2015 Cubs Offseason: Building a Winner Around David Ross

[SKO]

DPD, not really that relevant but in the first half when Hammel had a 2.98 ERA in his first 16 starts the Cubs went 7-9.

So they actually won more games with Crappy Hammel than Good Hammel. It's a testament to how much better the offense was in the second half, but also that baseball is weird sometimes.

[Eli]

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.

It's a tough balance. Theo had some interesting comments yesterday about how the next 2 years may actually be their best chance to have a fully loaded roster since the young talent is so cheap (which spawned some "super team" talk, unlikely as that may be). People think of the Cubs having a long window of contention, which is certainly true, but I guess there can be various shades of contending teams.

I do think there's some merit to the idea that the next two years may be their "best" window-within-the-window -- they still have Arrieta under control for those years for relatively cheap, Lester should still be ace-ish and the young players are all pre-arb. I could see there being a bit of a lull in 2018-2019 after a few guys decline and before the TV deal kicks payroll into high gear. Then again, hopefully a lull means something more like 88 wins instead of 95.

[Tonker]

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.

It's a tough balance. Theo had some interesting comments yesterday about how the next 2 years may actually be their best chance to have a fully loaded roster since the young talent is so cheap (which spawned some "super team" talk, unlikely as that may be). People think of the Cubs having a long window of contention, which is certainly true, but I guess there can be various shades of contending teams.

I do think there's some merit to the idea that the next two years may be their "best" window-within-the-window -- they still have Arrieta under control for those years for relatively cheap, Lester should still be ace-ish and the young players are all pre-arb. I could see there being a bit of a lull in 2018-2019 after a few guys decline and before the TV deal kicks payroll into high gear. Then again, hopefully a lull means something more like 88 wins instead of 95.

We know better than that, huh, Eli?

[Quality Start Machine]

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.

It's a tough balance. Theo had some interesting comments yesterday about how the next 2 years may actually be their best chance to have a fully loaded roster since the young talent is so cheap (which spawned some "super team" talk, unlikely as that may be). People think of the Cubs having a long window of contention, which is certainly true, but I guess there can be various shades of contending teams.

I do think there's some merit to the idea that the next two years may be their "best" window-within-the-window -- they still have Arrieta under control for those years for relatively cheap, Lester should still be ace-ish and the young players are all pre-arb. I could see there being a bit of a lull in 2018-2019 after a few guys decline and before the TV deal kicks payroll into high gear. Then again, hopefully a lull means something more like 88 wins instead of 95.

2018 is when hopefully one or two of the starters in AA in 2016 will be ready to move into the rotation. This would stretch the window out a bit.

[Eli]

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.

It's a tough balance. Theo had some interesting comments yesterday about how the next 2 years may actually be their best chance to have a fully loaded roster since the young talent is so cheap (which spawned some "super team" talk, unlikely as that may be). People think of the Cubs having a long window of contention, which is certainly true, but I guess there can be various shades of contending teams.

I do think there's some merit to the idea that the next two years may be their "best" window-within-the-window -- they still have Arrieta under control for those years for relatively cheap, Lester should still be ace-ish and the young players are all pre-arb. I could see there being a bit of a lull in 2018-2019 after a few guys decline and before the TV deal kicks payroll into high gear. Then again, hopefully a lull means something more like 88 wins instead of 95.

We know better than that, huh, Eli?

People think of the Cubs having a long window of contention, which is certainly true

[Eli]

I'm also still kind of amused that my comment about the Nationals gets brought up as if they've done anything since shutting down Strasburg and aren't now managed by Dusty Baker.

[InternetApex]

You guys are doing some good work in here but this thread title is bumming me out. Whoever did it should change it.

Now keep doing what you guys were doing.

[SKO]

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.

It's a tough balance. Theo had some interesting comments yesterday about how the next 2 years may actually be their best chance to have a fully loaded roster since the young talent is so cheap (which spawned some "super team" talk, unlikely as that may be). People think of the Cubs having a long window of contention, which is certainly true, but I guess there can be various shades of contending teams.

I do think there's some merit to the idea that the next two years may be their "best" window-within-the-window -- they still have Arrieta under control for those years for relatively cheap, Lester should still be ace-ish and the young players are all pre-arb. I could see there being a bit of a lull in 2018-2019 after a few guys decline and before the TV deal kicks payroll into high gear. Then again, hopefully a lull means something more like 88 wins instead of 95.

Yeah, for as much as people liked to throw out the "2015 Cubs will be the worst Cubs team of the next five years", I think there's just as much reason to think the 2016 Cubs might be the best team they'll field in that time period. It would make sense to be pretty aggressive this offseason.

[Quality Start Machine]

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.

It's a tough balance. Theo had some interesting comments yesterday about how the next 2 years may actually be their best chance to have a fully loaded roster since the young talent is so cheap (which spawned some "super team" talk, unlikely as that may be). People think of the Cubs having a long window of contention, which is certainly true, but I guess there can be various shades of contending teams.

I do think there's some merit to the idea that the next two years may be their "best" window-within-the-window -- they still have Arrieta under control for those years for relatively cheap, Lester should still be ace-ish and the young players are all pre-arb. I could see there being a bit of a lull in 2018-2019 after a few guys decline and before the TV deal kicks payroll into high gear. Then again, hopefully a lull means something more like 88 wins instead of 95.

Yeah, for as much as people liked to throw out the "2015 Cubs will be the worst Cubs team of the next five years", I think there's just as much reason to think the 2016 Cubs might be the best team they'll field in that time period. It would make sense to be pretty aggressive this offseason.

Not to mention, the market is flush with starting pitching, exactly what they need. Get one studly arm, then you can always package the Quality Start Machine with some other guys to get a young cost-controlled pitcher for the 4 spot, Hammel's your 5 for a year, and it's all crescent fresh from here on out.

[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?

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.

Apparently they are planning on being creative.

[Canadouche]

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 wonder how much it would cost to bring back Jackson? I don't know how good he is defensively, but offensively he's actually pretty similar to Dexter.

[Quality Start Machine]

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 wonder how much it would cost to bring back Jackson? I don't know how good he is defensively, but offensively he's actually pretty similar to Dexter.

He's better defensively. As for cost, he made 7.7 last year. If he'd re-up for 2 years at around that, the Cubs would be doing OK. But I don't think they'd need to rush into it. I don't know how many teams feel they have a hole that only Austin Jackson can fill.

[Tonker]

So, somebody finally accepted a qualifying offer: Colby Rasmus will get $15.8MM next year.  The Astros must be thrilled.

[R-V]

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.

Just curious, what makes you drop Greinke and not Price in as the hypothetical big $ pitcher?

Also, I was just looking at when the big moves went down last year, and now I'm depressed we may have to wait a month for anything significant to happen.

Hammel - December 8
Montero - December 9
Lester - December 10
Ross - December 19
Fowler - January 19

[Armchair_QB]

If they're looking for a defense-first CF who can't hit a lick, might as well throw Leonys Martin in the discussion.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/texas-rangers/headlines/20151111-grant-rangers-recognize-leonys-martin-s-value-on-the-field-or-in-the-trade-market.ece