Cubs and Mariners Have Discussed Nico Hoerner Trade

10 minutes ago, harmony said:

Any updates on Nico Hoerner's recovery from concerning flexor tendon surgury? Will Hoerner be ready when players report to Spring Training? Will Hoerner be available on Opening Day?

This year Bryan Woo averaged 6+ innings over his final 11 starts. Woo posted quality starts in 10 of his 22 starts this year; as a point of reference, Justin Steele recorded quality starts in 11 of his 24 starts this year.

There will probably be nothing new on Hoerner for a while. The surgery was just a few weeks ago. 

Timetable is 3-6 months. It sounds pretty likely barring a massive setback that even if Hoerner misses time, it'll likely be in the "weeks" at most. Like, 15-20 games, as the 6 month timing would push into the March/Early-April area. 

I think we have to assume any trade of Hoerner means the other team (in this case Seattle) has an understanding and little worry about the injury.

3 hours ago, 1908_Cubs said:

There will probably be nothing new on Hoerner for a while. The surgery was just a few weeks ago. 

Timetable is 3-6 months. It sounds pretty likely barring a massive setback that even if Hoerner misses time, it'll likely be in the "weeks" at most. Like, 15-20 games, as the 6 month timing would push into the March/Early-April area. 

I think we have to assume any trade of Hoerner means the other team (in this case Seattle) has an understanding and little worry about the injury.

Or a trade partner could be looking for an injury discount:

https://orthoinfo.aaos.org/en/diseases--conditions/flexor-tendon-injuries/

7 hours ago, harmony said:

Or a trade partner could be looking for an injury discount:

https://orthoinfo.aaos.org/en/diseases--conditions/flexor-tendon-injuries/

Do you think the Chicago Cubs are looking to sell Nico Hoerner at a discount? Because I don't think so. They have little reason to do that. He's too cheap, too controlled and has been too good for the Cubs to give any sort of real discount. 

Which is why in the event Hoerner *is* traded we can probably, pretty safely assume the follow things:

1. Any team who acquires Nico Hoerner is not overly concerned (short/long term) about his injury status. 

2. The Chicago Cubs do not feel his injury has negatively impacted his overall trade value in a meaningful way.

Ultimately, the injury probably effects the likelihood of a trade but not the return.  It takes an already narrow pathway for the Cubs to find value (and team who's willing to swap MLB pitching for a 2b) and makes it smaller (adds the injury into negotiations). But if the Cubs feel as though this is effecting the return, they probably just go ahead and keep Hoerner. They have little reason to sell him for less than they value him, and would probably be fine keeping a quality player on a relatively cheap contract. And if a team is that concerned by it, they won't meet that valuation and a trade won't happen. 

The injury throws a wrinkle in the contingency. It's why I think it's less likely that Nico gets traded. 

One fun thing about this hypothetical is that even though Nico only makes $11M, dealing him AND getting a league minimum SP suddenly gives you budget breathing room to comfortably tick all the other items off the offseason to-do list.

Like I don't know if this specifically would work because I don't know that Goldy would accept the reduced role.  But something like this the rest of the way forward:

- Paul Goldschmidt 1/$15M

- Clay Holmes 2/$24M

- Danny Jansen 2/$16M

- Josh Rojas 1/$5M

Or if you'd prefer, still go cheap on the lefty masher but add two separate RPs in the ~$10M range.

This feels much cleaner than the path forward after a Bellinger trade if it's truly on the table.

Welcome back Ryan Tepera ? Milb deal?

30 minutes ago, Bertz said:

- Paul Goldschmidt 1/$15M

Ew. No.  Especially at that cost.  Dude is washed and has been for 2 years.

3 minutes ago, mul21 said:

Ew. No.  Especially at that cost.  Dude is washed and has been for 2 years.

Think less about Goldschmidt specifically and more about being able to shop in the $15M aisle instead of the $5M one.

1 minute ago, Bertz said:

Think less about Goldschmidt specifically and more about being able to shop in the $15M aisle instead of the $5M one.

Oh, sure, the overall point is spot on but having watched enough of him the last 2 years I want nothing to do with the guy.

55 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

The injury throws a wrinkle in the contingency. It's why I think it's less likely that Nico gets traded. 

Agreed. I think the Cubs would not consider trading him if they are getting lowballed due to injury concerns and I feel every team they talk to will lowball them because they will use injury concerns as a reason to give back less. This is why I think young prospects for Crochet (or any other pitcher on a bad team) makes more sense than Hoerner to the Mariners. But who knows🤷

51 minutes ago, Bertz said:

One fun thing about this hypothetical is that even though Nico only makes $11M, dealing him AND getting a league minimum SP suddenly gives you budget breathing room to comfortably tick all the other items off the offseason to-do list.

Like I don't know if this specifically would work because I don't know that Goldy would accept the reduced role.  But something like this the rest of the way forward:

- Paul Goldschmidt 1/$15M

- Clay Holmes 2/$24M

- Danny Jansen 2/$16M

- Josh Rojas 1/$5M

Or if you'd prefer, still go cheap on the lefty masher but add two separate RPs in the ~$10M range.

This feels much cleaner than the path forward after a Bellinger trade if it's truly on the table.

Totally agree with your point. But I would rather go with a trade for Lowe and then sign Grichek as your right handed bat. Money probably works out the same. 

Apparently this Seattle Times writer today followed up and said the Mariners "covet" Nico.

15 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

I had to click on a Newsweek article, gross, to get the names I want to hear:

Meh on moving Hoerner still but I’ll take this rumor as the realest rumor 

Nothing in that article is a rumor.

Saying Gilbert or Kirby immediately makes the Cubs better is a "no horsefeathers, Sherlock" statement. That doesn't mean those names have been discussed.

28 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Apparently this Seattle Times writer today followed up and said the Mariners "covet" Nico.

At this point, I have to believe the thing that will hold up the deal is Castillo not waiving his NTC. That's the only name that makes sense from the Mariners stand point. They are reportedly working with $16M in space right now. Trading Miller or Woo in pre-arb to take on an extra $11M doesn't seem like the wisest move when you'll have to turn around and replace them along with finding a 3B with $5M remaining. Even if the Cubs took on Mitch Garver to offset the money, you still have to replace Miller or Woo and a 3B with the same $16M to spend. They've got Hoerner now, but I'm not sure how much better that makes them. Might be net 0.

30 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

I had to click on a Newsweek article, gross, to get the names I want to hear:

Meh on moving Hoerner still but I’ll take this rumor as the realest rumor 

The source for this is a Fansided blog post, so it's somehow less real than any random deal you or I could make up.

4 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

What do you need? Air quotes? Jon Morosi saying the Cubs are “viable candidates” among others for Crochet was just the hottest rumor 30 seconds ago!

There's a difference between a somewhat reputable person saying that Cubs have actually had discussions with the White Sox on Garrett Crochet specifically and some random as piggyback article saying the Cubs have discussed Nico Hoerner going to the Mariners and then "one of their starters coming back in return." Proceeding to name drop all of their starters after that statement isnt a rumor. But if you think Kirby or Gilbert for a Nico Hoerner package is a legit possibility, then enjoy your reality I guess.

30 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

At this point, I have to believe the thing that will hold up the deal is Castillo not waiving his NTC. That's the only name that makes sense from the Mariners stand point. They are reportedly working with $16M in space right now. Trading Miller or Woo in pre-arb to take on an extra $11M doesn't seem like the wisest move when you'll have to turn around and replace them along with finding a 3B with $5M remaining. Even if the Cubs took on Mitch Garver to offset the money, you still have to replace Miller or Woo and a 3B with the same $16M to spend. They've got Hoerner now, but I'm not sure how much better that makes them. Might be net 0.

I don't like the idea of dealing both Bellinger and Hoerner this winter, I'd like to keep it to one or the other, but yeah I wonder if both for Castillo+ is where we end up if this ultimately ends up happening.

For Jerry, it gets him the two infielders he's looking for at a smidge less than the $15M he's reportedly got available.

Jed gets a SP you can hang your hat on while freeing up $10M+.  I'd also assume part of the + along with Castillo would be relief help, allowing Jed to put most of the ~$40M he'd have available at that point towards the position player side.

15 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Not a thing that has happened and what a way to stretch “viable candidates” when only 29 exist in the entire whole universe 

Edit: I thought you read my posts  up until the last bit but see now you were just leading me along. To repeat: there’s prospects for that. Levine even specifically mentioned Shaw and Triantos, which obvy makes sense for a team looking to manage payroll without crushing its ceiling like the Mariners 

The post that name drops Gilbert and Kirby has nothing to do with your post regarding what Levine said, which was essentially nothing.

It's impossible to have a conversation with you because you can't even follow your own stuff.

Wait why are we suspecting that Hoerner + Bellinger brings back Castillo and a marginal piece, Castillo and Bellinger have very similar value, you'd need something really significant coming back to toss Hoerner in there too, something the Mariners don't really have since trading 2 SP doesn't make sense for either team.

12 minutes ago, Bertz said:

I don't like the idea of dealing both Bellinger and Hoerner this winter, I'd like to keep it to one or the other, but yeah I wonder if both for Castillo+ is where we end up if this ultimately ends up happening.

For Jerry, it gets him the two infielders he's looking for at a smidge less than the $15M he's reportedly got available.

Jed gets a SP you can hang your hat on while freeing up $10M+.  I'd also assume part of the + along with Castillo would be relief help, allowing Jed to put most of the ~$40M he'd have available at that point towards the position player side.

I just dont see the Mariners taking on Bellinger. They've already got Luke Raley playing the Bellinger role. Why would they take on Bellingers contract while giving up a decent pitcher that would need to be replaced? I can't imagine they think Emerson Hancock is ready to take on that role.

To me it's a simple Hoerner for Castillo + Ford deal. Maybe the Mariners want a AAA pitcher like a Birdsell in the deal to potentially throw out in the rotation as the #5, which... fine. But given that pitchers performing as well as Castillo are getting roughly what Castillo is owed, means he's pretty much a wash value wise. So really its Hoerner for Ford with the Cubs taking on Castillo to free up some salary for them, which I can see them wanting at least something for Castillo besides salary relief, much like the Cubs want something for Bellinger besides strictly salary relief.