Cubs Telling Potential Trade Partners They're Undecided On Selling At Deadline

23 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Oh, sorry. I misunderstood. As a free agent I wouldn’t be interested in him. He would be another glove first guy they would have to play at third and probably have to pay him as if he is a SS. I just feel the Cubs need a solid bat at 3rd. 

All good bro, that’s a fair take.

Even if we do sell there isn't much to move realistically if we're to compete in 2025 on Opening Day.  Taillon, Hendricks, and maybe a reliever (the latter 2 won't demand much).  They could even move Taillon if they get an appealing offer and hope they get lucky with whomever replaces him in the rotation the final 2 months.

May just make more sense to stay put and roll the dice and hope to get hot in the last 2 months for a wildcard spot and possibly add a reliever, catcher and/or 3b at the deadline that don't cost anything significant.  Can't see them adding a Candelario type.

Standing pat when you have 6 teams needing to leap for a wildcard spot would be monumentally dumb. Sell what isnt in your 2025 plan or buy for your 2025 plan.

There's 64 games left in the season. The final WC spot is projected to win 83 games. So the Cubs would at least have to shoot for 84 wins. To get to that number they have to be at a .578 winning percentage the remainder of the year. Only 4 teams in MLB currently exceed that number, the Cubs trail it by nearly 100 points. Hoping for a WC spot at this point and not doing much at the deadline is a typical Jed move.

57 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

Standing pat when you have 6 teams needing to leap for a wildcard spot would be monumentally dumb. Sell what isnt in your 2025 plan or buy for your 2025 plan.

There's 64 games left in the season. The final WC spot is projected to win 83 games. So the Cubs would at least have to shoot for 84 wins. To get to that number they have to be at a .578 winning percentage the remainder of the year. Only 4 teams in MLB currently exceed that number, the Cubs trail it by nearly 100 points. Hoping for a WC spot at this point and not doing much at the deadline is a typical Jed move.

The post you quoted was discussing next year's free agency (Paredes specifically) and potential off-season moves. Did you mean to quote a different post?

Yet another reason to never take Fansided seriously. Eat half of Taillon's contract to net a lead piece that wouldn't be in Chicago's top 20 and a secondary piece that might not be top 30. Good god that's bad. 

https://fansided.com/posts/orioles-cubs-trade-for-rotation-enhancement

For those who don't want to read

Taillon+half his contract worth of cash for FV 40 Mac Horvath and FV 35+ Trace Bright

7 minutes ago, KCCub said:

The post you quoted was discussing next year's free agency (Paredes specifically) and potential off-season moves. Did you mean to quote a different post?

Honestly didnt even mean to quote something. Probably just something saved into the box from a previous session. I was just responding to the post above mine.

I feel like some people just want the Cubs to Declare They Are Sellers but haven't actually thought through how seemingly useless the whole exercise would be. All our good players are signed, reasonably so, for the next two years. All our bad players can't get you anything of value. Like, sure, do the Michael Scott 'I Declare Bankruptcy' thing if you want. But the normal sell off trades are good offensive players/starters on expiring deals or shutdown relievers. We have none of those. 

Relatedly, trading Taillon for a 40 FV guy when we've already used 9 different starters this year and Horton will definitely be on an innings limit next year seems a little rash. 

11 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

I feel like some people just want the Cubs to Declare They Are Sellers but haven't actually thought through how seemingly useless the whole exercise would be. All our good players are signed, reasonably so, for the next two years. All our bad players can't get you anything of value. Like, sure, do the Michael Scott 'I Declare Bankruptcy' thing if you want. But the normal sell off trades are good offensive players/starters on expiring deals or shutdown relievers. We have none of those. 

Relatedly, trading Taillon for a 40 FV guy when we've already used 9 different starters this year and Horton will definitely be on an innings limit next year seems a little rash. 

I have no issues selling Taillon, I'm just not selling him for farm filler, especially when eating money. If Baltimore wants to send back Chayce McDermott then we talk. He's probably not going to remain a starter, but he should be a very good pen arm. If Baltimore wants the Cubs to eat a chunk then it probably has to be Cade Povich.

20 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

I feel like some people just want the Cubs to Declare They Are Sellers but haven't actually thought through how seemingly useless the whole exercise would be. All our good players are signed, reasonably so, for the next two years. All our bad players can't get you anything of value. Like, sure, do the Michael Scott 'I Declare Bankruptcy' thing if you want. But the normal sell off trades are good offensive players/starters on expiring deals or shutdown relievers. We have none of those. 

Relatedly, trading Taillon for a 40 FV guy when we've already used 9 different starters this year and Horton will definitely be on an innings limit next year seems a little rash. 

11 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

I have no issues selling Taillon, I'm just not selling him for farm filler, especially when eating money. If Baltimore wants to send back Chayce McDermott then we talk. He's probably not going to remain a starter, but he should be a very good pen arm. If Baltimore wants the Cubs to eat a chunk then it probably has to be Cade Povich.

I'm not going to pretend to be the prospect guy around here, but nothing about a 25 year old (26 in August) with a 5.4 BB/9 rate in AAA screams 'let's trade the guy who has given us 250 innings of a 4.20 ERA and is outperforming last year'. We free up $18m a year to do....what? Giolito got 2/$30 after a 1 WAR season, Eduardo Rodriguez got 4/$80 after a 3 win season, neither of them have thrown a pitch this year. 

Just now, squally1313 said:

I'm not going to pretend to be the prospect guy around here, but nothing about a 25 year old (26 in August) with a 5.4 BB/9 rate in AAA screams 'let's trade the guy who has given us 250 innings of a 4.20 ERA and is outperforming last year'. We free up $18m a year to do....what? Giolito got 2/$30 after a 1 WAR season, Eduardo Rodriguez got 4/$80 after a 3 win season, neither of them have thrown a pitch this year. 

This is my gripe with any thoughts on moving Taillon.  What's the end game?  You're not going to get a high end prospect, close to the majors or not, and you have to replace him in next year's rotation still and at a likely higher cost.  None of those things make any sense to me, especially if there's any thought of this team regressing to the mean over the rest of the season and possibly being in contention for a WC spot.

6 minutes ago, mul21 said:

This is my gripe with any thoughts on moving Taillon.  What's the end game?  You're not going to get a high end prospect, close to the majors or not, and you have to replace him in next year's rotation still and at a likely higher cost.  None of those things make any sense to me, especially if there's any thought of this team regressing to the mean over the rest of the season and possibly being in contention for a WC spot.

I'm sure there will be a name or two that gets thrown out there, but that's conveniently skipping the following steps:

1. PTR just putting the money right back in the team and not just telling Jed good luck with the farm dudes (Brandon Birdsell, opening day 5th starter!)
2. The Cubs actually having to make the best contract offer during free agency

You already have him, he's signed, he's going to probably give you as many starts as you want out of him.

I'm not for trading Taillon. I'm not for trading Happ. I'm not for trading Suzuki.

I'm for trading Morel. I'm for trading Hoerner, but the return has to make equal sense on a MLB level. I'm for trading Bellinger for anything just to get out of the uncertainty of the opt outs, I don't consider him a lock to exercise them. I'm for trading prospects to buy for the current and future of the MLB roster.

I don't know why people need some slam dunk sure thing as a requirement to make moves. There's plenty of moves that can be made that still make sense.

The Cubs have allegedly had discussions with the A's about Langeliers. He is struggling offensively in MLB but still provides the defense the Cubs covet and he has a lot of power so while the average doesnt play it would be like having Morel at a premium position. Maybe the Cubs revisit that and start talking about trading from the upper echelon of their prospect pool and try to get a Lucas Erceg thrown in.

The Yankees have constantly been wanting Bellinger, so eat whatever salary is needed to get even a Clayton Beeter.

Talk to the bottom feeders about some of their underperforming relievers with pretty good metrics under the hood like Andrew Nardi from the Marlins, Nicks Mears from the Rockies, or start up conversations with the Blue Jays again about Vlad and throw in Nate Pearson.

Do something besides sit on your ass.

26 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

I'm not going to pretend to be the prospect guy around here, but nothing about a 25 year old (26 in August) with a 5.4 BB/9 rate in AAA screams 'let's trade the guy who has given us 250 innings of a 4.20 ERA and is outperforming last year'. We free up $18m a year to do....what? Giolito got 2/$30 after a 1 WAR season, Eduardo Rodriguez got 4/$80 after a 3 win season, neither of them have thrown a pitch this year. 

As I said, he's probably not a starter because of the control issues, but the stuff absolutely plays where he could be a high leverage reliever right now. I also think you could go out and get a guy like Kikuchi for money similar to the 2/36 left on Taillon's contract this offseason. 

2 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

I'm sure there will be a name or two that gets thrown out there, but that's conveniently skipping the following steps:

1. PTR just putting the money right back in the team and not just telling Jed good luck with the farm dudes (Brandon Birdsell, opening day 5th starter!)
2. The Cubs actually having to make the best contract offer during free agency

You already have him, he's signed, he's going to probably give you as many starts as you want out of him.

That's the thing, us NorthSideBaseball GM's are working with a fraction of the data/knowledge that our front office has. We don't know what next year's potential budget will be, we don't have a temperature on possible off season trade targets, we don't know what their internal projections of this team actually is, and on and on. 

It's very easy to say on here "If you trade X player, you need to give a precise plan to justify trading said player". That's just impossible being the NSB GM's we all are. 

If the front office has a specific target/plan in mind to improve this team and that includes trading Taillon, then pull the trigger. Last year if that was unloading Taillon and then trading for Glasnow + extending Glasnow we would of all been thrilled (At least those who aren't terrified of his injury history) with that result.

If the plan is to trade Taillon and sign Kyle Gibson for $12m, then don't do it. 

mul21 mentions regress to the mean - what is the mean? 82/83 wins? That's the underlying issue most folks have with the current roster construction and why we see so many suggestions on "we need to move x player". 

I don't think everyone needs to have a hyper specific plan for every potential move, but I do think it's worth thinking about the possible outcomes before judging the decision to make/not make a move.  The thing I keep coming back to is that the *best case* scenarios I'm reading from trading Taillon are 'we functionally keep Taillon(similar player on similar deal), and we add a possible bullpen/platoon guy to the roster'.  To me that is not enough upside to deal with the downsides, which Squally has fairly clearly outlined.  This isn't to suggest that Taillon is locked in to a certain level of future production, but also the risks that exist with him are fairly universal.

59 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

The thing I keep coming back to is that the *best case* scenarios I'm reading from trading Taillon are 'we functionally keep Taillon(similar player on similar deal), and we add a possible bullpen/platoon guy to the roster'.  To me that is not enough upside to deal with the downsides, which Squally has fairly clearly outlined.

And I think most everyone here would agree with that line of thinking if that's the result. Similar to what I posted above - if they move Taillon for a BP/platoon guy and sign a Kyle Gibson this off season, I would hate that. That doesn't mean that's the only outcome though. 

I don't think it's that far fetched if the front office identifies Taillon as a spot where they believe they can do some combo of these things - add more upside, get younger, add more cost control.

Let's put it this way - if you listen to any national analyst/reporter talk about the Cubs potential deadline and spefically if they are selling, it's always Bellinger and Taillon (Heck, even the CBS fantasy baseball podcast was talking about on Friday how much it would improve Taillon's fantasy value if he was traded). Now maybe all that chatter stems from the very first rumor that came about and everyone just ran with it and it's all moot. But there's yet to be anything released saying Taillon is off limits (Similar to what the Cubs front office did for Morel this off-season).

IF we do end up being sellers and Taillon truely is available, I sure hope the front office isn't just looking at his spot as an upgrade on the margins and not thinking bigger. 

Let's just become buyers and not have to continue talking about trading Taillon. 

1 hour ago, KCCub said:

I don't think it's that far fetched if the front office identifies Taillon as a spot where they believe they can do some combo of these things - add more upside, get younger, add more cost control.

Yeah but Taillon isn't like, a shortstop. You need at least 5 of them, realistically 7-8. All of the pro-trade arguments essentially come down to clearing his salary because it's looking slightly underwater as a contract and just hoping it gets used in a different manner. We already have Hendricks (16m), Neris (hopefully) (9m), Bote (5.5m), Smyly (8.5m) coming off the books as essentially pure salary relief (by that I mean you don't have to replace their production/position), there's plenty of money and/or prospects there already to get us a front line starter without creating a hole there for the next 6 months and just assuming we'll fill it. 

I’m not trading anyone they plan on being in the team in 25’. This includes Hoerner, Taillon, Happ and Suzuki. It doesn’t include Morel, Neris, Merryweather, and Bellinger. Honestly I would be fine basically trading Bellinger as a salary dump. Basically I see the  Cubs needing a big bat next year, a 3rd baseman and a catcher. Maybe trade any combination of minor league talent with the exception of Horton to get Paredes. Morel can go in that deal too. Then sign Soto and either trade or sign a catcher. If they want to add a pen arm, fine. But I honestly think they have enough pen arms to make a good pen within their system. If they can’t get Soto, maybe sign someone like Chapman for 3rd and try working on a trade for the big bat. Maybe Guerrero? Maybe Tucker? Again, for either you work with the young talent and Morel to make the trade. If it is Guerrero, he becomes the DH, and you extend him. If it is Tucker he moves to right and you extend him. Tucker would cost much more. He plays right and Suzuki is the DH. If they have extra money they can look at an innings eating starter. With Imanaga, Steele, Taillon, Wicks, Assad, Horton, Brown, & Wesneski they don’t necessarily need another starter. But with many on innings limits, it wouldn’t hurt. 

I generally try to avoid just throwing out random trades, but feel like the only defensive position left for Morel to maybe fake it at is second base. The Red Sox have gotten pretty comfortably the worst production at second base in baseball this year. They moved David Hamilton over to second about a month ago and he's put up a 105 wRC this year which is admirable, so it's righting the ship a little bit, but he can't hit lefties at all and also doesn't really have much of a pedigree. How close does Morel come to getting us Teel? I'd be willing to give up more if needed. They've got Connor Wong and his 125 wRC through 2028 to fill the catching spot. In the short run we get by with Mastro and Wisdom, in the middle run we look at Murray, Shaw, Triantos. By opening day 2025 we'll have more data on the kids and another offseason to go after Chapman or trade for a long term solution. You move Seiya into a more full time DH role, give PCA daily starts, have RF for Cody (or Canario, or Caissie, or Alcantara). 

Aware this is more of a Sell discussion given Teel is probably at least a year away. But don't think removing Morel from the equation changes anything for the teams success the rest of the year. 

7 hours ago, Cuzi said:

Standing pat when you have 6 teams needing to leap for a wildcard spot would be monumentally dumb. Sell what isnt in your 2025 plan or buy for your 2025 plan.

There's 64 games left in the season. The final WC spot is projected to win 83 games. So the Cubs would at least have to shoot for 84 wins. To get to that number they have to be at a .578 winning percentage the remainder of the year. Only 4 teams in MLB currently exceed that number, the Cubs trail it by nearly 100 points. Hoping for a WC spot at this point and not doing much at the deadline is a typical Jed move.

They could be sellers and buyers and position themselves for 2025+ while in theory remaining in the race.  The issue is that don't really have a lot to sell even if they for whatever reason wanted to tank (unless they wanted to start moving position guys) nor is it worth going all-in on this team.

4 hours ago, squally1313 said:

I generally try to avoid just throwing out random trades, but feel like the only defensive position left for Morel to maybe fake it at is second base. The Red Sox have gotten pretty comfortably the worst production at second base in baseball this year. They moved David Hamilton over to second about a month ago and he's put up a 105 wRC this year which is admirable, so it's righting the ship a little bit, but he can't hit lefties at all and also doesn't really have much of a pedigree. How close does Morel come to getting us Teel? I'd be willing to give up more if needed. They've got Connor Wong and his 125 wRC through 2028 to fill the catching spot. In the short run we get by with Mastro and Wisdom, in the middle run we look at Murray, Shaw, Triantos. By opening day 2025 we'll have more data on the kids and another offseason to go after Chapman or trade for a long term solution. You move Seiya into a more full time DH role, give PCA daily starts, have RF for Cody (or Canario, or Caissie, or Alcantara). 

Aware this is more of a Sell discussion given Teel is probably at least a year away. But don't think removing Morel from the equation changes anything for the teams success the rest of the year. 

The only issue I have with getting Chapman and Bellinger opting in would be they still don’t have a big bat. They have a very solid defense, especially if Bellinger moves to right and Suzuki is the DH. Maybe Morel+ brings them a decent catcher. That would be a solid team, but not a very offensive team. That is why, IMO, Bellinger has to go and they have to replace his bat with a better bat. Either through free agency or a trade. 

18 hours ago, squally1313 said:

I generally try to avoid just throwing out random trades, but feel like the only defensive position left for Morel to maybe fake it at is second base. The Red Sox have gotten pretty comfortably the worst production at second base in baseball this year. They moved David Hamilton over to second about a month ago and he's put up a 105 wRC this year which is admirable, so it's righting the ship a little bit, but he can't hit lefties at all and also doesn't really have much of a pedigree. How close does Morel come to getting us Teel? I'd be willing to give up more if needed. They've got Connor Wong and his 125 wRC through 2028 to fill the catching spot. In the short run we get by with Mastro and Wisdom, in the middle run we look at Murray, Shaw, Triantos. By opening day 2025 we'll have more data on the kids and another offseason to go after Chapman or trade for a long term solution. You move Seiya into a more full time DH role, give PCA daily starts, have RF for Cody (or Canario, or Caissie, or Alcantara). 

Aware this is more of a Sell discussion given Teel is probably at least a year away. But don't think removing Morel from the equation changes anything for the teams success the rest of the year. 

I’ve had my eye on Teel for a while. Nico is more likely. I’m not sure how much trade value Morel has as a position player. 

46 minutes ago, Stratos said:

They could be sellers and buyers and position themselves for 2025+ while in theory remaining in the race.  The issue is that don't really have a lot to sell even if they for whatever reason wanted to tank (unless they wanted to start moving position guys) nor is it worth going all-in on this team.

This is what I've been saying all along.  Trading a package of prospects (PCA, Morel, Cassie, Alcantara, Ballesteros, Triantos, Wicks, Triantos, Wesneski, etc.) certainly gets you in the door for Robert, Paredes, Vlad, etc. which fills the need for the big bat for the rest of this season and and the next few.