It’s obvious now that the Cubs have more than a passing interest in free agent righty Yu Darvish, who the team’s top brass met with today in Texas. As Sahadev Sharma of The Athletic writes, it seems the growing likelihood of a match is the result more of market development than the pre-winter intentions of the Chicago organization.
The connection is real, then, but its consummation is hardly a fait accompli. It’s a good time to stop and take the temperature of the MLBTR readership on the subject with a poll.
It doesn’t take much explanation to establish the fit. Darvish is the top free agent starter, in MLBTR’s collective estimation. While the Cubs have added Tyler Chatwood to a staff that’s fronted by Kyle Hendricks, Jon Lester, and Jose Quintana, the club would like to add another high-quality arm to push Mike Montgomery into the bullpen (or out via trade). The club seems to have payroll space left to work with.
In one view, then, it’s simple: of course the Cubs should pursue Darvish. That said, if it’s circumstances driving the interest — say, Darvish’s interest levels and the still-lofty asking price of other top free agents like Jake Arrieta and Alex Cobb — then we have to bear in mind all the more that price will matter. It’s not as if the rest of the market will sit back and allow the Cubs to swoop in and make a deal; a few other teams, at least, have been cited as having ongoing interest.
So, rather than a simple yes/no question, I thought it’d be more interesting to see the circumstances under which folks believe a match would be sensible here for the Cubs. Darvish makes any team better, but perhaps you think he’s not as good as other options or that the team should prioritize other areas altogether. Or, maybe you think the expected contract price (something approaching or even exceeding Lester’s contract) is just too steep, but that Darvish would be a great add if he can be acquired for something below that rate. (Poll link for app users.)
Six years $150M with player opt out after year 2 or 3.
Yu need to sign him Cubs!!!
Why offer an opt out. That never works for the team
Because other teams will, and therefore you have to make it appealing.
Also how doesn’t it work? If he’s good enough to get a bigger contract down the line you’d assume he’s earned at least the first few years of a contracts value that he’s been paid. The surplus is limited, but most contracts are backloaded so if they opt out early good for them. If not, well that’s exactly what a normal 6 year contract assumes (risk), at least in an opt out scenario you likely come out ahead just not as old contract structures that work in your favor.
Agree. It also makes him play better in that window frame
There would be no way he would get more than the 25 MM/A at age 34 when his peripherals suggest year over year declines.
Opt outs work for the player and against the team. If he’s really good, you have him for a limited time then lose him. If he’s terrible, you have to keep and pay him for a longer time. If the former, your upside is for a limited time then you’re back to rebuilding. If the latter, your payroll is burdened and it will be difficult to compete. Though probably worth it if you win a ring during that limited time. A calculated gamble at best.
People look at opt-outs wrong.
They say that the player will opt out if the contract is undervalued, or he’ll stay if the contract is overvalued. And that both situations hurt the team. While those two statements are true, they fail to take a number of things into account.
First, opt-outs provide value to the player. People always seem to miss this obvious point.
Since we’re talking about the Cubs, let’s use Jason Heyward as an example moving forward. He signed with the Cubs for 8 years / $184 million with two opt outs. He turned down 8 years / $200 million with no opt out language from the Nationals. You can deduce from this that the Cubs saved $16 million over 8 years in actual money by offering the opt outs. That isn’t insignificant.
Smart teams understand this value and use it as leverage to make up the monetary difference from other offers. Desperate teams use it as leverage to make up other issues a player might have with signing with their team (eg. poor team play, poor location, etc.)
The Cubs play in a major market. They have an historic stadium that’ was recently renovated. They have a top-tier manager. They’ve made three straight NLCS appearances. And they won a World Series 14 months ago. When a team is in the position the Cubs are in (Dodgers, Yankees, BoSox, and a few others are in similar spots), and they offer an opt-out clause, it’s always to make up monetary differences from other offers because the other selling points are off the charts. So if the Cubs offer Darvish an opt-out, it’s because he took a few less dollars to sign.
Second – people ignore the fact that opt-outs are done one of two ways from a team’s POV.
1) The team front loads the contract, which protects them against a bigger cap hit if the player doesn’t opt out
2) They back load the contract, daring the player to opt out of the bigger money portion of the deal.
Guess which one smart teams do? They front load the contract, protecting themselves against regression. That way, if the player doesn’t utilize the opt-out due to it being an over-market deal, it’s still a smaller hit than they’d have taken if they gave him a LT deal w/ yearly salaries in line with the actual AAV.
Let’s look at Heyward again,
His money was front-loaded with 2017 and 2018 representing his biggest pay days ($28 mil per year). That leaves about $106 million over 5 years remaining on the deal. Will he opt-out? Probably not. I mean, the guy has barely hit his weight as a Cubs (.243 average vs a listed weight of 240 points.) But still, w/o the opt-out, the Cubs are likely paying Heyward $125 million over the final 5 years. With the opt-outs, they’re paying him $19 million less.
If the Cubs were to offer Darvish an opt-out, they’dd likely front load that contract as well, paying him significantly more money in 2019 and 2020 ahead of Bryant and Russell’s free agency year. If Darvish outperforms the contract and opts-out, it provides more money to sign Bryant and Russell. If Darvish underperforms and doesn’t opt out, then you’re at least paying him less than you would’ve had you not offered the opt out clause.
Seriously – unless a team is desperate and does something stupid, then these things do work out for the team.
I like the points you make. Only misconception is the cap hit. Salary is calculated based and the Average Annual Value (AAV) of a given contract, no matter if it’s front or back loaded. Pujols for example was being paid about half of his AAV in the first couple of years with Anaheim. But the team salary breakdown has him making the AAV for every season.
I can only speculate why this is done by owners. It’s their money after all. I would think back loading a contract gives the player incentive to stay, while front loading dares the player to opt out. With so much emphasis on teams getting younger and avoiding bad contracts I would think front loading would be the better way to go in certain scenarios.
Teams prefer it. It’s almost always to the benefit of the team. The player either sucks and it kinda hurts em, or it’s just an expensive backloaded contract ready to sign in his late years.
Correct. For whatever reason nobody else seems to realize that there’s zero difference between a six-year contract and a six-year contract with an opt-out after the third year. If they stick around, they have the exact same result. If they do opt out, the team got a bargain on the years that they were there. It’s not a fad, it’s almost always in favor of the team, so they have no problems letting agents push for them.
It works it also give insurance and incentive. If your that good then as a player you want the opt. If he does it save the Cubs money and they can free up in a few years for another SP.
it works both ways
By offering an opt-out, you can not only net the players best years and walk away from the heavy money part of the deal, but also you are getting a concession that can save real $ on whatever deal is signed.
God that’s a truly horrible contract (for the Cubs).
Sounds good to me
That what I said. Agree
Would rather have arrieta if the contract is the same
6 years is too long for a pitcher. More like 4/105M with an opt out after 2 years. I much rather have Alex Cobb for 4/65 with also an opt in incentive with 200IP. In at least 1 year of the first 2 years.
Die Hard Cubs fan and Darvish has been one of my favorite guys in the since I used him in one of MLB video games a while back (lame reason I know). But I really like the idea of 1 of Bryce Harper, Manny Machado, or Clayton Kershaw in a cubs Jersey in a year so I would rather hold off and sign a guy like Cobb. not just cause he’ll cost less but they can get him on a shorter deal. If Yu wants to sign a little below market value for less than 5 years I’ll take him but otherwise he’s just not worth it to me…
Well I’m glad you’re not going with your gut instinct and going with your gamer logic instead. Adrian Gonzalez swatted 83 Hrs for me in MLB the show in ’13, geez I hope the Cubbies sign him!
Ha!
People think Cobb will be cheaper, but it doesn’t sound like that. I’ve read that Cobb wants 20 mil per year. If the Cubs could get Darvish for 25 or 26 aav for the same years, it’s a major upgrade and totally worth it.
No draft pick with darvish either
alex cobb is a nice starter, for a team looking to improve your rotation, but for a team looking to win it all, a team needs to think bigger.than a low inning guy with low strikeout numbers
I know I’ve hit a bunch with this Reggie Jackson dude. Cubs should sign him. And this Rollie fingers guy might be a good closing option… good thing video games are basically real life. But I do love the show… because it’s fantasy.
Your reaching short jr. First off KC has to opt out his contract. Is doubtful any team will get him. LA will give him the city before he leaves. So odds on CK anywhere are slim to none. Harper possible but it’s going to be in the 400- 450 range- they will have move Heward. Hard to do with a NTC.
Macho we don’t need why blow 300 million? Blackmon would be a good if you can fight 20 other teams. Dallas K already said he wants to stay in Huston. So get busy living or get busy dieing?
Played say they want to stay placed all the time until money calls. I agree that Kershaw stays in LA. Don’t need Machado? How so? Guy guys plays the same if not better D than Russell but actually hits doing it. Maybe Russell finds his own this year since he is so young but to say machado is not needed is crazy.
he won’t have better d than Russel at shortstop and he won’t be a 400 million $ upgrade not worth it
Baez is better than Russell at SS.
Really? Machado not better D than Russell?
I highly doubt The Cubs will sign Kershaw, and wouldn’t make much sense to sign Machado.
I highly doubt The Cubs will sign Kershaw, and it wouldn’t make sense to sign Machado with Bryant at 3rd, and Russell/Baez at short. Harper’s market will be huge next off season, and they’ll have to compete with The Yankees for Harper.
not really on the Yankees that outfild is full.
I don’t know. Harper was interested in signing there.
Voted for the second option, but only because I don’t know what the market is right now. If Cobb is asking for 20 per season and Darvish can be had for 23, then of course you should go with Darvish.
And if Darvish could get 23 with the Cubs but a team that’s less likely to contend will offer 25, then if I were Darvish I think I would take the Cubs. If another team offered 28? I’d probably go the Gil Meche route and sign with that team. But I’m not Darvish and I’ll never be in a similar situation so I don’t know.
The real question is what is Yu willing to do to be a Cub. Chance of a lifetime. Don’t blow it Yu.
It’s also a pretty exiting time to be a Dodger, Astro, Indian, or Yankee. Not to mention how good the White Sox, Cardinals, and Brewers all could be in 2 years…
The rotation and bullpen are already good enough to get the playoffs but I love big time pitching staffs. Darvish and that group would have a shot at a world series and then Darvish will be there I imagine still, after Lester hits the market. Id sign him. 6/150 with a 5 million signing bonus plus cy young and playoff incentives.
You would need to give Yu what you gave Lester or more to sign him. Anything less is an insult.
As a Cards fan, YES, Cubs, PLEASE sign Darvish!!!
dude sux!
As a card fan also and baseball fan. No, no he doesn’t and you have a bad base level for what “sux”.
Go ahead and sign him Cubs fan! See how he does in the playoffs when it really matters!
About as good as Kershaw
so pretty good with a few bad starts! sounds about right
*insert Andrew Dice Clay “Ohhhh”*
Why settle for Alex Cobb, who would cost the Cubs a draft pick, or even Jake Arietta in free agency when they can sign the top starting pitcher this offseason?
Sign Yu Darvish, bring back Wade Davis as closer and maybe even swap Addison Russell for Manny Machado and the Cubs will once again have the best overall talent in MLB. Even “Genius” Joe Maddon would be hard pressed to screw up this roster.
The Orioles want two controllable starters for Machado (nuts), plus the Cubs seem to prefer Harper next year.
Cubs ain’t gonna get Harper. Unless they have close to 700 mil with Harper and Bryant. And Rizzo will be due for 130 mil as well. With 130m on the books with heyward its not gonna happen. Doesnt matter if the owner is the founder of etrade.
Cubbies will get Harper. Problem will be what they have to give up to get someone to take Heyward.
Very real chance that Heyward may opt out after next season. The way his contract is written, if he doesn’t opt out after next season there is a chance he loses his ability to opt out after his 4th.
If he chooses not to opt out after the 3rd year he has to have 550 TPA in order to opt out after the 4th year. If he is injured and misses any significant time he runs the risk of losing his final ability to opt out and cash in as a FA once again
Not worth reading for machado. The cubs need controllable starters themselves so it’s dumb to trade. Wait until next year to sign him and trade Russell.
Trading* Damn phones!
Does it involve more risk to hand out what would be the Cubs’ 3rd albatross contract in exchange for a couple good seasons (or more if they get lucky) from any of Darvish / Arrieta / Cobb in attempt to put them over the top as World Series favorites…
or does it involve more risk for them to pass on those guys and attempt to make it through this season with the current rotation with what would likely be a smaller chance of success in the postseason?
The Rangers needs to get off there lazy asses and re-sign Yu. Both sides wants it, especially Darvish. Hope this don’t turn out to be another Josh Hamilton deal.
5 years 115 million
Front load it.
1st year – 27m
2nd year- 26m
3rd year – 25m
4th year – 20m
5th year – 17m
Age 35 paying 17m is much more reasonable than 25m. Plus you get a chunk outta the way before the ’18 signing class …maybe even front load it a little bit more
Not happening. He’ll get at least what the Cubs paid Lester, maybe a little more.
Makes sense from Cubs prospective but there’s about a .00002% chance Cubs get Yu for that amount of money (or lack there of)!
heck my twins would beat that offer
I guess you didn’t see the Astros hammer him twice in the world series.Complete waste of money in my book.
I guess you didn’t see that the Astros picked up on him tipping pitches.
google.com/amp/amp.si.com/mlb/2017/12/11/dodgers-y…
Any pitcher is in trouble if the batter knows what’s coming.
Max Scherzer hasn’t won in any of his past six playoff starts. Complete waste of money in my book. Kershaw has an ERA over 4.00 in the playoffs, so why are people talking about him like he’s a star?
It’s easy to judge a player from a sample size of six games.
I think Cubs should match up with the Giants for a trade. I think they match up incredibly well as trade partners. I would think that the Giants would love to have any of Baez, Happ, Almora, or Russell. Mike Montgomery is also very intriguing from a Giants perspective.
From the Cubs standpoint, Cueto or Samardjiza would be an amazing addition to their rotation. The Giants would likely eat some money to get a solid deal…
Just an idea: Cueto, Hunter Strickland, and $20mm ($5mm/yr for 4 years)
to the Cubs for Ian Happ, and Mike Montgomery
Cubs deal from depth, get a legit Ace for $16mm/yr (well below market value), and a solid late inning bullpen arm.
Giants get a much needed young outfielder and a project starter with upside. Also get under the luxury tax threshold without moving multiple core pieces (just one).
A legit ace has a 4.52 ERA? And the Cubs have never been over the luxury tax
Lol
I wouldn’t call Cueto a legit ace anymore
One season where he dealt with blisters all year does not mean he isn’t capable anymore. 2016 he had a 2.79 ERA, 219.2 IP, 198 K’s, and a 1.09 WHIP. Looks like an Ace to me.
Now that the blisters have had time to heal, he is going to be fine. I can’t remember the last time a pitcher had a blister that effected him for 1 year turn into a career altering injury.
If he was somewhere inbetween 2016 and 2017 performance…3.10 ERA, 200 IP, 180 K’s, 1.20 WHIP. He would be getting top dollar on the market right now. $25mm+ per year on a 5 year deal.
I won’t dismiss Cueto like the others have. But that said he is a worry. But so is Darvish IMO who IMO really only has 1 full, true Ace-like season under his belt in his career. He was on his way to having 2 Ace-like seasons in 2014 but then his arm blew up….. yes, blew up. Then he had TJ surgery. He came back in 2016…. looked solid/great in half a season but nothing jaw dropping. In 2017 he was pretty…. meh. He hasn’t lost any velocity though according to fangraphs which is encouraging so you might be able to chalk up his mediocre 2017 to him just being worried about his contract situation…… or he just had a down year, not everyone can fire on all cylinders 100% of the time…… I mean look at Kershaw. He takes a break and falls into mediocrity every postseason, OHHHH.
Anyways. Cueto, Darvish, and Arrieta all possess their own unique red flags. That said, Cueto at 4 years and $89M guaranteed (club option in 2022) is a very intriguing deal. He makes $21M even in each of the next 4 years with a $5M buyout after that 2021 season.
I say I am intrigued with this proposition, but I counter your offer with Johnny Cueto for Mike Montgomery, Tommy La Stella, and a minor leaguer…. say…. Mark Zagunis. We take Cueto, his money, and his uncertainty off the Giants’ hands who REALLY need to shed some bad money off their books (not that Cueto is “bad money”….. yet) and you still get Montgomery. La Stella is stupid underrated and is buried on the Cubs depth chart. He’d likely be a starter most anywhere else. And then I toss in a top OF prospect in the Cubs system for good measure. Cubs hopefully get a Cincinnati Reds version of Johnny Cueto, and the Giants shed some payroll, get an intriguing pitcher in Montgomery, a 2Bman or 3Bman in La Stella (Either move Panik to the OF or La Stella becomes a super utility player…… still getting more playing time in SF than he would in Chicago), and an OF prospect.
I’m not comfortable coughing up a young stud like Happ for the questionable Cueto. But the fact that Cueto “only” gets $21M/yr and for only the next 4 years……. I’m interested. ESPECIALLY looking at what other pitchers are asking for and actually getting so far this offseason. I mean the Cubs gave Tyler f***ing Chatwood almost $13M/season….. WHY?! Alex cobb’s oft injured a** is thinking he’s worth $20M/season. If this is the current state of baseball then I’d rather have Cueto for $21M/year than any of these other names floating around.
Toss in Samardzija and his 3 remaining years of control in the deal and then I’ll consider tossing in Happ instead of La Stella. Cueto and Samardzija for Happ, Montgomery, De La Cruz, and a PTBNL. I think there a much better options out there……. but I’d toy with this possibility. Lester, Cueto, Quintana, Hendricks, and Samardzija is a pretty solid rotation. Expensive, but solid…… and with their longest deal in that rotation only being Cueto’s 4 years it’s not like it buries them under long, bad contracts. Hmmmmmm. Question though…… .why would SF be willing to trade off either of their two best starters? Doesn’t seem like they’re trying to tear down their team or shed payroll….. you know….. since they just traded for Longoria.
Totally agree! Ship the Shark or Cueto back to the central and bring a young OF bat to the west coast!
Lol. Take Hayward off the cubs then maybe you have a argument for a trade. A very small but at least it’s a start.
Samardzija is garbage. I’ve seen plenty of his inconsistent self here in Chicago. No thanks. Was more than happy to see him go.
Cueto is in no way an ace.. especially not for happ and Montgomery.. but keep dreaming
Its tricky. On one hand, without Darvish the Cubs look to have one of the weaker starting rotations of the bona fide contenders. I’d put them behind the Dodgers, Astros, Nats, Indians, Red Sox (if Price is healthy), and Diamondbacks. With Darvish though, they measure up a lot better, with Arrieta a little less so, with Cobb even less, so on and so forth. So signing him definitely gives them the best chance to compete.
The problem is that Darvish’s salary is going to be bolstered by the fact that he is the best of a rather lackluster crop of free agent starters. Whoever signs him is going to be stuck with that contract for a good long time. IMO it makes Archer, Odorizzi, Cole, etc. seem a lot more attractive as trade targets.
Well said.
As of right now, without Darvish, they have a better staff than the DBacks and Astros. Hendricks might be the best #3 in the game, outdueling Strasburg in game 1 of the NLDS. Kluber in game 7 of the world series, and Kershaw game 6 of the 2016 NLCS. Lester and Q are equal to a number 2 on most of those teams and have shown they can be ace quality in the playoffs… Q went pitch for pitch against Kershaw in game 1 until Maddon pulled him too early. Maddon abuses the bullpen constantly. The starters kept us in every game against the Dodgers with the exception of game 5, when the whole team gave up.
People who don’t think the Cubs have a quality staff shouldn’t express their opinion because they obviously don’t watch baseball.
I like how red little bird whiffle bat humpers come in here adding their sad, sad opinions on this news story. Aren’t you busy trying to convince yourself Ozuna is going to make a difference?
He’s not a top pitcher. Look at the numbers. They’re good, but not Scherzer or Kershaw level
Blake Camden, Scherzer and Kershaw aren’t available, and their contracts were signed years ago. Even at that, Kershaw is already pulling down about $36 million a year. Darvish at $25 million a year would be a good get at his talent level.
Disagree. Look at the numbers. This is not a top starter. Look at the IP. He doesn’t even average 150 innings.
He’s a 4-time All-Star in 5 seasons. You don’t make the All-Star game that often if you’re not among the top pitchers. No, he’s not Kershaw or Scherzer or even Sale level, but he’s certainly a top pitcher. You’re skewing his IP numbers because he missed time due to injury. If we’re going to do that, i guess we have to knock Kershaw for his two lengthy stints on the DL for his back the past two seasons.
He also pitched in the AL… Makes a big difference when comparing basic stats like era and whip…
4.52 ERA I remember wean you would get sent to the minor leagues or released with those numbers! Ace ? I think not !!!
He is not an ace but the cost of pitching is high. 150 atleast. The only bonus is the cubs will be playing again in a real bad division. Also whoever said kershaw on the cubs is a moron. will never happen.
I think theo can go visit dice k right now and cub fans will get a chubby.
I was going to vote for “sure, but only at a discount,” but that’s lame. Everyone wants to believe they’re getting some discount, but they’re really paying market rate. meaning full price. Expectations are all over the place, and usually inflated. If you’re a Cubs fan and you want him, the first choice is the only choice. You’re paying market rate no matter what.
Finally someone who gets it. Cubs fans who expect free agents to sign for less than market rate are highly delusional, but what else is new?
Except for the fact that Zobrist, Lackey and Heyward all took less guaranteed money and/or less in AAV to sign with the Cubs, this analysis is spot on. But don’t let that stop you from thinking that all Cubs fans are delusional.
That being said, I have no idea what the market is on Yu at this point. He’s been a consistent performer, but his WS implosion is not exactly how you’d want to go into a FA offseason.
Originally I thought this was just your average Theo due diligence and/or a shot across the bow of Cobb to lower his demands, but if Cobb is still asking for $20M/year, Darvish could make sense in the right deal for the Cubs. The math says he’s on track for ~5/$130M, and it might take another year to lock him up (especially this early in FA), but that doesn’t make a ton of sense for the Cubs, whose title window is firmly within the next three years. We’ll see how it plays out.
Nothing you said applies to Darvish. He’s the top free agent, not some veteran journeyman (Lackey, Zobrist) looking to. Heyward (vastly overpaid by the Cubs) doesn’t compare in any way here either. Realistically, Darvish is the top pitcher and to free agent overall this year. He’s not taking less money to come to Chicago, nor would he agree to a shorter term contract. Lester got 6 / $155MM with a substantial signing bonus. Darvish would reasonably expect something similar or more, possibly $160-$170MM
You say Heyward was overpaid, despite the previous comment stating that he took less money to sign with the Cubs. I guess if Darvish were to do the same and have a bad year or two, you would say he was overpaid as well.
He barely took a discount ($184 vs 200), and the other suitor was St Louis. It’s a pretty basic misunderstanding to call this a discount since:
a) the Cubs gave a player opt-out after 3 years (very valuable)
b) St Louis isn’t a place that you’d want to live if you’re not white… (google the stories that ran on what fans yelled at Heyward while he played there)
c) Heyward already knew what it was like to play in St Louis, and didn’t like it enough to stay
Zobrist is literally 8th in total WAR since 2009 among all MLB players. Then he won the WS MVP in his first season with the Cubs. Veteran journeyman? GTFOH with that crap.
And Lackey is aging, but he still has 40+ career WAR and started G1 of the NLDS for a team that won 100 games the year before he signed with the Cubs. You’re reaching. It wreaks of desperation and it’s beneath you.
Meanwhile, it’s being reported that Yu could accept only a 4-year contract, which probably explains the Cubs sudden interest. You might want to check the mirror for the delusional fan.
I wanna be on your Christmas list if you think turning down $16M in guaranteed earnings is no big deal.
I think it means that the market just isn’t there for Darvish or Arrieta right now, so it may seem like a discounted rate compared to what he was initially forecasted to get…
I’m not talking about expectations such as “Hosmer wants $200MM.” I’m talking about our (and others’) analysis after taking into account all relevant factors coming into the offseason.
That’s why I referred to “expectations,” not (as you characterized it) “market rate.” The market rate is what is paid, so that answers — itself except perhaps in some situations where a player’s individual market is skewed for some reason (personal preferences, unusual positional demand or lack thereof, etc) such that a contract does not really reflect typical supply and demand.
I even defined expectations in the post as something in the range of the Lester contract (155 mil). There is clearly a difference between guaranteeing that or getting him for, say, 100-120.
And sometimes, the market produces surprising results on premium players — such as, say, the 3/75 (+opt-out) that Yoenis Cespedes got the first time he re-signed with the Mets, when he left a bigger guarantee on the table in order to pick up a big first-year salary and gain the right to re-enter the market. Or when Ervin Santana opened the winter asking for nine figures and ended up being bailed out for 1/15 only after the Braves had a sudden need arise.
I would look to move KS and additional assets for SP
But our only additional assets are Major League proven talent such as Ian Happ, Almora, and Baez. Baez has to be nearly as untouchable as KB and Rizzo. Even Almora should not be moved. Guy is a .300 20 HR gold glove winning all star waiting to come out. He hardly strikes out at all. Just look at his stats from 2017. Imagine him with some experience. His defensive rating went down last year if I’m correct, but it could have been from poor placement, shifts, switching OF positions. Etc. so really Ian Happ is it. And he looks like a solid player. At his age he would command a fairly high return. Multiple years of control of a #2 or 3 starter kind of like Quintana. I say give Darvish 6/150 with a player opt out after year 2 or 3. We wouldn’t be wasting time flying to Texas to talk if we weren’t serious or don’t have the money. Hang on to Schwarber until his stock goes up. IF it goes up. I can’t imagine it going down. Right now he is hardly worth a reliever. With a good start to the season or a decent overall season, we could flip him and Zobrist with Heyward for prospects just as a salary dump to clear space for the monster free agent class after 2018. Then we forget about Harper and sign Blackmon, saving us about 300 million or more. Then we have the money to sign another starter as a #6, or in case Chatwood doesn’t pan out, or if Lester steadily declines, or even injury. But keep the depth man. It’s what separates us from so many teams. Happ, Baez, even Bryant can play almost anywhere. It allows us to rest players, or have a solid sub for an injured player. Leave it alone. But I wouldn’t trade just about anyone at this point unless the offer is to good to refuse.
I think the biggest question is should cubs sign Darvish or Arrieta? If your going to shell out 5yr/150-175 mil why not consider Arrieta for that amount or close to it? Similarly aged starters with Arrieta having possibly less mileage/injury concern. Tough decisions to make.
Because JA is not that amount if you have read anything. He wants 200 million 6-7 year deal. That’s in Stone as Boris has said many times. If he was 4-5 years Cubs would have signed him already.
Are guys retarted or just post to post wo knowing what’s going on?
I want 10 million a year for the job I do but does that mean I’ll get that? I’ll bet anyone that Arrieta does not ink for 200 mil or more. I think they’re shooting for the stars at 200 mil for Arrieta so IMO he will get paid somewhat close to what Darvish gets. Then it becomes a little bit like Scherzer/Lester which I thought Cubs should’ve spent a tad more for Scherzer when you’re spending that kind of money anyways. Remember Lester had huge signing bonus and private jet hours, etc on his contract too. Theo should’ve added a clause that Lester does not get added perks until he learns how to throw to any base!
I would rather resign Jake for less money and/or years
the cubs should hold off and go after alex cobb or lance lynn.
Pass on Lynn no thanks not to get another title. For 20+ million for Cobb I’ll take YU for a bit more money
I don’t understand why people treat darvish like an ace ?? He has never been durable and to think he’s commanding 25 mill per year ? Ewww
Cubbies should stick with Jake imo if you had to pick between the two. Could probably get him for less years
No ones saying he’s a top ace. TBH there are very little so called aces in mlb. Next JA will not be less years what are smoking. Sounds like people are just worried.
I disagree. If jakes market is dry he can Ben had for less years. There seems to be 0 interest in him right now
Yes there’s 0 interest in Jake lol some people sound real dumb on here..
Who has shown legit interest? His market has been dead so far this off season. You can want a player but it doesn’t mean they are worth what they are asking for. Has an offer been made to him or darvish yet ? To my knowledge no
Compared to Kershaw, who will be paid $35.5 million next year (and possibly more if he opts out after 2018), and Scherzer, who will be paid $42 million by 2019, $20-$25 million is a decent price for Darvish. No he’s not a true ace, but he’s still a good front line starter.
You think big blue will let him walk if he asks for that much ?
No. I’m sure they could afford it.
I love how people arm chair quarterback this situation. None who have any clue and more like worried. I’m sure all the neg feedback would be different if he signed on their team.
Theo has pretty much weighed all the options. Now it is a matter of what he will do. Options are out their and it what is the best interest of the team now and later.
Options all have pros and cons.
1. Sign Darvish. He’s a good pitcher and would ace many staffs. A Rotation of Lester, Hendricks, Quin, Darvish and Chatwood will be scary this summer no matter what hate and bs haters say.
He wouldn’t be the number 1 ranked FA if he wasn’t good. Cubs and D Backs sure couldn’t hit him.
Con to this is he won’t come cheap. But Theo has a way of making things work. 5-6 years at 150-160 maybe with an opt out would or should do it.
Yes he had a bad WS. He was tipping his pitches. One series is nothing. CK had a bad game too vs the Cubs in 2016. Cris Sale gave up 6 runs and lost. Price has yet to do anything on the Big stage. ZG hasn’t even got there yet. So please.
JA is possible. But JA has declined big time. His volosity is down and just a matter of time before he’s on the DL many times. Is that worth 200 million?
People say he’s cheaper. Doubt it. Boris already said 200 million 6 -7 year min.
Do you want to pay 33.5 million for a guy at 36,37,38? I’ll pass. Why not then trade for ZG he’s about a million more and your looking at the same time frame and he’s 2x as better and is an ace.
Then there is Cobb. Sure he’s good but a big drop in a pitcher from JA or YD. is 20 million at 5 years worth the drop off? Not really not if you want to get back to the WS
Last Lynn. If your serious about playoffs and the WS I’ll pass.
You could trade. But for who?
Archer? Sure it will cost you 2 pitching prospects plus Happ, Baez and Swarb
That’s what they want. For a guy who’s not an ace and a 4.00 ERA. Control means nothing if he can’t pitch or can’t pitch in the 2,s not for that price.
Then who? Salazar? Sure your looking at a package near the same. Their goes the core n what pitching in aaa we have.
Cole is possible but the Pirates aren’t giving him away ESP to the Cubs.
Ter from Atlanta is garbage. No thanks.
Now what? Do nothing and let Mike M pitch. Sure. But don’t expect to be in the WS.
So your the experts what’s your idea
Just remember your fantasy idea trades it takes two to trade. Easy to say. What you think and the other team are two different things.
Save money for next year. Cubs have lots of money and will have more next year. But CK not going nowhere if he even opts out. LA will give him the city first. Macho we don’t need. Esp for 300+ million. Dallas K already said he wants to stay in Houston. Harper would be nice but wo trading JH who has a NTC I don’t see it as Harper will probably be 400-460
But this year will not reflect next year.
So there’s the choices anyone got better ideas. Haters can hate all day long they are just worried putting on a big act. You get busy living or get busy dieing. Waiting gets you no titles just hopes and dreams.
You can’t act like there shouldn’t be legit concerns about his health though. 3 our of the last 4 seasons he hasn’t even tipped out at 150 innings and his era has been rising every year. How is less than 150 innings per season worth 25 million ? I like darvish but his value is is diminished if he can’t stay on the field
The rest of the baseball world disagrees with you.
If they disagree then why are most gm’s staying away from darvish’s piece tag ? They obviously don’t think he’s worth that much. Like arietta his demand has been limited
Why because they weren’t signed the first day of free agency? Every single team would sign darvish or Jake.. your logic is well dumb
It’s been waaaay past the first day of free agency though and nothing has changed ….
I agree with you. I’m just saying the options are small. People are dreaming of an Archer trade. Sure we can get Archer n gut the core in the mean time. JA, Darvish same difference. But I think JA due for an injury. I also flag he didn’t do that well esp in a FA year.
Cobb is good but for a few extra bucks y not the others.
A ZG trade good and cheaper but I can’t see paying 34.5 million at age 36,37,38
Would u sign a pitcher any pitcher at 34.5 mill if he was 37 right now?
NO
So ideas?
Best thing to do is wait out darvish and let his market tank. That’s how the padres will end up with Hosmer
No demand = price drop
In what fantasy land do you live in where TB said they want 2 pitching prospects Baez happ AND Schwarber lol get real
You don’t keep up on things do you. That was months ago before the winter meetings even began. Keep up with the times son. That’s like 3 months ago old news when the Cubs were connected to him. I never said do that deal or made up some deal. I’m surely no TB fan. But that is what they asked for considering there nothing else to pick from. You just need to read everything everyday and not stick to one network.
RemembTer Zimmerman, all these pitchers are similar to him. They have upside to be number 1 pitchers, but they also have some red flags in their past. It is not like you are getting Scherzer.
So what’s your 2nd point?
As Cards fan, I don’t want them to sign yu, that would make their rotation nails. But honest question, if they sign him something like 6 years $170 million, what does that do to them for Harper, etc next year? Can they sign him as well and have Lester, heyward, Darvish and Harper on payroll? Then what happens when Bryant and co. want to get paid? Bryant is on path to top Harper, machado, etc when he’s free agent. Not to mention Russell, Baez, Contreras etc. when they come up. Does Darvish help them in short term, but hurt them in long run? Yes I know they basically print money like other large market teams but how much can they afford with a depleted farm system that doesn’t show much signs of new guys coming up and drafting towards bottom of draft, would this actually set them up for another tank in a few years?
In short, Epstein and Hoyer know their budget projections. They wouldn’t be adding any payroll the organization could not afford.
Also, keep in mind revenues should go through the roof once their new tv deal is in place.
Correct but the question is should cubs sign Darvish? Do they go big on this year or maintain a team that is nlcs and save money for Harper, etc.? We’re not hoyer and Theo and we’re just speculating on what they should do. Personally I feel it should help them immmensely in near term but potentially hamstrung them from bigger deals so my vote is no for Cubs. I’m Cards fan but I’m not just saying this because I want cubs to suck. I just think long term eventually money runs out, without a decent pipeline or draft picks to produce prospects the money will run out, even with tv deal, etc. I personally like this era of cubs/cards where they look to be top 2 teams in division (with Milwaukee right there too). Haven’t been very many times where both teams have been good. It’s been either one or the other mostly for my lifetime.
Signing JA, or YU won’t effect the Cubs for 2019. They can sign Harper wo an issue if they want him or he wants them. Their money is no different than NY. Not to mention a 20 billion dollar tv deal coming and the park paid off. So money not the issue. Lux tax maybe. But the Yanks added Stranton so they are in worse shape for 2019.
As far as KB and the boys that issue we don’t have to worry about 2021-2022 for some. By that time Lester gone and so is Heyward if he doesn’t opt out. That’s big money. Could be used for the 2021 class which includes Archer n Trout
According to most projections if cubs sign Darvish for AAV of around 25 mil, and sign Harper to AAV of 40 mil, the 2019 payroll for luxury tax purposes would be around 210 million and this is without any other moves. Does this matter to cubs or will they blow past luxury tax levels and not even bat an eye?
They’ll get rid of Heyward by then, possibly Zobrist too.
Please tell me how they get rid of heyward? He opts out? Cause surely there’s teams lining up to pay him more? He gets traded? For what? No one would take him unless cubs pay most of his contract which would negate them trading him. Plus, if I’m not mistaken, he has a no trade clause.
There is no way he opts out not will a team take that albatross contract. It’s ellsbury all over again except he doesn’t have a full no trade clause after the third year of his deal
I think they move some people to make more room. They also could back load a contract.
He could opt out and resign a new deal with the Cubs. Even eating some contract will help. But he may be fine. Money not an issue and everything can be reworked.
There is no insentive for heyward to opt out just to make less money in a new deal with the cubs
Not a Cubs fan, but signing Darvish seems risky. I understand they want to solidify their starting pichting rotation, but Darvish just seems pricey given his age and previous injuries. I would just keep Arrieta if you are going to spend the money. Pitchers are so inclined to get injured, I just cringe at the thought of paying out tons of cash on them. But, if you want to compete, it is necessary at times.
You can have Jake, the Cubs have moved on.
7 years, $210 million sounds about right.
Then sign Arietta to the exact same deal.
Sounds like a plan.
They shouldn’t give Arrieta a similar deal. He’s slowly declining, and by the 3rd year of the contract, he would be 34.
You are right. They should give him the Stanton deal, instead.
Sure, spend some of the Ricketts money, why Not? The Cubs are a big market club with very high expectations so they need to go for it. They can afford it, believe me.
Who cares about this poll ???
The 10,173 people and counting who voted on it.
Based on what I saw in LA, Darvish is too unreliable to trust with taking up so in resources. Don’t understand why anyone would prefer Darvish to Arrietta, for example?
Poll:
Care
Don’t care X
though i voted option 2, i think the cubs will struggle, as other teams will offer moo
Yankmees aren’t interested in Darvish
Red Sox top rotation pitching is set
Dodgers ran Darvish out of town
Those are the only teams who can outspend the Cubs currently.
Every other team in the league can’t afford market value like the Cubs can. So basically, if the Cubs want him, he’s their for $160MM / 5 with option for 6.
If I’m the Cubs my first choice is Chris Archer, but TB surely wants more high end prospects than CHC can afford. Greinke is another good choice and a great fallback if Darvish doesn’t work out. AZ is seeking mainly salary relief, and the remaining commitment is just 4 years. I doubt the Dbacks would take Heyward in a swap of bad contracts, but it’s worth asking. If Cubs are pursuing Darvish this aggressively, Cobb’s price tag must be ridiculous.
Yu get what Yu pay for.
Cubs should offer Yu a 10 year/$300 mil deal, front-loaded and with incentives to drive the cost up each year. Then they should file bankruptcy and do a fire sale next year.
Darvish doesn’t stink, but he’s also not great. I don’t know if he’s is worth the big money hes’s asking for. He gave up more home runs than ever in his career in ’17 and his second highest earned runs in this career. Also his playoff stats are really bad. 2-4 with a 5.81 ERA with 17 ER in 26 innings. The guy will get paid though.
Praying the Cubs are dumb enough to sign him.
Yep me too. Cubs fans will have no problem if he signs with us trust me. Only haters esp Dumb Card fans.
Lot of hate on Darvish. Guy isn’t even two years removed from Tommy John. Most of his stuff came back last year, and with exception to the WS, he was a TOR pitcher. Did he have some bad outings during the year? Yep. So did pretty much every pitcher.
And as for his WS struggles, he was clearly tipping pitches based on his need to regrip his slider once he came set. That’s an insanely easy fix. In fact, the pitch tipping, to me, is more of an indictment on the Dodgers catcher and pitching coach for not catching it between starts. But I digress…
Darvish is worth comparable money to Lester. 6 years / $170 (slightly more since it was 3 years ago.) if the deal is comparable to that, then I’m on board
If the bidding starts to get in the Greinke, Price, or Scherzer range – then I’d have an issue with it.
Someone is smart on these boards. Was just looking at the top 10 trade canidits n FA. Darvish at 1, Archer at 2, JD M at 3 with Jake A at 5. Macho is 8th. I’m sure their a bit smarter than the ave poster in here.
Huh?
I was just reading the top 10 rankings for either trade or FA.
Price wasn’t worth what he got paid. Cubs dodged a bullet. Saving all his wins for the playoffs. 2 years and still saving I rest my case.
You rest your case? I don’t even really know your argument…
Scherzer has two Cy Young awards during the first three years of his deal. He’s lived up to the hype. Greinke followed a miserable 2016 with a really good 2017. And Price has been atrocious since he signed.
None of there successes or failures really has much to do with Darvish, though. I just don’t like the idea of giving a pitcher $200 million at this point in time. So if he comes in around $175, I’d be fine. If he tops $200, then I’m not on board.
Neither are on the market what’s your point? Everyone thinks a pitcher is trash if he’s not mad max or ck. my point is YD is the best option. As I said Price hasn’t done s” hit in 2 years after 218 million. That’s my point