You're the GM (Game)

[Boobaby1]

Contract:
2016 (age 32) - 13.5 M
2017 - 12.5 M
2018 - 11.5 M
2019 - 2M buyout OR 12.5 M TO

Trailing three years (per 162 game totals for total)
.262/.338/.412
15 HR / 65 RBI / 24 SB / 20.8% k rate
-.3/2.9/-2.2 UZR/150
3.4/3.4/2.5 WAR

I think the Cubs problem with Gardner (at least for me) is two fold

1. He's clearly declining from when he missed most of the 2012 season with an elbow injury
2. His K rate was around 16% before the injury but since it's been about 21%
3. His WAR the last two years before injury was 11.1; his last three years is 9.4

To me, he just looks destined for that Carl Crawford type decline.

Crawford at 31
.283/.329/.407
2.8 WAR
UZR 14.2

Crawford at 32
.300/.339/.429
2.4 WAR
7.3 UZR

Crawford at 33 (only 69 games due to injury)
.265/.304/.403
.4 WAR
-11.2 UZR

Gardner at 31
.259/.343/.399
2.6 WAR
-2.2 UZR

I just hate the idea of getting an OF in his mid/late 30s. It just completely against Theo's plan to trade a 26 year old MIF on a fair deal for a 32 year old OF.

Are there much better options out there? Unless the Cubs decide to completely blow the payroll up and trade for a center fielder and then sign Heyward, I'm afraid that they will have to do something like this.

Also, Ben Zobrist (34) is no kid either, nor is Span (31) for that matter.

FWIW, Gardner does have a good OBP skill set, and he comes with speed and a little bit of pop in his bat. I would have no problems with this, especially since it would be for three years. Now signing a 32 year old to a 6 year deal? That's a different story.

 

[beckdawg]

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/yankees-talking-brett-gardner-for-starlin-castro-cubs-article-1.2441411

I'd probably do a straight up trade of Castro for Gardner. He more or less replaces Fowler's numbers exactly and although it's over 3 years to Castro's 4 the salaries balance out. Probably makes more sense than Parra or Span on a 3 year deal.

Not entirely sure how I feel about that. Gardner makes $13.5, $12.5, $11.5 and $12.5/$2 mil buyout. Castro makes ~$7.9, ~10 mil, ~11 mil, ~12 mil, $16 mil/$1 mil buyout. So you're talking about $39.5 or $50 mil for Gardner and like $41.5 mil or $55.5 mil for Castro. So on a year by year bases Castro is cheaper. On top of that, while he's not playing SS with the cubs, Castro can play SS which has more value. Also, you're looking at a 26 year old vs a 32 year old. I would question how much defense Gardner is going to give you in CF. He's been below average the past 3 years overall in CF plus at 32 do you really trust his defense the next 2-3 years?

I get the logic behind the trade and I'd be ok with the thought of trading Castro even in this sort of deal but straight up I don't think is fair especially when Span or Jackson provide you roughly similar production at roughly that price in FA.

 

[beckdawg]

Gardner is GG quality.

He's not even close. He was average at best in CF.

 

[DanTown]

I get that, the issue is that there aren't a lot of CF options out there, especially considering you have 2 minor league options coming within the next 2 years in Almora and Martinez. If Almora does well at AAA he'll be up late and see some time there, Martinez should start at Myrtle Beach and if he does well get to AA fairly quickly. All Gardner is going to cost is money already spent on Castro. Maybe he ends up an expensive 4th OF but those are sunk costs anyway.

Ok, two problems with this

1. Gardner's sunk cost and opportunity cost is higher than Castro. If the Cubs wanted to deal Castro and not eat any money, they probably could. I'm not so sure that Gardner, especially if he has another year worse than his previous, will be as moveable. And then you're paying a guy more money (and the 3-4 million/year difference isn't negligible) to not have a role.
2. It doesn't address the issue that Gardner is most likely going to decline as he moves to Wrigley. He's a 2.4 WAR player NOW and if he declines any further, you're paying 13-14 million for a sub 2 WAR guy. Hell, Austin Jackson last year was a 2.3 WAR player.

I get the idea of trading Castro for help in the OF but I don't see how Brett Garnder is it. He's clearly declining and if he declines any further, he's not playable.

 

[DanTown]

Are there much better options out there? Unless the Cubs decide to completely blow the payroll up and trade for a center fielder and then sign Heyward, I'm afraid that they will have to do something like this.

Also, Ben Zobrist (34) is no kid either, nor is Span (31) for that matter.

FWIW, Gardner does have a good OBP skill set, and he comes with speed and a little bit of pop in his bat. I would have no problems with this, especially since it would be for three years. Now signing a 32 year old to a 6 year deal? That's a different story.

I find it funny that Gardner is suddenly available. You know why he is? The Yankees just traded for Aaron Hicks and here's Hicks numbers last year

.256/.323/.398
K rate - 16.9%
UZR 150 - 2.4

If the Cubs want to get a decent CF, they can find them in trades and FA with better options than a 32 year old guy who is clearly declining. if the Cubs were getting the last two years of Brett Gardner (so a 2-3 WAR guy with decent OBP and speed) then great but the age is clearly a concern. As is the extra cost of Gardner to Castro.

And it's not the just fact he's aging; it's the fact that he's going to decline (most likely) from a 2-3 WAR guy to a sub 2 WAR player which becomes a real anchor on the team. Zobrist, a guy I like, had a weird UZR that killed his WAR but his bat was still a positive and he brings the lack of SO to the team that Gardner simply doesn't. Zobrist was a 2.1 WAR guy but he was 6.3/5.8/5.5 the previous three so I'm not so sure that the decline for Zobrist is that sharp (i.e Zobrist will have a slight bounceback in 2016 then probably be close to his 2015 value in 2017/2018).

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Ok, two problems with this

1. Gardner's sunk cost and opportunity cost is higher than Castro. If the Cubs wanted to deal Castro and not eat any money, they probably could. I'm not so sure that Gardner, especially if he has another year worse than his previous, will be as moveable. And then you're paying a guy more money (and the 3-4 million/year difference isn't negligible) to not have a role.
2. It doesn't address the issue that Gardner is most likely going to decline as he moves to Wrigley. He's a 2.4 WAR player NOW and if he declines any further, you're paying 13-14 million for a sub 2 WAR guy. Hell, Austin Jackson last year was a 2.3 WAR player.

I get the idea of trading Castro for help in the OF but I don't see how Brett Garnder is it. He's clearly declining and if he declines any further, he's not playable.

What if he's the bridge to Almora or Martinez for a year or year and a half? Span and Parra are both going to sign 3 or 4 year contracts and the $38 million is a swap here not a addition to payroll. The cubs know what's out there for CF, it this what they think is the best option, as I said, this wouldn't bother me. It's 3 years, even if you DFA him after 2 it would be worth it to bridge to those young players.

 

[CSF77]

Almora might regress again or his extreme effort type of play may end him up on a long DL trip. Again.

You can not bank the future on that.

 

[DanTown]

What if he's the bridge to Almora or Martinez for a year or year and a half? Span and Parra are both going to sign 3 or 4 year contracts and the $38 million is a swap here not a addition to payroll. The cubs know what's out there for CF, it this what they think is the best option, as I said, this wouldn't bother me. It's 3 years, even if you DFA him after 2 it would be worth it to bridge to those young players.

If the idea is to not add payroll yet get a lead-off guy in CF, why not trade Castro for any prospects you can get without taking on cash and then sign someone? I mean Jon Jay for example is a guy maybe you can get in a buy-low scenario. He was awful last year but the two years before that he was .287/.360/.374 with UZR/150 around 5-6 in CF.

I'd be fine with Gardner if the guy going out was Montero because that way, I'm swapping decline 30s 14M contracts and replacing a C who plays 80 games with a CF who plays 140 games. But for Castro, the Cubs can probably trade him for no money and then make a better FA signing than Gardner.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

If the idea is to not add payroll yet get a lead-off guy in CF, why not trade Castro for any prospects you can get without taking on cash and then sign someone? I mean Jon Jay for example is a guy maybe you can get in a buy-low scenario. He was awful last year but the two years before that he was .287/.360/.374 with UZR/150 around 5-6 in CF.

I'd be fine with Gardner if the guy going out was Montero because that way, I'm swapping decline 30s 14M contracts and replacing a C who plays 80 games with a CF who plays 140 games. But for Castro, the Cubs can probably trade him for no money and then make a better FA signing than Gardner.

Montero can't go because someone has to catch until Contreras is ready or they come up with another option. Listen my ideal would be Span but Boras is asking for kind of silly money for him and he might wait awhile before coming back to earth. I think they have to settle CF before signing pitchers.

 

[DanTown]

Montero can't go because someone has to catch until Contreras is ready or they come up with another option. Listen my ideal would be Span but Boras is asking for kind of silly money for him and he might wait awhile before coming back to earth. I think they have to settle CF before signing pitchers.

The Cubs are going to give Kyle part-time catching duties as well as Ross obviously. Assuming both those guys get about a start a week, you're looking at Montero maxing out at around 100 games if he's healthy. To me, that's just a ton of money (14M) to pay him. I'd rather do something like

Montero, Vogelbach, McKinney to Seattle
Gardner, Jesus Sucre, future cash (via NY) to Chicago
Seth Smith, Jason Hammel to NY Yankees

Do a deal like that (a trade that saves the Cubs 10+ million this year while giving them a lead-off hitter, a high defensive C to platoon with Schwarber in the future) and then I'm in a Gardner deal. The Cubs then could afford to get Grienke AND Price in FA and then I'm fine with the make-up of the team.

Gardner - CF
Soler - RF
Rizzo - 1B
Bryant - 3B
Schwarber - C
Castro/Baez - 2B
Coghlan - LF
P
Russell - SS

And if the Schwarber catching thing implodes and he's murdering you, simply batting Russell 7th, Sucre/Ross 9th, and catching Sucre with Schwarber in LF isn't a bad thing. End of game you can go Baez at 3B and Bryant in LF too.

 

[chibears55]

Jordan Zimmerman: 1094 IP 7.43 K/9 1.82 BB/9 3.40 FIP
Jeff Samardzija: 991.2 IP 8.18 k/9 2.96 BB/9 3.84 FIP

That is really the 2 guys you should be looking at. 20 mil is reasonable with Jordan. Jeff should get 18 per on avg. Maybe less if you look at 2015's low value pitching in the AL. Most teams will shy away from a 4.23 FIP and his K/9 was down to 6.39. Now his BB/9 has improved to a 2.02 with the sox. That may push him up to the next level looking ahead.

Over all he is worth a short term deal. 4 years at 18 per on avg. I wouldn't go longer just because he is not a proven commody at the age of 30. Add to it his best selling point maybe the fact he is a 200 IP pitcher that can be had cheaper than the others. He starts to demand more cash then teams will start to look at him closer and judge that he falls short of those players.

My point is..
If Price Greinke or Cueto wants to be a Cub at 25 + , then the Cubs should make that deal..absolutely no reason why they shouldn't. ..

If those guys prefer another team or get offered a crazy amount then yes the cubs should look into the next tier of starters like Zimmerman. ..

But for me IMO... Jeff Samardzija is one of the last guys id consider, to me he nothing more then a Matt Garza hype.

 

[Boobaby1]

I find it funny that Gardner is suddenly available. You know why he is? The Yankees just traded for Aaron Hicks and here's Hicks numbers last year

.256/.323/.398
K rate - 16.9%
UZR 150 - 2.4

If the Cubs want to get a decent CF, they can find them in trades and FA with better options than a 32 year old guy who is clearly declining. if the Cubs were getting the last two years of Brett Gardner (so a 2-3 WAR guy with decent OBP and speed) then great but the age is clearly a concern. As is the extra cost of Gardner to Castro.

And it's not the just fact he's aging; it's the fact that he's going to decline (most likely) from a 2-3 WAR guy to a sub 2 WAR player which becomes a real anchor on the team. Zobrist, a guy I like, had a weird UZR that killed his WAR but his bat was still a positive and he brings the lack of SO to the team that Gardner simply doesn't. Zobrist was a 2.1 WAR guy but he was 6.3/5.8/5.5 the previous three so I'm not so sure that the decline for Zobrist is that sharp (i.e Zobrist will have a slight bounceback in 2016 then probably be close to his 2015 value in 2017/2018).

How much extra cost would it be if they got Gardner, and Baez was at 2B making the league minimum? Now you get two players for an average of 6.5 million per year and your lead-off man.

Gardner has also had some very successful season as far as staying off of the DL, so he wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

How much would they save if the went out and got Span (injury risk), Zobrist (34), or resign Fowler (60 mill), and still kept Castro?

That would put a major dent in the payroll to add pitching, and this FO has already stated that they will have to be creative, so I am assuming they mean in the financial end of it.

There are many ways that the Cubs can shuffle money and players around, and this is just one of them.

Nothing is concrete.

 

[DJMoore_is_fat]

On the Castro for Gardner topic -- We'll basically be ruling out acquiring a SP via trade unless we find a team willing to accept prospects. I can't imagine anybody wants to move two of our major league young players?

 

[chibears55]

The Cubs are going to give Kyle part-time catching duties as well as Ross obviously. Assuming both those guys get about a start a week, you're looking at Montero maxing out at around 100 games if he's healthy. To me, that's just a ton of money (14M) to pay him. I'd rather do something like

Montero, Vogelbach, McKinney to Seattle
Gardner, Jesus Sucre, future cash (via NY) to Chicago
Seth Smith, Jason Hammel to NY Yankees

Do a deal like that (a trade that saves the Cubs 10+ million this year while giving them a lead-off hitter, a high defensive C to platoon with Schwarber in the future) and then I'm in a Gardner deal. The Cubs then could afford to get Grienke AND Price in FA and then I'm fine with the make-up of the team.

Gardner - CF
Soler - RF
Rizzo - 1B
Bryant - 3B
Schwarber - C
Castro/Baez - 2B
Coghlan - LF
P
Russell - SS

And if the Schwarber catching thing implodes and he's murdering you, simply batting Russell 7th, Sucre/Ross 9th, and catching Sucre with Schwarber in LF isn't a bad thing. End of game you can go Baez at 3B and Bryant in LF too.

you gave up some talent for a 28 YO .180 hitting garbage catcher and a 32 YO CFer..

Montero not going anywhere


As for the rumor of Castro for Gardener...
I doubt Epstein would trade a cost controlled solid young player for 3 yrs of a 32 YO CFer on a decline..

They can get more for Castro then Gardner..

 

[DanTown]

How much extra cost would it be if they got Gardner, and Baez was at 2B making the league minimum? Now you get two players for an average of 6.5 million per year and your lead-off man.

Gardner has also had some very successful season as far as staying off of the DL, so he wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

How much would they save if the went out and got Span (injury risk), Zobrist (34), or resign Fowler (60 mill), and still kept Castro?

That would put a major dent in the payroll to add pitching, and this FO has already stated that they will have to be creative, so I am assuming they mean in the financial end of it.

There are many ways that the Cubs can shuffle money and players around, and this is just one of them.

Nothing is concrete.

I'm of this belief

1. Starlin Castro could be traded with zero financial incentive (i.e the Cubs would be rid of any financial commitments to him)
2. If the trade is Castro for Gardner, the Cubs are now paying $6 million more this year, $3 million more 2017, $1 million more in 2018, $9 million less/$1 million more in 2019. That extra money (especially this year) is real.
3. Gardner's decline means he's probably worse than Castro but just plays a different position. If he declines then is he a capable lead-off guy?

Again, I'm not against the idea of trading for Gardner (as my post outlines above); the problem is the cost here is too high and the Cubs really don't get a ton of value for Castro.

 

[CSF77]

If they make that deal. And I believe it should be a foundation for a pitching for hitting prospects deal. It makes sense if the main goal it to equal payroll to add at SP.

The whole moving Montero is just dumb. Wow

 

[Thunderfoot]

I don't like the Gardner for Castro trade at all, if it were to happen. IMO, the Cubs would be getting ripped off.

 

[DJMoore_is_fat]

I don't like the Gardner for Castro trade at all, if it were to happen. IMO, the Cubs would be getting ripped off.

Well, it does seem like Gardner is declining -- while Castro is not. When discussing Gardner earlier, a poster had referenced to the decline of Carl Crawford. I'm not sure how similar they are as players - but that is a frightening example. I do know Gardner has suffered leg injuries which have robbed him of his ability to steal 40 bases a year. But will he further decline, as Crawford has?

He seems to get on base well and I've heard his defensive abilities are average. Is Gardner the same level of defender as Fowler?

 

[Parade_Rain]

On the Castro for Gardner topic -- We'll basically be ruling out acquiring a SP via trade unless we find a team willing to accept prospects. I can't imagine anybody wants to move two of our major league young players?

I was thinking about that Castro for CF trade, too, and thought about a younger SP. I don't think they trade for a CF. It seems to be Castro, Baez or Soler or some combination with prospects for a young gun with TOR potential.

 

[beckdawg]

Looking all but a foregone conclusion at this point that the cubs will sign shark. I'm typically not inclined to believe Levine but he was speculating 3-4 years at $15 mil/season with incentives. I'd take that all day honestly. Would suck to give up a draft pick but you're probably getting one back with Fowler anyways. Regardless, Shark's been durable and he pitches like a #3 with some upside to pitch better if things fall right year to year.

It's not really that surprising to me that this would be their approach. The more interesting thing to me though is what do they do with the rest of their money. If they lock down Shark early as it seems they might, it basically let's them pick and choose value. For example, if teams are light on Heyward you have the money to sign him. If teams are light on Span/Fowler you can go after them. If teams are light on one of the bigger name pitchers you go after them and then look to trade for a CF. I'm also hoping they can re-sign Jackson early because him and Shark basically give you fall back options where if you did nothing else you would be ok though obviously you would still hope to do more.