Trade Debate.

[KBisBack!]

But hot damn -- the barbecue. We used to go to the one on Brooklyn almost once a week. The burnt-ends sandwich was off the hook. I loved going to Grinders and Blanc's, too. Dining was certainly awesome in KC. I'd love to move back there someday.

Ahh yes. Arthur Bryant's. Hard to beat.

Next time you are here check out Oklahoma Joe's. Very, very good.

Grinders is awesome also. They are serving their food out at Sporting Park for the soccer games and a behind Grinders is a great place to see a band.

Blancs, great burgers. Nuff said.

KC gets a lot of grief from the uneducated, but it is a great place to live. Glad that you enjoyed your experience here.

 

[JosMin]

Ahh yes. Arthur Bryant's. Hard to beat.

Next time you are here check out Oklahoma Joe's. Very, very good.

Grinders is awesome also. They are serving their food out at Sporting Park for the soccer games and a behind Grinders is a great place to see a band.

Blancs, great burgers. Nuff said.

KC gets a lot of grief from the uneducated, but it is a great place to live. Glad that you enjoyed your experience here.

And Gates. Holy ****. Gates.

 

[beckdawg]

I made the same comment about Shields to people who destroyed them in fangraph articles for how terrible the trade was. He can return prospects. They should have traded him before the deadline IMO though. But he's also not going to return as good prospects because let's be honest they got destroyed in who they gave up in comparison to similar level players like Garza who brought back 1 blue chip player not 2 or possibly even 3.

As for the cubs building by signing better FA's, the problem with your logic is you have to sign the right FA's. You can't just go out and get anyone. For example, if they went out and signed Upton last year what value does he have in a trade right now? What value does Hamilton have now? Most of the time the only way you can do what you're suggesting is to sign 2nd tier FA's to better value deals and hope they out perform the contract they were given. If you sign a guy to a contract and he under performs it you have to pay teams to take guys away(Marmol, Zambrano, Soriano...etc).

In that regard, someone like Edwin Jackson would be worth targeting. He's not out performed his contract but if he had, teams like the pirates could afford him and that opens the market to all teams rather than just the large market team in contention. And I agree if they can find these type of deals they should pursue them because they will have the money next off season.

I don't have any problem with that type of plan. My problem is when people suggest they should go out and sign 2 or more of the top 5 FA's because the top FA almost always disappoint you. I'd much rather they target under the radar guys who are better values like Beltran was. Those type of players can also bust as FA but the difference is if they do it's a smaller problem to have a guy locked in a 2 years $36 mil than if a guy making like 7 years $150 mil.

 

[mountsalami]

As for the cubs building by signing better FA's, the problem with your logic is you have to sign the right FA's. You can't just go out and get anyone.

Wonderful "blanket" statement.

I guess we can say the same thing about all the prospects that Boy Blunder has obtained also. But only they haven't stepped foot on a ML ball diamond yet and most will NOT. There has been no problems with launching millions in that direction though. Is some of that money wasted that could have been used to improve the ML team also ?

But really who gives a ****. There's nothing wrong with that logic.

 

[beckdawg]

But really who gives a ****. There's nothing wrong with that logic.

Your argument was buy FA's and if it doesn't work this season trade them for prospects. If you buy the wrong FA who is over payed you can't trade them. That's what's wrong with the logic. Also, i'm not sure what you're complaining about. I said if you adjust your thinking just slightly the idea works. If you go after a 2-4 year contract for a guy instead of a 7 year deal you can manage the risk. But, the top 5 FA's usually want 7+ year deals. I'm not saying you have to pick only the winners free agents. If you pick a crappy one at 2 years 20 mil you can manage that. You can eat $5-7 mil to move that guy after a year. If you pick a crappy one at 7 $140 mil how do you manage it? You are stuck with the player because you're not going to eat $100 mil to trad a guy after 1 or 2 years.

 

[mountsalami]

Your argument was buy FA's and if it doesn't work this season trade them for prospects. If you buy the wrong FA who is over payed you can't trade them. That's what's wrong with the logic. Also, i'm not sure what you're complaining about. I said if you adjust your thinking just slightly the idea works. If you go after a 2-4 year contract for a guy instead of a 7 year deal you can manage the risk. But, the top 5 FA's usually want 7+ year deals. I'm not saying you have to pick only the winners free agents. If you pick a crappy one at 2 years 20 mil you can manage that. You can eat $5-7 mil to move that guy after a year. If you pick a crappy one at 7 $140 mil how do you manage it? You are stuck with the player because you're not going to eat $100 mil to trad a guy after 1 or 2 years.

Well since there is a cap on farm and international spending. That can be easily budgeted.

There is no cap at the ML level. If I'm Theo Epstein with his track record I guess I would be afraid of picking a "crappy one."

So a good point made.

 

[beckdawg]

Well since there is a cap on farm and international spending. That can be easily budgeted.

There is no cap at the ML level. If I'm Theo Epstein with his track record I guess I would be afraid of picking a "crappy one."

So a good point made.

I hope he is and has learned from past mistakes. That Crawford contract really hurt. If he made a mistake on Jackson, after next year he has what 2 years $26 mil left? That's manageable. When he screwed up with Crawford he had something like 5 years $100 mil left. When Lackey under performed for two years he had like 3 years $48 mil left. That's not exactly good trade material.

That's the point I'm getting at. If they want to sell Jackson next year they can eat $10 mil to trade him to someone like KC or PIT. You can't eat $25-30 mil to trade a player like Lackey. And being able to trade to smaller market teams usually opens you up to more of the better farm systems because smaller market teams usually have to have them.

 

[X]

holy hell -- I like this thread.

Good points by everyone.

 

[mountsalami]

I hope he is and has learned from past mistakes. That Crawford contract really hurt. If he made a mistake on Jackson, after next year he has what 2 years $26 mil left? That's manageable. When he screwed up with Crawford he had something like 5 years $100 mil left. When Lackey under performed for two years he had like 3 years $48 mil left. That's not exactly good trade material.

That's the point I'm getting at. If they want to sell Jackson next year they can eat $10 mil to trade him to someone like KC or PIT. You can't eat $25-30 mil to trade a player like Lackey. And being able to trade to smaller market teams usually opens you up to more of the better farm systems because smaller market teams usually have to have them.

Your point is fine and I get it. Just adding Jackson isn't a bridge to anything if the plan isn't to compete. There were plenty of other less expensive options out there.

The signing of Jackson alone made no sense at all if you didn't add to the horrific offense also. To me it's money wasted if you are content at being a loser. Just bring up the youngsters and let them throw. No use trying to "mask" a season that was a planned tank to begin with.

 

[chibears55]

jackson could end up being a good sign.. he could end up being a pretty good no.4 if they add around him, shark, and wood who ended up surprising everyone this yr.
or he could be a guy they can trade for a needed bat this off season or next to a team looking to add a veteran back end starter. .
some people need to just understand, these first couple of years wasnt about being able to add high cost FAs, it was about getting guys they could flip and hold down positions for a couple seasons while they retooled their farm system. . like it or not that was their goal and they have done a pretty
good job at what they have accomplished, especially this past month..

 

[KBisBack!]

They should have traded him before the deadline IMO though.

Oh wow. This statement actually deserves an entire tirade on stupidity and ignorance, but I am not in a mood to stomach all the whining and crying that would come of it.

This is yet another shining example of the one step forward and three steps back and the loser mentality of valuing prospects at the minor league level over wins at the major league level.

The Royals are only 4.5 games out of the Wild Card right now. They are over .500 by the start of August for the first time in a decade. This might be the closest the Royals have been to making the playoffs since 1989.

Ask the Sox fans how they still feel about the White Flag trade. It was awful.

Had Dayton Moore done something so colossally stupid, he should have been fired on the spot and probably would never had gotten another job in Major League Baseball.

As for the cubs building by signing better FA's, the problem with your logic is you have to sign the right FA's.

No shit Sherlock. Thanks for making that discovery.

You know what you have to do when putting all your eggs in the basket of the farm system?? You have to draft the right guys, only when you are trying to draft the right guys you have very little idea of what kind of major league player they will be or if they will even make it to the majors. At least with FA you know you are getting a major league player.

I don't have any problem with that type of plan. My problem is when people suggest they should go out and sign 2 or more of the top 5 FA's because the top FA almost always disappoint you.

Because top prospects almost never disappoint do they??

I'd much rather they target under the radar guys who are better values like Beltran was. Those type of players can also bust as FA but the difference is if they do it's a smaller problem to have a guy locked in a 2 years $36 mil than if a guy making like 7 years $150 mil.

Total revisionist history at it's purest.

Had the Cubs signed a 35 year old OF to a 2 year $26M contract, you would have shit all the place.

 

[KBisBack!]

j it was about getting guys they could flip and hold down positions for a couple seasons while they retooled their farm system. . like it or not that was their goal and they have done a pretty
good job at what they have accomplished, especially this past month..

They haven't gotten one decent prospect back this past month.

They got back another extremely erratic RP, cause there hasn't been enough of those on the ball club lately.

A prospect 3B who has every sign of being the next Ian Stewart who the team finally dumped (.125 with 16k in 12 games in Iowa), and two AAAA starting pitchers in Arrieta and Grimm.

The last couple years have been about milking the fans for every penny possible with a well crafted PR campaign that has completely fooled far too many.

 

[beckdawg]

Your point is fine and I get it. Just adding Jackson isn't a bridge to anything if the plan isn't to compete. There were plenty of other less expensive options out there.

The signing of Jackson alone made no sense at all if you didn't add to the horrific offense also. To me it's money wasted if you are content at being a loser. Just bring up the youngsters and let them throw. No use trying to "mask" a season that was a planned tank to begin with.

I agree they need to add on offense big time this off season. They need a 2-3 year guy at 3B while Olt/Bryant chill in the minors because they got nothing there this year. I'm not sure how they plan to approach their OF. I think some form of Lake/Sheirholtz platoon would be fine for one of the spots because both have played well thus far and you honestly need to get Lake major league AB's to see what he has. You also need to figure out a 2-3 year solution for CF until Almora is ready to see major play. And you need a 2-3 year solution for the 3rd OF spot until Soler is ready.

I don't think Cruz is going to be the discount you think he is. Even if it does hurt him some i think he's still going to get a 5-6 year deal in the $15-17 mil a year season. Shin-Soo Choo could probably be the right contract type. Carlos Beltran might also be interesting if the Cards don't re-sign him. He's obviously older but you're buying time until your farm system is ready. There's not a lot at 3B though. You're talking Youkilis, Micheal Young and Mark Reynolds. Young could be alright I guess. Another option could be playing Lake at 3B(he did in the minors but was moved when they got a lot more 3B depth).

Maybe something like this for a line up
C - Castillo
1B - Rizzo
2B - Barney
SS - Castro
3B - Lake/Valbuena platoon
OF - Choo
OF - Dejesus
OF - Beltran

with Sheirholtz as the 4th OF. Or if Beltran is re-signed Lake/Sheirholtz platoon and Young at 3B. I think you can get Beltran on a similar 2 year $36 mil deal given his age. Dejesus 2 year $20 mil is probably likely. Maybe something like 5 years 65 mil for Choo? Not really sure where his market value is. Not sure what Young will cost either.

Not sure what they are going to do to replace Garza other than possibly trying to get him back in FA. I don't think they will though because they tried to trade him the past two years rather than signing him long term. Also, the Rays traded him with 3 years of team control rather than paying him when they could have dealt Shields instead. Seems like there is something sabrmetric types don't like.

I wouldn't hate them bringing back Scott Baker to see if he can finally get healthy because before he got hurt he pitched very well for the Twins. Also, he'd be cheap. As for Josh Johnson, i think it all depends on the price. At $15 mil a year? Hell no. At a 2 year $15-20 mil deal? That's the type of gamble I wouldn't mind them throwing money at. Because like I said, if he sucks after one year you can eat $7-8 mil and trade him to someone like Atlanta this year who has a starter go down an still get a half way worth while prospect.

 

[chibears55]

holy hell -- I like this thread.

Good points by everyone.

you were saying......

 

[beckdawg]

Because top prospects almost never disappoint do they??

That conversation had nothing to do with prospects. It's funny you ***** about people bringing up straw men arguments and you do it all the time.

Total revisionist history at it's purest. Had the Cubs signed a 35 year old OF to a 2 year $26M contract, you would have shit all the place.

Please find a quote where I said it was a bad signing for the Cards. You claim everything is fucking revisionist history yet never once cite me saying the opposite. And if you'd actually read my post you'd understand the reason why it is a good signing is because if he works out then great. If he doesn't then you can eat the money of his contract to get rid of him. In other words, it gives you options. If you sign Josh Hamilton, you're stuck with him.

You know what, don't bother trying to find a quote. You're going on my ignore list. It's obviously not worth my time to discuss with you because you just want to ***** about everything and any opinion outside your world view is incapable of being right.

 

[mountsalami]

I don't think Cruz is going to be the discount you think he is. Even if it does hurt him some i think he's still going to get a 5-6 year deal in the $15-17 mil a year season. Shin-Soo Choo could probably be the right contract type. Carlos Beltran might also be interesting if the Cards don't re-sign him. He's obviously older but you're buying time until your farm system is ready. There's not a lot at 3B though. You're talking Youkilis, Micheal Young and Mark Reynolds. Young could be alright I guess. Another option could be playing Lake at 3B(he did in the minors but was moved when they got a lot more 3B depth).

I wouldn't be scared to give Cruz a five year deal @ 15-17 milliom per. He may get more than that. I'm not a fan of Choo but he is better than anything else on the current roster. Which is fucking sad to say the least. I like the idea of playing Lake at third base. Anything there would be better than the shitballs they have tried to date.

I would much rather watch the season with the young guys on the field and tank it that way, over bringing in shitbags that have no reason of being here other than to fill a void, while Theo and Jed jerk their little boners to a pic of Kathleen Kearney. I want to see real progression as opposed to this non-factoring busy work and remaining stagnant.

 

[beckdawg]

I wouldn't be scared to give Cruz a five year deal @ 15-17 milliom per. He may get more than that. I'm not a fan of Choo but he is better than anything else on the current roster. Which is fucking sad to say the least. I like the idea of playing Lake at third base. Anything there would be better than the shitballs they have tried to date.

I would much rather watch the season with the young guys on the field and tank it that way, over bringing in shitbags that have no reason of being here other than to fill a void, while Theo and Jed jerk their little boners to a pic of Kathleen Kearney. I want to see real progression as opposed to this non-factoring busy work and remaining stagnant.

What scares me about Cruz is how much of his numbers is playing in that stadium? Over the last 3 years he's .307 50 hr's and 156 rbi's at home and .247 25 and 99 on the road. Wrigley isn't PetCo but it's still worrying. As for Choo, I'm a fan of his WAR projections for this year(7th in the league for CF) at 4.2. However, he's a #1 or #2 hitter and I think they need more of a middle of the line up guy. Castro is probably a #1 or #2 hitter unless he starts to develop major power which we've yet to see. So, if you get Choo and Castro as your #1/2 hitters then your 3B and other 2 OF spots need to be 3-6 hitters with Rizzo being the other guy.

As for Lake, what's nice is because he can play 3B and OF he should be able to get enough ABs next year for the team to get a good idea of what he is. Having that utility could be nice. Maybe platoon him at 3B and make him also the 4th or 5th OF and move him around as needed.

 

[mountsalami]

What scares me about Cruz is how much of his numbers is playing in that stadium? Over the last 3 years he's .307 50 hr's and 156 rbi's at home and .247 25 and 99 on the road. Wrigley isn't PetCo but it's still worrying. As for Choo, I'm a fan of his WAR projections for this year(7th in the league for CF) at 4.2. However, he's a #1 or #2 hitter and I think they need more of a middle of the line up guy. Castro is probably a #1 or #2 hitter unless he starts to develop major power which we've yet to see. So, if you get Choo and Castro as your #1/2 hitters then your 3B and other 2 OF spots need to be 3-6 hitters with Rizzo being the other guy.

As for Lake, what's nice is because he can play 3B and OF he should be able to get enough ABs next year for the team to get a good idea of what he is. Having that utility could be nice. Maybe platoon him at 3B and make him also the 4th or 5th OF and move him around as needed.

No reason to be scared. The Cubs are not broke. Never would I be scared to watch a true legit power hitter on this team. It is very much needed. They want to charge some of the highest ticket prices in the league, it's time to put something on the field worth the price of admission.

Like I've said before. They want you to buy their groceries but have no intentions of inviting you over for dinner.

I'm not a WAR or sabermetrics geek. I watch enough baseball and have for years to know who is good and who isn't.

I don't agree with all that you have to say but you are doing a good job stating your beliefs/opinion. I can respect that.

 

[Chris J]

Always remember tht yes it would be nice to see the Cubs throw some money at Infante Aaron Hiil, Nelson Cruz, and maybe Johnson or Linececum. I would actually be in big favor or getting Lincecum but you gotta convince these guys to come play for the Cubs.

Players looking to sign have to remember that the team still could be a few years away and players have to have it in the back of the mind that if they sign with the cubs, theres a chance they are traded away in July. Players dont like switcihign teams and cities that often

 

[Boobaby1]

Always remember tht yes it would be nice to see the Cubs throw some money at Infante Aaron Hiil, Nelson Cruz, and maybe Johnson or Linececum. I would actually be in big favor or getting Lincecum but you gotta convince these guys to come play for the Cubs.

Players looking to sign have to remember that the team still could be a few years away and players have to have it in the back of the mind that if they sign with the cubs, theres a chance they are traded away in July. Players dont like switcihign teams and cities that often

It was documented at the winter meetings that Theo stated that "Elite Players" had said they would like to play for the Cubs regardless of the current situation.

Whether Lincecum is elite or not, my interpretation would be that equal to or greater than him would play for the Cubs. Players know Chicago is a big market team, and with that generally comes big market contracts.

Hopefully we will see some of them here soon. opcorn: