caulfield12 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 (edited) QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Feb 10, 2018 -> 09:25 PM) Bazinga! Because Lester/Heyward/Darvish accounting for 80M+ per year is something to behold and admire. Like Heyward, cubs fans will come to regret this contract soon enough. How many teams haven’t regretted a contract of six years or more in length? Probably only the Angels with Trout. Cubs still well under luxury tax...$158 million across roughly 20 players. And they still have Almora, Happ, Baez, Schwarber, etc. Edited February 11, 2018 by caulfield12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrathofhahn Posted February 11, 2018 Author Share Posted February 11, 2018 (edited) QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 10, 2018 -> 10:57 PM) How many teams haven’t regretted a contract of six years or more in length? Probably only the Angels with Trout. Cubs still well under luxury tax...$158 million across roughly 20 players. And they still have Almora, Happ, Baez, Schwarber, etc. Problem isn't the money it's the length it will eat past the arb years of their top guys. Basically in Bryant is a FA in 22. Rizzo 22. Schwarber 22. Russell 22. Basically they have two guys now in Heyward and Darvish locked in past that date for over 50 million both likely at that time in their significant decline phase. Hell Heyward is already there. Also remember Q becomes free agent in 22 as well. Edited February 11, 2018 by wrathofhahn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonofaRoache Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (JPR @ Feb 10, 2018 -> 06:43 PM) Couple means 2, there is absolutely nothing but a minimal chance the Cubs win it. They have holes in the pen still. The playoffs, and 2005, prove that pitching wins and I'm not seeing any Mark Buehrle's on the Cubs' staff. They're not catching lightning in a bottle, again, anytime soon. In my opinion, if the Cubs don't win the NL crown this season then stick a fork in them. They'll just continue to score 10 runs a game while giving up 11. Losing Wade Davis has more impact on that squad than gaining a 33 year old SP. Davis is lights out as a closer while Darvish could not even succeed as a #3 starting pitcher in LA. It sucks that the Cubs are a great team but you are blinded by hate. They've to to 3 stright NLCS's and will go back again this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tray Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 I hate the cubs and the Ricketts but I do admire Epstein's formula - Draft great position players and then buy pitching. The Cubs hand was forced into that when the Astros foolishly selected Mark Appel with the first pick in 2013 Draft. Cubs would still be looking for the first modern day WS title for the franchise if Houston didn't make that mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (ptatc @ Feb 10, 2018 -> 06:25 PM) They know more about Arrietta than anyone. That should tell you something. Kind of like the Dodgers being unwilling to resign Darvish after going to the World Series with him. Player evaluation is weird, man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 11, 2018 -> 05:47 AM) Kind of like the Dodgers being unwilling to resign Darvish after going to the World Series with him. Player evaluation is weird, man Dodgers have luxury tax issues the cubs don’t have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 11, 2018 -> 06:08 AM) Dodgers have luxury tax issues the cubs don’t have. Dodgers have never had problems adding players they wanted despite those tax issues. If they wanted him he would have been there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 11, 2018 -> 05:47 AM) Kind of like the Dodgers being unwilling to resign Darvish after going to the World Series with him. Player evaluation is weird, man Their final offer was close to the Cubs offer for Darvish whereas Cubs aren't even talking to Arrieta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 11, 2018 -> 06:15 AM) Dodgers have never had problems adding players they wanted despite those tax issues. If they wanted him he would have been there They also want to reset their penalty for next year's class to add a Harper or Machado plus give a bump to Kershaw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 11, 2018 -> 06:15 AM) Dodgers have never had problems adding players they wanted despite those tax issues. If they wanted him he would have been there It’s a new CBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 (edited) QUOTE (SonofaRoache @ Feb 10, 2018 -> 10:34 PM) It sucks that the Cubs are a great team but you are blinded by hate. They've to to 3 stright NLCS's and will go back again this year. He’s most definitely blinded by hate, but you lose all credibility when you speak like a Sith and say the Cubs will be going back to the NLCS next year. The playoffs are always a crap shoot and they really had to battle to make it to the NLCS in 2016 & 2017. They’ll most likely go to the playoffs next year, but let’s check the rest at the door given the Dodgers & Nationals are as good if not better than the Cubs. Edited February 11, 2018 by Chicago White Sox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 If the Sox made this move in a similar position I’d be glad. Oh no it will hurt our flexibility in FOUR YEARS? Who cares. You never know what will happen that far out, and teams the past few years have shown to be adept at moving contracts deemed “immovable”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 (edited) QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 11, 2018 -> 06:08 AM) Dodgers have luxury tax issues the cubs don’t have. And the odds would be staked pretty high that he’d be returning to LA if he’d won one of those World Series starts. Otoh, his FA asking price might have been a notch or two higher and the Dodgers still have do have plenty of potential starters as well as the trade market and a deep system. We haven’t heard anything about the Cubs having legit interest in keeping Arrieta after it became obvious his stuff was falling off last year. Finally, if the Cubs win another World Series in the next four years and Darvish plays a key role, nobody will regret the contract that much because they kept their window open for 6-7 years, which is pretty incredible in this day and age of MLB. Edited February 11, 2018 by caulfield12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatScott82 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (wrathofhahn @ Feb 10, 2018 -> 10:14 PM) Problem isn't the money it's the length it will eat past the arb years of their top guys. Basically in Bryant is a FA in 22. Rizzo 22. Schwarber 22. Russell 22. Basically they have two guys now in Heyward and Darvish locked in past that date for over 50 million both likely at that time in their significant decline phase. Hell Heyward is already there. Also remember Q becomes free agent in 22 as well. Quintana’s deal expires after the 2020 season. But you are right about the other guys all having contracts that expire after the 2021 season. And with Lester and Darvish on the wrong side of 30 then and Heyward being himself, the Cubs likely have 3 years left in this current window. The funny thing is, that’s when most people expect our White Sox to be contenders with the window just opening up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Abreu Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 Dodgers could've traded Kemp, packaged with a prospect of course, and then signed Darvish with the new cap room. Guess nobody wanted Kemp/they didn't feel Darvish was worth the risk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turnin' two Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Feb 11, 2018 -> 07:05 AM) Their final offer was close to the Cubs offer for Darvish whereas Cubs aren't even talking to Arrieta. I don't get this. What did they know about him that would make them not want to sign him? Injury? Roids? Clubhouse Cancer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (turnin' two @ Feb 11, 2018 -> 02:02 PM) I don't get this. What did they know about him that would make them not want to sign him? Injury? Roids? Clubhouse Cancer? I think they just value the extra pick/draft flexibility or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 (edited) I like the other moves the Cubs have made, but that bullpen still lacks a closer. Edited February 11, 2018 by soxfan2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Feb 11, 2018 -> 06:15 AM) Dodgers have never had problems adding players they wanted despite those tax issues. If they wanted him he would have been there This isn't true. Dodgers need to get under $197 million. They paid the luxury tax last year. By not paying it this year their tax bill resets. They will target players in 2019 free agency (Kershaw, Harper, Machado). They'll be going way over the luxury tax threshold but will only pay a 20% tax on the overage to do so. If they brought back Darvish this year and then spent heavily again next year, they'd be paying a 50% tax on the overage. It truly is about money and not wanting to be over the tax line. Yankees, Nationals and Giants are trying to do the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Feb 11, 2018 -> 02:24 PM) I think they just value the extra pick/draft flexibility or something. Darvish doesn't have draft compensation attached to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 11, 2018 -> 04:48 PM) Darvish doesn't have draft compensation attached to him. Arrieta does - the Cubs will get a pick back if he signs elsewhere. And that's a silly concept anyway. If the Cubs are that worried about a 2nd or 3rd round pick that they're going after a pitcher that they like less, then their priorities are totally screwed up. They went after Darvish because they wanted starting pitching help and they picked the pitcher they preferred. Whatever their reason was, they seriously preferred darvish to Arrieta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 11, 2018 -> 03:50 PM) Arrieta does - the Cubs will get a pick back if he signs elsewhere. And that's a silly concept anyway. If the Cubs are that worried about a 2nd or 3rd round pick that they're going after a pitcher that they like less, then their priorities are totally screwed up. They went after Darvish because they wanted starting pitching help and they picked the pitcher they preferred. Whatever their reason was, they seriously preferred darvish to Arrieta. Yes they did. I don't think it hurts that they now have 4 picks on Night 1 of the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 11, 2018 -> 03:48 PM) Darvish doesn't have draft compensation attached to him. That's my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Feb 11, 2018 -> 03:51 PM) Yes they did. I don't think it hurts that they now have 4 picks on Night 1 of the draft. Also more bonus pool money if guys slip due to teams not want to pay their bonus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrathofhahn Posted February 12, 2018 Author Share Posted February 12, 2018 (edited) I mean sure but after ST doesn't FA lose any draft pick compensation attached to them? At this point with how much Boras has dragged things out why wouldn't you wait another couple of weeks? Prices are going to only continue to go down plus the draft pick penalty will soon be gone I doubt the cubs ever get a pick for Arrietta Edit: I was wrong Edited February 12, 2018 by wrathofhahn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts