Cubs offseason rumors/transactions

[chibears55]

Just want to make clear of my stance with the relievers...

We ended the year saying they needed to fix and upgrade the bullpen...

To this point they released Rondon, Davis ( their best reliever 2017) unsigned and Duensing unsigned..

They replaced Duensing with Alvarez

They replaced Rondon with Morrow


But now they need to either resign Davis or replace him with another capable closer..

Otherwise they havent really upgraded or fixed the pen if Morrow is closer, or use committee of guys to close, if their staying pat with everyone and just pretty much just replaced Davis with Morrow ..


Plus you have to factor in the stress 33 YO Morrow was put in during the post season and pitching all 7 games in WS.. look what overuse did to Chapman , just something to consider..

Id feel better with them adding a closer and being able to ease Morrow in here and there early in season so he fresh in 2nd half and post season..

So , that why i think their not done with the bullpen and are still looking to add a closer..






Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[chibears55]

So apparently...



and



If the yankees were willing to eat $34 mil AND give up some top prospects to facilitate an Ellsbury trade and presumably if he were in talks to come to the cubs he'd waive the NTC because familiar front office and winning team, I think that could be an interesting way to add some depth behind Almora. If we assume you're going to just buy out his Age 37 season for $5 mil, and you evenly distribute the $34 mil across the 3 remaining years he'd cost around $11.5 mil for the next 3 years. Obviously that's higher than you'd like to pay a back up outfielder but they paid Jay $8 mil last year. He hit .264/.348/.402 and the year prior hit .263/.330/.374. Given his age he's no longer great defensively in CF but probably still good enough to player there in a short side of a platoon and he does hit RHP well .287/.346/.434(109 wRC+) on his career and .274/.367/.429(113 wRC+) last year.

Now I'm not entirely saying the cubs should make this trade. To me I think it would depend on who the Yankees are offering prospect wise. But if they were willing to give up 2 prospects in their 5-15 range I think its an idea worth considering.

I dont think Theo would do this...

Why take on money to help Yankees clear money IF Harper both their goal next off season...

Also i think he more likely to look at guys like Granderson on a 1 or 2 yr low cost deal to hold down CF with Almora.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[beckdawg]

I dont think Theo would do this...

Why take on money to help Yankees clear money IF Harper both their goal next off season...

Also i think he more likely to look at guys like Granderson on a 1 or 2 yr low cost deal to hold down CF with Almora.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

I don't see how Harper is in the Yankees goals. As for Granderson... He's not a CF anymore. He was -6 DRS in 473 innings last year. Thats really really bad. His UZR/150 was -8.5. For reference DRS is a counting stat so the more you play the more likely you are to accrue +/-. To put -9 DRS in context, Schwarber last year was -9 in LF over 821 innings. UZR/150 really liked Schwarber though(7.5).

Like I said before, there's reason you would do the deal and reason you wouldn't re Ellsbury. I think the biggest reason not to has little to do with money and more to do with playing time. He'd in essence be another Zobrist as a guy you want to finding playing time but may struggle to. In order for the move to actually happen I think you'd have to probably move one of the Happ/Baez/Schwarber trio and Theo makes it sound like they have 0 interest in moving Schwarber.

ESPN.com had a theoretical trade of Duffy for Happ which was kind of interesting. Presumably there's other obtainable players out there but my initial thought when I read the idea of prospects + Ellsbury for salary relief was you'd take one of Happ/Baez and package them with current cubs prospects and/or some of the guys you acquire by getting Ellsbury and deal them for a starter. Tampa supposedly wants more than the Garza trade for Archer. Happ/Baez would be an interesting start to a deal but the cubs lack that second tier of prospects behind them.

Alternatively you could do something like Ellsbury and Betances as a way of adding more reliever depth or like with the comment above use prospects from Ellsbury to target a reliever via trade.

 

[chibears55]

I don't see how Harper is in the Yankees goals. As for Granderson... He's not a CF anymore. He was -6 DRS in 473 innings last year. Thats really really bad. His UZR/150 was -8.5. For reference DRS is a counting stat so the more you play the more likely you are to accrue +/-. To put -9 DRS in context, Schwarber last year was -9 in LF over 821 innings. UZR/150 really liked Schwarber though(7.5).

Like I said before, there's reason you would do the deal and reason you wouldn't re Ellsbury. I think the biggest reason not to has little to do with money and more to do with playing time. He'd in essence be another Zobrist as a guy you want to finding playing time but may struggle to. In order for the move to actually happen I think you'd have to probably move one of the Happ/Baez/Schwarber trio and Theo makes it sound like they have 0 interest in moving Schwarber.

ESPN.com had a theoretical trade of Duffy for Happ which was kind of interesting. Presumably there's other obtainable players out there but my initial thought when I read the idea of prospects + Ellsbury for salary relief was you'd take one of Happ/Baez and package them with current cubs prospects and/or some of the guys you acquire by getting Ellsbury and deal them for a starter. Tampa supposedly wants more than the Garza trade for Archer. Happ/Baez would be an interesting start to a deal but the cubs lack that second tier of prospects behind them.

Alternatively you could do something like Ellsbury and Betances as a way of adding more reliever depth or like with the comment above use prospects from Ellsbury to target a reliever via trade.

Holy cow, i didn't realize Granderson was 37 already..lol

I mentioned Granderson cause i saw a mention of him to cubs in an article..


I wouldnt put it pass the Yankees to at least attempt on Harper...
Though im hoping adding Stanton may have knocked them out of it, less big money team bidding on him the less he'll cost.

We'll see next year

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[Omeletpants]

Discussion on a Duffy/Happ trade

http://www.bleachernation.com/2017/...de-which-makes-for-an-interesting-discussion/

 

[beckdawg]

I wouldnt put it pass the Yankees to at least attempt on Harper...

I just don't see how it would work logistically. Like I suppose one could DH but you have 3 RFers. None of the three can play center so that's out.

I don't know that Theo and company would go after Ellsbury but if we're just spitballing trade ideas here the more I look at the idea of Ellsbury + Betances for salary relief the more interesting the idea seems. Supposedly there's some issues between him and the yankee front office which is why he may be available. The reason that idea seems very interesting to me is Betances sort of makes Ellsbury cheaper. If Betances were a FA today he's likely going to get your Wade Davis money which is likely $15+ mil. His arbitration estimate next year is $4.4 and then you have him for 2019 for maybe $7-8 mil. So you're likely saving $15-20 mil for him vs a similar level reliever. If the Yankees were to eat $34 mil and make Ellsbury roughly a $11.5 mil player x3 with a $5 mil buy out I would argue he's probably a guy who would get 2-3 years at $6-8 mil. So he's roughly some where between $15.5-21.5 mil over priced.

And I think like with the Stanton issue the Yanks may have trouble finding a team Ellsbury wants to go to. So, the cubs might even be able to get more if they hold that kind of leverage as a team he is willing to go to.

 

[chibears55]

I just don't see how it would work logistically. Like I suppose one could DH but you have 3 RFers. None of the three can play center so that's out.

I don't know that Theo and company would go after Ellsbury but if we're just spitballing trade ideas here the more I look at the idea of Ellsbury + Betances for salary relief the more interesting the idea seems. Supposedly there's some issues between him and the yankee front office which is why he may be available. The reason that idea seems very interesting to me is Betances sort of makes Ellsbury cheaper. If Betances were a FA today he's likely going to get your Wade Davis money which is likely $15+ mil. His arbitration estimate next year is $4.4 and then you have him for 2019 for maybe $7-8 mil. So you're likely saving $15-20 mil for him vs a similar level reliever. If the Yankees were to eat $34 mil and make Ellsbury roughly a $11.5 mil player x3 with a $5 mil buy out I would argue he's probably a guy who would get 2-3 years at $6-8 mil. So he's roughly some where between $15.5-21.5 mil over priced.

And I think like with the Stanton issue the Yanks may have trouble finding a team Ellsbury wants to go to. So, the cubs might even be able to get more if they hold that kind of leverage as a team he is willing to go to.

I origionally didnt think the Yankees would go after Stanton because of the OF depth they have..

My only thinking on this IF they want to try for Harper would be to deal Gardner for pitching next off season...


Ill take Ellsbury and Betances..
Im all for improving the roster

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[Omeletpants]

How does Ellsbury help the Cubs and who sits while he plays

 

[DanTown]

Those players are going to become expensive at some point quickly. And more to the point, you're always going to have holes. If you can get 1-2 first round pick quality players for a player who fits a need and who is maybe $15 mil more expensive than you other wise would pay over 3 years why would you not consider that? It's ironic that you of all people are arguing against this when you pushed for them to trade for Dee Gordon who's even more expensive and plays a position thats completely covered already and who wouldn't come with useful players.

Because Gordon helps you win and provides something in terms of a leadoff guy against righties and has projectable future value considering his age that Ellsbury doesn't. Ellsbury is depth and the guys you're acquiring are depth and they're so far off from being potential players that it's meaningless to project their future value.

And guess what? You don't mind paying for expensive players if they're valuable and good.

 

[chibears55]

https://twitter.com/sahadevsharma/status/940374207015346176


Most people are thinking the future move is Harper [emoji6]

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[beckdawg]

Because Gordon helps you win and provides something in terms of a leadoff guy against righties and has projectable future value considering his age that Ellsbury doesn't. Ellsbury is depth and the guys you're acquiring are depth and they're so far off from being potential players that it's meaningless to project their future value.

And guess what? You don't mind paying for expensive players if they're valuable and good.

Gordon is a career .297/.333/.377 hitter vs RHP(wRC+ of 97). Ellsbury LAST YEAR hit .274/.367/.429 vs RHP(wRC+ of 113). How does he not help you vs RHP? You want to argue that Ellsbury at his age can't be a full time player that's fine and frankly prudent. But to sit here and say he provides no value to the cubs is absurd. Among cubs with 100 PAs vs RHP last year, only 4 cubs had an OBP of better than .360(Bryant, Rizzo, La Stella, and Jay). And unlike Gordon, Ellsbury can play CF which is primarily where you'd want your lead off hitter to come from on the cubs.

As for this senseless argument about depth, you always want depth. Depth is never a bad thing because those "meaningless" players become pieces in trades for things you do need.

 

[beckdawg]

http://www.bleachernation.com/2017/12/11/report-cubs-have-shown-interest-in-matt-harvey/

 

[DanTown]

Gordon is a career .297/.333/.377 hitter vs RHP(wRC+ of 97). Ellsbury LAST YEAR hit .274/.367/.429 vs RHP(wRC+ of 113). How does he not help you vs RHP? You want to argue that Ellsbury at his age can't be a full time player that's fine and frankly prudent. But to sit here and say he provides no value to the cubs is absurd. Among cubs with 100 PAs vs RHP last year, only 4 cubs had an OBP of better than .360(Bryant, Rizzo, La Stella, and Jay). And unlike Gordon, Ellsbury can play CF which is primarily where you'd want your lead off hitter to come from on the cubs.

As for this senseless argument about depth, you always want depth. Depth is never a bad thing because those "meaningless" players become pieces in trades for things you do need.

Ellsbury is 34, Gordon is 29. If I'm predicting who is more valuable for the next three years it's guy 29-31 and not guy 34-36.

And depth is valuable. But at 10M a year for three years, that's an awful lot of money on depth.

And I have no real problem with Ellsbury but I'd rather spin Heyward and pay Ellsbury than pay Ellsbury AND Heyward.

I've laid out the reason for Gordon and

 

[CSF77]

I’m taking what Theo said at face value:

A lead off is a luxury because we scored 800 runs last year.

Our primary concern is pitching.

Now I do like Eldsbury. And he is a legit fit as a lead off. But again this is a luxury and adding payroll that can be spent elsewhere.

So I will give my take:

If the Cubs did a Eds’s plus prospects for? I have no idea what they would have to toss. Then turned around and traded those prospects and Happ/Schwarber for Archer/Colome then it makes sense.

You would have Lester/Archer/Q/Hendricks/Chatwood
Colome/Morrow/Edwards/Strop/Wilson/Montgomery/Grimm or Maples

Elds
Bryant
Rizzo
Contreras
Zobrist
Russell
Heyward
Almora

Bench
Baez/Caritini/Young/LaStella

 

[CSF77]

But I believe that they will go after Cobb.

After that they will look into a trade for late inning stability. Edwards you can point to his 5.16 BB/9. No one was really hitting the guy 3.93. And his SO/9 were a whopping 12.75/9

If he would have attacked the plate more there would have been no controversy

So this is my take: to you Chi

Edwards needs to control the strike zone. He has elite stuff and numbers backing them. But he has to make the next step.

Morrow is a set up that is good enough to close.

So protection on Edwards

Maples has insane SO ability. Stuff wise not many come close. 98 mph/wipe out slider and a 12/6 hammer is insane for a BP arm.
There is a progression going on and the Cubs need to hone their talent right now.

Locking up the 8-9 for 3 years will stall the development of 2 very talented arms.

 

[beckdawg]

If the Cubs did a Eds’s plus prospects for? I have no idea what they would have to toss. Then turned around and traded those prospects and Happ/Schwarber for Archer/Colome then it makes sense.

This was more or less my thought process though. One thing about Ellsbury I would mention in reference to Theo's comments is that I think Theo was essentially saying they don't need to sign one guy for the job. In other words, last year they got by with essentially platooning several guys in the 1 hole. As that pertains to Ellsbury, the cubs don't have a super obvious guy for the RHP portion of that as I've mentioned before. Almora is great vs LHP. The guy for RHP isn't as obvious. I've said before Happ probably makes the most sense with Zobrist a close second. Those two hit .243/.334/.529 and .249/.336/.401 respectively. Ellsbury hitting .274/.367/.429 last year would be a pretty substantial upgrade.

Simply put I look at this sort of Ellsbury move as sort of the reverse version of Castro to the Yankees. In that the cubs dealt away a young player to clear room for them to sign Zobrist. In this case they are taking on an older player to give them the pieces to trade for most likely a closer and or starter. And one of the things about the cubs last year was they hit .252/.334/.440 vs RHP and .264/.349/.428 vs LHP. And you're subtracting Jay out of that who was one of their best hitters vs RHP. La Stella was also great vs RHP but he's incredibly hard to get in the daily line up with Happ, Baez and Zobrist on the roster. Ellsbury would fit in much easier. And if you can package one of Happ/Baez plus parts you get from the yankees for a Starter you open up playing time for another player who's very good at hitting RHP in La Stella.

 

[CSF77]

This was more or less my thought process though. One thing about Ellsbury I would mention in reference to Theo's comments is that I think Theo was essentially saying they don't need to sign one guy for the job. In other words, last year they got by with essentially platooning several guys in the 1 hole. As that pertains to Ellsbury, the cubs don't have a super obvious guy for the RHP portion of that as I've mentioned before. Almora is great vs LHP. The guy for RHP isn't as obvious. I've said before Happ probably makes the most sense with Zobrist a close second. Those two hit .243/.334/.529 and .249/.336/.401 respectively. Ellsbury hitting .274/.367/.429 last year would be a pretty substantial upgrade.

Simply put I look at this sort of Ellsbury move as sort of the reverse version of Castro to the Yankees. In that the cubs dealt away a young player to clear room for them to sign Zobrist. In this case they are taking on an older player to give them the pieces to trade for most likely a closer and or starter. And one of the things about the cubs last year was they hit .252/.334/.440 vs RHP and .264/.349/.428 vs LHP. And you're subtracting Jay out of that who was one of their best hitters vs RHP. La Stella was also great vs RHP but he's incredibly hard to get in the daily line up with Happ, Baez and Zobrist on the roster. Ellsbury would fit in much easier. And if you can package one of Happ/Baez plus parts you get from the yankees for a Starter you open up playing time for another player who's very good at hitting RHP in La Stella.

I think there is a comprimise there. The problem I’m seeing is the Rays are not flushing the Rebuild flag yet. Selling Archer signals fire sale. I see them trying to off load Longoria more than anything right now.

So honestly that is why I believe Theo will settle on Cobb.

They need 5 guys that can take the ball and give you a chance to win.

Then they have to be able to get to the 9th inning with the game intact.

They keyed into the core issue last year and it was B.B./9. They were losing the battles at the plate. It is what it comes down to and it was every one. That is why Bosio got fired. One guy you blame him. All guys you blame the coach.

 

[Iceman2385]

This was more or less my thought process though. One thing about Ellsbury I would mention in reference to Theo's comments is that I think Theo was essentially saying they don't need to sign one guy for the job. In other words, last year they got by with essentially platooning several guys in the 1 hole. As that pertains to Ellsbury, the cubs don't have a super obvious guy for the RHP portion of that as I've mentioned before. Almora is great vs LHP. The guy for RHP isn't as obvious. I've said before Happ probably makes the most sense with Zobrist a close second. Those two hit .243/.334/.529 and .249/.336/.401 respectively. Ellsbury hitting .274/.367/.429 last year would be a pretty substantial upgrade.

Simply put I look at this sort of Ellsbury move as sort of the reverse version of Castro to the Yankees. In that the cubs dealt away a young player to clear room for them to sign Zobrist. In this case they are taking on an older player to give them the pieces to trade for most likely a closer and or starter. And one of the things about the cubs last year was they hit .252/.334/.440 vs RHP and .264/.349/.428 vs LHP. And you're subtracting Jay out of that who was one of their best hitters vs RHP. La Stella was also great vs RHP but he's incredibly hard to get in the daily line up with Happ, Baez and Zobrist on the roster. Ellsbury would fit in much easier. And if you can package one of Happ/Baez plus parts you get from the yankees for a Starter you open up playing time for another player who's very good at hitting RHP in La Stella.

I like the Elsbury trade idea, very interesting. The biggest reason I like it is if we could get useful prospects in return. R farm could definitely use a boost and some depth. Plus like u said its only a few million more expensive then JJ, but for 3 yrs instead of 1 yr.

My biggest concern w this trade is it taking ABs away from Almora, maybe it brings a shorter leash to AA against right handed pitching? Then again if he's worthy of an everyday role he'll make that clear eventually anyway.

 

[beckdawg]

I like the Elsbury trade idea, very interesting. The biggest reason I like it is if we could get useful prospects in return. R farm could definitely use a boost and some depth. Plus like u said its only a few million more expensive then JJ, but for 3 yrs instead of 1 yr.

My biggest concern w this trade is it taking ABs away from Almora, maybe it brings a shorter leash to AA against right handed pitching? Then again if he's worthy of an everyday role he'll make that clear eventually anyway.

My take on how you would play this AA/Ellsbury idea would be basically similar to how they used Almora last year though loosen the reigns a bit on him. What I mean by that is you would often see Almora come in during the 6th/7th inning as a defensive replacement/double switch guy for Schwarber. The interesting aspect of that is you're kind of minimizing the downside of Schwarber with this sort of idea as well. Presumably if you're behind in a game you're less likely to make that sort of double switch with Schwarber as to keep his bat in the game. If you need a PH in that situation you're probably talking about using Zobrist if he's on the bench or La Stella. On the contrary, if you're ahead in the game it would allow you to push Ellsbury over to LF and put Almora in CF.

I get the sense you wouldn't start Ellsbury vs every RHP. Last year Almora took 111 PAs vs LHP and 198 vs RHP. Jay took 101 PAs and 332 respectively. If you're talking about an every day player(let's use Rizzo who played 157 games), he had 179 PAs vs LHP and 512 vs RHP. Given how badly Almora killed LHP I think it's safe to assume he'll take every possible PA vs LHP next year. Depending on where he is in the line up that may be a few less than Rizzo but let's just say he gets 150 vs LHP. If we assume they increase his role from 2017 even slightly seeing him get to 250 PAs or 300 vs RHP isn't a big stretch. 50 PAs is roughly 13 more full games and 100 would be 26 more. He only started 65 games last year and of those only completed 50. So, even if you assume he gets 26 more starts you're only talking about him starting 91 games. At right around 100 games played and 500 PAs that's more than enough work on his end.

From there the question would be how much Ellsbury plays. That's one of the reason I think you simply have to move Baez or Happ. if the idea is you're using Ellsbury only vs RHP, you're not playing him over Schwarber with AA in CF. Schwarber kills RHP albeit not quite as good as AA vs LHP. So, you're ideal OF vs RHP would be Schwarber, Ellsbury, Heyward which makes sense given all 3 are LH. Ideally, Happ would be your 2B vs RHP but that creates tension between him and Baez for playing time. I've illustrated Baez doesn't hit RHP well hence one of the reasons I've suggested dealing him. But there's obviously some who love Baez's defense enough to keep him and honestly if you had Ellsbury then batting Baez 8th and just playing him for his defense isn't that big of an issue. One of my biggest gripes with him vs RHP is it's hard to work around him in terms of who you lead off. Ellsbury would solve that.

From a PA stand point, if Rizzo had 512 PAs vs RHP that's roughly 135 games vs RHP last year. If we assume that AA makes 75 starts vs RHP with the rest of his coming vs LHP, that's a pretty easy 240 PAs to find out of Ellsbury. He had 409 last year. So at the moment you're talking him being down 169 vs last year. But you could pretty easily pull another 50 from PH and a handful more via starts on "clear the bench" days maddon likes to do.

Regardless I think the playing time thing would largely work itself out so long as the entire thought process is using the prospects/players that come with Ellsbury to then move into a second trade. If you're not adding that idea I don't think the idea really works because obviously you're adding a guy into a challenging depth chart.

 

[TL1961]

We don’t have any need/use for Jacoby Ellsbury.

We din’t need another year of Jon Jay or someone similar to take playing time sway from Almora