Alex Cobb (Part 1)

[badger3034]

Seems weird to me that you guys think Cobb is willing to sign for 4/60, or as I would think, less than 4/80. If we as random fans believe that Cobb has the potential for a #2, or a #1 as some may say, what do you think Cobb thinks his own potential is (or team gms)? I know that most of you guys don't like giving out contracts on previous stats, and that leaves the argument in Cobb's sake for asking for more money. I'm pretty sure that the guy would've been signed if he was asking for a reasonable contract like that. Every team in all of baseball is looking for good pitching all the time, regardless of rumors, and there would've been someone who would've found him at that price....... if that's what he was asking for.

[KeithStone53151]

Seems weird to me that you guys think Cobb is willing to sign for 4/60, or as I would think, less than 4/80. If we as random fans believe that Cobb has the potential for a #2, or a #1 as some may say, what do you think Cobb thinks his own potential is (or team gms)? I know that most of you guys don't like giving out contracts on previous stats, and that leaves the argument in Cobb's sake for asking for more money. I'm pretty sure that the guy would've been signed if he was asking for a reasonable contract like that. Every team in all of baseball is looking for good pitching all the time, regardless of rumors, and there would've been someone who would've found him at that price....... if that's what he was asking for.

 

He's only going to get as much as he can leverage from a team. He's clearly not the pitcher Darvish is, so asking for more than $21 million per year is a silly ask. I could see him landing anywhere between $13 and 18 million AAV on 3-5 years. 4/60 is about the midpoint, seems reasonable.

[TJseven7]

You are using dated logic that the mlb seems to be scrapping. The same logic that makes teams pay tyrod and glennon 15 mil per in the nfl. Same logic that makes carr garrapolo smith worth 25 mil. What's rodgers worth then 50 mil?

 

Elite starters are paid 30-35 mil per. Cobb even as a 1 is around half of what those elites are worth. Arrietta a touch over cobb and yu a touch over that. They think they are going to get 20-25 over a huge window of time well into depreciation ages. Teams aren't that dumb this year. Deals have been very solid on the short term and many have incentives. The long term deals are the ones that are dying and these arms seem to want the old days.

 

I like cobb a lot... doesn't change the fact thats hes a 2.7 war guy over basically 4 years. Darvish is around 4. Arrieta has had 3 fantastic years and is trending down. These aren't the elites. The elites of the FA class doesn't mean they deserve elite arm money.

[coolhandluke121]

 

I don't think anyone is saying the Cubs aren't the favorite. People are saying they aren't head and shoulders above everyone else. Someone said they were going to win something like 110 games. That is crazy

 

Nice post. I said they "could". At least have the courtesy to read the post if you're going to call someone crazy.

 

They have an elite roster and you're being extremely complacent if you think the growing pains so many of their talented young players had last year are going to continue.

 

Nobody would EVER predict a team to win 110, but it's within reach for a group with that much talent.

[JohnBriggs12]

 

I don't think anyone is saying the Cubs aren't the favorite. People are saying they aren't head and shoulders above everyone else. Someone said they were going to win something like 110 games. That is crazy

 

Nice post. I said they "could". At least have the courtesy to read the post if you're going to call someone crazy.

 

They have an elite roster and you're being extremely complacent if you think the growing pains so many of their talented young players had last year are going to continue.

 

Nobody would EVER predict a team to win 110, but it's within reach for a group with that much talent.

 

 

They had one player who could be classified as having "growing pains" and that was Schawber. Russell is what he is, a fine defensive SS with some power but he's also a ,240 hitter in a large sample of ABs. Baez is a flashy defender with big time power and prone to strikeouts. He's had his best season by far last year. How is that growing pains? Bryant also boasted his best career .OPS. This perception that they had a bunch of hitters underperforming is pure hogwash.

[jjfanec]

 

I don't think anyone is saying the Cubs aren't the favorite. People are saying they aren't head and shoulders above everyone else. Someone said they were going to win something like 110 games. That is crazy

 

Nice post. I said they "could". At least have the courtesy to read the post if you're going to call someone crazy.

 

They have an elite roster and you're being extremely complacent if you think the growing pains so many of their talented young players had last year are going to continue.

 

Nobody would EVER predict a team to win 110, but it's within reach for a group with that much talent.

 

Could is still ridiculous. I am willing to out a ton of money on the Cubs not winning 110. I struggle to see them as 8 wins better than last year which would get them to 100. 18 wins with losing their stud closer and replacing Arietta with Darvish and Lackey with Chatwood and getting a full season of quintana. I think people are overrating the difference between the to picking swaps and Quintana was alright not great with the Cubs. Their rotation is one injury away from being messy and their starters are aging so injury isn't out of the question. I don't think they added anything on offense did they? And they lost a piece or two.

 

Say the Brewers add Cobb why wouldn't I assume they would have more of a winnincrease since even with Nelson being hurt they get a full season of Anderson. Chacin and cobb are ungrades from Garza and whatever else we tried to throw out there. We get a full season of hader in relief and better bullpen pieces. Cain and yelich are better than what we had. If the Cubs could jump 18 wins what could the Brewers jump

[brewcrewdue80]

Seems weird to me that you guys think Cobb is willing to sign for 4/60, or as I would think, less than 4/80. If we as random fans believe that Cobb has the potential for a #2, or a #1 as some may say, what do you think Cobb thinks his own potential is (or team gms)? I know that most of you guys don't like giving out contracts on previous stats, and that leaves the argument in Cobb's sake for asking for more money. I'm pretty sure that the guy would've been signed if he was asking for a reasonable contract like that. Every team in all of baseball is looking for good pitching all the time, regardless of rumors, and there would've been someone who would've found him at that price....... if that's what he was asking for.

 

He has to take the mound 33 times in a season to be worth that higher amount. Not be a question mark every year if this will be the year he gets 30+ starts. Thats why .I dont want to trade for Duffy. He's 4/60 without that claim. So I'll take Cobb an equal to Duffy for 4/60 and keep my depth. Its why Id go upto 4/68 because 2mil per extra is worth it to keep your pieces trading for Duffy.

 

The reason it's lower though is youre buying the thought process to 170IP and not 200-215.

[DR28]

HH has been really quiet on Twitter, not sure if that's a good sign on Cobb.

 

I really want him added!

[Fear The Chorizo]

The reason it's lower though is youre buying the thought process to 170IP and not 200-215.

 

And therein lies the reason why the premier bullpen free agents got equal to or more than what some though their market value would be, and the best starting pitchers on the market are struggling to get offers anywhere near where they thought they were valued - even the best starters aren't logging anywhere near the innings that true aces did 5 years ago. I don't care how great you are when you're on the hill, if you don't pitch as high a percentage of a team's overall innings as a similar pitcher 5 years earlier, you lose overall value that is picked up by relievers. That's why teams are more hesitant to dole out longterm deals to starters without options/optouts/performance bonuses baked in. I read it somewhere earlier, but this year's top free agents had the lowest cumulative WAR compared to recent years by far, plus the pitchers are trying to use recent contract comps as benchmarks even though the average IP totals for top starters has dropped by several games' worth of innings.

 

Boras is trying to sell Arrieta like a 220IP/season workhorse that pitches every year like it's 2015 - in reality Arrieta's 2015-2016 unicorn seasons were the only two he got anywhere close to 200+IP, and that workload is likely the reason he's perceived as a pitcher on the decline. If Boras marketed him realistically as a veteran starter who can consistently give you 180 quality IP provided the team is smart with his workload, he'd of been signed by the end of 2017.

[coolhandluke121]

 

 

They had one player who could be classified as having "growing pains" and that was Schawber. Russell is what he is, a fine defensive SS with some power but he's also a ,240 hitter in a large sample of ABs. Baez is a flashy defender with big time power and prone to strikeouts. He's had his best season by far last year. How is that growing pains? Bryant also boasted his best career .OPS. This perception that they had a bunch of hitters underperforming is pure hogwash.

 

The only thing that's hogwash is suggesting that a lineup with that many players 26 or under has somehow plateau'ed. It's ridiculous. Way to ignore Heyward, too. And the growing pains for Schwarber are a pretty big deal considering he's got Prince Fielder like hitting pedigree.

[Madhawk23]

 

 

They had one player who could be classified as having "growing pains" and that was Schawber. Russell is what he is, a fine defensive SS with some power but he's also a ,240 hitter in a large sample of ABs. Baez is a flashy defender with big time power and prone to strikeouts. He's had his best season by far last year. How is that growing pains? Bryant also boasted his best career .OPS. This perception that they had a bunch of hitters underperforming is pure hogwash.

 

The only thing that's hogwash is suggesting that a lineup with that many players 26 or under has somehow plateau'ed. It's ridiculous. Way to ignore Heyward, too. And the growing pains for Schwarber are a pretty big deal considering he's got Prince Fielder like hitting pedigree.

 

Unfortunately, I have to agree with this. That Cubs lineup is flat out scary, and I don't think we saw anywhere even close to their peak last year. All of their key bats are under 26 and I feel like many of them have the potential of just getting better over the next 3-4 years. Thankfully, their minor league pipeline appears to have dried up (finally) for awhile, so at least they don't have any more stud prospects on the cusp of joining this already potent group. But, they've been able to go out and buy the pitching help they've needed to supplement the home grown bats.

[And That]

I know this is getting the topic side-tracked, but...

 

All of their key bats are under 26

Contreras will be 26, Rizzo will be 28, Zobrist will be 37 (if you think Zobrist is not going to get significant playing time under Joe Maddon...), Bryant will be 26, and Heyward will be 28.

 

With players peaking earlier and earlier, I don't think it's any guarantee that this lineup will be dominant 3-4 years down the road.

[JohnBriggs12]

 

 

They had one player who could be classified as having "growing pains" and that was Schawber. Russell is what he is, a fine defensive SS with some power but he's also a ,240 hitter in a large sample of ABs. Baez is a flashy defender with big time power and prone to strikeouts. He's had his best season by far last year. How is that growing pains? Bryant also boasted his best career .OPS. This perception that they had a bunch of hitters underperforming is pure hogwash.

 

The only thing that's hogwash is suggesting that a lineup with that many players 26 or under has somehow plateau'ed. It's ridiculous. Way to ignore Heyward, too. And the growing pains for Schwarber are a pretty big deal considering he's got Prince Fielder like hitting pedigree.

 

Heyward's been bad offensively for 2 years. Career-wise he's got a .756 OPS and a .412 SP. Those are well below the standard for corner OF. I'm not saying the Cubs lineup is bad, but I'd give the Dodgers, Nationals and Rockies a slight edge not to mention the Brewers who've made the most significant offensive moves of any team in the NL. I notice you don't even mention they no longer have John Jay and his .374 OBP. Jay was a key cog in their lineup getting deep in counts. His replacement? Looks to be Peter Bourjos who hasn't posted a .700 OPS since 2013 and has a career .298 OBP.

[bill hAll Star]

 

 

They had one player who could be classified as having "growing pains" and that was Schawber. Russell is what he is, a fine defensive SS with some power but he's also a ,240 hitter in a large sample of ABs. Baez is a flashy defender with big time power and prone to strikeouts. He's had his best season by far last year. How is that growing pains? Bryant also boasted his best career .OPS. This perception that they had a bunch of hitters underperforming is pure hogwash.

 

The only thing that's hogwash is suggesting that a lineup with that many players 26 or under has somehow plateau'ed. It's ridiculous. Way to ignore Heyward, too. And the growing pains for Schwarber are a pretty big deal considering he's got Prince Fielder like hitting pedigree.

 

Heyward's been bad offensively for 2 years. Career-wise he's got a .756 OPS and a .412 SP. Those are well below the standard for corner OF. I'm not saying the Cubs lineup is bad, but I'd give the Dodgers, Nationals and Rockies a slight edge not to mention the Brewers who've made the most significant offensive moves of any team in the NL. I notice you don't even mention they no longer have John Jay and his .374 OBP. Jay was a key cog in their lineup getting deep in counts. His replacement? Looks to be Peter Bourjos who hasn't posted a .700 OPS since 2013 and has a career .298 OBP.

 

This is my job on this board to point out any Colorado-related inaccuracies, but I don't know if the Rockies offense is really that good. Half of the NL teams are tanking so they'd have to be in the upper half or so, but I'd take the Brewers' offense, the ones you mentioned, and maybe a few others over the Rox.

[tmwiese55]

Jeez, had no idea this would spiral so much of one small comment. Long story short to try and end it, yes a few are young and could massively improve. I said that way at the beginning. But that's still a question and you just don't know for sure. Until they do it you can't 'bank' on it so to speak. You have your two MVPs so obviously that's huge, all I said is after that you just don't really know what to bank on. Baez and Schwarber are the huge variables, continue to be Reynolds boom or bust types and they're just blah guys, as Brewer fans we know all too well on those types. But if they take a leap, then yea they're scary. If not then you have your two awesome guys and a bunch of mediocrity. And it's not like I expect one of the stars to get hurt so I fully expect their O to be strong. I only brought it up as a 'break' that could go our way to get us a much bigger chance than we think as of now.

 

Look at how deep the LAD and WAS lineups are vs the Cubs. Big difference.

[KeithStone53151]

 

 

They had one player who could be classified as having "growing pains" and that was Schawber. Russell is what he is, a fine defensive SS with some power but he's also a ,240 hitter in a large sample of ABs. Baez is a flashy defender with big time power and prone to strikeouts. He's had his best season by far last year. How is that growing pains? Bryant also boasted his best career .OPS. This perception that they had a bunch of hitters underperforming is pure hogwash.

 

The only thing that's hogwash is suggesting that a lineup with that many players 26 or under has somehow plateau'ed. It's ridiculous. Way to ignore Heyward, too. And the growing pains for Schwarber are a pretty big deal considering he's got Prince Fielder like hitting pedigree.

 

To luke's point, I would argue that Russell/Baez/Schwarber/Rizzo/Almora could improve on their 2017 numbers for one reason or another. Looking at their batted ball ratios, prospect pedigree, offseason adjustments, etc. Cubs fans could make the same kinds of arguments for those guys as we make for Arcia/Santana/Thames/Villar/Braun. My guess is they are due for a slight regression offensively, and maybe this will be the year they can't get through the season with 4-5 guys starting 30+ games. Cubs fans definitely don't factor in that they've been extremely lucky with SP health. Their current rotation has 3 guys that have had significant health issues and one guy turning 34, Quintana is probably the only guy they can 99% count on to start 30+ games this year.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Can we get the topic back on Cobb and stop talking about how great the Cubs are going to be? It's giving me a stomach ache.

 

So the Mets are signing Vargas (https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/02/mets-sign-jason-vargas.html), which would indicate that they are probably done tinkering with their rotation. Not that they were ever really linked to the top FA starters, but it does eliminate a possibility. We are starting to finally see an uptick in FA movement now, which would indicate that we should be seeing some of these bigger fish go soon as well. There's not much left for secondary starting pitching, besides maybe Tillman, so if the Brewers are going to make another move, it will likely be for one of Arrieta, Cobb or Lynn. Obviously if money was no object, I'd love Arrieta, but when taking value into account, I think Cobb is the choice.

[DR28]

Can we get the topic back on Cobb and stop talking about how great the Cubs are going to be? It's giving me a stomach ache.

 

So the Mets are signing Vargas (https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/02/mets-sign-jason-vargas.html), which would indicate that they are probably done tinkering with their rotation. Not that they were ever really linked to the top FA starters, but it does eliminate a possibility. We are starting to finally see an uptick in FA movement now, which would indicate that we should be seeing some of these bigger fish go soon as well. There's not much left for secondary starting pitching, besides maybe Tillman, so if the Brewers are going to make another move, it will likely be for one of Arrieta, Cobb or Lynn. Obviously if money was no object, I'd love Arrieta, but when taking value into account, I think Cobb is the choice.

 

Thank you!!!

[LouisEly]

Oddly enough Garza was never as good as Cobb. True story. Cobb was a 2 last year and profiles as a 1 if he can regain his dominant out pitch that he scrapped all of last year. You really haven't looked into cobb well enough. Wilkerson and Suter aren't #1 or even #2 types. Suter struggles after 3 ip.

Of course Cobb is better than Suter or Wilkerson, but not on a 4 year deal at age 30.

 

Garza's age 25-29 seasons:

 

FIP (weighted): 3.90, K/9: 8.0, BB/9: 2.9, HR/9: 1.0; slightly, but not significantly, worse than Cobb's career so far.

 

You also missed one critical factor with Cobb - he's only started more than 30 games in a season once, and that was back in 2012. Garza started at least 30 games in a season six times through age 29.

 

Garza through age 29 looks a lot like Cobb through age 29, but was much more durable.

[KeithStone53151]

Oddly enough Garza was never as good as Cobb. True story. Cobb was a 2 last year and profiles as a 1 if he can regain his dominant out pitch that he scrapped all of last year. You really haven't looked into cobb well enough. Wilkerson and Suter aren't #1 or even #2 types. Suter struggles after 3 ip.

Of course Cobb is better than Suter or Wilkerson, but not on a 4 year deal at age 30.

 

Garza's age 25-29 seasons:

 

FIP (weighted): 3.90, K/9: 8.0, BB/9: 2.9, HR/9: 1.0; slightly, but not significantly, worse than Cobb's career so far.

 

You also missed one critical factor with Cobb - he's only started more than 30 games in a season once, and that was back in 2012. Garza started at least 30 games in a season six times through age 29.

 

Garza through age 29 looks a lot like Cobb through age 29, but was much more durable.

 

I don't like comparing Garza to Cobb as they are completely different pitchers. Garza compares better to Lynn, as both heavily rely on FB for success...and once the FB went for Garza he was toast. I see a similar pattern for Lynn. Cobb ideally is a changeup specialist, and hopefully he can get that pitch back as he notably struggled with it last year. He's another year removed from TJ and I suspect the changeup will be back. Changeup pitchers age much better than fastball pitchers.

[clancyphile]

Oddly enough Garza was never as good as Cobb. True story. Cobb was a 2 last year and profiles as a 1 if he can regain his dominant out pitch that he scrapped all of last year. You really haven't looked into cobb well enough. Wilkerson and Suter aren't #1 or even #2 types. Suter struggles after 3 ip.

Of course Cobb is better than Suter or Wilkerson, but not on a 4 year deal at age 30.

 

Garza's age 25-29 seasons:

 

FIP (weighted): 3.90, K/9: 8.0, BB/9: 2.9, HR/9: 1.0; slightly, but not significantly, worse than Cobb's career so far.

 

You also missed one critical factor with Cobb - he's only started more than 30 games in a season once, and that was back in 2012. Garza started at least 30 games in a season six times through age 29.

 

Garza through age 29 looks a lot like Cobb through age 29, but was much more durable.

 

At this point, unless I can get a TOR guy (and Darvish really was the only one - CURSE THE CUBS!), then I'll stay out of the free agent market except to re-sign Walker and add Lucroy, then try to work a deal to bring a TOR guy to Milwaukee, probably centered on a package consisting of one of Santana/Arcia and one of Davies/Woodruff, with Ortiz and Nottingham (or some other prospects along those lines).

[DR28]

Oddly enough Garza was never as good as Cobb. True story. Cobb was a 2 last year and profiles as a 1 if he can regain his dominant out pitch that he scrapped all of last year. You really haven't looked into cobb well enough. Wilkerson and Suter aren't #1 or even #2 types. Suter struggles after 3 ip.

Of course Cobb is better than Suter or Wilkerson, but not on a 4 year deal at age 30.

 

Garza's age 25-29 seasons:

 

FIP (weighted): 3.90, K/9: 8.0, BB/9: 2.9, HR/9: 1.0; slightly, but not significantly, worse than Cobb's career so far.

 

You also missed one critical factor with Cobb - he's only started more than 30 games in a season once, and that was back in 2012. Garza started at least 30 games in a season six times through age 29.

 

Garza through age 29 looks a lot like Cobb through age 29, but was much more durable.

 

At this point, unless I can get a TOR guy (and Darvish really was the only one - CURSE THE CUBS!), then I'll stay out of the free agent market except to re-sign Walker and add Lucroy, then try to work a deal to bring a TOR guy to Milwaukee, probably centered on a package consisting of one of Santana/Arcia and one of Davies/Woodruff, with Ortiz and Nottingham (or some other prospects along those lines).

 

ARCIA IS NOT GOING ANYWHERE!!!

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

ARCIA IS NOT GOING ANYWHERE!!!

 

LOL, I would say the exact same thing for Davies. Clancy definitely has players that he likes, and those he doesn't like.

[bill hAll Star]

Oddly enough Garza was never as good as Cobb. True story. Cobb was a 2 last year and profiles as a 1 if he can regain his dominant out pitch that he scrapped all of last year. You really haven't looked into cobb well enough. Wilkerson and Suter aren't #1 or even #2 types. Suter struggles after 3 ip.

Of course Cobb is better than Suter or Wilkerson, but not on a 4 year deal at age 30.

 

Garza's age 25-29 seasons:

 

FIP (weighted): 3.90, K/9: 8.0, BB/9: 2.9, HR/9: 1.0; slightly, but not significantly, worse than Cobb's career so far.

 

You also missed one critical factor with Cobb - he's only started more than 30 games in a season once, and that was back in 2012. Garza started at least 30 games in a season six times through age 29.

 

Garza through age 29 looks a lot like Cobb through age 29, but was much more durable.

 

At this point, unless I can get a TOR guy (and Darvish really was the only one - CURSE THE CUBS!), then I'll stay out of the free agent market except to re-sign Walker and add Lucroy, then try to work a deal to bring a TOR guy to Milwaukee, probably centered on a package consisting of one of Santana/Arcia and one of Davies/Woodruff, with Ortiz and Nottingham (or some other prospects along those lines).

 

I love the penny-pinching people do when adding a FA that is a risk, yet only $/1 draft pick addition that could be very good to the team.

 

But when a trade for a pitcher is mentioned, "won't be a problem at all throwing away half of our supporting cast."

[tigerbrew]

Of course Cobb is better than Suter or Wilkerson, but not on a 4 year deal at age 30.

 

Garza's age 25-29 seasons:

 

FIP (weighted): 3.90, K/9: 8.0, BB/9: 2.9, HR/9: 1.0; slightly, but not significantly, worse than Cobb's career so far.

 

You also missed one critical factor with Cobb - he's only started more than 30 games in a season once, and that was back in 2012. Garza started at least 30 games in a season six times through age 29.

 

Garza through age 29 looks a lot like Cobb through age 29, but was much more durable.

 

 

I'm also very uncomfortable in giving Cobb a four year deal, it's too risky. And 4/60 is way too expensive, it's even more expensive than Garza's contract.

 

I think Stearns is waiting for the price and years to fall to a level that he's comfortable with.