Hammel to Cubs?

[Omeletpants]

Cubs should have traded Chatwood for Hamels straight up inc salaries

 

[beckdawg]

I agree the pickings were slim. I would have preferred Eovaldi because he actually has a little upside but the price was right on Hamels so I get it.

See I just don't see Eovaldi's upside. His best year was 3 years ago and that year he still had a 4.20 ERA. You're buying him at age 28 with a 4.26/4.29 ERA/FIP. Now I get it Hamels isn't a spring chicken but 2 years ago he had a 3.32/3.98 ERA/FIP. And frankly not that much has changed since then. He's got a HR problem that seems to be an issue with his fastball. Typically that's indicative of a velocity drop but outside of a fairly big drop in April he's more or less where you'd expect him to be. Maybe he's down slightly(1/2 mph or so) from his prime but that doesn't strike me as enough to take you from having a 0.30 wFB/C to a -2.08 wFB/C. I'd more expect what you saw from him last year with that pitch which was -0.05.

Statistically to me he looks like a guy that if you fix his fastball issue could be a poor mans version of him in 2016. That is to say especially in the NL with a good defense behind him I think he could be a 3.50 ERA type guy.

 

[beckdawg]

Cubs should have traded Chatwood for Hamels straight up inc salaries

Cubs still owe $25.5 mil after this year. Plus don't really see why a team out of it would want Chatwood. I think your best hope if you want Chatwood gone is a small market team in the offseason like Tampa buying him for a PTBNL with the cubs eating half his remaining deal. If they can fix Chatwood then he's an interesting trade target next july. If not and you're an uncompetitive team he's like a $6 mil inning eater. Probably can't find anyone in FA at that price.

 

[CSF77]

Mills was called up to replace Butler.

 

[CSF77]

I’m pretty sure if Hamels has a resurgence like Verlander did last year he ain’t going no where. They will adjust to him.

 

[CSF77]

Now I was a little shocked that the added Butler though. And a PTBNL. Was it to take more cash off their hands?

I don’t mind it really. Butler is a brick in the pipe. Theo and Jed like a flexible pen that they can recycle fresh arms and Butler has no options and filling a flex spot.

Wish him luck though. 1st of 2 guys from Col that really have talent but have not put it together.

Mills is not a bad add IMO. About time they gave him a look. Nice inning absorber in Sept.

 

[beckdawg]

Now I was a little shocked that the added Butler though. And a PTBNL. Was it to take more cash off their hands?

I don’t mind it really. Butler is a brick in the pipe. Theo and Jed like a flexible pen that they can recycle fresh arms and Butler has no options and filling a flex spot.

Wish him luck though. 1st of 2 guys from Col that really have talent but have not put it together.

Mills is not a bad add IMO. About time they gave him a look. Nice inning absorber in Sept.

texas is likely to trade several relievers before the deadline. My guess is they wanted a controlable MLB ready arm back to cover them for the rest of the season. And given what they got back in terms of total value that's likely worth as much to them as any half crappy prospect they may have had other wise.

 

[CSF77]

texas is likely to trade several relievers before the deadline. My guess is they wanted a controlable MLB ready arm back to cover them for the rest of the season. And given what they got back in terms of total value that's likely worth as much to them as any half crappy prospect they may have had other wise.

Before it was 2 now 3. Like I said I didn't mind because Butler had no options and really is not a show stopper that deserves it. His injury paved a way to rotate arms in and give the pen a chance to reset. Coming back then traded to a better opportunity was the best case scenario for him.

I'm actually fine with a 8 man pen with 1-2 spots set up in flex for young arms to get a taste of the good stuff. Lot of those guys get forgotten.

 

[beckdawg]

Before it was 2 now 3.

Was never officially confirmed as anything. That's just the reports people had.

 

[DanTown]

There wasn't much room for Butler on the 40 man anyway so him being in the trade was probably "hey Texas, we're going to release Butler, you want him or release him"

Hamels just has to be an improvement over Chatwood, who I actually think will be a viable arm out of the bullpen.

 

[Adipost]

I read that Hamels is currently the worst starting pitcher this month. 4 starts - 17 innings - 25 runs

That has got to be rock bottom for him, hopefully.

 

[anotheridiot]

https://www.cubshq.com/update/Tyler-Chatwood-headed-to-the-bullpen-25218

Chatwood to pen per cubs HQ, but they have been wrong before.

I like the Coomer idea about throwing every day, having time to remove some herkys or jerkys, so we may see him in mop up.

Maybe Monty was off yesterday thinking it was his last start.

 

[anotheridiot]

Before it was 2 now 3. Like I said I didn't mind because Butler had no options and really is not a show stopper that deserves it. His injury paved a way to rotate arms in and give the pen a chance to reset. Coming back then traded to a better opportunity was the best case scenario for him.

I'm actually fine with a 8 man pen with 1-2 spots set up in flex for young arms to get a taste of the good stuff. Lot of those guys get forgotten.

Just not ok with Bote constantly going down. That is the extra spot being used for a pitcher. If they can get the solid 7 relievers, it would open a spot for Bote to play everywhere but CF and catch.

 

[CubsFaninMN]

Just not ok with Bote constantly going down. That is the extra spot being used for a pitcher. If they can get the solid 7 relievers, it would open a spot for Bote to play everywhere but CF and catch.

Except for extremely short periods in unusual circumstances, this club has carried five starters and eight relievers ever since Maddon took over. I truly and sincerely doubt you will see a 7-man pen until someone else is managing the team.

 

[beckdawg]

Just not ok with Bote constantly going down. That is the extra spot being used for a pitcher. If they can get the solid 7 relievers, it would open a spot for Bote to play everywhere but CF and catch.

I don't think you understand Maddon's roster philosophy. The reason he runs 8 relievers isn't because 7 can't get it done. He does this for 2 reasons. The first is to keep wear on guys low. It feels like the cubs have really leaned on their bullpen but because they've managed to have another guy they don't have crazy high innings on anyone. Cishek is the highest with 47.1 but he's 40th among relievers in innings. The upshot of that is in theory by October your guys still have something left in the tank.

The second reason maddon does this is because it's advantageous to the way he plays guys offensively. You don't want a guy sitting on the roster not hitting in game situations because if you do that when you need the guy to come through in an at bat he may be so rusty he's useless. For teams carrying 13 batters, finding time for that guy cuts into time for the other bench bats. But the cubs have REALLY good bench bats. By running 12 guys on the bench you're funneling more at bats to everyone more evenly.

 

[chibears55]

Just not ok with Bote constantly going down. That is the extra spot being used for a pitcher. If they can get the solid 7 relievers, it would open a spot for Bote to play everywhere but CF and catch.

I think once the trade deadline passes and they have all their regulars back and healthy (excluding Darvish), then we'll see a more stable roster..

Plus and the biggest reason why were seeing an 8 man pen is because their not getting any consistent innings from the rotation..
5 innings has been the norm and 6 is like a milestone with this rotation..

Were seeing on average 3+ relievers per game to get through 4+ innings
That not good

Need to get more innings from the starters , otherwise the key guys from the pen like Chisek Edwards Strop Wilson are gonna have tired arms by October...

Why we've seen close games with Duensing and the callups getting the call because Maddon needed to use the guys above for back to back games ..



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[Omeletpants]

The second reason maddon does this is because it's advantageous to the way he plays guys offensively. You don't want a guy sitting on the roster not hitting in game situations because if you do that when you need the guy to come through in an at bat he may be so rusty he's useless. For teams carrying 13 batters, finding time for that guy cuts into time for the other bench bats. But the cubs have REALLY good bench bats. By running 12 guys on the bench you're funneling more at bats to everyone more evenly.

Very good point. I think back to the 60s and 70s and dont remember teams having very good bench bats. You had a few guys like Smokey Burgess who was a professional hitters, but the bench was fully of "guys" that didnt play much nor did you view them as professional hitters

Managers like Durocher and Earl Weaver were trying to get 162 games out of their starters and the only way you didnt play was if you were injured. With Joe's lineup I feel comfortable with any PH he throws out there.

 

[CSF77]

Bote is putting himself into a very nice situation with being able to play all 4 spots in the infield right now. But the reality is he has options and when Bryant returns he demotes.

Now next year is another story. I could see a package deal to move Chatwood with either Happ or Russell and bring back a SP upgrade.

 

[CubsFaninMN]

I love how everyone thinks the Cubs are idiots for not trading away players that are under-performing. Like Chatwood right now, or Heyward for much of the past two seasons.

For all of you who keep carping so derisively about how much we need to trade Chatwood, please remember that you can't just trade people you don't want. You also have to find another team who wants that player.

Here is an exercise for y'all. Next time you start complaining that the Cubs need to trade Chatwood, I'd also like you to include a paragraph that sums up your pitch to another club as to why *they* want to acquire said Chatwood. Otherwise, what you have is an old Monty Python sketch:

"I'll give you this slimy, stinking dead rat for that bar of gold!"

"Why in the world would i want to do that?"

"Oh, did I say a slimy, stinking dead rat? Oh, no, I meant this magic mouse who will bring you great luck!"

"If he's magic, why do you want to trade him?"

"Umm..."

 

[CSF77]

I love how everyone thinks the Cubs are idiots for not trading away players that are under-performing. Like Chatwood right now, or Heyward for much of the past two seasons.

For all of you who keep carping so derisively about how much we need to trade Chatwood, please remember that you can't just trade people you don't want. You also have to find another team who wants that player.

Here is an exercise for y'all. Next time you start complaining that the Cubs need to trade Chatwood, I'd also like you to include a paragraph that sums up your pitch to another club as to why *they* want to acquire said Chatwood. Otherwise, what you have is an old Monty Python sketch:

"I'll give you this slimy, stinking dead rat for that bar of gold!"

"Why in the world would i want to do that?"

"Oh, did I say a slimy, stinking dead rat? Oh, no, I meant this magic mouse who will bring you great luck!"

"If he's magic, why do you want to trade him?"

"Umm..."

I suggested him and Happ together to upgrade a SP slot