In the comments today, we were talking about the 2014 Cubs thanks to a post by Myles. I mentioned that I would not be surprised to see Arismendy Alcantara make the team out of spring training. I still think it’s more likely he starts in AAA Iowa, but it won’t surprise me. I didn’t see the Cubs spending much, or anything at 2nd base, or the rest of the infield for that matter. In response, Uncle Dave had a really good comment worth re-posting in an article of its own. Here it is.
I’d agree that they’re more likely to go for a high-cost impact bat in the outfield rather than the infield, simply because they don’t have a whole lot coming up through the system in the outfield over the next couple of years. Ellsbury or Choo would be great, but I wouldn’t count out a flier on Chet Granderson if they’re just trying to buy time until the kids start showing up.
Still, I don’t think that they break camp counting on anything from Olt or Alcantara next year, and you’re likely to see them sign a lesser name to give them options over the kids and/or Barney and Valbuena. Kelly Johnson comes to mind, as he’s a guy who could slot in at second, or move to be the long end of a platoon with Lake or some other RHB out in left if one of the young infielders does pan out, or maybe Ryan Raburn if you’re looking for a 2B who can also caddy for Schierholz (though he’d be a buy-high based on his performance this year in Cleveland).
I like the flexibility they have on the roster right now. Valbuena can give you a decent glove at second or third and at least get on base occasionally, which allows for the freedom to call up either Alcantara or Olt. Lake can find at-bats in either the outfield or the infield, if that’s your thing. DeJesus can play anywhere in the outfield, which makes it easier to find a fourth or fifth outfielder who can give you something, whether that’s a guy with a glove in center or a guy with a bat in left. It seems like making good moves with free agents should be easier without the burden of trying to hammer a square peg in a round hole.
I’m actually pretty optimistic about the lineup for next season. Add an impact bat, one breakout from Castro or Rizzo, and erase the black hole at second and you’re squarely on the right side of average.
The pitching seems like it’s in decent shape too. You’ve already got three established starters, some interesting pieces at the back end of the rotation to sort through for the rest of this year, and a few pleasant surprises in the bullpen. I know that spending real money on relief pitchers is like buying a new car, in that you lose half of its value the minute you drive it off the lot, but if you put a plus guy at the top of the bullpen, the rest of the guys get bumped down a slot and start to look pretty good. (I’d be pretty comfortable with Strop and Russell in the 7th-8th inning slots, for example, and your Blake Parkers and Brian Schlitters look OK at the back end of the pen). If you add another starter and an impact relief arm, I’d even go so far as to call the pitching staff good.
It seems like you could add an impact outfielder, an upgrade in the infield, a mid-rotation starter and overpay for an impact reliever like Grant Balfour for $40-50MM or so all-in, and you could get most of those guys on deals of three years or less, and given what the payroll looks like right now that seems possible. It gives you a bridge to the impact talent that is coming up in 2015 and beyond without robbing you of the flexibility to fill in where that talent fails in the future.
I like it. Let’s do it.
Comments
About time Rizzo homered.
Rizzo the RatQuote Reply
Rizzo homers by month:
April: 8
May: 2
June: 2
July: 3
Rizzo the RatQuote Reply
He’s been a doubles machine, though.
Rizzo the RatQuote Reply
Hey, my name in lights! So, the trade deadline is less than a day in the rearview and we’re already talking next year, huh…
http://youtu.be/GbKE0gJETA0
uncle daveQuote Reply
@ dmick89:
Fair enough (on Utley). I just think a short-term sign at 2B makes sense for the Cubs. Obviously, Utley would be the “best case” for that… but maybe that’s unrealistic (especially if the Phillies sign him to an extension) and someone like Kelly Johnson would be more likely.
shawndgoldmanQuote Reply
@ uncle dave:
We’ve been talking about next year since last year.
joshQuote Reply
@ shawndgoldman:
I think Dave is right in that we will see them go after someone. Johnson makes a lot of sense, but I can see Utley if he reaches free agency.
dmick89Quote Reply
@ josh:
(dying laughing)
dmick89Quote Reply
Seems like a good plan, but I doubt they do any of it. I think if they thought Kelly Johnson could play 2nd, he would already be on the roster. Lord knows he was cheap enough last year. The bulk of his playing time has been in the OF this year for the Rays. Raburn, even moreso.
I wouldn’t mind Balfour, but I would be shocked if he gets anywhere near that kind of contract. That’s Papelbon/Amaro territory. Maybe he gets in the range of Soriano to the Nats (~2/$30), but Soriano has had a better career. (Of course all bets are off if the A’s win the world series; the Tigers would probably back a truck full of money up to his driveway). I will be surprised if the Cubs sign anyone with the “proven closer” tag, to be honest.
I really have no idea what they will do. The smart money is probably on Ellsbury, but I’m not sure if they would pull the trigger if their pick is unprotected.
GWQuote Reply
Pretty sure Dave meant $40-50 million overall.
dmick89Quote Reply
Yeah, the Cubs offseason plans will probably depend on whether or not they have a protected first round pick.
dmick89Quote Reply
@ dmick89:
ah… that makes more sense
GWQuote Reply
odor, sardinas —-> AA
odor still only 19
GWQuote Reply
@ GW:
Sardines do stink
WaLiQuote Reply
Do the Angels have really bad pitching, or what? Doesn’t seem like they should be as bad as they are.
joshQuote Reply
I actually didn’t hate that Breitbart stat. I thought they did a poor job of explaining that a team that scores 4.8 runs per game has different needs from their starters than a team that scores 4.0, so it’s about value to that team, and not abstract value. It was about value, not pure performance.
It’s definitely a measure to talk about what happened, and not what will happen. It’s like how a stat like RBI tells you what happened, not what will happen or what true talent is. I think it’s perfectly okay to award players based on that rather than hypothetical performance. It’s a stat that cares a great deal about context, whereas WAR tries to care as little as possible about context. The goals are different. If I am trying to vote for the Cy Young, I might look at the Breitbart number, but if I was deciding who to sign in the offseason, I wouldn’t.
JQuote Reply
@ dmick89:
Jesus, if they hand a reliever $50MM, I’m just going to give up. I was thinking $5MM a year for a low-end infielder, $10MM a year each for a starter and reliever (or relievers), and $15MM a year (at the front end of a longer deal) for a big bat in the outfield.
It seems like one way an otherwise average team can contend is by winning one-run games via a strong bullpen. Pittsburgh and Oakland are doing a ton of that this year, and Oakland and Baltimore did it last year. I also think that there’s a bit of work to be done to properly value relievers. Everyone in your pen is going to get about 70 innings, but due to leverage not all of those innings will carry the same value. For batters and starting pitchers, though, it seems like the ABs and innings are all more or less similar in value. Grabbing a high-end closer not only gives you important innings, but also allows you to put average pitchers in a role where they can provide at least modest value. I’d really been in the camp that thought relievers are fungible and not worth spending on and I guess I still feel that way about guys at the back end of the pen, but I’m changing my mind about ones who can contribute in high-leverage situations.
I was just spitballing on the who in terms of infielders, but I bet they go outside for at least one alternative to Barney or Valbuena. Alcantara may show up at some point next year, but I’d be surprised if it were right off the bat. He’s not yet reached AAA and I’m sure they’ll game his service time. I refuse to believe that they’re willing to settle for what they have on hand, especially since they’ve hung on to everyone who wasn’t already out the door here at the deadline.
It’ll be interesting to watch this offseason. I think they’ll be a bit more aggressive, especially if short-term alternatives are available. How about a guy like Bartolo Colon, who probably won’t get more than two years at this point in his career? Seems like you could use some of your immediately available payroll flexibility to grab some bigger fish this time around.
Or maybe that’s just the Hope Monster talking, I dunno.
uncle daveQuote Reply
@ josh:
Looks like they’re 28th in the league even though Edison plays as a significant pitcher’s park.
uncle daveQuote Reply
I’m glad they didn’t give Navarro to STL for next to nothing, but I’m pretty surprised no one else was moved, and I’m actually upset by it. The goal from here on is to unload any pieces who are not part of a future winning team. Being worse now results in a better team later. How could they have not moved Russell, Gregg, Navarro, Dejesus, and Scheirholz? Might as well make this team shitty and maybe the magic beans you get in return turn into usable parts. None of those players are on the roster next time this team contends.
JQuote Reply
@ J:
I think that means one of two things is true;
1) the front office thinks contending in 2014 is possible, and that those guys could provide good value in pursuit of that effort; or
2) the front office thinks the market price will go up on the untraded assets. For Gregg this could mean an expectation (or gamble) that prices for bullpen help will rise in august. For the others it might mean they think prices will be higher in the winter or at next year’s trade deadline.
I think this is one of the reasons for optimism. The team is performing well, it has shed all its bad contracts from the “one last night on the town” end to the Tribune era, and it has quickly built is minor league system into something that will soon lead to MLB talent (through promotion or and/or trade). If they’re not at the turning point, they’re close. And at least one expalantion of the lack of deadline activity is an assessment by the front office that the turning point will come some time in the next year.
Or… Maybe the market for rentals just tanked. (in that case, job extremely well done moving the other assets early).
shawndgoldmanQuote Reply
shawndgoldman wrote:
Just did.
Bill ClayQuote Reply
GW wrote:
It’s the least they could do.
Bill ClayQuote Reply
uncle dave wrote:
Bill ClayQuote Reply
Akabari wrote:
Bill ClayQuote Reply
GW wrote:
Was hitting well in A+.
Bill ClayQuote Reply
You know what, objectively i like our system more than the twins.
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
bubblesdachimp wrote:
me too.
WaLiQuote Reply
@ J:
I agree, but it hasn’t been their style.
GWQuote Reply
@ bubblesdachimp:
I don’t.
GWQuote Reply
http://www.minorleagueball.com/2013/8/1/4566236/chicago-cubs-top-20-2013-pre-season-prospects-in-review
MishQuote Reply
@ bubblesdachimp:
I don’t know, but I’d guess that there isn’t much difference between the two. I’d also just go with the evaluators on this and not some Cubs fan. No offense, bubs, but you haven’t shown yourself to be the most objective person when it comes to Cubs prospects. That’s why we like you so much so please, get this objective you out of here. (dying laughing)
dmick89Quote Reply
How about Drew Storen as a reclamation project? People around these parts tiring of him…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/nationals/washington-nationals-arent-to-blame-for-drew-storens-struggles/2013/07/31/773e704c-fa04-11e2-a369-d1954abcb7e3_story.html
… but his peripherals aren’t all that bad. Mostly, he needs to lower his HR rate:
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=6983&position=P
I’d be happy giving him a run at the closer’s spot, letting everyone else slide down one inning.
shawndgoldmanQuote Reply
@ uncle dave:
If you remember, they made a run at Jason Grilli this past offseason, and ended up signing Fujikawa, so I think they do value those types. I just don’t see them going for one of the proven closers.
GWQuote Reply
As for infielders, my predictions would be Eric Chavez, if they can lure him away from Arizona, and Aledmis Diaz.
GWQuote Reply
You messed up the title of this post, dmick. Let me fix it for you…
Bill ClayQuote Reply
bubblesdachimp wrote:
Fixed
JonKneeVQuote Reply
When is the Jimenez signing? I thought it is scheduled for today.
WaLiQuote Reply
I just looked at 2014 committed salaries for the Cubs and there’s not much there. Also crazy seeing 2010 they were at $140m payroll. I think we could add Cano/Ellsbury/Choo + McCann + 1 RP and be at $110m. Then trade for a SP and RP in the last year of their contracts? I’m starting to think 2014 will be a big leap forward, especially if we can get a protected 1st rounder.
JonKneeVQuote Reply
@ JonKneeV:
I’m not sure if I want them to spend up to their payroll limits this offseason, unless a significant portion of that spending is in front-loaded or short-term deals. The team is going to need some financial flexibility going forward, and shouldn’t have a bunch of bad contracts all “going bad” at the same time.
shawndgoldmanQuote Reply
@ shawndgoldman:
Oh you’re not saying they should add Cano, Ellsbury AND Choo, are you? Sorry, mis-read your post.
shawndgoldmanQuote Reply
New Shit
MylesQuote Reply
@ WaLi:
No announcement yet. I have a post queued up for when it happens, but original report was 8/1 or 8/2, so may not be until tomorrow.
GWQuote Reply