Rosenthal: Cubs Want To Trade Cody Bellinger

38 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

You do realize that Castillo has between $75 million and $100 million left on his contract over the next 3-4 years,

I would still take him. But the Mariners arent going to take Bellinger in return for him. Castillo has one year left on his NTC. He gets to choose where he is going if he were willing to waive it. The Mariners are up against the ropes in terms of what they are willing to spend. The only reason for them to want to trade Castillo now when they have absolutely no leverage would be to dump his salary. They aren't taking back someone who has a larger salary. And Bellinger doesnt even fit their needs. Nico Hoerner would be more what the Mariners need.

Something like Hoerner for Castillo + ???.

8 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

I would still take him. But the Mariners arent going to take Bellinger in return for him. Castillo has one year left on his NTC. He gets to choose where he is going if he were willing to waive it. The Mariners are up against the ropes in terms of what they are willing to spend. The only reason for them to want to trade Castillo now when they have absolutely no leverage would be to dump his salary. They aren't taking back someone who has a larger salary. And Bellinger doesnt even fit their needs. Nico Hoerner would be more what the Mariners need.

Something like Hoerner for Castillo + ???.

Just the fact that one proposal has two opposite responses, one suggesting it is a bad deal for the Cubs and the other saying the Mariners would never do a deal like this, tells me it is probably pretty fair. But to your point, Mariners are looking for infield help. So why not add Phillies and Bohm in this deal? Phillies get Bellinger, who would do well in that park and helps them where they need help, Mariners get Bohm to help their infield, Cubs get Castillo. Add whatever else is needed, either some cash or lower level prospects. Not like the GM’s of both the Phillies and the Mariners are afraid to shake things up. 

7 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Just the fact that one proposal has two opposite responses, one suggesting it is a bad deal for the Cubs and the other saying the Mariners would never do a deal like this, tells me it is probably pretty fair. But to your point, Mariners are looking for infield help. So why not add Phillies and Bohm in this deal? Phillies get Bellinger, who would do well in that park and helps them where they need help, Mariners get Bohm to help their infield, Cubs get Castillo. Add whatever else is needed, either some cash or lower level prospects. Not like the GM’s of both the Phillies and the Mariners are afraid to shake things up. 

Because Alec Bohm has way more trade value than either one of Bellinger and Castillo.

No one takes the perspective of the other teams when thinking of trades for their team. They only look at what is good for the Cubs. Sure, you can sit there and say "add whatever prospects to make it work." But I'm pretty sure we've already discussed how the Cubs aren't going to be adding prospects to a Bellinger deal just to get rid of him.

10 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

Because Alec Bohm has way more trade value than either one of Bellinger and Castillo.

No one takes the perspective of the other teams when thinking of trades for their team. They only look at what is good for the Cubs. Sure, you can sit there and say "add whatever prospects to make it work." But I'm pretty sure we've already discussed how the Cubs aren't going to be adding prospects to a Bellinger deal just to get rid of him.

I don’t consider getting Castillo, just getting rid of Bellinger. I also don’t feel the prospect should come from the Cubs. If anything, since Seattle is getting the most valuable player in the deal, they would have to kick in a prospect to the Phillies. Cubs get Castillo for Bellinger. Pretty fair. Phillies get Bohm for Castillo. So they have to add to make it fair for the Phillies. Phillies get Bellinger for Bohm. So they need to get more. But more comes from the Mariners. Anything else added would be very small adds, if any.

21 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t know. I really think Bellinger for Castillo is pretty fair. Maybe the Cubs add $5M to $6M to the deal to make salaries the same. Then both guys are good players but just not worth their money. Bellinger is an everyday player that bats anywhere 2 thru 6 in a line up and Castillo is a solid #3 pitcher. Fair deal IMI. But if the Cubs had to add anything I wouldn’t tbh knit would be a high end prospect. Maybe someone not in the top 30? But if that did happen are the Cubs better off with Castillo and  FA bat, not Soto, or Kikuchi, Flanaagan or Eovaldi and Bellinger. That is what has to be asked. 

That particular trade is fair, because of the money that Castillo is owed.  It would also fill a need without adding to payroll this season.  

6 minutes ago, thawv said:

That particular trade is fair, because of the money that Castillo is owed.  It would also fill a need without adding to payroll this season.  

Yep. And if Bellinger doesn’t exactly fit the Mariners needs they can either trade him to get what they feel they need or trade the guy whose place he takes in the line up to get what they might need. Arozarena would be an example of someone who might be available if the Mariners got Bellinger. Not like Dipito is afraid to shake the team up with trades. As I said, Bohm seems like a target for them and Bellinger makes a lot of sense for Phillies. They are ibviously not the same value. So Mariners can trade Bellinger or Arozarena, plus something else for Bohm. Castillo is much more the type of guy the Cubs should target for Bellinger than Stroman is. And if not, just stay with Bellinger. The deal for Castillo would mean the Cubs would probably pick up another bat via FA. So is Castillo and Teoscar Hernandez better than Kikuchi and Bellinger? Honestly I am not sure. That is why I am fine just keeping Bellinger if they don’t get what they want. 

If they trade Belli it will probably be paying down his contract to get someone of value. So it will be Blli + money. They aren't going to save his entire salary and get anyone who can help the MLB team. 

14 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Yep. And if Bellinger doesn’t exactly fit the Mariners needs they can either trade him to get what they feel they need or trade the guy whose place he takes in the line up to get what they might need. Arozarena would be an example of someone who might be available if the Mariners got Bellinger. Not like Dipito is afraid to shake the team up with trades. As I said, Bohm seems like a target for them and Bellinger makes a lot of sense for Phillies. They are ibviously not the same value. So Mariners can trade Bellinger or Arozarena, plus something else for Bohm. Castillo is much more the type of guy the Cubs should target for Bellinger than Stroman is. And if not, just stay with Bellinger. The deal for Castillo would mean the Cubs would probably pick up another bat via FA. So is Castillo and Teoscar Hernandez better than Kikuchi and Bellinger? Honestly I am not sure. That is why I am fine just keeping Bellinger if they don’t get what they want. 

Great post.  Can we get a better pitcher than Castillo in free agency for 3/75 ish?  Maybe?  Maybe not.  But we'd be adding a solid #3 for just about no cost, and still have over 50 million to spend.  Then we can add a big bat to replace Belli, or just decide to run with Caissie.  I don't know.  We can also use that money for a Burnes, AND Scott.  Which I honestly don't see happening.  I see a Flaherty as a much more likely signing as he'll be 3-4 years, cheaper AAV, and no QO.  I'd actually be surprised if they don't sign Flaherty!

4 minutes ago, thawv said:

Great post.  Can we get a better pitcher than Castillo in free agency for 3/75 ish?  Maybe?  Maybe not.  But we'd be adding a solid #3 for just about no cost, and still have over 50 million to spend.  Then we can add a big bat to replace Belli, or just decide to run with Caissie.  I don't know.  We can also use that money for a Burnes, AND Scott.  Which I honestly don't see happening.  I see a Flaherty as a much more likely signing as he'll be 3-4 years, cheaper AAV, and no QO.  I'd actually be surprised if they don't sign Flaherty!

The Cubs are already ruling out the top tier of the market for batters and pitchers. This team is looking at Kikuchi's. Bellinger not opting out scrapped Jed's entire off-season plan. Any significant move is likely coming only through trade and it's not going to include Bellinger.

10 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

The Cubs are already ruling out the top tier of the market for batters and pitchers. This team is looking at Kikuchi's. Bellinger not opting out scrapped Jed's entire off-season plan. Any significant move is likely coming only through trade and it's not going to include Bellinger.

Probably not going to trade Bellinger. I agree with that. Just suggesting if they did, Castillo would be more appropriate. And now Kikuchi is gone. Went to the Angels. My guess is they stay with Bellinger and sign someone like Flaherty or Eovaldi, if they even go that high for a pitcher. 

Morgan, thaiss, 2 trades down, 2 problems solved. A couple more trades and we'll be swimming in the deep end of the kiddie pool.

18 minutes ago, thawv said:

Great post.  Can we get a better pitcher than Castillo in free agency for 3/75 ish?  Maybe?  Maybe not.  But we'd be adding a solid #3 for just about no cost, and still have over 50 million to spend.  Then we can add a big bat to replace Belli, or just decide to run with Caissie.  I don't know.  We can also use that money for a Burnes, AND Scott.  Which I honestly don't see happening.  I see a Flaherty as a much more likely signing as he'll be 3-4 years, cheaper AAV, and no QO.  I'd actually be surprised if they don't sign Flaherty!

Never be surprised at the Cubs not signing someone. Yes, he makes sense. But doesn’t mean they sign him.

15 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

The Cubs are already ruling out the top tier of the market for batters and pitchers. This team is looking at Kikuchi's. Bellinger not opting out scrapped Jed's entire off-season plan. Any significant move is likely coming only through trade and it's not going to include Bellinger.

What do you think Jed’s plan was without Bellinger? How does him opting in scrap the entire plan? Was the plan to sign a bat? If so, at most, Bellinger opting in cost the Cubs maybe $10M in payroll this year. But takes them off the hook of having to have someone fir 4 years at $22M a year. I would have rather he opted out, but I feel you are making way too much out of Bellinger staying. He isn’t dead weight. He is a solid player. 

42 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

The Cubs are already ruling out the top tier of the market for batters and pitchers. This team is looking at Kikuchi's. Bellinger not opting out scrapped Jed's entire off-season plan. Any significant move is likely coming only through trade and it's not going to include Bellinger.

I know this, but it's just a wish list. 

Kikuchi is signing with the Angels

12 hours ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Just picking on this to say the Cubs should have zero interest in Clarke Schmidt. How many 92-94 SPs with a slider and a TJ can one rotation have??! 

Drew Smiley is available. He's had TJ and a 93 slider

1 hour ago, Rcal10 said:

What do you think Jed’s plan was without Bellinger? How does him opting in scrap the entire plan? Was the plan to sign a bat? If so, at most, Bellinger opting in cost the Cubs maybe $10M in payroll this year. But takes them off the hook of having to have someone fir 4 years at $22M a year. I would have rather he opted out, but I feel you are making way too much out of Bellinger staying. He isn’t dead weight. He is a solid player. 

You would have to ask Jed those questions. I wasn't the one campaigning for Bellinger to opt out. I am not the one scratching off all of the best FAs from the offseason plan.

He absolutely is dead weight. Is he still a valuable player? Yes. At a certain price. That price being about half of what he is making. Why do you think Jed was publicly wishing for him to opt out? $50M isn't horsefeathers when you are trying to build an entire new bench, 2-3 relievers with at least one potential closer, and a TOR SP. If Bellinger wasn't dead weight, he would have opted out.

We can make the correct point that Bellinger doesn't have a ton of surplus value without silly exaggerations.  Bellinger made 17 million after being an injured wreck for 2 seasons, thinking he's only in the green at less than 15 million is clearly wrong.  His 2024 batting line with slightly above average defense in CF would have surplus value, and we know he clearly has potential to be greater than that(his career wRC+ is 10 points higher).  

4 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

You would have to ask Jed those questions. I wasn't the one campaigning for Bellinger to opt out. I am not the one scratching off all of the best FAs from the offseason plan.

He absolutely is dead weight. Is he still a valuable player? Yes. At a certain price. That price being about half of what he is making. Why do you think Jed was publicly wishing for him to opt out? $50M isn't horsefeathers when you are trying to build an entire new bench, 2-3 relievers with at least one potential closer, and a TOR SP.

I’m asking you because you suggested Bellinger opting in scrapped all of Jed’s plans. Jed didn’t say that, you did. So what do you think his plan was? I think Bellinger is probably being paid about $10M too much for next year. I just don’t see that as a reason to scrap everything. Like I said, if he opted out maybe the Cubs sign Alonso or Hernandez for $22M a year. So they are starting FA with $10M less. That is basically trading for Morgan instead of signing Stephenson. Now they are back on track with Jed’s plan. Except no one knows what that plan is. I just think you are making way too big a deal about Bellinger being here. I don’t think he is bowing out of the top FA because of Bellinger. I think he was never going for the top end of FA, regardless(with the possible exception of signing someone to replace Bellinger- and that wouldn’t have included Soto). I do agree with you that Jed would have rather Bellinger opted out. But I don’t see it scrapping all plans moving forward. 

1 minute ago, Rcal10 said:

I’m asking you because you suggested Bellinger opting in scrapped all of Jed’s plans. Jed didn’t say that, you did. So what do you think his plan was? I think Bellinger is probably being paid about $10M too much for next year. I just don’t see that as a reason to scrap everything. Like I said, if he opted out maybe the Cubs sign Alonso or Hernandez for $22M a year. So they are starting FA with $10M less. That is basically trading for Morgan instead of signing Stephenson. Now they are back on track with Jed’s plan. Except no one knows what that plan is. I just think you are making way too big a deal about Bellinger being here. I don’t think he is bowing out of the top FA because of Bellinger. I think he was never going for the top end of FA, regardless(with the possible exception of signing someone to replace Bellinger- and that wouldn’t have included Soto). I do agree with you that Jed would have rather Bellinger opted out. But I don’t see it scrapping all plans moving forward. 

I'm willing to bet the plan for RF was either going back to Suzuki or one of the rookies.

Acting like throwing a $32.5M wrench in the middle of that is no big deal is laughable. Bellinger opting in eliminated pretty much every option for shaking the lineup up.

23 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

He absolutely is dead weight. Is he still a valuable player? Yes.

26 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Probably because you cut out context and dont know the definition of dead weight - a heavy or oppressive burden. Bellinger is absolutely a burden. Again, if we wasn't, he, and most certainly Boras, would have opted out. And Jed wouldnt have been reportedly offering Bellinger up to any and all takers at the GM meetings.

24 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

You would have to ask Jed those questions. I wasn't the one campaigning for Bellinger to opt out. I am not the one scratching off all of the best FAs from the offseason plan.

He absolutely is dead weight. Is he still a valuable player? Yes. At a certain price. That price being about half of what he is making. Why do you think Jed was publicly wishing for him to opt out? $50M isn't horsefeathers when you are trying to build an entire new bench, 2-3 relievers with at least one potential closer, and a TOR SP.

That's a rough ice water bucket challenge on a Monday morning. I'm guessing the one and only route to a 90 win regular season with jeds available $ is getting Sasaki. Sasaki will be cheap initially because of international pool. Unfortunately he won't sign until later in January. A lot of options for player acquisitions will be done. That's why I'm figuring thaiss is our catcher addition. Morgan and possibly Finnegan and a few blind squirrels will be our bullpen adds. Mastrobuoni prob remains backup infielder. One of the recovering starting pitcher free agents gets some sort of st invitation or a short prove it deal. 

Rest assured, Sasaki will be our one true hope of a Paladin arriving at Wrigley in 2025. Jeds walking a high-wire tightrope without a net. It's up to him if he hangs on or crash lands. 

52 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

I'm willing to bet the plan for RF was either going back to Suzuki or one of the rookies.

Acting like throwing a $32.5M wrench in the middle of that is no big deal is laughable. Bellinger opting in eliminated pretty much every option for shaking the lineup up.

So Bellinger opting out would have cleared out more money and then the Cubs would have went with Cassie in the outfield/DH and not spent that money? Honestly, if that was the plan I am glad he opted in. If you believe, as I do, that had Bellinger opted out the Cubs would have tried replacing him with a similar player in the way of team value, he isn’t costing them $32M they didn’t expect to spend. He is probably costing them $10M, because whoever replaced him would have probably costed that. So instead of spending $10M on a pen arm they make a trade for Morgan. Again, him being here should not blow up the entire off season. Again, I agree Jed would have rather he opted out. But it isn’t nearly as big a deal as you are making it. It isn’t some egregious mistake Jed made. He is overpaying for a solid player. Hardly something to be all that concerned about. I am sure you can find numerous players in every roster in baseball that you can say the same thing about. 

9 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

So Bellinger opting out would have cleared out more money and then the Cubs would have went with Cassie in the outfield/DH and not spent that money? Honestly, if that was the plan I am glad he opted in. If you believe, as I do, that had Bellinger opted out the Cubs would have tried replacing him with a similar player in the way of team value, he isn’t costing them $32M they didn’t expect to spend. He is probably costing them $10M, because whoever replaced him would have probably costed that. So instead of spending $10M on a pen arm they make a trade for Morgan. Again, him being here should not blow up the entire off season. Again, I agree Jed would have rather he opted out. But it isn’t nearly as big a deal as you are making it. It isn’t some egregious mistake Jed made. He is overpaying for a solid player. Hardly something to be all that concerned about. I am sure you can find numerous players in every roster in baseball that you can say the same thing about. 

I really dont know how you jump to the conclusion that those $32.5M were only ever going to be used on Bellinger.

Just now, TomtheBombadil said:

Does it crack anyone else up that all offseason is going to be Cubs fans whining about not spending while also calling every dollar spent an overpayz? It’s fascinating, no?

It cracks me up that someone thinks Bellinger's money is somehow related to every dollar the Cubs spend.