Nov. 2: ESPN’s Buster Olney tweets that other teams have gotten the sense that the Cubs’ payroll flexibility is considerably more limited this offseason than many might expect. The sense, per Olney, is that the team will have to “spend very carefully to affect upgrades for the 2019 season.”
That’d explain to an extent why the Cubs would prefer to shed additional salary before electing to retain Hamels. It’d be a departure from standard operating procedure for Epstein & Co., and from a broader perspective, it does raise some questions about the team’s ability to play for top-of-the-market free agents.
Nov. 1: The Cubs still hope to keep Cole Hamels, per Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic (Twitter link), but there may be some steps taken before formally bringing him back. A multi-year contract between the two sides, at this point, is “unlikely,” per Rosenthal, who notes that the Cubs might make a trade to clear some salary off the books before exercising their $20MM option on Hamels.
It’s not immediately clear why the Cubs would feel the need to shed salary before picking up the option. Chicago dipped under the luxury tax threshold this past season, and Hamels’ $20MM salary for the 2019 campaign wouldn’t have any bearing on the team’s 2018 luxury tax ledger. Beyond that, Chicago appears poised to spend in perhaps significant fashion this offseason as president of baseball operations Theo Epstein, GM Jed Hoyer and the rest of the front office look to upgrade a roster that fell shy of expectations when it lost the National League Wild Card game to the Rockies. Given the fact that they’re already likely to add to the payroll, it’s curious to see the suggestion that salary must be shed before free agency truly begins in earnest.
That’s not to say that there isn’t salary the Cubs would prefer to jettison. The remaining $100MM+ on the contracts of Yu Darvish and Jason Heyward certainly aren’t movable right now, but the remaining $25.5MM on Tyler Chatwood‘s contract could perhaps be flipped for a different bad contract (or paid down to some extent in a salary dump deal). The Cubs would probably prefer not to pay $5MM for Brandon Kintzler‘s 2019 season, either, after the righty struggled in Chicago following a trade from the Nationals.
However, while it’s natural that the Chicago front office would want to shed some of those onerous financial commitments, it’s unclear why they’d need to move any money before picking up Hamels’ option. Exercising Hamels’ option would push the Cubs’ payroll well north of the $206MM luxury tax line for the upcoming season, but there’s been no indication that remaining south of that line is any sort of target for the organization. And even if the team isn’t comfortable with the idea of adding Hamels at $20MM and then spending aggressively in free agency, the Cubs could simply exercise Hamels’ option and then look for means by which to shed some unwanted contracts (e.g. Chatwood, Kintzler) after the fact.
Perhaps there’s more at play here than meets the eye — speculatively speaking, ownership may want a rotation piece cleared out before committing such a lofty payday to Hamels, for instance — but the takeaway that the two sides aren’t likely to strike up a multi-year pact is significant in and of itself. There’s been some speculation that Hamels and the Cubs could work out a multi-year arrangement that would lower the annual rate but still promise Hamels additional guaranteed money. That scenario, it seems, will not come to fruition.
The Cubs, then, are faced with the decision of agreeing to pay Hamels $20MM next season or opting for a $6MM buyout. The Rangers are on the hook for that buyout money as part of the trade that sent Hamels to Chicago in the first place, so while the opportunity exists for the Cubs to swoop back in and re-sign Hamels even after he hits the open market, one would imagine that the Rangers would take some umbrage to that scenario, even if there’s technically no wrongdoing on the Cubs’ behalf.
Frankly, this dilemma for the Cubs was largely unforeseeable at the time of the trade; when the deal went through, it looked like little more than a glorified salary dump that would give the Cubs a durable back-of-the-rotation starter. Hamels’ massive home/road splits gave some hope that he could fare better in a new environment, but few would’ve expected that he’d return to borderline ace status following a change of scenery. That’s precisely what happened, though, as the soon-to-be 35-year-old lefty allowed just five runs through his first seven starts in Chicago and posted an overall 2.36 ERA in 76 1/3 innings after the trade. Hamels benefited from an unsustainable 82.3 percent strand rate, so some regression is to be expected, but he was a vastly better pitcher with the Cubs — so much so that the $20MM option to which few paid any mind at the time of the deal is now a fascinating wrinkle to the onset of free agency as the deadline to make a decision looms.
Yeah I doubt the Cubs are waiting to dump salary, I’d expect the Cubs to play in the $235 million payroll range this year.
That’s not what the indications are. Perhaps they realize how much it is going to cost them in the future to keep their core together.
So the cubs raise the ticket prices and make wrigley look like disney land and their argument for doing so was to obtain high price free agents. Now the report is the cubs want to dump salary. I doubt it.
Yeah I still doubt it. They have new TV money coming.
It’s entirely possible the Cubs are trying not to over commit salary wise until they do land a big piece
The thinking could be that they’re willing to break the bank for Harper, but until he signs they’d rather not bust the luxury tax cap.
I too was thinking along the lines of the position Petrie just laid out.
Cubs dont want him I’m maybe #35 can head east to the phillies and add the much needed left handed starter they need. I would say 30 mil for 2yrs?? then retire as a phillie.
That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. Why the hell wouldn’t they want a solid Hamels in that rotation.
Why shouldn’t the team let Texas pay the buyout as long as there was no collusion? Would it be a given that there was collusion if he then went back to Chicago for 2 x $15m? If he enjoyed Chicago who wouldn’t want to try to win in 2019? The Rangers aren’t going anywhere.
dewey…..that makes perfect financial sense. i don’t know there would be a long line of teams wanting to pay Hamels $30m the next two years. Frankly, I wouldn’t offer him more than one year.
They worked it out by sending Smyly and his $7m to Texas. Two years only was $10 for the second year.
“The remaining $100MM+ on the contracts of Yu Darvish and Jason Heyward certainly aren’t movable right now.”
Yu has $101M left Heyward $106M. They can both opt put after 2019.
opt out* after 2019.
Heyward needs 550 PA to get the right to opt out. Yu’s player opt out has no conditions to vest.
Yes, understand bleak chance either of them does.
Nailed it X Factor!
You’re kidding about them opting out right? There’s literally Zero chance either of them opt out of their silly inflated salaries.
That’s why opt outs are terrible for teams to give. If the player becomes an MVP, he opts out and you lose him. If he sucks, you’re stuck with him. Lose-lose for the team; Win-win for the player.
Could also work for the team too. Sure, the player after a great season may leave, but you also get him for his best years (in theory) and you don’t have to pay for his down years.
The opt outs are pretty much irrelevant. Darvish & Heyward are going to need MVP caliber numbers to justify bigger paydays than what they already have.
You already admitted there’s a bleak chance. Don’t critique the writers when you have nothing of substance to add.
I’m really getting sick of the X-Man. Your takes are way out there. Zero chance that Heyward opts out! Crazy. Heyward is included in top 5 worst contracts in MLB. He is signed until 2023. About 22mil per. Check his offensive stats – hideous. Defense is only thing holding him up.
I don’t see what that has to do with their current status. There’s no way the Cubs could move either contract right now — not for any substantial salary relief — especially when both players still have full no-trade rights under the deals they signed.
Right now, there is now way the Cubs can move either of those contracts.
Giving Cubs fans reason to dream. By design, or by luck? gave themselves a potential out if Darvish and Heyward miraculously rebound, 2019.
We saw Price perform up to level of being considered WS MVP, and still opt in, but he had $120M. Slim as it may be, there’s hope and though not a Cubs’ fan, personally rooting for these 2 to rebound to consider opting out.
Lol. They’re not opting out. Come on man…
You’re probably right, definitely with Heyward. I wonder if a swap of Darvish to the Yankees isn’t possible, however, if the Cubs agree to take Ellsbury as part of the return. There would have to be more to it than that, but I think it’s a framework that’s possible.
Why would the Yanks do that and take on Darvish who is hurt plus his 106 mill and give back Elsbury 45 mill? Elsbury also has a no trade. But do the math, what sense does that make for the Yanks unless Darvish was healthy and Cubs were eating a ton of money in deal and Elsbury waived his no trade?
That’s at least a conceiveable idea, though. The Yanks need pitching more than anything else this winter. If Darvish come back 100% for ST (which is believed to be the case at this point), he could be as much of a boost as anyone else they might sign. It would be a trade that’s exceedingly risky for both teams, considering health issues and the amount of cash that’s involved, but it’s not out of the realm of possibility.
I could also see the Yankees wanting Almora back in the trade, while offering up some mid-range prospect to even things out.
That said, it would probably take a mild miracle for Elisbury to waive his NTC.
That deal makes no sense at all. They wouldn’t trade Ellsbury to pick up an extra $60 million, especially seeing as it doesn’t help that much with the luxury tax. They also don’t need Almora as they still have Judge, Hicks, Gardner, Stanton and Clint Frazier as it is. I don’t see how this makes sense for them.
I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for Darvish or Heyward to opt out of their contracts. Both are way over paid and I suspects smart enough to know that the mistake Theo made signing both to such elaborate contracts isn’t something that’s gonna be repeated by other GMs.. Like it or not Cub fans, you are stuck with these two turkeys for years. As for Hamels, if the Cubs don’t pick up that option, he’ll wind up elsewhere, maybe even back in Philly where he still maintains a home. Finally, depending upon where Baez plays in 2019, the Cubs will need a 2B or a SS. Russel is toast right now, burnt toast at that. Zobrist is like, what, 100 years old? Re-signing Daniel Murphy would be a good idea IMHO.
What would a fair return for Shwarber look like? Proven reliever with multiple years of control and a prospect with reasonable upside?
I’m pretty sure the Cubs aren’t trading Schwarber, and certainly not for the something like a reliever they could just go buy on the open market.
Schwarber won’t make much in 2019. Trading him doesn’t solve the problem.
You’re kidding right? Schwarber has barely any trade value.. He’s a league average bat with below average fielding and baserunning skills.
Look at his DH statistics as well as his fielding stats this year. He had 11 OF assists & lead our team with BB’s.
He’s got more trade value than Sonny Gray
So Yankeespride thinks Gary Sanchez has no trade value. All those things that ding Schwarber apply to Sanchez. To suggest Schwarber holds no trade value is just ludicrous.
That’s not setting the bar very high. Almost every player not on an expensive contract has more value than Sonny Gray right now.
Yeah I’m not sure what this is. I’m trading Schwarber anyway, at least not for an outstanding return, but Schwarber hit 26 homers with at.356 OBP this year, and actually played near league average D in LF this year. He’s also 25 and makes nothing. Schwarber has pretty high trade value bro. The stats don’t come close to backing that up.
While I disagree greatly with your assessment of Schwarber’s trade value right now, I do agree that trading him at this point in time is a pretty awful idea. Also, according to most metrics, his defense in LF was rated pretty high among qualifying NL LF this year. He had better metrics in LF than Harper did in RF.
Unless they get back some sort of high impact player, there’s no reason for the Cubs to trade Schwarber.
Schwarber has more value than Sanchez and the gap is widening. Take a look at a couple of things that separate them in value…Schwarber can play more positions at this point, has the same amount of power as Sanchez, Schwarber takes more walks, and Schwarber doesn’t have the laziness gene unlike like Sanchez.
Schwarber can only play LF or DH. Sanchez can at least play behind the plate… if not so well. He can also probably play 1B (at which Schwarber was terrible in A ball 4 years ago).and LF. Finally, Sanchez had a down year, but he’s just a year removed from finishing 22nd in AL MVP voting and winning a silver slugger. This will be taken into consideration for any trades involving him. There isn’t much difference between Sanchez’s 2018 season, and most of Schwarber’s 2017 season. Seriously, all it takes it a quick glance over their career stats, and one can easily see that Sanchez has at least performed to expectation at some point, and is the more likely of the two at continuing this.
Finally, Sanchez is half a year younger and hasn’t suffered a major ACL injury. They will also get paid about the same next season.
The only advantage that Schwarber has at all over Gary Sanchez, is that he is a LH batter.
The thing here is, I like Schwarber and think he can do great things. But reality is reality, and he’s not as valuable as Sanchez is.
Schwarber should be playing 1B. Cubs have Rizzo, and Rizzo is better. Schwarber will remain in LF and stay with the Cubs.
“Schwarber can only play LF or DH” Schwarber can indeed play Catcher, maybe not gold glove caliber, but Sanchez isn’t exactly Bench. That’s unfair judging Schwarber’s play at first on such a small sample size.
Did you just quote “22nd” in MVP voting? Dude once you’re out of the top 5 let it go! I think my Grandpa finished 23rd.
Schwarber’s catching days are over.
So Avinny you say Schwarber “was terrible” 4 years ago “at first base?”
You watched a lot of A ball games huh? Schwarber may have played some games at first but the Cubs never had him as a regular at first
That’s not true at all about Schwarber
Schwarber should be an DH. maybe they can swap him for middle infield help? I think Ian Happ can be an everyday LF who will provide better defense than Schwarber.
Oh Yankeepride try watching a ballgame once in awhile. Schwarber is above average defensively. He has improved dramatically and as expected that he would.
I think a swap for someone like Aaron Sanchez makes sense. Cubs could also pick up a backup catcher in that deal with the inclusion of Russell Martin and some cash. Maybe also dump the contacts of Kintzler and/or Deunsing to offset some of Martin’s contract.
Won’t happen. Ambitious idea on your part, but the Jays won’t do it.
Perhaps Cub ownership wants Cole Hamels’ $20MM 2019 option as a down payment or potential signing bonus to help secure Bryce Harper this offseason. It would seem the Cubs would also want to prioritize pitching this offseason which may be why this whole discussion of moving other salaries has come into play at this point in time.
I recall just 3 offseason’s ago the Cubs were in a bidding contest to secure FA Ben Zobrist but also needed to move Starlin Castro in short order to achieve that goal. Part of that was to free up dollars for Zobrist while the other factor was in freeing up 2B for the versatile veteran who only wanted to sign if he was guaranteed to become the Cubs primary regular at the position for the 2016 season.
maybe not harper, they might want to get out from under having addison russel on the field – and going for machado since it seems “dirty player that is really good” > “domestic abuser.
Despite the Cubs present logjam in their OF, Bryce Harper still makes more sense on the North Side than Manny Machado. Javier Baez provides a premium glove at SS with the likely departure of Addison Russell. Baez also put up Machado like MVP quality numbers with his bat last season. Machado’s reported preference is to continue playing SS with his next team in spite of the fact he is a proven Gold Glove defender at 3B where the Cubs already have Kris Bryant in place.
Actually, signing Harper makes virtually no sense at all. As good as he is, it would be a bad idea to pay Harper half as much as he wants (and financially cripple the front office for years to come) when you can get 70-75% of his overall production (plus better defense according to most metrics) from a combination of Schwarber and Happ for barely above league minimum. However, there will be an opening at 2B if the Cubs decide to part ways with Russell as they would more likely wish to continue using Zobrist as a supersub. As such, they could sign Machado and play him at 2B… or move Baez to 2B.
That said, I personally believe the Cubs should look into a trade with Minnesota for Whit Merrifield instead. Save all of that cash (that Epstein basically said today that they don’t want to spend unless absolutely necessary… as the payroll is already projected near $190M without adding anyone and simply exercising Hamels’s option). They will also get a real leadoff man for the first time since 2016 in the process, and maintain an ability to spend a few extra dollars on the bench and pen (where it’s needed the most). while saving some room for a trade in July if needed.
Good points here. Just wanted to let you know Merrifield is in Kansas City.
Ha! You’re right. Not sure why I was thinking he was with the Twins. Thanks for pointing out my gaffe there.
Would want Baez over Machado all day long!
The idea of signing Machado (which I’m not saying they should do), would be to have BOTH him and Baez.
Avinny makes a lot of sense on Merrifield
Trading Castro had zero to do with money and everything to do with signing Zobrist and then to free up second base. They were not trading Castro until they were signing Z. It was not the money it was the position.
Both factors came into play. The Cubs were not signing Zobrist unless 2B was free for him to play. Castro was the Cubs second baseman at the time. Addison Russell was their SS. Javier Baez was their backup at both positions and also the player likely to assume the role of supersub when Zobrist came aboard. The Cubs were not signing Zobrist and retaining Castro’s dollars so he could be yet another backup at 2B and SS. The trading of Castro to the Yankees ON THE SAME DAY they signed Zobrist to his FA contract amounted to a salary dump for the Cubs.
Zobrist did get his wish and was the Cubs starter at 2B for 113 of the 142 games he began in 2016 but eventually he returned to his accustomed role of supersub and Baez became the primary second baseman in 2017 and 2018.
According to Baseball Reference the Cubs will have a payroll of $218 million if they keep Hamels now that Kintzler has exercised his option. While that’s not too far into the luxury tax, they might not want to go further. And it wouldn’t leave them with much payroll room to add any other players. Signing Bryce Harper would put them in the penalty.
You’re forgetting about all of the players owed arbitration this year. Bryant, Baez, Schwarber, Montgomery, Hendricks, and Edwards all get raises this offseason
BBR’s estimate includes arbitration estimates.
Boras has publicly stated that he already knows where Bryce Harper will be playing next year. Take it with a grain of salt, and he gave no indication to what team that would be.
“We know who the team is. It’s already completed and done, but Bryce has told me that he wanted to tell you personally,” Boras said. However, if you’re of the belief Boras was being facetious, you’re correct. Chelsea Janes of the Washington Post reports (Twitter links) that Boras was indeed joking.
mlbtraderumors.com/washington-nationals
Caution!Stay away from the Cubs,they might try to dump some of that Baggage on you,lol
To lower the Cubs payroll I foresee the Cubs trading Kintzler, Chatwood & Schwarber.
My guesses are:
Schwarber to the Yankees for Sonny Gray
Chatwood & 2-3 minor leaguers to Miami or Baltimore
Kintzler & Jen-Ho Tseng to Seattle
if they eat money I can see chatwood to the giants, he is familiar with the NL west and right now if you are looking at trading bum, the rotation looks like maybe shark if he can stay on the fieldfor more than 5 minutes , rodriguez and suarez (who will be in their sophomore year) holland if he gets re signed but possibly not – any way you slice it, it is a thin rotation.
To lower the payroll, you expect them to trade Schwarber, in arbitration for the first time, and who made $600k last year, for a guy who made $6M+ and will enter his 3rd year of arbitration, in Sonny Gray. Okay.
That move might not lower payroll but would open up a OF spot for Harper. Those other two moves are purely payroll moves
So, let’s get this straight. They would be looking to reduce payroll just to add the $20M for Hamels. A $20M which could very well push their payroll to $190-200M before adding anyone else. Yet, by basically increasing their payroll by $5-7M (which will make trading Kintzler’s salary a moot effort) this will somehow make room to sign Harper?
Let’s entirely ignore Epstein’s statements today in which he basically hemmed and hawed his way out saying that they most likely won’t pursue Harper due to financial inflexibility.
Some people don’t understand simple concepts
Yeah Schwarber is going to carry pretty large trade value and Sonny Gray sucks. I’m not sure where this came from.
Sorry, but Schwarber’s trade value isn’t all that high right now.
Sorry, but it’s way higher than Sonny Gray’s right now.
You’re probably right there, but that’s not saying much at all. I have almost as much trade value as Sonny Gray does right now.
In all honesty, the only thing Schwarber has shown the baseball world is that he likes to take as many pitches as possible… even if it means he gets called out on strikes 90 times a year. He can hit 5 HR a month. And he is prone to multiple 6-week long droughts. He also walks a good number of times.
That’s not much to build trade value, even if he still has major potential.
@Avinny GarSac, LOL thinking Gray has no trade value at all.. Go look up the guys splits and you’ll see he was really good on the road compared to pitching at Yankee stadium
I would relish a trade of Gray for Schwarber, but additional pieces would have to be added by the Yanks to make it happen.
Gray has not only no trade value, its way less than zero. The Yankees would have to eat money just to unload Gray for free right now, and probably half of the deal.
I like a swap of Chatwood and Kintzler with Baltimore for Alex Cobb.
Cobb can at least give quality innings, and showed signs of his old form towards the end of the season. It’s essentially even money for the first year for Baltimore, but they free up cash in the final two years of Cobb’s deal, giving them more flexibility as they rebuild.
That is an interesting idea. However, the Cubs already have Drew Smyly on the books for next year as a backup for the rotation. If this wasn’t the case, I think the Cubs might actually be interested in something like that. It also makes sense to a good degree for the Orioles. I just don’t see the need for them to acquire another SP in this manner, especially if all of the manuervering is designed to find the financial flexibility to bring Hamels back.
So, in order to reduce payroll, they are going to trade Schwarber who will make around $600-750K next year for Sonny Gray (who they do not need even if they trade Chatwood) and will make no less than $6-8M? I really don’t see how that works.
Schwarber goes to arb this off season. He’s projected to get about $2.75 mil.
Schwarber is not expensive and Theo would never trade him for Sonny Gray. Get real. That not only is a terrible trade, the Cubs do not need Gray (he would not pitch in Cubs current projected rotation) it would cost the Cubs financially)
I don’t quite know how it works but couldn’t the Cubs – hypothetically – decline his option and sign him for 14 million? Hamels still gets his 20 because the Rangers pay the 6 mil buyout but but he’d only on the books for 14 from the Cubs… Just an idea probably something that makes it not allowed but who knows
That’s intriguing. I’d have to assume it’s not allowed but I don’t know that it’s not.
I thought the same thing but I’m assuming that’s collusion. That $6 mil would be some much needed relief though
I see no reason why that wouldn’t be allowed. Not sure why Hamels wouldn’t see what other offers from other teams have before taking 14 mil though.
There really must be some sort of rule-book clarity to be had on this type of situation….but I’d guess that there is nothing to stop Hamels and the Cubs from working things out in any way that best suits them.
Why would the Rangers have anything to say about it anyway? It seems to me that they could have precluded such a possibility – before agreeing to the trade – by including language that said as much. If it’s just a matter of them neglecting to do so, then isn’t that completely on them?
Why would Hamels sign for less than he can get from someone else if the Cubs decline his option? Odds are pretty good he can land at least $18M for 1 year, and somewhere around $35M for 2 years after his resurgence in the second half this year. Interesting idea, but I don’t think it works.
it’s allowed. but the rangers would not be happy and it would completely burn that bridge
I heard them talking about this on sports radio. There is no rule against it, but if Hamels is paid $6 mil by the Rangers and he becomes a free agent and turns right around and signs for $14 mil with the Cubs, the Rangers would file a grievance and most likely win and get their $6 mil back. Pretty much any instance where Hamels resigns for more $ with the Cubs after the Rangers pay the $6 mil will get a grievance. If he resigns with the Cubs for $10, then the Rangers don’t have much of a case.
Once the Cubs decline his option and Texas pays him the $6 million, he’s a free agent. What’s to prevent him from signing elsewhere for $15 or $16 million? He’s going to give up several million dollars because he loves the Cub fans?
nope…. i can see them declining the option just to sign him for 2-3 years at a lower base of 15mil a season. he gets his 6 mil. buyout. stays in fro 14 to 15 mil a year. he get a couple more years… they get a discount on salary. he stil gets his last years initial value at 20 mil.
If Hamels is bought out, his open-market value is greater than $14MM. There’s no reason to him just sign for a year and $14MM if the Cubs let him hit free agency. He’d be able to get two years at more than $20MM total (albeit at a lower annual rate) with relative ease, and I wouldn’t call three years completely outlandish (though it does seem unlikely).
Hey Steve, would it be possible to get links added to the main site for the CBA, JDA and MLB Constitution? I think it would be helpful.
It would be collusion and not allowed.
Cubs will win the World Series.
In 2124.
What does it take to make the cubs better than the 5th (arguably 4th) best team in the NL? Could probably make an argument a full season of hamels last year puts them somewhere in the 1-3rd best range.
I would say trading for Whit Merrifield to play 2B and leadoff. Get Darvish healthy and produce at least 25 strong starts. Hamels for a full year could help as well. So would haveing Bryant healthy for a year. The same with Morrow. Sure up the pen and the bench just a bit, and they should be there.
Keep in mind, they also have Drew Smyly signed for next year and should be returning from TJ surgery. Also, one of their stronger SP prospects, Thomas Hatch, is getting pretty close to making him MLB debut. So, there is some depth already in place for the rotation.
What they need is to find a way to produce consistent offense like they did for most of 2015-2016.
merrifield is basically the only thing KC has. they would never trade him unless they’re getting draft picks included in any salary dump to their team.
Can’t trade draft picks.
This makes no sense. You can’t trade draft picks in MLB (obviously besides those 15 or so competitive balance picks in the second and third round)
There’s NO WAY Hamels pitches like he did for the Cubs the entire year, look at his pre-trade numbers. A full year of Hamels doesn’t fix the offensive issues
Yup history repeats once again. The great Theo showing he’s got no clue on signing Free Agents. Jason Heyward = Carl Crawford.v2. Though this time Theo doesn’t have the Dodgers to dump his overpaid Free Agents on.
As if an Angels fan can talk. Pujols? Upton? Cozart? Trout? Simmons? That’s nearly $110M just for 5 guys… including 2 of the 5 highest contracts in all of baseball.
dont even include trout. any team would be willing to pay 33 mil for him. and the pujols contract card has been overplayed. now upton and cozart…maybe right.
I’m scared actually how much Trout would get right now. I really hope Machado or Harper don’t get 300 million dollars because Trout will easily get 500 million barring some ridiculous decline.
Oh Angels50 how is that Josh Hamilton contract working out for the Angels
Crazy that something Rosenthal pulls out of his a** for a headline becomes such a hotly debated topic. No way Cubs need to trade first!
If the Cubs do a dump I would think they could make a trade with the Twins with Kintzler and Caratina to the Twins for Austin
Why would they trade Caratini? He’s making league minimum and keeps the team from having to overpay for another backup C.. Besides this, the FO and coaching staff really like him. I also don’t see why they would want Austin, considering that they already have LaStella, Bote (who plays everywhere on the IF but SS) and Zobrist with a suitable middle IF backup in Chesny Young who should be about ready to come up full time from Iowa.
If they were to trade Kintzler to the Twins, odds are they would get someone like Addison Reed in return. That could be an even worse situation. Or, they would get a low level prospect or two with virtually no chance of sniffing the major leagues.
Right Caratina is making league minimum and if you add him with Kintzler that would help the Cubs get someone decent back like in Austin who can play outfield and first base just like Caratina did some except with power. Now as far as catcher you have Davis and Schwarber who can back up there. So what the Cubs would do with this trade is gotten salary relief and a decent player back that could still amount to something
Except Austin isn’t decent, has terrible metrics in the OF, can only really play 1B… and not what the Cubs would be looking for. By trading away Caratini for a guy they absolutely do not need… it only creates another problem.
Davis? Really? The guy who has all of 6 innings behind the plate in 2 callups? Oh, and will be a minor league FA this winter? And no, Schwarber’s window of catching has passed. That’s simply not going to happen, according to everyone in charge of the team.
I do give you props for at least getting creative.
To back AVinny GarSac here, Tyler is also someone you kind of don’t want on your team.
Starts fights (Holt and BOS) for no reason and gets mad when they retaliate? If he wasn’t careful, he could’ve gotten other star players on his team injured in an unnecessary brawl.
Maybe the cubs have their eye on adding a different pitcher and are interested in Hamels as a plan B. If Kershaw opted out on wednesday they have a few days to see if they have a legit chance to get him if not they pick up Hamels option – but Kershaw throws a wrench into things by extending his deadline leaving the cubs waiting to see what happens.. Perhaps they are going to strike a quick blockbuster which would leave them without a rotation spot or $$ to drop $20MM on 1 player.
everyone always thinks of these amazing trades with their own teams etc without any regard for the other team trading players. ridiculous ideas thrown around.
cubs will not trade schwarber because he’s slightly improved offensively. they wont giv eup on him quite yet. an dhes cheap. unless a team is willing to part with 1 round picks. it aint happening and i’d be shocked if any team would offer.
hamels opts out and signs with cubs to save a couple million, freeing up cap space. only if he resigns with 2-3 years at like 15mil.
they do not go after machado. they do not go after harper. sorry.
Bro… you can’t trade draft picks in MLB.
It’s possible the Cubs see this in simpler terms: They don’t want to pay $20M for a pitcher who might resemble the back-end, CC Sabathia type: Older but useful 6-inning pitcher, and not a #2. $20M is a lot. If Hamels were a free agent now, do we think the market would give him a one year deal at $20M?
Idk about 20M, but I think 1/18M or 2/35M isn’t out of the question. Although he’s not a TOR arm, he was reliable after the trade to the cubs and he has post season experience.
Cubs buy him out and let Texas pay the $6M buyout, then Chicago re-signs him for $15M. Cubs save $5M, Hamels makes the $6M buyout plus $15M, an extra $1M, for agreeing to re-sign. Win-win for both the team and player. Probably why a decision hasn’t been finalized yet.
They’re waiting to dump salary because there are free agent targets that are more important then Cole Hamels. It’s not really that controversial of a statement.
I wouldn’t pick up the option at 20M for 2019. Even though Hamels was good for the Cubs, and I would like him back this year, that’s just not market value for what he brings to the table. We should be paying for current value, not historic value. Also, we already have several other players under contract for 2019 that could contribute in a 4th/5th starter role – Chatwood, Montgomery, Smyly, Mills, plus other guys in the pipeline who aren’t too far off from contributing (Clifton, Alzolay, Underwood, Tseng, etc.). Not to mention there always seem to be some buy-low type free agents available every offseason that are worth a flier.
I would decline the option, and then try to bring him back for around 10M per year on a 1 year deal with an option for 2020. And then, if Hamels is willing to come back for those terms, maybe try to work out a trade to unload one of the other guys. Even if the Cubs are prepared to pass the luxury tax threshold, they still have to operate on an organizational budget. Plus, there is such a thing as having too many players and not enough roster spots. So, ultimately, they may try to unload somebody like Montgomery, Chatwood, Duensing, Kintzler, Smyly, etc. just to free up a roster spot. I doubt they could get much for Chatwood, but maybe they could do a bad contract swap with somebody and address a need elsewhere. Maybe try to trade him for Zach Cozart or Dee Gordon and use them in a 2B platoon with Zobrist, or otherwise as utility players.
Good post except Hamels will get much more than 10 mil. I would think the Cubs will go over the threshold to get who they want. Hamels will not be that guy unless something else goes down today.
Technically,he’d be getting 16M. 6M from the Rangers through the buyout. 10M from the Cubs. If he’s serious about wanting to return, then it’s not ridiculous for him to accept it.
If not, we have other options.
Not ridiculous but the buyout is guaranteed money from the prior contract and should not be a factor what he can get in a new contract on the FA market.
Chatwood for Tulo?
Decline the option, resign him for 2 years 30mil? Try and move some salary sure, but who and where too? ♂️
Don’t you think some crazy GM would give Hamels more that $15 milliion a year? The Yankees would snap him up at $18M, the Angels, the Dodgers, the Rockies, the Brewers, the Braves, the Nationals, the Phillies,…they would take him in a heartbeat.
If the season started tomorrow, the main issues would apply that were apparent last year:
The bullpen lacks any sort of dominance, and while it might produce decent overall numbers – outside of 1-2 guys (when healthy) there needs to be an overhaul here.
There’s way too many guys who can’t handle situational hitting and even put the ball in play enough. Ian Happ, Schwarber, Heyward, Almora, Baez, Contreras – do you honestly trust any of those guys in a big spot? You might say “BAEZ!!” Baez’s OBP is a joke compared to what it should be with his other numbers. He’s a good complimentary piece, but he’s not a middle of the order guy – he can’t make contact enough.
The Cubs are hoping for a lot of rebounds – Morrows health, Darvish’s health, Bryant’s health, Chatwood’s control, Edwards’s control, all while waiting for these young guys to take that next step that they might not ever take.
I think the best approach for the Cubs is to focus on winning in 2019, but with a bigger focus on 2020,2021 and beyond, because right now – this team seems to be lacking a solid approach, lacking full-time players at numerous positions (who is our starting OF btw – oh yea – there’s like 6 guys), aging in certain key roles, has no ace – if you aren’t going to win the World Series and you can realistically recognize that – why waste time, money and effort that could hurt you in two years when you can regroup, retool and have a legitimate shot?
Theo is a HOF exec based on ending WS droughts in Boston and Chicago alone. But after he won in Boston he had to do a massive salary dump and reset (tank) to get back to top. That’s where he’s headed now. How well would he do with small market teams with limited budgets? That’s the true best GM’s. I for one love to see budget crunch for them after series of bad moves. Heyward, darvish, Chapman trade, Chatwood, Q trade, Morrow, etc. Imagine if they still had Eloy and Torres as trade chips plus other prospects they traded? Then they could acquire what they really need which is pitching. Talk is Harper or Machado, either of which would make them better. They’d make all 30 teams better. But then it’s even harder for them to acquire pitching with no farm system and above the hard luxury tax. Then soon Baez, Bryant and Contreras will need to get paid big. Then what? They talk about the TV deal coming up but so what? Yankees and dodgers have unlimited incomes but still have to stay under the tax. I see no way but another tank coming cubs way. Cubs WS in 2028, calling it now. Meanwhile cards will keep plugging along and have 2-3 more WS by then never tanking, never finishing last.
Oh no, the Redbirds just missed the postseason again, calling it now.
Lmao that’s some wishful thinking as a Cubs hater
Oh wainofan if the Cubs still had Torres to trade now they would not have the 2016 world championship. You know the one the Cubs won that just your blood boiling.
How the Cardinals doing? Will they ever make the playoffs again? Or you just happy if they do not finish last.
Cardinals win potentially 3 out of the next 9 World Series? I hope you are a troll and not the disconnected with reality.
Cubs are going to be over the luxury tax this year. It’s a given. What’s the difference if you are 20 million over or 50 million. It pays off if you win. Ask Boston. The only team over the tax last year.
There is a difference about how far the Cubs go over the threshold as the tax is progressive. Also, if they don’t get under the limit in the following year,they are penalized even more than would be in the current year.
Like I said tho, if you win, the money will come. Don’t sweat the money if you get the right guys and win.
Still think the Cubbies will get Britton, try and move a salary piece,
I think the Tigers would gladly take Heyward and Happ. Heyward could play center for a year until Nick leaves, then move back to right. Happ would become the second baseman for the next 5 years. You might even get a decent prospect or two if you throw in Russell or Schwarber or even Chatwood.
Tiger offense was putrid.
Could this move be a precursor to preparations for a massive contract like Bryce Harper?