises or assurances that he had no authority or accuracy to make.  That's really a failure within the administrative branch. 

Unfortunately I think McLeod and the guys in his departments have made a whole lot of goofups over his years of leadership.  It's perhaps not totally shocking that some guy made yet another. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on June 29, 2020, 02:45:12 pm
What about the cost of housing them in Chicago or South Bend? What are the guys who are not on the list doing during the season? 

They might get food prepared for them at South Bend.  During a regular minor league season guys are usually sleeping multiple guys in an apartment, I doubt they are getting a housing allowance.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on June 29, 2020, 03:17:14 pm
You just never know, though...Tommy Lasorda had a nice long career with the Dodgers...even after his remarks about Koufax and the team's decision to go with him over Lasorda...
Minch ain't no Koufax.  Hell, I don't think he's even Lasorda.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on June 29, 2020, 03:47:18 pm
Totally get why Minch would be upset getting left off taxi squad. A tough go for a guy like this: 35th round pick, 7th year as a pro and one appearance above AA, kind of on the verge. Not making any money as he nears age 27. Guys like this are at the mercy of the club and can get jerked around.

But, at the other end, his tweet in quote marks is that he was told he was “penciled in” for taxi squad......and that’s not really a firm commitment by Cubs. Don’t want to get hyper technical but Websters says it means:  “to put (someone or something that may be changed later) on a schedule, list, etc.”

So, maybe Cubs were playing with words or maybe Minch didn’t check Websters and relied more than he should have, but would be nice if Theo reached out to Minch in some way. I guess that’s why there’s minor league free agency after 6 full seasons. Hope that Minch sticks with it and gets a good shot somewhere, eventually.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on June 29, 2020, 04:57:27 pm
My buddy's kid, Matt Cronin (who the Cubs tried to lowball as an underslot 3rd rounder before ultimately selecting Michael McAvene) made the Nationals roster.  Both Cronin and McAvene put up nice numbers in limited action last season.  Cronin had 41 Ks vs. 11 walks (1 HBP) in 22 innings along with a 0.82 ERA. .153 BAA and 1.00 WHIP.  McAvene had 20 Ks and 4 BBs (3 HBP) in 12.2 innings along with a 1.42 ERA.  .119 BAA.  0.71 WHIP
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on June 29, 2020, 05:35:04 pm
I keep reading conflicting reports, but this is how I understand it at this point.  Anyone who had better facts, please feel free to let me know.

As I understand it,

although each team can have up to 60 players on the "active" team, no one can actually appear in a game unless they are on the 40 man roster

All those on the 40 man roster will be paid at their contractual rate (MLB contract - Split contract - minor league contract)  So those not on the 40 man roster, whether with the Wrigley squad or the South Bend squad, will be paid the minor league minimum, if that is what their contract calls for.

If the 40 man roster is full, and they want or need to "activate" someone in the taxi squad that is not on the 40 man roster, someone will have to be removed and be replaced, with all the waiver or DFA rules in place.

I have not heard whether or not the Cubs have plans to pay MILB players through the season if not on the taxi squad.

I believe that minor league players get a small "meal money allowance".  I do not believe that they receive a housing allowance.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on June 29, 2020, 05:46:06 pm
If they were debating on him based on attitude and humility, he not only shot himself in the foot, but he unloaded the clip into various other parts of his body.
I don't mind his attitude.  You got to believe in yourself, especially if you're on the fringes.  FWIW (not much), I checked my top 200 list and saw that I had Minch at 77. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on June 29, 2020, 08:54:16 pm
Every system has a dozen or so like Minch.  Every once in a while, one of them makes it to the big leagues for a decent career.  Usually, not with the team that signed and developed them.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on June 29, 2020, 10:55:22 pm
It's sounding like the Cubs will likely be at full strength with no opt outs on their roster.  Jon Heyman tweeted today that Anthony Rizzo is likely to play this season.

Also the Cubs have had no positive Covid-19 tests thus far.

Quote
“To this point, we have not had anyone that’s talked to us about opting out as we sit here today,” Cubs general manager Jed Hoyer said Monday afternoon during a Zoom conference with Chicago reporters.

“Right now, we don’t have anyone that we know about that’s considering it,” Hoyer said. “If we did, we would respect the decision and understand that this is being made from a very important place of wanting to keep either themselves or their family members safe.”

https://theathletic.com/1901499/2020/06/29/no-opt-outs-or-players-testing-positive-so-far-as-cubs-brace-for-new-reality/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on June 30, 2020, 09:27:59 am
Sharma & Mooney have a piece on The Athletic that analyzes the makeup of the new rosters.

https://theathletic.com/1899264/2020/06/29/ready-or-not-the-cubs-roster-and-return-to-play-plans-are-taking-shape/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on June 30, 2020, 09:35:36 am
Sharma on the Cubs' DH in 2020.


https://theathletic.com/1901440/2020/06/30/keep-it-simple-kyle-schwarber-is-the-cubs-best-option-at-dh/?source=dailyemail
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on June 30, 2020, 10:12:06 am
I think I disagree. I think I would prefer Caratini getting regular AB's as DH, and Contreras DH'ing on days that Caratini catches...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on June 30, 2020, 10:50:56 am
I agree, Dave.  DH opens AB for somebody.

I'd rather give most of those AB to a professional hitter like caratani, rather than to Souza or Almora. 

And *if* Caratini is part of your normal 9-man lineup, then flipping Contreras to DH once in a while to keep him fresh wouldn't need to shake up the batting lineup. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on June 30, 2020, 09:09:40 pm
Dumb long-range questions:
1.  How does this season work for service time and free agency?  Bryant, etc.; this will still be a full season towards free agency, whether they get in 60 games or not? 

2.  How about luxury tax?  Much winter talk about the lux line, but then they unexpectedly chose to pay Quintana and go over the line after all.  Given that they're now only paying ≤40% of their anticipated budget, does that basically put EVERYBODY under the line, so that won't be a factor? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on July 01, 2020, 12:56:16 am
Dumb long-range questions:
1.  How does this season work for service time and free agency?  Bryant, etc.; this will still be a full season towards free agency, whether they get in 60 games or not? 

2.  How about luxury tax?  Much winter talk about the lux line, but then they unexpectedly chose to pay Quintana and go over the line after all.  Given that they're now only paying ≤40% of their anticipated budget, does that basically put EVERYBODY under the line, so that won't be a factor? 

March agreement addressed this.

1. Full year service time (unless player opts not to play and is not in a special health risk category).

2. Luxury tax still based on full season payroll but any tax to be paid pro-rated
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on July 01, 2020, 10:37:43 am
Pitching coach Tommy Hottovy contracted the coronavirus earlier this spring but has since recovered.  Definitely sounds like he had a rough experience with it though.  He's just 38 years old.

Quote
Cubs pitching coach Tommy Hottovy told Mully And Haugh of Chicago's 670 The Score that he was diagnosed with COVID-19 this spring.

Hottovy has since recovered and will apparently be present for the Cubs' first scheduled workout on Friday at Wrigley Field. "I had the virus," he said. "I got crushed ... It took me 30 days to test negative." The 38-year-old former minor and major league pitcher added that he ran a 100-plus-degree fever for six straight days and ultimately lost 18 pounds. He considered sitting out of MLB's planned 60-game season but now feels that he can be a sounding board for players and their families as to how to operate during this pandemic.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 01, 2020, 12:58:25 pm
...
2. Luxury tax still based on full season payroll but any tax to be paid pro-rated

So, that means we'll be in 3-time-over penalty, correct? 

Which means what in terms of draft-pick penalty? 
1.  If we sign any compensation-caliber free agent, we lose our first round draft pick?
2.  And if we again stay off from comp-caliber free agent, then our first-round pick moves back 10 picks? 

And in terms of financial penalties, for next season we'll be paying 50% penalty for any dollars beyond the lux line? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 01, 2020, 01:01:17 pm
Pitching coach Tommy Hottovy contracted the coronavirus earlier this spring but has since recovered.  Definitely sounds like he had a rough experience with it though.  He's just 38 years old.


This is considered a "mild" case. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 01, 2020, 01:04:43 pm
This is considered a "mild" case. 
There are also lasting lung problems that can hit you later in life.  A recovery does not mean you are free of the scourge.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 01, 2020, 01:08:53 pm
There are also lasting lung problems that can hit you later in life.  A recovery does not mean you are free of the scourge.

I don't know living with pulmonary fibrosis seems like a fun to live the rest of your life.  Imagine breathing through a straw everyday and being more prone to infections.

People have also ended up with neurologic problems like strokes, blood clots, dilated cardiomyopathy (think heart failure).  There was a reason I wasn't sleeping for the first month of this. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on July 01, 2020, 01:09:26 pm
So, that means we'll be in 3-time-over penalty, correct? 


No, Cubs were not over in 2018.

Over in 2019.

I suppose they could still get under in 2020 if things go bad.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 01, 2020, 01:47:56 pm
No, Cubs were not over in 2018.   Over in 2019.

I suppose they could still get under in 2020 if things go bad.

Thanks.   So next year's draft pick won't be compromised.  That's potentially helpful.  In such a short season, things could be pretty unpredictable.  I don't anticpate the Cubs taking 12th place or anything in the NL, but with such a short season, it wouldn't really be that hard.  Maybe they'll end up with a top-10 pick next year? 

I think it's going to be hard to get under "if things go bad". 

Spotrac has a really detailed competitive balance tax total.  https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/chicago-cubs/payroll/
*It lists the Cubs at $8.6 million over the cap. 
*Even if you give up and trade guys after only 20 games, it would take at least 3 big-ticket dumps to unload $8.6 in salary: 
-40 games: Quintana: $2.6M,  Kimbrel:  $3.54,  Chatwood:  $3.13

I wonder how they'll calculate lux tax:  30 games is half of a 60-game season, but 18.5% of 162.  If you trade Quintana after 30 games, would the Cubs be only liable for 50% of his full-season lux line, because 30 games is half of the actual season?  Or if they trade him after 30 games, are they still liable for over 80% of his lux line? 

Or if they got somebody to take Q right now, might they be fully relieved of his full $10.5 line, because he played the full season elsewhere?  Or would the Cubs still be liable for the 102 unplayed games, and he'd still count as $6.6 against their lux line? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 01, 2020, 02:21:08 pm
Lux line 2021: 
1.  For 2020, at $216.6, over the $208 line by $8.6
2.  2021, lux line will rise by only $2, from $208 to $210.  So basically presently we'd be $6.6 over that.
3.  Possible lux reductions:
Lester:  25.8
Chatwood:  12.7
Q:  10.5
Descalso:  2.5
Brad Brach:  1.1

Basically those 5 guys would take $52.6 off from what we've got now.  With the cap going up by a couple, in a sense we'd be $54.6 better than now.  Given that we're $8.6 over now, that would put us about $46 under. 

My guess is that salary raises for Bryant and Baez and those guys will gobble up a bunch of that $46.  But that with the state of the economy, with possibly uncertainty about whether Covid will continue to reduce fan attendance and revenue next year, and after the big losses the Cubs will experience this year, my guess is the Cubs will probably elect to NOT go over the lux line again this winter.  Even if that means going into next season with Mills, Alzolay or whomever, and a reduced-contract Chatwood as rotation guys. 

Just can't imagine they're going to want to shoot into 3-tax penalty, draft-pick pushback, etc. after the financial burn they'll be experiencing this season. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 01, 2020, 03:36:15 pm
Well worth the time it takes to read

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/how-cubs-tommy-hottovy-kept-his-family-safe-while-battling-covid-19
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on July 01, 2020, 03:46:20 pm
Well worth the time it takes to read

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/how-cubs-tommy-hottovy-kept-his-family-safe-while-battling-covid-19

That was a really good article, thanks for posting Bennett.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 01, 2020, 03:51:18 pm
Thanks.   So next year's draft pick won't be compromised. 

Losing 10 spots on the draft is only if you go over the luxury tax by I believe $40 million.  It doesn't matter how many years you go over far as draft IIRC.  The penalty for multiple years is increases in the percentage of tax you pay on the overage.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 01, 2020, 04:05:58 pm
That was a really good article, thanks for posting Bennett.
I probably should have put it in The Bleachers as you suggested in another post.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on July 01, 2020, 04:06:46 pm
I probably should have put it in The Bleachers as you suggested in another post.

Nah I think it works here just fine too.  :)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 02, 2020, 06:41:14 am
First MLB.com power rankings are out - Cubs #10.

https://www.mlb.com/news/first-mlb-power-rankings-of-2020
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on July 02, 2020, 11:43:53 am
Our first weird baseball injury of the season...hopefully Q won't be out for long.

Quote
Jose Quintana required surgery on his left thumb after getting hurt washing his dishes at home, and he won't resume his throwing program for another two weeks.

He needed a nerve repaired in his thumb, and he required five stitches afterwards. One imagines this will put Quintana at least three or four weeks behind at the beginning of the season. This should ensure that Tyler Chatwood opens up in the Cubs' rotation, with Alec Mills becoming the favorite to move into the fifth spot.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on July 02, 2020, 12:39:05 pm
I showed this to my wife, and explained why it is much too dangerous for me to help washing the dishes.  I don't think she was convinced.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on July 02, 2020, 12:41:19 pm
You help?  I have to do them myself.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on July 02, 2020, 12:47:06 pm
Someone making Q money should be able to afford a dishwasher...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on July 02, 2020, 12:51:13 pm
Someone making Q money should be able to afford a dishwasher...
A MAN'S GOTTA EAT!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 02, 2020, 06:06:39 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1278774226607050753/0p2NkGjY?format=jpg&name=900x900)

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/how-cubs-are-reconfiguring-wrigley-field-satisfy-health-safety-needs
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 02, 2020, 06:54:06 pm
Throw back tweet from 7 years ago today:

Baltimore Orioles @Orioles
The Orioles have acquired RHP Scott Feldman & CA Steve Clevenger from the Cubs in exchange for RHPs Jake Arrieta & Pedro Strop.


Even if Arrieta hadn't been included in the deal, it still would've been one of the best trades in Cubs history.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on July 03, 2020, 06:39:53 am
If Q missed the season would we get relief from his contract for Luxury Tax purposes?  I seem to recall Zobrist coming off the books last year. Is that only for a leave of absence? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 03, 2020, 07:58:04 am
No salary relief for injuries.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on July 03, 2020, 01:55:54 pm
Theo on Covid-19 and the Cubs baseball season.  It's good to have someone as intelligent and sensible, with the right values in charge.


https://theathletic.com/1907530/2020/07/03/how-theo-epstein-is-trying-to-focus-and-stay-positive-when-so-much-can-go-wrong/?source=dailyemail
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on July 03, 2020, 01:57:43 pm
No salary relief for injuries.

So we have to carve (pun intended) this into a mental health type injury where he is physically fine, but mentally he can't come to the ballpark due to confusion as to how he injured himself in this manner.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on July 03, 2020, 02:38:34 pm
Ted Lilly and Kyle Hendricks talk pitching.


https://www.facebook.com/Cubs/videos/282328133006326/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 03, 2020, 02:49:39 pm
Cubs Talk  @NBCSCubs  1m
David Ross indicated to reporters on Friday that no Cubs players have tested positive for COVID-19:
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 03, 2020, 07:10:41 pm
Has Anthony Rizzo lost a little weight?  He is listed at 240.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcCCzYPXYAAnvi_?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 04, 2020, 08:14:06 am
Yes, he has.

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/07/03/ian-happ-is-extremely-impressed-by-anthony-rizzos-new-look-continued-pop/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 06, 2020, 09:44:23 am
Cubs Talk   @NBCSCubs  5m
The Cubs will open the season against the Brewers at Wrigley Field, sources tell
@GDubCub
 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on July 06, 2020, 10:32:30 am
Mooney dreaming about Darvish.
https://theathletic.com/1910952/2020/07/05/its-time-to-dream-about-what-yu-darvish-could-do-this-season/?source=dailyemail
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 06, 2020, 01:44:15 pm
Sahadev Sharma  @sahadevsharma  28m
Kris Bryant's full answer on testing issues we're seeing throughout baseball right now, which includes this quote, "I wanted to play this year because I felt that it would be safe and I would be comfortable. Honestly, I don't really feel that way."

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcQyJ0yXsAAcwaV?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 06, 2020, 01:55:47 pm
Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  28s
Almora on testing snags: "It sucks. no other way to put it."

Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  3m
Almora, like Bryant, said he got tested Tuesday but not again until today.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on July 06, 2020, 02:42:11 pm
I was confused by why the Angels have to send their tests to Utah?  No labs in LA?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 06, 2020, 05:44:52 pm
Cubs schedule from MLB Network:


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcRrperWoAEvuO-?format=jpg&name=small)


I'm kind of surprised they didn't figure out a way to do 5 game series with in-division opponents to reduce travel. That would mean two series against each opponent instead of three. I guess that might make it difficult to schedule the 2 or 3 game interleague series.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 06, 2020, 06:45:31 pm
I'm kind of surprised they didn't figure out a way to do 5 game series with in-division opponents to reduce travel. That would mean two series against each opponent instead of three. I guess that might make it difficult to schedule the 2 or 3 game interleague series.

It looks like they cut down on travel by doing this

Quote
Nevertheless, limiting travel will be a priority, meaning teams will likely play the Cubs and White Sox on the same road trip. Similarly, it would make sense for the Cubs to play the Cardinals and Royals on a single trip, and on another play the Tigers and Indians (and maybe Reds).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 06, 2020, 07:03:59 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcR27WjXgAEw6bP?format=jpg&name=medium)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcR27WkWsAIYawy?format=jpg&name=medium)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcR27WkWoAAr8Tc?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 06, 2020, 07:17:17 pm
By the time they get their first off day, they will have played over a quarter of the season. Then their last two off days are only 2 games apart. Seems less than optimal scheduling.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 06, 2020, 07:20:03 pm
I was confused by why the Angels have to send their tests to Utah?  No labs in LA?

MLB set up a contract with a Utah based lab to avoid using up local tests. I’m not shocked that the results are slow at first. Usually it will get straightened out over time.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 06, 2020, 08:29:18 pm
By the time they get their first off day, they will have played over a quarter of the season. Then their last two off days are only 2 games apart. Seems less than optimal scheduling.

The EPL teams are all playing basically every three days, with the last rounds of the FA Cup and Champions League having to be played as well as the league games.  Sports in times of Corona - if you're going to play the season out, this is the way it has to be.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on July 06, 2020, 08:47:06 pm
MLB set up a contract with a Utah based lab to avoid using up local tests. I’m not shocked that the results are slow at first. Usually it will get straightened out over time.
So Robb is doing all these in his basement?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robb on July 07, 2020, 01:47:09 am
In my garage.  No basements here. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 07, 2020, 06:42:26 pm
Kimbrel gives up a HR in his first appearance. Baseball is truly back!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 08, 2020, 12:48:12 pm
Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  9m
Infielder Hernan Perez added to 60-man roster, will work out Thursday with position players. Roster now at 51.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on July 08, 2020, 05:26:29 pm
Sadly the Morrow Watch for Cubs fans is officially over...

Quote
Robert Murray, formerly of The Athletic, reports that the Cubs are releasing Brandon Morrow.

Baseball America also has Morrow's release listed in their transactions page. The right-hander was re-signed as a non-roster invite in December, but dealt with a Grade 1 calf tear that kept him from throwing for the final two weeks before the COVID-19 shutdown. The hard-throwing right-hander has dealt with a bevy of injuries in his career, and while this could just end up being a logistical move, it's also possible that Morrow's time with the Cubs is coming to a disappointing end.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 08, 2020, 05:33:02 pm
The Godot of the North Side.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on July 08, 2020, 05:48:04 pm
Or Guffman.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on July 09, 2020, 05:15:31 am
Kimbrel gives up a HR in his first appearance. Baseball is truly back!

Sucks that he needs spring training to be on form when there is no spring training.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 09, 2020, 11:52:56 am
https://theathletic.com/1917556/2020/07/08/why-the-cubs-arent-concerned-about-craig-kimbrel-or-their-bullpen-yet/?source=dailyemail

Article about Kimbrel and the Bullpen in Athletic.  I wonder what access the media has to any of the intrasquad games or anything?  Are they allowed to be present in Wrigley watching stuff, or having any socially distanced press conferences?  Or is any media coverage totally off-site?  They're texting somebody to ask what's happening, and texting Kimbrel to ask if they could have a phone or zoom interview? 

It was fun to have an article about players and baseball and optimism.  As you guys know, I love the optimistic spring-training, hope-springs-eternal articles.  This was one of those. 

Kimbrel has learned from last year, so he'll be better prepared for the summer start and short training camp. 
*He's been working with the data to try to improve himself. 
*Ross said his breaking ball has been looking good, for strikes.  (Ross, of course, was the bad scout who Theo sent to watch Kimbrel last spring, and Ross came back with a gushy report on how ready Kimbrel was... so I admit some mixed confidence in Ross as a Kimbrel-scout....). 
*Kimbrel has lost some weight, maybe in better shape.
*Kimbrel has been working with his changeup, thinks that might help him.
*Kimbrel says that if his curve is working better, and if he has a change besides, those will also make his fastball better. 

Article was generally positive about other relievers in camp. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on July 09, 2020, 08:18:23 pm
https://twitter.com/MLBastian/status/1280241235698036738
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on July 09, 2020, 09:38:38 pm
Quote
Kris Bryant, on keeping the core together as long as possible:

"It would be really cool to just have everybody stay here and play together and see what we've got , and when we're old and fat and we're tired, we're out of here. That'd be awesome."

Yeah it would be awesome.  Of course, the unspoken part of it is, "It'd be really cool if the Cubs were the high bidder for me and could keep everyone together."

Not that it's unfair, but with Scott Boras as his agent, the Cubs will need to be the high bidder to keep him.  I hope we are willing to pay up for Bryant and Baez and keep those guys together for a long time and still commit ourselves to build around them.   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on July 09, 2020, 09:59:30 pm
Yeah it would be awesome.  Of course, the unspoken part of it is, "It'd be really cool if the Cubs were the high bidder for me and could keep everyone together."

Not that it's unfair, but with Scott Boras as his agent, the Cubs will need to be the high bidder to keep him.  I hope we are willing to pay up for Bryant and Baez and keep those guys together for a long time and still commit ourselves to build around them.   

I would like to think that Bryant's quite strong statements about how important the Cubs have been to him and how much he would prefer (not just like) to remain a Cub suggest he might be willing to settle for something short of what it would take for another team to sign him. Of course, given the nature of these things, we may never know.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on July 09, 2020, 10:03:55 pm
I would like to think that Bryant's quite strong statements about how important the Cubs have been to him and how much he would prefer (not just like) to remain a Cub suggest he might be willing to settle for something short of what it would take for another team to sign him. Of course, given the nature of these things, we may never know.

Hey you can only hope! :)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on July 09, 2020, 10:22:33 pm
It could simply be, "Pay me a ton and ship these other clowns away."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 11, 2020, 12:31:42 pm
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  10m
Cubs adding more dugout-style seats so players can better spread out.

Ross: "They're going to take out some of the seats and cover that area down there, so players have got some area to sit and move around a little bit. That was a concern of ours."

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcqUOT3XYAAToh3?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 12, 2020, 10:59:53 pm
Underwood struck out 5 Cubs in a row today. He apparently has picked up the Hottvoy knuckle curve. If he can consistently throw that with his change up he could get really interesting.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 12, 2020, 11:18:53 pm
Yes, absolutely. 

https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/cubs/ct-cb-chicago-cubs-camp-takeaways-jon-lester-20200713-flxrivdlhvdltfjdpwyorg6bbm-story.html

1.  26 K's in 6-1/2 inning game.  I think the pitchers may be ahead of the hitters. 
2.  Lester sharp, although max velocity was 87. 
3.  Almora is injured after running into wall.  Rizzo still out. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on July 12, 2020, 11:42:59 pm
Underwood struck out 5 Cubs in a row today. He apparently has picked up the Hottvoy knuckle curve. If he can consistently throw that with his change up he could get really interesting.
  Either that or our hitters really really suck.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 13, 2020, 07:22:48 am
26K/6.5 innings, projected to 9 innings would be 36 K.  Our pitchers may be good; our hitters may not be that good.  And certainly the pitchers should be well ahead of hitters.  Pitchers could be pitching and using their Rapsodo and stuff for the last four months; the plate is the same distance and shape in a pitch lab or warehouse or local park as in Wrigley, and the pitchers are probably all in pretty much peak form.  Hitters practicing their swing in the mirror, or versus a pitching machine, not going to be close to peak form. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 13, 2020, 11:01:03 am
The strike outs are the real important thing because the pitchers are probably well ahead of the hitter.  If Underwood can add an above average curveball to his fastball and outstanding change-up he could pull a Rowan Wick type surprise season off. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 13, 2020, 11:47:18 am
Yes, Blue.  If Underwood emerged with an effective curve to go with his change, his stuff could really work.  Obviously his fastball velocity is plenty good, even if his command has never been; but I think having a couple of offspeed pitches helps make the fastball better, too.  The fastball probably doesn't need to be located quite as well when hitters can't sit on it as much. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 13, 2020, 08:37:46 pm
Lester has a vesting option for 2021 in his contract. He was supposed to have to complete 200 innings for it to vest. But in the shortened season, that has been prorated to only 74 innings.

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/how-cubs-jon-lester-just-got-126-innings-closer-returning-chicago-2021
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 13, 2020, 08:39:15 pm
Is that a component of the March agreement, or something the Cubs agreed to voluntarily?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 13, 2020, 08:49:26 pm
The article says it's something that Major League Baseball and the union have just agreed to.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 13, 2020, 09:50:51 pm
60 games = 12 starts (max).  74 innings / 12 = 6.16 innings per start. 

Still pretty unlikely, but if he's fresh and untired.  So who knows? 

The following distribution would get him to 74 innings in his 12 starts.
*1 x 8
*2 x 7
*7 x 6
*2 x 5
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 13, 2020, 10:28:16 pm
https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/why-cubs-catcher-victor-caratini-will-be-paired-yu-darvish-season

Caratini and Darvish.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 13, 2020, 11:19:02 pm
Short season, if Caratini catches the Darvish games, I don't think Contreras would be overwhelmed to catch the other 48. 

I might give Contreras's legs a full day off on those Darvish games?  Or would you still DH him sometimes? 

If Caratini caught once a rotation, he could DH maybe two of the other four games, and maybe start 36 games out of 60 combined? 

Obviously one thing to talk about that now; it's another when you know who's hot and who's cold, and how tight the race is.  Who knows, maybe those two will be two of our better hitters, and you'd actually prefer to start both guys all 60 games! 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 13, 2020, 11:28:42 pm
For every 5 games, start Contreras at catcher in 3, DH in 1, and available off the bench in the fifth.

Start Caratini at catcher in 2 games, DH in 2, and available off the bench in the fifth.

Carry Phegley in the extra roster spot so they can aggressively use Contreras and Caratini off the bench in the games they're not starting.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 14, 2020, 09:40:53 am
The strike outs are the real important thing because the pitchers are probably well ahead of the hitter.  If Underwood can add an above average curveball to his fastball and outstanding change-up he could pull a Rowan Wick type surprise season off. 

Jordan Bastian, with what Hottovy said about Underwood and his curve.  Really encouraging. About the pitch, and about Underwood himself and his work and effort.  Also interesting perspective about how for some pitchers, something can click just like that; for others it can take years of commitment to get something right, until it's finally useful and workable.  Hottovy also projected that the curve and Underwood will continue to improve. 

Hottovy doesn't determine the roster, Ross and Hoyer do that.  But Underwood is a guy who is out of options.  I've got to figure that Underwood is a guy that Hottovy is going to recommend, and that he'll make the roster. 
 
https://twitter.com/MLBastian/status/1282777126568173575?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1282777126568173575%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.northsidebaseball.com%2Fforum%2Fviewtopic.php%3Ft%3D3354start%3D50
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 14, 2020, 10:20:40 am
Cubs intrasquad game will be on Marquee at 6 pm today.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dev on July 14, 2020, 01:35:48 pm
manager David Ross and five other "Tier 1" individuals did not attend the team's Monday morning practice as they await results of their COVID-19 tests from Saturday.   ESPN article does not define Tier 1....what are they?  minor leaguers?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 14, 2020, 01:47:08 pm
manager David Ross and five other "Tier 1" individuals did not attend the team's Monday morning practice as they await results of their COVID-19 tests from Saturday.   ESPN article does not define Tier 1....what are they?  minor leaguers?

Quote
Tier 1, by the way, comprises the 80-something members of the organization with the highest access, including players and coaches.


https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/why-cubs-rest-baseball-sweat-mlb-battles-coronavirus-testing-issues
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dev on July 14, 2020, 01:54:40 pm

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/why-cubs-rest-baseball-sweat-mlb-battles-coronavirus-testing-issues

Cool man...hey that is good use of the interwebs....
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on July 14, 2020, 08:35:21 pm
Cubs intrasquad game will be on Marquee at 6 pm today.

Does anyone get Marquee TV??  Did Comcast swing a deal and I missed it?  I know the parties both said they were confident it would get done in time for the start of the season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: octagon on July 14, 2020, 08:37:35 pm
Does anyone get Marquee TV??  Did Comcast swing a deal and I missed it?  I know the parties both said they were confident it would get done in time for the start of the season.
Comcast and Marquee haven't made a deal yet.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 14, 2020, 09:14:43 pm
Does anyone get Marquee TV??  Did Comcast swing a deal and I missed it?  I know the parties both said they were confident it would get done in time for the start of the season.

My dad gets it in Des Moines through his cable and they have a great app for Apple TV that doesn’t detect when you are out of market.  Hulu has a deal with Marquee if you want to stream.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on July 14, 2020, 10:14:25 pm
RCN has Marquee.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on July 15, 2020, 10:23:51 am
"Currently, there are 11 players on the Cubs satellite roster working out at South Bend. Sources confirmed that five more prospects, right-handed pitchers Cory Abbott, Tyson Miller and Keegan Thompson and lefties Justin Steele and Jack Patterson, will be officially added to the group as well. That leaves four open spots to the 60 total allowed between the Wrigley and South Bend camps. The Cubs aren’t in a hurry to max out the combined roster."

Sharma The Athletic
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 15, 2020, 11:40:48 am
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  7m
Cubs: MRI on Rizzo confirmed rib inflammation on left side, leading to spasms in his lower back. Results were "as expected" and he'll be treated daily.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: BearHit on July 15, 2020, 11:51:54 am
https://www.painscience.com/articles/tennis-ball.php
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: jacey1 on July 15, 2020, 12:13:36 pm
My dad gets it in Des Moines through his cable and they have a great app for Apple TV that doesn’t detect when you are out of market.  Hulu has a deal with Marquee if you want to stream.
I have had HULU for a few months now and still no Marquee network, but I'm in TN.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on July 15, 2020, 02:46:35 pm
Sharma has an interesting, pretty detailed article on how the Cubs are approaching development of minor leaguers at South Band as well as those who are not.
https://theathletic.com/1927001/2020/07/14/in-south-bend-the-cubs-are-hoping-to-salvage-some-lost-development-time/?source=dailyemail
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 15, 2020, 04:18:15 pm
I have had HULU for a few months now and still no Marquee network, but I'm in TN.

Tennessee appears to have Cincinnati for the whole state with the Cardinals and Indians claiming small portions as well. The Cubs do not have any part of the state as a home territory so you won’t get Marquee.

If I’m reading the territory map correctly Marquee would be available in Iowa, Indiana, Illinois and southern parts of Wisconsin.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 15, 2020, 05:20:02 pm
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/59/MLB_Blackout_Areas.png/1000px-MLB_Blackout_Areas.png)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 15, 2020, 05:23:51 pm
Jon Heyman  @JonHeyman  1h
Jose Quintana’s checkup went well, his stitches came out and he’ll start tossing tomorrow, via NL sources. Team will know more once he ramps up. Quintana suffered the cut thumb injury washing his dishes, specifically his wine glasses.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 15, 2020, 05:37:51 pm
https://theathletic.com/1929307/2020/07/15/can-duane-underwood-jr-finally-put-it-together-for-the-cubs-in-2020/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on July 15, 2020, 07:22:13 pm
Tennessee is Cards, Braves, Reds
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 15, 2020, 07:34:25 pm
I'm puzzled by reference to players being held out on Wednesday because Monday test results weren't in yet.  I guess they've set some protocols.  But I'd almost think that the default would be that as long as a player goes through the testing protocol, the default would be that he's in until/unless a test says otherwise.  At least once the season starts.  If it's the league's testing system that can't process the results fast enough to get the results back, then a competing team shouldn't have to hold guys out of a game because the lab hired by the league is too slow, and there is no evidence that the guy has the virus. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on July 15, 2020, 09:52:52 pm
I'm puzzled by reference to players being held out on Wednesday because Monday test results weren't in yet.  I guess they've set some protocols.  But I'd almost think that the default would be that as long as a player goes through the testing protocol, the default would be that he's in until/unless a test says otherwise.  At least once the season starts.  If it's the league's testing system that can't process the results fast enough to get the results back, then a competing team shouldn't have to hold guys out of a game because the lab hired by the league is too slow, and there is no evidence that the guy has the virus. 

Seriously?  I think it makes a tad more sense to take the risk that a player misses a couple of days without being infected rather than risking the health of all of the other players and coaches if the player being tested turns out to be infected. It's been known for sometimes that people who are showing no symptoms can still be sick or carriers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 15, 2020, 10:20:30 pm
I'm puzzled by reference to players being held out on Wednesday because Monday test results weren't in yet.  I guess they've set some protocols.  But I'd almost think that the default would be that as long as a player goes through the testing protocol, the default would be that he's in until/unless a test says otherwise.  At least once the season starts.  If it's the league's testing system that can't process the results fast enough to get the results back, then a competing team shouldn't have to hold guys out of a game because the lab hired by the league is too slow, and there is no evidence that the guy has the virus. 

What MLB is doing is batch testing. The take small samples from say 10 players mix them together and use 1 test. If it tests negative you cleared 10 (ten is just a number I picked, no clue on him many are in a batch). It allows you to test more people, use less reagents and go quicker. 

The problem is if it test positive or there is a error with the test. So you have to wait for X time and go back and test each individually. The test time is usually in hours. It is going to be an issue with early games/practices.

What I learned on the podcast is it was completely up to the Cubs on how to proceed. They choose to be cautious and not risk exposing more players. They could choose to let people play/practice if they want.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 15, 2020, 11:18:34 pm
Cubs have signed Jose Lobaton. Probably just depth...but they could also be adding more catching depth because they expect Caratini to be playing a lot of first base.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 15, 2020, 11:22:47 pm
What MLB is doing is batch testing. The take small samples from say 10 players mix them together and use 1 test. If it tests negative you cleared 10 (ten is just a number I picked, no clue on him many are in a batch). It allows you to test more people, use less reagents and go quicker. 

The problem is if it test positive or there is a error with the test. So you have to wait for X time and go back and test each individually. The test time is usually in hours. It is going to be an issue with early games/practices.

What I learned on the podcast is it was completely up to the Cubs on how to proceed. They choose to be cautious and not risk exposing more players. They could choose to let people play/practice if they want.

Thanks, Blue.  That's really interesting, and makes a ton of efficiency sense.  Both the use of batch-testing in general, and that it was up to the Cubs. 

Ron, that also shades my thought.  *IF* 5 guys are held out because their batch tested positive, that's a higher risk factor than if their samples from 48 hours ago haven't even been tested at all. 

Seems to me that it's incumbent on the league to have contracted with enough labs so that they can do small enough batches so that they can count on getting results back within a safe number of days.  If the protocol is that you can't be in the building if you haven't gotten a negative within 48 hours, then it's incumbent on the league to have a positive or a negative within 48 hours. 

If it was and remains the club's call, in the event that test results are tardy, my guess is the Cubs might perhaps make a different choice during the season, if a starting pitcher's test get's delayed; or if Bryant and Baez's test results get delayed. 

It also seems to me that during the season, the abundance of caution might shift a smidge.  I watched Contreras HR clip from today; guys got close enough for foot-kicks, and for a bat-pat.  None of those players wore masks.  Perhaps if a guy took a test on Monday and the result isn't back yet, during the season maybe you would let him play, but you'd back off on the foot-kicks and bat-pats, and you'd make him mask when he's close to anybody?  Have him come in a different door, sit by himself, etc.? 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Tuffy on July 15, 2020, 11:49:11 pm
Cubs have signed Jose Lobaton. Probably just depth...but they could also be adding more catching depth because they expect Caratini to be playing a lot of first base.

He's the guy whom Rizzo picked off first when his hand bounced off first base for a fraction of a second in the deciding game of the 2017 NLDS, isn't he? 

I hope he doesn't bring that silly number 59 of his to the Cubs, but I guess we need the depth.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 16, 2020, 07:12:12 am
Lobaton is unusual guy, having played in 9 big league seasons, and having batted above .200 in less than half of them. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on July 16, 2020, 07:33:32 am
Yeah, we really need one of those.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on July 16, 2020, 10:13:48 am
Anyone else outraged that professional athletes can get tested for COVID over and over when ordinary citizens in some states have to wait in line for hours to get tested (if they can get tested at all)?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on July 16, 2020, 10:19:15 am
Ridiculous, isn’t it?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 16, 2020, 10:26:16 am
This is where I don't see the motive for non-catchers to "opt out" on the basis of safety.  You're going to a place where everybody else there is getting tested every other day.  How is that less safe than where guys will be if they aren't at Wrigley? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 16, 2020, 12:39:07 pm
Ross says Hendricks will start on opening day.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 16, 2020, 01:10:44 pm
Anyone else outraged that professional athletes can get tested for COVID over and over when ordinary citizens in some states have to wait in line for hours to get tested (if they can get tested at all)?

The only way this impacts the public is reagents and swabs being difficult to come by.  Very little of our medical supplies is manufactured in the US and that is a huge problem. Masks, reagents, most medications are all manufactured outside of the US. Even when things are made in the US, it is concentrated in 1 place so when the hurricane hit Puerto Rico we had a shortage of IV fluids.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on July 16, 2020, 01:26:30 pm
It's just not right.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on July 16, 2020, 03:29:23 pm
Someone correct me if I'm wrong on this...

So if a game goes to the 10th inning, a runner will be placed on 2nd base. This runner will be on base officially as the result of a fielding error, even though no such error occurred or will be recorded. If the pitcher allows this runner to score, he will be the losing pitcher, assuming the home score doesn't score in the bottom of the inning. This pitcher gets the L even though he had no part in putting the go-ahead runner on base.

This rule sucks.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 16, 2020, 03:56:22 pm
Heh heh, Dave, but if he doesn't let the runner score, then he'll probably get a win, because his team will then have a chance to get their guy in from 2nd in the following half inning!  :):) .

Could also cost closers some saves.  Cubs score their guy in the top of the 10th in Milwaukee, but Kimbrel lets their guy score from 2nd in the bottom.

I think it's going to be fun.  I'm also glad that it's going to be coupled with the 3-batter minimum.  Last year, if teams are starting an extra inning with a runner on 2nd, the manager would each make a couple of pitching changes per half inning and the 10th inning might take an hour. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: chgojhawk on July 16, 2020, 05:40:13 pm
Anyone else outraged that professional athletes can get tested for COVID over and over when ordinary citizens in some states have to wait in line for hours to get tested (if they can get tested at all)?

Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf said he gets tested 2X per week.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on July 16, 2020, 06:28:52 pm
I think the Athletic reported that the reason that the tests are being evaluated in Utah is to avoid taking away testing from local facilities.  Robb is the only one who should be angry.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robb on July 17, 2020, 03:43:16 am
I think the Athletic reported that the reason that the tests are being evaluated in Utah is to avoid taking away testing from local facilities.  Robb is the only one who should be angry.
I think we're good here
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on July 17, 2020, 08:29:36 am
Robb - what town do you live in?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 17, 2020, 12:12:01 pm
I think we're good here

It can change quickly.  The hospital system I admit too was running their own tests and had a 2-4 hour turn around time.  Now they have to send everything to Quest and it is a 7 day wait.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on July 17, 2020, 12:15:21 pm
BlueJay - is the change because of increased cases, or is there some other reason they are not doing their own tests?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 17, 2020, 12:35:50 pm
BlueJay - is the change because of increased cases, or is there some other reason they are not doing their own tests?

They are unable to get the reagents due to the increased testing down South.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on July 17, 2020, 12:38:25 pm
What special reagents does it take to extract DNA and run PCR?  It seems totally ridiculous.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 17, 2020, 12:46:46 pm
What special reagents does it take to extract DNA and run PCR?  It seems totally ridiculous.
https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/10/shortage-crucial-chemicals-us-coronavirus-testing/

Some places can't get the nasal swabs.  We just don't make stuff in America and it is a problem.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on July 17, 2020, 12:59:00 pm
I thought that sputum samples were an acceptable alternative.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 17, 2020, 01:15:37 pm
The swabs have about a 30% false negative rate due to the difficulty of collection and they can come from the nose or throat.  They have to be a deep sample and that is tough.

Sputum samples are going to be worse.  You have to get somebody to cough something up, so that will limit the number of people you can test.  They you have to get an adequate sample, which is tough and you won't know if the sample is adequate until you run the test.  Just from personal experience with sputum cultures in hospitalized pneumonia patients it isn't easy and a lot of times you end have to do an induced sputum and you can't do that with COVID-19.   If you do it inside a building that room you test in has to sit idle for 1 hour before it can be deep cleaned with coronavirus testing.  Swabs are quicker and easier to do.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: mO on July 17, 2020, 04:01:24 pm
T-Mobile is now offering free mlb.tv + 1 year of The Athletic to subscibers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on July 17, 2020, 05:29:53 pm
For all of you guys who were making plans to attend the Cubs Convention in January, sorry to report it has been cancelled. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on July 17, 2020, 05:42:20 pm
Ross has named Kyle Hendricks as the starter for the first game of this shortened season.
https://theathletic.com/1933336/2020/07/16/hard-work-transformation-pay-off-for-kyle-hendricks-with-opening-day-start/?source=twittered
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on July 17, 2020, 06:06:44 pm
Our rotation is going to make this year's team a sub-.500 squad.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 17, 2020, 08:24:42 pm
Our rotation is going to make this year's team a sub-.500 squad

They really need to have Hendricks and Darvish stick to a 5 day rotation rather than a 5 man rotation in the shortened season. If there's an off day, they should both move up a day. That gets as many as 3 extra games pitched by those two, which is 5% of the season.

And Lester should be the only other pitcher in a real starter's role. The fourth and fifth spots should just be mix-and-match with a lot of piggy backing, at least until Quintana proves he's healthy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robb on July 17, 2020, 10:18:11 pm
Dave, I am in St George. Terrible place,  don't anyone visit or move here.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on July 17, 2020, 11:27:42 pm
Underwood struck out 5 Cubs in a row today. He apparently has picked up the Hottvoy knuckle curve. If he can consistently throw that with his change up he could get really interesting.

For whatever thoughts about the Cubs rotation being a sub-.500 weak point, what if this might be true and Underwood might have found something?  He'd be new to just about everyone he faces, and it's a 60 game season.  And if he's flashing this kind of stuff, he'd be better as a Quintana fill in than just about anyone else we have.

Hendricks, second half Darvish, second half Chatwood, Underwood with a newfound knuckle curve that's turned him into '34 All-Star Game Carl Hubbell, veteran presence Lester, Quintana coming back once he's healed from his DaveP style dishwashing mishap....maybe this isn't so bad after all?

It may be summer camp, but perhaps some craig-level spring training optimism might be in order here?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 18, 2020, 08:31:37 am
He loses velocity as a starter and that might effect the curve as well.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on July 18, 2020, 08:49:14 am
Hope springs eternal...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 18, 2020, 09:12:45 am
They have talked about "multi-inning".  I wonder how many guys actually will pitch two or even three-inning outings?   

It's interesting to me that during this unusual summer camp, the media guys probably have limited access, and perhaps have limited mechanism to build relationships with players.  Sharma and Mooney, for example, go to Lester and Hendricks.  The experienced interview guys that they've got connections to.  And they tend to get stuff from Darvish. 

But Chatwood, it's his 3rd season now, and he's got a huge career opportunity to prove he can be a big-league starter.  I'd think he'd be a huge human-interest story, and a pivotal baseball story; surprised they haven't gotten him to talk.  Maybe they've tried, and he doesn't call back or answer their texts or whatever. 

Same with Mills, another fascinating human-interest story.  Huge career opportunity for him.  They talk about how Hendricks was pitching a lot, working on his stuff and wanting to be ready to ramp up soon.  Did Mills do that?  What changed for him that he was good last second half, but bad last April?  Is he pitch-lab adding something to his arsenal?  What is his current camp pitch-count?  Is he just a finesse guy who'll take 10 starts to get everything synced in, and by that time the Cubs will be long eliminated?  As a soft-toss finesse guy, has he been pounding soft-toss specialists like Lester and Hendricks for advice? 

Seems like there are some easy stories here, and guys on whom the season will significantly depend.  If Chatwood and Mills pitch 60-game rotation the way they did 2nd half, the Cubs rotation could be really good.  If Mills pitches like the Iowa April version, and Chatwood like it's 2018, the rotation could be the worst in the division.  Who knows? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 18, 2020, 09:46:33 am
Cubs have added Kipnis to the roster.

Cubs arranged a cash deal with the Padres to keep the tall Rule 5 guy, Trevor Megill, but bumped him off the 40-man. 

I like that, he seemed possibly interesting and useful, and if they can use him as an options yo-yo for a few years, that might be helpful.  This would mean he's not even using option year this year (age 26), so I think he'll be able to then be on options for his ages 27, 28, and 29 seasons. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on July 18, 2020, 06:26:45 pm
Dave, I am in St George. Terrible place,  don't anyone visit or move here.

Been there.  Done that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 18, 2020, 08:41:17 pm
https://www.mlb.com/cubs/news/albert-almora-jr-having-eventful-summer-camp

Is it spring training?  An article about Almora with a hitting adjustment and a supposedly good camp!  :):):)

Lester scattered 7 hits, including an Almora HR, over his 3 innings on Friday. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 18, 2020, 09:12:55 pm
By definition, I don’t think you can scatter 7 hits in 3 innings.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on July 18, 2020, 11:14:34 pm
By definition, I don’t think you can scatter 7 hits in 3 innings.

Well, they weren't all in the same inning, so technically ...   ;)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 21, 2020, 12:06:55 pm
No surprise - The Cubs are using the bleacher seating areas to place advertisements that will be prominent on television

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EddrgpjXkAAPTlT?format=jpg&name=small)(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eddrg8hWAAE4YOQ?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on July 21, 2020, 01:13:41 pm
I bet they are not the only team that will be doing that.  What is wrong with it?  With the lost revenue I would do every thing I could to bring in dollars as an owner.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on July 23, 2020, 11:36:55 am
Kinda fun Len Kasper interview with David Ross.
https://www.facebook.com/Cubs/videos/876321456110153/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 23, 2020, 12:44:23 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Edn36DLX0AAAiDo?format=png&name=large)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 23, 2020, 12:47:45 pm
Mark Zagunis has opted out of the season and Robel Garcia has been DFA'd.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 23, 2020, 01:07:17 pm
Bottom of the 7th in Wednesday night’s game with the Twins:

Daniel Descalso planted awkwardly on his follow-through when he hit a foul ball, and he had to be checked on by David Ross and a trainer.  Descalso was able to remain in the game  and flied out.

Now he is on the 45-day IL with a left ankle sprain.

The word “fortuitous” comes to mind
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on July 23, 2020, 01:23:32 pm
Heh, I called that last night when it happened...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on July 23, 2020, 01:28:57 pm
Those naked picture he has must be goodies.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Tuffy on July 23, 2020, 08:31:02 pm
Sadler had better be contributing if he's insisting on bringing that garbage number to Chicago (which, as far as I know, has never been worn by a player and was even worn by the illustrious Buck O'Neil when he coached).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 23, 2020, 09:14:51 pm
Derek Dietrich posted on his Instagram that he's signing with the Cubs. Not sure how he fits in.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 23, 2020, 09:23:46 pm
The kind of player who could be a difference maker on a team pretty close to being good enough, which sadly I don't think we are.  BABIP last season preposterously low and likely to revert.  Not-horrible defense at a few positions, good power, probably a reliably decent bat against RHP.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on July 23, 2020, 09:51:13 pm
Derek Dietrich posted on his Instagram that he's signing with the Cubs. Not sure how he fits in.

I’ve always thought Dietrich was a pretty good player.  He’s actually a fairly versatile guy, so I think he’ll carve out a role somehow.  He’s at least a better use of a roster spot than Descalso.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on July 23, 2020, 10:01:49 pm
Actually even in his down year last year, he had a .790 OPS, and he hasn’t had lower than a .751 OPS since 2015.  He’s a good signing for a team that can use some bench depth and still has question marks at 2B.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 23, 2020, 10:25:05 pm
The problem is that this is a team that could also use some starting depth, SP depth and bullpen depth.  Dietrich isn't turning a .500 club like we are into a true contender, but he's a decent player.  With the expanded postseason maybe we sneak in and get lucky for a round, and it's always nice to have an extra weapon or two for that eventuality.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 23, 2020, 10:32:43 pm
I was under the impression that Dietrich was almost unplayable anywhere but 1B and DH at this point in his career. But it looks like he was actually fine at second base in pretty significant playing time last year.

So I like this more than I did an hour ago. I don't have much confidence in the Kipnis/Hoerner combo, so signing an alternative is good.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on July 23, 2020, 11:04:33 pm
Dietrich is 3rd among active major leaguers in career HBPs——behind only Choo and Rizzo.

His HBP % is far higher than those two.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 24, 2020, 08:27:31 am
https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/07/24/at-long-last-it-happened-comcast-is-now-carrying-marquee-sports-network/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 24, 2020, 01:26:24 pm
Some athletes take pride in making their signature legible, some don’t.

The only one I'm sure of is Albert Almora.  Then a few more only because they added their numbers.  Maybe a wild guess or two after that.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EdtbuR8XkAYISGj?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Robb on July 24, 2020, 02:02:02 pm
From ESPN power rankings:


What they do more than any other team: Throw fastballs. The Cubs threw fastballs (including cutters) 67% of the time last year, the highest rate in baseball and 20 percentage points higher than the Angels, the team at the bottom. The Cubs' fastballs were not only frequent but anomalous: They were the league's second slowest, second lowest and least likely to be in the strike zone -- as well as the second most likely to induce a ground ball. -- Miller
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on July 24, 2020, 02:33:02 pm
I know pretty much all of them, but I collect baseball cards, so...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 24, 2020, 03:13:16 pm
What they do more than any other team: Throw fastballs. The Cubs threw fastballs (including cutters) 67% of the time last year, the highest rate in baseball and 20 percentage points higher than the Angels, the team at the bottom. The Cubs' fastballs were not only frequent but anomalous: They were the league's second slowest, second lowest and least likely to be in the strike zone -- as well as the second most likely to induce a ground ball. -- Miller

That's some really interesting data.  I wonder if our usage of cutter is unusually high, and if it was just a matter of 2-seam-4-seam, if we'd not led the majors?  I wonder too whether their is any linkage between highest usage but least often in strike zone?  For example, does non-strike fastball usage early in count necessitate more fastballs later in count, to avoid walks?  Or, is it the usage of more nibbling off-the-plate fastballs that allows more fastballs?  Since they aren't that mashable? 

Obviously living with a super-soft-toss rotation like Lester-Quintana-Hendricks-Mills makes the "slowest in baseball" pretty obvious.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on July 25, 2020, 06:42:10 am
Ladies and gentlemen, your Cubs corporate partner:

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/24/media/sinclair-fauci-conspiracy-bolling/index.html
  Please keep this in P&R.  I'm not disagreeing, just don't need this in my life in more than one CUBS topic.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 25, 2020, 08:26:00 am
  Please keep this in P&R.  I'm not disagreeing, just don't need this in my life in more than one CUBS topic.

Moved - though I'm not 100% sure I agree with you here.  The Cubs are the ones who made the conscious decision to bring politics into the organization.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on July 25, 2020, 10:43:56 am
Thank you, deeg.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on July 25, 2020, 11:13:33 am
I would consider boycotting watching the Marquee station.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on July 25, 2020, 12:44:30 pm
I made a conscious decision to put my posts regarding the Cubs' BLM statements in the politics & religion section. I think political (or religious) stuff belongs there even if it directly involves the Cubs. Curt cites one good reason. I try to regulate how much and when political news/opinion I am exposed to for my own state of mind. Can't really do that here if political posts aren't kept separate.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 26, 2020, 10:31:54 am
Chicago Cubs  @Cubs  20m
The #Cubs today placed LHP Brad Wieck on the 10-day IL with a right hamstring strain and recalled RHP Ryan Tepera from the club’s South Bend Alternate Site.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on July 26, 2020, 11:17:52 am
He must have hurt it when turning around to watch that bomb Yelich hit off of him yesterday.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 26, 2020, 11:28:55 am
His velocity has been down the last 2 appearances.

Hitting Heyward 6th is getting annoying.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on July 26, 2020, 11:34:25 am
Can we DH for him and let Lester hit?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 26, 2020, 12:15:21 pm
He must have hurt it when turning around to watch that bomb Yelich hit off of him yesterday.
His velocity has been down the last 2 appearances. 

Both correct

Quote
Wieck allowed a two-run home run to Christian Yelich in Saturday’s 8-3 loss to the Brewers. Manager David Ross emphasized that Wieck was healthy prior to the homer, in which he hurt his leg while throwing the pitch.

Wieck’s velocity has dipped to 89 mph since summer camp started. He missed the start of spring training in Arizona because of a procedure to repair an abnormal heart flutter.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/cubs/ct-chicago-cubs-brad-wieck-20200726-xfzphd37anh4npekrfscywhpem-story.html
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 27, 2020, 01:55:39 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ed9Cs3KXoAQZL16?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 28, 2020, 03:57:22 pm
Bryant has a sore elbow and is out of the lineup today.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 28, 2020, 11:15:01 pm
It certainly looks as if the Cubs are going to have enough offense to compete for the postseason, especially with over half the teams going.  But boy, the pitching is terrifying.  The bullpen has been awful, and we've gotten good performances from three soft-tossers for wins.  But can they keep it up?  We know Hendricks can, he's done it before - but Mills and Lester are a different story.

This figures to be a year with pretty minimal in-season movement in terms of trades, what with the uncertainty of the whole thing being cancelled at any moment and so many teams inevitably in postseason contention.  If there's any help coming it's going to have to be in-house, probably.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on July 28, 2020, 11:59:37 pm
Bullpen was effective in the Chatwood game and was actually pretty good tonight if you look closer.

Tepera gave up homer in the 9th that had a xBA of .110. Just a Cincy park homer. Tepera struck out the side tonight for his second time in a row, that is 6 Ks in his last two innings of work.

Suarez’ double off Ryan in the 8th had an xBA of .090. That’s baseball.

Sadler struck out the side in his inning too. HR was bad of course but Ks are promising. He’s getting swinging strikes, a good sign.

Wick has given up nothing so far.

To state the obvious re. Cubs bullpen, a lot will depend on Kimbrel. There is a low floor with this bullpen if things go south. And, too bad that Cubs did not bring back at least one of the 2019 vet FA relievers.

But, Cubs are 4-1 and not much to complain about so far, for me.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 29, 2020, 01:34:03 am
This is exactly what's happened every season since 2016.  We always heard underlying reasons why the bad bullpen wasn't actually bad - but in the end, bad is usually bad.  On paper this bullpen is the worst of the lot if Kimbrel doesn't turn it around but who knows, maybe this will be the season when the pollyanna crowd will be right and they'll wind up not being awful.  They only have to get lucky for two months, after all. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on July 29, 2020, 03:20:05 am
Yeah, ambiguity five games into the season is frustrating to some.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 29, 2020, 07:20:36 am
Wick, Ryan, Tempera, Sadler, Jeffries is a nice 5 to start from.

They need Kimbrel to be better and that would give you 6.

Brothers, Alzolay, Underwood, Mapples, etc... can fill it out. It isn’t the Yankees pen, but it will work.

When Quintana comes back that will give you Mills in the pen as a long guy. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 29, 2020, 08:11:00 am
Got my doubts on Jeffress.  He looked as wild as the 4A guys.  Sunday, he walked a guy, hit a guy, and gave up a long bomb one foot short of a HR. 

Monday he got a full-count chase on one guy on a ball way out of the zone, and then got a full-count rocket on the other. 

We'll see, he may settle in over time.  And skating on thin edge is what relievers often do, and getting chase swings is what relievers often live on.  But I think there's a chance that come September and perhaps October, we may not trust Jeffress much more than last-year's version of Strop, or the last-year-with-Cubs versions of Grimm or Rondon. 

I think Ross is going to be a gritty vet guy, though.  So I expect that Kimbrel and Jeffress are both going to be allowed very long leashes (relative to the 60-game season), just based on veteran-ness.  Plus Ross is the Cubs scout Theo sent to check Kimbrel out before they signed him, and Ross was all in.  That was then, this is now, of course...  But I suspect the same personal qualities and resilience that Ross has always liked in Kimbrel, and the breaking-ball movement that makes those pitches so hard to throw for strikes, will continue to have Ross give him every opportunity to try to bounce back. 

Kimbrel, he'll have other days.  If he was Kimbrel classic again, or close, obviously that would be huge.  But just getting a Kimbrel who might be kinda average, maybe a 30th-or-40th-percentile-caliber closer, would be anti-awful and pretty helpful. 

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on July 29, 2020, 08:12:15 am
Our closer is just sitting there.  Wick.  Nasty Wick.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 29, 2020, 09:07:07 am
Mills was really good.  That's really cool for him (and the team).  He was good last year, too.  63-mlb innings isn't enough to confirm that he'll stay good, but it's possible that maybe he just actually is pretty competitive most of the time? 

It's been a long tradition/lore to kinda avoid sequencing "similar" starters; I have no idea and kinda doubt that it really matters, or whether the concept has any truth to it. 

But in retrospect, stacking Mills and Hendricks back-to-back would seem to go against that?  Profiles are kinda similar.  Both soft-toss RH curveballers, obviously Hendricks with the change. 

Not sure whether that really actually helps a hitter at all, though.   Are Votto or Castellano any better prepared tonight to face Hendricks having just seen Mills than they would otherwise be, or have any new muscle memory based on 3 AB, or any new "approach" insights that film and Votto's history with Hendricks don't provide anyway?  Plus obviously the detailed movement on Kyle's curve and fastball isn't quite the same as Alec's, so even if yesterday's experience kind of helped them slow down the bat, I'm not sure it would in any significant way help them hit Kyle's movement. 

But congrats to Mills, hope he can keep that up in the majority of his starts.  Obviously the margin is modest, and often a guy with mediocre composite numbers still has three pretty good start for every terrible one, but the bad one still fills up the bad stats. 

Mills could be important long-term; we're paying $35M for Lester and Q as back-end starters; *IF* (hypothetically) Mills was variably better than Q, but at $10M saving, that could be very helpful. 


Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on July 29, 2020, 12:01:48 pm
So it's *early* days for sure, BUT in a season with only 60 games (if it gets that far), we're already almost 10% of the way through!

Most projection systems I've seen suggest that 30 wins gives you a little better than 50/50 chance of getting into the playoffs, with 32 wins bumping that to about 65%, and 34 wins bumping to about 75%.

The Cubs are 4-1, with 55 games left to play. If they play .500 ball from here on out, that would mean a 75% chance of making playoffs.

I know this is a stupid post, but it's still fascinating for me to think through these kinds of implications in so-short a season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on July 29, 2020, 12:38:10 pm
(Boy, was that a STUPID post or what?)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on July 29, 2020, 12:40:46 pm
So it's *early* days for sure, BUT in a season with only 60 games (if it gets that far), we're already almost 10% of the way through!

Most projection systems I've seen suggest that 30 wins gives you a little better than 50/50 chance of getting into the playoffs, with 32 wins bumping that to about 65%, and 34 wins bumping to about 75%.

The Cubs are 4-1, with 55 games left to play. If they play .500 ball from here on out, that would mean a 75% chance of making playoffs.

I know this is a stupid post, but it's still fascinating for me to think through these kinds of implications in so-short a season.

You need to recheck your arithmetic.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 29, 2020, 01:00:24 pm
yeah, big game tonight.  :)   Winning series against two division rivals is great.  But *IF* they could come out 5-1, that would really set them up.  :) . Hard to lose the head-to-heat tiebreaker with Cinci if we got up 3 games now, and if we came out of tonight 4 games ahead of Reds in the standings, that would be pretty significant barrier for them to catch. 

Obviously the Cubs have had big collapses in each of the previous two seasons, so we can do it again. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on July 29, 2020, 02:55:21 pm
You need to recheck your arithmetic.

Lol. I'll show myself to my room now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 29, 2020, 04:49:03 pm
You could make the case tat the #8 seed is actually the best place to end up, because while no one is likely to beat the Dodgers a best of 3 series is probably the best shot.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 29, 2020, 05:47:35 pm
Good point.  The Reds with Castillo and Gray, for example, would have a chance to beat anybody in best-of-3. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 29, 2020, 10:30:31 pm
Sahadev Sharma @sahadevsharma
Cubs bullpen has walked 20 of the 95 batters they've faced, 21.1% walk rate. ERA is 9.64. Not great!


Not unexpected given that they built a bullpen where either Rowan Wick or Kyle Ryan was the most "sure thing" they had.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on July 29, 2020, 11:39:23 pm
In 2011 Cubs had a very hard throwing reliever Chris Carpenter, a 3rd round pick in 2008. Great arm.

Put aside the high walks...I would watch Carpenter and where the catcher was setting up before the pitch and Carpenter rarely was anywhere near where the catcher was set up.

It’s command, as in none.

Cubs now have three relievers with great arms—Norwood, Brothers, Maples— and if you watch the catcher setup, these guys—like Chris Carpenter—consistently are nowhere where the catcher sets up.

No command. Forget the walks. Pitching requires some level of command.

I suppose if rosters get back down to 26, as planned, these three might be leading candidates to exit. Can’t be fun for our catchers to catch these guys.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 30, 2020, 04:52:12 am
Sahadev Sharma @sahadevsharma
Cubs bullpen has walked 20 of the 95 batters they've faced, 21.1% walk rate. ERA is 9.64. Not great!


Not unexpected given that they built a bullpen where either Rowan Wick or Kyle Ryan was the most "sure thing" they had.

I believe John Baker may be available. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on July 30, 2020, 08:49:40 am
In case any of you missed this article from the 24th of July

CHICAGO (AP) — The Chicago Cubs finalized minor-league deals with infielder Derek Dietrich and outfielder Ryan LaMarre on Friday.

Dietrich and LaMarre will report to the team's camp in South Bend, Indiana. The Cubs also announced left-hander Burl Carraway, the team's second-round pick in this year's amateur draft, will join their group of players at their auxiliary site.

The 31-year-old Dietrich, who also can play left field, opted out of his contract with Cincinnati and was released on Monday. He hit a career-high 19 homers last year for the Reds, but finished with a .187 batting average in 113 games.

Dietrich missed the start of summer camp with Cincinnati after he tested positive for the coronavirus.

LaMarre, 31, has played for five big league teams in five seasons. He hit .217 with two homers in 14 games last year with Minnesota.

The 21-year-old Carraway went 6-2 with 11 saves and a 2.47 ERA in his final two seasons at Dallas Baptist. He has a big fastball and might be able to help the Cubs out of their bullpen very soon.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on July 30, 2020, 01:28:31 pm
...It’s command, as in none.

Cubs now have three relievers with great arms—Norwood, Brothers, Maples— and if you watch the catcher setup, these guys—like Chris Carpenter—consistently are nowhere where the catcher sets up.   No command. Forget the walks. Pitching requires some level of command.

I suppose if rosters get back down to 26, as planned, these three might be leading candidates to exit. Can’t be fun for our catchers to catch these guys.

Agree, reb, good points.  I sometimes like to watch for that too, with the catchers.  Especially on fastballs.  We understand the breaking balls are supposed to break, and you're looking for some chase with those.  But the fastball really is supposed to be near target. 

1.  My fear is that it's not just Maples-Norwood-Brothers.  It may also be kimbrel... and Winkler.  It's not like Underwood and Jeffress are command artists, either.  I saw Underwood miss inside with fastball when it was called for outside corner.  And Jeffress had some fastballs that were well adrift, too, much less his breaking stuff. 

2.  We've had much buzz about pitch lab.  I wonder how effective pitch-lab is for improving command?  Quantifying spin rates, measuring which arm slots give best spin rates and break, that's very quantitative and helpful.  But I wonder if it's got any tricks for helping train command?  I'd guess there would be technology for measuring exactly how long the stride length is, and for recording the exact release point and follow-through?  So maybe they can tell a guy "your command gets off when you stride too long, or release too early...".  But I wonder if developing command isn't much harder than improving spin rates and grips? 

3.  To some degree, I wonder whether emphasis on spin rates makes command harder for some guys?  Is it possible that higher-spin pitches have more break and tend to be harder than ever to command?    Kimbrel looked to have had plenty of spin and plenty of motion on Monday.  Winkler seemed to have plenty of movement when I saw him, too. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on July 30, 2020, 01:52:07 pm
Cubs now have three relievers with great arms—Norwood, Brothers, Maples— and if you watch the catcher setup, these guys—like Chris Carpenter—consistently are nowhere where the catcher sets up.

Actually, Norwood and Brothers are much worse at this than Maples.

Chew on that for a minute.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on July 30, 2020, 03:14:59 pm
Chicago Cubs  @Cubs  22m
The #Cubs today recalled RHP Colin Rea from the club’s South Bend Alternate Site. RHP Dillon Maples was optioned to the South Bend Alternate Site.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on July 30, 2020, 03:28:14 pm
Re: our staff and command...I've been saying for years that it is impossible for Contreras to put up any kind of decent framing numbers with our staff's lack of command.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on July 30, 2020, 09:00:49 pm
Sample size of 1 game, but Chatwood seems much better.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on July 31, 2020, 02:21:06 am
Re: our staff and command...I've been saying for years that it is impossible for Contreras to put up any kind of decent framing numbers with our staff's lack of command.

He’s always managed to put up significantly worse framing numbers than whoever his catching partners were.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on July 31, 2020, 02:06:03 pm
The Cubs have signed former Indians closer Cody Allen to a minor league deal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on July 31, 2020, 02:46:09 pm
More on the signing ...

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/07/31/cubs-sign-former-indians-closer-cody-allen-to-minor-league-deal/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on July 31, 2020, 03:50:12 pm
I guess having one shot armed former elite closer isn't enough?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on July 31, 2020, 03:51:56 pm
Fangraphs has Cubs currently at 82.7% likely to reach post-season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on July 31, 2020, 04:05:18 pm
I guess having one shot armed former elite closer isn't enough?

They're building a great bullpen from 5 years ago. Kimbrel, Allen, Jeffress...that's dominant in 2015-16.

Based on this pattern, I've got to think recently DFA'd Kelvin Herrera will be a Cub any day too.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on July 31, 2020, 04:19:23 pm
I guess having one shot armed former elite closer isn't enough?
Kimbrel needs more pressure!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on July 31, 2020, 04:19:54 pm
Rex Brothers was pretty good around then too!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on July 31, 2020, 04:21:05 pm
Bring back Lee Smith!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on July 31, 2020, 04:22:11 pm
Heck, Lee Smith might be our 3rd or 4th best reliever if he came out of retirement for us.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on August 01, 2020, 11:12:50 am
They're building a great bullpen from 5 years ago. Kimbrel, Allen, Jeffress...that's dominant in 2015-16.

Based on this pattern, I've got to think recently DFA'd Kelvin Herrera will be a Cub any day too.
Don’t forget Hunter Strickland...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 01, 2020, 02:14:58 pm
Jon Heyman @JonHeyman
Teams that have seen how the Cubs are operating in a pandemic say they have it “completely buttoned up.” Not to say it will be easy to keep this record, but the Cubs are the 1 team to have ZERO Covid positives, including even on intake.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on August 01, 2020, 02:30:12 pm
If team with the fewest positives come late October gets the trophy the Cubs might be the favs?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on August 02, 2020, 12:40:16 am
Last team standing wins.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 02, 2020, 04:29:02 am
Bullpen ERA: Dodgers 1.06, Cubs 9.75
Bullpen WHIP: Dodgers 0.94, Cubs 1.96
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Tuffy on August 02, 2020, 07:40:43 am
At 6.00 runs per game, the Cubs' offense leads all teams in both leagues.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 02, 2020, 09:11:48 am
https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/cubs-appoint-vijay-tekchandani-health-and-safety-protocol-compliance-officer
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 02, 2020, 09:37:26 am
Patrick Mooney  @PJ_Mooney  27m
The Cubs will be adding lefty Justin Steele to their active roster before today’s game against the Pirates at Wrigley Field, sources said. Steele, 25, will be in position to make his big-league debut as the Cubs try to figure out their bullpen.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 02, 2020, 09:51:08 am
Good luck with that.

Marquez is the guy I’d like to see get a shot. With his heater he has a chance to successful immediately out of the bullpen, and it’s probably better for his development either way to get some competitive pitching in.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 02, 2020, 10:03:24 am
To make room for Justin Steele, will Craig Kimbrel be diagnosed with some heretofore unknown ailment?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 02, 2020, 10:04:23 am
To make room for Justin Steele, will Craig Kimbrel be diagnosed with some heretofore unknown ailment?

How about ending the Maples experiment?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 02, 2020, 10:06:24 am
How about ending the Maples experiment?

Chicago Cubs  @Cubs  22m
The #Cubs today recalled RHP Colin Rea from the club’s South Bend Alternate Site. RHP Dillon Maples was optioned to the South Bend Alternate Site.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on August 02, 2020, 10:33:40 am
Good luck with that.

Marquez is the guy I’d like to see get a shot. With his heater he has a chance to successful immediately out of the bullpen, and it’s probably better for his development either way to get some competitive pitching in.
  Heard Lee Smith was in town.  Had hopes for a bit.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 02, 2020, 10:38:36 am
Norwood to the IL with shoulder inflammation.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 03, 2020, 11:14:13 am
I thought the callup of Steele was interesting.  If there is concern with relievers who can't hit the target with their fastball, I'm not real confident that Steele will be much more accurate than Brothers?

The surprise to me, though, is Steele as opposed to Hultzen.  Last year I thought that Hultzen looked pretty good, both his minor league results, the scouting reports, and his small sample with the Cubs.   I know he's an intelligent guy.  And I know he had arm issues galore and mechanical issues, too.  I wonder if perhaps he hasn't really been "all in", so perhaps hasn't been fully committed to baseball amidst Covid?  Perhaps he's too intelligent for that?  So perhaps he wasn't doing as much throwing and coming to summer camp as tuned up as Steele?  Or perhaps he's just not healthy, and isn't really 100%? 

Or perhaps it's just about roster status?  He's a non-roster guy, so if they call him up yesterday, then if they try to send him out when rosters need to get reduced, they lose control?  Whereas Steele they could call him up, and then send him back down no problem?  I assume that's perhaps the logic? 

May also be that perhaps Steele has just been throwing it pretty well and hitting the target semi-often for South Bend?  His stuff is plenty good.  So *IF* nerves and adrenaline weren't making him extra wild, perhaps he'd be ready to function?  He's never going to be a command artist, I don't imagine. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on August 03, 2020, 12:07:13 pm
It is a shame that there is so little information coming out of South Bend.  I realize that performance in practice sessions are usually meaningless, but it would be nice to at least have something to dream on.

If nothing else, they could tell us who is doing best in the practice sessions.  I would love to hear how Carroway is doing, in the opinion of the coaches who are working with him.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on August 03, 2020, 06:04:12 pm
You know one of the reasons we are feeling fairly good about the Cubs midseason top 30 is that we've add 5 players without the status of other players diminishing due to their 2020 performance.  In any given year more prospects fail than succeed.

Reminds me of ~2 years ago when Arizona Phil raved about the prospects for upcoming Cubs SS-A season based on their performance in split squad games.  I was pretty excited given their youth. Once the season started none of them hit and over time they were demoted and replaced with 22/23 year olds.

So, it'd be great to get beaming reports or any reports out of South Bend.

Sorry about the rambling - the Cardinal news is hitting me hard.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 03, 2020, 07:30:45 pm
Steele, from what I’ve read, can throw strikes but his issue is command inside the strike zone.  Last year he was coming off TJS and he walk more guys, but in 2018 he was doing 5-8% walk percentages at various levels.

He has high spin and throws 92-95 as a starter so the velocity might tick up some too. The prospects guy for Bleacher Nation tweeted that he added a 2700-3000 rpm slider to his curve as well.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 03, 2020, 08:53:52 pm
It is a shame that there is so little information coming out of South Bend.  I realize that performance in practice sessions are usually meaningless, but it would be nice to at least have something to dream on.

If nothing else, they could tell us who is doing best in the practice sessions.  I would love to hear how Carroway is doing, in the opinion of the coaches who are working with him.

Something interesting that I came across is that minor league stadiums have to have their Trackman systems calibrated every year and most teams didn’t have that happen before the shutdown. The company that owns Trackman won’t send out techs to do this so most teams have no data on their alternative sites coming in.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on August 04, 2020, 11:07:19 am
"Through 10 games this season, @Cubs starting pitchers have held their opponents to a .156 batting average.

That's the lowest batting average allowed by any team's starting pitchers through 10 games of a season in the live-ball era (since 1920)."

Wow!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: BearHit on August 04, 2020, 11:28:38 am
We knew Joe Maddon was holding them back
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on August 04, 2020, 01:58:40 pm
Who knew David Ross was God?

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on August 04, 2020, 02:59:34 pm
MLB is impressed with the Cubs' COVID protocols:

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/08/04/kaplan-mlb-reached-out-to-cubs-to-discuss-covid-19-protocols-because-of-how-seriously-theyve-taken-it/

I would have thought that a Ricketts owned team would be ordered NOT to wear masks.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on August 04, 2020, 05:59:46 pm
I would have thought that a Ricketts owned team would be ordered NOT to wear masks.


It's healthy to note that our biases are not always confirmed.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 04, 2020, 06:05:18 pm
MLB is impressed with the Cubs' COVID protocols:

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/08/04/kaplan-mlb-reached-out-to-cubs-to-discuss-covid-19-protocols-because-of-how-seriously-theyve-taken-it/

I would have thought that a Ricketts owned team would be ordered NOT to wear masks.

It's healthy to note that our biases are not always confirmed.

https://www.wowt.com/2020/07/25/gov-ricketts-against-face-mask-mandate/

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on August 04, 2020, 06:15:53 pm
https://omaha.com/news/state_and_regional/ricketts-tells-local-governments-they-wont-get-federal-covid-19-money-if-they-require-masks/article_d15459b9-26df-527e-9899-9f579a3d8597.html
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 04, 2020, 06:19:00 pm
I’d love to see the Ricketts family emails about this one. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on August 04, 2020, 06:24:55 pm
Isn't there a politics thread to bash the Ricketts family views on political issues in?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on August 04, 2020, 06:28:32 pm
Yes, there is.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 04, 2020, 06:55:34 pm
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  37m
Theo, on Ross' impact on Cubs:
"He has stepped in and addressed things that have been lingering for years. ... He has not eased his way in."

Speculation on just what problems Madden let do the lingering?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on August 04, 2020, 07:03:39 pm
https://www.wowt.com/2020/07/25/gov-ricketts-against-face-mask-mandate/


https://omaha.com/news/state_and_regional/ricketts-tells-local-governments-they-wont-get-federal-covid-19-money-if-they-require-masks/article_d15459b9-26df-527e-9899-9f579a3d8597.html


Pete Ricketts has nothing to do with running the Cubs, nor does his despicable right wing father.  The only Ricketts family members that do actually have any direct engagement with the Cubs are Tom & Laura.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 04, 2020, 07:07:36 pm
Pete Ricketts has nothing to do with running the Cubs, nor does his despicable right wing father.  The only Ricketts family members that do actually have any direct engagement with the Cubs are Tom & Laura.

Pete may have nothing to do with it but Joe bought the team.  It seems very unlikely that he forked over several hundred million dollars and then completely stepped away.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on August 04, 2020, 08:14:22 pm
Pete may have nothing to do with it but Joe bought the team.  It seems very unlikely that he forked over several hundred million dollars and then completely stepped away.

This is an old argument in which no minds will be changed. And, as has been already noted, would be more appropriately pursued in the politics and religion thread.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on August 04, 2020, 09:10:44 pm
I don't know where Tom Ricketts stands on any of this, but it is possible to support wearing masks while not believing a mandate is enforceable.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 04, 2020, 11:15:36 pm

Jesse Rogers
@JesseRogersESPN
·
7m
Up to date stats you prob don't see every day.

The Cubs are first in baseball in starter's ERA (1.95) and last in bullpen ERA (7.55).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 04, 2020, 11:48:22 pm
Jesse Rogers
@JesseRogersESPN
·
7m
Up to date stats you prob don't see every day.

The Cubs are first in baseball in starter's ERA (1.95) and last in bullpen ERA (7.55).

In 2019, in a 162 game season (not just 11 games), Nationals had 2nd best starters ERA (behind only Dodgers) and 2nd worst bullpen ERA (ahead of only the Orioles).

As some may recall, Nats won the World Series.

Nats got some bullpen help near the trade deadline—which Cubs can do too—and used SPs out of the bullpen in post-season, which is getting to be more common.

I would not give up on Kimbrel just yet.  Made a horribly-located 2-strike pitch to Mondesi, but he threw better tonight. Think we’ll see Ross using him earlier in games and maybe he can get straightened out before too long. In any case, Cubs need to make a bullpen deal or two by end of this month.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 05, 2020, 12:28:25 am
It's not like the Cubs have the option to give up on Kimbrel even if they want to - their bullpen is a problem even if he turns it around.  Without him it's a shambles.

Whether it's straight-up tipping or a release-point issue, it's pretty obvious hitters know which pitch is coming before Kimbrel releases the ball.  He has to fix that before we can even talk about meaningful improvement.  The stuff itself seems workable enough.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 05, 2020, 02:46:37 am

...lWhether it's straight-up tipping or a release-point issue, it's pretty obvious hitters know which pitch is coming before Kimbrel releases the ball.  He has to fix that before we can even talk about meaningful improvement.  The stuff itself seems workable enough.

Take a look at Baseball Savant’s Statcast data on Kimbrel.

What you will see is that ALL of the hits allowed this season are 4-seamers in very hittable parts of the strike zone. Kimbrel has thrown a total of 2 pitches in these two starts——on a corner.

Of course, his other outing (the first one) was the one he could not throw strikes of any kind and no hits as a result.

So, while it is possible that he is tipping in some form, I doubt that is an issue.

Kimbrel is a 2-pitch pitcher in any case, so it’s not like a guy with a repertoire giving away something from an array of pitches. His fastball command has been terrible. That’s what has to be fixed.

In his first outing, he threw a lot of breaking balls and most were nowhere near the plate. Outing against Royals—a couple of very good curves.

Even 96.2 to 96.7 fastballs are going to get hit hard thrown in very hittable parts of the plate, especially for a guy with only two pitches. Maybe he could get away with that throwing 98.2 to 98.7–at least when throwing the curve consistently for strikes, which he’s not doing enough of either right now.

In his heyday, Kimbrel would consistently get ahead of hitters from the get-go, which would help now if he did it more. But, think he’s lost some confidence in recent seasons and isn’t attacking hitters the same way.

Of course, nobody thinks that Kimbrel has to pitch like the younger version of Kimbrel to be of value. The 2017 version of Wade Davis wasn’t the guy at his peak KC seasons either but mostly got the job done with lesser stuff. So, hoping that Kimbrel can sharpen up with what he has now and get some big outs at some point this season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 05, 2020, 03:59:27 am
He’s getting no swings - none - on the curve.  Yes his location is terrible (just look at the double tonight) but there’s no deception.  They know what’s coming.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 05, 2020, 11:22:26 am
Steele, from what I’ve read, can throw strikes but his issue is command inside the strike zone.  Last year he was coming off TJS and he walk more guys, but in 2018 he was doing 5-8% walk percentages at various levels.

He has high spin and throws 92-95 as a starter so the velocity might tick up some too. The prospects guy for Bleacher Nation tweeted that he added a 2700-3000 rpm slider to his curve as well.

Thanks.  yeah, I get the sense that his velocity, stuff, and spin rate is major league, and when he's at his best he's got a chance to be good.  You are right, that his walk-rate was respectable for his earlier minor-league career.  A caution there is that you can get by on control without command in the low minors.  And that it's probably harder to throw strikes when your fastball velocity increases some; and it's probably harder to throw strikes with your breaking stuff as you add more pitches and permutations, and as you jack up the spin and the break on them. 

Hopefully he'll be a delight, and will have legit stuff with reasonable control and command.  And that last year's wildman was kind of a post-surg thing and will not be more predictive moving forward than his earlier walk rates. 

I saw one of Steele's outings in spring training.  It was just one inning, and obviously guys often aren't even close to locked in early in March before camps closes.  But he looked super wild in that one.  His fastball was all over the place.  IN that single glimpse, his fastball command was horrific.  I think within that game and either the previous or subsequent day, Steele, Maples, and Brothers all pitched... and on that one viewing, Steele looked significantly wilder than either Maples or Brothers. 

Again, it was one glimpse in early March, and he may have been overthrowing to try to impress with velocity.  But I think there's a risk that he might have some wildman challenges. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 05, 2020, 12:09:56 pm
Thanks.  yeah, I get the sense that his velocity, stuff, and spin rate is major league, and when he's at his best he's got a chance to be good.  You are right, that his walk-rate was respectable for his earlier minor-league career.  A caution there is that you can get by on control without command in the low minors.  And that it's probably harder to throw strikes when your fastball velocity increases some; and it's probably harder to throw strikes with your breaking stuff as you add more pitches and permutations, and as you jack up the spin and the break on them. 

Hopefully he'll be a delight, and will have legit stuff with reasonable control and command.  And that last year's wildman was kind of a post-surg thing and will not be more predictive moving forward than his earlier walk rates. 

I saw one of Steele's outings in spring training.  It was just one inning, and obviously guys often aren't even close to locked in early in March before camps closes.  But he looked super wild in that one.  His fastball was all over the place.  IN that single glimpse, his fastball command was horrific.  I think within that game and either the previous or subsequent day, Steele, Maples, and Brothers all pitched... and on that one viewing, Steele looked significantly wilder than either Maples or Brothers. 

Again, it was one glimpse in early March, and he may have been overthrowing to try to impress with velocity.  But I think there's a risk that he might have some wildman challenges. 

Command is usually the last thing to return from TJS too.  I haven't seen much of him to know what his issue really is, but the prospects guys seem to think he can throw strikes, he just doesn't have command within the strike zone.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 05, 2020, 01:06:49 pm
He’s getting no swings - none - on the curve.  Yes his location is terrible (just look at the double tonight) but there’s no deception.  They know what’s coming.

Hitters want to hit the fastball that is right in the hitting zone—and that’s what Kimbrel is giving them. By and large, his curves have either been way out of the zone or pretty good ones in the zone that hitters will take.

Hardly anybody is looking to hit a curve unless (a) it’s a hanger and/or (b) it's a 2-strike count and have to protect against everything.

Put another way, If you were a hitter facing Kimbrel today, what would be your approach?

You’d sit on a heater and ignore anything else (absent a 2-strike count) because he will give you a 4-seamer in the hitting zone. You don’t need a tip. You just need to recognize what his pitching pattern is due to lack of fastball command.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on August 05, 2020, 01:19:52 pm
So he needs to locate his fastball better if the curve is to elicit swings.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 05, 2020, 01:26:35 pm
He has to give hitters a reason to swing at a curve.

Right now, there isn’t one.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 05, 2020, 01:40:21 pm
Chicago Cubs  @Cubs  15m
Our 7/30 rainout vs. the Reds has been rescheduled for Saturday, 8/29.  We'll play a doubleheader starting at 3:10 p.m. CDT. Each game will be seven innings.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 05, 2020, 02:14:18 pm
He has to give hitters a reason to swing at a curve.

Right now, there isn’t one.

Hitters have less than 1/2 of a second to determine what a pitch is, if it is going to be a strike and if the should swing.  If Kimbrel is tunneling his pitches hitters will have a lot harder time determining all of that and somebody would chase at a bad curve ball in the dirt at least once.  If the curve is coming at a different angle they can just ignore it and wait for a fastball.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 05, 2020, 02:53:59 pm
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  7m
Hottovy: Quintana on target for 2-inning sim game Thursday. Will probably get one more "start" after that before Cubs decide next step. Team wants to keep monitoring how MLB rotation is rolling, especially Alec Mills.
Sounds like moving Q to bullpen isn't out of the question.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 05, 2020, 03:11:07 pm
Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  15m
Hottovy, a KC area native, will continue to follow protocols during Cubs' visit. "I’m not leaving the hotel." Bummed he can't have lunch with his mom or see his sister, a third-grade teacher. "Can't do it."
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 05, 2020, 03:15:08 pm
Hitters have less than 1/2 of a second to determine what a pitch is, if it is going to be a strike and if the should swing.  If Kimbrel is tunneling his pitches hitters will have a lot harder time determining all of that and somebody would chase at a bad curve ball in the dirt at least once.  If the curve is coming at a different angle they can just ignore it and wait for a fastball.

That concept, tunneling, is more useful for a pitcher with multiple pitches, like Darvish or the gold standard of Maddux.

Kimbrel is a 2-pitch guy.  Sure, if there is an obvious giveaway between these two pitches, it is easier to sit on a pitch. But, Kimbrel has never been a good example of a guy who relies on deception or the need for a precise common route of the ball out of the hand.

Think this more of a Baseball 101 problem:  commanding the fastball and getting ahead of hitters so they can't ignore the curve.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 05, 2020, 05:09:06 pm
Hitters have less than 1/2 of a second to determine what a pitch is, if it is going to be a strike and if the should swing.  If Kimbrel is tunneling his pitches hitters will have a lot harder time determining all of that and somebody would chase at a bad curve ball in the dirt at least once.  If the curve is coming at a different angle they can just ignore it and wait for a fastball.

That's a great point.  Still, hitters are pretty quick at using that 1/2 of a second to diagnose stuff. 

One of the things they tend to be good at is discerning whether fastballs are on trajectory for the strike zone or not.   I think part of the issue with Kimbrel's curve is that even if a hitter doesn't realize it's curve out of the hand, his curves don't look like fastballs that are on trajectory to be swingable strikes.  Mondesi, Kimbrel got two strikes on him.  He was in swing mode, and almost swung far enough that it was *almost* strike three; far enough that it was worth an appeal.  But the pitch bounced in front of the plate.  I don't think Mondesi held up because it was tipped and he knew it was a curve coming; I think he held up barely in time because he knew that even if it was a fastball, it was on trajectory to be a ball low and he shouldn't swing at it, fastball or whatever. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 05, 2020, 07:08:27 pm
People haven’t swung at curves that have been thrown for strikes.

Kimbrel today said he got into bad mechanical habits and he was showing too much of the ball. Guys knew it was coming.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 05, 2020, 07:11:36 pm
People haven’t swung at curves that have been thrown for strikes.

Kimbrel today said he got into bad mechanical habits and he was showing too much of the ball. Guys knew it was coming.

That can't be right, Reb already refuted it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on August 05, 2020, 07:37:04 pm
I hate this Cardinal series coming up.  There are so many guys out that when we win, they'll shrug it off and if they manage to steal one or two we'll never hear the end of it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on August 05, 2020, 07:48:26 pm
Who cares if they shrug it off?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on August 05, 2020, 07:54:07 pm
P2, you have to be behind enemy lines.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on August 05, 2020, 08:17:06 pm
People who don’t live in Cardinal country have no idea...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 05, 2020, 08:21:27 pm
People haven’t swung at curves that have been thrown for strikes.

Kimbrel today said he got into bad mechanical habits and he was showing too much of the ball. Guys knew it was coming.

You need to stop parsing quotes that you read and leaving out the parts that don’t fit your narrative.

Hottovy and Kimbrel:

"You have to get them to honor it," Hottovy said of Kimbrel's curve ball, "and to get them to honor it, you have to consistently be able to throw that pitch in the strike zone, and then be able to attack (with the) fastball."

Kimbrel has faced three different teams: The Reds, Pirates and Royals. None of them have swung at his curve ball.

"I think at times it's one of two things," Kimbrel said, "Either I'm showing it too early or it's not starting as a strike, or they've already had that game plan to eliminate the curve ball."

In the Reds' case, it was the latter. Cincinnati rookie Tyler Stephenson told reporters as much after the game. He laid off three curve balls in his at-bat against Kimbrel.”

So, Kimbrel is positing that opposing hitters are “eliminating” the curve ball, as at least one opposing hitter has said. The “showing” comment is one possibility he mentions and, naturally, the other points he makes you ignore.

Of course, that’s exactly what I suggested. Hitters seem to be sitting on one pitch. We know why. The 4-seamer has been ineffective, so they want to hit that.

Further, no one takes issue with the notion that poor command can be a mechanical issue—-the other thing that Kimbrel posits. That is not the same as “tipping” pitches or that hitters “know” what’s coming.



Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 05, 2020, 08:24:26 pm
Here’s piece about the Hottovy/Kimbrel comments. Lot of stuff there about improving Kimbrel command.

https://sports.yahoo.com/inside-bullpen-cubs-craig-kimbrel-231149646.html
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 06, 2020, 09:41:06 am

Sahadev Sharma
@sahadevsharma
·
7m
The Cubs have optioned lefties Rex Brothers and Justin Steele to their South Bend alternate site to reduce their roster to the required 28 men
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 06, 2020, 10:31:51 am
You need to stop parsing quotes that you read and leaving out the parts that don’t fit your narrative.

Hottovy and Kimbrel:

"You have to get them to honor it," Hottovy said of Kimbrel's curve ball, "and to get them to honor it, you have to consistently be able to throw that pitch in the strike zone, and then be able to attack (with the) fastball."

Kimbrel has faced three different teams: The Reds, Pirates and Royals. None of them have swung at his curve ball.

"I think at times it's one of two things," Kimbrel said, "Either I'm showing it too early or it's not starting as a strike, or they've already had that game plan to eliminate the curve ball."

In the Reds' case, it was the latter. Cincinnati rookie Tyler Stephenson told reporters as much after the game. He laid off three curve balls in his at-bat against Kimbrel.”

So, Kimbrel is positing that opposing hitters are “eliminating” the curve ball, as at least one opposing hitter has said. The “showing” comment is one possibility he mentions and, naturally, the other points he makes you ignore.

Of course, that’s exactly what I suggested. Hitters seem to be sitting on one pitch. We know why. The 4-seamer has been ineffective, so they want to hit that.

Further, no one takes issue with the notion that poor command can be a mechanical issue—-the other thing that Kimbrel posits. That is not the same as “tipping” pitches or that hitters “know” what’s coming.





Jackass, I saw the quote on twitter, take it up with the author and at the time it wasn't linked to a story.

And to eliminate the curve they have to know it is coming.  If it is effectively tunneled you wouldn't know it is coming.

Jesse Rogers
@JesseRogersESPN
Craig Kimbrel on his struggles: "I got myself into some bad habits mechanically. I wasn't finishing the way I should, showing the ball more than I should...You leave a fastball over the middle, it's going to get hit."

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on August 06, 2020, 11:53:29 am
So...  10-2????

Just a tad bit higher % then my predicted 40-20 finish.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 06, 2020, 12:32:42 pm
Jackass, I saw the quote on twitter, take it up with the author and at the time it wasn't linked to a story.

And to eliminate the curve they have to know it is coming.  If it is effectively tunneled you wouldn't know it is coming.

Jesse Rogers
@JesseRogersESPN
Craig Kimbrel on his struggles: "I got myself into some bad habits mechanically. I wasn't finishing the way I should, showing the ball more than I should...You leave a fastball over the middle, it's going to get hit."

The Osteopath getting a bit testy, no?  Calling me a “jackass.” Calm down and behave yourself.

I’m sure you understand that hitters often come to the plate with a plan. Kimbrel said as much about the current situation. It doesn’t mean tipping pitches or that hitters “know” what’s coming. In his case, their plan is to sit on a pitch (i.e. fastball) and he’s been giving them “a fastball over the middle” and that mostly explains what’s happening. Baseball 101. Tunnel yourself out of that.

Also, “showing the ball” doesn’t mean tipping the type of pitch coming. It means a mechanical issue making it easier for hitters to follow path of the pitched ball earlier than the pitcher might want. Obviously, some pitchers are exceptionally good at that. Kimbrel isn’t one of those. Perhaps he can improve. Not sure can say the same about your name-calling.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on August 06, 2020, 03:41:34 pm
The Cubs have signed Kelvim Herrera to a minor league deal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on August 06, 2020, 03:47:04 pm
Also getting a minor league deal is a 30-year old pitcher named Matt Dermody, who supposedly pitched for the Blue Jays in parts of '16 and '17...never heard of him...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 06, 2020, 04:00:55 pm
Called it.

They're building a great bullpen from 5 years ago. Kimbrel, Allen, Jeffress...that's dominant in 2015-16.

Based on this pattern, I've got to think recently DFA'd Kelvin Herrera will be a Cub any day too.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 06, 2020, 04:49:34 pm
The Cubs have signed Kelvim Herrera to a minor league deal.

Wow, would getting him have been nice 4-6 years ago. 

What's happened to him?  He's still thrown 50 games a year for the last couple, just lousy ones.  Usually I assume when a guy gets washed up, he's had surgery or something. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on August 06, 2020, 04:49:35 pm
LOL. Who called that? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 06, 2020, 04:56:04 pm
Sahadev Sharma
@sahadevsharma
·
7m
The Cubs have optioned lefties Rex Brothers and Justin Steele to their South Bend alternate site to reduce their roster to the required 28 men

So, does that just leave Ryan as a lefty? 

Is Hultzen hanging out down in south Bend?  Or does he have an injury of some sort, or headed out to medical school or something more cerebral? 

I admit to some degree, given our weird bullpen, I don't fully mind just running with a Ryan + righties pen.  Simplifies things.  Let the righties pitch, and take what they give you versus lefties.  Less mid-inning switches is fine with me. 

Not sure he'd be any good in the pen, but maybe Quintana can return as a lefty relief specialist?  :):)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 06, 2020, 04:58:11 pm
Bleacher Nation on Matt Dermody

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/08/01/cubs-reportedly-sign-big-lefty-matt-dermody-out-of-independent-ball/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on August 06, 2020, 05:18:33 pm
In many situations, using a RH pitcher to pitch around a tough LH hitter may be more sensible than having a LH reliever pitch to two RH hitters.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 06, 2020, 06:44:05 pm
All this dumpster diving is getting embarrassing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on August 07, 2020, 10:10:27 am
The Athletic has a good article on how the Yankees and Cubs have set themselves apart in how they've dealt with Covid-19.

“It comes from the top,” said Ian Happ, the union representative for the Cubs. “It comes from what the Ricketts family was willing to provide for us, which was everything and anything we could have possibly needed to make it through this. Theo and (GM) Jed (Hoyer) did a great job of thinking through what we would need. The way that the entire staff has operated, the way that they’ve been compliant … everything from top to bottom has been super-professional. And I think that’s why we’re ahead on a lot of those things.”

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/arlo-guthrie-unveils-pandemic-inspired-stephen-foster-cover-hard-times-come-again-no-more-1034888/?fbclid=IwAR3qTp1MDItBP46-CPA0jurWfcDNppgSbu1IxJdOhWdwwJuTBPWqTvOFL_c
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 07, 2020, 12:04:45 pm
Cardinals have another positive test. Tonight’s game is postponed.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on August 07, 2020, 01:20:30 pm
Make them play with what they have. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on August 07, 2020, 01:34:41 pm
Seriously, this needs to stop, whether it's Miami, St. Louis, Philly...anybody.  It's not fair to the other team to have to sit idly because the other team's players HAD to go to a casino.  Play or forfeit.  No more postponements. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 07, 2020, 05:19:21 pm
MLB hasn’t officially announced it yet, but several writers are now saying the entire series has been postponed.

The Cubs don’t go to St. Louis again, but the Cardinals come to Chicago twice. All make-ups should be played at Wrigley.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 07, 2020, 06:48:34 pm
Seriously, this needs to stop, whether it's Miami, St. Louis, Philly...anybody.  It's not fair to the other team to have to sit idly because the other team's players HAD to go to a casino.  Play or forfeit.  No more postponements. 

I wonder how close we are to that point.  What if teams follow all the protocols and still get a positive test?  Where do you draw the line and how do you verify?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 07, 2020, 06:55:42 pm
If MLB sticks with 16 postseason teams they'll be playing well into November at this rate.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Tuffy on August 07, 2020, 07:17:22 pm
If only one team can't field enough players, they should have to forfeit.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 07, 2020, 07:48:25 pm

Ken Rosenthal
@Ken_Rosenthal
·
17m
MLB officially announces postponement of Cubs-Cardinals series and says two additional STL players and a staff member have tested positive in samples collected the past two days. Brings total of positive tests with club to 16 - nine players, seven staffers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 08, 2020, 03:12:08 am
Cubs have a scheduled off-day this coming Monday. So, that will be four days without games. Cards are scheduled to play Bucs that Monday. So no make-up game that day.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: mO on August 10, 2020, 09:36:17 am
Dietrich requested, granted release

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2020/08/09/derek-dietrich-requests-release-from-the-chicago-cubs-whove-granted-it/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 10, 2020, 04:13:44 pm
Pulling this from the BBFL topic because it's really more about the Cubs...

Pitchers are going down like flies this season.

There has been a lot of talk about how the Cubs are handling COVID procedures exceptionally well. But (knock on wood) they also seem to be one of the few teams who figured out how to get their starters ready for the season. All five were ready to go at least 80 pitches from day one, and the only injury has been Quintana's fluke dish washing accident.

I wonder what kind of system they set up during the shutdown to keep their starters at a place where they could ramp up in 3 weeks so effectively.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 10, 2020, 04:34:10 pm
One of the other clubs that got its pitchers ready is Cleveland, who Cubs play on Tuesday and Wednesday—at least until Zach Plesac  messed up the protocols this week.

Of its five SPs, worst ERA is 3.24, two are under 2.00, and Indians as a team have yet to give up more than 4 runs in a game this season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 10, 2020, 04:35:23 pm
I wonder if they didn't just end up there independently.  Sounded like Hendricks and Lester both had their own self-directed independent approaches, hendricks throwing a lot, Lester throwing hardly any. 

May be that the Cubs having a really, really old staff with veterans, and some smart guys, maybe they kinda already know themselves well and know how to get themselves ready?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on August 10, 2020, 05:41:08 pm
Pulling this from the BBFL topic because it's really more about the Cubs...

There has been a lot of talk about how the Cubs are handling COVID procedures exceptionally well. But (knock on wood) they also seem to be one of the few teams who figured out how to get their starters ready for the season. All five were ready to go at least 80 pitches from day one, and the only injury has been Quintana's fluke dish washing accident.

I wonder what kind of system they set up during the shutdown to keep their starters at a place where they could ramp up in 3 weeks so effectively.

I wonder to what extent this is impacted by the Cubs low velo starters?

All of Hendricks, Mills, Lester are slow. Q, when healthy, is, too.

Darvish can pump 98mph when he wants, but more so than any "power" pitcher I'm aware of, will also just cruise at 92-93 for a while. He dials it up and down a *lot*.

Chatwood more consistently pitches at higher velocity, but that's just 1 out of 5 starters.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 10, 2020, 06:42:36 pm
Or the Cubs have been lucky so far.

Health and the ability to avoid temptations of going out are going to be really important this year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 11, 2020, 12:53:46 am
Jordan Bastian
@MLBastian
Updates on IL pitchers via Cubs GM Jed Hoyer:

• Quintana scheduled to throw 3 IP Tuesday (South Bend) [sim game]
• Wieck throwing bullpen Tuesday
• Norwood throwing bullpen today

All progressing well so far
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on August 11, 2020, 10:41:56 am
Health and the ability to avoid temptations of going out are going to be really important this year.

I wonder if good veteran leadership plays a role in this for the Cubs too.  The Titans posted an article the other day about how one of their veteran "don't want to mess with" offensive linemen, Dennis Kelly, was enforcing the Covid protocols on the team, going right down to getting on to players for not wearing their masks properly. 

It seems like the Cubs players have talked about how their clubhouse culture has bought into doing things the right way with this.  We haven't really heard much if the Cubs have any clubhouse enforcers like that, but perhaps when you have players like Bryant, Rizzo, Lester, etc. who know what it felt like to win the World Series and probably want to win another one, it might help tighten the culture a little bit.  David Ross, being a longtime veteran leader player, might be better at tightening protocols on the team than a lot of other managers as well.  It seems like that kind of leadership is probably lacking in the Cardinals, Marlins, and Indians clubhouses at least.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: BearHit on August 11, 2020, 10:47:30 am
Not so much about winning - but caring that all of your team mates have families too - the big picture
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on August 11, 2020, 11:24:14 am
Not so much about winning - but caring that all of your team mates have families too - the big picture
For that very reason, any and all players who deliberately flaunted the rules like these casino Cardinals and Cleveland two should be suspended for the season.  Sitting out a couple weeks is weak.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: PRCubFan on August 11, 2020, 09:45:35 pm
https://twitter.com/JesseRogersESPN/status/1293281559571726342

Rizzo is such a jerk.  :-)

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on August 11, 2020, 10:48:35 pm
https://twitter.com/JesseRogersESPN/status/1293281559571726342

Rizzo is such a jerk.  :-)

Ha!  Oh wow, that is great!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 11, 2020, 11:49:48 pm
I'm sure that many of you remember that Kipnis came pretty close in the bottom of the 9th to hitting a Mazeroski homer to end game 7 of the 2016 WS.

Kipnis got a terrible hanging slider from Chapman on a 1-1 count and hit it really well but pulled it foul.  Jed Hoyer later said that he first thought that the Cubs had been walked off when the bat made contact.

Well, that would have changed history.  Glad that Rizzo can do the bit with Kipnis now. 

Almost wasn't so funny.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on August 12, 2020, 10:41:30 am
Boys just wanna have fun.
https://www.facebook.com/Cubs/videos/2867564430014673

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 12, 2020, 02:46:53 pm
Several unofficial tweets indicate that Adbert Alzolay has been called up.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 12, 2020, 02:52:55 pm
I wonder in whose place, or why? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 12, 2020, 03:36:42 pm
He might also like drinking coffee in the morning.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 13, 2020, 09:45:00 am
Bob Nightengale  @BNightengale  12h
The #Cubs (12-3) running away with the NL Central with 5 1/2 game lead. They have an .800 winning percentage. No one in #MLB even has .700 winning percentage. Magic Number: 39
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 13, 2020, 08:24:53 pm
During the game, Rosenthal said the Cubs and Cardinals will likely play double headers on Monday and Wednesday next week.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 13, 2020, 09:30:33 pm
Jordan Bastian @MLBastian
Yu Darvish with Cubs...

1st 26 starts (2018-19):

4.99 ERA
160 K
70 BB
.228 AVG (117-513)
137 IP

Last 17 starts (2019-20):

2.56 ERA
145 K
11 BB
.192 AVG (73-381)
105.2 IP
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on August 13, 2020, 09:32:06 pm
Darvish has just been brilliant so far.  We badly needed this from him this season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 13, 2020, 09:38:09 pm
Coming into tonight, Kyle Hendricks was leading NL pitchers in fWAR, and Darvish was 7th (in 3 starts--all pitchers ahead of him had 4 starts except for Trevor Bauer). I suspect that after tonight's start, Darvish is #1 and Hendricks is #2.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 13, 2020, 09:44:46 pm
What a shame we don't have Jiggy here to remind us that Asians are soft and fragile.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 13, 2020, 10:10:07 pm
..
70 BB
137 IP

Last 17 starts (2019-20):
11 BB
105.2 IP

Over that latter sample, the walk rate is 20% (on a per-inning rate) than over the front sample. 
Per inning, .52 walks/inning => 0.104 walks/inning. 

Pretty radical transformation for a pitcher in his 30's. 

Doesn't need to be quite that extreme, but I'd love to see Hottovy pull off a fraction of that walk-reduction with Kimbrel and Winkler, too!  :):).
(OK, I've given up on that happening for poor Maples.).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 13, 2020, 10:16:33 pm
Chatwood's walk-per-9 rate, 18-19-20:  8.2 - 4.3 - 2.4. 

He got clobbered last game, which was weird because he didn't walk anybody.  And being 3-appearances into the season, who knows where he'll go from here. 

But *IF* both Darvish AND Chatwood had radical reductions in their walk rates while working with Hottovy, that might look pretty impressive on his resume, if at some point he wants to look for a job elsewhere.  "Man, look what he did with Darvish and Chatwood..." would be what a lot of hopeful fans would be thinking...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on August 13, 2020, 10:24:20 pm
Something that crossed my mind tonight, but once Quintana comes back, would there be any potential for Chatwood to make a Ryan Dempster type transition to closer or late inning reliever?  Maybe that last Royals start he had was a complete fluke, and we wouldn't want to take him out of the rotation.  Still, that might be something worth kicking around. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 13, 2020, 11:10:15 pm
Something that crossed my mind tonight, but once Quintana comes back, would there be any potential for Chatwood to make a Ryan Dempster type transition to closer or late inning reliever?  Maybe that last Royals start he had was a complete fluke, and we wouldn't want to take him out of the rotation.  Still, that might be something worth kicking around. 

With thought and come playoffs with maybe zillions of off days, maybe you'll talk me into it.  :)

But my gut reaction really doesn't like that idea at all.  Chatwood has really good stuff, was excellent his other two starts.  I really like what he can bring to the rotation, and his stuff.  I think good Chatwood is probably way better than Q.  And the rotation has been doing so well, I'd really prefer not to mess with it, or to bring in another soft-tosser.  Bullpen is thin and short on lefties, *IF* Q has anything to offer, I think he can best do that in the pen.  I wouldn't mess with anything right now.  (If Chatwood stacks a couple of outings like last one, of course, I might change my tune...  But I'm pretty pro-Chatwood right now. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 14, 2020, 01:03:23 am
During the game, Rosenthal said the Cubs and Cardinals will likely play double headers on Monday and Wednesday next week.

Sounds like it is official.  (Considering, of course, that it is the Cardinals)

Derrick S. Goold  @dgoold  5h
#stlcards will play three doubleheaders in Chicago -- Saturday, Monday and Wednesday. The latter two coming in Wrigley vs #Cubs.


That comes to eight games in the next six days for the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 14, 2020, 08:20:20 am
..That comes to eight games in the next six days for the Cubs.

How long does it take for a "stretched out" guy to get "unstretched"? 

In summer camp, the story was that we'd need multi-inning relievers, and relievers were being stretched out to that effect.  But given that the rotation has been giving ≥6 innings with only a couple of extensions, I think there have been only a couple of relief 2-inning efforts, and I'm not sure any with >7 batters. 

So will guys who were stretched out to be able to go 2-3 in summer camp still have that capacity, perhaps even more so because they are now so well rested?  Or will 3 weeks of non-use have removed it? 

That will be interesting and fun, and maybe a nice opportunity to see some of the reliever mish-mash. 

We've got 9 relievers.  *IF* the regular starter was able to give ≥5 innings in each of the M-T-W days, that could leave like ≤9, 2, and 9 innings to pick up on those days.  If a couple guys could go an extra inning (starters included), I'd think Ross has the numbers to make this work without excess stress.

Might be a cool opportunity for Colin Rea to maybe get a start and see if he might go 3 or 4.  I assume he was stretching for rotation work at South Bend? 
*I wonder if they'll try to rush Quintana back to start one of those?
*Or perhaps call up Alzolay to start one of them? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 14, 2020, 08:20:32 am
Do the special rules allow any extra roster spots for double-headers?  For example, Alzolay on Monday and Q on Wednesday, without needing to cut anybody? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 14, 2020, 08:30:35 am
Do the special rules allow any extra roster spots for double-headers?  For example, Alzolay on Monday and Q on Wednesday, without needing to cut anybody? 

Yes.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 14, 2020, 09:21:27 am
Thanks.  So then we'll have 10 non-rotation guys available for each of those days, including some "stretched" guys. 

might not be too bad at all.  Probably the key is that the rotation starters keep plugging away.  Chatwood got hammered last time, and Lester and Mills are probably both subject to pretty short starts *if* their stuff is off. 

But otherwise, a double-header is maybe like a 14-inning extra-inning game?  Only much less stressful, both because you have the extra pitcher available, and you know it's going 14 in advance, so you can pace your relievers accordingly, as opposed to 3 pitchers in the 9th and 2 more in the 10th and then running out of pitchers as the game extends unpredictably.  Plus with DH, *IF* you've got a guy who can extend for an extra inning or two, you don't need to pull him for a pinch hitter. 

Should be fun, I think!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: jacey1 on August 14, 2020, 12:14:40 pm
Sounds like it is official.  (Considering, of course, that it is the Cardinals)

Derrick S. Goold  @dgoold  5h
#stlcards will play three doubleheaders in Chicago -- Saturday, Monday and Wednesday. The latter two coming in Wrigley vs #Cubs.


That comes to eight games in the next six days for the Cubs.
I realize i had the team finishing less than .500 for this season and so far Im pleasantly surprised....
Lets go 6-2 in those next six days!!! 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 14, 2020, 12:16:38 pm
Chicago Cubs  @Cubs  21m
Our Aug. 7-9 series at St. Louis has been rescheduled as three 7-inning doubleheaders at Wrigley Field.

#Cubs will be home team for Game 1. Cardinals home team for Game 2.

8/17, first pitch 4:15 p.m. (CDT)
8/19, 1:20 p.m.
9/5, 4:15 p.m.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on August 14, 2020, 12:18:52 pm
The Cubs have lost more games in the past week or so then the Cardinals.

Cubs don't stand a chance.  The Cardinals haven't lost in over two weeks.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on August 14, 2020, 12:34:29 pm
There is a reason why the Cardinals have not lost in a week.

Everyone knows that the Umpires favor them.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 14, 2020, 12:36:23 pm
Think positively.  This gives the Cubs an opportunity to put A LOT of space between themselves and the rest of the division.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 16, 2020, 01:43:28 pm
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  58m

Some moves pregame...

Cubs place Tyler Chatwood on 10-day IL (retro to Aug. 13) with mid-back strain. A development that happened this morning. Ross said yesterday Chatwood was in plans for Monday.

RHP Jason Adam selected from South Bend. RHP Jharel Cotton DFA'd.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on August 16, 2020, 03:12:10 pm
Things could go south for the Cubs in a big hurry.  I'm not optimistic.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on August 16, 2020, 03:17:01 pm
Cardinals start to play, Milwaukee comes to town, Cubs fold up.  Back up the truck, trade'em cheap.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 16, 2020, 07:26:54 pm
Clearly Kimbrel pitching well is the problem.  His form is inversely related to our success.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 18, 2020, 06:01:19 pm
Chicago Cubs  @Cubs  24m
Today’s #Cubs roster moves:

- Placed OF Steven Souza Jr. on 10-day IL (retroactive to Aug. 17) with a right hamstring strain

- Selected contract of INF Hernán Pérez from the club’s South Bend Alternate Site

- Transferred LHP Brad Wieck to 45-day IL
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 18, 2020, 06:49:46 pm
Wonder how Cody Allen's doing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 18, 2020, 09:11:56 pm
I wonder what it would take to extend Happ right now. He's looking like a star, so he might want to bet on himself. But it's also still a small sample, so maybe he'd be interested in security.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 19, 2020, 07:30:55 am
Darvish is up to 95.1 on the 4-seamer (three pre-TJ seasons: 92.8, 92.9, 92.4).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on August 19, 2020, 10:52:22 am
Sharma has an article on the Cubs' offense that is very heavy with interesting quotes from Ross, as well as specific analysis of the struggles Bryant, Baez, Schwarber and Contreras have had.

After typing "the struggles Bryant, Baez, Schwarber and Contreras have had" I found myself scratching my head about how the heck the Cubs can be having such generally successful offensive results this season with those four struggling.

https://theathletic.com/2004210/2020/08/18/how-the-cubs-recent-losing-streak-exposed-their-offensive-flaws/?source=dailyemail
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on August 19, 2020, 11:06:26 am
I didn't feel all that negative after reading the article.  Regression means improvement for the struggling hitters.  The difficulties would be less noticeable if multiple front line players were not struggling at the same time. Just gotta limit the number of these bad streaks.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: BearHit on August 19, 2020, 11:07:26 am
Good pitching hides offensive weaknesses
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 19, 2020, 12:08:19 pm
Thanks for article, Ron.  Couple thoughts:
1.  Happ, Heyward, Kipnis, Bote, obviously it's been the non-stars that have been carrying the offense.
2.  As P2 notes, reversion towards normal seems variably likely in all cases.  The "stars" will likely produce more; the support guys less. 
3.  To some degree, the stars just are what they've always been.  No improvement.  Maybe coincidentally a little bit worse, but that's just a sample fluke, probably.  Maybe a little worse, because they are getting older, so Bryant is hurt more often, Contreras is perhaps tired more often, etc.. 
4.  Schwarber's 2nd-half burst last year was hoped to reflect an emergence as a star slugger, that would endure as a new normal.  This year's early results don't reinforce that. 
5.  The article confirmed what's seemed observationally true:  it's not like the stars have been chasing particularly.  They've just been having a hard time hitting strikes. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 19, 2020, 12:26:11 pm
Eno Sarris has theorizing that the Summer camp featured just the teams pitchers and in a normal spring training you looks at multiples of pitchers so it isn't surprising that offenses have struggled so far.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on August 19, 2020, 12:33:20 pm
One of the Cardinal announcers, sorry I had to listen to them since MLB won't let me get Cub/Cardinals games in my region, made the point that many of the regulars are struggling or will struggle in the absence of fans and normal activity.  Going through one's normal pre-game routines, getting "pumped", and concentration start to fade as the spectator-less season progresses.   On top of that, the short season will cause, as Baez is a good example, players who are not performing to his or our expectations to begin pressing because, hey, we're halfway through and I'm batting .180.    Does explain why some of these AAA and AAAA players doing so well.  This is the big time to them, fans or not.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on August 19, 2020, 12:59:32 pm
The team of McLaughlin/EdmOnds hasn't been as bad as some of their announcing pairs in years past, to be fair...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on August 19, 2020, 05:49:35 pm
Edmonds is pretty good. Fair and knowledgeable. Also not a screaming homer.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on August 19, 2020, 05:56:04 pm
Of course, he played for both teams.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 20, 2020, 02:13:49 pm
ESPN has a piece up about trade deadline candidates.

Anybody interested in any of these relievers they mention?

RELIEVER

Possible solutions: Ken Giles, Mychal Givens, Heath Hembree, Greg Holland, Joe Jimenez, Keone Kela, Ian Kennedy, Brandon Kintzler, Richard Rodriguez, Trevor Rosenthal, Chris Stratton, Tony Watson, Brandon Workman.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on August 20, 2020, 02:22:06 pm
Heath Hembree.  Cuz the name is cool.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 20, 2020, 02:59:48 pm
I think Tony Watson is the only lefty on that list, which is what the Cubs really need. But I'm not sure he's that good anymore. I'd assume he's a pretty likely target.

Giles, Kela, and Workman are the most interesting to me if they go for a righty (although I think Kela has had a few clubhouse incidents with teammates, so I don't know if he'd be a fit). A Kintzler reunion would be fine too, but I'd rather get someone who misses bats.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 20, 2020, 03:14:30 pm
Don’t see it happening but, aside from the bullpen, could see Cubs upgrading at DH.

He has two prohibitively expensive years left on his contract, so isn’t going to happen, but JD Martinez would be a nice fit baseball-wise—kind of like Castellanos was in 2019. Not sure anybody reasonably available out there who's a better offensive player than Caratini, but if Theo can find him, could see that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on August 20, 2020, 03:28:45 pm
I'd rather sign Castellanos when he opts out of his deal with the Reds.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 20, 2020, 03:41:31 pm
I'd rather sign Castellanos when he opts out of his deal with the Reds.

After the season is a whole different matter than maybe doing something this season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 20, 2020, 03:55:42 pm
I'd be kind of surprised if Castellanos opted out this year with so much COVID uncertainty. He still has another opt out after 2021, so I think he'll wait to take that. I doubt the Cubs will be spending this offseason anyway.

Hoerner has looked like he's not ready for MLB, and it doesn't seem like Ross is interested in giving Kipnis or Bote an opportunity to run with the job at second base. So a Tommy La Stella reunion would be interesting if the Cubs traded for a hitter. He's a free agent at the end of the year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 20, 2020, 04:06:03 pm
Yeah, La Stella makes a lot of sense.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on August 20, 2020, 04:09:03 pm
After the season is a whole different matter than maybe doing something this season.
True...I was thinking financially more than competitively...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 21, 2020, 04:52:53 pm
Hoerner has been really unlucky this year. You’d like more balls in the air, but he upped his EV from 85 to 90 mph. He’s walking and the strikeouts are sub 20%. His xBA is .276 and xOBA is .327 vs the .204 BA and .245 OBA.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on August 21, 2020, 06:16:59 pm
Hoerner is solid. He just needs a hot streak.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on August 22, 2020, 10:17:05 am
From Bleacher Nation:

"The Cubs plopped away two more bases loaded situations last night, so of course I had to check if it has really been as bad as we feel. Actually? It’s worse. By the nature of the situation, teams tend to quite a bit better overall when the bases are loaded. Overall MLB is .282/.334/.445 with a 111 wRC+. The Cubs, in the 4th most PAs with the bases loaded, are hitting a mind-numbing .194/.222/.194, good for a 16(!) wRC+. The Cubs are 84% worse than league average when they get the bases loaded! To be sure, it’s been only 36 plate appearances, but talk about 36 painful plate appearances: at the moment you have the opportunity to change the game in a fundamental way, when the situation is set up for you to be much BETTER than average, the Cubs have hit like a terrible, terrible-hitting pitcher."

That's pathetic!
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 22, 2020, 11:14:33 am
https://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/team/_/table/batting/sort/strikeouts/dir/desc

mlb team hitting:   Cubs are:
1.  1st in K's-per-game. 
2.  22nd in slugging
3.  22nd in batting average
4.  4th in walks-per-game
5.  17th in HR.


Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 22, 2020, 06:47:44 pm
https://www.mlb.com/news/players-likely-to-move-at-trade-deadline

With the Cubs pleading poverty, no deals may be coming.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 22, 2020, 06:57:53 pm
Chicago Cubs  @Cubs  26m
The #Cubs today placed Kris Bryant on the 10-day IL (retroactive to Aug. 19) with a left ring finger sprain.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 22, 2020, 09:00:23 pm
Bryant's growing injury history would make me really reluctant to sign him to a huge long term contract.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on August 22, 2020, 09:11:36 pm
The fact that he's not worth anywhere near Boras' asking price didn't do it?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 23, 2020, 08:47:26 am
Baez is too inconsistent, Rizzo has a bad back, Schwarber never developed.

Ian Happ is the only Cub worth having around long term.

Do I fit in?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on August 23, 2020, 10:40:58 am
Baez is too inconsistent, Rizzo has a bad back, Schwarber never developed.

Ian Happ is the only Cub worth having around long term.

Do I fit in?

You forgot Bryant.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 23, 2020, 11:10:18 am
Chicago Cubs  @Cubs  3m
Today’s #Cubs roster moves:
- Selected contract of OF Ian Miller from South Bend Alternate Site
- RHP James Norwood transferred to 45-day IL
- Signed INF Patrick Wisdom to minor league contract (assigned to South Bend)

Miller takes Kris Bryant's roster spot.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 23, 2020, 11:15:28 am
You forgot Bryant.

Bryant is a bum. He frequently gets injures different body parts and can’t hit in the clutch.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on August 23, 2020, 11:16:07 am
We have one player on the team batting above .225

Pathetic.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on August 23, 2020, 11:17:33 am
Only 4 players on the team with an OBP above .250

Pathetic
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on August 23, 2020, 11:19:02 am
We have only one player with an OPS above .791

Pathetic
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 23, 2020, 05:53:11 pm
Bryant is a bum. He frequently gets injures different body parts and can’t hit in the clutch.

Chris?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: bitterman on August 23, 2020, 07:08:34 pm
I think you can safely say Caratini is a decent number 1 catcher and you can explore trades for Contreras. I’d also like to explore trades for Schwarber.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 23, 2020, 07:12:40 pm
We'll probably hang on to win the division but it seems pretty clear the offense is still a dysfunctional mess.  Feast or famine, too many same-y hitters.  With money likely to be tight righting the ship is going to be a huge challenge, especially with the pitching needing major reinforcements.  Contreras is probably about the only tradable asset (just don't think Schwarber is worth much) and you'd have to seriously consider it.  I do think Caratini can be a decent #1 catcher and there's always Amaya on the horizon.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 24, 2020, 01:42:18 am
Darvish is a great quote machine:

Quote
“I feel weird,” he said. “Most people when you get old, you lose velo and a lot of stuff, but I feel really good, more than when I was 25, 26. So I feel weird.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on August 24, 2020, 10:12:29 am
Sharma on Darvish.

https://theathletic.com/2017876/2020/08/23/yu-darvish-feels-weird-and-thats-a-good-thing/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 24, 2020, 03:02:04 pm
Looking for a LH reliever?

Thought this was kind if interesting from Bob Nightengale:

“The Arizona Diamondbacks are dropping hints that they could go both ways, acquiring talent but selling at the same time, trading No. 2 starter Robbie Ray, with a few teams showing interest in him as a reliever.”

Ray has been terrible this season as a SP but has a track record and is a pending FA.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 24, 2020, 03:47:16 pm
Jordan Bastian @MLBastian
Ross: Chatwood will be activated to start Tuesday's game in Detroit. Quintana will be activated and added to the bullpen.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 24, 2020, 04:37:07 pm
How many more bad starts from Mills before that situation changes?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 24, 2020, 05:00:41 pm
I wouldn't be surprised if he piggybacked Mills this week. If Mills struggles, then Quintana will be in line to start in 5 days.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 25, 2020, 03:10:46 pm
Chicago Cubs  @Cubs  3m
The #Cubs today activated RHP Tyler Chatwood and LHP José Quintana off of the 10-day IL.

RHP Jason Adam and OF Ian Miller were optioned to the club’s South Bend Alternate Site.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 25, 2020, 04:49:20 pm
Adam certainly had an eventful stint - 9 Ks in 3.2 IP.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Tuffy on August 25, 2020, 08:24:23 pm
Ian Miller got into just one game, as a pinch runner; I hadn't even noticed.

At least we gave him a normal-looking number (6), unlike what most of these teams are doing with their alternate-site callups.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on August 26, 2020, 11:31:44 am
Jim Bowden has a new piece at the Athletic, detailing 1 move he would like to see each Central division team make. Here's the Cubs move...

Trade pitching prospects Brailyn Marquez and Kohl Franklin and catching prospect Miguel Amaya to the Milwaukee Brewers in exchange for left-handed closer Josh Hader.

Note: Hader is controllable thru 2023.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 26, 2020, 11:43:37 am
Top 50 trade deadline candidates from MLBTradeRumors.com:

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2020/08/top-50-trade-deadline-candidates.html

Looking through this, I wonder if the Giants might be a one-stop shop for the Cubs. A few days ago, Bleacher Nation cited a vague quote from Theo that seemed to be saying the Cubs would look for LH relief pitching and a hitter who could handle LH pitching. Tony Watson is the obvious LH relief target (free agent at the end of the year; was only supposed to make $3 million this year so even the Cubs could afford that). And #26 on the MLB Trade Rumors list is Wilmer Flores, who would seem to be the perfect fit for the bat they're looking for (also only scheduled to make $3 million; can play all over the infield).

So what would a Watson/Flores package would cost? Flores is signed through next year with a $3.5 million team option for 2022, so he'd be able to stick around past this year. Maybe the Giants would want to hold on to him, but they are not likely to compete until after he's a free agent.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on August 26, 2020, 12:33:03 pm
This may be wrong of me, but I don't actually want to make any Nowacrat trades.  I feel like the Cubs are kind of an average team, with it's better players approaching FA.  Theo can let it ride with the talent that he's already accumulated, and for this weird season ride that as far as it will take him.  (Probably not very far, but whatever...).

Some degree of rebuilding may be approaching pretty quickly.  Any prospects with a chance to be a part of the next rebuilt Cubs phase, I'd like to keep.  That includes some potential support players, like for example Abbott, not just the couple of guys we think might become asset starters. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 26, 2020, 12:34:50 pm
As tight as money is that might be more willing than what the Cubs are going to willing to take on.  The Phillies have had no issue with spending money and they only took around $100,000 in salary for Workman and Hembree.  My guess would the Giants would have to take Descalso in a trade like that.  The other problem is the Cubs can only trade from their 60 man roster or it has to be a PTBNL.  So you could do somebody like Miller or Abbott, but that will hurt the Cubs pitching depth next year.  A PTBNL is risky for both the Cubs and Giants and the last info on any of their other players would be from March.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 26, 2020, 02:33:25 pm
Sahadev Sharma  @sahadevsharma  5m
Really tough day for the Cubs organization as sources confirm that a significant number of staff from player development along with amateur and pro scouting are being let go. Story coming soon with more details.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on August 27, 2020, 08:37:45 am
This is a good take on the Cubs falling short where it really matter last night.

https://pointlessexercise.substack.com/p/the-cubs-do-what-they-do-best-disappoint?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&utm_source=copy
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on August 27, 2020, 10:26:49 am
Jon Greenberg has what I believe to be an exceptional column today. I hope everyone reads it.

https://theathletic.com/2026335/2020/08/27/greenberg-did-the-cubs-do-right-by-jason-heyward/?source=dailyemail
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 27, 2020, 09:41:52 pm
Bleacher Nation tweeted out Pedro Strop’s IG account that had him driving from Cincinnati to Chicago.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on August 28, 2020, 10:03:43 am
Morosi on MLB Central this morning speculating that the Cubs might be looking to add a SP, and mentioned Bauer and Lynn as possibilities.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on August 28, 2020, 10:04:29 am
I believe he referred to it as “one last run” with the current core...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on August 28, 2020, 10:17:16 am
Eno Sarris at the Athletic is a bit more realistic, mentioning Richard Bleier and Paul Fry as bullpen arms that could be Cubs targets (mostly due to cost)...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on August 28, 2020, 05:02:59 pm
Sarris is also reporting that the Cubs and Tigers have discussed Cameron Maybin...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on August 28, 2020, 06:27:55 pm
Happ has done so well in center and left, I was surprised by his play in right last night.  3 balls out there that I think Heyward would have played much better.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on August 28, 2020, 06:49:18 pm
Happ's defensive metrics this year are awful.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 28, 2020, 07:48:59 pm
Morosi on MLB Central this morning speculating that the Cubs might be looking to add a SP, and mentioned Bauer and Lynn as possibilities.

Lynn seems like a stretch, given his non-zero salary, control through 2021 and decent numbers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 29, 2020, 10:25:07 am
Jason Heyward - Cubs

BB -   3rd  -  14
K   -   10th -  14
BA -   2nd - .270
OBP - 3rd - .389
SLG - 2nd - .500
OPS - 3rd - .889


Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 30, 2020, 10:57:33 am
Cubs have traded two PTBNL for Jose Martinez. He’s a career .319/.392/.554 hitter against LHP, so he should help.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on August 30, 2020, 11:12:17 am
Phegley DFA’d...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 30, 2020, 11:29:57 am
Both PTBNL have the or cash considerations. Usually if it is a PTBNL or cash it is usually cash so my guess is 1 PTNBL (not on the 60 man taxi squad) and cash unless he is horrible.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 30, 2020, 03:29:02 pm
Some very speculative rumors that the Cubs are talking to the Tigers about Daniel Norris.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 30, 2020, 05:04:06 pm
With 26 games to go in the season, Cubs have 2nd best winning % in the NL.

Brutal.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: bitterman on August 30, 2020, 08:43:15 pm
No More Nova-Kimbrel.

None. Zero. No More.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 31, 2020, 02:29:13 pm
Jon Heyman @JonHeyman
Andrew Chafin traded to Cubs
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 31, 2020, 02:37:30 pm
Jon Heyman @JonHeyman
Andrew Chafin traded to Cubs


Headed to Cubs
August 31, 2020
Chafin (finger) was traded from the Diamondbacks to the Cubs on Monday in exchange for a player to be named later, Jon Heyman of MLB Network reports.
ANALYSIS
Chafin has been sidelined since Aug. 19 with a sprained left index finger, and he'll suit up for a new team once he returns. The southpaw was wearing a splint for the past week to help his finger heal, although it's unclear when he'll be able to take the mound again. Chafin allowed six runs on nine hits and four walks while striking out 10 over 6.2 innings this season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on August 31, 2020, 02:40:51 pm
Quote
Chafin allowed six runs on nine hits and four walks while striking out 10 over 6.2 innings this season.

He will fit right in with this bullpen.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 31, 2020, 02:50:08 pm
Chafin is a good lefty reliever that can get righties out that the Cubs basically get for free.  I think he has 1 more year of control left as well.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 31, 2020, 02:55:03 pm
Cubs get LH Josh Osich from the Red Sox. 4.95 career ERA...he's never been good.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 31, 2020, 03:05:58 pm
Joel Sherman @Joelsherman1
Hear the #Cubs acquired Cameron Maybin from the #Tigers


Does that mark the end of Almora's Cubs career?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 31, 2020, 03:27:11 pm
Tigers get Zach Short.

I think Happ ended Almora’s career with the Cubs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 31, 2020, 04:41:35 pm
Almora has options remaining. Would expect him to be sent out.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 31, 2020, 04:50:55 pm
Guessing that Cubs might be interested in bringing back Maybin in 2021. Zach Short seems just a bit much to give up for one month of Maybin. Cubs probably also needed to open up Short’s 40-man roster spot.

Hernan Perez and Ian Miller have been removed from the 40-man and DFA.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dogstoothe on August 31, 2020, 05:08:17 pm
What is DFA?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on August 31, 2020, 05:16:02 pm
Designated for assignment.   They are placed on waivers.  The can Cubs can also trade them during this time.  If they clear waivers they can be reassigned to South a end or choose free agency.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dogstoothe on August 31, 2020, 05:34:51 pm
Thanks CUBlue.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 31, 2020, 05:36:00 pm
Presumably, Chatwood figures to go on IL.

And, guessing that Rea will be optioned.

I suppose that Almora has a chance to stay on active roster if one more pitcher is moved off active roster. Not sure who that might be as lots of no-options-remaining guys on the staff.

Somebody has to come off when Bryant activated. I suppose that Almora still could have a role as his usual late-inning defensive replacement. Maybin seems more of a RFer last couple years in NY and Detroit but Wrigley has more modest CF ground to cover, so maybe he takes over.

If Almora had more trade value, perhaps Cubs could have made a better run at Archie Bradley. Think Bradley might have been a good fit here.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on August 31, 2020, 05:40:37 pm
Almora to SB.  One foot in the door.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 31, 2020, 06:44:27 pm
Bastian says Chafin might be on IL couple more weeks.

Jordan Bastian
@MLBastian
It's a player to be named later or cash consideration deal with the D-backs for Chafin. He's currently on the IL with a sprained finger on left hand. Still might be a couple weeks away from a return
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on August 31, 2020, 06:50:34 pm
What is Maybin's issue in terms of sticking with a team?  He's got more uniforms in his closet than Nike.  Any clues?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on August 31, 2020, 06:54:58 pm
June 7, 2005: Drafted by the Detroit Tigers in the 1st round (10th pick) of the 2005 amateur draft. Player signed September 1, 2005.

December 4, 2007: Traded by the Detroit Tigers with Dallas Trahern (minors), Burke Badenhop, Frankie De La Cruz, Andrew Miller and Mike Rabelo to the Florida Marlins for Miguel Cabrera and Dontrelle Willis.

November 13, 2010: Traded by the Florida Marlins to the San Diego Padres for Edward Mujica and Ryan Webb.

April 5, 2015: Traded by the San Diego Padres with Jordan Paroubeck (minors), Carlos Quentin, Matt Wisler and 2015 competitive balance round A pick to the Atlanta Braves for Craig Kimbrel and Melvin Upton Jr..

November 20, 2015: Traded by the Atlanta Braves to the Detroit Tigers for Ian Krol and Gabe Speier.

November 3, 2016: Traded by the Detroit Tigers to the Los Angeles Angels for Victor Alcantara.

August 31, 2017: Selected off waivers by the Houston Astros from the Los Angeles Angels.

November 2, 2017: Granted Free Agency.

February 21, 2018: Signed as a Free Agent with the Miami Marlins.

uly 31, 2018: Traded by the Miami Marlins to the Seattle Mariners for Bryson Brigman (minors) and international bonus slot money.

October 29, 2018: Granted Free Agency.

February 18, 2019: Signed as a Free Agent with the San Francisco Giants.

March 23, 2019: Released by the San Francisco Giants.

March 29, 2019: Signed as a Free Agent with the Cleveland Indians.

April 25, 2019: Purchased by the New York Yankees from the Cleveland Indians.

October 31, 2019: Granted Free Agency.

February 12, 2020: Signed as a Free Agent with the Detroit Tigers.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on August 31, 2020, 06:59:08 pm
What is Maybin's issue in terms of sticking with a team?  He's got more uniforms in his closet than Nike.  Any clues?

I think it's mostly that he's just not very good. He's a useful 4th outfielder on a good team, but he can make more money signing as a starter on a bad team. So he signs with a bad team to start, then a contender trades for him at midseason, then he goes through the same pattern again.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on August 31, 2020, 08:27:43 pm
Maybin has averaged 2 WAR per 600 PAs in his career. Those are numbers of an average regular. For a big chunk of his career, he wad a good defensive CFer. And, he could run. That all adds up to a player that has value.

Purely as a hitter, he’s been a bit below average. And, teams are often looking for offense from their OFers, so are willing to part ways with him to upgrade offensively...and then some other team sees a fit with him based on his all-around game.

There have been many, many solid players in baseball history who move around and are in demand for a role.

Maybin just had a very good offensive showing with Yankees in 2019, but rest of his game has declined. So, we’ll see what he can contribute with Cubs. If you had told me before the season that Maybin would be more attractive to Cubs than Almora for September, I would have been disappointed. But here we are.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 01, 2020, 09:44:37 am
Sahadev Sharma  @sahadevsharma  5m
Really tough day for the Cubs organization as sources confirm that a significant number of staff from player development along with amateur and pro scouting are being let go. Story coming soon with more details.

Gordon Wittenmyer finally has some details

Quote
A significant example was seen in the week leading up to Monday’s deadline, when the Cubs informed seven pro scouts and advisors in that department that their contracts will not be renewed after this year.

That included long-renowned pitching guru Jim Benedict, whose hiring after the 2017 season was heralded by the Cubs and noted throughout baseball’s inner circles, where he was known as “the pitcher whisperer.”


Quote
Sources say Benedict, respected special assignment scout and advisor David Howard, along with scouts Dave Klipstein, Spike Lundberg, Nic Jackson, Mark Kiefer and Joe Nelson were cut from the 27-man roster of pro scouts, along with about two dozen others in player development — part of company-wide cuts across an organization that had significantly grown its baseball operations department in nine years under Epstein.

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/cubs-layoffs-pitcher-whisperer-jim-benedict-others-force-change
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 01, 2020, 09:54:41 am
Nic Jackson?  Oh no....
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on September 01, 2020, 10:00:52 am
Nic Jackson?  Oh no....

Well it's bad enough craig ruined Nitro Nic's baseball career, but it looks like he's done quite the number on his scouting career too.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 01, 2020, 12:53:45 pm
Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  9m
Souza also returns.

Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  10m
Ross said Bryant is in the lineup today

No word on the offsetting moves.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 01, 2020, 12:58:38 pm
I like to crap on the Rickett's being cheap, but this is probably due more to the Cubs losing at least 2 minor league teams next year than anything.

Benedict is probably the only high salary guy and he probably lost his job with move to redo the pitching infrastructure more than anything.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 01, 2020, 03:03:45 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eg2qc99XcAAWgqQ?format=png&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Tuffy on September 01, 2020, 06:59:10 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eg2qc99XcAAWgqQ?format=png&name=900x900)


Unlike a lot of other teams, the Cubs have done a pretty good job in keeping their jersey numbers looking normal in this bizarre season full of sudden call-ups keeping their spring training digits.  The only too-high number that they seem to have issued (as opposed to players asking for them, like Q's 62 and Sadler's 65) is the 60 that they gave Adam.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 02, 2020, 04:51:39 pm
Chicago Cubs  @Cubs  23m
The #Cubs today placed LHP José Quintana on the 10-day IL (retroactive to Aug. 31) with left lat inflammation and recalled RHP Jason Adam from the club’s South Bend Alternate site.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 02, 2020, 05:01:03 pm
That very well could be the season for Q...

Alzolay gets his chance to shine, presumably...at the very least, a tandem with Rea...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on September 02, 2020, 05:04:56 pm
Isn't this Alzolay's last option year? They need to just put him in the rotation and leave him so they can get a better idea what they have before Spring Training next year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 02, 2020, 06:57:40 pm
Agree, br.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dev on September 03, 2020, 12:31:43 pm
Really?  Put him on a short leash at least...they ARE in the playoff hunt...if they were out of it, then yes.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 03, 2020, 12:52:05 pm
dev, we've got Darvish and Hendricks. 
*Chatwood and Quintana are injured. 
*So we're trying to fill 3-4-5 from Lester, Mills, Alzolay, Rea, and Miller.  Alzolay gave us a good start earlier, and has better stuff.  So I'd kinda think he'd be the best Nowacrat candidate for win-now purposes.  He might be bad on a given day, but that's surely also true of Lester, Mills, Rea, and Miller. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 03, 2020, 01:07:05 pm
So, assuming we buy out Lester for 10M, rather than paying him 25M for '21...we have Darvish and Hendricks for next season. Our 3-5 as it looks right now would be Mills, Alzolay, Rea?

Looking at potential FA starters, there is Bauer, Stroman, Tanaka, Paxton, and a bunch of 4-5 types...Gausman may be the best of those...

If we are still broke (assuming arbitration will devour any FA's we lose), what do we do?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on September 03, 2020, 01:10:25 pm
Agree with craig. With his stuff, he has at least the third highest ceiling on the health staff right now (and even though Hendricks is far more likely to be very good the rest of the year, Alzolay might have a higher ceiling than him too).

As long as 5 of the 7 current options have the potential to blow up every time they go out there, you might as well throw the one with the highest ceiling out there every fifth day. Getting a head start on evaluating him for next year is just a bonus.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 03, 2020, 09:59:46 pm
Sharma mentioned that Marquez was struggling earlier in the year, but he seems to have righted the ship and of Mills continues to struggle he might be an option in the rotation. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on September 04, 2020, 05:07:42 pm
The Cubs are re-signing Strop according to Jesse Rogers. Obviously, this was inevitable given that they’ve signed so many guys who were good a few years ago and they have such a strong pre-existing relationship.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dev on September 04, 2020, 05:25:50 pm
dev, we've got Darvish and Hendricks. 
*Chatwood and Quintana are injured. 
*So we're trying to fill 3-4-5 from Lester, Mills, Alzolay, Rea, and Miller.  Alzolay gave us a good start earlier, and has better stuff.  So I'd kinda think he'd be the best Nowacrat candidate for win-now purposes.  He might be bad on a given day, but that's surely also true of Lester, Mills, Rea, and Miller. 
I  see he is starting Game 1 tomorrow vs Wainright...ugh.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 04, 2020, 06:54:46 pm
The Cubs are re-signing Strop according to Jesse Rogers. Obviously, this was inevitable given that they’ve signed so many guys who were good a few years ago and they have such a strong pre-existing relationship.
The Iowa Cubs must need another pitcher.  No, wait.  That can't be it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 04, 2020, 07:00:01 pm
There's still some life in that arm...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 04, 2020, 08:10:59 pm
Pure desperation move about as likely to work out as most of the other ones.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 04, 2020, 09:26:10 pm
It costs the Cubs nothing, so I’m not sure why people are upset. Plus he’s a good dude in the clubhouse.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on September 04, 2020, 09:33:44 pm
Strop coming back is great. Even as a lottery ticket, he's probably better than half the pitchers in the bullpen right now. He's great in the clubhouse.

And if you're ranking Cubs relievers over the last 40 years, he's no worse than #3 (I'd put him at #2, behind Lee Smith, but ahead of Marmol). So he should finish his career as a Cub.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 05, 2020, 12:56:12 am
It's not a matter of being upset at bringing Strop back - it's fine for what it is.  But the problem is the Cubs' repeated attempts to build a bullpen by dumpster diving instead of going after guys who actually have a good chance to succeed.  And let's not pretend this is any different - Strop was already in a steep decline before this season, and his velocity has seen a huge drop on top of that.  If he gives us anything of value it'll be a miracle.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on September 05, 2020, 03:21:09 am
Darvish has a fan in Trevor Bauer:


https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/29804825/inside-yu-darvish-return-elite-status-chicago-cubs-ace
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 05, 2020, 03:37:11 am
It's not a matter of being upset at bringing Strop back - it's fine for what it is.  But the problem is the Cubs' repeated attempts to build a bullpen by dumpster diving instead of going after guys who actually have a good chance to succeed.  And let's not pretend this is any different - Strop was already in a steep decline before this season, and his velocity has seen a huge drop on top of that.  If he gives us anything of value it'll be a miracle.

Since August 1 thru tonight’s game, Cubs bullpen has 4th best ERA in NL. It’s actually about 1/2 run better than NL bullpen average for that period.

That period is the entire season, less the first week of the season when Cubs bullpen had ERA of almost 10.00.

So, let’s get over that first horrible week already and acknowledge that bullpen has been okay since then.

Maybe it can get better too. Wick threw well tonight and maybe the lefty situation can improve with the addition(s). So, let’s see.

As to Strop, as CBJ noted, he’s basically a freebie and a total non-risk signing and he won’t even be here unless he shows something at the complex.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 05, 2020, 05:02:22 am
Darvish has a fan in Trevor Bauer:


https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/29804825/inside-yu-darvish-return-elite-status-chicago-cubs-ace

Yeah, but I won’t hold that against him. Love Yu anyway.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 05, 2020, 07:04:19 am
I’d love for the Cubs to sign Bauer as a free agent.

Darvish, Bauer, Hendricks, Alzolay, Marquez would be a rotation that could do damage in the playoffs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dev on September 05, 2020, 09:12:11 am
Strop coming back is great. Even as a lottery ticket, he's probably better than half the pitchers in the bullpen right now. He's great in the clubhouse.

And if you're ranking Cubs relievers over the last 40 years, he's no worse than #3 (I'd put him at #2, behind Lee Smith, but ahead of Marmol). So he should finish his career as a Cub.
I take it Sutter misses the 40 year cut off...he was amazing to watch.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on September 05, 2020, 09:30:09 am
Strop coming back is great. Even as a lottery ticket, he's probably better than half the pitchers in the bullpen right now. He's great in the clubhouse.

And if you're ranking Cubs relievers over the last 40 years, he's no worse than #3 (I'd put him at #2, behind Lee Smith, but ahead of Marmol). So he should finish his career as a Cub.
I take it Sutter misses the 40 year cut off...he was amazing to watch.
  No love for Chapman, Dempster, or KIMBREL either.
Title: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 05, 2020, 10:32:59 am
Past 40 years...

Smith, Strop, Marmol, Myers, Beck (or Rondon)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on September 05, 2020, 10:49:14 am
By fWAR, it's Smith, Marmol, Strop, Marshall, Assenmacher in the top 5. The only thing keeping Marshall out of the top 2 is longevity--he pitched only 219 innings as a reliever for the Cubs.

https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=rel&lg=all&qual=y&type=8&season=2020&month=0&season1=1980&ind=0&team=17&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&startdate=&enddate=&page=1_30
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on September 05, 2020, 01:13:22 pm
It's not a matter of being upset at bringing Strop back - it's fine for what it is.  But the problem is the Cubs' repeated attempts to build a bullpen by dumpster diving instead of going after guys who actually have a good chance to succeed.  And let's not pretend this is any different - Strop was already in a steep decline before this season, and his velocity has seen a huge drop on top of that.  If he gives us anything of value it'll be a miracle.

Yeah,  We should have gone after one of the top relievers available last year, regardless of what it cost.  Perhaps Kimbrel.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 05, 2020, 02:35:15 pm
Chicago Cubs  @Cubs  28m
Today's #Cubs roster moves:

- Recalled RHP Adbert Alzolay from the South Bend Alternate Site to serve as 29th man for the doubleheader

- Claimed INF Ildemaro Vargas off waivers from the Twins

- Released RHP Jharel Cotton
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 05, 2020, 02:59:51 pm
Sadler claimed by the Mariners.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on September 05, 2020, 05:28:06 pm
I’d love for the Cubs to sign Bauer as a free agent.

Darvish, Bauer, Hendricks, Alzolay, Marquez would be a rotation that could do damage in the playoffs.

Bauer would make the team dangerous but I'm not sure how you have faith in Marquez who hasn't pitched above A-ball yet.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on September 05, 2020, 05:40:34 pm
I'm still skeptical of Bauer. He was great in 2018, and he's been great so far this year. But he also has his suspicious jump in spin rate this year (a jump he has previously said could only be achieved by using pine tar). Outside of 2018 and 2020, he's been a pretty mediocre pitcher. And he does not come across as a good guy on Twitter--I would expect him to be a pretty hard guy to root for.

But talk about Bauer is moot anyway. There is a 0% chance the Cubs are going to be in on the most expensive pitcher on the market this offseason. It'll be shocking if they're in on anyone other than a couple Gausman/Quintana types.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dev on September 06, 2020, 07:30:04 am
Bauer is going to the Yankmes...don't they all?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 06, 2020, 03:57:00 pm
Chicago Cubs  @Cubs  28m
The #Cubs today selected the contract of LHP Matt Dermody from the club’s South Bend Alternate Site. 

RHPs Adbert Alzolay and Tyson Miller were optioned to South Bend.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JeffH on September 06, 2020, 06:21:41 pm
Didn't see this posted.

Steven Souza has been designated for assignment.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 06, 2020, 08:31:13 pm
Boy, this franchise could be in real trouble.  Bryant and Baez have torpedoed their trade value with this terrible season.  There's 3/5 of the rotation to replace and the bullpen will be a clusterfrick as usual.  The offense has the same fundamental flaws which have never been addressed, and ownership is clearly in shutdown mode.  Even if they wanted to tear it down and rebuild, who would they trade?  Darvish and Happ maybe, but not much else.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on September 06, 2020, 08:55:04 pm
We'll always have 2016. May have to settle for that for some time to come.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 06, 2020, 09:10:50 pm
We'll always have 2016. May have to settle for that for some time to come.

Yeah, but it took less than a month for the universe to punish us for that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on September 06, 2020, 09:40:02 pm
Tony Andracki @TonyAndracki23
Heyward was experiencing shortness of breath and feeling light-headed in Sunday's game, so Cubs sent him to the hospital to get tests and make sure everything's alright.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 06, 2020, 09:54:28 pm
Tony Andracki @TonyAndracki23
Heyward was experiencing shortness of breath and feeling light-headed in Sunday's game, so Cubs sent him to the hospital to get tests and make sure everything's alright.


Breathing trouble is a Covid-19 symptom.  Please, let it be something else.


I'm guessing it is something else as the game probably would have been stopped immediately if that was suspected.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 06, 2020, 10:01:43 pm
Breathing trouble is a Covid-19 symptom.  Please, let it be something else.


I'm guessing it is something else as the game probably would have been stopped immediately if that was suspected.

Would it?  I think that would have been a first, if so.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 07, 2020, 01:07:55 pm
Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  3m
Billy Hamilton claimed off waivers from METS

Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  34s
INF Ildemaro Vargas added to roster, will wear No. 16. Hamilton yet to report to major league team. LHP Matt Dermody optioned after Sunday's game, DFA'd to make room for Hamilton. RHP Duncan Robinson added to 60-man pool, headed to South Bend (with Strop). C Jose Lobaton released
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on September 07, 2020, 01:14:58 pm
Dermody was optioned or DFAed?  Unclear from the sentence.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 07, 2020, 01:28:10 pm
Dermody was optioned or DFAed?  Unclear from the sentence.
Both
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 07, 2020, 01:31:29 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EhVNiAbXgAMhgpN?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on September 07, 2020, 05:40:34 pm
Right now, Javy Báez’s is hitting .195/.233/.362 and his 54 wRC+ is the third worst mark in all of baseball among qualified hitters. Kris Bryant is hitting even worse, .173/.247/.296 with a 47 wRC+, which would be second worst in baseball


https://twitter.com/kheindl34/status/1303078789627482112
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dogstoothe on September 07, 2020, 06:17:27 pm
So why aren’t they batting 8th and 9th?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 07, 2020, 07:15:53 pm
Javy went to RF his last AB...hopefully that felt good to him...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on September 07, 2020, 09:04:30 pm
I wonder what this does to their FA market price?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on September 08, 2020, 04:54:01 am
Ian Happ currently leads the majors in OPS ahead of Trout and Tatis Jr.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 08, 2020, 05:00:29 am
His offense is looking legit, though it must be noted that his metrics in CF are brutal.  Probably need to move him to a corner at some point.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Tuffy on September 08, 2020, 05:30:06 am
Javy Báez’s is hitting

I think I developed a stutter trying to pronounce this.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on September 08, 2020, 08:01:14 am
Now what would be the Cubbie move?  Sign Javy and Bryant to huge contracts and trade Happ and Hendricks to replace them and extend Lester and DFA Contreras.  Yeah, that should cover it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 08, 2020, 08:40:42 am
Cubs Weekly Podcast had the guys behind the applied weather metrics on. It was interesting to hear the discuss how variable the wind is on Wrigley and just a few degrees difference on how the wind hits the scoreboards when the wind is blowing in can make the difference between it helping or hurting fly balls.

The also talked about humidity and how the studied a minor league team in South Carolina. The minors league teams leave the balls out and change them less frequently than major league teams and it can cause a 50 foot difference in how far the ball travels.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 08, 2020, 04:03:53 pm
Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  4m
Billy Hamilton added to roster, will wear No. 6. Jose Martinez optioned to South Bend.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Tuffy on September 08, 2020, 07:59:06 pm
Cubs grab a 2-0 lead as Bote hits a triple over Castellanos' head in right with Schwarber and Contreras on the bases.

The pitch was letter-high and it didn't look like he got great contact, but it just kept carrying.
Title: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dihard on September 08, 2020, 09:57:26 pm
Big win tonight in a non-Darvish/Hendricks game. Buried the Reds pretty far behind us and picked up a half game on the Cards, too. How does one calculate a magic number these days?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 09, 2020, 12:21:38 am
In a 162 game schedule, the Cubs would be on pace for 94 wins.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Jack Birdbath on September 09, 2020, 07:39:16 am
Big win tonight in a non-Darvish/Hendricks game. Buried the Reds pretty far behind us and picked up a half game on the Cards, too. How does one calculate a magic number these days?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

@CubsMagicNumbr: DIV1: 19
DIV2: 14
WC: 14

#WhereStoriesPlay
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 09, 2020, 02:51:29 pm
Ildemaro Vargas starts at 2B for the Cubs Wednesday night.

Quote
Vargas, 29, was originally signed by the Cardinals as a teenage IFA back in 2008. He worked his way up through their system – without much success – before being released in 2015 and playing in the independent Atlantic League. He picked up with the Diamondbacks soon after that, finally having his first touch of success in Triple-A in 2016: .354/.418/.449 (138 wRC+).

That led to his first cup of coffee with the Diamondbacks in 2017, but he didn’t stay long. Vargas bounced up and down from the Minors over the last three years, until the D-Backs DFA’d him in early August of this year. The Twins picked him up for cash considerations five days after that, but they have since DFA’d him, leading to today.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 10, 2020, 01:40:21 pm
Marc Topkin
@TBTimes_Rays
#Rays are getting Pedro Martinez ... the infielder, from #Cubs as 1 of the PTBNLs in the Jose Martinez trade
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on September 10, 2020, 01:50:28 pm
Marc Topkin
@TBTimes_Rays
#Rays are getting Pedro Martinez ... the infielder, from #Cubs as 1 of the PTBNLs in the Jose Martinez trade


No wonder the Rays do so much more with so much less. Quite the steal there.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 10, 2020, 01:54:29 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EhkySKNX0AEj_Co?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 10, 2020, 02:20:11 pm
BA had Martinez as Cubs #16 prospect before this season..
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 10, 2020, 02:27:42 pm
Since August 1, Cubs bullpen ERA is 3.69——8th best in majors and 4th best in NL.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: wmljohn on September 11, 2020, 07:00:42 am
Quote
Since August 1, Cubs bullpen ERA is 3.69——8th best in majors and 4th best in NL.

That is nice to see.  The bullpen gets better the team gets worse.  Maybe they should go back to sucking ass like the beginning of the season so the team can go back to kicking ass like the beginning of the season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on September 11, 2020, 08:00:44 am
I don't think a solid bullpen contributes to losing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 11, 2020, 08:00:52 am
The Cubs have won 26 games, not many in late-inning rally mode.  Don't they have some record where they've only lost one game where they had an 8th-inning lead?  Last year they had a stunning record of blown saves and losing games where they led late, but this that hasn't been a problem, to date.  Could flip tomorrow, of course.

Of their 26 wins, only 8 have been one-run wins.  Most they've had some cushion late.  (My recall may be off, but some of those 1-run wins involved a larger cushion that got trimmed...).   
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: jacey1 on September 11, 2020, 12:12:00 pm
Losing Pedro Martinez is not good. I hope this one does not turn out to bite us in the azz.
HATE losing him or someone like him for a "Jose Martinez" type player.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on September 11, 2020, 02:13:40 pm
Losing Pedro Martinez is not good. I hope this one does not turn out to bite us in the azz.
HATE losing him or someone like him for a "Jose Martinez" type player.

Will anyone remember his 0-14 stint as a Cub?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 11, 2020, 03:11:07 pm
Will anyone remember his 0-14 stint as a Cub?

He’s under control through at least 2022. You’ll see him again.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 11, 2020, 03:31:03 pm
has talent, but he hits the ball on the ground around 58-60% of the time and had a 30% K rate last year.  I don't like trading him, but he isn't a lock to even get a chance to go 0-14 in the majors.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 11, 2020, 04:38:27 pm
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  37m
Cubs have recalled lefty Rex Brothers. Right Adbert Alzolay optioned. With two off-days next week, there’s flexibility on the staff. No technical need for a 5th starter until Sept. 22.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 11, 2020, 04:44:50 pm
What about the need for a 4th starter?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 11, 2020, 05:04:19 pm
Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  36s
Ross, after speaking to Tommy Hottovy, said Pedro Strop is “getting close.”

Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  3m
Ross on Kipnis: “he’s dealing with a little something.” Expects him to return to lineup soon
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 12, 2020, 09:19:39 am
From Bryan Smith, via Twitter...

Craig Kimbrel.

First 4 outings: 2.2 IP, 6 H, 23.63 ERA, 5 BB, 2 K. 60.5% FB, 39.5% CV. Swing rate on CV: 6.7%. SLG allowed on FB: 1.250.

Since Aug 14: 9.1 IP, 2 H, 1.93 ERA, 7 BB, 21 K. 58.8% FB, 41.2% CV. Swing rate on CV: 32.9%. SLG allowed on FB: .000.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 13, 2020, 12:04:33 pm
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  39m
Ross says Bryant has "another gear" that he expects out of himself. Targeted today as a day off to pair with Monday's off-day. Still getting treatment on wrist. Ross still balancing getting KB right, while working in rest/recovery for the wrist.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 13, 2020, 03:45:15 pm
Excellent piece from Sharma on Cubs bullpen at The Athletic.

https://theathletic.com/2062086/2020/09/13/how-the-cubs-bullpen-transformed-itself-from-team-weakness-to-strength/
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 13, 2020, 04:38:10 pm
Thanks, reb.  Yes, that was interesting read. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Tuffy on September 13, 2020, 06:43:07 pm
What the standings would look like if we were playing 162 games and all the missed games were split:

WLGB
Chicago7971-
St. Louis71714
Milwaukee71756
Cincinnati72776.5
Pittsburgh658112
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 14, 2020, 01:56:14 pm
Considering the no-hitter by Alec Mills, the turn-around by the bull pen, and Yu Darvish pitching like a Cy Young winner, doesn’t pitching coach Tommy Hottovy deserve a few kudos?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 14, 2020, 03:03:29 pm
Yeah, strong agree.  The injuries interrupted, but I think he'd gotten Chatwood turned around, too. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on September 14, 2020, 04:12:46 pm
Cubs top brass has long been SUPER positive on Hottovy. We're seeing the reasons why this year.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on September 14, 2020, 06:54:01 pm
Any word on if or when Chatwood may come back?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 15, 2020, 10:05:37 am
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eh7cAKSWkAAvceT?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 15, 2020, 10:11:30 am
Mooney with an interesting column on Alec Mills, including how the Cubs saw him as a potential "Kyle Hendricks" years ago.

The column also mentions a surprising something of which I was unaware:
"Since 2015, only the Los Angeles Dodgers (3.44) have a better team ERA. The Cubs (3.66) are right there with Cleveland’s pitching factory (3.66) and slightly ahead of the St. Louis Cardinals (3.74), Houston Astros (3.76) and Tampa Bay Rays (3.87)."

https://theathletic.com/2066469/2020/09/14/how-the-cubs-targeted-alec-mills-trying-to-trade-for-the-next-kyle-hendricks/?source=dailyemail
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 15, 2020, 10:19:52 am
From the article...which makes Mills' performance even more impressive...

“He learned from watching Kyle Hendricks’ evolution,” Borzello said. “He watches Kyle go about his work, and throw his sides and how he breaks down hitters and uses the scouting reports. He’s trying to mirror Kyle in a sense.”

That made Mills no-hitting the Brewers even more impressive considering that Hendricks pitched into the eighth inning the night before at Miller Park.

“I feel like we’re showing our hand,” Borzello said. “Then it really becomes imperative for the guy who’s pitching second – Mills behind Kyle – to execute because we’ve kind of shown how we’re going to attack them. Because they’re so similar, (the plan’s) not going to change. You’re going to have to execute your pitches. You’re not going to have a lot of room for error.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 15, 2020, 11:17:05 am
It's almost like these guys know something about what they are doing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on September 15, 2020, 11:37:09 am
I still believe these two guys need to be separated in the rotation.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 15, 2020, 12:44:59 pm
Absolutely...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: BearHit on September 15, 2020, 01:00:45 pm
I heard Hottovy gets most of his intel from this forum...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on September 15, 2020, 01:05:24 pm
Probably not since Dusty left...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: DelMarFan on September 15, 2020, 03:00:14 pm
Not to take anything away from Mills' accomplishment, it was good timing.  Milwaukee's soul was crushed the night before.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 15, 2020, 03:18:03 pm
Get it that Mills would like to pattern his work after Hendricks, but don’t really see similarity.

Hendricks at times makes hitters look awkward. Of course has a true Plus Plus pitch with his change-up.

Mills doesn’t make hitters look bad or miss bats and doesn’t have a Plus pitch. He has a .211 BABIP this season (Hendricks has his typical .285). Mills’ underlying numbers are very similar to his 2019 Iowa numbers (when he had ERA of 5.00), except far fewer hits [BABIP] and fewer Ks [!!]. Probably being helped by having a major league defense behind him, compared to Iowa Cubs defense.

So, guessing he might be a solid, reliable #5 starter going forward but going to be surprised if he’s better than that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 15, 2020, 03:24:56 pm
I still believe these two guys need to be separated in the rotation.

Yelich has had thousands of pro AB's.  Does facing Hendricks 3-4 times on Saturday really change his muscle memory or slow down his bat to better handle Mills 20 hours later? 

Brewers have scouting reports, and Yelich has faced lots of pitchers.  Does facing Hendricks Saturday improve his understanding of how Mills will pitch him on Sunday?  Will he better guess sequencing on Sunday because he saw Hendricks on Saturday instead of on Friday? 

Both are soft-toss righties.  Does seeing Hendricks' change on Saturday help Yelich hit Mills' curve on Sunday? 

I know it's traditional view, that stacking similar-style pitchers benefits hitters.  Maybe it's true.  But I wonder. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 15, 2020, 04:16:48 pm
Gordon Wittenmyer  @GDubCub  6m
Chatwood has had a setback with elbow/forearm as he pushed his rehab. Ross says not ruling out possibility that if Cubs make World Series he might have time to be a bullpen piece for that.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 15, 2020, 05:12:35 pm
Lifted from Bleacher Nation:

Jeremy Frank
@MLBRandomStats

Kris Bryant, Javier Baez, and Anthony Rizzo year by year:

2015: .278/.375/.495 (138 wRC+)
2016: .287/.367/.516 (134 wRC+)
2017: .281/.378/.509 (129 wRC+)
2018: .283/.357/.500 (127 wRC+)
2019: .285/.369/.524 (130 wRC+)
2020: .203/.279/.364 (71 wRC+)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: method on September 15, 2020, 06:02:01 pm
Bryant is badly broken right now.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 15, 2020, 07:43:09 pm
Bryant is badly broken right now.

wRC+ for 2020:

Bryant  60

Baez  56
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dogstoothe on September 16, 2020, 11:41:05 am
Man, these new stats and abbreviations have left me in the dust, but I’m not afraid.  Bryant with a hit, RBI, 3 runs scored, 2 walks. Encouraging. Baez encouraging too, hustling. Hate too see errors in the box score though.  Rizzo with a double, that throw by Heyward, a walk off W in the ninth. The mojo coming back. How are the playoffs going to work?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: jacey1 on September 16, 2020, 12:19:24 pm
The throw by Heyward was KEY and totally exciting. He had to be right on the money and damn if it wasn't. Out number 3...NICE
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: BearHit on September 16, 2020, 12:52:07 pm
Loved that throw!

I'm often surprised how many errant throws you see from professional outfielders - or infielders on assists...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dogstoothe on September 16, 2020, 12:52:19 pm
When we win the division then we don’t have anything to do with round 1, we wait (patiently) for the best of five NLCS games?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dogstoothe on September 16, 2020, 01:13:21 pm
Delete that last post. We have got to best the Braves to sit around and wait. OK. All this conjecture is tiring. Lester on the hill tonight, he’s been on those hills before.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dallen7908 on September 16, 2020, 03:22:11 pm

Dogstoothe: Please check out this.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/29892536/2020-mlb-playoffs-schedule-bubble-locations-how-watch-every-postseason-game

Also, according to an article in the Washington Post by Dave Sheinin, the 16-team playoff had support from an overwhelming number of the owners -pre-pandemic and is likely to continue past this year. My thought is that the support could decrease among big money clubs if there are 7 or more upsets this year.

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 16, 2020, 03:44:30 pm
Jordan Bastian:

• Lefty José Quintana (10-day IL, left lat) threw a bullpen session on Monday and will have a light mound workout again on Wednesday, per Ross. A simulated game could follow for Quintana, who still has a chance to rejoin the bullpen before the end of the season.

"We'll have to see how things continue to progress," Ross said. "We'll probably be bringing him in out of the bullpen like we tried last time. That worked pretty well, and try to build him back up a little bit."

• Lefty Andrew Chafin (10-day IL, sprained finger on left hand) is scheduled to throw a simulated game on Wednesday, per Ross.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Tuffy on September 16, 2020, 10:48:29 pm
With today's win the Cubs have clinched a .500 record for the season, their sixth in a row, starting in 2015.

The last time they had six .500 seasons in a row was 1967 to 1972.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 16, 2020, 11:02:35 pm
With today's win the Cubs have clinched a .500 record for the season, their sixth in a row, starting in 2015.

The last time they had six .500 seasons in a row was 1967 to 1972.

How many .500 or better seasons from 1947-1966?

TWO.

One was a .500 season (1952). The other was 82-80 (1963).

The CLOSEST Cubs came to first place in those 20 straight years was 13 games behind.

Too bad this board wasn’t around for encouragement back then.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 16, 2020, 11:37:57 pm
Mark Gonzales:

Chafin threw well in sim game, Ross confirmed it’s “conceivable” he could be activated for Twins series.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 17, 2020, 10:01:26 am
Jon Lester hints at retirement

Patrick Mooney  @PJ_Mooney  10h
Jon Lester would’ve liked to acknowledge the crowd at Wrigley: “That’s probably the most frustrating part. Going back to ’14, I didn’t really get to walk off the field like I wanted to at Fenway. Having an empty stadium, not really how I envisioned possibly my last start here.”
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 17, 2020, 10:03:45 am
More on Jon Lester

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/cubs-jon-lester-david-ross-anthony-rizzo-world-series-feels-emotional-weight-final-home-start-cub
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 17, 2020, 10:31:13 am
A lovely column on Jon Leseter from Sahadev Sharma.

It is extremely sad that Lester will probably not be able to say a final farewell to fans in Wrigley Field as he walks off the mound as a player.

https://theathletic.com/2073316/2020/09/17/i-didnt-think-six-years-would-go-this-fast-jon-lesters-wrigley-farewell/?source=dailyemail

Who knows, maybe after the Cubs fail to pick up his option, they'll come to some token deal that will enable him to pitch one more time before the fans in 2021 (assuming there are fans in 2021).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ben on September 17, 2020, 11:34:13 am
Thanks Ron.  Great article.  What a stud Lester has been for the Cubs!

It's just amazing that a guy whose pick-off move is worse than that of a Little Leaguer could be so darned fabulous for us and the Red Sox!

Particularly when it's counted the most!

Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 17, 2020, 11:51:46 am
Man, when Lester came out yesterday, it didn't even occur to me the that he won't get another home-start and he won't get a playoff home start either.  I wish I'd realized in the moment.  What a classy guy and what a huge overachiever he's been for the Cubs.  Amazing career, quite the craftsman. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on September 17, 2020, 11:57:43 am
He might still get a playoff start in the first round (assuming the Cubs hold on to one of the top 4 seeds). Those aren't being played in the bubble. I'd assume Darvish and Hendricks will start two of those three games. And if Lester pitches as well in his next start as he has in his last two, he'll probably get the third game over Mills.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 17, 2020, 12:17:11 pm
Quote from: Brett Taylor at Bleacher Nation
•   It’s still going to be a lost year for Báez at the plate, and there’s pretty much no turning that ship around at this point. But as he showed this week, that doesn’t mean he can’t still contribute positively to Cubs wins.

•   … The same is true for Kris Bryant, with the primary difference being: David Ross has been willing to move Báez down in the order to mitigate the impact of his struggles at the plate. Bryant? He is still getting more PAs than any player on the Cubs not named Ian Happ. It has become a stubbornness, even as Bryant has posted a 117 wRC+ over the past 10 days, built ENTIRELY on a .500 BABIP. The strikeout rate is still terrible. The walk rate is still terrible. The power is still non-existent. The quality of contact is still abysmal. It makes me sad that Bryant is a shell of himself right now, and it makes me angry that Ross continues to risk games in a vain hope that Bryant will just magically fix himself in the final 10 days of the season. At this point, you just have to play with what you have, not what you wish you had.
 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: ticohans on September 17, 2020, 01:17:29 pm
A lovely column on Jon Leseter from Sahadev Sharma.

It is extremely sad that Lester will probably not be able to say a final farewell to fans in Wrigley Field as he walks off the mound as a player.

https://theathletic.com/2073316/2020/09/17/i-didnt-think-six-years-would-go-this-fast-jon-lesters-wrigley-farewell/?source=dailyemail

Who knows, maybe after the Cubs fail to pick up his option, they'll come to some token deal that will enable him to pitch one more time before the fans in 2021 (assuming there are fans in 2021).

I hope something like this is worked out. Lester and the fans deserve it.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on September 18, 2020, 07:39:35 pm
I wonder if Bryant wouldn't be wise to take a QO.  It's not that bad a paycheck, give him another year with his buddies, and a year to redeem his value.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 18, 2020, 08:17:50 pm
I wonder if Bryant wouldn't be wise to take a QO.  It's not that bad a paycheck, give him another year with his buddies, and a year to redeem his value.

Who says the Cubs would make one?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on September 18, 2020, 08:44:55 pm
Good point.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 18, 2020, 10:38:15 pm
I wonder if Bryant wouldn't be wise to take a QO.  It's not that bad a paycheck, give him another year with his buddies, and a year to redeem his value.

That’s a year away.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on September 19, 2020, 04:29:02 pm
Rowan Wick is going to the IL with a left oblique strain. It sounds like he might be done for the year.

Andrew Chafin has been activated in Wick's roster spot.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 20, 2020, 08:14:41 am
Cubs offense:
*Runs:  20th
*HR:  18th
*OPS:  20th
*Slugging: 24th
*OBP: 17th
*Average: 27th
*BB: 10th (198)
*HBP: 1st (41?)

They average 7 hits, 4 walks, and 1 HBP per game. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 20, 2020, 08:24:06 am
Cubs offense:
*Runs:  20th
*HR:  18th
*OPS:  20th
*Slugging: 24th
*OBP: 17th
*Average: 27th
*BB: 10th (198)
*HBP: 1st (41?)

They average 7 hits, 4 walks, and 1 HBP per game. 
Yet if they had beaten the Twins Saturday night they would have been on pace for 100 wins in a 162 game season.  Go figure.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 20, 2020, 11:54:53 am
Defense is underrated.

https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=fld&lg=all&qual=0&type=1&season=2020&month=0&season1=2020&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&startdate=2020-01-01&enddate=2020-12-31&sort=24,d
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 20, 2020, 11:57:51 am
NL ERA.

https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=nl&qual=0&type=8&season=2020&month=0&season1=2020&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&startdate=2020-01-01&enddate=2020-12-31&sort=16,a
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 20, 2020, 12:05:38 pm
Cubs offense:
*Runs:  20th
*HR:  18th
*OPS:  20th
*Slugging: 24th
*OBP: 17th
*Average: 27th
*BB: 10th (198)
*HBP: 1st (41?)

They average 7 hits, 4 walks, and 1 HBP per game.

That’s what we get when Baez-Bryant-Rizzo all struggling and Cubs also doing poorly in DH production. See DH wRC+ below.

https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=dh&stats=bat&lg=nl&qual=0&type=8&season=2020&month=0&season1=2020&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&startdate=2020-01-01&enddate=2020-12-31&sort=16,d
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 20, 2020, 07:07:08 pm
The season is saved

Chicago Cubs   @Cubs  1h
The #Cubs today recalled OF/INF José Martínez from the club’s South Bend Alternate Site and optioned LHP Josh Osich to South Bend.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on September 20, 2020, 07:37:47 pm
That should improve things.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 20, 2020, 07:53:50 pm
He just needed to work on his base running a bit...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 21, 2020, 12:49:09 am
Apparently Ross pulled Schwarber for disciplinary reasons tonight.  Keep an eye on that situation.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on September 21, 2020, 12:54:24 am
Schwarber was pulled because of this triple which I think is a bit ridiculous.


https://www.mlb.com/gameday/twins-vs-cubs/2020/09/20/631617#game_state=final,lock_state=final,game_tab=videos,game=631617
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on September 21, 2020, 07:27:10 am
So he pulled Hoerner a few days ago for a misplay and now Schwarber, right?  I guess there's no time for fooling around with the playoffs coming up.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: JR on September 21, 2020, 07:44:42 am
Still, one of the knocks on Maddon at the end of his run was he ran too loose of a clubhouse and let mistakes go.  Ross doesn't seem like he's taking that approach here.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 21, 2020, 07:52:19 am
https://www.mlb.com/gameday/twins-vs-cubs/2020/09/20/631617#game_state=final,lock_state=final,game_tab=videos,game=631617

After the ball bounced off the wall and bounced away, Schwarber didn't seem to be moving with the greatest urgency. 

I assume guys get away with stuff all the time, so there might be others more egregious.   

But think it's good if Ross enforces hustling and playing sharp.  And perhaps established veterans like Schwarber and Baez need that enforcement more than anybody?  Plus maybe it's a better lesson to the team if standards get enforced for veterans core guys than if it's only for fringe guys? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 21, 2020, 08:32:08 am
Schwarber assumed the runner would stop at second.  It's like hitting an infield grounder.  Always go hard.  You never know.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 21, 2020, 01:58:12 pm
Schwarber assumed the runner would stop at second.  It's like hitting an infield grounder.  Always go hard.  You never know.

OFers get a book too. Maybe the scouting report is that Schwarber is slow going after balls landing behind him. Cubs don’t want that book.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 21, 2020, 04:15:26 pm
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  31m
Ross: Jose Quintana will be activated on Tuesday and will start vs. Pirates. He'll have "a little bit of leash" in terms of pitch count.

Sahadev Sharma  @sahadevsharma  3h
With Rowan Wick down, you may have been hoping for a Pedro Strop return. That's out the window now as he's been shut down for the year with an injury. So who could step up that's already in the bullpen? And will we finally see Brailyn Marquez this week?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dihard on September 21, 2020, 05:11:55 pm
Damn. I was definitely hoping for a Strop reunion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 21, 2020, 07:06:27 pm
Schwarber assumed the runner would stop at second.  It's like hitting an infield grounder.  Always go hard.  You never know.

So why did Ross decline to bench and publicly defended Baez after he didn't run out a pop up that dropped for a "single"?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 21, 2020, 07:07:10 pm
Sahadev Sharma  @sahadevsharma  3h
With Rowan Wick down, you may have been hoping for a Pedro Strop return. That's out the window now as he's been shut down for the year with an injury.

Bullet dodged.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 21, 2020, 07:11:53 pm
So why did Ross decline to bench and publicly defended Baez after he didn't run out a pop up that dropped for a "single"?
You're not the first to ask that question.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 21, 2020, 07:13:27 pm
So why did Ross decline to bench and publicly defended Baez after he didn't run out a pop up that dropped for a "single"?

I didn't hear or realize he'd publicly defended.  What did he say?  I wonder if after second thought, he realized he needed to discipline next time so these kinds of habits don't become normal and acceptable? 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 21, 2020, 07:26:14 pm
I didn't hear or realize he'd publicly defended.  What did he say?  I wonder if after second thought, he realized he needed to discipline next time so these kinds of habits don't become normal and acceptable? 

Basically, "I don't want to be a manager who quibbles over every little thing, and Javy busts his ass out there every day."

I think the board will attest that no one has been a bigger and more persistent Javy backer than me.  But the guy has a history of these sorts of moments, which I've never hesitated to point out, and I think pulling him over one makes much more sense than Schwarber, who has no such history.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 21, 2020, 07:56:12 pm
If Bryant is indeed done for the season, you have to wonder if the Cubs might non-tender him.  He's due $20 million or so and obviously has negative trade value at that salary.  Do you want to be on the hook for $20 million for a lame duck year of this Bryant, especially when ownership is crying poverty at every turn?
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 22, 2020, 03:56:05 pm
Jordan Bastian
@MLBastian

Ross: Kris Bryant getting treatment now. Feeling better today. Still some stiffness.

"You have to be cautious with this thing," Ross said. "To me, that's a good sign."

Not in lineup and not available, but Ross still optimistic it's not an IL thing.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 22, 2020, 04:03:46 pm
If Bryant is indeed done for the season, you have to wonder if the Cubs might non-tender him.  He's due $20 million or so and obviously has negative trade value at that salary.  Do you want to be on the hook for $20 million for a lame duck year of this Bryant, especially when ownership is crying poverty at every turn?

2021 is not going to be a normal payroll year for ANY club, with the uncertainties about fan attendance, vaccine or not.

So, who knows how any individual player will be handled. On his podcast today, Buster noted that Rockies may try to get out from under Arenado’s long-term deal and that Cubs might be in the picture (Cards too). Maybe (my speculation) Cubs could send Bryant to Rockies as a one-year salary offset and work out other offsets for Arenado’s additional years. Think we’ve discussed variations on this theme before.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on September 22, 2020, 04:25:11 pm
Cubs should be careful with Arenado. He wasn't as bad as Bryant this year, but he was pretty close. The Cubs definitely don't want to lock into the 2020 version of Arenado for the next several years.

It sounds like he tried to play through a shoulder injury for a lot of this year, so that was probably the problem.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 22, 2020, 04:35:41 pm
Obviously, you have to do your due diligence with a guy locked in so long at big bucks, but nobody is a sure thing.

Buster seemed pretty sure Rockies would have to pay down a chunk of Arenado’s deal to move him, so there’s that, and might not get back major prospects either.

Whatever Cubs offered to Boras/Bryant awhile back, it must have been a sizable amount to lock down 3B. All bets are off in these times, but one would think Cubs like Arenado's typical overall game.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 22, 2020, 04:41:29 pm
Boy is this winter going to be weird.  How are teams going to handle not only the financial problems from this year, but also the very poor performances of Bryant, Baez and other star players, along with the unknown effects of Covid-19 next year.

For the Cubs, with only one year left on Bryant, Baez, Schwarber and Rizzo (though Cubs have an option on him), as well as Epstein himself, what are the priorities going to be with Happ and Heyward being the most reliable hitters this season?

Strange times, indeed.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: brjones on September 22, 2020, 06:09:24 pm
IMO, I think the Cubs offseason is going to be pretty predictable. It'll involve them shedding a lot of money and not spending nearly enough to adequately replace what they lost.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 22, 2020, 06:29:00 pm
Whether it's this offseason or next, another teardown-rebuild is unavoidable at this point.  But I don't think Theo has the stomach for it - he'll want to go off and be a hero somewhere else instead.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on September 22, 2020, 08:41:11 pm
If he prefers that, he should do it.  He is a lock for HOF, as he should be, ending almost a century drought for not just one historic franchise, but two.  He is the best GM since Branch Rickey, and whatever he chooses, I wish him luck.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Playtwo on September 22, 2020, 08:49:55 pm
Amen.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dihard on September 22, 2020, 11:31:19 pm
We are officially in the playoffs. Now let’s clinch the dang division.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 23, 2020, 09:07:23 am
From Sharma’s latest at the Athletic...

Piggybacking Quintana, Adbert Alzolay was brilliant in his four innings of work. The young righty struck out seven and walked two, allowing just one run on two hits. What stood out for Alzolay were his breaking pitches, particularly a slider that he’d adjusted the grip on over the past 10 days under the guidance of director of pitching Craig Breslow and the two pitching coaches overseeing the players in South Bend, Ron Villone and James Ogden.

“We changed the grip on the pitch,” Alzolay said. “It’s more like a cutter grip so I can stay behind it longer. The velo went up. We put a lot of work on that pitch. I feel today it was good, it was working. But since it’s new for me, I think that pitch can get better.”

Alzolay said the previous version of the pitch was too much like his curveball in movement and velocity. This was in the mid-80s, while his curve remains in the high 70s and low 80s. The pitch is so new that Statcast labeled all 31 of his breaking balls as curves. But a look at the velocity of the curveballs makes clear that at least 16 of the 32 he threw were actually sliders (perhaps more) and as many as seven of the 14 swings and misses he got were on the pitch.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 23, 2020, 09:17:32 am
From Sharma’s latest at the Athletic...

Piggybacking Quintana, Adbert Alzolay was brilliant in his four innings of work. The young righty struck out seven and walked two, allowing just one run on two hits. What stood out for Alzolay were his breaking pitches, particularly a slider that he’d adjusted the grip on over the past 10 days under the guidance of director of pitching Craig Breslow and the two pitching coaches overseeing the players in South Bend, Ron Villone and James Ogden.

“We changed the grip on the pitch,” Alzolay said. “It’s more like a cutter grip so I can stay behind it longer. The velo went up. We put a lot of work on that pitch. I feel today it was good, it was working. But since it’s new for me, I think that pitch can get better.”

Alzolay said the previous version of the pitch was too much like his curveball in movement and velocity. This was in the mid-80s, while his curve remains in the high 70s and low 80s. The pitch is so new that Statcast labeled all 31 of his breaking balls as curves. But a look at the velocity of the curveballs makes clear that at least 16 of the 32 he threw were actually sliders (perhaps more) and as many as seven of the 14 swings and misses he got were on the pitch.

Tommy Hottovy has been a busy guy.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 23, 2020, 09:21:51 am
https://twitter.com/cubprospects/status/1308764526792323073?s=21
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: craig on September 23, 2020, 09:22:32 am
Thanks, Dave, that's really helpful. 

It's one of the things that strikes me about pitching, an 8th year pro like Alzolay can still only now be figuring out what's going to work for him.  And can make an adjustment that can change his career in year 8.  Pitchers can mechanically tweak something and it changes everything.

I don't think it's the same for a hitter 7 or 8 years into their career to make some mechanical tweak or minute adjustment in their stance and suddenly have dramatic change.  Pitching is just a different world. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on September 23, 2020, 12:09:09 pm
Pitching is the one field that it is not uncommon to see substantial increases in production in years 28 - 38.

It is not unusual for a pitcher's command to improve as they enter those years.  Someone with above average stuff, but below average command can see their command increase at a higher rate than his stuff decreases.

Also, those are the years where less effective starters are often moved to relief, where their increase in velocity often is a difference maker in middle of the road pitchers.

Finally, as Craig has mentioned, a tiny change in a pitcher's mechanics can cause a much greater change in production, both positively and negatively, than similar changes for a batter.  When a young pitcher makes it to the majors, they are mostly convinced that they have star potential, and are reluctant to make changes to the things that they believe caused their previous success.  By the time that they reach their middle to late 20s, the smarter ones begin to realize that their performance is more likely to decrease than to increase, unless changes are made.  It looks like pitching labs and pitching coaches are starting to convince pitchers at a younger age that change can be dangerous, but it can also be very good.

I think that the Cubs program is beginning to have an impact on older pitchers, many from other organizations, and their much maligned, but successful efforts to build their bullpen "on the cheap" as some have described it, is starting to show very good results.  Partly, I believe, this is due to the fact, as many have pointed out, that relievers tend to be the most variable in effectiveness from year to year, making turnover in the bullpen a good thing.  But most promising to me is that it looks like it can also produce results from those at a younger age, with earlier and greater results.

At this point in his career, I would hate to see Alzolay turned into a permanent reliever, but it is nice to see that he seems to have substantial potential as a reliever, and I kind of like to see the team go back to the older system, where younger pitchers were usually started off as a long reliever, and gradually worked themself into the starting role as they prove themselves.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 24, 2020, 04:43:33 pm
Mooney on Kris Bryant:

Of the top 15 picks in that first round [2013 draft], Bryant’s WAR as a Cub (24, per Baseball-Reference) is higher than the other 14 players combined (23.9).
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 24, 2020, 04:55:43 pm
Some of us here lamented that Cubs didn’t bring back ANY of the FA relievers from 2019.

So, Cishek has now been dumped by the Sox after a bad year, Strop was released by Reds, Phelps has a 6.53 ERA on the season. Only Kintzler is having a good season, but has had some of that Jeffress-good fortune with a FIP way higher than his ERA.

So, perhaps with exception of Kintzler and Cubs having a solid bullpen without any of those guys, maybe front office deserves some credit for its bullpen decisions.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 24, 2020, 05:21:18 pm
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  56m
Cubs have announced their 40-man player pool for thr playoffs. Here are the 28 active plus the 12 extras.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eitc1p3XsAUjDIk?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on September 24, 2020, 05:38:25 pm
Seems like a good group, although I question the wisdom of adding Wisdom.  Mostly because I am entirely ignorant of Wisdom.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Tuffy on September 24, 2020, 06:45:05 pm
If the Cubs get swept by the White Sox (and end the season with six straight losses), all the Cardinals have to do to catch up is go 5-2 in their remaining games. 
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 24, 2020, 06:53:14 pm
If the Cubs get swept by the White Sox (and end the season with six straight losses), all the Cardinals have to do to catch up is go 5-2 in their remaining games. 

The first tiebreaker is head-to-head record (if applicable). If that’s also a tie, the next tiebreaker is intradivision record. If that’s still a tie, the next is record in the final 20 division games (plus one until the tie is broken).


The head-to-head record is 5-5
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 25, 2020, 08:59:41 am
Source: Cubs plan for potential limited seating at Wrigley Field in 2021 and cut 60 jobs in their business department — all because of COVID-19

The Chicago Cubs on Thursday laid off about 60 members of their business department because of declining revenue amid the COVID-19 pandemic, a source told the Tribune.

In addition, the team is bracing for limited seating capacity for games at Wrigley Field in 2021 in the event fans are allowed to attend games without a vaccine for the coronavirus, the source said. Should fans be allowed to return in limited capacity, the Cubs would prioritize season ticket holders for admission.

The Cubs likely are to follow the model of other teams that have allowed fans to attend games should they get permission. Wrigley’s seating capacity is 41,649, but a significant reduction would continue to affect revenue.

In May, Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts told a group of season ticket holders in an online chat that about 70% of the team’s revenue stems from game-day operations, including ticket sales.

The decline in revenue because of COVID-19 cut into the team’s baseball operations department last month — more than two dozen scouts and player development staffers were informed their contracts would not be renewed this fall.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 25, 2020, 04:42:40 pm
Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  52s
Patrick Wisdom on roster, Martinez optioned, Manny Rodriguez places on 45-day IL. Wisdom to wear No. 59
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 25, 2020, 05:18:18 pm
That should help...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on September 25, 2020, 06:48:05 pm
Team needs wisdom badly
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Dave23 on September 25, 2020, 07:05:45 pm
Wisdom hasn’t been the same since he took off the Cardinals uniform and lost the mojo...
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 27, 2020, 05:25:04 am
Wouldn't mean seeing Marquez get a couple of innings tomorrow in a meaningless game.  No downside, really, and if he impresses you have to consider using him in the postseason.  This team is so flawed it's going to need to take some big risks to have any chance.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 27, 2020, 12:28:27 pm
Chicago Cubs  @Cubs  23m
The #Cubs today selected the contract of LHP Brailyn Marquez from the South Bend Alternate Site.

INF Patrick Wisdom has been designated for assignment.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 27, 2020, 12:30:21 pm
Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales  31m
Marquez will wear No. 61
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 27, 2020, 12:32:06 pm
Gordon Wittenmyer  @GDubCub  27m
Brailyn Marquez called up. Theo says plan is for him to pitch an inning today and be option in postseason with fewer days off.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 27, 2020, 02:07:37 pm
Jordan Bastian  @MLBastian  4m
Here’s Cubs president of baseball operations Theo Epstein, on pitching prospect Brailyn Marquez...

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ei8ZKv0WkAY5R8m?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 27, 2020, 02:48:28 pm
Sharma with a fine column on how this group of players has transformed the culture and expectations of the Cubs as a team and franchise.

Sometimes, because of this monumental shift in expectations, we don't fully appreciate how good these guys have been and what they've done for their fans, even after 2016.

https://theathletic.com/2095962/2020/09/27/the-cubs-are-nl-central-champs-but-nobody-is-satisfied/ (https://theathletic.com/2095962/2020/09/27/the-cubs-are-nl-central-champs-but-nobody-is-satisfied/)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 27, 2020, 08:57:19 pm
Various outlets reporting that Cub are the only team in the majors without a positive COVID-19 test this season.

Seems like that should warrant an automatic bye to the NLCS.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 27, 2020, 09:14:20 pm
Cubs final winning % works out to 92 wins in a 162 game season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on September 27, 2020, 09:24:23 pm
Cubs final winning % works out to 92 wins in a 162 game season.

But with no games against anyone outside the Central divisions.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on September 27, 2020, 09:35:36 pm
But with no games against anyone outside the Central divisions.

Which was the only division with 4 teams to advance to the playoffs.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 28, 2020, 11:02:11 pm
Cubs finished #3 in NL bullpen ERA since August 1, excluding the terrible bullpen performance of the first week.

3.72.  Reds were #4 at 4.09.

Marlins have a weakness in the bullpen.  Their bullpen ERA was 5.50.

Of course, in the post-season, all bets are off.  A new season.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 29, 2020, 03:03:25 pm
Going with Lester in a possible game 3 is an interesting choice. The Marlins are bad against righties and crush lefties.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on September 29, 2020, 03:41:49 pm
I think it's a dismal choice.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Reb on September 29, 2020, 04:47:47 pm
The righty alternative to Lester is who, Alec Mills?

Would not be excited about that. Think Lester is better choice.

Regarding Marlins vs. righties or lefties, keep in mind it was a short season. For example, Tigers had a .400 BABIP against lefties and, therefore, had a wRC+ against lefties of 142. Doubt Tigers are that good but you can get that in 60 games.

Marlins had a wRC+ against lefties of 111. That was #6 in NL. Good but would not call that crushing lefties. Also, was partially because of a better than average .318 BABIP vs. lefties, so maybe just a bit lucky. Marlins have very good slugging % against lefties but they love to run against righties (and not much against lefties) and runs scored against lefties (absent the running game) is not what you’d think if just focused on slugging. OBP virtually identical vs. lefties or righties.

Don’t see much of anything here that would cause me to opt for Mills over Lester. Hope it works out successfully if there is a game 3.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 29, 2020, 05:39:01 pm
Alzolay.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: davep on September 29, 2020, 05:46:28 pm
With the series tied 1 - 1, if it were my decision, I would start Alzolay. 

If I had to put money on what Ross would decide, I would bet on Lester starting the game.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 29, 2020, 06:06:50 pm
With the series tied 1 - 1, if it were my decision, I would start Alzolay. 

If I had to put money on what Ross would decide, I would bet on Lester starting the game.

They’re BFFs, that’s pretty much a given.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on September 29, 2020, 06:13:05 pm
Alzolay.
I agree, but risky putting a kid into a close out game.  Ross will start Lester, so it's probably moot.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CurtOne on September 29, 2020, 06:21:37 pm
If pitching Lester is a given, pitch him in game 2 if we win game 1.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: dogstoothe on September 29, 2020, 07:32:00 pm
No, pitch Darvish, win, and rest up.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: CUBluejays on September 29, 2020, 07:42:49 pm
Marlins have a wRC+ of 113, with .191 ISO against lefties and 23.9 K%

Marlins have a wRC+ of 89, .120 ISO, 25.1 K% against righties.

Pick a righty, any righty.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Deeg on September 29, 2020, 07:52:15 pm
No, pitch Darvish, win, and rest up.

Darvish should be pitching in game 1, not 2.  Too crucial in a short series to risk anything else.  Mistake.

And yes, any righty in game 3 over Lester.  But the righty should still be Alzolay.
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 30, 2020, 10:18:40 am
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EjK96jXXcAAeurm?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on September 30, 2020, 10:26:13 am
Mark Gonzales  @MDGonzales   13m
Underwood left off, Cubs carrying 13 pitchers

Mark Gonzales @MDGonzales  19m
Vargas, Phegley added, Osich DFA
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Ron on November 06, 2020, 08:02:31 pm

Cubs win Gold Glove Team Award.

https://twitter.com/Cubs/status/1324859085544624128/photo/1
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Bennett on November 07, 2020, 09:06:17 am
Cubs win Gold Glove Team Award.

https://twitter.com/Cubs/status/1324859085544624128/photo/1

Derrick S. Goold  @dgoold  15h
According to @sabr's SDI, the #Cubs edged the #stlcards for the first NL Team Gold Glove award by 3/10ths of a point:

Cubs 21.9
Cardinals 21.6
Title: Re: Cubs in '20
Post by: Chris27 on November 07, 2020, 05:26:39 pm
Cardinals led the majors in defensive runs saved. Cubs were tied for 6th/7th.