Quantcast

shin-soo chooObligatory caveats that would normally come at the end, but are needed up front to temper any undue enthusiasm: as it was with a number of free agents last year, a smart front office “talks” to just about every free agent that could conceivably fall into a range where they might possibly consider a deal. Don’t get too excited, and take this only for what it is.

On his radio show yesterday with Ben Finfer, Bruce Levine reported that the Cubs have talked to Shin-Soo Choo, and are legitimately interested in signing him. You can listen for yourself at that link (start around 4:30), and there is almost an air of “yeah, I can’t believe it either” in Levine’s voice. But his sources tell him what they tell him.

I know that credible interest in Choo is a bit hard to believe, given the tenor of everything coming out of the front office right now … but it isn’t impossible. Although we have suspicions, we don’t know that the Cubs won’t have a payroll that re-approaches $100 million in 2014 (there are cost constraints in place, without a doubt, but it’s not like $100 million is that high, all things considered – and that’s where Levine says the Cubs could wind up). I’ve got the Cubs at about $73 million right now when factoring in arbitration raises, pre-arb 40-man players, and outstanding payments owed to non-Cubs. Even with a closer and another starter in their sights, adding Choo is not so outrageous as to be dismissed out of hand.

We’ve been talking about Choo as a possible Cubs target as far back as August, mostly for the obvious reasons: corner outfielder, huge OBP, lefty bat, veteran, free agent, yadda yadda yadda. He’s a superficial fit, no doubt about it.

The problems with Choo emerged only after (1) the Cubs’ financial picture cleared up a bit, (2) the prospects of adding big pieces for 2014 became less palatable for a variety of reasons, and (3) Choo’s price tag started being reported as above the seven years and $126 million Jayson Werth got from the Nationals a few years ago. At 31 without a ton of pop, a corner outfield glove, a 2013 OBP that was inflated by an unsustainable HBP rate, and an enormous platoon split, devoting those kinds of dollars to Choo doesn’t seem to make a ton of sense.

A more reasonable deal, however? Unlike in the infield, the Cubs don’t have a glut of young talent immediately on the doorstep. They also don’t have a ton of impact left-handed bats on the way, and the “discipline” skill tends to last quite a ways into a guy’s 30s. Even if 2014 is going to be a punt job, having Choo in place for 2015 – when the Cubs will have no regular outfielders (save Ryan Sweeney, if you want to count him) under contract – could make a whole lot of sense.

So do I think the Cubs will make a hard push for Choo at his market price? I don’t.

Instead, if Choo is this year’s Michael Bourn or Nick Swisher – each of whom was looking for a nine-figure deal last year, but ultimately had to settle in the $50 million range – and doesn’t sign for a few more weeks or into next month? Sure. Heck, even at five years and $75 million – plus the loss of a second round pick – I would totally be on board with the deal.

With teams like the Rangers, Mariners, Diamondbacks, and Reds still looking at outfield bats, however, I’m not convinced Choo will have to settle.

But, hey – sources say the Cubs are interested. So it’s worth following.

  • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

    I would love to have Choo at 5years / $75 million.

    I’d probably be on board at 5 years / $90 million.

    It’s when those years start climbing to 6 and 7 that I feel like hedging a bit.

    • #1lahairfan

      I find myself completely agreeing.

    • Jason P

      Agreed.

    • The Mayor

      5 years is a bit more than I’d like to see, but the dude can play. I agree on the $-per-season you applied.

    • Patrick W.

      Exactly right.

      Offer 5/75 negotiate to 5/90. Always can throw in a 6th year with a buyout.

      • http://Q MichiganGoat

        Yeah that’s ideal but I doubt he has to settle for much less than something like 7/8 years and around 150M they way this market has developed.

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

          You think Choo is going to get close to $25 million per (7 years, 150 million)?

          That’s Cano territory. He’s not that good.

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

            Wow… messed up that math badly.

            $21 million per. Not quite as high, but still awfully high for a low power corner outfielder.

            • willis

              If I didn’t see what has been going on, I’d say hell no is he getting upwards of that. He just isn’t that great. But, with the cash being thrown around…you just don’t know. I think the cubs be players if it was 5-6 years and around 15-16 per, but it’ll go higher than that and no way the cubs do.

              • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

                In that vein it’ll be interesting to see what Granderson gets.

                • Rebuilding

                  Granderson got 4/60 from the Mets

                  • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

                    Yeah, I just now saw the numbers on mlbtraderumors.

                    That sort of makes me think Choo is going to land in the $18 million per year range.

              • Rebuilding

                He was a 6.3 oWAR player last year. A 423 OBP creates a lot of runs and tires out a lot of pitchers

                • hansman

                  A more likely OBP for next year on him is somewhere near his career average of .389. It will be interesting to see if he gets paid based on last year (7/150) or his career (5/80).

            • http://Q MichiganGoat

              It’s really more of an either or he’ll get a contract that approaches that, I never thought Cano would get 10/240M but I could see Choo getting 8/150M.

              • Jay

                Any team that duplicates the stupidity of the Ellsbury deal and gives Choo that kind of contract seriously needs to be sent to bed without supper.

                • Rizzovoir Dog

                  I’d go 4/76

              • Patrick W.

                I think for better or worse Choo will get downgraded due to a couple of things outside his control: his skill set is undervalued and he’ll be compared for better or worse to other Asian players. Couple that with the other chips falling where they have already and I can very easily see his overall contract falling by the day. With Ellsbury, Granderson and Beltran off the market specifically where they went, and the Dodgers shopping outfielders, Choo needs to sign this week to get max value. I expect him to get no more than 100MM total.

    • cubmig

      I have no mathematical rationale (other than it attracts in relation to the 75$M & 90$M cited) that 65$M for 4 years could be a starting point. As I’ve said many times before: Sign Choo…..find a way.

    • Voice of Reason

      First, there is no way that the cubs will sign choo as he is not going to sign for the peanuts the cubs will be willing to pay.

      Choo will not sign for $15 million a year over 5 years. Granderson got $15 million a year over 4 years and choo is better so he will get more. Also, ellsburys contract definitely means choo gets over $100 million in his deal. All these factors point to the cubs passing.

      Choo will get something like $18 million a year over 6 years which gets him over $100 million.

      And its Bruce Levine making this report. He has never ever broken a story in his life. Why believe him?

      The cubs will not sign choo.

      • Patrick W.

        That logic doesn’t necessarily hold. Beltran, Granderson, Ellsbury took competition for Choo off the mark but it also took suitors for Choo out of the market. There is an intersection where a guy’s worth matches a guy’s landing spot. I expect 5/100 might get it done based on the landing spots decreasing daily.

  • cubs fan22

    Sign choo,tanaka and trade for kemp

  • Rebuilding

    If you get Choo and Tanaka, trade Samardzija for Skaggs and Eaton and put Baez at 2b (Oliver is projecting Baez at 4.3 WAR if he gets a full season) – things in 2014 get a whole lot more interesting. An OF of Choo, Eaton and Lake/Shierholtz is pretty damn good

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      Especially if Vitters is able to take Eaton’s starts against lefties.

      BIt of an if there, but mainly with the glove I think.

      • Rebuilding

        Yeah, I think it’s likely Eaton would play CF and Choo would be in RF. Choo just doesn’t have the wheels or instincts to play CF. Eaton is merely average but the better of the two IMHO. But of course it’s a discussion I would love to have since we have neither guy lol.

        Choo would also make Schierholtz even more expendable. Moving him and Shark would save about $7 million this year to go to Choo or Tanaka

    • Kyle

      “(Oliver is projecting Baez at 4.3 WAR if he gets a full season)”

      schwing!

      • Rebuilding

        Yeah, I was surprised when I saw it. It’s “only” projecting a 298 OBP and a 486 SLG so it’s not a wildly optimistic projection. 2b/SS offense is just so weak right now it doesn’t take much to add WAR

        • aaronb

          I could imagine that they are being wildly optimistic on his defense. That is usually the culprit of overtly inflated WAR ratings.

          (I say this having not seen the breakdown of the projection)

          • Rebuilding

            I’m pretty sure the system just projects dead average defense for minor leaguers. Whether he would provide that at 2b is ?

            • aaronb

              I’ve to really high hopes for the kid. I hope he lives up to his projections regardless of defensive position.

          • ClevelandCubsFan

            Maybe. I know there are doubts about Baez’s glove sticking at SS, but there are some good things being said about his glove, too. And that makes me cautiously optimistic about his defensive value at second.

            • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

              He could stick at short. He’ll never get to as many balls as Castro, but he’ll get to enough to hold the position.

              He would likely be, eventually, above average at least at second.

      • Cheese Chad

        Positivity, I love it!

  • Jason P

    5/75 for Choo would be great for all the reasons you mentioned. Odds are the Cubs aren’t going to be able to fill all 3 outfield spots long term with an impact prospect, so you might as well get a FA that fits your philosophy.

    If it gets beyond that in years or money, though, it might not be worth it

  • cub2014

    i have been calling for Choo for a long time now.
    Still he is a long shot, he is a very good fit for now
    and the future (as long as contract is around 5 years).
    Can play center now or switch to left when kids
    come up, gives us a legitimate leadoff hitter with
    some pop from the left side.

  • chrismarti

    Anything over 5 years, or being our lead off hitter is a big no for me.. For 5 yrs I’d absolutely LOVE Choo as a #2 hitter. This is just my opinion but I don’t see him as a lead off hitter. I feel like he fits the 2 spot perfectly

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      He may not be a leadoff hitter when the Cubs are contending regularly, but for 2014 (baring any other OBP additions) he absolutely would be.

      • chrismarti

        Totally agree.. massive improvement over what we have right now

  • When the Music’s Over

    If the Cubs do drop some serious cash on someone, it will be very amusing to see the reactions of all the militant sign no one backers.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      There really aren’t too many of those. People who did not back signing Cano were often accused of that opinion, but I don’t think that was an entirely fair assessment.

      • wvcubsfan

        But the draft pick ;)

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

          Make no mistake, losing that draft pick hurts, as much or more for the lost budget as for the pick itself.

          • wvcubsfan

            I agree, hence the winky face. I agree the “pool number” is probably as big of an issue as the second round pick. I really liked what they did last year with the draft budget, but would probably like the addition of a high quality MLB player more.

  • Spoda17

    I would not go above five years. I agree Luke. But ultimately, I think we won’t get him unless it is in February.

  • Kyle

    I would enjoy such an addition.

    • baldtaxguy

      I wonder if they will overpay since they covet the OBP tools. Even so, I think it would be a very positive step.

  • Die hard

    Tanaka comes if Cubs signs Choo? I like it as Cubs would contend in 2014

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      I wouldn’t go that far. With with Choo (and hopefully Tanaka) the Cubs would have a lot of holes. They’d be better, but I’m not sure they’d be challenging the Cardinals just yet.

      • Kyle

        We’d probably come up short. But at least it wouldn’t feel completely crazy to consider it.

        • ClevelandCubsFan

          If you have enough strengths, you’re just a few injuries on the other guys away from being competitive.

        • Rich H

          If we got Tanaka and Choo would our days of July sell off’s be over? I hope so I am to the point I want long term pieces.

          An outfield of Lake, Shierholtz, Choo, Sweeney, Bago and Vitters would be pretty deep against righties but Lake and Vitters better learn to play all over when a lefty is on the mound.

          I would still want to add some more speed that can hit from the right side.

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

            I’d still look to sell off players who aren’t long term pieces, at least in 2014.

            Schierholtz perhaps, for example. Maybe Valbuena and/or Barney.

            • Brains

              these aren’t sales, they’re thrift store giveaways. we’re past fire sales and into making lutefisk with ash and lye.

              • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

                So… trading players that don’t fit into your long term plans is the same as curing fish in a traditional Scandinavian practice often mocked by Garrison Keillor.

                Ok.

                I have no idea what to do with that comparison, so I’m just going to pretend this never happened.

                • Brains

                  fodder, fire, ash, ash solution (lye) = smelly aged fish = the cubs

                  • Brains

                    love the keillor reference, btw, much better than the cubs’ current limp bizkit soundtrack cd

          • Kyle

            Whether or not we sell off in July depends heavily on where we stand in July, which is hard to predict right now.

            • TOOT

              Actually, it’s easy to predict. Next to last.

              • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

                Ahead of… Milwaukee?

                • TOOT

                  Yes, ahead of Milkaukee. Why do I say that? Because I believe Castro and Rizzo WILL have bounce back years. I have been pretty harsh on the guys, but I think they will get it together. If not, here we go again.

      • jt

        Like the ’012 ‘Os the ’14 Cubs with Choo and Tanaka (assuming Tanaka is as good as projected) would be as good as the BP.

  • Galvan

    Here’s a question:

    Lets say the Cubs land Tanaka,

    Wouldn’t it make more sense for them to keep Shark as well?

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      Not unless Shark extends. If not, it’d likely make more sense to trade him for nearly-ready pieces who will be here when the team is in full-blown contention mode.

    • Blackhawks1963

      We aren’t getting Tanaka. Not with multiple contenders in the mix. Not with NY, LA, San Francisco and Seattle having big Japanese American populations and tv stations that beam back to Japan in the native language. Not with Mrs. Tanaka being a budding celebrity in Japan who will probably want to be in either the Big Apple or Hollywood if she gets a vote.

      Call me Debbie downer, but I put our chances at getting Tanaka extremely remote.

      • ClevelandCubsFan

        Man, when there was only one possible suitor, it was NO WAY THE CUBS BID ENOUGH. Now that every team is functionally in the mix, the mantra is NO WAY THE CUBS CAN SIGN TANAKA.

        What do we do? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

        How many reasons have we heard why the Cubs can’t sign this guy? Now Blackhawk, you’re adding his wife’s celebrity status (of which we have no idea how her status translates in American markets or even what route her handlers are suggesting for her if any) and large Japanese populations (even though only 1 large US city has a Japanese-American population over 1%, and that’s Honolulu) and Japanese TV stations (does this matter in the digital age? it didn’t stop Fukudome or Fujikawa).

        Look, I agree the odds of getting Tanaka are against us. But by the very nature of things, the odds are against EVERY team. No team at this point even has a 20% chance of signing Tanaka in my opinion.

      • baldtaxguy

        The Cubs will not win the post and sign Tanaka because of his wife?

        • wvcubsfan

          She doesn’t want to be compared with Kim DeJesus at BN so she won’t let him sign with the Cubs.

      • Akabari

        Not that I want to be THAT guy, but his wife is not a “budding celebrity”. She was in a girl-band when she was younger (Kinda like a Japanese Spice Girls, I guess), but that’s pretty much it. She hasn’t released a single in about 7 years, the last time her group performed. She’s just someone who does super minor tv appearances once in a while. Her status would HARDLY be a reason to turn down even an extra half million dollars.
        You know, not that I like…watch Japanese pop at all or anything…
        I heard all this from a friend, okay!?

        • DarthHater

          [img]http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3726/11283985934_7a515d447b_n.jpg[/img]

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

          Japanese spice girls eh…

          Sounds like a winner for the 7th inning stretch to me!

          • DarthHater

            Geisha Spice, Ninja Spice, Samurai Spice, . . .

  • willis

    If there was no market for him…maybe. But there will be and someone will pay him too much. Adding him would be a nice boost, but the cubs just don’t have the cash to do it (so they say).

  • Blackhawks1963

    With Boras as the agent and Ellsbury getting $156 million Choo is a shoe in to get $120 million. And that price tag I say no.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      I might go 6 years / $120 million.

      To be honest, though, I have more qualms with the six years than than the $20 million per.

      And I’m not sure Choo is going to get that high anyway. I don’t think they are that close in terms of overall value (though given Ellsbury’s injury history, that can be hard to assess).

      • Blackhawks1963

        Have you not followed the last 10 days of monster signings around baseball? Choo will easily get $120 million, especially because he is the last big name standing, his agent is Boras and there are multiple teams with serious interest.

        • Matt D

          tell that to Bourn

  • Rebuilding

    Choo is a guy who I think will age very well. He drew 112 walks last year and got hit 26 times! The things that deteriorate aren’t really a part of his game. Keep in mind that any deal we give over 5 years gets us to 2019 and possibly new TV money. They could give him an extra year or two on the back end and just chalk it up that they are basically going to have to write it off at that point (Yankees style)

    • Jason P

      I think there’s a possibility he turns into David Dejesus by the end of his contract, but if that’s the worst he ever gets, that’s probably not such a bad thing.

  • ClevelandCubsFan

    Choo + Tanaka for the win!

    Seriously, seriously… wouldn’t the first half of the year be more interesting with Choo? And wouldn’t it give us unrealistic expectations (=$) come August when we’re hovering around .500 and a couple young studs come up and we start thinking…. maybe….

    And wouldn’t 2015 start looking REALLY interesting? Image April 1, 2015….

    (warning: unrealistic projects based on lots of IFs going right at the right time are ahead)

    LF – Choo
    SS – Castro
    3B – Olt
    RF – Bryant
    2B – Baez
    1B – Rizzo
    C – Castillo
    P – Tanaka (a guy can hope Renteria bats him 8th, right?)
    CF – some guy we found

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      Make that Aug 1, 2015 and it isn’t so optimistic. I’m not sure Bryant will be up by April.

      Candidates for the empty CF slot could include Szczur (likely a 4th OF), Ha (likely a 4th OF), Andreoli (interesting guy, likely a 4th OF, but maybe not).

      • http://www.hookersorcake.com hookersocake

        I think we lead the league in #4 OFers and #3 starters.

        • hansman

          It is what salvaged the Cubs 2011 minor league rankings. Oh the back-up player depth we had then.

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

            Still do.

            • hansman

              Very true.

  • Jono

    Choo-choo, all aboard!!

    I officially apologize for wasting those seconds in everyones lives. I understand if a suspension comes down on me

  • Dumpgobbler

    I really don’t believe we’re in on Choo. The price will jump on him if other teams think we are though.

  • Rebuilding

    Eaton
    Choo
    Baez
    Bryant
    Rizzo
    Castro
    Castillo
    Alcantera

    A guy can dream

    • Rich H

      I like that dream in 2015.

    • http://Bleachernation Lou Brock

      Castro could play a nice CF till Almora is ready to take over.

  • http://bleachernation Ferris

    Five yr 85m with two yr option….id do it

  • http://bleachernation.com woody

    So in other words it’s OK to give Choo 5 years for 75 mil, but not for Shark? Let’s face it no reason to spend that kind of money if all indications point to the fact that the team won’t compete. I like Choo, but think if you’re spending that kind of money get a power bat to protect Rizzo.

    • wvcubsfan

      Please once and for all Jeff IS NOT a FREE AGENT!!!!

      Contract extensions for arbitration eligible players and free agents CAN NOT be directly compared.

      If you would like to continue to compare apples to oranges please do so to yourself.

      • Blackhawks1963

        We have several people on here who lack the capacity to understand that Samardzija is under contract for 2 more seasons. You can’t fix ignorance.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      Getting people on base in front of Rizzo will help him more than getting a big bat in the lineup behind him. If the first baseman is holding runners more often, it might open up some holes on the right side for Rizzo to poke a few more singles through.

      • DocPeterWimsey

        Indeed, given that there is no statistical support for the whole “big bat to protect Batter X” notion anyway, and given that there is a ton of statistical support correlating RBI with the OBP of the two batters preceding Batter X, I definitely like that!

        I’m of mixed minds with Choo. He has great OBP against RHP, but his OBP against LHP was not that great once you take away the HBP. (How many terms can I abbreviate here?) He might be at the point where you have to platoon him, already: and I suspect that he’s going to get a big contract for someone who’s going to be ineffective against one third of starters.

  • http://www.survivingthalia.com Mike Taylor (no relation)

    I am guessing we will offer Choo the same money was allocated to sign Sanchez last year. 5/90 was our best offer? He put up a 6.2 WAR last year. Choo put up a 5.2 WAR last year (could be higher if put in a corner outfield spot).

    We are addressing needs: another lefty in the bullpen that has been effective, re-signing a 4th outfielder on a cheap deal, and being linked to two, high profile targets that could lead the team into the immediate future.

    Choo = Schierholtz traded (saves $4.8M)
    Tanaka = Samardzija traded, 1 MLB-ready piece, 3 MLB-near-ready pieces (saves $4.9M)
    Valbuena + Murphy = $2.5M = Barney traded (saves $2.1M)
    Carlos Villanueva traded = saves $5M
    =
    $16.8M AAV to pay for Choo

    $22.5M left allocated in free agent payroll.

    Looks like we’d be on our way for a large, 2015 push with Bryant, Baez, Alcantara, and one of Arrieta/Hendricks/Ramirez/Beeler/Vizcaino vying for a rotation spot.

  • Jeffery

    What would it mean if cubs sign choo?

    • Edwin

      They would pay him money, and in return he would play for the Cubs.

      • caryatid62

        **slow clap**

      • Ron

        Ha, it could change the conversation about punting on ’15 at least.

  • sans

    Choo makes sense on all-levels. The problem is that the Cubs aren’t in a position to win, so a major free-agent like Choo would use the Cubs as leverage to enhance his offers from contenders – like Sanchez, last offseason.

    It’s going to take an overpayment of a prominent free-agent in order to get the ball-rolling. That’s not likely to come from the Cubs anytime soon.

    • caryatid62

      It’s going to take an overpayment for any free agent to sign anywhere. Nobody with significantly marketable skills takes a discount to go to a team because they won last year. They get the most they can from the team willing to give them the most money. Aside from a few aging ring-chasers, players go for the most money they can get when leaving their “home” team.

      Carlos Beltran didn’t sign with the Yankees because they were the Yankees. He signed with them because they gave him 15 mil per year.

      The Cubs aren’t in a better or worse place than other teams RE: marketable free agents. They’ll have to pay the most money no matter what. If they were coming off a 100-win season, they’d be in the same place.

      • sans

        Are there players who will go for the money? Of course.

        But there are also plenty of players who prioritize winning, over money.

        • caryatid62

          None that are particularly marketable. I honestly cannot name a single player who switched teams in the last 5 years who took less money to be on a “winner.” Furthermore, if winning is the priority, then there shouldn’t be any amount of money that would dissuade them from going to a winner, and in that case, the Cubs aren’t going to get anyone who values a “winner” right now. Either the player values winning or they don’t. When you’re talking about hundreds of millions of dollars, it’s all monopoly money anyway.

          I’d honestly have a problem with a player who says “I’ll take $100 million to join the Red Sox, but I’ll sign with the Cubs for $120 million.” He’ll likely never be able to spend $100 million or $120 million in his lifetime–that difference is meaningless. That player doesn’t really value winning–they just want to screw with their market.

          • sans

            There’s a huge difference between $120 and $100. Then you have to factor in taxes, agent fees, etc.

            The players who prioritize winning, never stay on the market long.

            While it wasn’t about winning, Kerry Wood sure showed a ton of loyalty to the Cubs regrading his last contract.

            It’s not all about money. Many of these players love to play and stay competitive. For the next 3 years, any player looking to win, won’t consider the Cubs.

            • caryatid62

              There’s not much difference when you account for the fact that you likely will have a hard time spending either amount of money in your lifetime. Either way, you and your children (and likely your children’s children) are set for life. Everything else is ego.

              There ARE players who choose to stay in a place they’ve played for a long time, but these considerations are as much about family needs (home, school, etc.) as they are about “loyalty.”

              Like I wrote above, I don’t know of a single player in the last five years who took less money to go to a winner when a less successful team offered him more money, especially among those players getting contracts of over $70 million or so. If you can think of one, I’m all ears.

              Players play for the team willing to pay them the most money. If they value winning, then I agree players won’t come to the Cubs no matter how much they pay them. However, I think the number of players who fit your category is very, very, very small. And of the players who matter in FA, I think the number is almost zero.

    • Blackhawks1963

      Based in published rumors Texas, Seattle, Detroit, San Francisco and the Cubs all have interest in Choo. He is going to get paid $120-150 million folks.

      • willis

        Yep, he’ll get close to if not that. Regardless, the players in on him have more money and more will to spend than the cubs.

  • Durbin

    Targets I want the Cubs to go after.

    2b – Brian Roberts
    Of – mike morse
    Of – Juan Pierre
    Cf – Rajai Davis

    Sp – Erik Bedard
    Sp Daniel Hudson
    Sp – Suk min yoon

    Pie in the sky…..Choo and Tanaka

    • ClevelandCubsFan

      Juan Pierre and Brian Roberts? We’d be throwing away the next 4 seasons. At least.

  • Andrew

    I think I’d go for choo on a Jayson werth type deal. Much like the nationals were when they signed werth, the cubs have talent on the way but need other pieces to supplement it too.

    • sans

      Excellent example!

      People still balk at Werth’s contract. But the Nationals had to swoop in early and wow Werth financially in order to obtain his services – based on the fact that the Nationals hadn’t yet established themselves as a proven winner.

      Such overpaying is what the Cubs are going to need to do in order to lure a major free-agent.

  • Josh

    Cubs are going to likely need to over pay via years, or per. Because he is going to go to a team like the Rangers or Reds if the figures are identical

  • Eric

    One of the things that bothered me last year is that we didn’t take advantage of having a protected draft pick.

  • Nick

    Where is assman when you need him? Would love to have Choo

  • http://www.bairsdenuni.wordpress.com BAIRSDEN

    Would like to know if Theo has spoken to Coletti about Kemp and/or Ethier. Both could be cheaper per year and I can’t imagine Ethier costing anything we couldn’t live without.

    Makes sense that the offer that was aimed at Sanchez could be on the table for Choo. A leadoff hitter would be real nice but I’d rather have Kemp or Ethier — either one could provide protection for Rizzo who in my mind needs it more so than Castro does to hit his potential as a hitter.

    Fingers crossed on Tanaka. Like Darvish, Cespedes and Ryu it’s an opportunity to speed up the rebuild process without sacrificing a pick.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      I’m hoping we get some rumors on what the Dodgers are looking for in exchange for Kemp/Ethier this week.

      • Ron

        Luke, who would play better center field defense, Choo, Sweeny or Lake?

  • Serious Cubs Fan

    I’d only want Choo at the right price. I feel like a team such as the Tigers, Mariners, another team who is going for it will be willing to overpay for him too the point the cubs won’t.

    • ClevelandCubsFan

      I’d like the top 25 plauers in the league at the right price… :-)

      • Brains

        hah, nice

Bleacher Nation Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Bleacher Nation is a private media site, and it is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago Cubs. Neither MLB nor the Chicago Cubs have endorsed, supported, directed, or participated in the creation of the content at this site, or in the creation of the site itself. It's just a media site that happens to cover the Chicago Cubs.

Bleacher Nation is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

Google+