Sean Marshall officially headed to Cincy

[dabynsky]

Well, you know what I mean

I do and if Wood reaches his upside it is going to be a homerun of a trade for the Cubs. This isn't a deal without risk, but I like the Cubs chances of being substantially better in a couple seasons as a result of this trade.

 

[Jntg4]

The reality is that I still can't believe Theo and Jed got that big of a return on Sean Marshall. I don't care how awesome Marshall was, he was a fucking middle reliever and the Cubs got a MLB-ready starter and two decent prospects back. That's insanity.

Set-up and Middle Reliever aren't the same.

Generally a bullpen is broken down into 1 closer, 2 set-up men, 3 middle relievers, and 1 long reliever.

 

[Rice Cube]

Set-up and Middle Reliever aren't the same.

Generally a bullpen is broken down into 1 closer, 2 set-up men, 3 middle relievers, and 1 long reliever.

My philosophies of reliever leverage have conditioned me to not think of relievers that way, so apologies for the errors in semantics.

 

[X]

Now that I've had time to take the knee-jerk emotion out of it (I did <3 Marshall) this trade is a win for the Cubs, imo. We most likely weren't going to sign Marshall after this season (someone would throw bigger money @ him than we'd be willing to pay atm it seems) and we wouldn't get draft compensation for him either thx to the new CBA (which Theo has stated several times). Wood has potential and is cheap through '17 or so...and my reds-fan cousin says Dave Sappelt (minor leaguer we got) has upside, and he was a bit upset to see both Wood AND Sappelt go in a trade for a bullpen guy (albeit a good one).

 

[Captain Obvious]

Even if Wood doesn't reach his upside, I'd still bet money we win this deal. Cost controlled back end of the rotation SP > one year of the best reliever in baseball(not saying Marshall is, speaking in generalities.)

 

[ZDemp34]

Yeah I'm still surprised we got this huge of a package for Marshall.

 

[Rice Cube]

Yeah I'm still surprised we got this huge of a package for Marshall.

That's what she said.

 

[Cloud 9]

I do really like Travis Wood, but trading away one of our strengths in Marshall definitely hurts. I'm not crazy about this move, but we'll see I guess.

 

[The Bandit]

I do really like Travis Wood, but trading away one of our strengths in Marshall definitely hurts. I'm not crazy about this move, but we'll see I guess.

It's meant to make us better long term. Were rebuilding and Marshall was a free agent after this year so we traded him at the height of his value. He's 29 and wasn more then likely going somewhere else after this season anyways. So we traded a 29 year old reliever for a 24 year old south paw starter with potential and under team control for like 5 years or whatever, plus 2 decent prospects. It's a win if were rebuilding which we are.

 

[Captain Obvious]

It's meant to make us better long term. Were rebuilding and Marshall was a free agent after this year so we traded him at the height of his value. He's 29 and wasn more then likely going somewhere else after this season anyways. So we traded a 29 year old reliever for a 24 year old south paw starter with potential and under team control for like 5 years or whatever, plus 2 decent prospects. It's a win if were rebuilding which we are.

It's a win if we aren't rebuilding. It's just a smart move regardless of the state of the team. Moneyball, baby!

 

[Jntg4]

It's a win if we aren't rebuilding. It's just a smart move regardless of the state of the team. Moneyball, baby!

Not really... if the Cubs were tied for first mid-season and the other team jjst acquired a big reliever it would be a bad trade, but I'm assuming you meant strictly if it happened in the off-season, so I guess this is irrelevant.

 

[The Bandit]

It's a win if we aren't rebuilding. It's just a smart move regardless of the state of the team. Moneyball, baby!

If were contending it's not a smart move? If we were contending holding on to Marshall would be smart we could actually resign him and we could actually use his production in the bullpen

 

[ZDemp34]

Well, we're not contending, so this is a really good move.

 

[brett05]

Look the reality is that Torreyes and Sappelt aren't elite prospects. They aren't top 100 talents, but that doesn't mean they lack upside.

I never said they lack upside.

 

[Captain Obvious]

If were contending it's not a smart move? If we were contending holding on to Marshall would be smart we could actually resign him and we could actually use his production in the bullpen

It absolutely is a smart move. We're trading a pitcher that pitches one inning and gets paid 3MM soon to be a lot more for a guy who pitches 5-7 and makes about 1/10th of that. Even if Marshall is an elite reliever, he's only going to be worth 3 wins. Wood doesn't have to be a great SP to be worth 3 wins.

 

[dabynsky]

I never said they lack upside.

If you didn't, you said everything but those exact words in these quotes:

Media is calling him Augie 2.0

Explains why both guys are not registering as prospects

I like wood. The other prospects are not ranked. That speaks volumes. All Chicago media thinks the prospects are never will bes

I see a whole lot in their about their upsides in those quotes

 

[brett05]

If you didn't, you said everything but those exact words in these quotes:



I see a whole lot in their about their upsides in those quotes

Merry Christmas dabynsky.

 

[dabynsky]

Merry Christmas dabynsky.

Merry Christmas brett.

 

[DewsSox79]

It's a win if we aren't rebuilding. It's just a smart move regardless of the state of the team. Moneyball, baby!

really?

you are quite the tool.

 

[Captain Obvious]

really?

you are quite the tool.

That is the basic premise of moneyball, buckaroo. Sell high, buy low. That would be the exact opposite of what KW did with Alex Rios, so I wouldn't expect you to understand.