2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

User avatar
Cubswin11
Hall of Fame
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 8:17 pm
x 9097
x 6048

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Cubswin11 » Fri Dec 20, 2019 12:43 am

Transmogrified Tiger wrote:
Gilby wrote:A little more foresight by ownership/Theo would've been nice, specifically before inking those Chatwood and Kimbrel deals. Like if this isn't just about Marquee being a flop, how was this not handled better before ending up with the plan of trading Bryant.


Exactly, the CBA has been in place for 3 years, the consequences of spending from that perspective are not a surprise. So either we have to believe that Theo was confident that the team would be so good that they'd be fine just taking an offseason to trim payroll(even as late as *this June* when he committed 37 million to Kimbrel), or ownership pulled the rug out from under them.

I strongly lean it was a kept in the dark/rug pulled out situation and/or business side horsefeathering up so bad with renovations and TV deal they didn’t or couldn’t keep money promises on future payrolls. I don’t believe he would’ve put himself in a spot to entirely sit out offseasons that included Manny, Bryce, Kershaw, Cole, Strasburg, Rendon, Arenado and some of these other clearly elite players.
0 x
Screw Pitchers

User avatar
Regular Show
All-Star
Posts: 3740
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 10:16 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 2595
x 1460

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Regular Show » Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:11 am

Backtobanks wrote:
Sammy Sofa wrote:
Regular Show wrote:I hate the Yankees and I hate teams that buy their way to a championship (which I know the Cubs didn't do).


No, that definitely was a huge part of what they did.


In the last 4 years the Cubs payroll was 12% over the Cards, 88% over the Brewers, 74% over the Reds, and 102% over the Pirates. We were the Yankees of the NL Central.


I'm okay with being the Yankees of the NL Central (we should be the Yankees of the NL Central).

I'm not okay with being the older version, high-spending Yankees of MLB.
0 x
"It was met with, basically, he didn't want to talk about that. He didn't want me to tell him that. I just basically said, 'Well that's why we want an electronic strike zone.'" -- Ben Zobrist

User avatar
Deeg
All-Star
Posts: 1686
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 9:14 pm
Location: Kagurazaka, Japan
x 44
x 119

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Deeg » Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:25 am

Backtobanks wrote:
Sammy Sofa wrote:
Regular Show wrote:I hate the Yankees and I hate teams that buy their way to a championship (which I know the Cubs didn't do).


No, that definitely was a huge part of what they did.


In the last 4 years the Cubs payroll was 12% over the Cards, 88% over the Brewers, 74% over the Reds, and 102% over the Pirates. We were the Yankees of the NL Central.


Why is that the measuring bar?
0 x
“Hopefully, we’ll have two of the most important currencies in the game – impactful young players and available payroll dollars and go make some hay. But we’re not there yet. We haven’t accomplished anything yet.”

TomtheBombadil
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 9283
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 8:35 pm
x 903
x 915

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby TomtheBombadil » Fri Dec 20, 2019 4:52 am

It might not be long before we see the Indians part with their franchise player, shortstop Francisco Lindor. The Indians have informed clubs that have pursued Lindor that they want their “best and final offers so they can make an assessment over the weekend,” Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic writes


Get it done, poopeaters!
0 x
Spoiler: show
Image


"We struck down evil with the mighty sword of teamwork and the hammer of not-bickering." - The Shoveler

champaignchris
Starter
Posts: 955
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 4:40 pm
x 10
x 211

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby champaignchris » Fri Dec 20, 2019 7:16 am

Cubswin11 wrote:
Transmogrified Tiger wrote:
Gilby wrote:A little more foresight by ownership/Theo would've been nice, specifically before inking those Chatwood and Kimbrel deals. Like if this isn't just about Marquee being a flop, how was this not handled better before ending up with the plan of trading Bryant.


Exactly, the CBA has been in place for 3 years, the consequences of spending from that perspective are not a surprise. So either we have to believe that Theo was confident that the team would be so good that they'd be fine just taking an offseason to trim payroll(even as late as *this June* when he committed 37 million to Kimbrel), or ownership pulled the rug out from under them.

I strongly lean it was a kept in the dark/rug pulled out situation and/or business side horsefeathering up so bad with renovations and TV deal they didn’t or couldn’t keep money promises on future payrolls. I don’t believe he would’ve put himself in a spot to entirely sit out offseasons that included Manny, Bryce, Kershaw, Cole, Strasburg, Rendon, Arenado and some of these other clearly elite players.


This seems like the most likely course of events. The only thing that makes me wonder about this possibility is that if ownership wasn’t being straight with Theo, there really wasn’t much reason for Theo to stick around after the 2018 season, when we presume the news came down that the purse strings were tightening.

He could have said, “I did what I came here to do,” had a great retirement ceremony, gotten a laurel and hearty handshake from the owner, and then within a year walked into pretty much any new project he could conceive of taking on. No one would have blinked at that.
0 x

Backtobanks
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 6926
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 2:32 am
x 10
x 95

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Backtobanks » Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:36 pm

Deeg wrote:
Backtobanks wrote:
Sammy Sofa wrote:
No, that definitely was a huge part of what they did.


In the last 4 years the Cubs payroll was 12% over the Cards, 88% over the Brewers, 74% over the Reds, and 102% over the Pirates. We were the Yankees of the NL Central.


Why is that the measuring bar?


We are a big market team in a division of mid-size market teams and outspend all of them by quite a bit every year. Fans complain when the Yankees or the Dodgers outspend their competition, but we've been doing it for quite awhile. Guys like Steinbrenner took his profits and put it into the team on the field while Wrigley used the Cubs as a tax write off.
0 x

CubinNY
Hall of Fame
Posts: 24001
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 5:52 pm
Location: Pike Road, Al
x 485
x 1029

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby CubinNY » Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:29 pm

Backtobanks wrote:
Deeg wrote:
Backtobanks wrote:
In the last 4 years the Cubs payroll was 12% over the Cards, 88% over the Brewers, 74% over the Reds, and 102% over the Pirates. We were the Yankees of the NL Central.


Why is that the measuring bar?


We are a big market team in a division of mid-size market teams and outspend all of them by quite a bit every year. Fans complain when the Yankees or the Dodgers outspend their competition, but we've been doing it for quite awhile. Guys like Steinbrenner took his profits and put it into the team on the field while Wrigley used the Cubs as a tax write off.

In the last 4 years... What about the five years before that when they were intentionally sucking and filling Wrigley? They can go horsefeathers themselves. And also they should use their financial advantage like a cudgel, destroying the competition in their division because the competition gets extra picks and charity from the rest of the league that the Cubs don't get.
2 x

User avatar
Andy
Hall of Fame
Posts: 33389
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 8:02 am
Location: West Michigan
x 1068

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Andy » Fri Dec 20, 2019 3:31 pm

Regular Show wrote:
Backtobanks wrote:
Sammy Sofa wrote:
No, that definitely was a huge part of what they did.


In the last 4 years the Cubs payroll was 12% over the Cards, 88% over the Brewers, 74% over the Reds, and 102% over the Pirates. We were the Yankees of the NL Central.


I'm okay with being the Yankees of the NL Central (we should be the Yankees of the NL Central).

I'm not okay with being the older version, high-spending Yankees of MLB.

I am. Everyone in MLB is swimming in money, if the Cubs decided to swim in slightly less money and the rest of them didn't, that's their damn problem.
0 x

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 62368
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 3463
x 12173

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby jersey cubs fan » Fri Dec 20, 2019 3:33 pm

Try telling a Pirates fan the Cubs didn't buy their way past them into the top of the NL Central and eventual World Series.

The Cubs huge payroll advantage provides tremendous leeway, not the least of which is the ability to brush off a bad contract that would absolutely sink a garbage team all by itself. The Cubs bought their WS title and they will have to buy their next one too. And they better get cracking or it's going to take several decades to get it done again.
5 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
Hairyducked Idiot
Kyle in disguise
Posts: 35850
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 2:42 pm
Location: GRIP IT AND RIP IT
x 2650
x 3416

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Hairyducked Idiot » Fri Dec 20, 2019 5:22 pm

Transmogrified Tiger wrote:
Gilby wrote:A little more foresight by ownership/Theo would've been nice, specifically before inking those Chatwood and Kimbrel deals. Like if this isn't just about Marquee being a flop, how was this not handled better before ending up with the plan of trading Bryant.


Exactly, the CBA has been in place for 3 years, the consequences of spending from that perspective are not a surprise. So either we have to believe that Theo was confident that the team would be so good that they'd be fine just taking an offseason to trim payroll(even as late as *this June* when he committed 37 million to Kimbrel), or ownership pulled the rug out from under them.


I think he significantly overestimated the market for some of his assets. He assumed teams would be showering him with high-profile prospects in offers for Bryant and has been resoundingly met with "meh."
0 x

User avatar
Transmogrified Tiger
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 57058
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:23 pm
Location: Greater St. Louis
x 598
x 7625

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Transmogrified Tiger » Fri Dec 20, 2019 5:55 pm

Hairyducked Idiot wrote:
Transmogrified Tiger wrote:
Gilby wrote:A little more foresight by ownership/Theo would've been nice, specifically before inking those Chatwood and Kimbrel deals. Like if this isn't just about Marquee being a flop, how was this not handled better before ending up with the plan of trading Bryant.


Exactly, the CBA has been in place for 3 years, the consequences of spending from that perspective are not a surprise. So either we have to believe that Theo was confident that the team would be so good that they'd be fine just taking an offseason to trim payroll(even as late as *this June* when he committed 37 million to Kimbrel), or ownership pulled the rug out from under them.


I think he significantly overestimated the market for some of his assets. He assumed teams would be showering him with high-profile prospects in offers for Bryant and has been resoundingly met with "meh."


There's just no way that he built the team with Plan A being trade Bryant for prospects(and Bryant is the only salary big enough to fix payroll ills). He committed 8 figures in 2020-21 to a reliever in June, combined with the rapidly approaching FA of the positional player core there's no way trading your best player to get under the tax was his first choice, because you know you're taking a step back when you do it even if they're showering him with prospect riches.
0 x

User avatar
SouthSideRyan
is ELL
Posts: 50288
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 6:08 am
Location: South Loop
x 858
x 2224

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby SouthSideRyan » Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:14 pm

squally1313 wrote:
Transmogrified Tiger wrote:
squally1313 wrote:I have no idea if any of this is accurate, but assuming it is, I found it pretty informative and pretty depressing on the motivations for the Cubs dropping payroll in 2020...though I guess the silver lining is that this article makes it seem like it would just be a one year dip.

https://www.bleachernation.com/cubs/201 ... x-in-2020/

No, this still does not mean we should trade Kris Bryant.


The tl;dr is that going over the tax for the 2nd straight year is more like a ~25 million cost than a ~5 million cost, and doing so for a 3rd straight year is upwards of 50 million.


"Putting it another way: The system in place makes it much cheaper for the Cubs to have a $207 million payroll in 2020 and then a $250 million payroll in 2021 than to have a $209 million payroll in 2020 and then a $211 million payroll in 2021. It’s an absurd extension of the way these penalties are structured, but it’s true."


And then cut 35M from the 2022 payroll to get back under!!
0 x
Exile on Waveland wrote: IU smells like poop.

User avatar
SouthSideRyan
is ELL
Posts: 50288
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 6:08 am
Location: South Loop
x 858
x 2224

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby SouthSideRyan » Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:22 pm

Regular Show wrote:
Bryant's Disco Ball wrote:This is a difficult question because nobody really knows what the exact profit is that a team like the Cubs make after all the expenses, but what is a good guess as to what the payroll should be and one that would get people to go, 'OK, they spend enough.'

$300 million? $400 million?


This is going to be a bad take and not popular, but I don't want the Cubs to morph into the old Steinbrenner's Yankees where we buy FAs every offseason and outspend every team. Like if Mark Cuban bought the team and allowed the Cubs to spend as much as they see fit and didn't care about making a profit...

On the one hand I'm happy the players are getting more money and all the revenue is being put back into the team, but I would hate winning that way. Like it's awesome if we outbid the Yankees for Cole, but I personally would kinda hate this team if we kept doing that and had a payroll over $300 million.

I'm fine with a team near the luxury tax with times going strategically over. I want the luxury tax line bumped WAY up in the next CBA discussion. Next year it will start at $208M and then goes up to $210M. I'm hoping it gets bumped up to $240M in the next CBA since teams treat it as almost a hard cap.

I hate the Yankees and I hate teams that buy their way to a championship (which I know the Cubs didn't do). They should always be in the top 3-4 in spending, but I don't want them to be #1 in spending except in strategic, special offseasons.


Thumbs down button press.
0 x
Exile on Waveland wrote: IU smells like poop.

User avatar
Hairyducked Idiot
Kyle in disguise
Posts: 35850
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 2:42 pm
Location: GRIP IT AND RIP IT
x 2650
x 3416

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Hairyducked Idiot » Fri Dec 20, 2019 7:20 pm

Transmogrified Tiger wrote:
Hairyducked Idiot wrote:
Transmogrified Tiger wrote:
Exactly, the CBA has been in place for 3 years, the consequences of spending from that perspective are not a surprise. So either we have to believe that Theo was confident that the team would be so good that they'd be fine just taking an offseason to trim payroll(even as late as *this June* when he committed 37 million to Kimbrel), or ownership pulled the rug out from under them.


I think he significantly overestimated the market for some of his assets. He assumed teams would be showering him with high-profile prospects in offers for Bryant and has been resoundingly met with "meh."


There's just no way that he built the team with Plan A being trade Bryant for prospects(and Bryant is the only salary big enough to fix payroll ills). He committed 8 figures in 2020-21 to a reliever in June, combined with the rapidly approaching FA of the positional player core there's no way trading your best player to get under the tax was his first choice, because you know you're taking a step back when you do it even if they're showering him with prospect riches.


Why is there no way?
0 x

User avatar
Sammy Sofa
Licks Butts
Posts: 84717
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 3:45 am
Location: Washington DC
x 15678
x 18024

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Sammy Sofa » Fri Dec 20, 2019 7:43 pm

Hairyducked Idiot wrote:
Transmogrified Tiger wrote:
Hairyducked Idiot wrote:
I think he significantly overestimated the market for some of his assets. He assumed teams would be showering him with high-profile prospects in offers for Bryant and has been resoundingly met with "meh."


There's just no way that he built the team with Plan A being trade Bryant for prospects(and Bryant is the only salary big enough to fix payroll ills). He committed 8 figures in 2020-21 to a reliever in June, combined with the rapidly approaching FA of the positional player core there's no way trading your best player to get under the tax was his first choice, because you know you're taking a step back when you do it even if they're showering him with prospect riches.


Why is there no way?


AKA

Image
1 x
► Show Spoiler

User avatar
Cubswin11
Hall of Fame
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 8:17 pm
x 9097
x 6048

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Cubswin11 » Fri Dec 20, 2019 7:59 pm



Image
0 x
Screw Pitchers

User avatar
javy knows my name
previously Beertown Cubbie
Posts: 9392
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:46 pm
Location: Chicago
x 1743
x 886

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby javy knows my name » Fri Dec 20, 2019 9:15 pm

Bertz wrote:
Bryant's Disco Ball wrote:This is a difficult question because nobody really knows what the exact profit is that a team like the Cubs make after all the expenses, but what is a good guess as to what the payroll should be and one that would get people to go, 'OK, they spend enough.'

$300 million? $400 million?


My assumption is that there are more costs than we give credit for in running the team, so their break even point is probably well south of $300M.

That being said there are two big caveats there:

1. They definitely pocketed a ton of money from 2012-2015, and haven't turned around and dipped back into that money. They'll point to the renovations but that leads to...
2. A lot of their costs are building up equity. So it's not *really* a loss even of it's not straight up liquid profit

So ultimately. I don't *really* care about where that break even point is.


They use this excuse so much, and it makes me blind with anger. This is your landlord telling you he can't fix your light bulb bc his mortgage payments are too high.
8 x
neely wrote:but in reality
2006 .364
2007 .351
2008 his one big year
2009 .347
2010 90 games played
2011 .323
what do you call that?

User avatar
Regular Show
All-Star
Posts: 3740
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 10:16 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 2595
x 1460

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Regular Show » Fri Dec 20, 2019 10:24 pm


If Betts does indeed get traded it greatly increases the chances of him reaching FA (especially if he gets traded to small-mid market team). I'd be okay with cost-cutting moves and austerity measures this offseason if the Cubs truly are committed to going all-out for Betts next offseason.

Also, they better announce a Baez extension before Cubs Convention or everyone is just going to be in a foul mood there.
0 x
"It was met with, basically, he didn't want to talk about that. He didn't want me to tell him that. I just basically said, 'Well that's why we want an electronic strike zone.'" -- Ben Zobrist

Backtobanks
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 6926
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 2:32 am
x 10
x 95

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Backtobanks » Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:28 pm

Regular Show wrote:
If Betts does indeed get traded it greatly increases the chances of him reaching FA (especially if he gets traded to small-mid market team). I'd be okay with cost-cutting moves and austerity measures this offseason if the Cubs truly are committed to going all-out for Betts next offseason.

Also, they better announce a Baez extension before Cubs Convention or everyone is just going to be in a foul mood there.


How much cost-cutting and austerity has to happen for the Cubs to acquire Betts next offseason? The budget will need to replace Lester and Quintana along with your desired Baez extension and raises (plus arbitration).
0 x

TomtheBombadil
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 9283
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 8:35 pm
x 903
x 915

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby TomtheBombadil » Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:38 pm

Backtobanks wrote:How much cost-cutting and austerity has to happen for the Cubs to acquire Betts next offseason? The budget will need to replace Lester and Quintana along with your desired Baez extension and raises (plus arbitration).


TBF he doesn't say acquire
0 x
Spoiler: show
Image


"We struck down evil with the mighty sword of teamwork and the hammer of not-bickering." - The Shoveler

User avatar
Hairyducked Idiot
Kyle in disguise
Posts: 35850
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 2:42 pm
Location: GRIP IT AND RIP IT
x 2650
x 3416

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Hairyducked Idiot » Sat Dec 21, 2019 12:01 am

The presence of those guys plus Arenado on the market makes it impossible to get good leverage for a Bryant deal
0 x

User avatar
Regular Show
All-Star
Posts: 3740
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 10:16 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 2595
x 1460

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Regular Show » Sat Dec 21, 2019 12:48 am



The Cubs can afford Betts if they don't mind being over the luxury tax line for the next few seasons and spending 300+ million to sign Betts next offseason. If you go to Cots Contracts you'll see they only have $58.5M marked for 2022 (declining the option on Kimbrel). Obviously, keeping some of the core will be expensive and arbitation raises and whatnot.

I don't think you can afford Bryant and Baez and Betts. I think Schwarber leaves as a FA. I think the Cubs will extend Rizzo even though it might backfire... I think the Cubs trade Contreras at some point or maybe work out an extension if he comes down on years/length. This is just speculation while talking with a friend, but we think Baez is looking for an 8-10 year deal and Contreras wants a 6-7 year deal and Bryant is looking for a 10 year deal. KB thinks he's going to be playing till he's 40 (and thinks he'll still be good) and said he doesn't know anything else besides playing baseball. That doesn't bode well for the Cubs...

The Cubs probably want to go 6 (with options) on Baez, 6 (with options) on Contreras and just 7-8 years on Bryant with opt-outs because Boras. They're having a lot of trouble getting any traction on these extensions. They've tried every offseason going back all the way to 2015 (for KB). Addison Russell turned down the one offered by the Cubs so it's a good thing in that instance.

The Cubs will have money to spend in the coming years if we don't lock these players up, but FA isn't a good path to contention IMO.
0 x
"It was met with, basically, he didn't want to talk about that. He didn't want me to tell him that. I just basically said, 'Well that's why we want an electronic strike zone.'" -- Ben Zobrist

User avatar
Deeg
All-Star
Posts: 1686
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 9:14 pm
Location: Kagurazaka, Japan
x 44
x 119

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Deeg » Sat Dec 21, 2019 1:59 am

There's absolutely no chance on Goc's green Earth the Cubs are going to try and sign Betts. You're 100% kidding yourselves.
3 x
“Hopefully, we’ll have two of the most important currencies in the game – impactful young players and available payroll dollars and go make some hay. But we’re not there yet. We haven’t accomplished anything yet.”

UK
Hall of Fame
Posts: 21257
Joined: Thu May 15, 2003 2:38 pm
x 218
x 658

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby UK » Sat Dec 21, 2019 9:41 am

Regular Show wrote:
If Betts does indeed get traded it greatly increases the chances of him reaching FA (especially if he gets traded to small-mid market team). I'd be okay with cost-cutting moves and austerity measures this offseason if the Cubs truly are committed to going all-out for Betts next offseason.

Also, they better announce a Baez extension before Cubs Convention or everyone is just going to be in a foul mood there.


Charlie Brown lines up for his 8 FG attempt in a row with Lucy as his holder.
0 x
"It was kind of weird to look in the mirror the first time I tried my hat on." - Mark Bellhorn

Backtobanks
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 6926
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 2:32 am
x 10
x 95

Re: 2019-20 Offseason Rumors/General Chit-Chat

Postby Backtobanks » Sat Dec 21, 2019 1:24 pm

Regular Show wrote:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1He7WB2TXeoGRjWmS3-pkTXz_kHh773JvhCXLVXxkTWg/edit#gid=1520401900

The Cubs can afford Betts if they don't mind being over the luxury tax line for the next few seasons and spending 300+ million to sign Betts next offseason. If you go to Cots Contracts you'll see they only have $58.5M marked for 2022 (declining the option on Kimbrel). Obviously, keeping some of the core will be expensive and arbitation raises and whatnot.

I don't think you can afford Bryant and Baez and Betts. I think Schwarber leaves as a FA. I think the Cubs will extend Rizzo even though it might backfire... I think the Cubs trade Contreras at some point or maybe work out an extension if he comes down on years/length. This is just speculation while talking with a friend, but we think Baez is looking for an 8-10 year deal and Contreras wants a 6-7 year deal and Bryant is looking for a 10 year deal. KB thinks he's going to be playing till he's 40 (and thinks he'll still be good) and said he doesn't know anything else besides playing baseball. That doesn't bode well for the Cubs...

The Cubs probably want to go 6 (with options) on Baez, 6 (with options) on Contreras and just 7-8 years on Bryant with opt-outs because Boras. They're having a lot of trouble getting any traction on these extensions. They've tried every offseason going back all the way to 2015 (for KB). Addison Russell turned down the one offered by the Cubs so it's a good thing in that instance.

The Cubs will have money to spend in the coming years if we don't lock these players up, but FA isn't a good path to contention IMO.


So you're saying we could be the NL version of the Angels. A team of 2 or 3 superstars surrounded by a bunch of role players and no pitching.
0 x


Return to “Transactions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest