2022 MLB Winter Meetings Reset

In News And Rumors by Rice Cube130 Comments

The Winter Meetings go from Sunday to Wednesday this week and I’m guessing plenty of texts and conversations have been conducted even before everyone arrives in San Diego. Ken Rosenthal on his Athletic mailbag podcast suggested that the new CBA seemed to give teams more confidence to spend, which accounts for the higher-than-usual price tags we’ve seen for the relievers, middle rotation starters, and of course Jacob deGrom, who got more years and money than most would have predicted, but perhaps the Rangers are just nuts. If the Cubs want to spend, they obviously will and we’ll find out together, but aside from that, there are other things to look to during these meetings.

Draft Lottery

The first ever MLB Draft Lottery is on Tuesday, and the Cubs have the 12th worst record in 2022 and the odds that go with it to snag a top-6 pick. Let’s just say the Cubs will just pick 12th in every round, but if they sneak into the top 6 anyway, that would be pretty funny and if the QO guys haven’t signed yet, that might partly change some of their calculus since they’d have a few hundred thousand more dollars to distribute in next year’s draft as a result.

Rule 5 Draft

The Rule 5 Draft will be held on Wednesday, the Cubs have some spots open and some guys on the roster they can probably afford to outright or DFA if they wanted to, so I imagine they’ll pick someone (just not sure whom). Since draft order is determined by the regular season record, the Cubs will pick 12th in all rounds of the Rule 5 (however many) and may stand to lose a few good prospects if any other teams feel like taking a risk, especially on a still-kinda-far-away prospect like Luis Devers.

Random Rumors

  • The Marlins are apparently open to trading anyone not named Sandy Alcantara, so there are a lot of their capable starters that could be had for the right price.
  • Sean Murphy is of course the big catcher name on the trade block, but unfortunately none of the rumored suitors are the Cubs (so far). UPDATE: guess Atlanta isn’t the top suitor but there are plenty still in the mix for Murphy per Feinsand.
  • Pirates OF Bryan Reynolds (pretty much their only good player besides Ke’Bryan Hayes and Oneil Cruz) reportedly requested a trade because, well, it’s the Pirates and can you blame him? I don’t really see an incentive for the Pirates to talk to the Cubs about a swap, but you never know. UPDATE: per the Pirates beat, the Yankees are the top team in the Reynolds sweepstakes.
  • The Cubs have been linked in various degrees from “sorta” to “very interested” to all the big four shortstops, so chances are they’ll snag one of them and we will have to grow to love Dansby Swanson. Or don’t, I can’t tell you what to do (hoping for Correa or Bogaerts tbh, and the latest suggests Bogaerts is now the priority, which yes, and also suggests the Cubs aren’t afraid to give up a draft pick since the farm is kind of loaded right now anyway and their first rounder is protected regardless).

Share this Post

Comments

  1. andcounting

    The winter meetings so far seem to be like most other meetings. Everyone did all their work right before the meetings started, but the meetings themselves aren’t very productive.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  2. BVS

    Rice Cube,

    Somehow I managed to give Crime Dog +2 thumbs up and -2 thumbs down. So +4 thumbs up total which I’m totally good with.

    Lou Whitaker should have been on the ballot and elected though.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  3. Author
    Rice Cube

    While any of the four SS would be obvious upgrades on this Cubs roster, I think my reactions would be something like this…

    Correa: YAAAAAAAAASSSSS (I don’t think he’d be stupid to cheat anymore but who the hell knows)

    Turner: Woohoo speed!

    Bogaerts: yay!

    Swanson: oh, I suppose

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  4. dmick89

    Rice Cube,

    With four of them available I agree with the reactions to the first three, but going with Swanson is like winning the 3rd runner up in a beauty contest. In other words, you lost.

    It also would depend on other moves of course, but to me this is such a simple offseason. Correa and Verlander and you keep your draft picks. Costs a lot, but the Cubs owners are billionaires so they’ve got it.

      Quote  Reply

    1

    0
  5. Author
    Rice Cube

    dmick89,

    I think Swanson is not a key big-time move but a combo move with a bunch of other guys, so if they go Swanson they definitely need to sign other pieces or else it seems wasteful

      Quote  Reply

    1

    0
  6. andcounting

    Rice Cube,

    The thing is, there’s not really a combination of moves that makes up for having no premium players on your roster. Nico was a 4 WAR shortstop, which is amazing, but he loses a lot of that value switching to 2B. Maybe the shift ban changes that a little, but Fangraphs projects both Swanson (6.4 last year) and Hoerner as 3.5 WAR shortstops next season. Getting Swanson just seems stupid. It’s like there’s this glut of great shortstops hitting the free agent market that, despite the Cubs not having a hole at shortstop, could potentially help the Cubs plug a hole at 2B or 3B. With any of the top 3 available shortstops, signing them is worth a 1-3 win upgrade at short and probably a 2-3 win upgrade at 2B. So making this kind of move makes all kinds of sense and the cubs start thinking that’s a great path to improvement. But if Swanson were the only shortstop on the market, would the Cubs even have him on their radar? Like, hey, we could clone Nico and age him three years and it’ll only cost $125 million or something. Yay!

    It’s a marginal improvement, but marginal improvements will not get you very far without someone worth more than 3 wins on the roster. But with better shortstops available, it’s just a decision to be a little worse than they could have been. You can’t make a signing that’s big by association, but that’s what the Swanson signing would attempt to be.

      Quote  Reply

    1

    0
  7. Author
    Rice Cube

    andcounting,

    I can’t argue with you today.

    But seriously, the math I did earlier seems to work especially if they do some creative accounting and what not. Even if they did push the luxury tax they can probably reset it pretty soon after that. I’m in favor of signing all the best players (on paper) and hoping for the best, if they don’t execute on the field then we can yell at them later but they at least have to show they’re trying, right?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  8. andcounting

    Rice Cube,

    What do you suggest would show they’re trying? And what do they have to show they’re trying to do?

    Signing all the best players is one thing. If they sign Dansby Swanson, they’ll prove to me they’re trying to sign exactly zero of the best players.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  9. Author
    Rice Cube

    andcounting,

    I’d like them to push Stroman to the number three starter given the already established in-house depth.

    I’d like Correa/Bogaerts at short and Nico at 2B, then hopefully an upgrade at the corner infield positions and pushing Yan Gomes to backup catcher.

    Definitely need a center fielder that is not Morel.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  10. andcounting

    Rice Cube,

    I do think you’re dreaming, (dying laughing). I’d be shocked if they acquired more than one starter. I think all they feel they need to show to appease the fans is two signings. A starter and a position player is ample evidence for this fanbase.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  11. andcounting

    andcounting,

    I’d be happy to see your dream come true I just don’t think they’re going to do that based on what we’ve seen and heard so far. Especially with the Mets out on deGrom.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  12. Author
    Rice Cube

    andcounting,

    This is probably the 1.25 plan we sort of landed on like 7 threads ago where the Cubs do bare minimum in free agency but use their prospect pipeline to fill in the blanks with a look toward 2024 as super-competitive but 2023 is at least poised for a surprise run like with the last core

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  13. Author
    Rice Cube

    If we assume the Cubs are willing to forfeit draft picks and pool space, Rodon wants 6 years…which sounds reasonable given he’s about the same age as Lester when he was signed for the 6 years, albeit with slightly more injury history.

      Quote  Reply

    1

    0
  14. Author
    Rice Cube

    berselius,

    Bare minimum for his market would be like 6 years at $30MM AAV, if we assume $35MM AAV due to this mad market, that’s $210MM overall investment for Rodon.

    So if there are around $100MM to play with before they skirt the luxury tax threshold…

    $35MM for Rodon
    $35MM for Correa/Bogaerts (give or take)
    $20MM for Senga

    Leaving $10MM to sign a center fielder so I think they’re probably going past the luxury tax at this point if they’re serious about doing something this year and next. You have to sign the guys when they’re available, so might as well get what you can.

      Quote  Reply

    1

    0
  15. dmick89

    Rodon would be a great signing. I just figured there’s no way the Cubs would sign two massive contracts in one offseason and I’d rather have Correa than Rodon. I’ll take them both though. (dying laughing)

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  16. andcounting

    I don’t know what the projections are on salary, but I was thinking the best we could reasonably hope for was Senga and Correa. I don’t think we have any reason to predict they will get within shouting distance of the luxury tax this season. I think it would take a World Series size cash windfall for them to pay that much on an annual basis.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  17. dmick89

    Rice Cube,

    It’s a win now move. Worry about 6-7 years when it rolls around. It’s way too many years, but I can appreciate the desire to do whatever you have to in order to win now. I’m really surprised it took that much though.

    Contracts are crazy this year.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  18. Author
    Rice Cube

    dmick89,

    The other possibility is the Cubs actually trading from their depth to land some guys, but I don’t know how likely that is given how few rumors we’ve gotten on that front because Jed plays everything so close to the vest

      Quote  Reply

    1

    0
  19. andcounting

    I do think speed ages really well. Guys who are really really fast stay really really fast. And he obviously has the base-stealing skills to match. I think this contract won’t suck for anybody.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  20. Author
    Rice Cube

    There was an idea I saw in passing on the Twitters suggesting that a team could get Bogaerts/Swanson on a similar combined value as Correa so I’m all for a leakproof infield if the Cubs actually find a capable 1B who hits better than Rivas/Wisdom platoon prior to Mervis coming in as our designated statue at first

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  21. berselius

    andcounting:
    I do think speed ages really well.Guys who are really really fast stay really really fast. And he obviously has the base-stealing skills to match.I think this contract won’t suck for anybody.

    *Adolfo nods approvingly*

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  22. andcounting

    Rice Cube,

    I think that price is more informative about how much value the Cubs might have in hand with some middle relievers they’ve had a chance to test out over the past season or two. If they were to make some deals, I wonder if they might be willing to part with, some of their bullpen arms, since they seem to be able to churn them out fairly consistently from their own pipeline.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  23. dmick89

    I saw that the White Sox are entertaining offers for Liam Hendriks. I think the Cubs should offer Kyle Hendricks. The White Sox come out ahead in that deal though. They get an extra letter out of it. Maybe the Cubs should get a PTBNL also.

      Quote  Reply

    1

    0
  24. andcounting

    berselius,

    I could never decide if I liked her or couldn’t stand her until a few years ago when she helped considerably with the decision and never looked back.

      Quote  Reply

    2

    0
  25. Author
    Rice Cube

    The nicest thing to happen today, other than this comment, is for the Cubs to sign everyone. Barring that, get the top pick in today’s draft lottery to own the libs

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  26. Author
    Rice Cube

    It’s interesting that the Padres are pretty much out on the shortstops now that Trea Turner is off the board, it suggests they think only Trea was better than just keeping Tatis around whenever he gets unsuspended

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  27. andcounting

    Rice Cube,

    I think it’s more that they wanted to upgrade at leadoff. That was one of their weakest spots in the order (along with the cleanup spot, which won’t be such a problem once Tatis returns) and they would be scary offensively pretty much up and down the lineup. Still weird that they would only want Turner and were willing to offer him more than $300 million, but that’s the explanation that makes the most sense to me.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  28. andcounting

    Rice Cube,

    I mean, they could, but if you had the potential of going with Turner, Soto, Machado, Tatis 1–4 in whatever order and potentially 8 or even 9 guys with OPS+ over 100 in the lineup, starting it off with a baserunner god would be nuts.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  29. BVS

    If you are also reading BN you know Brett is going crazy on the possibility of the Cubs signing a 2-fer like Texas did yesterday. I mentioned that upthread too. I suppose there could be a slight chance of that happening. After all, we aren’t the Reds or Pirates.

    Why stop there? If Jed has the green light, might as well sign all three of the SS left, put XB at 3B, Correa at 2b, Dansby at SS and Nico in CF.

    I mean, if we want to have crazy dreams, let’s make sure they are really crazy!

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  30. Author
    Rice Cube

    BVS,

    While I feel like Nico could handle CF it would be a shame to waste a perfectly solid-to-elite infielder, but I’ll let the Cubs figure that out. I am in agreement that the Cubs should sign everyone.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  31. andcounting

    BVS,

    The thing I really don’t like about the Swanson/Bogaerts multisigning is the idea of blocking two spots on the roster for win value that very possibly could be equaled by signing Correa alone. I assume they’ll all be wanting full NTCs like Turner got (unless that turns out to be the difference between the $300 million offer from Philly and the $343 million San Diego offered) in which case it feels like they’d be offering a colossal amount of money that could get in the way of multiple prospects a few years down the road. If they sign multiple shortstops, even in fantasy land, one of them better be Correa. Signing Bogaerts and Swanson feels way too much like extending Báez and Bryant for more than they were asking and without the added benefit of liking them at all. That would suck, especially, especially if it gets in the way of landing a front-of-the-rotation starting pitcher.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  32. BVS

    andcounting,
    Rice Cube,

    Well, I was thinking crazy, after all! Nico has played 4 games in CF. That makes him as qualified as Morell, probably, to play there. Heck, put Correa there and let him be Robin Yount.

    Back in reality world, where AC is dragging me, (dying laughing), I think Dansby and XB are better than Bryant and Baez, by at least 1 WAR each, unless KB stays on the field. Baez is more exciting, and I love his elan, but…

    Both the #1 starters have signed, unless you love Chris Bassitt for 4 years. I like Chris Bassitt a lot. He did great for my fantasy team in 2021. But he’s a 3, no?

    Sign all three and Senga and two relievers. Pick up something from the heap for back up C. Spend the Ricketts’s money. I pledge to help their ad revenue by watching them on TV.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  33. dmick89

    BVS,

    I hope I’m wrong, but I’ll put the odds of the Cubs signing all 3 at 0.000%, signing 2 at 0.001% and signing 1 at 0.5%. The Cubs will have to prove me wrong. (dying laughing)

      Quote  Reply

    1

    0
  34. BVS

    dmick89,

    Ahh dmick, you’re legendary optimism is back! (dying laughing)

    My odds: sign 3 — 0% but I can waste pixels dreaming; sign 2 — 3%; sign 1 — 25%.

      Quote  Reply

    1

    0
  35. BVS

    So if the Yankees ate significant cash, would you make a trade for Aaron Hicks bad contract to fill CF until PCA is ready? Perhaps for someone like Ethan Hearn and Yohendrick Piñango?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  36. Author
    Rice Cube

    BVS,

    I feel like there are probably other CF candidates out there but I don’t know who is actually available from teams that are likely to just keep selling. Maybe since the A’s are continuing to sell then they could do a mega package for Sean Murphy and one of Laureano or Pache, but that’s probably me dreaming again

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  37. Perkins

    andcounting:
    Rice Cube,

    The wider narrative suggests Cubs fans will get upset and as a result do nothing whatsoever about it.

    Marquee hasn’t exactly gotten off the ground and the gate at Wrigley hasn’t looked impressive the last couple years. They must have burned through a bunch of spots on the STH waitlist, so I think money is talking to the Rickettses more than anything else.

      Quote  Reply

    1

    0
  38. andcounting

    Perkins,

    Agreed, although I would frame it more along the lines of there being great opportunity for a return on any investment they make this year rather than their fear of additional losses if they don’t do anything. I’m sure they realize it’s a lot easier to please fans and increase revenue after two really disappointing years than it was to keep them happy after winning the World Series.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  39. andcounting

    Rice Cube,

    Yeah, I mean the Yankees are interested in him. I’d bet on the Cubs signing Bellinger though. He’s the kind of player the Cubs might show a willingness to outspend for because he’s probably not commanding a very long commitment from anyone. They’d probably go high AAV and give him a chance to prove himself, almost exactly the position Schwarber was in post-Chicago but with a higher past peak.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  40. andcounting

    andcounting,

    With PCA waiting in the wings no one is going to complain if Bellinger becomes little more than a backup. He’s a super-low risk, decently high reward option. Exactly what the Cubs are looking for in center.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  41. andcounting

    Rice Cube,

    But they don’t even really look at it that way if it’s 1–2 years. It seems like defense at CF has been exposed as the market inefficiency du jour, so as long as he’s healthy it should probably pay off regardless of his offense (I’m guessing).

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  42. dmick89

    Wouldn’t Bellinger want the ability to at least opt out after the first year? I’d be surprised if he signs for more than a year. Maybe 1 year plus a team option that vests if he plays 120 games or something.

      Quote  Reply

    1

    0
  43. andcounting

    dmick89,

    Yeah, and that might be what the Cubs are wanting anyway. I just think it’s one of those scenarios where the fit is just too good not to make it work. Like when Adam Lambert joined Queen.

      Quote  Reply

    2

    0
  44. Author
    Rice Cube

    Well this is certainly annoying especially if front offices need to evaluate players etc etc

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  45. Author
    Rice Cube

    dmick89,

    I don’t think it is within their collectively bargained rights, the players proportion of the rules committee is also not a majority so even if they wanted to they’d need one of the MLB execs to go rogue

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  46. andcounting

    Rice Cube,

    If they can show it screwed up their stats in any way, enough of them have incentives/pay structures tied to performance that they’d have a case whether it’s in the CBA or not.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  47. Author
    Rice Cube

    andcounting,

    That would be exceedingly difficult due to how many baseballs they’d probably have to track down and tie to distinct batting events, but also with all the Statcast data it might not be all that outlandish.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

Leave a Comment