Heard something just now on "The Score" that didn't make sense....

[NCChiFan]

Kind of surprised no one brought up the 1964 Ernie Broglio to the Chicago Cubs for Lou Brock trade.

 

[chibears55]

Also why are we comparing him to Ozzie Smith? We're talking about an 80's player for the most part which is an entirely different era.

ssomeone above compared him to ozzie..
i just wanted to point out that offensively castro has had a better first 4 yrs then ozzie, and they were pretty close defensively..
but mostly wanted to show that the padres gave up on him after 4 yrs and got little in return, dont want the cubs making that same mistake...

Or, the going price for a starting SS is a young good pitcher. See the trade the dbacks made for Bauer last year.

that one trade, and that dont make it the going price for a starting SS..
just feel they need to get more for a 4 yr starting SS then just a one yr pitcher who won 15 games for a playoff team ..

Why is it knee jerk? It's trading a position you are strong at for one you are quite weak at.

the knee jerk are for those who just want to trade away castro for anything because they dont like him...

The point made about trading a 1-2 pitcher (not saying he is but he is better than what they have currently) whom is also 23 YO with some upside ahead of him also you make that trade 100% of the time.

If there is competition going on and teams are willing to give up SP that is better than you have always make that deal.

again, i dont have a problem trading castro... i just feel they should get more then just a starter with 1 yr under his belit for him..
we have no idea or benchmark on what this kid will be except that he won 15 games for a world series team, he could very easily lose 15 games next year or just end up being an AVG 10-12 game winner for his career. we have a couple of starters in our system that can just as easily win 15 games on a very good team..
at least with castro there a higher chance that he at the very least returns to the hitting he gave his first couple of years..

cant just trade a guy away because you feel that the pitcher in return is better then what we have now, the majority of the starters are better then what we have now in the rotation...
you have to look long term to see if who your trading for will be better then what you have in your system and or if you are not able to sign a player of his caliber via FA so you dont have to lose assets via trade.

you need to also make sure your not selling yourself short in a trade by not getting enough value in return for whomever your trading...
like him or not starling castro is worth alot more then a shelby miller today to have that be a straight up trade with some garbage add in..
just like ozzie smith was worth more then a gary templeton with some garbage add in...

 

[CSF77]

that one trade, and that dont make it the going price for a starting SS..
just feel they need to get more for a 4 yr starting SS then just a one yr pitcher who won 15 games for a playoff team ..

Really?

This has more to do with the numbers.

Shelby Miller 31 GS 173.1 IP 8.78 K/9 2.96 BB/9 3.06 ERA 2.1 WAR
Travis Wood 32 GS 200.0 IP 6.48 K/9 2.97 BB/9 3.11 ERA 2.8 WAR
Jeff Samard 33 GS 213.2 IP 9.01 K/9 3.29 BB/9 4.34 ERA 2.8 WAR
Edwin Jack 31 GS 195.1 IP 6.93 K/9 3.03 BB/9 4.98 ERA 2.0 WAR
Jake Arrieta 9 GS 51.2 IP 6.45 K/9 4.18 BB/9 3.66 ERA 0.0 WAR

The main point is Miller becomes the defacto Ace of the staff just by his numbers. Factor in age where he is younger then the rest he has more longevity with the Cubs and could become a long term member of the rotation.

I'm 100% behind it if they pull it.

 

[chibears55]

The main point is Miller becomes the defacto Ace of the staff just by his numbers. Factor in age where he is younger then the rest he has more longevity with the Cubs and could become a long term member of the rotation.

a lot of starters would be considered an ACE with this cubs rotation, dont mean i want most of them...

your numbers are from a starter who in his first yr. won 15 games for a 97 win team that had a much better offense, defense, and bullpen then the 96 lost cubs..
guess how his numbers would of looked if he played for the cubs in 2013..

he could also just be a guy who wins 10-12 games a year and you just traded away an asset you couldve gotten more in return for, while you have younger guys in your system that could be a shelby miller for your team...
point is after just one season, we dont know what shelby miller has to offer consistantly on the major league level..

not saying that shelby miller is a bad pitcher , just saying we really dont know what he will turn out to be on the major league level because we have nothing but 2013 to measure him by..

again, all im saying is if your trading away a player like starlin castro who is young and a bit more established in what he brings to the table, you have to make sure you gain more value in return then just shelby miller if your trading for him or at least an established starter if your trading to another team.

 

[beckdawg]

Kind of surprised no one brought up the 1964 Ernie Broglio to the Chicago Cubs for Lou Brock trade.

Honestly, this sort of attitude bothers me if you're suggesting what I think(if not my mistake). I hate that people are afraid to make a trade with the cardinals because 50 years ago the cubs did and it turned out terrible. I have long said the St. Louis FO is one of if not the best in baseball but the fact is even great GMs make poor trades. So, just because they are interested in Castro doesn't mean that he's the second coming of Lou Brock. The thing is that the Cardinals need a SS very very badly and what options are out there for an above average SS? Maybe they can pry Drew away from Boston but after that they don't have a ton of options. On the other hand they have lots and lots of pitching with Wainwright locked up long term as their ace as well as wacha, miller, Martinez, Garcia, and Carpenter as well as probably other names I've forgot.

 

[CSF77]

your numbers are from a starter who in his first yr. won 15 games for a 97 win team that had a much better offense, defense, and bullpen then the 96 lost cubs..
guess how his numbers would of looked if he played for the cubs in 2013..

I would argue D side. Cubs were not bad there. Note I did not list any W/L. Those numbers have little bearing on W/L.

 

[CSF77]

Honestly, this sort of attitude bothers me if you're suggesting what I think(if not my mistake). I hate that people are afraid to make a trade with the cardinals because 50 years ago the cubs did and it turned out terrible. I have long said the St. Louis FO is one of if not the best in baseball but the fact is even great GMs make poor trades. So, just because they are interested in Castro doesn't mean that he's the second coming of Lou Brock. The thing is that the Cardinals need a SS very very badly and what options are out there for an above average SS? Maybe they can pry Drew away from Boston but after that they don't have a ton of options. On the other hand they have lots and lots of pitching with Wainwright locked up long term as their ace as well as wacha, miller, Martinez, Garcia, and Carpenter as well as probably other names I've forgot.

Agree with this. Castro would be well sought if a bidding war comes up. He should get better as a hitter and as a fielder but he is not going to be a top of the order hitter on quality teams. He could knock in 80 RBI's on a quality team in the 7 hole and for a light hitting SS that has plenty of value.

I believe for the Cubs a SP holds more value long term and short term. If we were talking about a 30 YO with a year or 2 of control going on I would never bother. But a 23 YO with 5 years of control putting up numbers equal or better than what we have and at a younger age. Both Wood and Shark were not established at that age. That just shows how advanced Miller is and how much upside he could gain over those 5 years of control.

Line up wise I would plug Murphy out there. He handled it at Iowa and for a filler until Baez he gives some HR power and his glove was decent. 2B toss up with Watkins and Valbuena. They need to cut the string with Barney and non tender him. 3B give Olt the first stab at it. With Valbuena in control it gives a decent back up for 3B or 2B if ether slump.

But the push now should be opening spots for Baez and Bryant. That should be the main focus. If Baez is a SS then make it so.

 

[NCChiFan]

Honestly, this sort of attitude bothers me if you're suggesting what I think(if not my mistake). I hate that people are afraid to make a trade with the cardinals because 50 years ago the cubs did and it turned out terrible. I have long said the St. Louis FO is one of if not the best in baseball but the fact is even great GMs make poor trades. So, just because they are interested in Castro doesn't mean that he's the second coming of Lou Brock. The thing is that the Cardinals need a SS very very badly and what options are out there for an above average SS? Maybe they can pry Drew away from Boston but after that they don't have a ton of options. On the other hand they have lots and lots of pitching with Wainwright locked up long term as their ace as well as wacha, miller, Martinez, Garcia, and Carpenter as well as probably other names I've forgot.

No wasn't trying to suggest anything about your post other than I was surprised (like the reason I started this thread) that the Lou Brock trade wasn't mentioned, not that I don't agree with trading Castro who has been inconsistent, heh, nor do I think Castro is a HoF'r. However, the one un nerving thing about this move is, the Cubs are in the process of finding a new Manager. I would think, that would be first on the old priority list before you starting making player moves that a new manager might have a problem with, before he even takes the reins.

That being said, if the Cubs can pick up a young SP starting pitcher with an upside like the kid from the Cardinals for an inconsistent SS, where you might have a suitable back up in the minor league in a years... mmmm... I think I like my chances with the SP. Just not having a managers input, or maybe he brings in his own bullpen manager who might have an opinion on something he sees in the young Cardinal SP... This just bothers me.

Edit: Guess I just want the Cubs to get this whole manager thing figured out.

 

[CSF77]

However, the one unnerving thing about this move is, the Cubs are in the process of finding a new Manager. I would think, that would be first on the old priority list before you starting making player moves that a new manager might have a problem with, before he even takes the reins.

That is why they want a manager in house before the winter meetings. So far the history has been no signings at the meetings but they discuss trades and they talk mostly. The next few weeks after they start pulling the strings on the work they did at the meeting.

Anything coming out now has been teams calling the Cubs early on Castro to get a head start. With Baez so close it doesn't take a rocket scientist to get Baez is the future and Castro could be moved.

 

[beckdawg]

I honestly don't think the manager should have any impact. If the front office believes Castro is the right player they will keep him regardless of the manager. If they don't think he is, then you trade him for a player you think is. Mangers come and go unless they are very good ones. Players are more permanent.

 

[SilenceS]

Well, doesn't really matter as the search should be shortened. The Red Sox basically told Theo to go **** himself on talking to Lovullo. It was supposedly in the contract when Theo was released that he cant hire away Boston employees.

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24186812/lovullo-remains-in-limbo-dispute-arises-between-cubs-and-bosox

 

[beckdawg]

Well, doesn't really matter as the search should be shortened. The Red Sox basically told Theo to go **** himself on talking to Lovullo. It was supposedly in the contract when Theo was released that he cant hire away Boston employees.

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-heyman/24186812/lovullo-remains-in-limbo-dispute-arises-between-cubs-and-bosox

If the MLB stops the cubs from this interview it's pretty bullshit really. Are they saying as long as Theo is a cubs employee they can't interview ANYONE from the redsox? Really? I can understand him not poaching anyone from the group that was there when Theo was but to stop them 2 years after the fact? It's pretty stupid and if I were Lovullo I'd be pretty pissed about it.