Cubs offseason rumors/transactions

[beckdawg]

Bleachernation brought up an interesting name I haven't seen much talk about which is Danny Salazar. He's a name that's been brought up a year or two ago but sorta died down when cleveland became really good. An obvious question would be why would they deal him when they are a good team. Well the first reason is they are losing some hitting. Santana is going to be too expensive and they are also losing Bruce. Their current projected opening day budget is $126.5 mil. Last year they were at $124 mil and last year was the first time I believe ever they had a payroll over $100 mil. So, they seem like they are maxed out and wont really be active in FA. So, to add pieces trades are likely.

Salazar has 3 years of arbitration yet(will be his second pass thru and he's likely to get around $5.2 mil). When he's healthy he's been pretty intriguing. But he's only throw more than 150 innings once(2015) and only made 25 starts twice(2015 and 16). In terms of numbers, his ERA wasn't very pretty but the underlying numbers are positive. He has a career 10.51 k/9 and 3.22 bb/9. K/9 is basically ace level. Walk rate probably pushes him down a bit from "ace" level though but it's not horrible.

As for the offer, think Happ might make some sense. Kipnis is getting pretty pricey for Cleveland and he's 31. He has 2 years $13.67M/$14.67M with a third year $16.5/2.5M team option. They are set in CF with Zimmer and at DH with Edwin Encarnacion so Almora and Schwarber don't make much sense. And they have Jose Ramirez and Kipnes at 2B/3B and Lindor at SS so Baez doesn't make a ton of sense. Happ could play a corner OF for them though I think they are looking more for a RF with Brantley in LF. So, Happ may not be an amazing fit either for them but think it's an interesting idea at the very least. And while I personally would rather deal Baez I think Salazar for Happ wouldn't be a terrible trade.

 

[CSF77]

Bleachernation brought up an interesting name I haven't seen much talk about which is Danny Salazar. He's a name that's been brought up a year or two ago but sorta died down when cleveland became really good. An obvious question would be why would they deal him when they are a good team. Well the first reason is they are losing some hitting. Santana is going to be too expensive and they are also losing Bruce. Their current projected opening day budget is $126.5 mil. Last year they were at $124 mil and last year was the first time I believe ever they had a payroll over $100 mil. So, they seem like they are maxed out and wont really be active in FA. So, to add pieces trades are likely.

Salazar has 3 years of arbitration yet(will be his second pass thru and he's likely to get around $5.2 mil). When he's healthy he's been pretty intriguing. But he's only throw more than 150 innings once(2015) and only made 25 starts twice(2015 and 16). In terms of numbers, his ERA wasn't very pretty but the underlying numbers are positive. He has a career 10.51 k/9 and 3.22 bb/9. K/9 is basically ace level. Walk rate probably pushes him down a bit from "ace" level though but it's not horrible.

As for the offer, think Happ might make some sense. Kipnis is getting pretty pricey for Cleveland and he's 31. He has 2 years $13.67M/$14.67M with a third year $16.5/2.5M team option. They are set in CF with Zimmer and at DH with Edwin Encarnacion so Almora and Schwarber don't make much sense. And they have Jose Ramirez and Kipnes at 2B/3B and Lindor at SS so Baez doesn't make a ton of sense. Happ could play a corner OF for them though I think they are looking more for a RF with Brantley in LF. So, Happ may not be an amazing fit either for them but think it's an interesting idea at the very least. And while I personally would rather deal Baez I think Salazar for Happ wouldn't be a terrible trade.

It would be doable. My main issue with losing Baez is he is a SS that can play 3B and 2B better. Happ is okish anywhere you put him but you really can’t call him anything but slash.

I’m honestly down with a 1 for 1 or 1 plus a arm like Clifton or Underwood for a SP. but when we start talking about Swiss cheezed team for a SP them I’m out.

Now I don’t believe that they will not trade from depth. If you look at it Happ is expendable. He worked out when injury hit Zo and Russell but even then his role could have been filled by LaStella.

If they traded Happ and promoted Young to play with LaStella and Baez on the bench they would be fine. Zo can still move into the corner OF like he did before.

 

[anotheridiot]

It would be doable. My main issue with losing Baez is he is a SS that can play 3B and 2B better. Happ is okish anywhere you put him but you really can’t call him anything but slash.

I’m honestly down with a 1 for 1 or 1 plus a arm like Clifton or Underwood for a SP. but when we start talking about Swiss cheezed team for a SP them I’m out.

Now I don’t believe that they will not trade from depth. If you look at it Happ is expendable. He worked out when injury hit Zo and Russell but even then his role could have been filled by LaStella.

If they traded Happ and promoted Young to play with LaStella and Baez on the bench they would be fine. Zo can still move into the corner OF like he did before.

Stella as a fielder is below average at 2b and way below average at 3b. This is all he is, a bat off the bench, maybe 3 starts a month.

 

[CSF77]

Stella as a fielder is below average at 2b and way below average at 3b. This is all he is, a bat off the bench, maybe 3 starts a month.

Depth. That is it. Happ has more value as a trade chip.

The top 2 chips both play SS

 

[brett05]

And while I personally would rather deal Baez I think Salazar for Happ wouldn't be a terrible trade.

Too much of a risk for CLeveland, especially with Salazar's performance if he can stay healthy. Just not enough from the Cubs

 

[beckdawg]

Too much of a risk for CLeveland, especially with Salazar's performance if he can stay healthy. Just not enough from the Cubs

Not sure how that's more risk for Cleveland than Chicago. You said it yourself "if Salazar can stay healthy." He hasn't. His best season he was worth 3.1 fWAR over 30 starts(185 innings). Last year he was at 2.2 over 19 starts/103 innings. 2016 he was 2.5 over 25 starts/137.1 innings. Happ as a rookie in 115 games was worth 1.8 fWAR. On a 650 PA pace he would have been worth 2.8 wins. He had more years of control(6 vs 3) and one would assume at the very least he'll get better in year 2.

Now if you're saying it should be Happ + some minor pieces for Salazar ok. I mean as I've said before when i talk about trades I generally only discuss the meat of the deal unless I explicitly say so. For example, if it were Happ + Hatch for Salazar I wouldn't really say that's changing the deal much. Hatch has mid rotation upside but he's not a deal breaker.

On the contrary if you're saying it will take another big piece you're nuts man. Happ last year was basically as valuable as Salazar has ever been(on a per PA basis) and given him adjusting to the majors you'd expect him to get better. Salazar has a career 3.82/3.56 ERA/FIP over 104 starts/587.1 innings. I like the guy but let's not get crazy. That's #3 starter numbers. I think there's more potential there if he stays healthy/gets with the right coaching but potential is just that until it's applied.

 

[brett05]

Not sure how that's more risk for Cleveland than Chicago. You said it yourself "if Salazar can stay healthy." He hasn't. His best season he was worth 3.1 fWAR over 30 starts(185 innings). Last year he was at 2.2 over 19 starts/103 innings. 2016 he was 2.5 over 25 starts/137.1 innings. Happ as a rookie in 115 games was worth 1.8 fWAR. On a 650 PA pace he would have been worth 2.8 wins. He had more years of control(6 vs 3) and one would assume at the very least he'll get better in year 2.

Now if you're saying it should be Happ + some minor pieces for Salazar ok. I mean as I've said before when i talk about trades I generally only discuss the meat of the deal unless I explicitly say so. For example, if it were Happ + Hatch for Salazar I wouldn't really say that's changing the deal much. Hatch has mid rotation upside but he's not a deal breaker.

On the contrary if you're saying it will take another big piece you're nuts man. Happ last year was basically as valuable as Salazar has ever been(on a per PA basis) and given him adjusting to the majors you'd expect him to get better. Salazar has a career 3.82/3.56 ERA/FIP over 104 starts/587.1 innings. I like the guy but let's not get crazy. That's #3 starter numbers. I think there's more potential there if he stays healthy/gets with the right coaching but potential is just that until it's applied.

I think Happ could get better. Most think he over played himself last year. It's just too early to inflate his value IMO

 

[beckdawg]

I think Happ could get better. Most think he over played himself last year. It's just too early to inflate his value IMO

Saw an interesting report on Happ yesterday. Statcast has a "barreled" metric they use to essentially determine who's making the best contact. Happ’s barrel rate matched those of Freddie Freeman, Paul Goldschmidt and Mike Trout. I say this not to suggest he's Mike Trout but rather to indicate while the scouting prior to his call up suggested he had only average power that because of the contact he makes he likely to out perform that. For instance, I'm not entirely sure i'm comfortable saying he's a 30 HR hitter but 25 seems perfectly reasonable. The scouting on his hit tool I believe was a 55 which would indicate the thought of .280ish hitter. He hit .253/.328/.514 last year. Presumably if his k rate comes down .280 also seems quite reasonable and would put him roughly in the .280/.360 range for BA/OBP.

In 2017 there were 41 hitters who hit over .360 OBP. Of those only 22 hit 25 or more HR. He's never going to be an amazing defender but the fact he can play 3 positions also helps. As I've said before, I'd personally deal Baez before him because I think that highly of his bat.

Regardless, if there's any inflating here I feel its on Salazar. Like I said I think he's a very interesting pitcher and can see why people would inflate his value. But he's not Q and Q while consistently very good was not a cy young type pitcher. He's more the Lester consistently durable and very good rather than the ridiculously great Sale/Kershaw type. Obviously we've seen what sale was worth in trade and what Q was worth. Salazar is clearly worth less than both. Happ before getting called up was a top 25 prospect and while that's not quite top 10 like Eloy it's not far off. And obviously given he performed well in the majors that should have only increased his value as a guy you know can hit MLB pitching is always going to be more valuable than a prospect. Cease was in the 70's if memory serves of the top 100.

So, like I said, I think Happ is a fair starting point for the "meat" of the deal. Maybe Cleveland would want a pitcher back which is why I mentioned Hatch. Hatch isn't Cease but Salazar isn't Q. But to give up any more than that would be stupid. Salazar just hasn't proven he's worth that Q level of trade.

 

[brett05]

Saw an interesting report on Happ yesterday. Statcast has a "barreled" metric they use to essentially determine who's making the best contact. Happ’s barrel rate matched those of Freddie Freeman, Paul Goldschmidt and Mike Trout. I say this not to suggest he's Mike Trout but rather to indicate while the scouting prior to his call up suggested he had only average power that because of the contact he makes he likely to out perform that. For instance, I'm not entirely sure i'm comfortable saying he's a 30 HR hitter but 25 seems perfectly reasonable. The scouting on his hit tool I believe was a 55 which would indicate the thought of .280ish hitter. He hit .253/.328/.514 last year. Presumably if his k rate comes down .280 also seems quite reasonable and would put him roughly in the .280/.360 range for BA/OBP.

In 2017 there were 41 hitters who hit over .360 OBP. Of those only 22 hit 25 or more HR. He's never going to be an amazing defender but the fact he can play 3 positions also helps. As I've said before, I'd personally deal Baez before him because I think that highly of his bat.

Regardless, if there's any inflating here I feel its on Salazar. Like I said I think he's a very interesting pitcher and can see why people would inflate his value. But he's not Q and Q while consistently very good was not a cy young type pitcher. He's more the Lester consistently durable and very good rather than the ridiculously great Sale/Kershaw type. Obviously we've seen what sale was worth in trade and what Q was worth. Salazar is clearly worth less than both. Happ before getting called up was a top 25 prospect and while that's not quite top 10 like Eloy it's not far off. And obviously given he performed well in the majors that should have only increased his value as a guy you know can hit MLB pitching is always going to be more valuable than a prospect. Cease was in the 70's if memory serves of the top 100.

So, like I said, I think Happ is a fair starting point for the "meat" of the deal. Maybe Cleveland would want a pitcher back which is why I mentioned Hatch. Hatch isn't Cease but Salazar isn't Q. But to give up any more than that would be stupid. Salazar just hasn't proven he's worth that Q level of trade.

Agreed, he's not Q, but as you said Happ is not Eloy and there is a vast difference today in the value of those two.

 

[beckdawg]

Agreed, he's not Q, but as you said Happ is not Eloy and there is a vast difference today in the value of those two.

You're acting as though one is an MVP and the other is a league average player. I think the gap between the two is far closer. Happ could easily be a routine all-star and Eloy may only be a Edwin Encarnacion type. Even if you want to suggest Eloy's value is closer to Cody Bellinger which would be fantastic, he was only worth 4 wins last year. In other words you're likely talking about a 3-3.5 win player vs a 4-4.5 win player unless eloy literally reaches his ceiling in which case all bets are off. The difference here is you're talking about 3.5 years of Q who's been worth basically 4 wins on average vs 3 years of Salazar who's been worth 2.18 over his 5 year career. And Q was one of the most durable starters in the majors while Salazar hasn't reached 200 innings once.

So there's a vast difference between Q and Salazar too and the value you would get reflects that. And let's not forget here he didn't pitch a full season last year and he had 4.28 ERA when he did pitch. You wouldn't be selling high on him which maybe Cleveland wouldn't sell at all because of that. But my point here is there's simply no way any team would give up something more valuable than Happ for him as the main piece. It just wouldn't happen. As mentioned Happ was a top 25(believe top 20 prospect). You're not going to get a top 10 prospect for a guy with a career 3.82 ERA and that's essentially what you're arguing for if you say someone more valuable than Happ is what it would take.

 

[brett05]

You're acting as though one is an MVP and the other is a league average player. I think the gap between the two is far closer. Happ could easily be a routine all-star and Eloy may only be a Edwin Encarnacion type. Even if you want to suggest Eloy's value is closer to Cody Bellinger which would be fantastic, he was only worth 4 wins last year. In other words you're likely talking about a 3-3.5 win player vs a 4-4.5 win player unless eloy literally reaches his ceiling in which case all bets are off. The difference here is you're talking about 3.5 years of Q who's been worth basically 4 wins on average vs 3 years of Salazar who's been worth 2.18 over his 5 year career. And Q was one of the most durable starters in the majors while Salazar hasn't reached 200 innings once.

So there's a vast difference between Q and Salazar too and the value you would get reflects that. And let's not forget here he didn't pitch a full season last year and he had 4.28 ERA when he did pitch. You wouldn't be selling high on him which maybe Cleveland wouldn't sell at all because of that. But my point here is there's simply no way any team would give up something more valuable than Happ for him as the main piece. It just wouldn't happen. As mentioned Happ was a top 25(believe top 20 prospect). You're not going to get a top 10 prospect for a guy with a career 3.82 ERA and that's essentially what you're arguing for if you say someone more valuable than Happ is what it would take.

You are also discounting how much more valuable pitchers are than hitters as I have been saying for several years now and transactions seem to be indicating just that.

Don't forget not all rated prospects are the same (AKA #1 this year is not the same as #1 three years ago).

 

[beckdawg]

You are also discounting how much more valuable pitchers are than hitters as I have been saying for several years now and transactions seem to be indicating just that.

Don't forget not all rated prospects are the same (AKA #1 this year is not the same as #1 three years ago).

Eloy and Happ were rated that in the same year. Not sure what you're talking about there. As for discounting hitting vs pitching, you said yourself that Salazar wasn't worth as much as Q. I literally have 0 idea what you're talking about because you're just throwing out vague terms such as "he's worth more than that." Then what exactly is he worth? Because the problem with your argument is it's literally impossible to have the conversation because you never offer any specifics.

For example, If Salazar isn't worth Jimenez as you've already agreed, there were maybe 10 players between him and Happ to start the season on prospect rankings. Think Eloy started the season at #9 and Happ started at #20. I'm certainly willing to agree there's a point some where around the top 10 prospects depending year to year on players where guys go from being all-star caliber(ie happ) to franchise caliber(ie probably Eloy). The problem with what you're saying is there's literally no middle ground between them. You're either an all-star type or a franchise caliber player which you have already said Salazar isn't worth. So, if Happ isn't "enough" then how the hell do you add more?

The only way what you're even suggesting might make sense is to fiddle with the secondary portion of the trade. The problem is that most had Happ at like a 60 grade if I remember correctly and Cease was a 55 grade or thereabout depending on how the site ranks. You're not going to give up essentially 2 top 50 players for Salazar which is the only way you could offer Happ and someone better than Cease. If he had a mid 3 ERA and was consistently healthy then sure maybe I could see the argument for giving up that. But he's closer to a 4 ERA(was over 4 last year) and has consistently got hurt.

As yet another example, I'd argue his performance ~2 wins per year is also worse than Gray(2.4 win average over 5 years). Like Salazar Gray has had a couple injuries though he's at least hit 200 innings twice. He was dealt with 3.5 years of control for Dustin Fowler(#66 prospect on mlb.com right now), Jorge Mateo(#97) and James Kaprielian 50 grade prospect who's Oakland's #10 prospect. Besides that fact Gray is probably better than Salazar, Fowler had a significant injury that cost him the rest of 2017 and Kaprielian blew out his arm and didn't pitch in 2017 so both contain substantial risk. I think you'd find most would suggest the #97 and #66 prospect are rarely worth a top 25 prospect in trade especially when neither has proven they can hit MLB pitching.

Either way, I've given you multiple examples of better pitchers being worth roughly equivalent values to Happ.

 

[brett05]

The issue is that #1 and #11 isn't the same year to year. It's the story of "The one eyed man."

That said, Your recent example of Gray seems to be pretty solid. Now it is Oakland so that is a MAJOR factor for me in them getting raked, but It has swayed me some to this being more fair than I have up to now given credit.

 

[beckdawg]

The issue is that #1 and #11 isn't the same year to year. It's the story of "The one eyed man."

That said, Your recent example of Gray seems to be pretty solid. Now it is Oakland so that is a MAJOR factor for me in them getting raked, but It has swayed me some to this being more fair than I have up to now given credit.

Not sure I agree Oakland got raked. See where we differ here is you basically think every pitcher is way more valuable than most hitters. To me there's tiers. I believe there's 10-15 guys at any given time that are so valuable as pitchers they are almost untradable. Your Sale's are in this group. And I think if you want to argue teams can name their price for them that is fair because outside rare cases these guys don't become FA's and developing your own is basically impossible. You have to essentially get lucky to have a top 3 pick in the right year of a draft or find some guy no one else saw coming.

In the second tier I think Q and Lester are good examples. I don't think they belong in a grouping with Scherzer/Kershaw/Sale. But clearly Q and Lester are fantastic pitchers that could be #1 starters on some teams(maybe not so much at Lester's age but you know what i mean). In this group, I think these are guys that can essentially be traded and will cost a fair bit but are reasonable. For example, I think Jimenez and Cease for Q was very reasonable especially when you consider you get 3.5 years of him. I wouldn't say the sox did bad but pitchers in this tier are never going to get you something nuts like 2 top 25 prospects. You're generally talking 1 top 25 guy and one guy in the back half of the top 100. Depending where each guy is the other guy may raise or fall but that's generally the rule of thumb.

In the third tier I think you have questions. I'd put Salazar here. He's interesting enough that you can maybe argue for him in the second tier if healthy and if things go right but hasn't consistently shown the ability to be on that level. Gray is a bit harder for me to classify. I'd probably put him in the back half of tier 2. That sort of makes sense given they got two top 100 prospects and a guy who if healthy would be close. I think Beane basically traded a gamble of talent over health because had both Fowler and Kaprielian been healthy you're probably talking 3 top 100 types. In terms of value for tier 3 guys it's harder to quantify because it's kind of dependent on their particular situation. But I think i'd put Drew Pomeranz here and he was traded for Espinoza who was like top 30 but that was literally all they got and he was an A ball guy. Think you could argue that when the cubs traded Cashner he might be in this tier and they got Rizzo. So think if you were to say a top 50 guy for anyone in this tier it's probably a decent start but obviously it depends on the MLB guy and the top 50 guy. If he's someone like Happ at the majors I think that makes him more valuable than Espinoza who was in A ball.

But generally speaking that's how trades seem to go.

 

[DanTown]

Happ is the only bat in the AA+ level of the organization that may translate to being a leadoff hitter and he fits a perfect platoon of CF (Almora) and LF (Schwarber).

 

[brett05]

Not sure I agree Oakland got raked. See where we differ here is you basically think every pitcher is way more valuable than most hitters. To me there's tiers. I believe there's 10-15 guys at any given time that are so valuable as pitchers they are almost untradable. Your Sale's are in this group. And I think if you want to argue teams can name their price for them that is fair because outside rare cases these guys don't become FA's and developing your own is basically impossible. You have to essentially get lucky to have a top 3 pick in the right year of a draft or find some guy no one else saw coming.

In the second tier I think Q and Lester are good examples. I don't think they belong in a grouping with Scherzer/Kershaw/Sale. But clearly Q and Lester are fantastic pitchers that could be #1 starters on some teams(maybe not so much at Lester's age but you know what i mean). In this group, I think these are guys that can essentially be traded and will cost a fair bit but are reasonable. For example, I think Jimenez and Cease for Q was very reasonable especially when you consider you get 3.5 years of him. I wouldn't say the sox did bad but pitchers in this tier are never going to get you something nuts like 2 top 25 prospects. You're generally talking 1 top 25 guy and one guy in the back half of the top 100. Depending where each guy is the other guy may raise or fall but that's generally the rule of thumb.

In the third tier I think you have questions. I'd put Salazar here. He's interesting enough that you can maybe argue for him in the second tier if healthy and if things go right but hasn't consistently shown the ability to be on that level. Gray is a bit harder for me to classify. I'd probably put him in the back half of tier 2. That sort of makes sense given they got two top 100 prospects and a guy who if healthy would be close. I think Beane basically traded a gamble of talent over health because had both Fowler and Kaprielian been healthy you're probably talking 3 top 100 types. In terms of value for tier 3 guys it's harder to quantify because it's kind of dependent on their particular situation. But I think i'd put Drew Pomeranz here and he was traded for Espinoza who was like top 30 but that was literally all they got and he was an A ball guy. Think you could argue that when the cubs traded Cashner he might be in this tier and they got Rizzo. So think if you were to say a top 50 guy for anyone in this tier it's probably a decent start but obviously it depends on the MLB guy and the top 50 guy. If he's someone like Happ at the majors I think that makes him more valuable than Espinoza who was in A ball.

But generally speaking that's how trades seem to go.

minus your hyperbole, I basically agree

 

[chibears55]

Cubs just signed their first new reliever..

Dario Alverez
Lefty from the Rangers

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[CSF77]

His BB/9 went up to 7.7 last year. But he has a strong SO/9 going on. Pretty much a slider pitcher. 61% usage. Can get up to 94 MPH. Sounds like a location issue going on and no one was fooled.

 

[beckdawg]

Cubs just signed their first new reliever..

Dario Alverez
Lefty from the Rangers

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Interesting guy. Big time k rate. Control has been an issue for him. Looks like he has 2 pitches(FB/SL). Fastball is 92-94. Slider appears to be decently nasty. I *think* he's probably more of a loogy than a multiple out guy.

 

[chibears55]

Interesting guy. Big time k rate. Control has been an issue for him. Looks like he has 2 pitches(FB/SL). Fastball is 92-94. Slider appears to be decently nasty. I *think* he's probably more of a loogy than a multiple out guy.

Possible they could look to spend low money on a couple of borderline relievers in order to spend little more on closer etc..

Hearing Rondon and Grimm may not return to save on what theyd earn in ARB..

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk