There are still elite free agent options available
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/73824277/2162117212.0.jpg)
That’s right, 2025 is here. It’s less than 40 days until pitchers and catchers will begin to report to Spring Training. Before you know it we’ll be chatting about whether Matt Shaw is as fierce an option at third base as he appeared during the Premier 12 Tournament, or whether Matthew Boyd can actually stick in the Cubs rotation. But for now, we’re still deep in the heart of hot stove season and there are still a number of intriguing players available.
Before we get into the specific players the Chicago Cubs should be considering to round out their roster, however, let’s dive into some tunes.
Meanwhile, with Cubs Convention slated to kick off in 15 days there’s a lot to look forward to on the Northside of Chicago. The Cubs are still alive in the Roki Sasaki sweepstakes, they pulled off one of the biggest moves in the offseason trading for an elite corner outfielder in Kyle Tucker and the Cubs have announced that Sammy Sosa will finally be welcomed back in the Cubs fold at this year’s convention.
But there are still some holes in the roster, and approximately three or four (depending on how you look at it) too many utility infielder types on the 40-man. I’ve made the case a time or two (or twenty) that an elite reliever to back up current presumed closer Porter Hodge could go a long way towards fortifying the Cubs hopes of winning the NL Central in 2025. After all, the team blew 26 saves last season en route to another 83-win campaign that saw them on the outside of the playoffs yet again. One or two more reliable arms in Craig Counsell’s bullpen was one of the big differences between the Cubs playing meaningful baseball in October and not.
As luck would have it, there are three free agents who cost nothing more than money, out there who all fit this bill. None of them have a qualifying offer attached to them, and all of them have high leverage experience including at least part of one season in the playoffs.
To take a closer look at Tanner Scott, Jeff Hoffman and Carlos Estévez I pulled their standard dashboard stats from FanGraphs. In order to compensate for the small sample size that is the life of relief pitcher I pulled numbers from 2022-2024. You can see that table below:
2022-24 Scott, Hoffman & Estévez
| Name | Season | Team | W | L | SV | G | GS | IP | K/9 | BB/9 | HR/9 | BABIP | LOB% | GB% | HR/FB | ERA | FIP | xFIP | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tanner Scott | 2023 | MIA | 9 | 5 | 12 | 74 | 0 | 78.0 | 12.00 | 2.77 | 0.35 | .291 | 76.8% | 50.9% | 0.06 | 2.31 | 2.17 | 2.66 | 2.8 |
| Jeff Hoffman | 2024 | PHI | 3 | 3 | 10 | 68 | 0 | 66.1 | 12.08 | 2.17 | 0.81 | .278 | 80.2% | 37.6% | 0.09 | 2.17 | 2.52 | 2.80 | 2.0 |
| Tanner Scott | 2024 | - - - | 9 | 6 | 22 | 72 | 0 | 72.0 | 10.50 | 4.50 | 0.38 | .247 | 79.7% | 50.0% | 0.06 | 1.75 | 2.92 | 3.38 | 1.6 |
| Jeff Hoffman | 2023 | PHI | 5 | 2 | 1 | 54 | 0 | 52.1 | 11.87 | 3.27 | 0.52 | .226 | 74.2% | 42.6% | 0.07 | 2.41 | 2.57 | 3.24 | 1.5 |
| Carlos Estévez | 2024 | - - - | 4 | 5 | 26 | 54 | 0 | 55.0 | 8.18 | 1.96 | 0.82 | .229 | 75.0% | 32.9% | 0.07 | 2.45 | 3.24 | 4.09 | 1.2 |
| Carlos Estévez | 2023 | LAA | 5 | 5 | 31 | 63 | 0 | 62.1 | 11.26 | 4.48 | 1.01 | .344 | 72.6% | 30.7% | 0.09 | 3.90 | 3.94 | 4.55 | 0.9 |
| Tanner Scott | 2022 | MIA | 4 | 5 | 20 | 67 | 0 | 62.2 | 12.93 | 6.61 | 0.72 | .347 | 72.4% | 46.3% | 0.13 | 4.31 | 3.67 | 3.53 | 0.5 |
| Carlos Estévez | 2022 | COL | 4 | 4 | 2 | 62 | 0 | 57.0 | 8.53 | 3.63 | 1.11 | .247 | 70.4% | 36.1% | 0.10 | 3.47 | 4.08 | 4.27 | 0.3 |
| Jeff Hoffman | 2022 | CIN | 2 | 0 | 0 | 35 | 1 | 44.2 | 9.07 | 4.63 | 1.01 | .289 | 74.6% | 28.6% | 0.07 | 3.83 | 4.30 | 5.06 | 0.2 |
A couple of notes. First, Estévez gets unfairly dinged here by being a member of the Colorado Rockies prior to his time with the Los Angeles Angels. I know what I said about small samples above, and honestly, I think it’s more fair to look at the smaller sample of Estévez’s work in Anaheim and Philadelphia than holding him to the beast that is Coors Field for pitchers. He’s still a titch below the other two, by most advanced metrics, but he also has more actual closer experience in that time, with more than 50 saves in the last two seasons.
Second, as I was writing this MLB Trade Rumors reported that Jeff Hoffman is rumored to want a deal similar to what Clay Holmes got from the Mets. That’s notable both because Holmes received a 3-year $38 million contract from the Mets, but also because the Mets want to use Holmes as a starter. It’s an interesting idea, and one a handful of pitchers have been quite successful at over the last couple of years including Michael King and Reynaldo López. Hoffman features a four-pitch mix that could work for starting if he were stretched out.
Speaking of MLB Trade Rumors, below are their contract estimates for the three relievers I identified above:
- Tanner Scott MLB Trade Rumors estimate 4-years $56 million
- Jeff Hoffman MLB Trade Rumors estimate 4-years $44 million
- Carlos Estévez MLB Trade Rumors estimate 3-years $27 million
So, night owls and early risers, I put it to you: Should the Cubs sign one of the top remaining relievers and if so, which one?
