How I would approach the offseason

[beckdawg]

Here's another I found... 30 year old Matt Kemp coming off a 141 wRC+ 2.5 fwar season was traded to San Diego for Héctor Olivera who was 30 at the time.

 

[knoxville7]

I've tried to give you the benefit of the doubt multiple times and see your side of this but then you say stuff like this. You initially said that I over value bryant and now say that none of us know his value and to suggest we do is laughable. If that's the case how is my OPINION of what he's worth over valuing him if none of us know what he's worth?

The reason why it mattered to me what value you put on Lindor is because the premise of your argument was effectively that you can't trade Bryant/Kimbrel for prospects and then in turn use those pieces to acquire Lindor and Arenado. I mean correct me if I'm wrong there because clearly you don't like me putting words in your mouth but that's what I've gathered from your statements. I flat out disagree. There are a number of reasons it may not happen but to suggests the value isn't there is just flat out wrong in my opinion.

I can literally cite recent trade examples if you would like and go in excruciating detail why it matters but I doubt you care. Simply put when the Yankees traded for Stanton it cost them a 40+ and a 40 grade prospect. Stanton was coming of a 7.3 fWAR season. Arenado is 3 years older, making about $5 mil more annually and hit .253/.303/.434(76 wRC+) last year. I already outlined what Machado went for as a comparison for Lindor's potential value. Kimbrel in my opinion is worth a 45 grade prospect if you eat some of his contract because the cubs gave up a 45 grade prospect for half a season of a 32 year old David Phelps. Kimbrel will be 33 next year.

So, simply put the "cost" in terms of prospect for Arenado and Lindor would likely be 1 top 100 prospect, a 45 grade, and 4-ish 40 grade prospects. If you get something like a top 100 prospect and 2 40 grade prospects for Bryant you're literally short 2 40 grade prospects. Strictly speaking the cubs would either need to get more out of Bryant/Kimbrel or get Arenado/Lindor cheaper than Stanton/Machado. But even if they didn't, 2 40 grade prospects is frankly nothing to make these trades happen. You're talking about guys like Trent Giambrone or really lower level guys with some potential like Fabian Pertuz or Luis Verdugo.

In other words, saying it's a "pipe dream" from a value stand point is just flat out wrong. I fully understand that Colorado may not trade Arenado in which case my argument is moot. But I don't know that and no one else outside the organization does either. What i do know is he was demanding a trade before the 2020 season and the cubs were reportedly interested in him. What I also know is in the past several trades Cleveland has made the returns have been viewed as lacking. They traded Kluber for Emmanuel Clase(40+ grade) and Delino DeShields(.252/.310/.318 in 2020). They traded Clevinger for Gabriel Arias(40+), Joey Cantillo(45), Owen Miller(40), Austin Hedges(great defensive C but career .198/.255/.356) , Josh Naylor (50) and Cal Quantrill(40).

With Lindor, Cleveland has almost 0 leverage because absolutely no one thinks they are going to re-sign him. So their options are ride it out one more year and take the QO or trade him. I see absolutely no way he returns more than Machado did given LA was loaded with prospects and lost Seager so they NEEDED machado as much as anyone could. And given Cleveland's recent track record in trades they are far more likely to go for quantity of players rather than a few elite prospects which may not make a ton of sense traditionally speaking but for an organization who has to let players like Lindor walk they need quantity to build up the next group of players.

good job to take my post and take one part of it to respond to...as if the rest of the context doesn’t matter. Enjoy your day and fantasizing over getting arenado/lindor for the “haul” the cubs get from Bryant/Kimbrel

 

[beckdawg]

good job to take my post and take one part of it to respond to...as if the rest of the context doesn’t matter. Enjoy your day and fantasizing over getting arenado/lindor for the “haul” the cubs get from Bryant/Kimbrel

I literally spent 5 lengthy paragraphs responding to the core claim you are trying to make which is that the Bryant/Kimbrel aren't worth Arenado/Lindor. I honestly don't know what you want. You claim i put words in your mouth. I explain to you that I'm literally trying to get you to take a stance so I have something to discuss rather than dealing with purposefully vague terms like "more value". Your response to that was that no one can say what value a player has and that to try is laughable.

I mean seriously man I'm not trying to be a dick. I actually enjoy discussing roster creation. But what am I supposed to do with a comment where on one hand you say that players like Lindor and Arenado are pipe dreams and then in the next breath suggest that we have no way of knowing a players trade value? Clearly I disagree that it's a pipe dream but you're just entirely shutting down any conversation to be had because when I ask you to put a value on Lindor you wont do it. So I can go on and on pointing out similarly talented players to Bryant and Lindor and what they have been traded for but it's fruitless because you don't seem to want to have that discussion.

You say you want to focus on attainable players. I guarantee you Lindor is getting traded. It's great to plan ahead and have money for free agents but end of the day it's about acquiring the best player to fit your team and looking through the next 3 free agent classes, no one fits the cubs needs better than Lindor in terms of batters. There's no guarantee that Lindor makes it to FA. Betts was in the same situation and re-signed. Plus even if Lindor does become a FA, assuming he has a QO tied to him, I believe the rules now cost the cubs a 2nd and 4th round pick to sign QO players. So either way there will be prospect cost tied to getting him.

As for Arenado, you can claim the trade is a pipe dream but it literally costs nothing to ask. The guy demanded a trade before the start of the season. If there is still bad blood between him and Colorado why wouldn't you try to exploit it? Colorado can say no but I think it's worth questioning whether they really want to pay a 30 year old 3B $33 mil a year for the next 6 years when they had a .438 win% in 2019 and a .433 win% in 2020 and three of their top 6 prospects are 3B with ETAs in 2022. Honestly, I suspect those prospects are why they were initially apparently listening to offers on Arenado in the first place which apparently pissed him off so much.

So, I mean that's where I stand. Both players fit the type of hitter the cubs desperately need. Both have reasons to believe their teams would make them available. Maybe they put the cost too high in which case you don't have to make a trade. But at the very least they should entertain the idea of trying.

 

[knoxville7]

I literally spent 5 lengthy paragraphs responding to the core claim you are trying to make which is that the Bryant/Kimbrel aren't worth Arenado/Lindor. I honestly don't know what you want. You claim i put words in your mouth. I explain to you that I'm literally trying to get you to take a stance so I have something to discuss rather than dealing with purposefully vague terms like "more value". Your response to that was that no one can say what value a player has and that to try is laughable.

I mean seriously man I'm not trying to be a dick. I actually enjoy discussing roster creation. But what am I supposed to do with a comment where on one hand you say that players like Lindor and Arenado are pipe dreams and then in the next breath suggest that we have no way of knowing a players trade value? Clearly I disagree that it's a pipe dream but you're just entirely shutting down any conversation to be had because when I ask you to put a value on Lindor you wont do it. So I can go on and on pointing out similarly talented players to Bryant and Lindor and what they have been traded for but it's fruitless because you don't seem to want to have that discussion.

You say you want to focus on attainable players. I guarantee you Lindor is getting traded. It's great to plan ahead and have money for free agents but end of the day it's about acquiring the best player to fit your team and looking through the next 3 free agent classes, no one fits the cubs needs better than Lindor in terms of batters. There's no guarantee that Lindor makes it to FA. Betts was in the same situation and re-signed. Plus even if Lindor does become a FA, assuming he has a QO tied to him, I believe the rules now cost the cubs a 2nd and 4th round pick to sign QO players. So either way there will be prospect cost tied to getting him.

As for Arenado, you can claim the trade is a pipe dream but it literally costs nothing to ask. The guy demanded a trade before the start of the season. If there is still bad blood between him and Colorado why wouldn't you try to exploit it? Colorado can say no but I think it's worth questioning whether they really want to pay a 30 year old 3B $33 mil a year for the next 6 years when they had a .438 win% in 2019 and a .433 win% in 2020 and three of their top 6 prospects are 3B with ETAs in 2022. Honestly, I suspect those prospects are why they were initially apparently listening to offers on Arenado in the first place which apparently pissed him off so much.

So, I mean that's where I stand. Both players fit the type of hitter the cubs desperately need. Both have reasons to believe their teams would make them available. Maybe they put the cost too high in which case you don't have to make a trade. But at the very least they should entertain the idea of trying.

and I’ve told you that arenado/Lindor have more value than Bryant. if you’re looking for me to name a specific set of players to make up the package, I won’t do it because that’s where I say trying to pin down the exact value comes down ultimately to what a team is willing to part with...not what some message boards think is equal value. Not to mention sometimes you don’t get fair value for a guy, sometimes a team overpays for a guy, competition builds. Things we cannot possibly know. If you think you do, by all means enjoy yourself.

sure, both Arenado and Lindor are available, and it’s fine to call and kick the tires. ultimately, neither will be a cub next year...the cubs do not have the resources to make it realistically happen in my opinion. You think otherwise, and that’s fine

 

[CSF77]

I think that's way too much for Arenado....way way way too much. I mean look at the Stanton trade I mentioned. That was Staton +$30 mil for Castro(more salary dump but not pure cash so they got a body to use) and Jorge Guzman(40+ grade) and Jose Devers(40 grade). You're not going to sit here and convince me a 30 year old Arenado coming off a 76 wRC+ season with a $33 aav left on his deal and an opt out after 2021 was worth more than a 27 year old Stanton coming off a year where he hit .281/.376/.631(158 wRC+) and a 7.3 fWAR season where his AAV was like $28 mil.

I mean those 3 plus a top 100 prospect is an insane return for a player who's already got paid. There's literally no surplus value on Arenado's contract. If you want another example, look at the Cano trade. That's way more complicated because Diaz was also in that trade and was arguably the best reliever in baseball at the time and had a bunch of control left. Even still that trade netted Kelenic and Justin Dunn and throw away parts. Dunn was a 35+ and I think you could argue Diaz straight up could have got Kelenic himself given the cubs had to give up Torres to get Chapman and the package the Yankees got for Andrew Miller. Cano himself didn't get much of anything.

Historically speaking, players like Arenado hold almost no trade value. And the thing is, Colorado has almost no leverage if Arenado does want out because he has an opt out after 2021 and I believe a full NTC. So, you're likely looking at a limited list of teams who'd even consider bringing him on at the $23-25 mil a year I suggested. That list grows smaller based on where Arenado wants to play.

I should also add from the team acquiring him stand point that opt out is a big deal. While I think it'd be crazy for him to opt out because he's very unlikely to do better than that deal, the team acquiring him can't assume that. So, you have to view him as more a 1 year rental that which also hurts the return anyone would be willing to offer colorado.

When I'm talking about trading for Arenado I am serious in saying I wouldn't give up any of the cubs top 6 prospects. If they want to talk about Chase Strumpf or maybe Ryan Jensen or Cory Abbott.... sure have a discussion. They mention anyone better than them they can **** right off in my opinion.

Well that would be 2 55 level and 2 50. The point is to force Col to eat contract and pay for that in talent.

The way I approach it is Amaya is #3 in depth as a catcher and has higher trade value. I would do this if I am extending both Contreras and Caritini and the DH is not active in 2021.

The top 100 return is purposeful as it would be gauged on something Col would want.

Roederer has a noodle arm. I see Happ as the long term LF this makes him expenible. His value is in his bat.

Franklin is a solid arm but it is going to take more than a 45 grade arm to peak interest.

Is it too much for a strait trade? Yes. But to force a eating of contract no.

 

[CSF77]

and I’ve told you that arenado/Lindor have more value than Bryant. if you’re looking for me to name a specific set of players to make up the package, I won’t do it because that’s where I say trying to pin down the exact value comes down ultimately to what a team is willing to part with...not what some message boards think is equal value. Not to mention sometimes you don’t get fair value for a guy, sometimes a team overpays for a guy, competition builds. Things we cannot possibly know. If you think you do, by all means enjoy yourself.

sure, both Arenado and Lindor are available, and it’s fine to call and kick the tires. ultimately, neither will be a cub next year...the cubs do not have the resources to make it realistically happen in my opinion. You think otherwise, and that’s fine

They have the resources. You are devaluating the Cubs system.

Marquez has a ace level arm. 55 scale prospect.
Davis 55 scale prospect
Amaya 55 scale prospect.

All 3 are in premium positions.

Then Howard SS 55 scale. He is fringe top 100 and most likely would have been on it if games were played.

Then #5-10 are all 50 grade players.

The system has improved after Theo started to target ceiling vs floor talent in his drafts.

 

[beckdawg]

Well that would be 2 55 level and 2 50. The point is to force Col to eat contract and pay for that in talent.

I understand what you're saying. But historically teams don't do that. The way you need to look at this is what would Arenado get in this offseason if he were a FA? For me personally, I don't think he'd get more than $25 mil a year and that may be pushing it given the financial situations of teams. Maybe I'm wrong there but just humor the argument.

If you were to sign him as a FA you'd be paying the QO cost but his current deal is like -$8 mil a year in value. In other words, to get rid of him at full price Colorado would probably have to give up players for any team to be remotely interested in his full contract.

So when you say the point is to force Colorado to eat the contract.... that doesn't have to happen because they aren't trading him unless they eat a sizable chunk of his money. Conversely, let's say they are willing to eat the money. What is a team willing to pay them at that point? My argument would be roughly equivalent to the picks they would lose as a QO which in the case of the cubs would be roughly 2 40 grade prospects. The reason for that is because a team like the cubs may like Arenado but he's not the only option out there. And if he makes a stink again with a full NTC and an opt out after 2021 then Colorado has no real leverage. It's the same reason the Yankees got Stanton so cheap because he limited the market to like 3 teams.

 

[knoxville7]

They have the resources. You are devaluating the Cubs system.

Marquez has a ace level arm. 55 scale prospect.
Davis 55 scale prospect
Amaya 55 scale prospect.

All 3 are in premium positions.

Then Howard SS 55 scale. He is fringe top 100 and most likely would have been on it if games were played.

Then #5-10 are all 50 grade players.

The system has improved after Theo started to target ceiling vs floor talent in his drafts.

the cubs system wasn’t part of the argument, so that’s irrelevant. The OP stated the cubs could trade Bryant and Kimbrel and use the prospects they net from those two trades to acquire arenado or lindor. I said they could not. Sure, throw in some prospects the cubs ALREADY have and yeah, something could get done. Stick to the main argument, don’t move the goalposts for him

 

[CSF77]

the cubs system wasn’t part of the argument, so that’s irrelevant. The OP stated the cubs could trade Bryant and Kimbrel and use the prospects they net from those two trades to acquire arenado or lindor. I said they could not. Sure, throw in some prospects the cubs ALREADY have and yeah, something could get done. Stick to the main argument, don’t move the goalposts for him

Define:

sure, both Arenado and Lindor are available, and it’s fine to call and kick the tires. ultimately, neither will be a cub next year...the cubs do not have the resources to make it realistically happen in my opinion. You think otherwise, and that’s fine

Then.

Resources is a vague term. Cash. 3rd highest cash generator.
Talent: 3 top 100 prospects. 1 more that is grade 55. 5 more grade 50 talent.

So I am not sure where you are coming from here. Do you feel that it would take a 60 talent player? Currently only the top 20 on the top 100 hold that value. I highly doubt a team would give up that for a player making 35 mil per. That is the talent they would be giving up at a cheaper cost.

This is the list of 60+ grade talent

1	Wander Franco	SS	Tampa Bay Rays	MLB	2021	19	5' 10" / 189 lbs	S	R
2	Adley Rutschman	C	Baltimore Orioles	A (Full)	2021	22	6' 2" / 220 lbs	S	R
3	MacKenzie Gore	LHP	San Diego Padres	ROK	2020	21	6' 2" / 197 lbs	L	L
4	Spencer Torkelson	3B/1B	Detroit Tigers	A (Full)	2022	21	6' 1" / 220 lbs	R	R
5	Casey Mize	RHP	Detroit Tigers	MLB	2020	23	6' 3" / 220 lbs	R	R
6	Nate Pearson	RHP	Toronto Blue Jays	MLB	2020	24	6' 6" / 250 lbs	R	R
7	Royce Lewis	SS	Minnesota Twins	AA	2020	21	6' 2" / 200 lbs	R	R
8	Bobby Witt Jr.	SS	Kansas City Royals	A (Full)	2022	20	6' 1" / 190 lbs	R	R
9	Jarred Kelenic	OF	Seattle Mariners	AA	2021	21	6' 1" / 190 lbs	L	L
10	Cristian Pache	OF	Atlanta Braves	MLB	2020	21	6' 2" / 215 lbs	R	R
11	Joey Bart	C	San Francisco Giants	MLB	2020	23	6' 2" / 238 lbs	R	R
12	Brendan McKay	LHP/DH	Tampa Bay Rays	MLB	2020	24	6' 2" / 220 lbs	L	L
13	Andrew Vaughn	1B	Chicago White Sox	A (Adv)	2021	22	6' 0" / 215 lbs	R	R
14	Dylan Carlson	OF	St. Louis Cardinals	MLB	2020	22	6' 2" / 205 lbs	S	L
15	Julio Rodriguez	OF	Seattle Mariners	A (Adv)	2022	19	6' 3" / 180 lbs	R	R
16	Austin Martin	SS/OF	Toronto Blue Jays	ROK	2022	21	6' 0" / 185 lbs	R	R
17	Forrest Whitley	RHP	Houston Astros	AAA	2020	23	6' 7" / 238 lbs	R	R
18	Michael Kopech	RHP	Chicago White Sox	MLB	2021	24	6' 3" / 225 lbs	R	R
19	Sixto Sanchez	RHP	Miami Marlins	MLB	2020	22	6' 0" / 234 lbs	R	R
20	Matt Manning	RHP	Detroit Tigers	AA	2021	22	6' 6" / 195 lbs	R	R

 

[beckdawg]

I just want to clarify something because I feel as though my position is being misstated. In fairness, maybe I could have been clearer than I have been. But, this isn't me moving the goal posts. I've felt from the beginning that Bryant gets you something like 90% of the way to Lindor. I mean we can quibble over value here but I don't think that kind of statement is that far off being accurate. Honestly, it kind of depends on what you're looking for as a team because if all you want is the bat then the gap is probably even less as a lot of Lindor's value is tied to his glove. Bryant is more a mid order bat where as Lindor is a lead off hitter.

Anyways, the point I was always trying to make is that trading Bryant likely gets you close enough in value to Lindor where any additional pieces you need to add aren't things you're upset over giving up. This is why I brought up the Machado trade as an example. I have said i thought Bryant was worth a top 100 guy and something similar to Kremer and Pop. Machado got an additional 40 grade prospect and a throw in roster filler. If Lindor is traded for a similar value to Machado and I'm correct on Bryant's value then are we really going to bat an eye over the cubs having to include Fabian Pertuz, Trent Giambrone or Luis Verdugo?

As for Arenado, I feel like my view of his value and the rest of people here is far apart. In my opinion, he's barely worth a couple of top 30 guys where as others are saying you'd have to give up top 100 prospects which to me seems nuts given the past examples I've presented. And honestly if I'm wrong on the cost then I wouldn't go after him at all. That's why people placing a value on players matters to me because for two 40 grade prospects then sure I think Arenado is an interesting play. But I'm not going to give up a top 5 cubs prospect for a 30 year old making $33 mil a year even if colorado eats a chunk of his contract. That type of deal just doesn't make sense to me.

Regardless, I would make a strong push to go after Lindor unless Cleveland wants some kind of crazy package for him. I don't see them getting more than Machado personally but if they can then good on them. Arenado is purely a value proposition for me and if he comes cheap I'd consider him.

 

[CSF77]

I still feel that flipping Bryant for Lindor is not the right play. It would be a rental for a year and it would delay the inevitable 2022 implosion.

As you said. Losing Rizzo, Bryant or Lindor, Schwarber and Baez just means a bunch of picks that might be in the 45-50 range.

I personally feel that they trade Bryant now. Then push Bote to 3B. If they feel that they can push a eat deal and get Nolan for 25 per then that is a solid plan that Jed can forge ahead with. I am not going to squabble about return value that Col will want because that is part of the negotiable part. I do feel that Col would laugh at 2 40 grade prospects. They would rather wait for Nolan to have a monster year again and past the 2021 opt out and then play for a mega return with no cash offset.

The cards are in Col's hand right now. If he opts out then he most likely can not match what he has. So that would be unwise on his part. Selling low is stupid also so wait for a better scenerio as time is in their favor.

 

[knoxville7]

I just want to clarify something because I feel as though my position is being misstated. In fairness, maybe I could have been clearer than I have been. But, this isn't me moving the goal posts. I've felt from the beginning that Bryant gets you something like 90% of the way to Lindor. I mean we can quibble over value here but I don't think that kind of statement is that far off being accurate. Honestly, it kind of depends on what you're looking for as a team because if all you want is the bat then the gap is probably even less as a lot of Lindor's value is tied to his glove. Bryant is more a mid order bat where as Lindor is a lead off hitter.

Anyways, the point I was always trying to make is that trading Bryant likely gets you close enough in value to Lindor where any additional pieces you need to add aren't things you're upset over giving up. This is why I brought up the Machado trade as an example. I have said i thought Bryant was worth a top 100 guy and something similar to Kremer and Pop. Machado got an additional 40 grade prospect and a throw in roster filler. If Lindor is traded for a similar value to Machado and I'm correct on Bryant's value then are we really going to bat an eye over the cubs having to include Fabian Pertuz, Trent Giambrone or Luis Verdugo?

As for Arenado, I feel like my view of his value and the rest of people here is far apart. In my opinion, he's barely worth a couple of top 30 guys where as others are saying you'd have to give up top 100 prospects which to me seems nuts given the past examples I've presented. And honestly if I'm wrong on the cost then I wouldn't go after him at all. That's why people placing a value on players matters to me because for two 40 grade prospects then sure I think Arenado is an interesting play. But I'm not going to give up a top 5 cubs prospect for a 30 year old making $33 mil a year even if colorado eats a chunk of his contract. That type of deal just doesn't make sense to me.

Regardless, I would make a strong push to go after Lindor unless Cleveland wants some kind of crazy package for him. I don't see them getting more than Machado personally but if they can then good on them. Arenado is purely a value proposition for me and if he comes cheap I'd consider him.

im glad you agree that lindor > arenado. Regarding arenado, I’m guessing you meant top 300 and not top 30? Otherwise, the statement doesn’t make any sense lol. I think Colorado will demand a top 100 guy be in the package for arenado. Maybe I’m wrong...but, I doubt it. That’s why I was so adamantly against the idea. Acquire a guy making that kind of money and giving up prospects does nothing to help the cubs IMO. They will still have the same offensive woes with arenado.

lindor I think would be a huge get for the cubs, but he would be a huge get for about 25 or so other clubs as well...and most of those clubs have better prospects to offer than the cubs do. Now maybe you can get a deal done for Bryant quickly before a lindor trade is done...but then the cubs are acting not out of strength in trade negotiations with teams for Bryant so you probably don’t quite get equal value for him. And right now I don’t think Bryant’s value is all that great anyways. Why would a team want a one year rental of a guy that hasn’t hit in two years?! Like, what kind of prospects do you think they will part with for that rental? I wouldn’t give much personally.

 

[beckdawg]

I still feel that flipping Bryant for Lindor is not the right play. It would be a rental for a year and it would delay the inevitable 2022 implosion.

As you said. Losing Rizzo, Bryant or Lindor, Schwarber and Baez just means a bunch of picks that might be in the 45-50 range.

I personally feel that they trade Bryant now. Then push Bote to 3B. If they feel that they can push a eat deal and get Nolan for 25 per then that is a solid plan that Jed can forge ahead with. I am not going to squabble about return value that Col will want because that is part of the negotiable part. I do feel that Col would laugh at 2 40 grade prospects. They would rather wait for Nolan to have a monster year again and past the 2021 opt out and then play for a mega return with no cash offset.

The cards are in Col's hand right now. If he opts out then he most likely can not match what he has. So that would be unwise on his part. Selling low is stupid also so wait for a better scenerio as time is in their favor.

I don't see Lindor as a rental. If you are trading for him you are re-signing him IMO.

I don't see your point of view on Arenado however which is fine. Teams don't give mega returns for 31+ year old players making $30+ mil a year. I mean if you can find an example of a trade like you're suggestion I'm open to listening but I don't think one is out there.

Look at it this way... Longoria was traded prior to his 32 year old season. Longoria signed a much more favorable deal or tampa. SF was trading for a guy who had 5 years at $13.7, $14.7, $15.2, $18.7, $19.7, and a team option of $5 mil or $13 mil. Tampa paid down $13 mil of the $87 mil he was guaranteed making the player SF was getting a 5 year $74 mil deal. SF gave up Span who SF paid $2 mil of his $11 mil remaining which was another money sink reducing another $9 mil off Longoria's deal effectively, and the prospects the Rays got were Matt Krook, Stephen Woods and Christian Arroyo. Fangrpahs has a 40 grade on Krook from 2019. They have no grade on Woods. Arroyo had a 50 grade on him in 2018 right after the trade.

Longoria's contract is SO much better than Arenado's. 5 years and effectively $65 mil vs 6 years $199 mil. And even being 33% of the contract value the best the rays got for him was a 50 grade prospect, a 40 grade prospect and two piece that look like more or less fodder.

 

[beckdawg]

Regarding arenado, I’m guessing you meant top 300 and not top 30? Otherwise, the statement doesn’t make any sense lol. I think Colorado will demand a top 100 guy be in the package for arenado. Maybe I’m wrong...but, I doubt it. That’s why I was so adamantly against the idea. Acquire a guy making that kind of money and giving up prospects does nothing to help the cubs IMO. They will still have the same offensive woes with arenado.

No i don't mean top 300. I wouldn't give up more than 2 40+ prospects for Arenado. In other words something like 2 of Strumpf, Jensen, Franklin, Carraway, Abbott or Morel.

Look I know you're going to say I'm crazy but I'm not. I literally have shown multiple examples of 30 year olds making top of the market money and what they have been traded for. No team in baseball is going to give colorado a top 100 prospect for a player making $33 mil a year.

Now maybe Colorado still asks for that. Neither of us know what they will ask for. All I'm saying is no team in baseball is going to deal with them if that is the case. And if you are saying even then my example of 2 40+ grade prospects isn't enough that's fine. Don't make the trade. That's the max I'd be willing to offer them. It's essentially the price the yankees paid for Stanton. And sure a lot of people will say that Miami got hosed in that trade but I don't care about it being fair for Colorado. I care about the cubs getting a good deal.

If Colorado is put in the position where they feel they have to move him then they aren't going to have leverage so take advantage of it. If not then move Baez to 3B and go after Lindor or move Bote there and basically do the idea you were talking about a long while back of just riding Bote to save money.

 

[knoxville7]

I just want to clarify something because I feel as though my position is being misstated. In fairness, maybe I could have been clearer than I have been. But, this isn't me moving the goal posts. I've felt from the beginning that Bryant gets you something like 90% of the way to Lindor. I mean we can quibble over value here but I don't think that kind of statement is that far off being accurate. Honestly, it kind of depends on what you're looking for as a team because if all you want is the bat then the gap is probably even less as a lot of Lindor's value is tied to his glove. Bryant is more a mid order bat where as Lindor is a lead off hitter.

Anyways, the point I was always trying to make is that trading Bryant likely gets you close enough in value to Lindor where any additional pieces you need to add aren't things you're upset over giving up. This is why I brought up the Machado trade as an example. I have said i thought Bryant was worth a top 100 guy and something similar to Kremer and Pop. Machado got an additional 40 grade prospect and a throw in roster filler. If Lindor is traded for a similar value to Machado and I'm correct on Bryant's value then are we really going to bat an eye over the cubs having to include Fabian Pertuz, Trent Giambrone or Luis Verdugo?

As for Arenado, I feel like my view of his value and the rest of people here is far apart. In my opinion, he's barely worth a couple of top 30 guys where as others are saying you'd have to give up top 100 prospects which to me seems nuts given the past examples I've presented. And honestly if I'm wrong on the cost then I wouldn't go after him at all. That's why people placing a value on players matters to me because for two 40 grade prospects then sure I think Arenado is an interesting play. But I'm not going to give up a top 5 cubs prospect for a 30 year old making $33 mil a year even if colorado eats a chunk of his contract. That type of deal just doesn't make sense to me.

Regardless, I would make a strong push to go after Lindor unless Cleveland wants some kind of crazy package for him. I don't see them getting more than Machado personally but if they can then good on them. Arenado is purely a value proposition for me and if he comes cheap I'd consider him.

read the bolded again. It doesn’t make sense unless you meant top 300

 

[beckdawg]

read the bolded again. It doesn’t make sense unless you meant top 300

Wait, are you thinking I mean like 2 top 30 in all of baseball? I was meaning basically 2 prospects in the cubs top 30. In other words, fangraphs has 28 cubs with 40 or better grades. I was essentially saying 2 40 or 40+ type players for him rather than any of the cubs top 6 prospects who are 45 grade or better.

I legitimately don't think Arenado has any real value in a trade for Colorado. I believe they are not only going to have to eat part of his contract but if they move him they aren't really getting anything back other than not having to pay him $20-25 mil a year.

Obviously maybe I'm wrong here but when I talk about going after Arenado that's the type of trade I'm talking about. That's why the deal is desirable to me because I don't see the cubs giving up anything they can't live without. Like or the sake of argument let's say I'm right. Let's say Colorado will buy down Arenado's AAV to $25 mil a year for Chase Strumpf and one of Fabian Pertuz or Luis Verdugo. Neither player in that trade is seriously going to set the cubs organization back.

 

[knoxville7]

Wait, are you thinking I mean like 2 top 30 in all of baseball? I was meaning basically 2 prospects in the cubs top 30. In other words, fangraphs has 28 cubs with 40 or better grades. I was essentially saying 2 40 or 40+ type players for him rather than any of the cubs top 6 prospects who are 45 grade or better.

I legitimately don't think Arenado has any real value in a trade for Colorado. I believe they are not only going to have to eat part of his contract but if they move him they aren't really getting anything back other than not having to pay him $20-25 mil a year.

Obviously maybe I'm wrong here but when I talk about going after Arenado that's the type of trade I'm talking about. That's why the deal is desirable to me because I don't see the cubs giving up anything they can't live without. Like or the sake of argument let's say I'm right. Let's say Colorado will buy down Arenado's AAV to $25 mil a year for Chase Strumpf and one of Fabian Pertuz or Luis Verdugo. Neither player in that trade is seriously going to set the cubs organization back.

thankyou for clarifying what you meant exactly. It was left very vague. No way for me to infer you meant that with the initial wording.

that may indeed be what arenado is valued at...but the Rockies have to agree to that valuation. They have him in a long term contract. They don’t have to trade him. I also don’t see arenado making the cubs much of a better team. I’d rather not take on a 30 year old 3rd baseman making 30+ mil a year for multiple years. It’s a bad investment

 

[beckdawg]

thankyou for clarifying what you meant exactly. It was left very vague. No way for me to infer you meant that with the initial wording.

that may indeed be what arenado is valued at...but the Rockies have to agree to that valuation. They have him in a long term contract. They don’t have to trade him. I also don’t see arenado making the cubs much of a better team. I’d rather not take on a 30 year old 3rd baseman making 30+ mil a year for multiple years. It’s a bad investment

Well I wouldn't take him on at $30 mil either. I'd take him at like $25 mil like I said. I think he can be a 3 win player at worst going forward

As for Colorado, like I said maybe they don't bite but as I said doesn't hurt to have a conversation.

 

[CSF77]

im glad you agree that lindor > arenado. Regarding arenado, I’m guessing you meant top 300 and not top 30? Otherwise, the statement doesn’t make any sense lol. I think Colorado will demand a top 100 guy be in the package for arenado. Maybe I’m wrong...but, I doubt it. That’s why I was so adamantly against the idea. Acquire a guy making that kind of money and giving up prospects does nothing to help the cubs IMO. They will still have the same offensive woes with arenado.

lindor I think would be a huge get for the cubs, but he would be a huge get for about 25 or so other clubs as well...and most of those clubs have better prospects to offer than the cubs do. Now maybe you can get a deal done for Bryant quickly before a lindor trade is done...but then the cubs are acting not out of strength in trade negotiations with teams for Bryant so you probably don’t quite get equal value for him. And right now I don’t think Bryant’s value is all that great anyways. Why would a team want a one year rental of a guy that hasn’t hit in two years?! Like, what kind of prospects do you think they will part with for that rental? I wouldn’t give much personally.

Depends on the top 100 return. Amaya no. They have Contreras and Caratini under control and Ethan Hearn and Ronnier Quintero as the next wave. Not to mention Ross values catching and has put the time into Contreras and Caratini to justify a investment.

If we are talking Marquez or Davis **** no. Howard nope. The Cubs are potentially losing 4 players and Davis helps plug that gap. Marquez has ace upside where they don't have to look externally for their next ace. They would have it in house.

So I look at it from a depth view point. Strong depth theyn yes can trade from it. Weak no.

Now in view of everything I still feel that the right play is trade Bryant. Start Bote. Hold the rest. Going into 2022 they would have Baez, Rizzo, Schwarber all expiring. I would offer arb to Rizzo and Baez as they are both worth 18 mil. Schwarber is not worth 18 mil so I would let him test the waters. At that point Davis should be ready and they can move Happ to LF.

Now if Rizzo and Baez walk and the Cubs get picks that is fine. The market should be solid.

• Francisco Lindor (28): Lindor turned down an extension offer reported to be worth more than $100MM a few years ago, and the move looks wise. He’s already topped $28MM in arbitration salaries and could plausibly command $300MM+ on a free-agent deal.
• Javier Baez (29): Baez has been in extension talks with the Cubs, but their ownership has been reluctant to spend money in recent winters. Baez was an All-Star in 2018-19, finished second in ’18 MVP voting and is one of MLB’s most well-rounded infielders.
• Carlos Correa (27): Correa hasn’t topped 110 games since 2016, but the former AL Rookie of the Year has been 29 percent better than the league-average hitter in his career, per wRC+. The average shortstop hasn’t topped 100 during his time in the Majors.
• Trevor Story (29): No shortstop has more than Story’s 123 home runs since the time of his MLB debut in 2016 (despite missing about two months of that season due to injury). He’ll have to overcome the standard Coors Field stigma, but he’s hit for power on the road as well and grades out very well at shortstop (career +40 DRS).
• Corey Seager (28): The 2016 NL Rookie of the Year returned from 2018 Tommy John surgery to swat 19 homers and an NL-leading 44 doubles in just 139 games in 2019. With so much star power around him in L.A., Seager has in some ways become underrated.

 

[CSF77]

Top of the Class

• Freddie Freeman (32): He’s such a franchise icon that the club’s former GM preferred Freeman to his own right arm … and that we forgot to include him in the initial version of this list. Gulp. It is indeed hard to imagine Freeman in another uniform after so many great seasons in Atlanta. Then again, an elbow injury did crop up in 2019. And the team’s current executive leadership may not have quite the same attachment to a much older version of the slugger. We’ll see whether and when serious talks on a second extension. If Freeman does reach the market, there’s a good chance he’ll be one of the most hotly pursued players. But teams are only going to pay so much for a first baseman of this vintage in the current environment.
• Anthony Rizzo (32): He isn’t sure to be part of this class, as the Cubs could in theory decline their option next winter and let Rizzo sign a multi-year deal elsewhere. That’s … unlikely. Through nine years and over five thousand plate appearances in the majors, Rizzo is a .273/.373/.488 hitter who has launched 218 home runs. He has been a steadily excellent producer since his breakout 2014 season. We’ll see what the intervening seasons bring, but the odds are good that Rizzo will be one of the best bats available in the 2021-22 offseason. You might think the Cubs would be interested in pursuing an extension, particularly given Rizzo’s central role in the club’s identity, but the team declined the advances of the star first bagger this offseason. Future talks remain possible, but this was perhaps the most promising window.

Other Regulars

• Brandon Belt (34): Long a high-quality but under-appreciated hitter, Belt has also dealt with significant concussion issues over the years. He was healthy in 2019, but also drooped in the power department — already a source of consternation for many Giants fans — over the past two campaigns. There are some rays of hope. Belt’s plate discipline was as good as ever last year (13.5% walk rate, 20.6% strikeout rate). And by measure of Statcast, he has produced better contact than the results would suggest (.327 wOBA vs. .355 xwOBA in 2018; .319 vs. .346 in 2019).
• Matt Carpenter (36): While he’s not playing first base at the moment, Carpenter has plenty of experience there and will likely be viewed as a first bagger when he reaches free agency. It feels rather likely that the Cardinals will end up paying a $2MM buyout rather than exercising a $18.5MM vesting option. Then again, couldn’t Carpenter’s sudden fall-off in 2019 represent a blip? He was a top-notch offensive producer for years before. I can’t think offhand of a player whose Statcast readings dove so dramatically. Carpenter dropped from a 44.7% hard contact rate in 2018 to a miserly 31.1% rate in 2019, while he sunk from a .392 xwOBA (his fourth-straight season ranking in the top ten percent leaguewide by that metric) to a middling .332 mark. Carpenter ended the year with a .225/.334/.392 batting line and personal-high 26.2% strikeout rate. He could be a big factor in this market, but he’ll have to figure out what went wrong.