MLBTR led to me this article by Nick Cafardo, which talks a bit about the Cubs.
“We’re certainly farther along than we were last year at this time,” said Epstein. “When we got here, we identified one core player [Starlin Castro] and now we can look around and see Anthony Rizzo, Darwin Barney, Jeff Samardzija , and others. We do have more positional prospects than pitchers, so we felt Jackson will be with us for many years to come.”
Epstein is hoping his top prospects — namely outfielders Jorge Soler (a Cuban defector), Brett Jackson, and Albert Almora , shortstop Javier Baez , and pitcher Arodys Vizcaino — will all be in the majors together by 2015. First baseman Rizzo is already there.
The Cubs have been waiting 108 years for a championship, a feeling Epstein is familiar with from his Boston days. While he doesn’t feel the Cub fans’ pain the same way, he understands it. He has always wanted to build a team from the ground up, and he’s getting that opportunity.
“I think, initially, what I’d been through in Boston was of interest to our fan base,” he said. “But I think they have bought into our plan and our vision. People are excited about good young players and we hope to keep adding to it and get to the point where we’re an exciting contending team year in and year out.”
They may be farther along, but they still have a ways to go. When you’re hoping that prospects that are in A ball and lower (Soler, Almora, Baez), along with an oft-injured pitcher, there’s a whole lot that can go wrong. That said, there’s no denying they’re in better shape today than they were this time last year. Another good season from some of the top prospects and the Cubs will be in much better shape this time next year.
Also of interest, Cafardo mentions Matt Garza.
Hard to read the Cubs, since they’re building for the future while also signing veteran pitchers. Garza still has to show teams in spring training that his injured elbow is OK; the Cubs would listen on a possible deal.
I think a spring training deal is possible, but it’s not very likely. There aren’t many quality players traded during spring training and ones coming off injury are probably traded even less frequently. My guess is that teams will want to see what Garza can do over the course of an extended period in which he’s giving it 100% rather than several weeks in which he’s working up to 100%.
I won’t be surprised if they do trade him, but I don’t think trading Garza is going to turn the Cubs future around so I’d prefer they hang onto him and see what he can do during the season. Maybe he has another 2011-like season and becomes even more valuable than he’d have been a year earlier. Garza is only under contract through 2013 so whatever return the Cubs get will be limited. They could probably land a decent prospect in return, but the hopes for multiple prospects went out the window when he got injured.
Paul Sullivan’s HOF ballot had votes for Biggio, Raines and… wait for it… Lee Smith.
Only 2 of 7 Trib voters voted for Piazza. Shockingly, Sosa got 0 votes.
I am kinda partial to signing Garza to a long term deal,it only gets harder to get players for the middle to top of the rotation. I’d be comfortable with a Jackson like deal, though I’d be lying if I said I had any idea what that extension would actually resemble.
Aisle424 wrote:
Bruce Miles had a piece the other day about how Sosa is getting no buzz at all nationally or locally, not even the same negative buzz that some of the other first time ballot guys are getting.
In the piece, he made a point of mentioning “Sosa’s handlers, both private and media“, and then he mentioned his “media handlers” again, saying they disappeared after the corked bat. He really seemed to be calling out some of his colleagues — too bad he didn’t name them. Maybe you remember who they were.
He also said Ricketts wasn’t ready to talk on the record about a public reconciliation with Sosa as of a year ago anyway.
As for Miles, he said “I did not vote for Bonds, Clemens or Sosa this time“.
I think part of the reason Sosa isn’t getting any attention is because he’s way down the ballot in terms of qualified hall of famers. I’d vote for him, but there are arguments for not doing so right now that have nothing to do with steroids. Unfortunately, I think those other arguments are going to exist for a long time because the voters are stupid and can’t even vote in the guys now who most belong. According to Repoz, 18.5% of the voters have published their ballots online and the top vote getter is Biggio with less than 68%. It’s going to be hard for anyone to get elected.
However, we know MLB Network decided to air the HOF announcement live so we can be certain that at least one person was voted in. My guess is that person is Biggio.
The voters have turned this thing into a fucking joke and should be embarrassed.
@ Myles:
I’m not against signing him, but I think he’s worth far less than most people do. There seems to be this idea that Garza is a legitimate ace and when you look at his numbers, that’s just not true. I think he’s a bit better than average, but I still like Jackson more than Garza. I’m not on the Samardzija bandwagon yet, but I also think there’s a decent chance he’s better than Garza. The projections all seem to agree that he’s the 2nd or 3rd best in the rotation.
So the question is whether his perceived value comes down because last year it seemed like people were talking $100 million contract and that, in my opinion, is ridiculous. I think a 4/52 contract would be about right, but I’m not sure I’d sign him.
@ Suburban kid:
I saw that. The problem with not voting for guys this time is that the ballot is going to keep adding very worthy names and nobody is going to get in because the vote is too spread out. It’s lunacy.
@ Aisle424:
Exactly. As we talked about recently, in a couple years there is a decent chance there are 19 players on the ballot who are quality hall of famers. They could change the rule to vote for as many as you want (which it should be) and it won’t matter because those crusty dumbasses will still vote for only a few.
@ dmick89:
yeah that 10 vote limit has always kind of blown my mind. it’s an arbitrary number that is in no way impacted by the number of qualified guys on the ballot. but like you said, it probably wouldn’t matter even if they got unlimited votes because the voters are fucking morons.
EnricoPallazzo wrote:
whoops, fixed it to make it classier.
Yeah that ESPN guy made a fantastic point that even Harry Ass Cum almost understood. Making up personal rules about who should and shouldn’t be disqualified, and for how long, depending on the truthiness of their guiltiness, in one’s own estimation, and without any uniform standard applied across the electorate, makes a shamockery of the entire HOF dealio.
@ Suburban kid:
I figure the best thing that can happen to the HOF is that the ballot becomes so crowded nobody gets in. Eventually the HOF will make changes for the better. They may not be the best changes, but it will be an improvement.
NHL ends lockout apparently
Through 108 ballots, Biggio only player with more than 63.9%. http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/newsstand/discussion/the_2012_hall_of_fame_ballot_collecting_gizmo
@ dmick89:
This is probably Internet-able, but when was the last time nobody was inducted into the HOF, and were they “deservedly” kept out (i.e. weren’t going to be first or second ballot guys anyway)?
dmick89 wrote:
I don’t see Garza getting anything less than 5/75 after what we’ve seen this offseason. As you mention, while I think he’s better than you give him credit for there is a perception that he’s a bit better than he is – but his solid numbers in the AL East should serve to bump him into Anibel Sanchez territory.
As for a trade I guess I’m of the opinion that his value will be higher in spring training when he can still yield a compensation pick if traded. And he’ll only be in his age 30 season to start his next deal so he’s still on the youngish side and a long term deal shouldn’t be too big a boondoggle.
Given the value of draft picks I’m wondering if Theo and crew are regretting trading Dempster and not holding onto him for the pick.
tem wrote:
Wouldn’t the Cubs have to offer arbitration of at least $13M and he would have to decline that? Then someone else would have to pick him up. Given that Dempster is being paid 2/$26.5 I don’t think someone would have picked him up for what Dempster would have wanted to get paid knowing they would have to give up a draft pick.
tem wrote:
If the cost of Garza is 5/75, then I’m definitely trading him and getting back something. He’s not worth that type of deal. Garza is a very good pitcher but he’s not even a great one and has never even thrown a 120 ERA+ season and only one season with a FIP below 4 (albeit a season with a 2.95 FIP in 2011).
WaLi, I’m glad to see you were able to finish shooting your video
@ Suburban kid:
Thanks. Dinosaurs and tigers are my favorite.
@ WaLi:
I imagine the Cubs did well in trading Dempster because he likely would have been stuck in some Kyle Lohse free agent purgatory right now due to the stigma of that QO hanging over him.
@ Myles:
Agreed. Sanchez got 5 years and $80 million or $16 million per year. His rWAR over the last 3 years was 9.0, fWAR was 12.0 and his WARP was 7.2. That’s an average of 9.4.
Garza at 5/75 would only be $1 million less per year. Garza’s rWAR over the last 3 years was 4.8, fWAR 7.7 and his WAR was 3.9. Average of 5.5.
Garza is worth a lot less than Sanchez. Sanchez has been, on average, worth more than 1 more WAR than Garza per season. The value of the win is, what, $5.5-6.0 million? Sanchez is younger too. I think Garza is probably worth $10 million per season over 4 years, 5 years max.
@ Rice Cube:
Yeah, you and WaLi are right. The Cubs probably wouldn’t have offered arbitration and if they did, Dempster probably would have accepted it. As was said, he ended up getting $13+ million per year for 2 years and could have gotten $13 million next year if he accepted arbitration. If the Cubs don’t trade Dempster and offer him arbitration, he’s a Cub next year. That’s not so bad. He’s a good pitcher, but then the Cubs get nothing at all for him.
@ dmick89:
Garza’s recent injury history drives that down too. Sanchez had injury problems early in his career, but has been solid the past three seasons.
Not to mention, the offers for Dempster had he been offered arbitration would have been even less.
@ Berselius:
Good point. If there are some teams out there who think he’s better than he really is, I hope it’s not the Cubs. I’d say if Garza shows he’s healthy and pitches up to expectations, the Cubs should offer a 4-year, $40 million extension. If he doesn’t want it, trade him.
Myles wrote:
ZiPS has him at 2.7 WAR in 2013 and CAIRO 2.6. So we’ll go with 2.7.
2013: 2.7 WAR
2014: 2.2 WAR
2015: 1.7 WAR
2016: 1.2 WAR
You don’t really want to sign someone when they’re going to be below 1 WAR so I figure 4 years max. Average win value of $6.0 million (might be generous). That’s $46.8 million over 4 years.
Teams get a 10% discount on contract longer than 3 years so Garza is worth 4 years and $42.1 million.
That’s $10.5 million per year so if Garza really wants a 5-year deal, you drop the average annual value by $1 million and go with $9.5 million per year over 5 years or $47.7 million.
Let’s be super generous and go 3.5 WAR in 2013 (3.5, 3.0, 2.5, 2.0, 1.5, total of 13 WAR). That’s $78 million using average win value of $6 million, but let’s bump that to $6.5 million. $84.5 million. Multi-year discount $76.1 million.
Since we were generous, let’s be pessimistic and say 2.0 WAR in 2013 (2.0, 1.5, 1.0, total of 5.5 WAR and $33 million). Over 4 years that would be $40 million, $45 million over 5 years. Multi-year discount over 4 years would be $36 million and over 5 years it would be $40 million.
So we can say that Garza is worth somewhere between 3 years and $33 million and 5 years and $76.1 million. One is being relatively pessimistic while the other quite optimistic.
I added something to block comment spam so if anyone has any issues posting comments (not going through), please let me know.
dmick89 wrote:
That explains why all my posts about penis enlargement went missing
@ The Wreckard:
I just didn’t want anyone else to have that information.
I know the Cubs are pursuing an outfielder… but if Soler plays great to begin the year, would it be crazy to try and bring Soler up? I mean more contractually speaking than anything. He has a 9/$30 contract, but I think there is some funny clause in there. What is the downside of calling him up early? Other than developmental issues of course.
dmick89 wrote:
The average of those being almost identical to Jackson’s contract. Full circle. I wouldn’t mind signing him at ~$14m/year if there is no trade market, but I’d prefer a contending team with a deep farm to suffer an unimaginable series of pitching injuries.
dmick89 wrote:
Works fine.
WaLi wrote:
Because the SNAKE OIL SALESMAN Slick Theo might accidentally start WINNING SOME GAMES, jabroni!
@ GBTS:
I know, right? I mean look at Castro… started playing full time when he was 20 and he is an All-Star now. Mike Trout started playing full time when he was 20 and he was almost an MVP. Bryce Harper started playing full time when he was 19 and he was ROY. Following this track, if Soler was to start playing full time this season, he will be ROY/MVP/All-star. By delaying his entrance to the majors there is a larger chance of him not getting these titles and maybe not amounting to anything at all.
@ WaLi:
He’s played 34 games at the professional level in the US. He had fewer than 100 PA at low A last year. My guess is he begins the season back at low A and, if he performs well, will probably get a midseason promotion to Daytona (high A). Even if he started in Daytona and played well, he’s not likely to play above AA in 2013.
The risk is that he’s just not remotely close to ready and considering his last level, that is likely true. The Cubs contract with him as it is, basically gives him 3 years to develop in the minor leagues and then 6 years of MLB service time prior to becoming a free agent. Even if he takes 4 years to develop, he can’t become a free agent until after 6 years of MLB service time.
Zach Putnam ——-> Cubs
@ WenningtonsGorillaCock:
World Series —————-> Cubs
WenningtonsGorillaCock wrote:
Did the local writers just pick this up?
@ WaLi:
This must be that “post hoc ergo propter hoc” stuff that has been going around lately.
@ WaLi:
Brett from BN saw it in the transaction wire a few days ago and MLBTR just barely reported the official signing which is a minor league deal.
34 year old Kyuji Fujikawa ——-> BA’s Cubs Top Ten Prospect List
(dying laughing)
WaLi wrote:
MLBTR just posted it. With a blockbuster like this, I’m surprised it wasn’t front page news on the New York Times
@ JonKneeV:
That scouting report on Baez is impressive.
Interesting that both of the top 2 prospects have had, to this point anyway, issues being patient at the plate. I guess it’s not interesting when you picture them in a Cubs uniform and just same old shit.
Also sounds like the Cubs intend to use Vizcaino as a starter if possible.
It’s certainly a more impressive top 10 than the last few years. Baez, Soler and Vogelbach have a ton of power so if the Cubs could get two of those guys to work out, they’d have one hell of a middle of the lineup.
@ WenningtonsGorillaCock:
Hmm it must be officially official now.
http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20121102&content_id=40153388&vkey=pr_chc&c_id=chc
That’s from November.
@ WaLi:
Ah I think we claimed him 11/2, released him on 11/30, then signed him to a minor league deal yesterday.
@ WaLi:
Correct.
#Yellon
@ dmick89:
Baez has average speed, just like Castro (dying laughing)
@ Rice Cube:
Turn it green
What happened to Dillon Maples last year? Did he catch Hayden Simpson disease?
New Shit