Ugh. I'd rather have Voit. Oh well, easy to cut.

Ugh

simple and accurate.

Just let Mervis play without the safety net. The team isn't going anywhere. Let's see what we have for the future.

My understanding is that when SD traded Hosmer to Boston, they also sent along the remaining money he was owed, minus the minimum salary for the 3+ years left on his contract.

Then, the Red Sox paid the pro-rated part of the minimum salary for the remainder of 2022. Eventually, they put him on waivers after the season, nobody claimed him, he became a free agent, and the Cubs have now signed him for the 2023 season at the minimum salary.

Assuming the above is accurate, then is the following accurate?

1) The Red Sox now take the money San Diego sent them to pay for the rest of his contract (which would now be $39 million minus the league minimums for 2023-2025 of $720k, then $740k, then $760k, for a total of $2.22m), and send the checks to Hosmer every two weeks or whatever it is.

2) Hosmer now gets paid the minimum salary in 2023 from both Boston and the Cubs. In other words, he not only gets the $12.28 million in non-minimum salary from the Padres deal (sent by Boston with the money SD gave Boston) this year, but he also gets $720k from the Red Sox, because they assumed his contract when they traded for him last year. Then, Hosmer also gets $720k from the Cubs, because he has signed a deal with them for the 2023 season.

3) As of this moment, as long as Hosmer doesn't retire, he will get $13m for each of 2024 and 2025 (all of it sent by the Red Sox, but almost all of it being from San Diego).

So is Hosmer effectively "triple-dipping" this year, getting a combined $13.72 million from San Diego, Boston, and Chicago?

@4 nope. All but the league minimum goes to Hosmer from Padres via Red Sox. League minimum covered by whatever team he's active with (Cubs for now). If inactive, I think the league minimum portion comes from the Red Sox

@4 nope. All but the league minimum goes to Hosmer from Padres via Red Sox. League minimum covered by whatever team he's active with (Cubs for now). If inactive, I think the league minimum portion comes from the Red Sox

Correct, the Cubs assumed the Sox's responsibility for the league min. If for whatever reason the Cubs had paid more than league min, that would have saved the Padres money (by the amount over the league min). The only way Hosmer could get more than his $13M is if the Cubs had signed him for more than $13M.

The Chicago Cubs filled a need at first base and designated hitter

No. No, they did not.

As long as he's not a bad guy, and there's no evidence that he is, this is a zero-risk pick-up. Even if he does nothing more than take little pressure off Mervis, and provide a bit of stability at 1st or DH. He's not making enough money that Rossy will have to Heyward him into the line-up regularly if he's sucking. And maybe he has a dead cat bounce for a couple of months and you flip him for a lottery ticket. Even if he Gaetti's, they can't be tricked into signing him beyond this year because he's already getting paid elsewhere.
Now let's just trade Madrigal for some lefty help in the bullpen, and call it an off-season.

**That's right I verbified two former Cubs. I make no apologies, and given the chance I'd do it again.**

The peanut gallery exploded. “He gets paid to put the barrel on the ball, you guys get paid to think about fly balls and ground balls,” offers Hosmer clearly on the tape. Which wouldn’t be so bad, he’s right. But as I finished up the interview — Butler was great, he admitted that he looked for the low ball, since the pitcher was trying to throw it there anyway, something I found very interesting in terms of game theory — there was a hum behind me that threatened to take away my concentration.

I didn’t know who exactly was talking, but the tone of the stream and the intent was clear: “we get paid to put barrels on balls man, what the f— is this guy talking about, walk rates, ground-ball rates, barrels dude, barrels, what’s up with this hair, must be because he’s Greek, yeah or blind, these are some stupid questions, man, I’ve never heard anything like this, dude needs to shut up, bothering us about ground-ball rates man, barrels, dude, barrels, nut sacks more like.” The interview with Butler had been getting better, but there was one last emphatic statement from the trio behind me before they exited: “This guy’s the f—ing worst.”

There’s a pause on the tape, where Butler stops talking and there’s no follow-up from me. It’s painful to listen to, now, even 10 months after it happened. Butler noticed, and to his credit, asked: “You all right?”

https://tht.fangraphs.com/learning-the-language-of-the-clubhouse/

This is an infamous excerpt from 2013! from Eno Sarris of Fangraphs that portrayed Hosmer as the "bad guy" of the Royals clubhouse.

The only way Hosmer could get more than his $13M is if the Cubs had signed him for more than $13M.

Don't give them ideas!

this is a zero-risk pick-up.

Sure but why are the Cubs taking zero risks? Payroll is quite low. One of the richest teams in baseball and we're hoping that our free minor-league 1B is for real (after hoping our free minor league 1B was for real last year) but grabbing a free 1-WAR player as an insurance policy while we roll out our not-free but cheap 1-WAR DH too? We're not the f'ing Royals.

Mervis is a LHB. At a min, he needs a platoon partner but Hosmer is LHB ... which suggests he'll be taking PA from Reyes ... or suggests he's there as "Mervis flops in the spring" insurance. In theory, they could have grabbed Abreu or Bell. And although it's not clear that Voit or Myers is actually better than Hosmer and neither is free, they are at least RH balance for Mervis and Myers adds some OF depth.

This all seems so Trib/Hendry. Big revenues but we are back to sitting it out on all the big FAs. Stroman, Taillon and Swanson are fine players but they aren't elite. Then we fill in gaps like we're the Pirates.

As long as he's not a bad guy, and there's no evidence that he is,

He's an "unwritten rules, play-the-game-right" enforcer guy. Depends on whether you think that's "bad" or not.

Hosmer had his pick of teams. He must have gotten a guarantee of playing time from the cubs

Another question I have is, does the signing mean he stays with cubs for three years or does he do this all over again next offseason ?

It means he does this all over again next offseason. Or, I guess, sooner than that if the Cubs tire of his act.

Mervis is a LHB. At a min, he needs a platoon partner but Hosmer is LHB

The Cubs line-up is RH-heavy. If Hosmer is decent and Mervis can hit big league pitching, having both in the line-up will help balance it. If you need to platoon away from a lefty, Wisdom can shift over with Morel taking third.
Yeah, they could have grabbed Abreu or Bell, but they didn't. Looking at what was left, Hosmer is not a terrible pick-up.
I had never heard the interview from 2013, but c'mon, that's 10 years ago. A lot has changed with players understanding analytics since then.

A lot has changed with players understanding analytics since then.

Sure, but the issue was not Hosmer not understanding analytics - it was him being a dick about it.

#12 and hopefully adding some info to #13 ... when he was traded to the Red Sox, the Red Sox had control of him for the remainder of his contract. Because that was a trade. When he was DFA'd by the Red Sox and took the release then he was a full FA under the control of no team (i.e. not required to provide his services for any team). He is now obligated to provide his services to the Cubs but only for the one year covered by this new contract.**

As far as I know, there was nothing stopping him and the Cubs agreeing on 3 years at league min but the Cubs have no real incentive to take on the extra commitment and, since it doesn't result in more $ for Hosmer, no real incentive for him to limit his options for 2024.

** It is obviously "odd" that Hosmer was under contract to nobody yet, signing a new contract, he can't receive any extra money with, essentially, his Cubs salary being paid to the Padres. All he gets out of this is a chance to keep playing baseball while running the risk of injury. (The Cubs presumably are responsible for his medical costs through the end of the contract, I'm not sure what happens if his care and potential rehab extends into the offseason.) Equally obviously, it is a small concession to make in exchange for guaranteed contracts.