URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Bleacher Bums Forum
  HTML https://bbf.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Bleacher Bums Forum
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 504070--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Cubs in ‘25
       By: guest424 Date: December 12, 2024, 5:30 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Feinsand said there's an 85% chance Tucker's a Cub.
       If that's wrong it's because it's 6:30 am and I misheard it.
       #Post#: 504071--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Cubs in ‘25
       By: Deeg Date: December 12, 2024, 7:12 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Not to belabor the obvious but since Tucker would almost
       certainly be a one-year rental for the Cubs, trading assets for
       him only makes sense if you're going to seriously go for it next
       season. Unless of course it's merely a matter of trying to get
       into their "if everything goes perfectly we have a chance to
       sneak in" sweet spot and placate casual ticket buyers for
       another year. Tucker is a great player but the Cubs are more
       than Kyle Tucker away from being really good.
       #Post#: 504072--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Cubs in ‘25
       By: guest424 Date: December 12, 2024, 7:29 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       If you trade valuable pieces for him and don't extend him Jed
       should be fired.
       Damn I really hope it's just Suzuki,Paredes,and scraps if it
       happens.
       #Post#: 504073--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Cubs in ‘25
       By: CurtOne Date: December 12, 2024, 8:20 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The other day I suggested that we trade Paredes to the Astros
       and immediately go after Bregman.  To that I got two Agrees and
       two Disagrees.  The two real holes in the Cubs are catcher and
       third.  Bregman is the only legit 3B available, unless we trade
       PCA to the Cards for Arenado and repeat the Brock gaffe.  We are
       willing to spend 750M for Soto but not what it would take to
       plug a real hole?  I'm missing something.  I guess we spend
       another year bitching about third base.
       #Post#: 504074--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Cubs in ‘25
       By: Deeg Date: December 12, 2024, 8:31 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=CurtOne link=topic=647.msg504073#msg504073
       date=1734013245]
       The other day I suggested that we trade Paredes to the Astros
       and immediately go after Bregman.  To that I got two Agrees and
       two Disagrees.  The two real holes in the Cubs are catcher and
       third.  Bregman is the only legit 3B available, unless we trade
       PCA to the Cards for Arenado and repeat the Brock gaffe.  We are
       willing to spend 750M for Soto but not what it would take to
       plug a real hole?  I'm missing something.  I guess we spend
       another year bitching about third base.
       [/quote]
       Let's not be hyperbolic. St. Louis is going to have to attach a
       prospect to get someone to take that contract, or eat most of
       the money.
       The issue with Bregman is that his offense has been in decline
       for several seasons, and he wants to be paid like he's still a
       superstar.
       #Post#: 504076--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Cubs in ‘25
       By: Fanzone Date: December 12, 2024, 10:34 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I advocated trading for and extending Tucker 6 weeks ago in the
       event that Bellinger opted out.  I think that there is a
       reasonable chance that he would agree to extend for something
       around $300-$310 million over eight years.  (I doubt that the
       Cubs would be willing to go past his age 35 season.)   For
       position players, the annual average is only behind Soto, Judge
       and Ohtani, and the total value is only behind those three, and
       (slightly behind) Seager, and Harper.  As good as he is, Tucker
       isn't in a league with Soto, Judge, Ohtani and Harper, and
       Seager plays a much more important position.  Tucker was open to
       an extension with the Astros before things went south last year
       over his (allegedly) misdiagnosed shin injury.  That injury may
       influence him to conclude that it's better to lock in
       generational wealth right now rather than hold out for a much
       larger offer from the Yankees, Phillies, Giants or Blue Jays
       that would never materialize if he suffered a serious injury
       next year.
       Another possibility is to play the Dodgers game of deferring
       money.  I don't know whether Ricketts and Tucker would be open
       to that.
       #Post#: 504077--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Cubs in ‘25
       By: craig Date: December 12, 2024, 11:04 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Fanzone, yes, you mentioned this way back.  Nice call!  I
       thought of that as soon as the Cubs/Tucker rumors emerged this
       week!  Couple thoughts:
       1.  Extension requires two sides.  As you note, perhaps he'd be
       willing, and having experienced injury might be more cognizant
       that injury can happen, and might change things.  So maybe he'd
       be interested in securing it now.
       2.  I admit I wouldn't, if I was in his shoes.  I'd be reluctant
       to make that commitment to an unfamiliar organization, before
       playing for a while.  Will I like the manager, and feel
       comfortable?  Do they have expectations that are weird?  I
       haven't missed being in the playoffs since I came up in 2018;
       Cubs haven't won a single playoff game since before then.  Do I
       trust that this is a place where I'm going to be winning?  Will
       I enjoy playing with the other guys on the team?  Or will their
       be jealousy and the camaraderie won't be fun?  Will my wife want
       to live there for years, and maybe need to make all new friends?
       
       So, if it was me, I'd say, "Yes, I'm very interested.  But lets
       maybe wait till June, and see how I feel."  If it's June, and I
       feel like 'yeah, I like this team, I like the other guys, PCA,
       Dansby, Seiya, Shota, Happ, Amaya, Brown, Hoerner, Busch, Wicks,
       Caissie, Taillon, Brown, I love these guys, they are fun!  And
       this team is flat-out good, we've got a real chance to win for a
       long time. The fans are fun, this is an awesome place.  My wife
       has made a bunch of fun friends and is settling in, she'll be OK
       here.  Counsell is cool, I like, trust, and respect him, so I
       think we'll be in good hands there, too.  Yeah, let's do this.
       But if it was me, I'd not be eager to do it January, before
       getting a chance to really see whether I like it and want to
       stay.
       #Post#: 504082--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Cubs in ‘25
       By: Fanzone Date: December 12, 2024, 12:48 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thanks, Craig.  Yes, we discussed this a while. back.  I guess
       I'm not as delusional as some people on this board have accused
       me of being. If I remember correctly, you were kind of
       ambivalent about the idea of trading for and extending guys like
       the Braves have done.
       You raise a good point about Tucker waiting.  But waiting to
       June might be too risky.  What if you get hurt?  If I remember
       correctly, these type of extensions often happen around the end
       of spring training.
       #Post#: 504084--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Cubs in ‘25
       By: craig Date: December 12, 2024, 1:11 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Yeah, end of camp could make a lot of sense, that's often when
       players who are extending with their own team do it.  Get it
       done before it becomes a distraction, and all of that.  And beat
       the injury risk, as you say.  Getting to camp start of February,
       by end of March he'd have almost two months of chances to get to
       know the players and coaches and get comfortable.
       But yeah, regardless of whether April or June, both of those are
       well beyond December/January.  When a decision is being made
       now, the Cubs have two scenarios:
       1.  Only make a good trade offer *IF* he agrees to an extension,
       an extension that you're willing to pay, before you complete the
       trade.  Or,
       2.  Make a trade, with no guarantee that he'll extend with you,
       or extend at terms that you're willing to accept.
       #Post#: 504085--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Cubs in ‘25
       By: craig Date: December 12, 2024, 1:45 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Fanzone link=topic=647.msg504076#msg504076
       date=1734021281]
       I advocated trading for and extending Tucker 6 weeks ago in the
       event that Bellinger opted out.  I think that there is a
       reasonable chance that he would agree to extend for something
       around $300-$310 million over eight years.  (I doubt that the
       Cubs would be willing to go past his age 35 season.)
       ...[/quote]
       Fanz, you doubt that the Cubs would be willing to go past his
       age 35 season.  Several thoughts on that:
       1.  If so, Cubs shouldn't make pay the trade price.
       2.  Star players get long contracts.  That's the market; winning
       bidders accept that; stars/agents expect it.  So *IF* Cubs are
       unwilling to go longer beyond 35, forget about an extension.
       3.  I think the Cubs WOULD be willing to go beyond 35, well
       beyond.
       4.  *IF* the Cubs have been in semi-serious Tucker discussions,
       logic follows that they think extending is variably plausible.
       But extension is implausible if they won't budge past 35.  So,
       the logical conclusion is that *IF* they make a trade, it
       follows that for this player at this time, they anticipate being
       willing to go well beyond 35.
       5.  Hoyer understands that teams sign stars with eyes open:
       accepting low value at end is justified by high value before the
       end.  He's expressed that choice is case-by-case.  How much
       sense that choice makes depends on the personality; on the
       player's age; and on the club's competitive window.
       6.  I don't think Hoyer thought the situation was quite right
       2,3, 4 years ago.  The farm wasn't near enough to harvest yet.
       He did think it was right for Ohtani a year ago.  *IF* he's
       actually serious about Tucker discussions, that would reflect
       that Hoyer thinks a serious competitive window is opening.
       Accepting low value at end is now justified by high value in the
       upcoming years, where he thinks the Cubs have a shot to be very
       good.
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page