|
|
Post by Clark Street on May 18, 2024 13:11:19 GMT -5
Cubs trade Richard Lovelady to the Rays. in return Cubs get double A pitcher Jeff Belge Surprised to get anything for him. MiLB - Jeff Belge: link |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on May 18, 2024 18:27:18 GMT -5
Surprised to get anything for him. MiLB - Jeff Belge: linkSeems like an interesting project , almost a career 13 K/9 (12.79) but also almost 6 W/9(5.72 ) I figured Lovelady would be an un claimed waiver release so getting anything seems a bonus. |
|
|
|
Post by kfidd on May 25, 2024 11:40:46 GMT -5
www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2024/05/25/danny-jansen-cubs-target/FanGraphs writer speculating that Toronto (23-27 and in the brutal AL East) could make free agent to be Danny Jansen available at the deadline. Cubs pursued Jansen a couple seasons ago but obviously no deal materialized. Jansen would be an upgrade on both defense and (massively) offense. He’s slashing an insane .313/.391/.625 with excellent K and BB rates. I don’t know if he’d be available now or not but I’d love to see the Cubs aggressively pursue upgrades sooner rather than later if they intend to compete this season. The production from catcher has been miserable and both Miguel and Yan can’t throw runners out to save their lives. Jansen could be a massive addition to this team and getting him earlier rather than two months from now would allow much more opportunity to learn the pitching staff and get comfortable here. Again, is he actually available? This is pure (but logical) speculation. The Cubs need help and have some positional glut in their system.
|
|
|
|
Post by lu13cubbie on May 25, 2024 12:08:30 GMT -5
Jansen would be a good get, especialy if the Cubs keep Caissie.
|
|
|
|
Post by foolforthecity on May 25, 2024 12:59:29 GMT -5
He’s also a rental(?). If they had to give up a lot, I’m not sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by thisbuds4u on May 25, 2024 13:38:31 GMT -5
www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2024/05/25/danny-jansen-cubs-target/FanGraphs writer speculating that Toronto (23-27 and in the brutal AL East) could make free agent to be Danny Jansen available at the deadline. Cubs pursued Jansen a couple seasons ago but obviously no deal materialized. Jansen would be an upgrade on both defense and (massively) offense. He’s slashing an insane .313/.391/.625 with excellent K and BB rates. I don’t know if he’d be available now or not but I’d love to see the Cubs aggressively pursue upgrades sooner rather than later if they intend to compete this season. The production from catcher has been miserable and both Miguel and Yan can’t throw runners out to save their lives. Jansen could be a massive addition to this team and getting him earlier rather than two months from now would allow much more opportunity to learn the pitching staff and get comfortable here. Again, is he actually available? This is pure (but logical) speculation. The Cubs need help and have some positional glut in their system. Maybe the Cubs should have kept Contreras. Hoyer took a position [catcher] that wasn't a weakness and turned it into one. |
|
|
|
Post by fine09 on May 25, 2024 14:31:01 GMT -5
www.bleachernation.com/cubs/2024/05/25/danny-jansen-cubs-target/FanGraphs writer speculating that Toronto (23-27 and in the brutal AL East) could make free agent to be Danny Jansen available at the deadline. Cubs pursued Jansen a couple seasons ago but obviously no deal materialized. Jansen would be an upgrade on both defense and (massively) offense. He’s slashing an insane .313/.391/.625 with excellent K and BB rates. I don’t know if he’d be available now or not but I’d love to see the Cubs aggressively pursue upgrades sooner rather than later if they intend to compete this season. The production from catcher has been miserable and both Miguel and Yan can’t throw runners out to save their lives. Jansen could be a massive addition to this team and getting him earlier rather than two months from now would allow much more opportunity to learn the pitching staff and get comfortable here. Again, is he actually available? This is pure (but logical) speculation. The Cubs need help and have some positional glut in their system. Maybe the Cubs should have kept Contreras. Hoyer took a position [catcher] that wasn't a weakness and turned it into one. It wasn’t last year at catcher after they settled on Gomes & Amaya. Then again much of the reason they didn’t want Willson was his numerous injuries & he’s still having those issues, getting even weirder as we go.. |
|
|
|
Post by thisbuds4u on May 25, 2024 15:19:15 GMT -5
Maybe the Cubs should have kept Contreras. Hoyer took a position [catcher] that wasn't a weakness and turned it into one. It wasn’t last year at catcher after they settled on Gomes & Amaya. Then again much of the reason they didn’t want Willson was his numerous injuries & he’s still having those issues, getting even weirder as we go.. Never said it was last year. And if you look, the Cubs could have used his offense last season and now. I also wouldn't classify getting an arm broke by a baseball bat the same way as pulling a hamstring or oblique. Amaya wasn't originally their 1st choice. They gave Barnhart $6.5 million to play in 47 games. |
|
|
|
Post by fine09 on May 25, 2024 17:14:38 GMT -5
It wasn’t last year at catcher after they settled on Gomes & Amaya. Then again much of the reason they didn’t want Willson was his numerous injuries & he’s still having those issues, getting even weirder as we go.. Never said it was last year. And if you look, the Cubs could have used his offense last season and now. I also wouldn't classify getting an arm broke by a baseball bat the same way as pulling a hamstring or oblique. Amaya wasn't originally their 1st choice. They gave Barnhart $6.5 million to play in 47 games. Yes, the broken arm was the reason for my “weirder” comment. Gomes hit very well last year & if they are a part of the reason our 4 starters are so good offense should come fro elsewhere but not so much yet |
|
|
|
Post by thisbuds4u on May 26, 2024 3:36:37 GMT -5
Never said it was last year. And if you look, the Cubs could have used his offense last season and now. I also wouldn't classify getting an arm broke by a baseball bat the same way as pulling a hamstring or oblique. Amaya wasn't originally their 1st choice. They gave Barnhart $6.5 million to play in 47 games. Yes, the broken arm was the reason for my “weirder” comment. Gomes hit very well last year & if they are a part of the reason our 4 starters are so good offense should come fro elsewhere but not so much yet If Amaya and Gomes deserve credit for 4 starters being good then they deserve blame the failure of the other pitchers. But I don't believe that either way. I don't believe pitch framing is as big an issue as compared to inconsistent umpiring. The Cubs are getting no offense from their catchers and they can't control the running game, not that Cub pitchers give them much help in that department. For a team that supposedly has a top-rated farm system, I doesn't see any catching prospects that justify letting Contreras walk. |
|
|
|
Post by kfidd on May 26, 2024 7:47:44 GMT -5
I don’t believe the Cubs have any regrets about letting Contreras walk. There was a clear organizational shift happening that emphasized defense over offense from the catching tandem. While Contreras’ bat is missed the lack of confidence from the pitching staff (specifically the rotation) is not. I’m not pulling the numbers again as it has been well documented but the ERA of the pitching staff was significantly higher with Contreras behind the plate as opposed to catcher B. Especially in his later Cubs tenure years.
The problem is that there is a difference between having an emphasis on defense > offense from your catchers and them being an automatic out in the lineup. That only becomes more obvious when the entire lineup likes to play Jekyll and Hyde at the same time. We got away with it last year because Gomes went superhuman and decided to have his best offensive season at age 36 or whatever but that never should have been expected to happen again.
OPS: Amaya .521, Gomes .458. That is unacceptable no matter how good the defense is. And I agree with the above here that if they get credit for the good pitcher performances then they have to bare some blame for the bad ones as well, not to mention the complete ineptitude at throwing runners out.
I can’t speak for the front office here (though it seemed they were ready to simply part ways regardless of the situation) but I was hopeful Contreras might return on a short big dollar deal as our 1B/DH. But as a catcher there were more than enough signs that we needed to move on. Now, as is the problem with much of the roster, the Cubs need to figure out the future. Hopefully the future begins soon because we’ve sucked for long enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by cfin on May 26, 2024 9:58:07 GMT -5
Would I like more offense from Amaya and Gomes? Absolutely! (I'd like more offense from every position, but that's a different tangent).
I just don't like depending on offense from the catching position. If you get it from your catcher... that's great. But that's never the #1 focus for a catcher, at least in my opinion.
I think too often you see catchers that start to hit, their defense or game prepping starts to take a hit as they see the offense as being more important. And that's exactly how I saw Contreras. If Contreras would have come back, I probably would have stuck him at 1B. I think his offense might've gone to another level if he was playing 1B and the game prepping with the pitchers would have gotten better with a better catcher.
It goes beyond pitch framing, it's about knowing what pitches to throw. Reading the scouting reports and really understanding them. Catcher is the one position on the field that has homework to do, every day. I would rather they spend time doing that homework than spending time in the hitting cage or other aspects of their hitting.
The second part is that catcher is the one position that is not going to play 162 games, probably not even 140. If you're planning your offense around your catcher being your #4 hitter in your lineup, then you have to account for that missing cog in your lineup for those games when he's not playing. While you can DH him during some of those games, I think catcher is just one position that needs more full days off than any other position.
Would I like more offense from the catching position? Sure. But the catching position is not the problem with the offense.
I also kind of wondered about trading Amaya this past offseason while he seemingly had a little bit of value and signing someone like Caratini to be in the catching tandem with Gomes. But I think the front office was too afraid that Amaya would break out and they'd look foolish for trading him.
|
|
|
|
Post by kfidd on May 26, 2024 10:28:55 GMT -5
I also kind of wondered about trading Amaya this past offseason while he seemingly had a little bit of value and signing someone like Caratini to be in the catching tandem with Gomes. But I think the front office was too afraid that Amaya would break out and they'd look foolish for trading him. This is perhaps my biggest concern of the Hoyer/Hawkins regime, the lack of guts. If you trade a prospect and they flourish elsewhere? Good for them. What should matter more is what did the returning player/s do for you? I applauded them for making the Busch trade but it still feels like there have been more opportunities in the last season or two to make noise. They seem to play things very conservatively and it’s great for creating organizational depth but doesn’t feel like it really presents an opportunity to take that big leap forward. Or at least hasn’t yet. I guess the other thing is I absolutely loathe no trade clauses and wish they’d stop dishing them out. Hopefully they learn their lesson from the Happ and Suzuki clauses (I’m not advocating for trade either of them but rather that it completely nullifies options and opportunities and serves no benefit to the club). |
|
|
|
Post by cfin on May 26, 2024 10:57:41 GMT -5
This is perhaps my biggest concern of the Hoyer/Hawkins regime, the lack of guts. If you trade a prospect and they flourish elsewhere? Good for them. What should matter more is what did the returning player/s do for you? I applauded them for making the Busch trade but it still feels like there have been more opportunities in the last season or two to make noise. They seem to play things very conservatively and it’s great for creating organizational depth but doesn’t feel like it really presents an opportunity to take that big leap forward. Or at least hasn’t yet. I guess the other thing is I absolutely loathe no trade clauses and wish they’d stop dishing them out. Hopefully they learn their lesson from the Happ and Suzuki clauses (I’m not advocating for trade either of them but rather that it completely nullifies options and opportunities and serves no benefit to the club). Yea, I'm starting to shift my blame more towards Hoyer (Hawkins too if he's making any of the decisions). I thought Ross made some boneheaded decisions during his time as manager, but the front office just isn't concerned with getting the right players. The front office wants their cake and they want to eat it too. I think you see this with the glut of outfield prospects still in the system, while the major league club withers away. I think if you really asked Hoyer/Hawkins and they could give an honest answer, they'd say that the Happ extension and Suzuki signings were a mistake. There are players in AAA that would perform better if they had the opportunity to do so. But they can't not play Happ and Suzuki because that would be acknowledging that those contracts were a mistake. I hate to say it, but I'm starting to think that the best thing that could happen would be a total collapse of this team. That would give the front office and opportunity to trade away some of these players, like Happ and Suzuki (you'll have to eat salary and you won't get much back, but just to open up opportunities for others would be a plus). Once again this is a team that is flirting with contending, but I think if you ask any scout or anyone with any baseball knowledge this team has no chance at winning in the playoffs. If they did, it would just be luck to win 13 games in the playoffs. Not saying that couldn't happen... but it'd be foolish to think that any type of dynasty is being built because of it.
(Edit: And yes, I'm aware that Happ and Suzuki have no trade clauses. But if this team collapses I think it becomes easier for them to entertain the idea of waiving those no trade clauses to go some where else... just don't know if anybody else is going to want them)
|
|
|
|
Post by irishcubfan on May 26, 2024 11:29:47 GMT -5
Yes, the broken arm was the reason for my “weirder” comment. Gomes hit very well last year & if they are a part of the reason our 4 starters are so good offense should come fro elsewhere but not so much yet If Amaya and Gomes deserve credit for 4 starters being good then they deserve blame the failure of the other pitchers. But I don't believe that either way. I don't believe pitch framing is as big an issue as compared to inconsistent umpiring. The Cubs are getting no offense from their catchers and they can't control the running game, not that Cub pitchers give them much help in that department. For a team that supposedly has a top-rated farm system, I doesn't see any catching prospects that justify letting Contreras walk. Agreed about inconsistent umpiring regarding perceived catch framing skills. Every borderline ball or strike leads to an over exaggerated glove movement by Amaya, it is so annoying. The most disappointing aspect of the Cubs this year has been defense with PCA the only oñe with a good to great year. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike on May 26, 2024 11:34:23 GMT -5
I was penciling in Jansen as a Gomes replacement for next year, anyway. Seemed to lineup with our needs.
|
|
|
|
Post by thisbuds4u on May 26, 2024 12:41:42 GMT -5
This is perhaps my biggest concern of the Hoyer/Hawkins regime, the lack of guts. If you trade a prospect and they flourish elsewhere? Good for them. What should matter more is what did the returning player/s do for you? I applauded them for making the Busch trade but it still feels like there have been more opportunities in the last season or two to make noise. They seem to play things very conservatively and it’s great for creating organizational depth but doesn’t feel like it really presents an opportunity to take that big leap forward. Or at least hasn’t yet. I guess the other thing is I absolutely loathe no trade clauses and wish they’d stop dishing them out. Hopefully they learn their lesson from the Happ and Suzuki clauses (I’m not advocating for trade either of them but rather that it completely nullifies options and opportunities and serves no benefit to the club). Yea, I'm starting to shift my blame more towards Hoyer (Hawkins too if he's making any of the decisions). I thought Ross made some boneheaded decisions during his time as manager, but the front office just isn't concerned with getting the right players. The front office wants their cake and they want to eat it too. I think you see this with the glut of outfield prospects still in the system, while the major league club withers away. I think if you really asked Hoyer/Hawkins and they could give an honest answer, they'd say that the Happ extension and Suzuki signings were a mistake. There are players in AAA that would perform better if they had the opportunity to do so. But they can't not play Happ and Suzuki because that would be acknowledging that those contracts were a mistake. I hate to say it, but I'm starting to think that the best thing that could happen would be a total collapse of this team. That would give the front office and opportunity to trade away some of these players, like Happ and Suzuki (you'll have to eat salary and you won't get much back, but just to open up opportunities for others would be a plus). Once again this is a team that is flirting with contending, but I think if you ask any scout or anyone with any baseball knowledge this team has no chance at winning in the playoffs. If they did, it would just be luck to win 13 games in the playoffs. Not saying that couldn't happen... but it'd be foolish to think that any type of dynasty is being built because of it.
(Edit: And yes, I'm aware that Happ and Suzuki have no trade clauses. But if this team collapses I think it becomes easier for them to entertain the idea of waiving those no trade clauses to go some where else... just don't know if anybody else is going to want them)
If the Cubs fail to make the playoffs this year, then Ricketts needs to make some changes in the front office especially when it comes down to player personal decisions. |
|
|
|
Post by cfin on May 26, 2024 13:25:21 GMT -5
Yea, I'm starting to shift my blame more towards Hoyer (Hawkins too if he's making any of the decisions). I thought Ross made some boneheaded decisions during his time as manager, but the front office just isn't concerned with getting the right players. The front office wants their cake and they want to eat it too. I think you see this with the glut of outfield prospects still in the system, while the major league club withers away. I think if you really asked Hoyer/Hawkins and they could give an honest answer, they'd say that the Happ extension and Suzuki signings were a mistake. There are players in AAA that would perform better if they had the opportunity to do so. But they can't not play Happ and Suzuki because that would be acknowledging that those contracts were a mistake. I hate to say it, but I'm starting to think that the best thing that could happen would be a total collapse of this team. That would give the front office and opportunity to trade away some of these players, like Happ and Suzuki (you'll have to eat salary and you won't get much back, but just to open up opportunities for others would be a plus). Once again this is a team that is flirting with contending, but I think if you ask any scout or anyone with any baseball knowledge this team has no chance at winning in the playoffs. If they did, it would just be luck to win 13 games in the playoffs. Not saying that couldn't happen... but it'd be foolish to think that any type of dynasty is being built because of it.
(Edit: And yes, I'm aware that Happ and Suzuki have no trade clauses. But if this team collapses I think it becomes easier for them to entertain the idea of waiving those no trade clauses to go some where else... just don't know if anybody else is going to want them)
If the Cubs fail to make the playoffs this year, then Ricketts needs to make some changes in the front office especially when it comes down to player personal decisions. I harp on Happ and Suzuki a lot. That's just my opinion. I'm sorry if that offends anyone - but that's my opinion.
When I look at the offensive woes for this team, I continue to look at the four corners and the DH spot. Morel has been OK... I'm not really sold on him ever reaching that lineup anchor level. Busch too has been OK, maybe a little less that was expected. But they're getting nothing from LF, RF, or DH.
Busch is and was expected to be an experiment. Certainly they (all us included) wanted to see that experiment succeed. But come season's end if he hasn't put up the numbers you wanted out of him, he's easy to jettison and let go - you can even non-tender him if it comes to that. Morel is in a similar boat, although if he doesn't put up the numbers you expect at season's end his trade value probably is diminished. But the point being you can replace Busch and Morel easily.
You can't replace Happ and Suzuki easily. And while I'd say that Morel and Busch are marginally pulling their weight... Happ and Suzuki are not. And while you don't have any real clear cut replacements for Morel and Busch in the minors (maybe Shaw for Morel, but he's not showing anything at AA this year) - you do have replacements ready for Happ and Suzuki. You could put Canario in LF, PCA in CF, Bellinger in RF and you'll get more production out of your outfield than you're getting now. And you've still got Davis and Caissie in AAA. But you can't replace Happ and Suzuki that easily.
That's why I see this as more and more becoming a failure of the front office.
|
|
|
|
Post by chubbycub on May 26, 2024 13:51:39 GMT -5
Yes, the broken arm was the reason for my “weirder” comment. Gomes hit very well last year & if they are a part of the reason our 4 starters are so good offense should come fro elsewhere but not so much yet If Amaya and Gomes deserve credit for 4 starters being good then they deserve blame the failure of the other pitchers. But I don't believe that either way. I don't believe pitch framing is as big an issue as compared to inconsistent umpiring. The Cubs are getting no offense from their catchers and they can't control the running game, not that Cub pitchers give them much help in that department. For a team that supposedly has a top-rated farm system, I doesn't see any catching prospects that justify letting Contreras walk. "If Amaya and Gomes deserve credit for 4 starters being good then they deserve blame the failure of the other pitchers. But I don't believe that either way." __________________
Sooo glad you said that. A catcher can call the right pitch in the right location, then the ball goes sailing over his head like we saw with whatshisname the other night after his almost immaculate inning. That's the pitcher's failure. And Hendricks' decline certainly isn't their fault any more than Steele's success last year was.
Remember when people here wanted their Amaya and they wanted it right now? They thought they had the guy to replace Contreras, and they still might. I wasn't that impressed with his arm. Come to think of it, I don't remember WHAT everybody thought was so special that he needed to be made room for, but he's young and right now that's his only firm asset.
Last night I saw a grounder go right through where Swanson should have been because he was playing almost right up the middle. Dunno if it was his idea or somebody else gambling with positioning, but I have a bigger issue with that way of thinking than pitch framing or any other catcher related thing. I didn't look up the hitter's spray charts to see if it might have actually been warranted by statistical tendencies to have a guy playing there instead of nearer where a traditional shortstop does. One step to his right would have let Swanson keep the ball on the infield and get an out.
|
|
|
|
Post by thisbuds4u on May 26, 2024 13:57:04 GMT -5
If Amaya and Gomes deserve credit for 4 starters being good then they deserve blame the failure of the other pitchers. But I don't believe that either way. I don't believe pitch framing is as big an issue as compared to inconsistent umpiring. The Cubs are getting no offense from their catchers and they can't control the running game, not that Cub pitchers give them much help in that department. For a team that supposedly has a top-rated farm system, I doesn't see any catching prospects that justify letting Contreras walk. "If Amaya and Gomes deserve credit for 4 starters being good then they deserve blame the failure of the other pitchers. But I don't believe that either way." __________________
Sooo glad you said that. A catcher can call the right pitch in the right location, then the ball goes sailing over his head like we saw with whatshisname the other night after his almost immaculate inning. That's the pitcher's failure. And Hendricks' decline certainly isn't their fault any more than Steele's success last year was.
Remember when people here wanted their Amaya and they wanted it right now? They thought they had the guy to replace Contreras, and they still might. I wasn't that impressed with his arm. Come to think of it, I don't remember WHAT everybody thought was so special that he needed to be made room for, but he's young and right now that's his only firm asset.
Last night I saw a grounder go right through where Swanson should have been because he was playing almost right up the middle. Dunno if it was his idea or somebody else gambling with positioning, but I have a bigger issue with that way of thinking than pitch framing or any other catcher related thing. I didn't look up the hitter's spray charts to see if it might have actually been warranted by statistical tendencies to have a guy playing there instead of nearer where a traditional shortstop does. One step to his right would have let Swanson keep the ball on the infield and get an out.
How many balls have been hit just out of Hoerner's reach this year? Seems like it happens every game. |
|
