Off-Season Notes

I've been meaning to get around to a more comprehensive analysis of the Cubs hot stove dealings, so here it goes, at least in terms of first impressions.  The Cubs lost some significant pieces of their roster due to free agency, retirement, or declining to pick up options.  Dexter Fowler, Aroldis Chapman, David Ross, and Jason Hammel are the players to whom I refer.  In addition, the Cubs seem to have said goodbye to a few other assets, viz., Coghlan, Cahill, and Wood, all of whom became free agents.  There have been some rumors that they have been in touch with Wood, but so far it is just rumors.  Wood wants to start, though, which doesn't seem in the cards.

As far as Hammel goes, I was not surprised they let him walk.  Nor would I have been surprised to see him retained.  The curious thing about Hammel is that, besides being a lot better pitcher before the All-Star Break than after in most seasons, is that he has been pretty much of a flop everywhere but with the Cubs, where he has delivered parts of three very solid seasons.  So far, Hammel has not drawn a lot of interest.  Maybe other teams have noticed this too.

The departure of Hammel did leave a gap in the rotation.  Apparently, Montgomery is the likeliest player to inherit the fifth spot.  I like Montgomery and I think he will deliver.  Going into the off-season, though, the major team needs were to shore up the rotation and the bullpen and to find a replacement for Fowler in center field and as a leadoff hitter.  I still see room for improvement in the rotation, mostly in finding some sort of fallback for Lackey if he continues to slide. Most teams would be happy to have a guy like Lackey as a #5.  In many respects, he strikes me as a notable pitcher in his declining days, much as Ferguson Jenkins and Greg Maddux were when the Cubs of yesteryear brought them back.  Lackey is capable of some good performances, but my guess is he is a .500 pitcher at best next year.

There has been some talk of the Cubs signing Tyson Ross, the former Padres pitcher who is coming off thoracic outlet surgery.  Ross is pretty good.  Indeed the Cubs were looking to trade for him last off-season.  The idea, I would suppose, is to sign him to a one-year of incentive-laden contract and bring him along slowly.  That would be a smart move, but, of course, with a pitcher coming off surgery, it is not without risks.

On the bullpen side, the Cubs traded Jorge Soler for the former Royals closer Wade Davis.  A healthy Davis is an upgrade over what remained of the Cubs bullpen.  Arguably, he is a more versatile and more reliable closer option than Chapman, who, besides being really expensive, was not the most reliable pitcher for the Cubs last year.  Chapman pissed off a lot of fans when he criticized Maddon for using him in the ninth inning of Game 6, though, honestly, he was not the only guy who questioned that move.  I've always thought of Chapman as more of a physical freak, for want of a better term, not really a pitcher.  I suspect what Chapman was really getting at, though, was his desire, like many of the current wave of power closers, preferably to pitch a single inning with a lead and nobody on base.  To my mind, Andrew Miller and Kelly Jansen, were and are the best relief pitchers around right now.

With Montgomery moving into the rotation and Wood gone, the Cubs still need left-handed relievers.  I would guess Zastryzny is in the mix.  He looked good last year.  They signed a couple of journeymen who don't look like much, as well as the aging Uehara, a righty who gets lefties out.  I can see another move on the horizon here before spring training rolls around.

Going into the off-season, the Cubs really looked set in terms of position players with the exception of center field, so set in fact that they felt able to give up Soler for Davis even up.  Whoever replaces Fowler, though, is going to have big shoes to fill.  Fowler was not that great defensively, though more than adequate, but he quite simply was the catalyst for the offense through both seasons he played here.

The Cubs are seemingly committed to bringing Almora along.  This guy is a terrific outfielder, but still an immature hitter.  They also seem committed to keeping Heyward in right field rather than switching him to center.  Heyward, of course, is an amazingly good outfielder, but, last year, he was an amazingly bad hitter.  The Cubs signed Jon Jay, formerly the Cardinals center fielder for many years and lately a Padre.  Jay is a really good outfielder and a decent hitter.  He is certainly not in Fowler's league by any means.  In some respects, Jay, especially if Almora pans out, fills the same role Coghlan has for the past two years.

So, the question is, right now, are the Cubs a better team than last year?  In all honesty, they might be, but realistically, they are not.  Still, with a little luck, they seem good enough to repeat, which is going to be OK with most fans.

Another Bullpen Move

The Cubs seem convinced they need to shore up their bullpen options.  Yesterday they agreed to a one-year deal with Koji Uehara, the former Red Sox closer.  Uehara is years away from his banner year as closer on the last Red Sox World Series team, though he has been pretty good since then.  Uehara, though, had a bit of an off year in 2016.  His fastball velocity has declined a lot and he will be 42 years old when the season begins.  One would have thought the Cubs would be looking for a lefty to add to the mix with the evident departure of Travis Wood and the move of Montgomery to the rotation, not to mention the departure of Chapman back to New York as a free agent.

I kind of thought the team's biggest priority would have been getting a younger starting pitcher, especially with the departure of Hammel and potential swing men like Wood and Cahill.  The top three starters, Lester, Arrieta, and Hendricks are top notch and I think Montgomery will work out pretty well.  The big question mark has to be Lackey.  Lackey had a decent year in 2016, winning 11 games and pitching to a 3.35 ERA.  However, he averaged only a little over five innings per start.  In the post-season, he was not very good.  In fact, he was pretty shaky at best in his three starts, getting hit pretty hard and averaging a full inning less per start than in the regular season.  Lackey is 38 years old, so if any one of the Cubs starters is going to crack, it is probably him.

I'm still not a big fan of the Davis deal for reasons detailed in a previous post.  Basically, he now has a history of arm issues, he's 31, and he is a rental.  At his best, however, he is a dominant bullpen presence.  Maybe I am being sentimental, but I always rather liked Soler's promise and I was sorry to see him moved.  Maybe I was overly impressed by his performance in the 2015 post-season because that really was a show and you really hoped he could put it all together again.

Say It Ain't So

Lots of trade rumors involving the Cubs and KC reliever Wade Davis.  Not to take anything from Davis and his abilities when healthy, but there are at least three reasons to question the wisdom of the deal.

First off, Davis was hurt and DLed a couple of times last year with forearm issues.  Not nearly as good when activated later in the year.  Big risk factor.

Second, Davis is another rental.  He will be a free agent in 2017.

Third, you have to consider the price.  Is he worth a potential star slugger like Soler for a year's service.  Granted Soler is blocked mainly by Jason Heyward, but in some respects you wonder why, as Heyward, while a great defender, was a complete bust last year at the plate  Soler, on the other hand, in limited play, hit 12 homers, which projects out to 25 or more over the course of a full season.  He is still, at worst, an attractive platoon in either corner outfield spot.

Anyway, although closer is still not the greatest team weakness, my feeling is a player in his contract year is not worth a major chip like Soler.  A lesser prospect, sure.  Even Torres for Chapman last year was a big price, although it worked out well, more from a psychological point of view than consistently dominant results.