Chicago Cubs need to raise the ceiling of their roster!

Evaluating the Boyd trade even more coming up next. You guys do great work, I listen. You are Locked On Cubs, your daily Chicago Cubs podcast. Part of the Locked On Podcast Network, your team every day. You are Locked On Cubs, part of the Locked On Podcast Network, your team every day. Alongside Sam Ulver, I'm Matt Cozy. Sam and I are lifelong fans, taking our passion into discussion with you. On all things Cubs. Thank you for being part of the show and making us your first listen today. And the best way you can help us grow the show is to listen every day, like the video, and comment anything below. Today's episode is brought to you by our great partners at FanDuel. You can start the season with a big return on FanDuel. New customers can place a $5 bet. You'll get started with $150 in bonus bets if you win your first $5 bet. The Chicago Cubs have won 83 games two years in a row. In 2024, they finished with the 12th highest run scored total, and the 10th lowest runs allowed total. Pretty good. Eight of their nine positional starters finished in the top 100 in war. Three of their main five starting pitchers finished in the top 35. Couple guys, Hodge, Miller, emerged as real high leverage relievers. Folks, the Cubs are not a bad team. They're okay. You might even say they're good. No, I wouldn't say that. They finished 10 games out of first in the division, six games out of the last wild card spot. They're okay, but they're not to the good level. How do they go from okay to good to really good or even great? They need to raise the ceiling of the team. They already have a high floor. I just cited all the info right there. In order to have a successful 2025 and beyond, they need to raise the roof, Sam, and build a higher ceiling on this roster. I agree. I firmly agree with that. There's different ways to do that. Like a star player raises your ceiling, but he also raises your floor at the same time because it gives you small ways or the least amount of ways possible to not be good because you just know you're going to get production. But I want to talk about this void signing because in regards to this comment and this topic because you had a tweet, of course, that people just exploded and listened and engaged with. I think you're right on the tweet. This is more me. I just want to play a little contrarian, if you will. The tweet, this is at Matt underscore cozy. Matthew Boyd raises the floor for the Cubs, but guess what? Then there's like an indent or a couple of entries. They don't need to raise the floor, exclamation point. They aren't a bad team. They need to raise the ceiling by adding impact players. Boyd is a four or five in the rotation. They need to add a two or three. Maybe they still will. And I was reading this. I think this was put out right around the time I start to engage on my phone around 9 a.m. And I was thinking about it, and I view the Boyd transaction differently in a vacuum. Now, first of all, I want to preface by saying, no matter what, this isn't a needle moving move like that. But I think the process of it is, I actually look at it more as a ceiling raiser versus a floor raiser, and I'm going to tell you why. We have no idea what we're going to get out of Matthew Boyd. He has only thrown, he has not come close to 100 innings in 2019. The Cubs went out and handed him $29 million because he showed a really, really good flash for about 50 total innings in 2024. Now, do I love that process, a $29 million major risk, major gamble? No, I don't. But I do think that this acquisition is more of a, when I think about raising floor, Matt, I think about safe. I think about, hey, we know what we're going to get out of said guy. You know, it's not going to wow us, but we just know he's not going to be that bad. We don't know that with Matthew Boyd. We don't even know if he's going to throw 80 innings because he hasn't in a really long time. I think this acquisition is more, the Cubs are trying to catch lightning in a bottle. They think that they found something and saw something in a brief period of time in 2024, and I think that they're hoping that he is a 140-inning guy with an ERA in the low to mid threes, which would be the two or three you're talking about, and I think that he has, they believe that he has two or three ceiling, and they're giving him a shot. For example, I think Evaldi would be a floor-raising signing because you just kind of know what you're getting out of a Nathan Evaldi. He has more of a track record. This is a complete unknown for better or for worse. Hmm. Yeah, I have to think about the Evaldi one. I guess I just thought, because I saw some comments, not only to the tweet but to our episode on Tuesday, about Steele and Imanaga. Like, oh, Steele and Imanaga is a good one, too. I know that. It's about pushing Tyone to a three, maybe pushing him to a four, and pushing the group of Assad Wisniewski to the bullpen. Agree, agree. Same thing on offense. It's not about half and Suzuki. They're not the problem. Let me read you. Who hits in the first four spots in the order? If there's only three clear candidates, which there is now, but they're going to trade one of them next week, that's a problem. I don't disagree with anything you're saying. I just think from their eyes, they think that this might be a ceiling-raising acquisition because they don't know. Let's look at Evaldi. Here's his numbers from 2020 now. I'm just going to read his ERA. 372, 375, 387, 363, 380. The guy is the definition of consistency. To me, my definition of a floor-raiser is I know exactly what I'm going to get. I know Evaldi's not going to be better than Steele next year, but I know for sure he's going to be better than Assad or Hendricks. Boyd, I wouldn't be shocked if he had a 3.04. I wouldn't be shocked if he had a 5 ERA and got injured. So I guess what I'm saying is I agree with everything you said. I just think that transaction is more of a mystery. And when I think mystery, I just think could it raise their ceiling? Yeah. It could damage their floor because we have no idea. Is he a floor-raiser? We have no idea if he's going to be better than Hendricks or Assad because what if he doesn't pitch? Well, then I can make the case that that's even worse. 100%. This team doesn't need any mysteries. They are taking a real shot on him, and they are hoping. I think internally they are thinking that he might be the third best pitcher on this team right now. You don't even need to add that much volume. What if this offseason they just added three guys? What if they only signed Willie Adamas, they traded Horner and or Paredes for a starting pitcher, and signed a good veteran reliever? Offseason over. Well, what if they just didn't do anything but sign Juan Soto? Okay. They'd be far better off. Far better. Yeah. Look at this lineup I put together today. I want to focus a little bit more on Adamas for just a minute. Please. I'm interested. 32 homers last year. Over 100 driven in. Hit 24 and 23, 31 the year before, 25 the year before. He could play third, could play second too. Look at this lineup if they keep Bellinger. By the way, I think we might do this for Thursday. If they clear Bellinger, they better acquire someone like Adamas. Yeah. Don't get your hopes up with that. But here's a lineup with Bellinger but without Horner and Paredes. Look. Pap. Pap, Suzuki, Bellinger, Adamas, Bush, Swanson, PCA, Shaw, Amaya. It's a better team. Come on. Yeah. It's a better team. I just don't see how they fit that in with what they're talking about with their salary stuff right now. Right. I think if they got Adamas, Bellinger would have to be off the team. Who is the player that they want? I don't think anyone. It's a one-year deal for Bellinger. What one-year deals are bad? If you don't want Juan Soto, who do you want? Exactly. Santander is that much better than Bellinger, is he? No, it's more power. More power? Alonso is the one that I'm on the fence about. But Matt, how are they? Adamas is a clear upgrade. But again, positionally. So when you say you're on the fence about Alonso, you're saying assuming Bellinger gets moved and they get rid of a bunch of his salary? I'm just saying I think Alonso could move the needle. I agree with that. Santander, Adamas, but then the list is over after that. Unless it's somewhat in trade that we don't know. Yeah, I just think those conversations will come if they can just get rid of 18, 19 Ms of Bellinger's salary. Because right now, after this Boyd thing, I think 14.5 still counts towards 2025. So what do they have left? I have that, actually. So right now they are 39 to the first threshold. And like you said, they're not going to come. They're not going to do that. No. So really, they're probably leaving a buffer of 10 Ms. They're about 29 to their arbitrary line. Right. And Adamas might cost 30. Right. And so I was thinking about what I'm going to say. Well, if they traded Horner and Paredes, they'd have room. Right, right. True. That's 17. I was thinking about the solo show for Friday. Yeah. And I'm going to do something along the lines about what Cap was saying on our show, because I felt this way for a couple years. If you remember, Cap insinuated on our show, and I think he's right, that if the Cubs were really good at the end of July, Ricketts would throw out the budget stuff and go get players to make because they've proven they're really good. You remember that part of the show? If he sees a path to playoffs or more, they would go out and buy. Yeah. Why do we have to wait until July, and that's going to be the show? I don't know. Because if you're going to do that in July, just do it now, and then we'll be good. Do you not see how important the first 60 games is? Yeah. It's like I get that. First 90? From a reliever standpoint, but that's it. I don't understand the rest of it. So it's going to be something on that because then it's like, oh, well, you know, we didn't do enough to be buyers in July. Well, because we weren't buyers in July because we didn't have enough. It's like a chicken and egg situation. But, again, we could talk more about this next episode, but what does your instinct tell you? So let's say they clear 20. Let's say they clear 19 of Bellinger's 27 M's, right? 19. Got it. Are they going to replace that? Yeah, my instinct tells me that they would replace it not with one guy. It would be depth stuff, like maybe another depth bat, some reliever, like a reliever or two. A depth bat? Yeah, I don't. Dude, you were the first. What does that even mean? You were the first. Michael Conforto? You were the first. Jock Peterson? You were the first one. I was the first one to suggest that they're going to trade Bellinger, and you were the first one to say, if they trade Bellinger, I wouldn't be surprised if they just let Owen Casey be the guy. Right. And so I wouldn't be surprised. My instinct right now is telling me not to expect much. Same. It is now. I mean, we've done basically now three shows on Matthew Boyd. If that doesn't tell you where this offseason is headed, because the Cubs have paid him almost a third of what they have of their offseason. Right. And if he's a mystery, why did they do that? I like Assad as a mystery better. I like watching him better. No, no, I don't. I don't. I'd rather Boyd. Again, I actually like the Boyd signing. I just – it's just a lot. It's just a lot. No, I do. I do. I like – let me tell you, though. I like it, too, if they were trying to upgrade that part of the rotation. This team, I've never been around a team that I root for that I know exactly what I'm going to get pretty much from every guy. So, when we add a guy that is a little mysterious that goes, hey, you know what, if things go here and here, maybe he could be really good, that intrigues me. I'm just looking for something to be intriguing. I know what we're going to get out of Steele in a great way. I feel confident about Imanaga. Not as much Tyone. I have moved on from the Assad experience for the most part. Offensively, I know Hap. I know Bellinger. I know Suzuki. I know Horner. I know Swanson. We all know what we're going to get out of these guys. Yeah, you want a new flavor. You mentioned that last week. I just want a guy – I get that. I just want a guy where I could go to sleep at night and go, you know what, maybe if this, this, and this happens, this guy could be really good. So, with Boyd, I'm just going to watch 59 innings of tape of 2024 and hope that's the guy we're getting. Coming up next, offseason's at a really good pace. What could that mean? Stay tuned. This episode is brought to you by FanDuel. Get ready to tackle the NFL action with FanDuel, America's number one sports book, because right now new customers can bet $5 and get $150 in bonus bets if you win. The FanDuel sports book app gives you everything you need to place live bets on the NFL all in one place. So, to get a hunch in the middle of the game, you can check out the latest stats, do live play-by-play, and so much more on the same page where you place your bets. Matt, it was a Monday night last night. I was sitting at home, not much to do. I went on FanDuel, and I made a bet on the Cleveland Browns, plus 6.5. The Browns were down 2, driving with about a minute and 45 seconds left. I'm thinking, oh, there's no way I won't cover this. Jameis Winston, pick 6, 41-32. But then the Browns, in junk time, get to the 2-yard line. I'm thinking, all right, nice, easy cover. We're good. And Winston throws another pick, and I lose. Sometimes that happens. Just visit FanDuel.com to join today. You'll get started with $150 in bonus bets if you win your first $5 bet. That's FanDuel.com. Never waste a hunch. Make every moment more with FanDuel, an official sportswear partner of the NFL. Multiple starting pitchers have signed this offseason, multiple catchers as well. Kyle Higashioka signed with the Rangers. Maybe that gives the Cubs a nice outline on a possible contract for a Carson Kelly or Danny Jansen. Aroldis Chapman signed with the Red Sox Tuesday. He gives teams a nice measuring stick for high-leverage relievers, perhaps. So the market is moving, and this should bode well for continued activity, especially next week at the winter meetings in Dallas, Sam. Matt, I was watching our friend Kyle do a show over on the Setup Man, and then I think I saw it on his Twitter. I can't remember. But there's starting to become some buzz of Ballesteros just being the backup catcher. Have you seen that? They don't necessarily have to get a catcher. Have you seen that? A little bit. No, actually I haven't. I watched that video tonight. What's your thoughts on that? Well, they could open the season with Amaya and Theis and then have Ballesteros come up either early or late spring, early summer, something like that. Yeah, I think that's what he was saying as well. Mid-summer. I'm not opposed to that, because while I don't think a two-year deal for Carson Kelly is a bad thing, especially if you feel good about an Amaya-Ballesteros combo in 2026, well, if you want to just do the one year for Kelly, don't you need to pay him more AAV? What would that be? Seven, eight M's for Carson Kelly or Danny Jansen? I don't know about that. The reason I brought this up is I'm starting to get really not interested with these choices for a catcher. Okay. They just don't excite me. I'd rather see Miguel Amaya take a step forward. Yeah, I just don't see, again, in terms of volume of possible additions, I didn't think catcher had to be on the list. You need to add impact elsewhere, especially if you believe in the Amaya-Ballesteros combination, which seems like there's momentum for it. Right? Absolutely. The offseason, I think, is very positive, though, the flow. Yeah, the Chapman thing, I think it's one year, 10.3 quarters, I think is what it was. That's not cheap. That means a guy like Tanner Scott is going to be looking for about 14, 15 a year. Yeah, no, I think so, four for 60. Yeah, that's a hefty price to pay a reliever. Obviously, the Cubs did the one-year route with Hector Neres last year, and that didn't go well. Right, right. But what if Tanner Scott was one of just three players you added? So, including Boyd? No, no, no, this was in my hypothetical scenario. This was before Boyd. I'm just saying that they have a major league position players and a prospect nucleus to get a starting pitcher or a closer. Yeah. They really only needed to sign one hitter. Yeah. I mean, I guess they still could, but this Boyd, I'll just come out and say this Boyd thing is throwing me off. Yeah, I know. I know it is. I just wish it didn't happen. I know it is. I like it better than you. And maybe he is good for the Cubs in 2025. Maybe we'll do like an opposite of what we did last year, and instead of wanting a guy like Montgomery and doing bad, we'll record you, and then when Boyd finishes fourth in the Cy Young, we'll play this. Right, well, that's fine. I'm just, I don't know. No, look, Scott, I mean, anything that makes me intrigued. Why did you just say the name Scott? Tanner Scott. Oh. Scott would be. I wasn't following for a second. Scott would be a nice addition. Anything that makes me intrigued to watch this team is what I'm looking for. But offseason flow has been good, I agree. Out of all the catchers, Higashioka was the guy I liked best. He's off the board. So, you know, we'll have to see what happens with him. Maybe they could get Gary Sanchez a low-cost option. Yeah, I think that, I think that, I would love for the platoon to be righty-lefty, you know, the two. Well, then Maya Tice, Maya Ballesteros. Ballesteros, right. I think the winter meetings are going to be busy. Do you think they'll be busy for the Cubs? I'm not good at that. I don't know. It's just hard to get a read on them. I don't know how to do that. Like, I don't know when they're going to make moves. You're better at predicting that. I don't know. I think it's just going to be, I think we're going to have a lot to talk about. I hope Soto signs before Sunday. I really do. I just hope Jed doesn't do one of those. Like, let's say they sign a, let's say they sign a nice reliever, you know, in a week. And Jed's like, yeah, we're in the seventh inning of our offseason. Like, we don't need any of that. Yeah, why does he, I guess why does he insist on describing it that way? And limiting it. Like, what if something comes up? What if you get a great offer? It really shouldn't be the seventh inning in December. No. There's over two months till spring training. No, I hope right now they're in the second. Right, right. Exactly. Top of the second. They're down, they're down three nothing. Because Assad couldn't find, because Assad couldn't find the zone or something. Oh, okay. Eli Morgan left the changeup up. Oh yeah, I forgot about Morgan. So right now we're at Morgan, Boyd. I don't want to count Tice. I really don't. Well, that's up to you then. So yeah, they've made two ads. Two real ads. Because I don't think Tice made them any better from Bethencourt. I really don't. I got to tell you, the off-season activity is completely different from last year. Last year it was just dead right now. Well, because Otani was just, Otani's just a different animal than what Soto was. And what he could bring to the table. But it also does seem like teams are more willing to spend a little bit. Yeah. I mean, even like the Cubs-Bellinger thing last year was so awkward. Very. I was like, oh, I'm not going to give you that extra three and a half. All right. Coming up next, we talk about something very strange. Stay tuned. We're back here on Locked On. Cubs MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred said last week in an interview that there could be a new addition to games this year called the Golden At Bat. What is that? Well, teams can choose a spot each game where they can send a batter of their choosing up to the plate. Sam, I'm curious to hear your thoughts because my view is that this Golden At Bat thing is intergalactically stupid. It's awful, but I couldn't help but laugh and think about how embarrassing it would be for the Cubs because they would be one of the only teams that would not know who to send up. I would guess it would be Suzuki. But like, you know, the Yankees, they got two choices if Soto returns. The Dodgers, everyone's this. I mean, the Brewers will send up Contreras or Curio. And we have, I guess, oh, it's a tough righty, so Hap. It would just be so ironic if that happened, but it's a terrible idea and it won't get passed. And if it does, then, you know, you could do a few solo shows. So you could have someone in theory bat consecutive times. I don't know the details of it. Would that person need to be replaced on the bases by a courtesy runner? Well, could they? But could they do that? Yeah, exactly. Or maybe that's the catch. You actually can't do that. Yeah, Suzuki draws a walk and then he gets pinch run for it and he can hit again. I read it as it would have to be like, oh, Suzuki's up. So this is a spot where, and then he just got a hit. It has to be somebody else. I don't know. Well, that would be at least more fair, yeah. I really think these gimmicks right now in sports, you look at the in-season tournament in the NBA. Yeah, what is that about? The all-star format in the NBA. It's just kind of letting you know that things aren't going great when you have to dig that far into your bag of gimmicks. As Jeff passed and said, baseball's fine the way it is. In terms of the rules, I just think that the ownership and the commissioner need to do a better job of marketing the sport. We have a player right now in this league that's doing something that has never been done and may very well never be done again, and pretty much 90% of the country doesn't care about it. That's the problem. Not the rules of the game or having a golden at bat or a silver at bat or a bronze or whatever it is. But, no, when I read that, I got a little bit queasy. Coming up on Council against the lefty. Council, he wants to get Wisdom back on the team. Coming up on Thursday. It's the lefty. We're going to use a golden at bat on Wisdom. Like three. It's a bad take. Coming up on Thursday, we're going to talk about Cody Bellinger, or maybe we don't. We're still processing that. That's a good tease. Also, we're always pending breaking news this time of year. Pending. So there's that. Thank you so much for checking out this edition of Lockdown Cubs. You can give us 20 to 30 minutes. We'll give you all things Cubs with a laugh or two along the way. Be sure to hit subscribe on YouTube. Smash the like button for the algorithm and leave a five-star review on Apple, Spotify, and everywhere. Get your podcast. Remember, comments have debuted on Spotify. He's Sam Olber. I'm Matt Cozy. This is Lockdown Cubs. Lockdown Cubs. See ya.