though Hosmer has been an average at best hitter for five years now

More like "his whole career." Sure, he had a few decent seasons here and there, but he's never really been a very good hitter for a 1B for more than one year in a row.

As the article points out, this was mostly a no-cost acquisition for the Cubs, but still was always a bit puzzling just because the upside was never all that high.

It doesn't seem logical that the Red Sox owe him any money, especially for 2023, since the Cubs took him on.

Finally!

#2 ... we went over that in excruciating detail in some thread this offseason. Because the Red Sox acquired him in trade from the Padres, it's then a guaranteed contract with the Red Sox. The Padres agreed to pay all but the min for those years but the Red Sox are on the hook for the min for the entire term of the contract. Now how the Cubs contribution this year gets doled out, I'm not sure we ever quite nailed that down -- does that all go to the Red Sox or does it get pro-rated between SD and Bos or does it, for some reason, all go to SD? (I assume it's pro-rated.)

When the Red Sox DFA'd Hosmer and he cleared waivers, the Cubs picking him up was only a commitment for 2023. That certainly had no effect on SD and Bos's guarantees for 2024-25. As it stands, they are totally on the hook for those years with the Red Sox owing the league min portion.

#1 ... I think you know it wasn't that puzzling. 1B/DH was a sinkhole last year. This year it was going to be some mix of Mancini, some Wisdom and maybe Mervis who clearly nobody in the organization believes in all that much. Heck we were giving DH PAs to Luis Torrens early. Bringing him in to see if he could rediscover mediocrity made plenty of sense. Kepping him on the opening day roster over Morel, Vazquez or Mervis was pretty questionable.

Anyway, it's not like the 1B/DH holes have been filled. Mervis has been terrible, Mancini has been terrible and not exactly a defensive wizard, Wisdom was terrible in his few games there last year and just 3 innings there this year. I wonder if we're going to start seeing some Bellinger there when he gets back. DH doesn't worry me (Morel/Wisdom or, when he's recalled, Valezquez/OF and even Madrigal) but it would be nice if somebody on this team would learn 1B. Wisdom is the obvious choice but he was so bad there last year; maybe Happ now that he's got his extension and his surprisingly good 2022 defense seems to have become atrocious 2023 defense.

Now how the Cubs contribution this year gets doled out, I'm not sure we ever quite nailed that down -- does that all go to the Red Sox or does it get pro-rated between SD and Bos or does it, for some reason, all go to SD? (I assume it's pro-rated.)

The Cubs' money is subtracted from what Boston owes because Hosmer and money were sent to Boston. Contractually, all of what was owed to Hosmer became Boston's responsibility—if it's your player than it's your contract—but the Padres sent about $44M to Boston thus easing the Sox's actual outlay such that Boston only owed the equivalent of league minimum. So for this year, the Cubs covered about a third of Boston's out-of-pocket expense for Hosmer.

#1 ... I think you know it wasn't that puzzling. 1B/DH was a sinkhole last year. This year it was going to be some mix of Mancini, some Wisdom and maybe Mervis who clearly nobody in the organization believes in all that much. Heck we were giving DH PAs to Luis Torrens early. Bringing him in to see if he could rediscover mediocrity made plenty of sense. Kepping him on the opening day roster over Morel, Vazquez or Mervis was pretty questionable.

I like how you're arguing with me in the first sentence but basically agreeing with me in the last sentence.

I mean, the bottom line here is that they ended up doing exactly what everyone thought they should do in the first place - see if Mervis has anything worthwhile to contribute or not - while wasting a month and a half in the process. I mean, hell, they didn't even waste it that hard - he only got 100 PA, Mervis already has nearly half that and he hasn't even been up two weeks yet.

So essentially they brought a guy in that no one wanted to see, knew he sucked so limited his playing time, then released him in favor of a guy who was already there before he was even signed.

Puzzling!

I like how you're arguing with me in the first sentence but basically agreeing with me in the last sentence.

I suppose it's the word "acquisition." The Cubs acquired Hosmer in January. That wasn't puzzling. Best we can do there is argue that they should have paid more money for Myers or Bell or gotten their hands on Voit instead of Hosmer. But that the Cubs werenn't going to just turn 1B/DH full-time over to Mervis wasn't surprising or puzzling. Mervis was then terrible in spring (179/294/250, 11 Ks in 34 PA) so still not a puzzling decision to hang onto Hosmer really. Probably a bad one though in retrospect (i.e. "questionable").

But sure, the Cubs made a number of slightly odd opening day roster decisions. Suzuki was on the IL but obvious short-term replacements Velazquez and Morel were sent down. Instead it was Mastrobuoni mainly and some Mancini. Torrens made the opening day roster, taking some RHB DH PAs. Rios was the main LHB DH which was kinda weird ... and he can't play 3B better than Wisdom? Dig out their stats and squint and it's not hard to see what the Cubs saw in each of those guys but it's also true that Morel made more sense than any of those guys (and Hosmer) and Morel or Velazquez seemed like the obvious short-term replacement for Suzuki. And of course poor Velazquez is still stuck in AAA.

All that said, I'm a bit behind on the Cubs' 25-man. I knew Mastro was back up, but Bellinger to the IL, Thompson sent down, Wesneski sent down, Mike Tauchmann up instead of Velazquez, Rios back up. Hosmer's DFA seems to have opened the 40-man slot for Tauchmann ... how long is he sticking around now? So Hosmer out for the 32-yo OF with the career 89 OPS+ in 667 PA (that thanks to 270 very good PA for the Yanks in 2019), who put up OK numbers in the KBO last year. If Hosmer was puzzling, what's Tauchman? Ugh.

Meanwhile ...

Bell 95 OPS+, 0 WAR
Myers 49 OPS+, -0.5 WAR
Voit 53 OPS+, -0.2 WAR
Hosmer 67 OPS+, -0.4 WAR
Mervis 56 OPS+, -0.1 WAR
Mancini 89 OPS+, -0.5 WAR
Abreu 47 OPS+, -1.0 WAR (wow!)
CJ Cron 79 OPS+, -0.2 WAR
Y Gurriel 81 OPS+, -0.3 WAR

All of you who had "none of the above" get a gold star. Meanwhile we laughed and laughed ...

Santana 94 OPS+, 0.7 WAR
Flores 113 OPS+, 0.3 WAR
Wade Jr 157 OPS+, 1.6 WAR (not actually on the open market this offseason)

#2 ... we went over that in excruciating detail in some thread this offseason.

I'm not disappointed that I missed it ;-).

I can't believe there is no place for Hosmer to play at league minimum. Isn't he an Oakland A in waiting at minimum wage ? While he may not be a world beater, he's got to be a solid everyday first baseman at minimum wage for a basement dweller. Noda can play OF

107 OPS+ in 400 PA last year

That's. . .not a solid everyday first baseman

Regardless, I agree with the basic premise that Hosmer's most likely value going forward is to make a horrible team slightly less horrible.

. Isn't he an Oakland A in waiting at minimum wage ? While he may not be a world beater, he's got to be a solid everyday first baseman at minimum wage for a basement dweller. Noda can play OF

it’s a tribute to the marvelousness of the pitching staff that the As have some solid hitting (not at every spot but several.)

So Noda has a 137 OPS+, Aguilar a 100. No reason for Hosmer there

If you want to move Noda you’re benching
Ruiz 108
Laureano 96
Bleday 127

Seth Brown has been hurt but last year had a 117

The team OPS + is 98.

They have some holes on offense but unless he can play second or third he’s of no help.

Now a Hosmer level pickup for the pitching staff would become their ace right away

I can't believe there is no place for Hosmer to play at league minimum. Isn't he an Oakland A in waiting at minimum wage ? While he may not be a world beater, he's got to be a solid everyday first baseman at minimum wage for a basement dweller. Noda can play OF

107 OPS+ in 400 PA last year

Hicks and Hosmer are both going to Oakland. :)

though Hosmer has been an average at best hitter for five years now


More like "his whole career." Sure, he had a few decent seasons here and there, but he's never really been a very good hitter for a 1B for more than one year in a row.

He had a 100 wRC+ from 2019-23 and 106 for his career. That's an average hitter over the past 5 years and an above average one for his career.

He had a 100 wRC+ from 2019-23 and 106 for his career. That's an average hitter over the past 5 years and an above average one for his career.

But it's not average or above average for a first baseman, which was the point the original post was making. 110 is more in line with average at the position over his career.

But it's not average or above average for a first baseman, which was the point the original post was making.

It's not bad for someone who's playing every day, though.

I'm reminded of Bill James's rant that every year teams lose the pennant because they can't get average production from some lineup spot.

For those not up to date with James's rants, he favors a lower replacement level, where a lot of a player's value comes from simply accumulating playing time. The point being that a player who can take up 300 at bats without embarrassing himself is actually providing a valuable service that teams will pay money for, even if it doesn't add up to a lot of runs above replacement.

It's not bad for someone who's playing every day, though.

I'm reminded of Bill James's rant that every year teams lose the pennant because they can't get average production from some lineup spot.

Don't get me wrong, I fully agree, especially for teams on a budget, they have to look at the whole, and accept what they can get, and arguably getting an average defensive fielder (relative to position) and an average bat (relative to league, regardless of position) gives you room to work at other spots because you are "safe" at that position. There are of course a million different ways to build a team and just focusing on relative to average for the position might not give you the best bang for your buck.

I was just pointing out what the article mentioned, at the same time, there is a reason guys like Hosmer will keep getting jobs, a bit of relative certainty, clears room for the team to experiment at other places....If Bellinger and Swanson didn't perform to the level they have so far, I think the team sticks around with Hosmer a bit longer, but as it stands he doesn't have a place on the team now. (although Bellinger is on the IL, you would have imagined they would have waited until his return to make this move, unless he was blocking someone of interest)

For those not up to date with James's rants, he favors a lower replacement level, where a lot of a player's value comes from simply accumulating playing time. The point being that a player who can take up 300 at bats without embarrassing himself is actually providing a valuable service that teams will pay money for, even if it doesn't add up to a lot of runs above replacement.

not sure about the lower replacement level, but given a choice when building a team before the season and dealing with certainty thresholds, I have two guys, one who is a 0 waa player, but who's history has indicated they will play at a minimum of 150 games, and compared to a slightly better .1 waa player, who's history indicates I can count on them to show up for 120-130 games, I'm going to take the guy who gives me more games. (note numbers are theoretical, I don't know where the real threshold would be)

when talking about a part time player, always take the higher rate guy. Whether it's a platoon split or just a guy you know going into the season is already injured(Tatis for example, or early Pujols when he had his foot issues) and plan around it.

Re 16. In the case of Hosmer he isn't really adding runs and he is embarrassing himself. He's below replacement right now and if he's not costing your teams runs (as compared to everyone else on the roster) then that team is losing a lot of games and has no reason for a 33 year old player that can handle only first base.

There's probably lots of players that could give you 150 to 160 games a year and put up -25ish runs on defense/offense/position.

I don't think teams gain very much for just going ahead and giving a guy a try to do that. The problem is a)they can get worse and b)they can miss playing time.


You don't purposely sign a below replacement level player to be your starter amd say yo yourself you're adding value.

I'm talking about a guy like a 100 OPS+ first baseman. A little below average, but not embarrassing himself.

107 OPS+ might not be average for a first baseman but at a minimum wage rate it's got to be darned good. Value and Cost must both be considered. Minimum wage for him allows you to spend more elsewhere and on teams with little veteran presence it's an excellent idea

If this is the end for Hosmer, here are some comparable careers (this is not systematic, just eyeballing it):

George McQuinn
Earl Torgeson
Pete O'Brien
J.T. Snow

107 OPS+ might not be average for a first baseman but at a minimum wage rate it's got to be darned good. Value and Cost must both be considered. Minimum wage for him allows you to spend more elsewhere and on teams with little veteran presence it's an excellent idea

An "excellent" idea? Sounds more like settling when you don't have any better ideas. An "excellent" idea would be acquiring a player who actually gives you positive value, not a guy who gives you below average value but you can pat yourself on the back because he's cheap.

Sounds more like settling when you don't have any better ideas

Yes, of course, Hosmer is an "option" only when the other available options are worse. And these better ideas?

In 2022, the Cubs got 0.1 WAR out of 1B, with the PAs coming mainly from Alfonso Rivas, Frank Schwindel and PJ Higgins. Thanks mainly to Contreras and some non-suckitude from Reyes and Ortega and the revolving door, they did get 1.6 WAR out of DH.

Now, as it turns out, none of those people are on the Cubs' 40-man roster this season. I suspect they all would have gladly have taken a spot if offered. None of them are in the organization, Schwindel is over in Japan, only Reyes has played in the majors this year and was DFA'd a couple weeks ago, nobody has signed him yet (or b-r missed it or maybe he's off to Japan??) Everybody in MLB seems to agree that none of those guys belongs in the majors (except Contreras of course).

In short, the Cubs had an entire organizational void at 1B and DH. This is the definition of "we need to get some guys in here that won't embarrass themselves." The only question at that poins is "is this guy better than nothing?" and, yes, even Hosmer is better than nothing. So were probably 8 other guys the Cubs coulda had, he certainly wasn't my top choice, probably not even my 5th choice but (as I noted) none of those guys are doing anything either.

They had one "kid" in the organization -- 25-yo Matt Mervis who came out of nowhere to go nuts last year and play at 3 levels. Still MLB.com puts him 5th in the Cubs list. Clearly part of the plan was/is to give Mervis a chance cuz, why not. But still, you bring in other guys in the spring. Plus there's that whole DH thing. So Mancini (for real money) and Hosmer (for free) make perfectly good sense.

Mervis struggled this spring. But if somebody wants to argue that he still deserved an opening day slot ahead of Hosmer, I'm not gonna object strongly. As it is, he had a solid start and was up after a month. Hosmer not surprisingly was no good, it was a surprise he wasn't dumped then but so be it.

Unfortunately Mervis has stunk. One of his positives in the minors is that, for a power guy, he made a lot of contact. That was still true at AAA this year where he K'd about 1 in 6. Alas, he's K'd at 37% in the majors so far. His BABIP, EV and HH% are all fine when he does hit it ... yet somehow an ISO under 100. Far too soon to give up on him but, here we are, 30% through the season and the Cubs have gotten -0.5 WAR (15th) out of 1B and -0.1 WAR (14th) out of DH. There's no obvious help on the horizon other than "Mancini and Mervis can't be this bad." So true, Hosmer wasn't a solution to "we got nothing" but nobody else has been yet either.

At this point I think we have to teach somebody else how to play 1B too. Not on an everyday basis necessarily, on a 20 starts a year basis maybe. For the rest of this season it should be a Happ, Bellinger, Suzuki, Morel, Velazquez, Wisdom, Mancini, Mervis and maybe Madrigal and Mastro rotation among 6 slots. (I ran out of roster spots along the way there, so sue me.) Maybe 1B is unsolvable right now but, with this many bats around, there's no reason we should be 14th at DH.

If you want the big meta-point, it's that no, there are not an untold supply of non-crappy, freely available 1B/DH types. That's why Mitch Moreland and Mark Reynolds and, now, Carlos Santana keep getting jobs. The embarrassing bit for the Cubs wasn't so much signing Hosmer as it was that it actually made sense to sign Hosmer because he was better than anybody in the org at the time.

So indeed, last year the average 1B OPS+ was 110 ... but of course half the teams will be below average and average 1B tend to cost decent money if you don't have a young one. The 2023 Cubs were very likely to have a below-average 1B. Last year, 8 teams got a sub-100 OPS+ out of 1B. Heck, 6 teams were below 90. These weren't nobody teams necessarily -- SFG, Bos, Pit, Cubs, LAA and Hou (won the WS!) How bad is that? Well, in 2021 and 2022, even Eric Hosmer put up OPS+ of 104 and 107. That sort of production and, if you can find a platoon partner, you might even be top 20 in the league!

I believe all of those teams went out and got new 1B. How are they doing this year?

Bos -- Casas 83 OPS+
SFG -- that's the Flores/Wade wunder-platoon
Hou -- Abreu 48 OPS+
Pitt -- Santana 95 OPS+
LAA -- Urshela 85 OPS+
Cubs -- Hosmer 68, Mancini 89

Apparently not that easy to find. And my offseason suggestions of Bell, Myers, Voit have all stunk too. So far this year, although overall 1B OPS+ is up a bit to 113, 12 teams are below 100, 7 of those below 90. The Cubs are actually OK at 98 because Mancini has crushed it while playing 1B (926 OPS) and stunk badly at DH and RF (370 OPS).

We (the internet saber nerd community) like to say things like "just put Mervis out there and see what he can do." And sometimes why not? And sometimes that works. And sometimes you get Spencer Torkelson (79 career OPS+, -1.4 WAR in 579 career PA). It is only sensible to have some sort of backup plan to Spencer Torkelson.

Duke's not wrong here really. I mean what he suggests isn't reliable enough to be considered a "plan" per se but I'm certainly happy (in 20/20 hindsight) that the Cubs spent $17.5 M on Bellinger and nothing on Hosmer than $10 M on who knows for CF and $7.5 M for Wil Myers. Or maybe that money went to Smyly ($8) ... or maybe it went to Fulmer, Barnhart and Boxberger which ain't working out so great. You start every offseason with a bunch of holes and, even if you have enough money to fill them, you won't outbid enough teams to do so. So you're gonna be replacement level at some of those spots and 1 WAR at some others and maybe 2 WAR at 1 or 2 of them. You gotta pick. In Hosmer, the Cubs got a 0-1 WAR player for a 0 WAR price, "allowing" them to spend 1 WAR money somewhere else. Nothing wrong with that even though we all expected this ending.

The Cubs had Wisdom and they had Morel who they said they didn't know where his PA were going to come from. Sure you can say Wisdom wasn't great defensively out there last year but as far as plans go you've got all of the off-season and ST to work on it.

As for Duke's "he's a cheap answer that allows you to focus elsewhere", again that only works when the lottery ticket hits and it generally doesn't. That may be acceptable to the Miami Marlins or Pirates but the Cubs shouldn't have to use a strategy of signing a minimum wage first baseman/DH to do things elsewhere.

I'm fine with bringing in Hosmer at league minimum during the off-season as a possible option. I'm against the idea that Hosmer is THE option, which is what Duke is suggesting

Casas' 83 OPS+ (.680 OPS) is over the whole season. He got off to a miserable start. His OPS for the past 30 days is .770, and over the past 14 days is .989. Just saying.

That kind of implies that besides the last 14 days he's been terrible. So let's see.

Thr first 16 days of the last 30 days he put up a .625 OPS. His last 7 days he's done.544. So really he had a good week over a week ago. Yep, 14 PA and a 1.662 OPS over 5 games the week prior.

Numbers don't lie, but interpretation will vary. Like, his 118 OPS+ over the past 28 days looks good, to me. His .797 OPS over that time looks good, to me. He's streaky, is what I gather from your dissection. I'd leave him in there. (He's the reason they let Hosmer go, and so, I think you can't be regretful about that.)

I wouldn't call that streaky. I'd call that really terrible except for 14 PA

And I'd respond to both of you talking about Casas with Voros' Law. There's no such thing as a meaningful 73 PAs (Voros actually chose the number 60). For that matter, there's no such thing as a meaningful 144 PAs.

All I can say with confidence is that he's likely to show good plate discipline. That you can hope for midrange power and that he's likely be useful if he can keep the midrange power and plate discipline and manage a .240 BA. And that I'd bet against all 3 parts happening. He's young. There are no obvious alternatives and in the Red Sox shoes I'd be delighted if he showed me wrong.

Voros' Law has nothing to do with describing what happened. Casas has been terrible this year with the bat.

#33 My specific point is that you shouldn't confuse results in part of a season with ability. To put this in perspective, Jose Altuve is having a below replacement level season -- in the same general range as Casas. It tells us nothing meaningful about Altuve's ability level. And Casas' results tell us nothing about his ability level.

Sure and my specific point was that Casas has been terrible despite having a very good 14 PA stretch happen in the last 30 days.

#35 And that's fair. You shouldn't try to exclude those 14 PAs because they don't align with your overall point. It's no more valid than excluding his April 10-14 (0-14 with 2 walks) because he's obviously not that bad.

Bad hitters can have good stretches. Count everything possible.

I didn't try to exclude them from my point. My point was his 83 OPS+ is reflective of his terrible performance so far and that it isn't because of a bad start.

not sure about the lower replacement level, but given a choice when building a team before the season and dealing with certainty thresholds, I have two guys, one who is a 0 waa player, but who's history has indicated they will play at a minimum of 150 games, and compared to a slightly better .1 waa player, who's history indicates I can count on them to show up for 120-130 games, I'm going to take the guy who gives me more games. (note numbers are theoretical, I don't know where the real threshold would be)

Obviously, the bigger issue is that this isn't even a workable question only as theoretical. Everyone knows that even if the average expected result is 0 WAA or 0.1 WAA that the error bars are way too big to make this kind of comparison all that useful.

But any team that doesn't think their coaching staff/player development system can find and develop anything better than sub-replacement should be overhauling their staff. Yes, many teams are going to end up fielding sub-replacement players, but they all should be thinking that they can do better than average. Unless you have something like a 95 win team otherwise built around this one last player, and you're a shoe-in for the playoffs, teams should be willing to take the risk.