Cub's Prospect Watch And Development Discussion Thread

[CSF77]

Not to mention: If Theo can not even retain Shark on an extension there is no way that he will pay top dollar while the Ricketts are running(ruining) the shop.

Shark has low miles. He should be able to pitch close to 200 IP per for the next 6 years. To me that is a solid 100 mil investment. They already know what they have and are invested into it. VS rolling the dice on another Edwards...BTW how many IP this year for Edwards? Thought so.

 

[beckdawg]

Is there a need from the other side? You have to look at what team could benefit this and going into the future. Yanks have Brian Roberts back filling 2B. Jeter retiring. They have a clear need.

Is there a need for the Mets? Absolutely. Their SS's are hitting .224/.320/.294 this year. Ruben Tejada has been their primary starter and while younger, he's far from a top tier prospect. In fact he is 24 like Castro and comparing the two isn't even worth your time. Their best SS prospects are still in A ball and don't profile to be anymore than average MLB players at best. MLB.com gave both of them 50 ratings. Now, maybe they have no intention of trading Noah but the need is clearly there.

And honestly, you can easily argue Castro is a substantial upgrade for say 15 teams at SS. It's not a tough argument to make because there's not a ton of good SS. The cubs wouldn't have to sell any team on Castro. Other teams would have to sell the cubs on their prospects and quite frankly the Yankees don't have very highly thought of prospects. Gary Sanchez is their only prospect you could argue for as any sort of trade headliner(including Hammel). MLB.com rated him at a 60 prior to the season. Mason Williams rated as a 55 and has played shitty. They had nothing else above 50 which is considered to be an average MLB player in the future. Also keep in mind while, Sanchez is a 60 rating you're talking about him hitting .255/.325/.423 in AA. His arm is well thought of but overall his defense is still in question to the point where he may end up having to move off it at some point. Overall, their system has some depth in it but few with star potential. It's one of the systems in the 1/3 worst of the majors.

I want to be clear so this doesn't side track into yet another "why trade Castro?" debate. I'm not saying they necessarily should trade him just that if they were to trade him the Yankees sure as hell aren't getting him unless they pull off some sort of 3 team voodoo magic. I don't even know what they could offer a third team to increase the prospect pool.

 

[JP Hochbaum]

You can't wait around for things like that. Sure there maybe a new hot arm up comming...so what. As we have seen the Cubs are not willing to pay top dollar. They underbid by 1/2 on Darvish. Theo should have know it would go into the 50 mil range to net him. Tanaka went for 150 mil. Again you have to put on the big boy pants when you go up against these teams.

Don't come across about the next. They have been a also ran every major name with no legit offer made.

I expect them to do more of the same. Flip for 2nd rate prospects vs top 100 prospects and sign rentals.

My prediction is they trade both Shark and Hammel and we have never heard about any of the returns before. Then they back fill with Hendricks and Joch. Next year they do another 1 year with Kendrick.

IS there any sentence in this response that is true?

 

[CSF77]

IS there any sentence in this response that is true?

Dude Theo won with Dice K. He had to go to 50 mil to win. Darvish was going to get at least that. They bid in the 20-25 mil range. 1/2 of what it would have taken to win DiceK.

That is a PR move.

I believe they were more serious about Tanaka but were not going to go over 120 mil. Yanks were not going to lose and the word on the street was 150 mil to win even before it was announced.

Bottom line is the Ricketts bit off more than they can afford buying the Cubs. Their approach fits the Royals market.

 

[CSF77]

but anywho

Cubs Notes: Bryant, Schwarber, Trades, Samardzija
By Steve Adams [June 20, 2014 at 8:21pm CDT]
The Cubs promoted top prospect Kris Bryant from Double-A to Triple-A yesterday, but as MLB.com’s Carrie Muskat writes, president Theo Epstein doesn’t feel the 2013 No. 2 overall pick’s development is complete yet. Muskat spoke with manager Rick Renteria and current Cubs players Jake Arrieta and Anthony Rizzo about Bryant’s future as well. The 22-year-old Bryant, who slashed an unthinkable .355/.458/.702 with 22 homers in 69 Double-A games, didn’t seem to have a hard time adjusting to his new Triple-A surroundings; he went 1-for-4 with a two-run homer in last night’s Iowa debut.

More on Bryant and the Cubs…

Despite Bryant’s tremendous minor league success, Epstein told reporters, including the Daily Herald’s Bruce Miles, that he doesn’t expect Bryant to be promoted to the Major Leagues this season (Twitter link). That may be disappointing for Cubs fans, but from a business standpoint there’s little harm in letting Bryant develop at Triple-A and waiting to start his service clock.
Via Jesse Rogers of ESPN Chicago (on Twitter), Epstein also said that if No. 4 overall pick Kyle Schwarber‘s bat warrants fast-tracking him to the Major Leagues, the team won’t slow him down by leaving him behind the plate to develop. A catcher and outfielder at Indiana, Schwarber’s bat is said to be much closer to big-league ready than his glove behind the plate. However, the consensus seems to be that he could reach the Majors quickly as an outfielder.
As for the team’s more immediate concerns — presumably, dealing away several veterans from the big league roster — Epstein says that trade talks remain sporadic at present, Rogers reports. “The rule of thumb is there is more speculation this time of year than actual trade talk,” said Epstein. “Teams don’t like to rush into those types of things.” While last year’s Scott Feldman deal went down in early July, Epstein said that did not mean anything for this year’s plans. The head baseball man also hinted that he hopes a healthy number of buyers could work to his team’s advantage. “The parity creates more potential buyers,” he said. “A lot of teams are out there that could be one or two players away from getting into the playoffs and doing some damage.”
The Cubs may come to regret not locking up staff ace Jeff Samardzija when they had the chance to do so at a lower price, writes Gordon Wittenmyer of the Chicago Sun Times. Wittenmyer reports that, earlier in the year, Samardzija had proposed a $100MM deal while the Cubs were sitting at $60MM. Samardzija’s representatives signaled that they would split the difference, but Chicago only increased its offer by $500K. Now, with the asking price much higher, it seems as though the 29-year-old will instead be dealt, and Wittenmyer argues that the club will struggle to replace him for anything approaching a reasonable price.

 

[CSF77]

Again this show the Rickett's penny pinching ways. They could have signed Shark at 80 mil last off season and only went up by 500k? Dude if you can't see a miser when it slaps you in the face than I can't help you.

 

[theberserkfury]

The Cubs may come to regret not locking up staff ace Jeff Samardzija when they had the chance to do so at a lower price, writes Gordon Wittenmyer of the Chicago Sun Times. Wittenmyer reports that, earlier in the year, Samardzija had proposed a $100MM deal while the Cubs were sitting at $60MM. Samardzija’s representatives signaled that they would split the difference, but Chicago only increased its offer by $500K. Now, with the asking price much higher, it seems as though the 29-year-old will instead be dealt, and Wittenmyer argues that the club will struggle to replace him for anything approaching a reasonable price.

Yikes.

 

[Boobaby1]

Again this show the Rickett's penny pinching ways. They could have signed Shark at 80 mil last off season and only went up by 500k? Dude if you can't see a miser when it slaps you in the face than I can't help you.

I don't think that it's Rickett's in this case. They were willing to spend 120 million plus the posting fee for Tanaka. I fully believe this is Theo and Jed throwing caution about Shark being a certainty as a front line starter and not making bone-head mistake #2 by overpaying like they did with Jackson.

Notice how they have upped the ante now that he is showing improvements and consistency?

 

[CSF77]

I don't think that it's Rickett's in this case. They were willing to spend 120 million plus the posting fee for Tanaka. I fully believe this is Theo and Jed throwing caution about Shark being a certainty as a front line starter and not making bone-head mistake #2 by overpaying like they did with Jackson.

Notice how they have upped the ante now that he is showing improvements and consistency?

And now they are not willing to go to 100 mil after knowing he is a front line starter.

Boo come on now.

I'm under the opinion even Tanaka was a PR move. Rumor was Tanaka's wife wanted to live in a media meca. IE LA or NY. Due to this fact most specualtion was the Cubs has to blow away the competition. 124 mil was the viewed market value. Cubs bid market value when those factors were already know on what it took to win.

So I take it as: We are going to have to pay out 150 mil to get Tanaka. Ok just make a market bid. It will look good and get another flip.

On Shark they low balled him from day 1. Now it has bit the Cubs on their ass and they will be scrambling to get a return.

The ones they signed: Rizzo and Castro. Team freindly deals.

F/A they signed: Jackson: Knee jerk reaction to losing on Sanchez.
Ret: 1 year deals designed to be used as trade goods or 2 deals with AAAA players. Sweeney and Schierholtz. A busted signing on Fuji. 12 games for a 2 year deal...

Sure they have gained some controllable assets at low cost but have done nothing to put out a quality product and makes me worried as a Cub fan looking forward.

Are they going to shaft Baez and Bryant down the road?

Looking at the landscape being developed I would say yes.

 

[Diehardfan]

Ricketts is slowly, maybe unwittingly, building a reputation in pro sports that rivals Michael McCaskey and possibly Bill Wirtz. You'd think a guy who lives in this area would know better.

 

[nwfisch]

Jorge Soler went 3-for-5, hit 2 doubles, drove in 2 Rs for Mesa in Rookie League opener. #Cubs
:fap:

Ricketts is slowly, maybe unwittingly, building a reputation in pro sports that rivals Michael McCaskey and possibly Bill Wirtz. You'd think a guy who lives in this area would know better.

You'd think a guy like Ricketts would be smart enough to see what George and Rocky have done with their teams in the past 5 years or so and make them relevant, big market teams again.

 

[chibears55]

F/A they signed: Jackson: Knee jerk reaction to losing on Sanchez.
Ret: 1 year deals designed to be used as trade goods or 2 deals with AAAA players. Sweeney and Schierholtz. A busted signing on Fuji. 12 games for a 2 year deal...

Sure they have gained some controllable assets at low cost but have done nothing to put out a quality product and makes me worried as a Cub fan looking forward.

Are they going to shaft Baez and Bryant down the road?

Looking at the landscape being developed I would say yes.

Looking at where committed payroll is at now for the next 5 yrs 31,31,20,22,27 if I see kalish, ruggiano, coghlan, or anyone that would be normally a bench player starting in the outfield on opening day then we can definitely say the rickets are pinching pennies because there will be no reason not to try and add a FA bat or two on a 1 to 3 year deal to hold those positions until if and when players in their system are ready or a younger better solution arises via FA or trade..

going into 2015, I would rather have Lake, bonifacio, and whomever else of the leftover crappy outfielders they have on the bench and start with Alcantara in Center and add a couple of true solid hitting OFers in the corners via FA or trade..

as far as baez and Bryant goes, I understand the extra year of control BS but if these kids are hitting, at the very least when the Iowa season ends they should be brought up to get them ready for opening day 2015 at 3B and 2B.. time to quit monkeying around and start putting a team together for 2015..

 

[beckdawg]

Again this show the Rickett's penny pinching ways. They could have signed Shark at 80 mil last off season and only went up by 500k? Dude if you can't see a miser when it slaps you in the face than I can't help you.

It wasn't the Ricketts most likely. They had more than enough money after crapping out on Tanaka. The issue likely was Shark was coming off a rather poor season ERA wise and they didn't feel he'd shown enough to offer him the $17 mil/season they did after a strong start this year. I mean I get what some see in Shark as a potential ace and I can see why some want to retain him. However, Shark has been no where near consistent over his career and if you're going to give someone $100 mil in contract they'd better show at least some consistency. Shark's never finished a season as a starter below 3.5 ERA and his career ERA is 3.96.

I'm not saying Shark is a bad pitcher. I'm saying giving Shark proven ace or near ace money when he's not shown that over full seasons is a recipe for disaster. You're gambling essentially that he is the pitcher you hope rather than paying for what he's been. Dan Haren has a career 3.78 ERA and got $10 mil a year. Granted Haren is 34 not 29. And granted I can get behind buying Shark's potential slightly but you're talking about offering him nearly double that and he turned it down. $17 mil/year offer wasn't chump change.

If we look at where that puts him you have these guys
Greinke $26 mil
Cliff Lee $25 mil
Hammels $23.5 mil
Sabathia $23 mil
Felix Hernandez, $22.857 mil
Tanaka $22 mil
Matt Cain $20.8 mil
Verlander $20 mil
Wainwright $19.5
Buehrle $19 mil
Lincecum $17 mil

Can you honestly argue Shark is as accomplished as any of those guys? You can make the case that about Tanaka but he's obviously a some what different case. You can also make a case on Buehrle but it's also sort of a different situation because he's in the last year of his large FA contract. So, to sit here and say Shark is as valuable as the majority of these guys seems crazy to me. Can he be? Maybe but I really don't see where people are getting off like the cubs are low balling Shark. $17 mil/season is a very fair offer.

 

[CSF77]

He is worth 100 mil including next yeasts buy out

 

[chibears55]

He is worth 100 mil including next yeasts buy out

I disagree. . I don't think he shown enough the past 2 1/2 yrs. 76 starts to be worth a 20 mil per pitcher.. he had flashes of it last year but fell off, and this year he started out hot but has cooled off somewhat in his last few starts..

think that what the cubs are seeing and a 17 mil per is a generous offer considering the uncertainty of what your gonna get out of a jeff samardzija over the next 5 years when you look and see the inconsistencies of his 76 starts to date.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T217A using Tapatalk

 

[beckdawg]

He is worth 100 mil including next yeasts buy out

Over what? 5 years? 6? At 5 years he'd be making more money than Wainwright. He's not a better pitcher than Wainwright. $100 mil over 6 years is less than the 5 year $80 mil they already offered him annually. The home team view on Shark from some is out of control here. Even if you use Shark's FIP which is highly favorable to Shark over the past 3 years, he's the 25th best pitcher in the league over the past 2.5 years.

Gio Gonzalez signed a new deal after being traded to the Nationals for 5 yrs/$42M with two years of options of $12 mil. Gio has been a superior pitcher to Shark even prior to the deal and in his 4 post FA years of 2015-2018 would making $11 mil then three years of $12 mil assuming both of those options hit. Even if you up that a few mil per year for inflation that's not $17 mil/season. I mean seriously to suggest Shark is worth more than that is pulling numbers out of your ass. Hamels, also better over the past 2.5 years, got $500k more annually. Anibal Sanchez who hit FA got $80 over 5 which is what they offered Shark. Sanchez has better numbers. 3.10/2.90 ERA/FIP compared to Shark's 3.80/3.52 over the the past 2.5 years.

I don't know where people pull these numbers from. If you compare Shark's performance to other starters and then compare what starters ahead of him are making you can argue $17 mil/season is over paying Shark rather than "not enough" which is fine given their need but to vastly over pay is nuts. It seems like people just assume the cubs are being cheap because of the past 3 years without having any idea of what the market is.

The only explanation I can come up with for this line of thought people think the cubs should be desperate to keep a player and over pay them to do so since they didn't land Sanchez and Tanaka. That's honestly quite terrible business for any team to do.

 

[SilenceS]

After a bad two games Bryant goes 2 for 4 with 2 homers and 3 RBI's. He just gave Iowa the lead in the bottom of the 8th.

 

[CSF77]

Adjustment period.

 

[CSF77]

Over what? 5 years? 6? At 5 years he'd be making more money than Wainwright. He's not a better pitcher than Wainwright. $100 mil over 6 years is less than the 5 year $80 mil they already offered him annually. The home team view on Shark from some is out of control here. Even if you use Shark's FIP which is highly favorable to Shark over the past 3 years, he's the 25th best pitcher in the league over the past 2.5 years.

Gio Gonzalez signed a new deal after being traded to the Nationals for 5 yrs/$42M with two years of options of $12 mil. Gio has been a superior pitcher to Shark even prior to the deal and in his 4 post FA years of 2015-2018 would making $11 mil then three years of $12 mil assuming both of those options hit. Even if you up that a few mil per year for inflation that's not $17 mil/season. I mean seriously to suggest Shark is worth more than that is pulling numbers out of your ass. Hamels, also better over the past 2.5 years, got $500k more annually. Anibal Sanchez who hit FA got $80 over 5 which is what they offered Shark. Sanchez has better numbers. 3.10/2.90 ERA/FIP compared to Shark's 3.80/3.52 over the the past 2.5 years.

I don't know where people pull these numbers from. If you compare Shark's performance to other starters and then compare what starters ahead of him are making you can argue $17 mil/season is over paying Shark rather than "not enough" which is fine given their need but to vastly over pay is nuts. It seems like people just assume the cubs are being cheap because of the past 3 years without having any idea of what the market is.

The only explanation I can come up with for this line of thought people think the cubs should be desperate to keep a player and over pay them to do so since they didn't land Sanchez and Tanaka. That's honestly quite terrible business for any team to do.

6 years including next.

Was thinking 10 mil Arb3 buy out. 15 mil for 2 years then 3 at 20 mil per with mutual options along the way.

The problem is the no trade that shark wants.

 

[SilenceS]

Kris Bryant hits another homer. 1 for 2 with a walk and a solo shot today. All 4 of his hits in Iowa have been long balls.