Trade deadline/rumors

[TC in Mississippi]

Ive been saying this all along..

This is their best opportunity to win it all in a while..

So, if they have an opportunity to add pieces that could enhance their chances with winning it this year, then they should add tbose guys..

Noone saying drain the farm , but dont do nothing

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I527 using Tapatalk

Well they already made a move that I think made them better. Does another move have to be huge? What if that move was a lefty bench bat instead of a guy that needed a ton of playing time like Reddick or Beltran? What percentage chance does a name player make you closer to a WS win? Again I'm not saying don't make moves that make you better but I wouldn't be uncomfortable going into the playoffs with this team, albeit healthy.

 

[RacerX]

Why is there so much debate when an obvious middle-ground is available. This is not a binary option or a "Sophie's Choice", there are alternatives to "All-In" and "mortgaging the future".

And, remember, this team is jacked up for many years of success regardless of what we do or whom we trade in the next week - our prospect pool is very deep overall, and the team has mega-cash flows. So we are rich in the two most valuable commodities in the game.

Personally, it's hard not to be a huge Schwarber fan, but i don't think there is anyway he can exceed or surpass the hype and value he is garnering at the moment. I would trade him in a NY second, along with another OF prospect, for the two Yankee relievers plus one of their younger legit SP prospects.

As you look at our talent level in their 20s, we are imbalanced with position players vs. pitchers, i am ok with sacrificing a valued position player for pitching - even if that pitching is a little long in the tooth, which is why i want a young arm thrown into that trade.

 

[beckdawg]

Outside of Beckdawg, who overvalued Alcantara?

To be fair I said i was completely bias in my feelings on him

 

[beckdawg]

If dealing one guy is "mortgaging the future", whatever that even is, then your system is already flawed. One can say our system is flawed because we have not developed pitching and have to buy/trade for all our pitchers. In that case, you trade from your strengths obviously. You have to give to get.

The fact is that you never know what your future is. The entire point of building redundant parts is some of them are going to disappoint. Now if you're saying trade Schwarber for a proven #1 or #2 starter I think that's a different conversation. My issue is trading him for a reliever is undeniably bad value. If we can sit here and say that today then there's a chance 2 years from now that trade is going to look like an absolutely disaster. And if the idea is well you gotta win the world series this year so let's stack the deck as much as possible, what happens if they then just don't hit in the NLDS or NLCS and get bounced? What then? It's exactly what happened last year and adding someone like Miller does nothing to help that.

That's my issue with the idea. Relievers really don't impact games as much as people think. Over the entire season the best 2 bullpens in the majors are Houston and the Yankees at 5.8 fWAR and 5.1 fWAR respectively which is a group of around 8 guys. Schwarber by himself was worth 1.9 fWAR in 273 PAs last year as a 22 year old who'd only been a professional for 1 year.

Luckily I think this front office isn't stupid enough to make the move. Miller's undeniably a great reliever. But the difference between him and Mike Montgomery who the cubs gave up relatively little for isn't even that much. Montgomery has been worth 0.8 fWAR and has a 2.15/2.91 ERA/FIP. Miller has been worth 1.5 fWAR and has a 1.31/1.99 ERA/FIP. There's no way you're going to tell me that difference is equal to the difference between Vogelbach/Blackburn and Schwarber.

 

[Washington]

While I am still against giving up the farm for one single year, I've heard a few good points on sports radio recently that have shifted my perspective slightly. One was from Steve Stone who said if you are in position to win - you never know when that opportunity will come around again. Yes we have a young core and looked primed to be very good for many years. But next year Rizzo and Lester could get major injuries and our chances of winning go out the window.

Nothing in the future is guaranteed. We are in first place in late July so we do have a chance to win. I personally would acquire Chapman and possibly Beltran, as neither would cost the farm. We desperately need a tough, veteran hitter who can come through with RISP. I don't know if he's on the juice or what, but Beltran some how has 20 HR's with solid BA/OBP this year. How the heck old is Beltran? He's like going Julio Franco style.

This right here ^^^^^. There are no guarantees of what tomorrow brings. When you are this close, you do what it takes. See Bowman for an example of how it is done.

 

[Washington]

The way to win a championship is to get there every year.

The way to win a championship is to make the playoffs and have all the stars align doing whatever it takes to put the best team you can on the field. Think the Royals were happy with their rental of Cueto? Think there are any regrets at all as they are still celebrating being World Champions?

If we win it all this year without Schwarber, why would he be a necessity in the future especially if your organization keeps developing players? The Cubs need to start developing pitchers soon.

 

[chibears55]

Well they already made a move that I think made them better. Does another move have to be huge? What if that move was a lefty bench bat instead of a guy that needed a ton of playing time like Reddick or Beltran? What percentage chance does a name player make you closer to a WS win? Again I'm not saying don't make moves that make you better but I wouldn't be uncomfortable going into the playoffs with this team, albeit healthy.

If trading for a player makes you 1% better or 100% better then you do it, especially when you're competing for a WS title. .

The trade deadline is an opportunity for a team who right there , to add player(s) that not only will help them secure a playoff birth but also a chance to add guys who can help them beat the other top playoff teams.
Which are now the Giants and Nationals..

Adding LH Montgomery helps with that situation and makes bullpen better..
If they can add another strong reliever whether it Miller Chapman Betances or anyone, it would be an upgrade over someone at the bottom and make them better.

Adding a LH bat like Reddick Bruce or Beltran is a huge upgrade over what they have now from the left side snd it makes the bench better.

Im not uncomfortable with the team overall but there are a couple players I wouldn't mind seeing upgraded



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I527 using Tapatalk

 

[beckdawg]

If trading for a player makes you 1% better or 100% better then you do it, especially when you're competing for a WS title.

This is a pretty simplistic way to look at things and is extremely short sighted. To throw up a pretty simplistic example of this, let's say the cubs traded Kris Bryant for David Ortiz. Ortiz is clearly the best hitter in the majors this year with his 180 wRC+. So, by your definition that would make the cubs 1% better. But the obvious flaw here is he's retiring after this year. Now admittedly that is a stacked example to prove the point I'm making but the same logic applies. Trading young players for in their prime players is always a trade off for good over a long period vs good now. And if you do that enough then you have no one who's good next year.

The other problem with trading Schwarber that I haven't seen people mention is the utter lack of left handed power in baseball right now. As of today here's the guys with more than 15 HRs; David Ortiz, Anthony Rizzo, Robinson Cano, Chris Davis, Jake Lamb, Carlos Gonzalez, Bryce Harper, Jay Bruce, Daniel Murphy, Kyle Seager, Brandon Moss, Freddie Freeman, Rougned Odor, Corey Seager, Curtis Granderson, Joey Votto, Michael Saunders, and Jason Kipnis. It's not a lengthy list and a lot of the guys are either in their prime or on the down slope.

If you're going to trade Schwarber, you better get at least equal value back and every baseball person out there has said that from a baseball standpoint you would never trade Schwarber for a reliever. If you or the cubs still believe their bullpen is weak that doesn't mean you shut down trade discussions for other relievers. You can easily target other relievers. But just giving up one of the best young talents in baseball because another team draws a line in the sand is horrible negotiation.

 

[chibears55]

This is a pretty simplistic way to look at things and is extremely short sighted. To throw up a pretty simplistic example of this, let's say the cubs traded Kris Bryant for David Ortiz. Ortiz is clearly the best hitter in the majors this year with his 180 wRC+. So, by your definition that would make the cubs 1% better. But the obvious flaw here is he's retiring after this year. Now admittedly that is a stacked example to prove the point I'm making but the same logic applies. Trading young players for in their prime players is always a trade off for good over a long period vs good now. And if you do that enough then you have no one who's good next year.

The other problem with trading Schwarber that I haven't seen people mention is the utter lack of left handed power in baseball right now. As of today here's the guys with more than 15 HRs; David Ortiz, Anthony Rizzo, Robinson Cano, Chris Davis, Jake Lamb, Carlos Gonzalez, Bryce Harper, Jay Bruce, Daniel Murphy, Kyle Seager, Brandon Moss, Freddie Freeman, Rougned Odor, Corey Seager, Curtis Granderson, Joey Votto, Michael Saunders, and Jason Kipnis. It's not a lengthy list and a lot of the guys are either in their prime or on the down slope.

If you're going to trade Schwarber, you better get at least equal value back and every baseball person out there has said that from a baseball standpoint you would never trade Schwarber for a reliever. If you or the cubs still believe their bullpen is weak that doesn't mean you shut down trade discussions for other relievers. You can easily target other relievers. But just giving up one of the best young talents in baseball because another team draws a line in the stand is horrible negotiation.

2 things. .

Im not talking about trading any of the core players on roster to make them better..
Obviously im talking about upgrading in areas that could use it.

by my definition, I think most posters on here knew what I was talking about as far as making the team 1% better or 100%

I wasnt specifically talking about trading Schwarber
and I did mention other relievers with Miller Chapnan and Betances as far upgrading the pen

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I527 using Tapatalk

 

[Omeletpants]

When I look at the Cubs 6-9 slots I see a lack of thump. If we had had Schwarber at 6 I think we have done much better on the low scoring games.

 

[beckdawg]

2 things. .

Im not talking about trading any of the core players on roster to make them better..
Obviously im talking about upgrading in areas that could use it.

by my definition, I think most posters on here knew what I was talking about as far as making the team 1% better or 100%

I wasnt specifically talking about trading Schwarber
and I did mention other relievers with Miller Chapnan and Betances as far upgrading the pen

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I527 using Tapatalk

Fair enough but you long were in the Miller camp so that was more my assumption given that's sort of the talk that's going on right now. All I'm really trying to get across here to everyone in the topic is that you can't be hyper focused on 1 guy.

 

[chibears55]

Fair enough but you long were in the Miller camp so that was more my assumption given that's sort of the talk that's going on right now. All I'm really trying to get across here to everyone in the topic is that you can't be hyper focused on 1 guy.

Yea
I still would like Miller but not at a high cost

Im just all for upgrades where it needed

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I527 using Tapatalk

 

[beckdawg]

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/...sale-jose-quintana-trade-deadline-rumors.html

Yes please?

 

[CSF77]

When I look at the Cubs 6-9 slots I see a lack of thump. If we had had Schwarber at 6 I think we have done much better on the low scoring games.

If Schwarber babe Ruth was hitting there would be no low scoring games and you pile on list would continue to grow.

 

[CSF77]

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/...sale-jose-quintana-trade-deadline-rumors.html

Yes please?

Justin Morneau Might be someone to look into. He fits the profile as a PH

And if you wanted Sale it would cost Schwarber, Hendricks to start. Then you would just open up the door to them. Eloy....sure. Torres. Ya etc.

Sale is up with Kershaw and that is what it costs to get greatness.

 

[TL1961]

The Nationals have very good offense, very good defense, very good starting pitching and decent to good relief pitching. And they may very well add at the deadline.

The Giants have very good starting pitching, solid play on O and D, experience and great managing.

The Mets have great starting pitching that proved it can shut you down in a postseason series.

The Dodgers could throw Kershaw at you three times in a series if things fell wrong. Or Kershaw / Chris Archer possibly four to five times.

IF you get by all that, the AL team waiting will likely be favored to win the WS.

Insurmountable? Absolutely not.

But this is why you do not EVER go "all in". Play to be there every year, not to try to be a "Super team".

 

[chibears55]

Justin Morneau Might be someone to look into. He fits the profile as a PH

And if you wanted Sale it would cost Schwarber, Hendricks to start. Then you would just open up the door to them. Eloy....sure. Torres. Ya etc.

Sale is up with Kershaw and that is what it costs to get greatness.

Reinsdorf would never trade anyone to Cubs to help them win world series

Sent from my LG-V495 using Tapatalk

 

[chibears55]

The Nationals have very good offense, very good defense, very good starting pitching and decent to good relief pitching. And they may very well add at the deadline.

The Giants have very good starting pitching, solid play on O and D, experience and great managing.

The Mets have great starting pitching that proved it can shut you down in a postseason series.

The Dodgers could throw Kershaw at you three times in a series if things fell wrong. Or Kershaw / Chris Archer possibly four to five times.

IF you get by all that, the AL team waiting will likely be favored to win the WS.

Insurmountable? Absolutely not.

But this is why you do not EVER go "all in". Play to be there every year, not to try to be a "Super team".

Or

That the reason why you add players to upgrade and help beat those teams

Otherwise

You can sit here every year for the next couple years and say that about those teams

I don't understand why some are afraid to trade away kids..
Again, who in their system beside maybe Torres and Jiminez who are probably a good 2-3 yrs away will be replacing any of the 26 and under position players already on team in next 3+ yrs

Sent from my LG-V495 using Tapatalk

 

[beckdawg]

And if you wanted Sale it would cost Schwarber, Hendricks to start. Then you would just open up the door to them. Eloy....sure. Torres. Ya etc.

Sale is up with Kershaw and that is what it costs to get greatness.

Thinking Quintana would be more the target than Sale because as you mention cost. That being said, I some what doubt they'd want Hendricks. Their two top prospects are both pitchers(Spencer Adams and Carson Fulmer) and if you consider right now their starting staff is Sale, Quintana, Carlos Rodon, James Shields(stuck with for a couple more years). I think they'd prefer bats.

 

[Diehardfan]

This is so inane, arguing about something that no one here has any say so in whatsoever. What a waste of energy. The Cubs blew it up and started from scratch. They did that for a reason...and the reason wasn't to go "all-in" the first chance they had to win something. They want a shot to win every year and trading your young players which is the very life's blood of your organization...for aging, back of their career players is a death sentence. Theo Epstein is not Jerry Angelo or Phil Emery....much too smart for that. He's not only been good at what he does, he's also been very, very lucky that this many of his drafted players have turned out to be the real deal. He's not about to belay that good fortune by sending them packing.

Deadline trading is a curse...you almost always over pay.