Trade deadline/rumors

[ZAN]

That makes relatively little sense to me. Granted he's a lefty so I suppose you could argue for him in the bullpen but surely someone would need him more as a starter and would pay more.

2nd half backslide is a proven thing for Jason Hammel at this point in his career. I'm choosing to gloss over his putrid outing the other day and write it off as that one start that every pitcher in baseball has every year. But usually around that 120 inning mark, Hammel falls off the face of the earth.

Maybe we swing Doolittle and Hill instead of going for Gray (health and performance issues this year)?

 

[CSF77]

Most teams tend to shy away from guys like Hill. Came from no where and off an injury. Theo may just go for him due to the lower cost. McKenny and a arm I bet buys him. Add to it Jed and Beene seem to deal with each other a lot any ways. Seems like a natural trade partner.

 

[beckdawg]

2nd half backslide is a proven thing for Jason Hammel at this point in his career.

You can't just trade for a guy assuming Hammel will be shit. If that is what they truly think he shouldn't be on the team to begin with. And more to the point, as I mentioned Hill doesn't really make a great deal of sense because he's only around this year. If we assume that Hammel's gone to make room for Hill then you have the same problem going into next year with little to show for your effort.

Let's say just hypothetically that you could get Hill for McKinney. Why would you make that trade when you could in theory go after Drew Smyly or Jake Odorizzi? Sure both of those two probably cost more than McKinney but you're going to have to do something for your #5 starter in 2017 anyways. So, my point was basically that if you're willing to throw away someone for Hill then why not just find your "young pitcher" everyone has been talking about for ages? And granted that player has to actually be available to make that logic work but if that sorta player is out there it makes far more sense.

It'd be different if say Hammel got hurt and was out for the year. Then trading for Hill makes more sense but as of now all the cubs pitchers are healthy and while I get the idea SilenceS suggested of a 6 man rotation, that's part of the reason they brought in Warren. And additionally, if they were to go after a younger starter who might be rough around the edges a bit, they could also fill that capacity. In essence, that's what they did with Arrieta and look where it got them there. Now sure Arrieta is not going to be the norm but that doesn't mean they can't find someone who effectively turns into a decent rotation member.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Most teams tend to shy away from guys like Hill. Came from no where and off an injury. Theo may just go for him due to the lower cost. McKenny and a arm I bet buys him. Add to it Jed and Beene seem to deal with each other a lot any ways. Seems like a natural trade partner.

There seem to be a lot of suitors for Hill. He's been good since last August with Boston and if he's ok after this DL stint he'd be attractive as a rental. I think he ends up in Boston or Miami.

 

[CSF77]

There seem to be a lot of suitors for Hill. He's been good since last August with Boston and if he's ok after this DL stint he'd be attractive as a rental. I think he ends up in Boston or Miami.

I know there will be bidders but we are not talking top 100 players valued prospects. More likely guys in the 10-20 range of a teams depth.

On Beck: I kinda agree on the why issue. But like I said: they could go forward with the 6 man rotation past Warren and toss him back in the pen. If they want to keep Jake and Jon on a 5 day it is fine. But I'm thinking Jake needs more off time IMO as he has been struggling and will most likely get used in the all star game. Not to mention after the Card series he fell off the table vs the Mets.

Jon and Lackey I don't worry much about. Hendricks is also getting to that point. But the whole 5 1/3 100 pitch deal not feeling it. He needs to be getting to the 7th more than not the rest of the way

The main issue is the BP had the least use (top 5 I believe now). That is putting innings on the staff early season and I believe we are seeing the start of the cost of those innings. The 21 day run adding a 6th is not enough. Having 6 starters lets you push back a starter when needed to give them a day or 2 to recover vs having a BP day. Add to it if one goes down you are not sitting on Warren....

On going after a higher end target. Doubtful. I believe they are at the "in the now" process. Losing too much talent to add talent over all hurts their chances. Losing a non factor for this year makes more sense.

Injury happens. That is a reality. They need to add to the pool vs subtract

 

[beckdawg]

So in the madness I often have trying to fall asleep(insomnia FML) I thought about something with regard to trades. Over the past 2 seasons Hammel has been worth 4.1 fWAR and is roughly on a similar pace to the 2ish fWAR he's averaged. Hammel obviously isn't a world beater or anything but he's fairly durable and effective. He's making $9 mil this year with a $10 mil option next year or a $2 mil buyout. For someone who's a pretty decent lock as a 2-ish fWAR pitcher $10 mil is a bargain. However, it's more a bargain for a team who needs a guy rather than a team who is trying to win the world series. In other words, $10 mil for Jason Hammel would have been great on the 2012-2014 cubs and possibly even a 2015 style cub team but you'd obviously like better on the 2016 cubs. As such, it's long been my thought they'd probably just buy him out next year and try to upgrade.

Anyways, what triggered in my mind last night was the idea of having Warren starting again. The idea has largely been a 6 man rotation going forward to limit innings but I do wonder if the cubs instead would shop Hammel. As a hypothetical "what if," what if the cubs dealt Hammel + parts to the twins for Abad? From the twins side, they get a pretty reliable #4/5 starter to replace one of Gibson or Milone who have been pretty garbage and it's a short term contract so unlike Hughes, Santana and Nolasco they aren't locked in for 3+ years. That plays well with Jose Berrios in AAA, Tyler Jay at A+, Stephen Gonsalves in AA and Kohl Stewart also at AA. From the cubs side, they get the lefty specialist they desperately need and are able to move Warren into the rotation as the #5. He's not a FA until 2019. So, between him and Hendricks they will have locked up the back half of their rotation for several years. And given Hammel's price/performance I doubt it would take much if anything for him to be an equal value to a decent lefty specialist.

The idea probably plays with other teams but the twins struck me as a low budget team that would see Hammel as a value. As for limiting innings on the starters, Warren starting in the pen limited his. You could possibly call up Pierce Johnson in that same role. Alternatively, they signed Matusz and are apparently building him up as a starter in mesa atm. That move makes more sense if you push for this sort of move with Hammel. And as a tangental idea, it would explain a bit more why the cubs might be looking at guys like Hill.

 

[DanTown]

So in the madness I often have trying to fall asleep(insomnia FML) I thought about something with regard to trades. Over the past 2 seasons Hammel has been worth 4.1 fWAR and is roughly on a similar pace to the 2ish fWAR he's averaged. Hammel obviously isn't a world beater or anything but he's fairly durable and effective. He's making $9 mil this year with a $10 mil option next year or a $2 mil buyout. For someone who's a pretty decent lock as a 2-ish fWAR pitcher $10 mil is a bargain. However, it's more a bargain for a team who needs a guy rather than a team who is trying to win the world series. In other words, $10 mil for Jason Hammel would have been great on the 2012-2014 cubs and possibly even a 2015 style cub team but you'd obviously like better on the 2016 cubs. As such, it's long been my thought they'd probably just buy him out next year and try to upgrade.

Anyways, what triggered in my mind last night was the idea of having Warren starting again. The idea has largely been a 6 man rotation going forward to limit innings but I do wonder if the cubs instead would shop Hammel. As a hypothetical "what if," what if the cubs dealt Hammel + parts to the twins for Abad? From the twins side, they get a pretty reliable #4/5 starter to replace one of Gibson or Milone who have been pretty garbage and it's a short term contract so unlike Hughes, Santana and Nolasco they aren't locked in for 3+ years. That plays well with Jose Berrios in AAA, Tyler Jay at A+, Stephen Gonsalves in AA and Kohl Stewart also at AA. From the cubs side, they get the lefty specialist they desperately need and are able to move Warren into the rotation as the #5. He's not a FA until 2019. So, between him and Hendricks they will have locked up the back half of their rotation for several years. And given Hammel's price/performance I doubt it would take much if anything for him to be an equal value to a decent lefty specialist.

The idea probably plays with other teams but the twins struck me as a low budget team that would see Hammel as a value. As for limiting innings on the starters, Warren starting in the pen limited his. You could possibly call up Pierce Johnson in that same role. Alternatively, they signed Matusz and are apparently building him up as a starter in mesa atm. That move makes more sense if you push for this sort of move with Hammel. And as a tangental idea, it would explain a bit more why the cubs might be looking at guys like Hill.

I tend to believe that the Cubs mostly want to upgrade their #4 spot in a playoff rotation because if the Cubs season rests on the shoulders of Kyle Hendricks in a playoff game, I'm not sure that's the best of ideas. If you think about how Hendricks pitches, I'm not sure him being "pumped" or a little nervous makes him an effective pitcher because his margin for error is so small. If the team was healthy and pitching as well as they have normally, I'm pretty sure that Hammel and not Hendricks would get the call in a game 4.

I think they might look at a guy like Hill and make him a SP and go six man this year. Or get Hill and do a modified six man

Arrieta
Lester
Lackey
Hill
Hammell

Arrieta
Lester
Hendricks
Lackey
Hill

Arrieta
Lester
Hammell
Hendricks
Lackey

One of the problem with a true six man rotation is it that would mean less starts for your high value SP (Jake, Jon). In this kind of setup, you still get 9 starts from Arrieta/Lester/Lackey and then two each from Hill/Hammel/Hendricks.

 

[beckdawg]

I tend to believe that the Cubs mostly want to upgrade their #4 spot in a playoff rotation because if the Cubs season rests on the shoulders of Kyle Hendricks in a playoff game, I'm not sure that's the best of ideas. If you think about how Hendricks pitches, I'm not sure him being "pumped" or a little nervous makes him an effective pitcher because his margin for error is so small. If the team was healthy and pitching as well as they have normally, I'm pretty sure that Hammel and not Hendricks would get the call in a game 4.
Lackey

One of the problem with a true six man rotation is it that would mean less starts for your high value SP (Jake, Jon). In this kind of setup, you still get 9 starts from Arrieta/Lester/Lackey and then two each from Hill/Hammel/Hendricks.

I get you're not the biggest Hendricks fan from previous discussions we've had but i mean the guy's 7th in the majors in ERA right now. He's not a prototypical great starter but at some point you just have to accept that despite not having prototypical great starter tools that he's just effective. With that being said, I'm definitely willing to concede that he doesn't presently go deep enough into games as you'd like. Although, it's not as pronounced as you'd think. He's thrown 96.2 in 16 starts. Danny Salazar has thrown 99 in 16 starts. Drew Pomeranz is at 95 in 16 starts. Jose Fernandez is at 100.1 in 16 starts....etc. And even the 3rd time through the line up metric people have used against him in the past is good this year at .216/.278/.318.

To me that's more a case of you just hoping to get at least 5 good innings from him in the playoffs and turning it over to the bull pen a la the royals. In order for that to happen, they probably need that lefty specialist and then on top of that another guy to be strong. Strop and Rondon are probably the best you can hope for in the 8th and 9th. With a good lefty specialist you could probably use Wood who's been great in the 7th. Then just becomes a matter of getting through the 6th. I don't know if they'd have to add someone or if they could rely on Grimm returning to form or Edwards but they do have some options there.

As for the 6 man rotation, my take on it was more that you would essentially just have Lester and Arrieta pitch say an inning less in their starts but start them as you would normally in the 5 man set up. You could probably also give them an extra day between starts by going a 4 man 3-5 and having the #6 start every like 7th day or whatever that works out to and using them out of the bull pen in between.

 

[DanTown]

I get you're not the biggest Hendricks fan from previous discussions we've had but i mean the guy's 7th in the majors in ERA right now. He's not a prototypical great starter but at some point you just have to accept that despite not having prototypical great starter tools that he's just effective. With that being said, I'm definitely willing to concede that he doesn't presently go deep enough into games as you'd like. Although, it's not as pronounced as you'd think. He's thrown 96.2 in 16 starts. Danny Salazar has thrown 99 in 16 starts. Drew Pomeranz is at 95 in 16 starts. Jose Fernandez is at 100.1 in 16 starts....etc. And even the 3rd time through the line up metric people have used against him in the past is good this year at .216/.278/.318.

To me that's more a case of you just hoping to get at least 5 good innings from him in the playoffs and turning it over to the bull pen a la the royals. In order for that to happen, they probably need that lefty specialist and then on top of that another guy to be strong. Strop and Rondon are probably the best you can hope for in the 8th and 9th. With a good lefty specialist you could probably use Wood who's been great in the 7th. Then just becomes a matter of getting through the 6th. I don't know if they'd have to add someone or if they could rely on Grimm returning to form or Edwards but they do have some options there.

As for the 6 man rotation, my take on it was more that you would essentially just have Lester and Arrieta pitch say an inning less in their starts but start them as you would normally in the 5 man set up. You could probably also give them an extra day between starts by going a 4 man 3-5 and having the #6 start every like 7th day or whatever that works out to and using them out of the bull pen in between.

He's got a crazy low BABIP (.250). His rates are the same as they've ever been in terms of K/BB/HR/etc. He has a 26.8% soft contact rate which is unsustainable. Again, I like Hendricks but his margin for error is so razor thin that I'm not sure the Cubs trust him to start a playoff game 1-1 on the road. What Hendricks does really well is not have bad outings but in the playoffs, you care more about having a guy who can give you a good outing. Hendricks median game score is like 58. Lackey, who has had more bad outing, still has a higher median of 63.

I want a high ceiling pitcher in a playoff game, not a low floor guy. Low floor guy like Hendricks is great for 32-34 starts but it's not great for one start, especially with the stuff he has and how hard it is to be accurate with increased adrenaline, etc.

 

[beckdawg]

He's got a crazy low BABIP (.250). His rates are the same as they've ever been in terms of K/BB/HR/etc. He has a 26.8% soft contact rate which is unsustainable. Again, I like Hendricks but his margin for error is so razor thin that I'm not sure the Cubs trust him to start a playoff game 1-1 on the road. What Hendricks does really well is not have bad outings but in the playoffs, you care more about having a guy who can give you a good outing. Hendricks median game score is like 58. Lackey, who has had more bad outing, still has a higher median of 63.

I want a high ceiling pitcher in a playoff game, not a low floor guy. Low floor guy like Hendricks is great for 32-34 starts but it's not great for one start, especially with the stuff he has and how hard it is to be accurate with increased adrenaline, etc.

Fangraphs disagree's about the soft contact being unsustainable. And honestly the BABIP is low because of that soft contact not to mention the ridiculously good infield defense the cubs have. It's literally the same reason Arrieta is a great pitcher because he generates so much soft contact. The cubs as a team generate 20.9% soft contact from starters which is 3rd in the majors behind the Phillies and Nationals. There's pretty clearly an organizational focus there. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Hendricks is the 7th best pitcher in the league or anything. But it's not unprecedented for guys like him to succeed.

As for wanting a higher ceiling pitcher, I don't have a problem with that idea. But what I would say is the very fact that Hendricks is consistently good and not necessarily great is what makes him attractive in the playoffs. If he were your best starter then sure I'd argue you want someone who can go out and dominate. But out of your #4 starter I want someone who I know is going to keep me in the game. I mean sure all things being equal would I rather have Jose Fernandez or Hendricks? Of course I take Fernandez but I don't think that type of pitcher being on the cubs is realistic right now. On the other hand, would I rather have Hendricks or say Drew Smyly who may be available? I'm taking Hendricks. Ditto on Hendricks vs Matt Moore and Drew Pomeranz. The variability of those starters is higher and they could go out and dominate or they could pitch poorly enough to literally lose you the game. It's rather unlikely you get that out of Hendricks and he gives the bats the cubs have invested so much in a chance. If the bats don't show up then that's more a organizational philosophy problem more than anything.

Edit: one point of clarification, he might not stay at 26% soft contact but what i mean buy it not being unsustainable is I think he'll still have a very high soft contact rate. For example on his career his soft contact rate is 22.2%.

 

[Grizzly]

Sometimes you stat guys crack me up. Sometimes a game is just game. Those stats help nothing in pitching one game in a playoff series. Maybe Hendrick isn't all hyped up, maybe the hitters are all hyped up and Hendricks sinker and slow stuff throws them off balance. Maybe it evens helps Arrieta in the next game having the hitters looking at 89 mph one day and 95 mph the next. Maybe Hendrick wouldn't even make it through 2 innings. Looking at stats over 30 to 40 games really means nothing on any given day. Kind of like Soler last year where he reached base like 7,8 or 9 times in a row. Nothing in his year long stats would make you think he was going to do that.

 

[beckdawg]

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/07/brewers-trade-aaron-hill-red-sox.html

Funny when i read this i read it was the Oakland hill not this one.

 

[beckdawg]

http://www.csnchicago.com/chicago-cubs/theo-epstein-doesnt-see-any-quick-fixes-cubs-trade-market

“We are still looking for a starter for a couple reasons,” Epstein said. “For the long-term, because we’re just not that deep organizationally in starting pitching, and because you can’t assume health.”

“It’s a tough market for starting pitching,” Epstein said. “There are teams that are in probably more desperate straits for a starter that might pay a higher price than we would. But we’ll see. We’re going to pursue all avenues.”

On the bullpen

“That’s certainly an area that we would look to upgrade externally and also internally,” Epstein said. “If I had to make a prediction, I’ll say that we’re going to get some help from somebody who’s currently in the ‘pen, but not locked in yet. At least one of those guys will lock in and pitch really well. And then someone who’s not with us now — but he’s still in the organization — will come up and pitch really well."

“And then I think we’ll add. There’s a good chance that we’ll make a deal that will help us in the ‘pen as well. When things don’t go well, there’s always a rush to look outside, especially this time of year.

“It’s important, and we’re doing it. But it’s really important to remember that Trevor Cahill and Clayton Richard and Justin Grimm threw really big innings in the postseason for us last year. And they are certainly capable of doing it again.”

Interesting quotes from Theo. Granted smoke screen always applies but historically he's never been one to use it much. He's a pretty straight shooter. Now you can read whatever you want into that but the comments on the bullpen to me read more like what I've thought for awhile in that they are looking for a smaller piece not a big catch there since he mentions those 3 specific guys.

The starter comment is also interesting. Hill's been connected to the cubs but he's not really a long term play. The thought has largely been the cubs are looking at young starters but it's sort of fallen by the wayside for more talk of Miller/Chapman and Hill.

 

[CSF77]

http://www.csnchicago.com/chicago-cubs/theo-epstein-doesnt-see-any-quick-fixes-cubs-trade-market



On the bullpen



Interesting quotes from Theo. Granted smoke screen always applies but historically he's never been one to use it much. He's a pretty straight shooter. Now you can read whatever you want into that but the comments on the bullpen to me read more like what I've thought for awhile in that they are looking for a smaller piece not a big catch there since he mentions those 3 specific guys.

The starter comment is also interesting. Hill's been connected to the cubs but he's not really a long term play. The thought has largely been the cubs are looking at young starters but it's sort of fallen by the wayside for more talk of Miller/Chapman and Hill.

Sounds like the internal guy they are thinking is Grimm. He played a big part last year and his struggles have made the pen soft. Cahill to a lesser degree as he has been ok this year and last year was not there all year.

I also think they are thinking on Edwards impacting the pen. It doesn't help with the 2nd LH issue.

On the starter add. It really sounds like they want control vs a short term buy and some one who has potential vs a known commodity. Sounds low buy to me and they have that in Warren. Not really getting that bit.

 

[beckdawg]

Sounds like the internal guy they are thinking is Grimm. He played a big part last year and his struggles have made the pen soft. Cahill to a lesser degree as he has been ok this year and last year was not there all year.

I also think they are thinking on Edwards impacting the pen. It doesn't help with the 2nd LH issue.

On the starter add. It really sounds like they want control vs a short term buy and some one who has potential vs a known commodity. Sounds low buy to me and they have that in Warren. Not really getting that bit.

I got to that link via bleacher nation who speculated on Nathan being an internal guy. He's givnen up 1 run in 5 innings at AA with 6 k's and no walks.

As for the starter, I agree on control portion but I think they are probably trying to set their sights higher. You have to think about this in a grander picture than just today. The cubs at present are set to lose Arrieta, Lackey and possibly Hammel(might buy him out next year in fact) after 2017. Now maybe they bring Arrieta back but that's 2 rotation spots. I think it's some what safe to look at Warren for Hammel mid-termish. But who do they have that's ready to replace Lackey? Maybe Underwood but he's been hurt a lot recently and not played particularly great. Williams is a BOR type. Johnson doesn't have the control you want out of a #3. I suppose you could look at Hendricks as that #3 guy given how he's pitched but that seems like a pretty weak staff if you're going with Arrieta, Lester, Hendricks, Warren and say Williams/Johnson.

 

[CSF77]

I got to that link via bleacher nation who speculated on Nathan being an internal guy. He's givnen up 1 run in 5 innings at AA with 6 k's and no walks.

As for the starter, I agree on control portion but I think they are probably trying to set their sights higher. You have to think about this in a grander picture than just today. The cubs at present are set to lose Arrieta, Lackey and possibly Hammel(might buy him out next year in fact) after 2017. Now maybe they bring Arrieta back but that's 2 rotation spots. I think it's some what safe to look at Warren for Hammel mid-termish. But who do they have that's ready to replace Lackey? Maybe Underwood but he's been hurt a lot recently and not played particularly great. Williams is a BOR type. Johnson doesn't have the control you want out of a #3. I suppose you could look at Hendricks as that #3 guy given how he's pitched but that seems like a pretty weak staff if you're going with Arrieta, Lester, Hendricks, Warren and say Williams/Johnson.

I believe you look at it as they need a lefty in the back of the rotation. The whole spiel makes me think they will not resign Hammel unless their is nothing there.

I would be fine with them trading for a back end lefty or a young lefty in some ones pen that they believe they can convert. Say this year they trade up for a LHRP then convert him over in the off season. That point they let Hammel walk.

 

[CSF77]

So a guy that might fall into this is Matt Moore. Rays have looked into Vogelbach. So maybe a possibliity to look into. Maybe keep him in the pen for the year then set him up next year. I believe he is under control until 2019.

 

[beckdawg]

So a guy that might fall into this is Matt Moore. Rays have looked into Vogelbach. So maybe a possibliity to look into. Maybe keep him in the pen for the year then set him up next year. I believe he is under control until 2019.

Moore doesn't strike me as the type of pitcher this front office would want. He's been a high walk rate guy in the past at 3.82 per 9 on his career. He has been better this year at 2.6 but you're essentially buying him as an upside play and even if that is his new norm he's got a 4.54/4.53 ERA/FIP and he's at 8.13 k/9. He does have a some what decent contract for the next 3.5 years though.

If you're going to buy on an upside lefty from Tampa I think Drew Smyly is the guy. While Moore is at 3.96/4.15 ERA/FIP on his career, Smyly is at 3.69/3.72. He's also still on his rookie deal for an additional year over Moore and his underlying k/9 and bb/9 are more supportive of someone who could be a front line guy. His k/9 is 8.96 while his bb/9 is 2.53. I've brought him up in this post before so I wont dive too deep but he obviously has some rough spots but so does Moore. Additionally, if you're using either him or Moore out of the pen I think he's a better fit as here's their splits

Smyly
v LH .198/.244/.323
v RH .256/.315/.449

Moore
v LH .240/.318/.367
v RH .243/.328/.403

Moore's probably slightly better against righties but Smyly is pretty dominant against lefties and with his higher k/9 he is probably a guy you can bring in during a tight jam and hope to get some k's. Plus, he will walk fewer batters.

 

[CSF77]

Moore doesn't strike me as the type of pitcher this front office would want. He's been a high walk rate guy in the past at 3.82 per 9 on his career. He has been better this year at 2.6 but you're essentially buying him as an upside play and even if that is his new norm he's got a 4.54/4.53 ERA/FIP and he's at 8.13 k/9. He does have a some what decent contract for the next 3.5 years though.

If you're going to buy on an upside lefty from Tampa I think Drew Smyly is the guy. While Moore is at 3.96/4.15 ERA/FIP on his career, Smyly is at 3.69/3.72. He's also still on his rookie deal for an additional year over Moore and his underlying k/9 and bb/9 are more supportive of someone who could be a front line guy. His k/9 is 8.96 while his bb/9 is 2.53. I've brought him up in this post before so I wont dive too deep but he obviously has some rough spots but so does Moore. Additionally, if you're using either him or Moore out of the pen I think he's a better fit as here's their splits

Smyly
v LH .198/.244/.323
v RH .256/.315/.449

Moore
v LH .240/.318/.367
v RH .243/.328/.403

Moore's probably slightly better against righties but Smyly is pretty dominant against lefties and with his higher k/9 he is probably a guy you can bring in during a tight jam and hope to get some k's. Plus, he will walk fewer batters.

How much talent are you paying for Smyly? Seeing that currently at 2-10 with a ERA ballooned up at 5.47. The SO/BB are good and I'm expecting him to improve going to the NL.

I could see Vogelbach and a pitcher like Johnson or some one off the radar with upside. But no one that is a high end talent.

 

[DJMoore_is_fat]

No way can we be buyers at the dead line this year. Our whole organizational outlook is the next 5-10 years.

With our historic and stunning collapse this season, the single worst thing we could do is jeopardize future years for a season in which we are not realistically going to compete.

I'm still somewhat shell-shocked by our complete unraveling. But we have to stay the course with our 5-10 year plan.

As insane as it sounds, we should probably move Arrieta to further stock our farm system. He has fallen off a cliff completely and will be walking after next season anyways. If this continues who knows what he'll be worth at that point.

In my 36 years as a Cubs fan, this season is the second most disappointing ever (behind only 2003).

We should have known better, guys.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk