In advance of next week's Winter Meetings in Orlando and partly as a result of the flurry of activity on Tuesday, my brother and I have enjoyed an aggressive back-and-forth regarding the state of the Cubs. We have approached the current status of the franchise from different points of view. While we both believe that genuine contention lies in 2016 with a strongly competitive team capable of progressing early and competing in 2015, we disagree on what current steps should be taken to help the team reach that goal. Or at least we used to.
I have repeatedly contended that this offseason represents the best opportunity for big-time upgrading given the presence of marquee talent on the market and the club's guaranteed protected #4 overall selection in next June's draft. The opposing view? The 2014 Cubs aren't going to compete yet, so what's the point of spending now instead of later?
There are plenty of business reasons for spending now with a trio standing out. First, as happened with the Yankees last year, attendance is way down at Wrigley Field. After Cubs fans tasted winning somewhat regularly in the 2000s, the 2010s have been a massive letdown. It would certainly help to pack the ballpark again.
The other two business reasons are more important to the team's bottom line. The second reason: a competitive team that generates interest from Chicagoans could significantly increase the odds of obtaining city approval for major renovations of the stadium and Wrigleyville area. And third, the club's television rights contract is up for grabs in 12 months. Higher ratings equal big dollars there.
But even with all of that in the open, the baseball reasons for spending now instead of next year are extremely compelling. In order to convey that in full, three realities must be clearly understood:
1. The Cubs are historically bad and devoid of talent at the MLB level, having just lost the most games ever at the MLB level over a two year stretch;
2. There is serious, impact talent in the pipeline set to reach Wrigley Field in the 2014 and 2015 seasons; and
3. Unlike in years past, the Cubs do not have significant financial resources committed well into the future.
The third point merits a deeper look. In latter portion of the last decade, the club made a series of massive, long-term salary commitments to players including Carlos Zambrano (5 years, $90M), Ryan Dempster (4 years, $52M), Ted Lilly (4 years, $40M), Jason Marquis (3 years, $21M), Carlos Marmol (3 years, $20M), Alfonso Soriano (8 years, $136M), Aramis Ramirez (5 years, $75M), Derrek Lee (5 years, $65M), Kosuke Fukudome (4 years, $48M), and Milton Bradley (3 years, $30M).
The current Cubs? They carry only one such deal at this point: the remaining 3 years and $33M on Edwin Jackson's deal (I am presuming that the signing bonus was paid up front). There is some dead money on the 2014 payroll, namely $14M for Alfonso Soriano, $1.2M for Gerardo Concepcion (also in 2015), and roughly $500K for Scott Hairston.
This is a franchise in a much different position than it was in three years ago when the payroll ballooned to $144.3M for a 75-87 disappointment.
With this foundational understanding of the state of the franchise, my brother made a comment that spurred a detailed comeback from me. I have criticized him repeatedly for not being willing to take bold steps to improve the team this offseason. Translation: he doesn't want the Cubs to spend any money in free agency, instead preferring bargain bin shopping and trades. I have countered with the reasons given below, as well as the idea that the team lacks sufficient talent to trade for impact talent: when you're short on talent everywhere, you can't use what little you have to plug a hole because it just creates another one.
Anyway, in response to my questioning why he doesn't want the team to win in 2014 if possible, he rose the idea of the team signing Robinson Cano, Masahiro Tanaka, Matt Garza, Curtis Granderson, and Grant Balfour this offseason so that we could enjoy watching a competitive team in 2014, lamenting that it would be against the team's long-term interest. He said, "I know it's dumb to make some major expenditures with where we are at this point."
And that was it; I had my opening.
See, it's not nearly as crazy as it sounds for the Cubs to go on a massive spending spree. Here are projected contracts required to sign the five free agents listed above:
Cano: 8 years, $200M
Tanaka: 7 years, $110M plus $20M posting fee (given the new cap, the player will get more)
Garza: 5 years, $80M
Granderson: 4 years, $62M
Balfour: 3 years, $24M
The Granderson number feels a bit high while Garza may be a bit low; regardless, these deals are in the ballpark.
There's no way the Cubs could actually absorb such enormous expenditures, right? Here's a look at the 2014 roster without any major additions:
LF Lake ($.5M)
SS Castro ($6M)
1B Rizzo ($3M)
RF Schierholtz ($3.8M)
CF Sweeney ($1.5M)
C Castillo ($.5M)
3B Valbuena ($1.5M)
2B Barney ($2M)
SP1 Samardzija ($4.9M)
SP2 Jackson ($13M)
SP3 Wood ($3.6M)
SP4 Arrieta ($.5M)
SP5 Rusin ($.5M)
Bench: C Kottaras ($1M), INF Murphy ($1M), 3B Olt ($.5M), OF Bogusevic ($.5M), McDonald ($.5M)
Bullpen: Strop ($1M), Russell ($1.7M), Wright ($1.5M), Parker ($.5M), Vizcaino ($.5M), Arrieta ($.5M), Grimm ($.5M), Villanueva ($5M)
Dead Money/Prospects: Soriano ($14M), Fujikawa ($4.5M), Hairston ($.5M), Soler ($2M), Concepcion ($1.2M)
The lineup costs just $18.8M, the bench $3.5M, the rotation $22.5M, the bullpen $11.2M, and dead money and prospects $22.2M for a total of $78.2M. That's a really terrible roster with a payroll that would have ranked 22nd in 2013, just behind Kansas City and ahead of Minnesota. One of these is not like the others...
Well, after that sobering look at our likely future, here's a look at the 2014 roster with those big salaries added in (I will amortize the posting fee over the life of Tanaka's contract given that I expect the team to finagle his salaries to accomplish the same):
LF Lake ($.5M) / Schierholtz ($3.8M)
SS Castro ($6M)
2B Cano ($25M)
1B Rizzo ($3M)
RF Granderson ($15.5M)
CF Sweeney ($1.5M)
C Castillo ($.5M)
3B Valbuena ($1.5M)
SP1 Samardzija ($4.9M)
SP2 Tanaka ($18.6M)
SP3 Garza ($16M)
SP4 Jackson ($13M)
SP5 Wood ($3.6M)
Bench: C Kottaras ($1M), INF Murphy ($1M), INF Barney ($2M), OF Bogusevic ($.5M), OF Schierholtz (above)
Bullpen: Balfour ($8M), Strop ($1M), Russell ($1.7M), Wright ($1.5M), Parker ($.5M), Vizcaino ($.5M), Arrieta ($.5M)
Dead Money/Prospects: Soriano ($14M), Villanueva ($5M), Fujikawa ($4.5M), Hairston ($.5M), Soler ($2M), Concepcion ($1.2M)
For that 25-man roster, the Cubs would spend $53.5M on the lineup, $8.3M on the bench, $56.1M on the rotation, $13.7M on the bullpen, and $27.2M in dead money and prospect contracts for a total of $158.8M.
The 2010 payroll was $144.3M, so this isn't exactly uncharted territory for the Cubs. This projected number also misses high compared to what the team would realistically do if the five free agents were brought aboard: Villanueva is expendable with Chris Rusin and Justin Grimm available for spot starts and long relief, and Barney is unnecessary with marquee starters at 2B and SS, leaving the club free to unload both salaries for low-level prospects or even just the salary relief alone. Removing that $7M and replacing it with a pair of minimum-salary bodies leaves a payroll of $152.8M. That 2014 club is obviously exponentially better than the product the team is likely to put on the field.
Just as importantly, those players augment the talent the club has coming up through the minors as opposed to blocking it. Here's a look at the 2015 roster with approximate arbitration raises and re-signing Wesley Wright for $1M beyond his 2014 figure:
CF Lake ($.5M)
3B Baez ($.5M)
2B Cano ($25M)
LF Bryant ($.5M)
1B Rizzo ($5M)
RF Granderson ($15.5M)
SS Castro ($7M)
C Castillo ($1.5M)
SP1 Samardzija ($10M)
SP2 Tanaka ($18.6M)
SP3 Garza ($16M)
SP4 Jackson ($13M)
SP5 Wood ($5.5M)
Bench: C Kottaras ($1.3M), IF Alcantara ($.5M), 3B/OF Olt ($.5M), OF Sweeney ($1.5M), OF Szczur ($.5M)
Bullpen: Balfour ($8M), Strop ($1.5M), Russell ($2.2M), Wright ($2.5M), Parker ($.5M), Vizcaino ($1.5M), Arrieta ($1.5M)
Dead Money/Prospects: Fujikawa ($.5M), Soler ($3M), Concepcion ($1.2M)
That roster? The lineup is $55.5M, the bench $4.3M, the rotation $63.1M, the bullpen $17.7M, and dead money and prospect contracts are down to $4.7M. The total? $145.3M.
Under that scenario, as of the end of 2015, the Cubs would have the following guaranteed salary commitments remaining:
Cano: 6 years, $150M
Rizzo: 4 years, $32M (includes $2M paid for 2020 buyout of team option)
Castro: 4 years, $38M (includes $1M paid for 2020 buyout of team option)
Tanaka: 5 years, $92.9M
Garza: 3 years, $48M
Granderson: 2 years, $31M
Jackson: 1 year, $13M
Balfour: 1 year, $8M
Soler: 5 years, $18M
Sweeney: Buyout of team option, $.5M
That 2015 team has the potential for an explosive lineup, top to bottom, and some serious pitching every day. Samardzija would hit free agency and a group of (hopefully) contributors would be well into the arbitration system including Strop, Castillo, Vizcaino, Wood, and Arrieta, but there would be increased flexibility to acquire talent via trade given the amount of in-house options. More importantly, there would be a lot of 2014 and 2015 wins in the rearview mirror.
The 2014 payroll of $158.8M would have ranked fifth in baseball in 2013, roughly $1M behind Philadelphia and just a hair beyond Boston. However, given the rosy long-term outlook for the club, the team payroll likely wouldn't reach the $159M figure again for a few more years given that the team's biggest talent acquisitions will come in the form of cheap, internal options: Javier Baez, Kris Bryant, Jorge Soler, Albert Almora, Arismendy Alcantara, Christian Villanueva, Kyle Hendricks, Pierce Johnson, CJ Edwards, Corey Black, Ivan Pineyro, and even former top prospects turned question marks in Mike Olt and Brett Jackson. There is a ton of talent on the way that will actually help to decrease the payroll over time.
To be clear: I am not proposing that the Cubs sign Cano, Tanaka, Garza, Granderson, and Balfour in the next month. That would cost an enormous amount of someone else's cash plus the club's 2nd and 3rd round draft picks next June. But Cano, Tanaka, and Garza for cash and a 2nd rounder? Yeah, I'm all for it! Removing Granderson and Balfour from the above calculation and replacing them with minimum salary bodies, the 2014 payroll drops to $136.3M and the 2015 number is down to $122.8M. A $122.8M payroll for the Chicago stinkin' Cubs? That's eminently doable: the Cubs were at $134M or more from 2009-2011 and $118.3M in 2008.
The $122.8M figure would have figured tenth in 2013 behind the Yankees, Dodgers, Phillies, Red Sox, Tigers, Giants, Angels, Rangers, and White Sox. The Blue Jays, Cardinals, Nationals, and Reds would have all been within $12M of that number too. By 2015, given inflation and the mounds of cash pouring into the game, a $122.8M payroll should be close to the median figure in the league.
The Cubs' actual payroll peers in 2013? With their revenue rankings in parentheses, the three teams spending just more than the Cubs were St. Louis (7), Washington (13), and Cincinnati (17). The three spending just less were Baltimore (19), Milwaukee (20), and Arizona (24). The Cubs? The Cubs were fourth in revenue.
The moral of this story: don't think that it's crazy for the Cubs to go after a 25-year-old potential #2 starter, a top-2 position player over the last four years (Cano trails only Miguel Cabrera from 2010-2013) who plays a premium position, and another #2/#3 starting pitcher at the same time. It's just absolutely not crazy, not for a team that plays in Chicago owned by billionaires in a sport with millions of additional dollars coming in every year. The Cubs could add Cano or Tanaka using just the amount of increased revenue they'll enjoy in 2014 as a result of MLB's new national television contract. Cano, Tanaka, and Garza would all supplement, not block, the core of prospects making its way to Chicago in the coming years.
The club should actually have even more spending flexibility in 2014 than it may have had without its international shopping spree in 2013. Thanks to the additions of teens Eloy Jimenez, Gleyber Torres, Jen-Ho Tseng, Jefferson Mejia, Erling Moreno, and Johan Matos, the Cubs spent at least $7.8M on international amateur signing bonuses in 2013. While the team will still spend internationally in 2014, their expected bonus outlay is severely restricted by the $250K maximum bonus that the team may offer as a result of the new CBA. Thus, expect the Cubs to spend something like $2M-$3M on amateur targets. If the team also signs two compensation free agents like Cano and Granderson, the Cubs would forfeit their 2nd and 3rd round draft picks and the corresponding bonus pool allocation. Accounting for slight inflation, those picks would be worth about $1.3M and $720K. Taken together, the team would have about $7M less to spend on amateur talent in 2014 than it did in 2013, cash that may be reallocated to other avenues.
There's one additional factor that must be considered having looked at all of the above: the financial state of the team. Much has been made of the heavily debt-financed purchase of the team by the Ricketts family. Thus, any available figures should be taken with a very large grain of salt. Nonetheless, Forbes currently values the Cubs as MLB's fourth most valuable franchise at a value of $1B. The team's 2013 revenue of $274M also ranked fourth. The $32.1M operating income ranked first (although you may wisely question the utility of operating income). Unfortunately, the club also ranks first in a much less appealing category: debt-to-value ratio. The 58% figure is one of just three at 50% or higher and many clubs are in the single digits or at 0%.
Still, the team's revenue increases have been largely immune to the on-field product, increasing steadily from $156M to $274M over the past decade that included a pair of division flags and a quartet of top-10 draft picks.
The team doesn't have to spend its money this offseason and it most likely won't. But don't confuse yourself: it's not crazy to think that they have the resources to do so while fitting acquisitions squarely into gaping holes in the short- and long-term plans. The rule of thumb of baseball payrolls is to spend roughly 50% of revenue. Applying that figure would leave the Cubs with a $137M payroll in 2014, plus half of any gains.
Still think a $152.8M payroll is crazy?
Friday, December 6, 2013
Monday, December 2, 2013
Chicago Cubs Offseason Wish List
Like every fan, I want the Cubs to win, and I'd prefer that the team do so sooner rather than later. I also recognize that building a championship level team takes time, unless the Cubs are interested in a Dodgers-style free-for-all. Given that the current regime has shown no inclination to spend well beyond the luxury tax threshold (or even close to it for that matter), here's the series of realistic moves I'd like to see the team pursue this winter with an eye toward competing in 2015 and beyond.
I'll start with the move that has a less than 1% chance of happening. I'll then move along assuming that said move does not come to fruition. Unfortunately, I started this list about a week and a half ago, so just take yourself back to mid-November in your mind.
1. Transaction: Sign 2B Robinson Cano for 8 years, $208M
Realistic?: <1%
Rationale: The pendulum finally seems to have swung too far against free agent talent. Three factors are dominating the discussion on Cano. First, the $310M figure floated by his apparently inept representation. Second, the reluctance of seemingly every team to commit big dollars to players into their mid-30s. Third, everyone appears resigned to the reality that Cano will not leave the Bronx.
Here's why folks are off base: Cano is different. He's not different in that he won't age. Of course he will age. Barring a deluge of HGH in his tap water, Cano's talent will fade over time. Paying $26M to a 37-year-old Cano doesn't sound appealing. So what exactly makes Cano different? His position. Cano is no Darwin Barney with the glove, but he's a very capable second baseman. Whereas Albert Pujols and Josh Hamilton clog up first base and corner outfield spots with their rapidly declining bats, Cano fills the much weaker keystone. Even if he regresses to the point that he is a league average bat, he does so at a position with below average offensive output league-wide. Obviously, if he continues to hit, he is only that much more valuable given the scarcity of quality bats at second base. He does not offer speed, so his bat needs to carry the load. But who better to bet on than a high average, low strikeout, average walk, high power second baseman? Cano also fits beautifully given the Cubs' plethora of big, right-handed power bats coming up through the system. Arismendy Alcantara represents the only viable second base solution, and he's hardly enough to justify passing on Cano.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: It won't happen because of cash. There are lots of reasons to be wary of the Cubs as big spenders. The Ricketts family heavily debt-financed their purchase of the squad: the Cubs are one of only five teams with a debt-to-value ratio of at least 40% and they lead the league at 58% (they're also 4th in revenue and 1st in operating income). Theo Epstein and Jed Hoyer may be completely smitten with the concept of building exclusively from within. Or perhaps the team prefers next offseason's crop of targets (if so, that's a poor decision). Whatever the reason, the club isn't willing to spend the amount necessary to nab Cano. I wish they would: it's not my money and he's a marquee talent with tremendous positional value.
More importantly, at some point this offseason, other clubs will realize that Cano has shifted from unattainable at $310M to eminently in play at $200M. When that happens, bidding will heat up and Cano should be able to nab something like 9 years, $245M. The Cubs aren't going to go that high.
2. Transaction: Trade 3B Luis Valbuena to the New York Yankees for a low-level prospect
Realistic?: 100%
Rationale: The Yankees find themselves in a holding pattern at the hot corner. Alex Rodriguez may very well be their everyday third baseman next year; he may also ride off into the shunned sunset, never playing another game at Yankee Stadium. In either scenario, Valbuena makes plenty of sense for the Bombers. Valbuena provides exceptional defense with the ability to play (a presumably adequate) second base if necessary. Offensively, he is batting average challenged, but draws enough walks to get on base adequately with good power to the pull side. To recap, he's a glove-first, lefty third baseman with solid pull power. He was built for the Yankees, either as a hedge against A-Rod or a perfect bridge from A-Rod to the team's next big third baseman. Valbuena comes with the added bonus of depressed salary given that his primary attribute - his defense - is traditionally undervalued in the arbitration process. For a team screaming about the luxury tax, Valbuena represents an excellent all-around fit.
For a team that struggled to fill the third base spot for decades after the departure of Ron Santo, the Cubs find themselves completely stocked at the position. The team's top two prospects - Javier Baez and Kris Bryant - may both see third base in their defensive futures. On top of that duo, Mike Olt (AAA), Christian Villanueva (AA), and Jeimer Candelario (A) all rank among the club's better prospects. With so many potential options and a window that opens later rather than sooner, Valbuena is a placeholder. Given that he is not in the club's long-term plans, the team would be well served to flip him while his value is decently high. While Valbuena wouldn't figure to bring back much in a deal - think a lesser Corey Black-type - perhaps the Cubs could get creative. The Cubs could easily absorb the $3M the Yankees owe Vernon Wells into their 2014 payroll, even if the club simply released Wells upon completing the deal. Offering Brian Cashman the chance to improve his third base spot while pulling off a net payroll deduction? That might just pry a decent prospect, someone like Jose Campos after his elbow issues have darkened his prospect star.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: This move makes too much sense to me. I haven't been able to talk myself out of it. Valbuena is a safe acquisition for the Yankees as a hedge against departures from A-Rod and/or Cano. The Cubs don't need Valbuena and would be well served to cash in on his late-20s peak performance. I think that this move will happen because the Cubs recognize their logjam at third base while the Yankees appreciate the need for cheaper, productive infield talent even if the ceiling is low.
3. Transaction: Trade OF Albert Almora to Miami Marlins for SP Andrew Heaney
Realistic?: 10%
Rationale: This one is simple: the Cubs are flush with positional talent without pitching depth. The Marlins have Christian Yelich and Jake Marisnick pushing to the Majors but no other positional talent, yet the franchise is loaded with pitching. Why not take a bit from each team's surplus to even out the distribution among positions?
*Disclaimer: I haven't liked Almora since before we drafted him. It kills me that the club took such a low ceiling player at #6 with such an obvious need for pitching. Almora is described as a guy who can reach .290/.340/.450 lines with average center field defense and some running ability. Yipee? I'd right the wrong from draft day 2012 and flip the ninth and sixth picks.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: Teams just don't make prospect-for-prospect deals. They just don't. This one makes about as much sense as any you can imagine. My mind tingles with expanding the possibilities (Almora and Alcantara to Miami for Heaney and Jose Urena?). But I realize the unlikelihood.
4. Transaction: Trade SP Jeff Samardzija to the Toronto Blue Jays for pitching prospects
Realistic?: 50%
Rationale: The Cubs presumably would have locked Samardzija into a new deal by now if one was coming. Samardzija has bet on himself and appears to be in line to cash in as a result of going year-to-year. So the team can deal him for pieces that fit the window of contention a bit better and offer a higher overall value.
The rationale for Toronto is even simpler: they're already all-in. After last season's blockbusters with the Marlins and Mets, Toronto has to show something big this year. As it stands, the Jays don't have the rotation horses to do it. Enter a strong #2 option in Samardzija. Shark enables them to fill out their staff to complement their intriguing offense.
Much like the Marlins, the Jays possess a bevy of arms that should interest the Cubs. Aaron Sanchez figures to be off limits, although any deal that includes Sanchez is worthwhile for the Cubs. I'd be surprised to see Samardzija-for-Sanchez straight up, but any pieces coming back beyond Sanchez are gravy to me. Assuming Sanchez sticks with the Jays, a deal including any pair of the following sextet of arms should be enough to entice the Cubs: diminutive 2012 top pick Marcus Stroman, big teen Roberto Osuna, polished high-floor lefty Sean Nolin, massive lefty Matt Smoral, tiny big-armed righty Alberto Tirado, and recovering lefty Daniel Norris.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: I think it is likelier than not that Samardzija gets traded this offseason. Operating in that reality, only a small handful of teams genuinely possess the right combination of win-now approach and pitching depth to match up with the Cubs. The Diamondbacks have the prospects, but I question whether they actually have the need for Samardzija. The Yankees could actually be a strong match for the Cubs with premium prospect catcher Gary Sanchez possibly available in light of Brian McCann's new deal and power arm Jose Ramirez making progress. But the Jays are still the best match of desperation and talent, and I can see the regime flipping Samardzija if it means 12 controllable years of Norris and Osuna.
5. Transaction: Sign one of the second-tier free agent starting pitchers among Matt Garza, Ricky Nolasco, and Ubaldo Jimenez
Realistic?: 20%
Rationale: Last offseason's signing of Edwin Jackson was an admission: the Cubs had no pitching in their system. In order to compete at the highest level, the team needs some pitching.
That's where one of these pitchers comes in. If the Cubs do trade Samardzija, the rotation will have only Jackson, Travis Wood, Jake Arrieta, Justin Grimm, Carlos Villanueva, Chris Rusin and Kyle Hendricks to fight for spots. While that group isn't exciting for 2014, it isn't any more exciting for 2015. While the farm figures to have a few arms pushing for jobs by then, the likes of Pierce Johnson and Neil Ramirez aren't likely to push for All-Star bids. As I mentioned earlier, championship level teams are built over time and this group of free agent starters offers the ability to add a helpful arm for only cash. Garza figures to obtain the highest commitment (4 years, $72M) while Nolasco will be paid as a plus innings eater (4 years, $60M) and Jimenez is this winter's biggest wild card (anywhere from 3 years, $40M to 5 years, $90M). My preference is for Garza given his ceiling while Jimenez at least intrigues.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: I could see any of these additions from the Cubs perspective. But for the player? The money will have to escalate quite a bit to justify a guaranteed year (or more) of losing during the player's prime. There's also heavy risk with Garza (injuries) and Jimenez (velocity). Strangely, I don't think any of these signings are more or less likely depending on what happens with Samardzija.
6. Transaction: Sign CF Jacoby Ellsbury for 7 years, $141M
Realistic?: 15%
Rationale: This one is really simple. The Cubs have tons of bats coming that can play in the infield or in the outfield corners. But in center? If you like Albert Almora, I suppose he could fill that role. I'm just not a believer, so give me Ellsbury. He should slot into the franchise seamlessly given the need for a top-of-the-order bat, a plus outfield defender, and some speed. Any of the club's hitting prospects should fit 2-5, but none of them are all that great atop the lineup. Ellsbury just makes too much sense.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: That's a lot of money for a speed/defense/on-base center fielder in his 30s. The Red Sox have given almost no indication that they plan to retain Ellsbury, a puzzling move for the franchise given what he has meant to them over the years. Power isn't truly a part of his game - his 2011 outburst notwithstanding - and dollars tend to follow homers. Realistically, there are a lot of reasons for this move to happen, but other teams need an impact performer too. I'm not sure that the Cubs will be willing to top the market.
7. Transaction: Tender 2B Darwin Barney for 1 year, $2M
Realistic?: 99%
Rationale: The Cubs need to play someone at second base this year and the non-Barney internal options are...uninspiring. Barney's 2013 offensive output was mortifying to be sure. However, he is bound to improve on those numbers in 2014. His price tag remains reasonably low. More importantly, he can be flipped this summer.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: It's going to happen. The best-case scenario for the club with Barney involves a few months of health with a regressed BABIP leading to a poor offensive line like .260/.305/.350. If Barney pumps out that line with his elite defense at second base, there should be some market for him, at which point the team will have spent about $1M to obtain a low-level prospect. That's not a bad move.
8. Transaction: Sign This Year's Scott Kazmir for 1 year, $500K....or Sign Last Year's Scott Kazmir for 2 years, $15M
Realistic?: 20%
Rationale: The Cubs are still in desperate need of pitching, so finding high upside arms is the top priority this winter. Finding a formerly successful starter who has fallen on hard times makes plenty of sense. The name that came to mind was Texas' Colby Lewis, a formerly solid mid-rotation arm carved up over the last couple of years.
Then again, last year's Scott Kazmir, Scott Kazmir himself, would make plenty of sense even at a much higher cost. Kazmir is a huge lefty power arm, something the Cubs have lacked since...well, forever? Kazmir comes with considerable risk but also considerable upside.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: Strangely, it seems as though the club might avoid this type of pitcher in the aftermath of the Scott Baker 2013 experience. I think they'll go after a somewhat safer option to avoid this level of risk.
9. Transaction: Sign a Couple of Cheap Relivers
Realistic?: 99%
Rationale: The team needs pitching. That includes relief pitching. Grabbing arms from outside the organization makes plenty of sense.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: It's going to happen. I don't think we'll see this regime spend heavily on relief pitching anytime soon. Spending lightly? Certainly.
10. Transaction: Bid $65M for the Right to Negotiate with SP Masahiro Tanaka, then Sign Him for 6 years, $65M
Realistic?: 5%
Rationale: It's the same thing as all of the above pitching explanations: the Cubs need big-time pitching and lots of it. Unfortunately, there's so little talent in the organization that they really can't afford to give up their inexpensive prospect talent in order to acquire said pitching talent. So, instead, they should utilize one resource that should give them a sizable advantage over most of their peers: cash. The Cubs can buy their way into Tanaka. It's possible that a $65M posting fee will be inadequate to secure his services. Regardless, the team has the chance to acquire an MLB-ready 25-year-old #3 or better starter for only cash. Such opportunities are exceedingly rare.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: I think that the Cubs will place a very competitive bid on Tanaka, likely extending beyond $40M in an attempt to negotiate with the hurler. I just don't know if they're got the resources to outbid the Yankees or Dodgers. Unfortunately for the Cubs, those two clubs have a twisted incentive to spend lavishly bidding on Tanaka in lieu of paying an established MLB starter like Garza because the posting fee will not count against the luxury tax. The Cubs are well under the tax threshold, so this factor cuts against the team. I'll be stunned but ecstatic if the Cubs manage to win the bidding for the right to pay Tanaka.
I'll start with the move that has a less than 1% chance of happening. I'll then move along assuming that said move does not come to fruition. Unfortunately, I started this list about a week and a half ago, so just take yourself back to mid-November in your mind.
1. Transaction: Sign 2B Robinson Cano for 8 years, $208M
Realistic?: <1%
Rationale: The pendulum finally seems to have swung too far against free agent talent. Three factors are dominating the discussion on Cano. First, the $310M figure floated by his apparently inept representation. Second, the reluctance of seemingly every team to commit big dollars to players into their mid-30s. Third, everyone appears resigned to the reality that Cano will not leave the Bronx.
Here's why folks are off base: Cano is different. He's not different in that he won't age. Of course he will age. Barring a deluge of HGH in his tap water, Cano's talent will fade over time. Paying $26M to a 37-year-old Cano doesn't sound appealing. So what exactly makes Cano different? His position. Cano is no Darwin Barney with the glove, but he's a very capable second baseman. Whereas Albert Pujols and Josh Hamilton clog up first base and corner outfield spots with their rapidly declining bats, Cano fills the much weaker keystone. Even if he regresses to the point that he is a league average bat, he does so at a position with below average offensive output league-wide. Obviously, if he continues to hit, he is only that much more valuable given the scarcity of quality bats at second base. He does not offer speed, so his bat needs to carry the load. But who better to bet on than a high average, low strikeout, average walk, high power second baseman? Cano also fits beautifully given the Cubs' plethora of big, right-handed power bats coming up through the system. Arismendy Alcantara represents the only viable second base solution, and he's hardly enough to justify passing on Cano.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: It won't happen because of cash. There are lots of reasons to be wary of the Cubs as big spenders. The Ricketts family heavily debt-financed their purchase of the squad: the Cubs are one of only five teams with a debt-to-value ratio of at least 40% and they lead the league at 58% (they're also 4th in revenue and 1st in operating income). Theo Epstein and Jed Hoyer may be completely smitten with the concept of building exclusively from within. Or perhaps the team prefers next offseason's crop of targets (if so, that's a poor decision). Whatever the reason, the club isn't willing to spend the amount necessary to nab Cano. I wish they would: it's not my money and he's a marquee talent with tremendous positional value.
More importantly, at some point this offseason, other clubs will realize that Cano has shifted from unattainable at $310M to eminently in play at $200M. When that happens, bidding will heat up and Cano should be able to nab something like 9 years, $245M. The Cubs aren't going to go that high.
2. Transaction: Trade 3B Luis Valbuena to the New York Yankees for a low-level prospect
Realistic?: 100%
Rationale: The Yankees find themselves in a holding pattern at the hot corner. Alex Rodriguez may very well be their everyday third baseman next year; he may also ride off into the shunned sunset, never playing another game at Yankee Stadium. In either scenario, Valbuena makes plenty of sense for the Bombers. Valbuena provides exceptional defense with the ability to play (a presumably adequate) second base if necessary. Offensively, he is batting average challenged, but draws enough walks to get on base adequately with good power to the pull side. To recap, he's a glove-first, lefty third baseman with solid pull power. He was built for the Yankees, either as a hedge against A-Rod or a perfect bridge from A-Rod to the team's next big third baseman. Valbuena comes with the added bonus of depressed salary given that his primary attribute - his defense - is traditionally undervalued in the arbitration process. For a team screaming about the luxury tax, Valbuena represents an excellent all-around fit.
For a team that struggled to fill the third base spot for decades after the departure of Ron Santo, the Cubs find themselves completely stocked at the position. The team's top two prospects - Javier Baez and Kris Bryant - may both see third base in their defensive futures. On top of that duo, Mike Olt (AAA), Christian Villanueva (AA), and Jeimer Candelario (A) all rank among the club's better prospects. With so many potential options and a window that opens later rather than sooner, Valbuena is a placeholder. Given that he is not in the club's long-term plans, the team would be well served to flip him while his value is decently high. While Valbuena wouldn't figure to bring back much in a deal - think a lesser Corey Black-type - perhaps the Cubs could get creative. The Cubs could easily absorb the $3M the Yankees owe Vernon Wells into their 2014 payroll, even if the club simply released Wells upon completing the deal. Offering Brian Cashman the chance to improve his third base spot while pulling off a net payroll deduction? That might just pry a decent prospect, someone like Jose Campos after his elbow issues have darkened his prospect star.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: This move makes too much sense to me. I haven't been able to talk myself out of it. Valbuena is a safe acquisition for the Yankees as a hedge against departures from A-Rod and/or Cano. The Cubs don't need Valbuena and would be well served to cash in on his late-20s peak performance. I think that this move will happen because the Cubs recognize their logjam at third base while the Yankees appreciate the need for cheaper, productive infield talent even if the ceiling is low.
3. Transaction: Trade OF Albert Almora to Miami Marlins for SP Andrew Heaney
Realistic?: 10%
Rationale: This one is simple: the Cubs are flush with positional talent without pitching depth. The Marlins have Christian Yelich and Jake Marisnick pushing to the Majors but no other positional talent, yet the franchise is loaded with pitching. Why not take a bit from each team's surplus to even out the distribution among positions?
*Disclaimer: I haven't liked Almora since before we drafted him. It kills me that the club took such a low ceiling player at #6 with such an obvious need for pitching. Almora is described as a guy who can reach .290/.340/.450 lines with average center field defense and some running ability. Yipee? I'd right the wrong from draft day 2012 and flip the ninth and sixth picks.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: Teams just don't make prospect-for-prospect deals. They just don't. This one makes about as much sense as any you can imagine. My mind tingles with expanding the possibilities (Almora and Alcantara to Miami for Heaney and Jose Urena?). But I realize the unlikelihood.
4. Transaction: Trade SP Jeff Samardzija to the Toronto Blue Jays for pitching prospects
Realistic?: 50%
Rationale: The Cubs presumably would have locked Samardzija into a new deal by now if one was coming. Samardzija has bet on himself and appears to be in line to cash in as a result of going year-to-year. So the team can deal him for pieces that fit the window of contention a bit better and offer a higher overall value.
The rationale for Toronto is even simpler: they're already all-in. After last season's blockbusters with the Marlins and Mets, Toronto has to show something big this year. As it stands, the Jays don't have the rotation horses to do it. Enter a strong #2 option in Samardzija. Shark enables them to fill out their staff to complement their intriguing offense.
Much like the Marlins, the Jays possess a bevy of arms that should interest the Cubs. Aaron Sanchez figures to be off limits, although any deal that includes Sanchez is worthwhile for the Cubs. I'd be surprised to see Samardzija-for-Sanchez straight up, but any pieces coming back beyond Sanchez are gravy to me. Assuming Sanchez sticks with the Jays, a deal including any pair of the following sextet of arms should be enough to entice the Cubs: diminutive 2012 top pick Marcus Stroman, big teen Roberto Osuna, polished high-floor lefty Sean Nolin, massive lefty Matt Smoral, tiny big-armed righty Alberto Tirado, and recovering lefty Daniel Norris.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: I think it is likelier than not that Samardzija gets traded this offseason. Operating in that reality, only a small handful of teams genuinely possess the right combination of win-now approach and pitching depth to match up with the Cubs. The Diamondbacks have the prospects, but I question whether they actually have the need for Samardzija. The Yankees could actually be a strong match for the Cubs with premium prospect catcher Gary Sanchez possibly available in light of Brian McCann's new deal and power arm Jose Ramirez making progress. But the Jays are still the best match of desperation and talent, and I can see the regime flipping Samardzija if it means 12 controllable years of Norris and Osuna.
5. Transaction: Sign one of the second-tier free agent starting pitchers among Matt Garza, Ricky Nolasco, and Ubaldo Jimenez
Realistic?: 20%
Rationale: Last offseason's signing of Edwin Jackson was an admission: the Cubs had no pitching in their system. In order to compete at the highest level, the team needs some pitching.
That's where one of these pitchers comes in. If the Cubs do trade Samardzija, the rotation will have only Jackson, Travis Wood, Jake Arrieta, Justin Grimm, Carlos Villanueva, Chris Rusin and Kyle Hendricks to fight for spots. While that group isn't exciting for 2014, it isn't any more exciting for 2015. While the farm figures to have a few arms pushing for jobs by then, the likes of Pierce Johnson and Neil Ramirez aren't likely to push for All-Star bids. As I mentioned earlier, championship level teams are built over time and this group of free agent starters offers the ability to add a helpful arm for only cash. Garza figures to obtain the highest commitment (4 years, $72M) while Nolasco will be paid as a plus innings eater (4 years, $60M) and Jimenez is this winter's biggest wild card (anywhere from 3 years, $40M to 5 years, $90M). My preference is for Garza given his ceiling while Jimenez at least intrigues.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: I could see any of these additions from the Cubs perspective. But for the player? The money will have to escalate quite a bit to justify a guaranteed year (or more) of losing during the player's prime. There's also heavy risk with Garza (injuries) and Jimenez (velocity). Strangely, I don't think any of these signings are more or less likely depending on what happens with Samardzija.
6. Transaction: Sign CF Jacoby Ellsbury for 7 years, $141M
Realistic?: 15%
Rationale: This one is really simple. The Cubs have tons of bats coming that can play in the infield or in the outfield corners. But in center? If you like Albert Almora, I suppose he could fill that role. I'm just not a believer, so give me Ellsbury. He should slot into the franchise seamlessly given the need for a top-of-the-order bat, a plus outfield defender, and some speed. Any of the club's hitting prospects should fit 2-5, but none of them are all that great atop the lineup. Ellsbury just makes too much sense.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: That's a lot of money for a speed/defense/on-base center fielder in his 30s. The Red Sox have given almost no indication that they plan to retain Ellsbury, a puzzling move for the franchise given what he has meant to them over the years. Power isn't truly a part of his game - his 2011 outburst notwithstanding - and dollars tend to follow homers. Realistically, there are a lot of reasons for this move to happen, but other teams need an impact performer too. I'm not sure that the Cubs will be willing to top the market.
7. Transaction: Tender 2B Darwin Barney for 1 year, $2M
Realistic?: 99%
Rationale: The Cubs need to play someone at second base this year and the non-Barney internal options are...uninspiring. Barney's 2013 offensive output was mortifying to be sure. However, he is bound to improve on those numbers in 2014. His price tag remains reasonably low. More importantly, he can be flipped this summer.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: It's going to happen. The best-case scenario for the club with Barney involves a few months of health with a regressed BABIP leading to a poor offensive line like .260/.305/.350. If Barney pumps out that line with his elite defense at second base, there should be some market for him, at which point the team will have spent about $1M to obtain a low-level prospect. That's not a bad move.
8. Transaction: Sign This Year's Scott Kazmir for 1 year, $500K....or Sign Last Year's Scott Kazmir for 2 years, $15M
Realistic?: 20%
Rationale: The Cubs are still in desperate need of pitching, so finding high upside arms is the top priority this winter. Finding a formerly successful starter who has fallen on hard times makes plenty of sense. The name that came to mind was Texas' Colby Lewis, a formerly solid mid-rotation arm carved up over the last couple of years.
Then again, last year's Scott Kazmir, Scott Kazmir himself, would make plenty of sense even at a much higher cost. Kazmir is a huge lefty power arm, something the Cubs have lacked since...well, forever? Kazmir comes with considerable risk but also considerable upside.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: Strangely, it seems as though the club might avoid this type of pitcher in the aftermath of the Scott Baker 2013 experience. I think they'll go after a somewhat safer option to avoid this level of risk.
9. Transaction: Sign a Couple of Cheap Relivers
Realistic?: 99%
Rationale: The team needs pitching. That includes relief pitching. Grabbing arms from outside the organization makes plenty of sense.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: It's going to happen. I don't think we'll see this regime spend heavily on relief pitching anytime soon. Spending lightly? Certainly.
10. Transaction: Bid $65M for the Right to Negotiate with SP Masahiro Tanaka, then Sign Him for 6 years, $65M
Realistic?: 5%
Rationale: It's the same thing as all of the above pitching explanations: the Cubs need big-time pitching and lots of it. Unfortunately, there's so little talent in the organization that they really can't afford to give up their inexpensive prospect talent in order to acquire said pitching talent. So, instead, they should utilize one resource that should give them a sizable advantage over most of their peers: cash. The Cubs can buy their way into Tanaka. It's possible that a $65M posting fee will be inadequate to secure his services. Regardless, the team has the chance to acquire an MLB-ready 25-year-old #3 or better starter for only cash. Such opportunities are exceedingly rare.
Why It Will/Won't Happen: I think that the Cubs will place a very competitive bid on Tanaka, likely extending beyond $40M in an attempt to negotiate with the hurler. I just don't know if they're got the resources to outbid the Yankees or Dodgers. Unfortunately for the Cubs, those two clubs have a twisted incentive to spend lavishly bidding on Tanaka in lieu of paying an established MLB starter like Garza because the posting fee will not count against the luxury tax. The Cubs are well under the tax threshold, so this factor cuts against the team. I'll be stunned but ecstatic if the Cubs manage to win the bidding for the right to pay Tanaka.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)