2015 Cubs Offseason: Building a Winner Around David Ross

[Quality Start Machine]

On the other hand, CF is not known for being an offensive position, with some notable exceptions. Considering how strong the rest of the Cubs lineup is, they could tolerate a pretty significant amount of awful as long as the defense is stellar.

I see this "they can tolerate something bad because ..." a lot. I think it's weird.

It's not weird if you want a .500 team. The Cubs are playing for the World Series. If they think there's something fixable in Bradley that turns him into a low-risk/high-reward proposition, then go for it. But again, he's pretty fucking far from Plan A.

[PenFoe]

If Boston's really shopping Jackie Bradley around, how creative does Jepstink get to bring him in?

I kinda feel like this guy is just an older version of Almora.  Am I wrong?

I would be extremely hesistant for them to give up much for a guy who has basically had one good month in the majors, however highly regarded he was as a prospect. Dude had a .548 OPS in 530 PA before this year, and even this year he had a .426 OPS in his first 24 games, followed by a blisteringly hot 1.441 OPS over his next 25 games (with a .577 (!) BABIP), then in his last 25 games he had a .510 OPS.

There's a lot of absolutely unplayable offensive production sandwiched around one ludicrous hot streak. He scares the piss out of me.

But...he's 25 and may be better than Heyward on defense.  He wouldn't solve the lead-off man problem but The Cubs may have enough offense to work around him and he's cheap.  He also strikes out about 30% of the time, which doesn't seem to jive with what Theo said he wanted to do this off-season.

I mean he's worth looking into but the price would have to be less than the Red Sox could probably get from a much dumber team willing to overreact to a small sample size.

I don't think the Cubs have enough offense they can just punt CF and make it a defense only position and if they're planning on doing so why not just call up Almora?

Or maybe Theo sees what he saw when he drafted him, and the Cubs think they can make him into a decent hitter? That way, they can let Almora continue trying to figure it our offensively?

Either way, I doubt Bradley is Plan A or even Plan B. Just something to consider if the CF market goes beyond what they're willing to spend, and they don't just want to say "fuck it" and hand the keys over to Austin Jackson..

I would hope to God Theo's not allowing anything about Albert Almora to influence his thinking when his focus should be on making a title run with a team that was four wins away from a world series last year. If he forces his way into the picture, cool, but a guy who has had one decent half season at AA should be a complete non-factor in their major league plans.

Also, I would feel considerably better about just saying "fuck it" and handing the keys over to Austin Jackson, Major League CF who has averaged 3 fWAR a year in his career, than banking on Jackie Bradley, Jr. and his 25 games of actually decent major league production.

I mean if they get him for the trade value you would expect for a fourth outfielder with upside, fine, sure, let's try it and hopefully hedge the bet with Jackson or something, but given the hot streak and the hype that often surrounds Boston prospects and the fact that teams like the Mariners also have interest in him I'd say he'd be more of a risk than he's worth.

I know I'm Exhibit A for "Prospect Overhype Guy" but I'd be willing to wager that Almora never amounts to anything at the major league level. 

And I'd be willing to wager even more that if he does, it's not for the Cubs.

[Quality Start Machine]

If Boston's really shopping Jackie Bradley around, how creative does Jepstink get to bring him in?

I kinda feel like this guy is just an older version of Almora.  Am I wrong?

I would be extremely hesistant for them to give up much for a guy who has basically had one good month in the majors, however highly regarded he was as a prospect. Dude had a .548 OPS in 530 PA before this year, and even this year he had a .426 OPS in his first 24 games, followed by a blisteringly hot 1.441 OPS over his next 25 games (with a .577 (!) BABIP), then in his last 25 games he had a .510 OPS.

There's a lot of absolutely unplayable offensive production sandwiched around one ludicrous hot streak. He scares the piss out of me.

But...he's 25 and may be better than Heyward on defense.  He wouldn't solve the lead-off man problem but The Cubs may have enough offense to work around him and he's cheap.  He also strikes out about 30% of the time, which doesn't seem to jive with what Theo said he wanted to do this off-season.

I mean he's worth looking into but the price would have to be less than the Red Sox could probably get from a much dumber team willing to overreact to a small sample size.

I don't think the Cubs have enough offense they can just punt CF and make it a defense only position and if they're planning on doing so why not just call up Almora?

Or maybe Theo sees what he saw when he drafted him, and the Cubs think they can make him into a decent hitter? That way, they can let Almora continue trying to figure it our offensively?

Either way, I doubt Bradley is Plan A or even Plan B. Just something to consider if the CF market goes beyond what they're willing to spend, and they don't just want to say "fuck it" and hand the keys over to Austin Jackson..

I would hope to God Theo's not allowing anything about Albert Almora to influence his thinking when his focus should be on making a title run with a team that was four wins away from a world series last year. If he forces his way into the picture, cool, but a guy who has had one decent half season at AA should be a complete non-factor in their major league plans.

Also, I would feel considerably better about just saying "fuck it" and handing the keys over to Austin Jackson, Major League CF who has averaged 3 fWAR a year in his career, than banking on Jackie Bradley, Jr. and his 25 games of actually decent major league production.

I mean if they get him for the trade value you would expect for a fourth outfielder with upside, fine, sure, let's try it and hopefully hedge the bet with Jackson or something, but given the hot streak and the hype that often surrounds Boston prospects and the fact that teams like the Mariners also have interest in him I'd say he'd be more of a risk than he's worth.

I know I'm Exhibit A for "Prospect Overhype Guy" but I'd be willing to wager that Almora never amounts to anything at the major league level. 

And I'd be willing to wager even more that if he does, it's not for the Cubs.

Unless he learns how to get on base more, he's going to be somebody's SAM FULD. Which is a crying shame, because it is fun watching him play center field.

[Canadouche]

On the other hand, CF is not known for being an offensive position, with some notable exceptions. Considering how strong the rest of the Cubs lineup is, they could tolerate a pretty significant amount of awful as long as the defense is stellar.

I see this "they can tolerate something bad because ..." a lot. I think it's weird.

It's not weird if you want a .500 team. The Cubs are playing for the World Series. If they think there's something fixable in Bradley that turns him into a low-risk/high-reward proposition, then go for it. But again, he's pretty fucking far from Plan A.

I think the reality is that most teams today, even the best ones, have a position or two in which they don't have a reliable offensive player. Even the Royals gave a ton of at bats to Omar Infante and Alex Rios, whose WARs were in the negatives over the span of 2015. The amazing thing is that the Cubs don't need to be one of those teams.

They very well might have a Plan A and B in which they slot somebody into CF who should rake. But if they had to go a Plan C route to pick up a third ace (something else most teams don't have), then acquiring a player who might be offensively reliable but should be defensively sound wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, would it?

[SKO]

On the other hand, CF is not known for being an offensive position, with some notable exceptions. Considering how strong the rest of the Cubs lineup is, they could tolerate a pretty significant amount of awful as long as the defense is stellar.

I see this "they can tolerate something bad because ..." a lot. I think it's weird.

It's not weird if you want a .500 team. The Cubs are playing for the World Series. If they think there's something fixable in Bradley that turns him into a low-risk/high-reward proposition, then go for it. But again, he's pretty fucking far from Plan A.

I think the reality is that most teams today, even the best ones, have a position or two in which they don't have a reliable offensive player. Even the Royals gave a ton of at bats to Omar Infante and Alex Rios, whose WARs were in the negatives over the span of 2015. The amazing thing is that the Cubs don't need to be one of those teams.

They very well might have a Plan A and B in which they slot somebody into CF who should rake. But if they had to go a Plan C route to pick up a third ace (something else most teams don't have), then acquiring a player who might be offensively reliable but should be defensively sound wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, would it?

No, it wouldn't be, but I'm not sure that a 200 million dollar contract to an over 30 pitcher if it also means potentially punting all offense at a spot where they got a lot of offense last year makes a ton of sense. I'd rather they trade for Ross or something and re-sign Fowler or take that 200 million and spend it on Heyward if that's the case.

[Quality Start Machine]

On the other hand, CF is not known for being an offensive position, with some notable exceptions. Considering how strong the rest of the Cubs lineup is, they could tolerate a pretty significant amount of awful as long as the defense is stellar.

I see this "they can tolerate something bad because ..." a lot. I think it's weird.

It's not weird if you want a .500 team. The Cubs are playing for the World Series. If they think there's something fixable in Bradley that turns him into a low-risk/high-reward proposition, then go for it. But again, he's pretty fucking far from Plan A.

I think the reality is that most teams today, even the best ones, have a position or two in which they don't have a reliable offensive player. Even the Royals gave a ton of at bats to Omar Infante and Alex Rios, whose WARs were in the negatives over the span of 2015. The amazing thing is that the Cubs don't need to be one of those teams.

They very well might have a Plan A and B in which they slot somebody into CF who should rake. But if they had to go a Plan C route to pick up a third ace (something else most teams don't have), then acquiring a player who might be offensively reliable but should be defensively sound wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, would it?

No, it wouldn't be, but I'm not sure that a 200 million dollar contract to an over 30 pitcher if it also means potentially punting all offense at a spot where they got a lot of offense last year makes a ton of sense. I'd rather they trade for Ross or something and re-sign Fowler or take that 200 million and spend it on Heyward if that's the case.

The Cubs need starting pitching in a winter where there's a glut in the market. It's easy to buy a top 3 guy right now. Heyward kind of has his own niche. Yeah, it would be awesome to stick him between Schwarber and Soler. Any lineup that has Miguel Montero and Addison Russell as the weak links is one you start planning the parade for. But I think if the Cubs can either get a good deal on Span or make a trade that doesn't clean the house out for a CF for 2-3 years, that's probably what they're looking for. At that time they might have a better handle on Happ, McKinney or one of the other guys not named Almora.

I'm sure Theo and Jed have a whiteboard or some shit with a fuckload of scenarios drawn out. They've gotten the Cubs this far, I'm confident they can outthink a bunch of goofballs on a fringe messageboard.

[Eli]

Any lineup that has Miguel Montero and Addison Russell as the weak links is one you start planning the parade for.

That 2015 parade was dope AF.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Any lineup that has Miguel Montero and Addison Russell as the weak links is one you start planning the parade for.

That 2015 parade was dope AF.

Yeah. Russell was awesome in the NLCS.

[Quality Start Machine]

Any lineup that has Miguel Montero and Addison Russell as the weak links is one you start planning the parade for.

That 2015 parade was dope AF.

David Ross killed the parade just as sure as the Muppets killed my grandfather.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

What if they get just one premier starter--and no other starters--and say, Span?  No trades until next summer.  Fans will freak out with a Hammel and Hendrix back end redux but whataver.

They didn't get much of anything at the non-waiver deadline last year--they actually got more production from what they got at the August deadline (Jackson and Cahill) than at July (Haren and Hunter), but they didn't give anything up, either, and it paid off, in that they won 2 postseason "series" and all of the guys they didn't trade contributed and enhanced their value in the process.

Rather than make a big trade this offseason would they be better off with just signing a stud P, solid CF and everyone else stays for now?  Barring injury,a team with Lester, Arrieta and, say, Greinke in its rotation is likely going to be in contention through June.  So let's see how Baez continues to be the super-utility slick IF guy with Castro being Castro at the keystone, same with George Sun in right.  I think it's become clear that if and when a trade does happen it would be one or two (or three(!)) of these guys invovled  The gamble has paid off so far in that Baez and Soler only enhanced their value by playing (and Castro rescued his value). This year the hope falls more on the Ghleybar/Happ/Almora/McKinney group doing similar.  If two of those guys get hot, then next year the Cubs should be able to get whomever they want to bolster by late July.

[Eli]

What if they get just one premier starter--and no other starters--and say, Span?  No trades until next summer.  Fans will freak out with a Hammel and Hendrix back end redux but whataver.

They shouldn't. I'm not the biggest fan of either guy (for mostly irrational reasons), but that's still a pretty strong 4/5 combo.

[SKO]

What if they get just one premier starter--and no other starters--and say, Span?  No trades until next summer.  Fans will freak out with a Hammel and Hendrix back end redux but whataver.

They shouldn't. I'm not the biggest fan of either guy (for mostly irrational reasons), but that's still a pretty strong 4/5 combo.

Yeah, as long as they upgrade the third SP somehow and fill CF with an actual major league center fielder I wouldn't consider this offseason a failure by any stretch.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

What if they get just one premier starter--and no other starters--and say, Span?  No trades until next summer.  Fans will freak out with a Hammel and Hendrix back end redux but whataver.

They shouldn't. I'm not the biggest fan of either guy (for mostly irrational reasons), but that's still a pretty strong 4/5 combo.

There was of course nothing rational about my white-hot scalding hatred for Hammel, which only intensified with each passing game until that first fucking inning of that last one when Victor fucking Du--

Sorry,...but I agree, at least on Hammel.  Objectively, he shouldn't kill you as a #4.  And I quite like Kyle as the #5 heading in. 

I'm starting to fantasize about a Greinke signing and my pants are moving.

[Oleg]

What if they get just one premier starter--and no other starters--and say, Span?  No trades until next summer.  Fans will freak out with a Hammel and Hendrix back end redux but whataver.

They didn't get much of anything at the non-waiver deadline last year--they actually got more production from what they got at the August deadline (Jackson and Cahill) than at July (Haren and Hunter), but they didn't give anything up, either, and it paid off, in that they won 2 postseason "series" and all of the guys they didn't trade contributed and enhanced their value in the process.

Rather than make a big trade this offseason would they be better off with just signing a stud P, solid CF and everyone else stays for now?  Barring injury,a team with Lester, Arrieta and, say, Greinke in its rotation is likely going to be in contention through June.  So let's see how Baez continues to be the super-utility slick IF guy with Castro being Castro at the keystone, same with George Sun in right.  I think it's become clear that if and when a trade does happen it would be one or two (or three(!)) of these guys invovled  The gamble has paid off so far in that Baez and Soler only enhanced their value by playing (and Castro rescued his value). This year the hope falls more on the Ghleybar/Happ/Almora/McKinney group doing similar.  If two of those guys get hot, then next year the Cubs should be able to get whomever they want to bolster by late July.

I think part of the plan is to look beyond 2016 anyway.  That's really the impetus for trading for a young starter like Ross or Carrasco.  Those types probably wouldn't be available very often and perhaps The Cubs should strike while they are.

Ian Happ is an interesting case in that he seems to be a polished college hitter who can also play the IF.  I think he may end up being the insurance policy for Baez or Castro flaming out this year.  There's probably no need to move him quickly but I also don't think it'd be much of a concern if they did.

The question may become, "Is the offense that Rizzo/Bryant/Schwarber/Soler give you enough to make up for further Russell/Baez growing pains and little production out of the catcher spot?"  How do you mitigate that risk, knowing the free agents just aren't out there right now?

[SKO]

What if they get just one premier starter--and no other starters--and say, Span?  No trades until next summer.  Fans will freak out with a Hammel and Hendrix back end redux but whataver.

They shouldn't. I'm not the biggest fan of either guy (for mostly irrational reasons), but that's still a pretty strong 4/5 combo.

There was of course nothing rational about my white-hot scalding hatred for Hammel, which only intensified with each passing game until that first fucking inning of that last one when Victor fucking Du--

Sorry,...but I agree, at least on Hammel.  Objectively, he shouldn't kill you as a #4.  And I quite like Kyle as the #5 heading in. 

I'm starting to fantasize about a Greinke signing and my pants are moving.

In Hammel's last 15 starts after the hammy injury the team went 8-7 despite him constantly tub-shitting. As long as he reverts somewhat closer to his first half performance last year (although I doubt he can repeat it entirely), they should have no problem winning with him in the regular season. Same with Hendricks. The Cubs had the best record in the majors in the second half with those two (and Haren, actually) being fairly shitty. They can win plenty of regular season games with those guys going 5 IP and giving up 3 ER. I just want a quality 3rd starter for any playoff series they might play next year. That guy doesn't have to be David Price. He just has to be better than those two idiots.