Trade deadline banter

[CSF77]

Honestly if Archer isn't available and if prices are high on Gray I wouldn't mind a run at Shark if SF would eat a tiny bit of money. He's got 3 years at 19.8 mil per. If the Giants would eat like $11.4 mil you'd essentially be pushing Lackey's money to Shark the next 3 years. I also wouldn't mind see them trying a run at Daniel Norris as a buy low guy on a young starter for a Detroit team that figures to sell.

Norris is young and they have control. I really don't see them giving up on him at all.

Shark no...no...no. He is not a big game starter. Add to it he left on crummy terms.

 

[beckdawg]

Norris is young and they have control. I really don't see them giving up on him at all.

Shark no...no...no. He is not a big game starter. Add to it he left on crummy terms.

@Shark, i'm not expecting him to be a big game starter. I'm expecting you replace Lackey next year with him. Now I wouldn't give up a ton for Shark and probably wouldn't even deal Candelario but Shark is a durable pitcher who has good underlying numbers. I don't want him to be an "ace" but more give you a solid #3/4 ish starter.

@Norris I'm not sure they move him either but keep in mind that was one of Dumbrowski's last moves. I'm not 100% sure the current front office is as tied to Norris as he may have been. And I can see the case if they are rebuilding which it appears they are for them to trade a good young guy now for 2-3 more controllable pieces. They have next to nothing in terms of young infielders. Their top 5 positional prospects are OF. #6 is a C(#16 in their system). #7 is a 3B(#20 in their system). Nick Castellanos at 3B for them is really their only young guy and he isn't really living up to expectations as a .261/.311/.427 career hitter. Iglesias is a defensive stud at SS but he can't hit. Kinsler at 2B is almost 36. Cabrera at 1B is 34.

Long story short, I could potentially see a package involving Ademan and maybe Candelario enticing them. 6 of their top 10 prospects are pitchers. And if you're blowing it up anyways these years of Norris' youth don't likely matter. He's on pace to be a 2022 FA so that's what 4 years of control left? It's pretty hard to rebuild that fast. Suppose you could argue wait and see if you get better offers later but I think you could make a strong offer as the cubs now and potentially sway them. Perhaps overpay a little based on what he appears to be now in the hopes he develops more.

 

[CSF77]

Depends on how they rebuild. It took the Cubs 5 years because they used the draft for the most part to build their core.

Sox are using trades and should rebound faster.

4 years is a lot of time if Det goes primary trades secondary draft.

 

[CSF77]

And on Shark: he talked a lot of snack about the rebuild and honestly I doubt Theo would even consider it. And has he even won a play off game? I'm pretty sure we spanked him like the baby that he is.

 

[beckdawg]

And on Shark: he talked a lot of snack about the rebuild and honestly I doubt Theo would even consider it. And has he even won a play off game? I'm pretty sure we spanked him like the baby that he is.

You're taking shit personally. The game is a business. I seriously doubt Theo holds any ill will. For one thing, Shark was right to have concerns. His concerns are not the cubs concerns obviously but there's a lot of young teams out there that aren't the cubs. From Shark's point of view it's easy to see them not being competitive and wasting his prime.

Ultimately, none of that matters to me. What matters to me is players who can pitch. As of today, there are 13 starters in the majors with a k/9 over 10. You're talking about Sale, Scherzer, Kluber, Robbie Ray, deGrom, Strasburg, Archer, McCullers, Kershaw, Carlos Martinez, Severino, Greninke and Shark. Of those 13, only 8 have a bb/9 under 2.5(Sale, Scherzer, Kluber, Strasburg, Kershaw, Severino, Greinke and Shark). And of the 8 left, he has the lowest bb/9 at 1.11. So, frankly I'm more than willing to take a chance on him especially when his ERA is no where near his FIP. He has a 4.63 ERA and 3.38 FIP. He's not even that expensive contract wise for that sort of production and he's on a short term deal meaning you're not tied into him for 6-7 years.

Frankly, I'll take him over Darvish in FA because Darvish is going to get paid and unlike Darvis Shark hasn't been hurt recently.

 

[chibears55]

Looking like there a lot of interest in Justin Verlander

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[TL1961]

The entire time Shark pitched for the Cubs, he eyed a big payday elsewhere, even though the Cubs paid him a ton of $.

If he becomes a FA, he will expect to get paid like a #1, which he isn't.

His pitching stats are good. But I wonder about the mentality. He sometimes seems to pitch as though expecting to lose. Not sure how to describe/define that, but he seems to lack that killer instinct.

 

[CSF77]

Looking like there a lot of interest in Justin Verlander

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Verlander is a guy that I would want. I think he is owed 56 mil. Something like that. Cubs could use him as the 3 and it gives plenty of play off experience and vet leadership.

I honestly want them to stack their chips towards Archer in the offseason. But as far as a inseason Verlander should be lower cost in prospects due to taking contract commitments off of Det

 

[CSF77]

The entire time Shark pitched for the Cubs, he eyed a big payday elsewhere, even though the Cubs paid him a ton of $.

If he becomes a FA, he will expect to get paid like a #1, which he isn't.

His pitching stats are good. But I wonder about the mentality. He sometimes seems to pitch as though expecting to lose. Not sure how to describe/define that, but he seems to lack that killer instinct.

I pretty much agree with this.

Here is the thing Beck. Shark pretty much is not a guy that you can depend on in a series. So he gives nothing but a extension of what we are already getting with Jake and John.

If they are going to spend trade assets what matters is the goal. If the goal is getting by then that is fine. But they are in the competition window. So you have to target either young upside or play off successful starters. Shark is neither

 

[beckdawg]

I pretty much agree with this.

Here is the thing Beck. Shark pretty much is not a guy that you can depend on in a series. So he gives nothing but a extension of what we are already getting with Jake and John.

If they are going to spend trade assets what matters is the goal. If the goal is getting by then that is fine. But they are in the competition window. So you have to target either young upside or play off successful starters. Shark is neither

Verlander is walking 4.18 guys per 9 and is already 34. He's also owed $28 mil the next 2. In other words, he costs you in 2 years what Shark costs in 3. Also please spare me this bullshit about not being able to depend on Shark in a playoff series. He's started 1 game vs a cubs team that won 100+ games last year. Regardless I guarantee the front office wont think the same way you do. The fact of the matter is they actually were rumored to be interested in Shark when he signed in SF but he got too pricey for them and they fell back on Lackey.

 

[chibears55]

I just want someone who will help this year and will be an upgrade over Arrieta and Lackey for next year or so..

I think and hope if they do get a SP at deadline and if Hendricks returns healthy..
They will release Lackey and go with..

Lester
Hendricks
new guy
Arrieta
Montgomery/Butler/Anderson



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[beckdawg]

The entire time Shark pitched for the Cubs, he eyed a big payday elsewhere, even though the Cubs paid him a ton of $.

If he becomes a FA, he will expect to get paid like a #1, which he isn't.

His pitching stats are good. But I wonder about the mentality. He sometimes seems to pitch as though expecting to lose. Not sure how to describe/define that, but he seems to lack that killer instinct.

Wait what? Shark is under contract through 2020 and has no opt out. What are you talking about if he becomes a FA? As for what he did while with the cubs, i mean are people seriously bitching about what he did here? He played well enough to net Russell. So what he eyed a big pay day. You think Bryant isn't? I mean I suppose I can see the argument he has an over inflated value in himself but why are people seemingly taking that personal? The market paid him what he's "worth" when he signed the deal with SF. We know what that cost is. Now I'm not saying i'd pay him $19 mil a year personally. I mentioned if SF eats about $10 mil he'd be priced like Lackey for the next 3 years. Do people realistically think there's a better solution out there to replace Lackey for cheaper than that because I sure as hell don't. Edinson Volquez he of the career 4.41 ERA got a 2 year $22 mil deal last offseason. Bartolo Colon got $12.5 mil. Rich Hill got 3 years at $16 mil per.

Long story short you're not going to get any discount on pitchers. If you want to argue they are better off going after Archer/Gray then fine. But what if they aren't available or are too pricey? What's the plan then? If you're telling me it's Verlander then go try and sell that to someone else. Beside the fact his numbers aren't as good, he's older and hits the luxury tax even harder. I certainly wouldn't trade much of value for a 34 year old Jason Vargas. I'd be shocked if the sox seriously entertained trading Q to the cubs. Cole I'd be interested in but I some what doubt Pitt deals him in division.

So, if you're looking to plug a hole for next year as well as trying to win this year you could do a lot worse than Shark.

 

[beckdawg]

I just want someone who will help this year and will be an upgrade over Arrieta and Lackey for next year or so..

I think and hope if they do get a SP at deadline and if Hendricks returns healthy..
They will release Lackey and go with..

Lester
Hendricks
new guy
Arrieta
Montgomery/Butler/Anderson



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Here's how I see this playing out. My guess is we wont see Archer moved in which case you're looking at a big ticket guy for the cubs this offseason. Realistically right now I think it's about finding a guy who can be a #3/4 type to take Lackey's spot next year and push Lackey to the #5 or w/e this year. Initially I had hoped that would be Gray but the prices seem to be getting higher than my like. That's why I brought up Shark. Lester, Hendricks and Shark isn't the most dominating line up but it lets you set your sights on a big ticket guy this coming offseason rather than splitting time finding 2 guys. The 5th slot you can figure out between Butler/Mills/Montgomery.... whomever. And the thing is Lester Hendricks and Shark are a pretty durable staff. Other than this hand issue with Hendricks none have missed major time the last 2-3 seasons.

 

[CSF77]

Here's how I see this playing out. My guess is we wont see Archer moved in which case you're looking at a big ticket guy for the cubs this offseason. Realistically right now I think it's about finding a guy who can be a #3/4 type to take Lackey's spot next year and push Lackey to the #5 or w/e this year. Initially I had hoped that would be Gray but the prices seem to be getting higher than my like. That's why I brought up Shark. Lester, Hendricks and Shark isn't the most dominating line up but it lets you set your sights on a big ticket guy this coming offseason rather than splitting time finding 2 guys. The 5th slot you can figure out between Butler/Mills/Montgomery.... whomever. And the thing is Lester Hendricks and Shark are a pretty durable staff. Other than this hand issue with Hendricks none have missed major time the last 2-3 seasons.

Rays most likely sits on Archer until the winter meetings. At that point he would be the biggest name out there. The Cubs have the asserts to get him if they don't blow them trying to fix this season.

That means if they trade either Eloy or Alzolay they have less than 0% chance to be involved. The Rays would have to ass can the season to even concider trading him at the dead line. Not to mention his market would be better with a weak pitching F/A market vs competing vs Gray and Q.

That said say they did this. He would be the ace by default. Then Lester. Then you need a 3. Hendricks maybe that guy but you really need either a back of the rotation lefty if Montgromy is not that guy. Last game his SO were good but way too many hits.

Now if that is the case is there a guy that they can target here or do they wait for the off season?

Honestly if I'm Theo I'm going into the dead line with Candy and Zag as my chips. See what shakes out. If I gave Q for Eloy and Candy and I know I will never get Archer then I'm focusing on developing Alzolay. He has that upside that can be special.

That is the way I would look at it. As far as MOR. I don't look at it as value or trying to get a team to pay to get better contract value. I look at it as I'm building a contender and I need the "best" players that are available. Money is really not a front line factor unless I have cap concerns. I'm looking at it as I am losing over 50 mil in pay roll and I have some wiggle room. I would also have to have enough future cap to cover retention. That is it.

That said, they need 2 starters at least. Most likely 3 by the start of next season. The 3rd is wishful thinking that Montgomery sticks. Even then you have to focus up on a 2 inning guy in the off. So that factor still remains.

Then I'm looking at my system. Who is feasible to look at as a option. Tseng is a good bet to be able to cover my 5 at some Point in 2018. So I can buy a flip starter and feel ok there.

After him is Alzolay in AA Hopefully AAA. DeLaCruz also if healthy. There are a few other arms that are intriguing but for now let's talk about the 2 guys that seem to be lower risk.

So even if Tseng flops he can still play the roll Butler has this year. I expect about the same results. And 4-2 is really not piss poor performance

 

[beckdawg]

That is the way I would look at it. As far as MOR. I don't look at it as value or trying to get a team to pay to get better contract value. I look at it as I'm building a contender and I need the "best" players that are available. Money is really not a front line factor unless I have cap concerns. I'm looking at it as I am losing over 50 mil in pay roll and I have some wiggle room. I would also have to have enough future cap to cover retention. That is it.

I mean if it's the difference between a good and a great prospect than sure. I look at it like this. There's essentially 4 combos on a trade. Good prospects for good player. That's your proverbial block buster trade. Average or low impact prospect for bad player. This is your prototypical salary dump. Bad prospect for bad player. This rarely happens but it's more or less PTBNL trades on DFA'd players. The last is average prospect for bad player plus money.

The last case is where I see shark falling in. Maybe I'm wrong here but I believe you feel closer to this than you may think. Shark has a 4.63 ERA. I've already sang the praises for why I think he's a good buy low guy. But at the end of the day SF is selling a guy with a mid 4 ERA who's owed close to $60 mil over the next 3 seasons. In my view that's a pretty hard sell. I think if you are SF and you're actually selling you have two options here. You take basically nothing in a salary dump or you eat some money and get some average prospects.

Basically what I'm thinking here is something along the lines of Candelario a chesny young level player and a low level throw in of some description in return for Shark and some salary relief. If they aren't willing to eat any money I have a tough time seeing them getting anything more than a couple of 20+ org prospect and I say that as someone who actually likes the idea of adding Shark.

I mean maybe that's the disconnect between us on Shark. Maybe I wasn't clear and you read this as actually paying decent prospects for him. I really don't see it that way. Candelario I suppose is an OK prospect but as I've said before to me he's more just moving parts around that aren't really needed. And I would only move him if the cubs also got some salary relief. I look at it as similar to the Pirates moving Liriano a year or so ago. Pitt had to give up 2 semi decent prospects in Reese McGuire(Tor's #11 prospect atm) and Harold Ramirez(#13) in that trade in order to get Drew Hutchison. I'd argue Sharks in a little bit better place stat wise than Liriano was but I don't think it's far off.

 

[CSF77]

If there is nothing on the table as "better" and it costs Zag and Candy I honestly wouldn't make a stink about it.

But

I would rather have Q.

If TB wanted Candy in the package because they wanted to move Longora off the hot corner in his 30's then that plays as a factor.

Honestly I would be talking to the Rays primary just to see what it would take in theory to even entertain the idea. I would bring up names that I am thinking of in other deals just to get a reaction or sense of interest. Those players would go under potential good towards Archer.

But basically I would get a feel of when and if they would do it. Do I have what it takes to make a offer. I wouldn't even concider the competition at this point but I would hold onto my list to up the anti.

 

[chibears55]

Just heard cubs could have interest in Denard Span..

If that true, possibly have potential deal involving Jay or Almora..

Span under contract for 2 more years

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[CSF77]

Just heard cubs could have interest in Denard Span..

If that true, possibly have potential deal involving Jay or Almora..

Span under contract for 2 more years

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

U have resource

 

[chibears55]

U have resource

Yes..my sources
????

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[chibears55]

According to Bruce Levine, the Cubs are showing interest in veteran outfielder*Denard Span.

Theo Epstein*and*Jed Hoyer*realize the team could use a consistent veteran bat at the top of the lineup, similar to what*Dexter Fowlergave the Cubs the previous two seasons.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk