Heath Bell Rumor?

[dew1679666265]

He wasn't a top 30 prospect in the Cubs system before the season, keep in mind. And the Cubs system was terrible entering the year.

 

Be the team that trades Victor Zambrano for Scott Kazmir, not the other way around.

 

Scott Kazmir was always an elite prospect. He had terrific stuff and an extremely bright future. Wells has pretty good control and average or so stuff. There's a world of difference between Kazmir and Wells. The Mets traded a guy that had the potential to be a top of the line, elite ace. The Cubs would be trading a guy that might be a decent fifth starter throughout his career, unless he's able to dominate with average stuff.

 

Why is it either 5th starter or dominant? What about being a decent 3rd-4th starter, those guys are valuable. They get $10m+ contracts.

 

But yes, Kazmir and Wells are not similar.

 

That's the likely upside of those two pitchers. Kazmir was ticketed as an elite ace, Wells likely had the upside of a bottom of the rotation starter. If Wells had better upside, I suspect he would have been ranked somewhere in the top 30 of a (then) bad Cubs minor league system.

 

Maybe Wells can be a decent 3rd-4th starter. But I don't think a few very good ML starts are going to completely erase from GMs minds that Wells wasn't a top 30 prospect before this season. Thus, his perceived value before the year will be used in trade negotiations and will likely drop the return we can expect.

[javy knows my name]

You know who has awesome stuff, unlike Randy Wells?

 

Heath Bell.

[dew1679666265]

fair trade

Fair? Probably. But useful? Not really. The Cubs waste too much money on relievers every year, and they keep spending valuable resources replacing the guys that were going to be the solution when they figure out how terribly inconsistent relief pitchers can be. SD would be selling high on Bell as well, seeing as how he's a 31 year old reliever entering his most profitable arbitration seasons with the benefit of playing all his home games in cavernous pitcher's parks. He's a reliever. And now that he has spent a few months racking up saves, he's got "proven closer" label attached to his name, driving up his price, if not his real value. They can't just offer him arby and hope somebody else signs him as a free agent, thus netting draft picks, like when the Cubs signing Latroy Hawkins as a gift to Minnesota.

 

How is a very good back of the bullpen reliever not useful? Especially when our pen is struggling? I can understand not wanting to overpay for one, but arguing that a very good reliever is not useful? I don't understand that at all.

 

Bell has not been helped that much by his home park two of the past three years. His numbers have been very good both at home and on the road. I agree that he will likely cost too much in terms of prospects in a trade, but if the Padres were willing to offer him at a reasonable cost, I'd be interested.

 

We need offensive help first and foremost, but if we can address both the pen and the offense while not trading away the entire farm, I'm in favor of it. I just don't think Bell will come cheaply enough.

[jersey cubs fan]

A team that cannot hit and doesn't have a dime to spare should not be trading guys who have pitched well as starters for more relief pitchers. He will be back next year making $4m. Once middle relievers start getting saves on their resume, their price skyrockets past their value.

[JeffH]

This would be a typical Hendry move.

 

Can't score any runs? Let's get some more pitching!

[JonJayCutler]

Wow the board seems very divided on this. I don't see a problem with selling high on Wells, because its almost certain he will come back down to earth. I just don't think including him in a trade for a reliever is very smart. Every year you see teams send scraps to other teams for a good reliever in return. There are plenty of good relievers out there that we could get for less (Feliciano, Guerrier, Affeldt, Grabow).

 

Of course none of them are as good as Bell, but I would rather either keep Wells and hope he continues to impress, or include him in a trade for a bat. Plus trading Wells would leave our rotation very thin. Like others, I'm not ready to see Shark as a starter yet.

[dew1679666265]

A team that cannot hit and doesn't have a dime to spare should not be trading guys who have pitched well as starters for more relief pitchers. He will be back next year making $4m. Once middle relievers start getting saves on their resume, their price skyrockets past their value.

 

If your problem is with Hendry re-signing Bell next year, I can't argue either way there. I can't predict what Hendry will do. I can say that making this trade upgrades our team in an area of weakness now, though, and I'm in favor of upgrading the team - at a reasonable cost. A pitcher who wasn't a top 30 prospect in a (then) bad system who is currently pitching well above his head and is likely to regress sooner than later is a reasonable cost for a very good reliever.

 

And what are the chances that Wells keeps up this performance all year and into future seasons? He could, but his stuff and the expectations surrounding him entering this season don't favor him continuing to be a dominant starter.

[jersey cubs fan]

A team that cannot hit and doesn't have a dime to spare should not be trading guys who have pitched well as starters for more relief pitchers. He will be back next year making $4m. Once middle relievers start getting saves on their resume, their price skyrockets past their value.

 

If your problem is with Hendry re-signing Bell next year, I can't argue either way there. I can't predict what Hendry will do. I can say that making this trade upgrades our team in an area of weakness now, though, and I'm in favor of upgrading the team - at a reasonable cost. A pitcher who wasn't a top 30 prospect in a (then) bad system who is currently pitching well above his head and is likely to regress sooner than later is a reasonable cost for a very good reliever.

 

And what are the chances that Wells keeps up this performance all year and into future seasons? He could, but his stuff and the expectations surrounding him entering this season don't favor him continuing to be a dominant starter.

 

I'm not saying don't trade him, I'm saying don't trade him for another freaking reliever. And I don't know what there is to say about a potential resigning. He's not free agent eligible, and Hendry is not going to non-tender him. He'll get a deal.

[dew1679666265]

A team that cannot hit and doesn't have a dime to spare should not be trading guys who have pitched well as starters for more relief pitchers. He will be back next year making $4m. Once middle relievers start getting saves on their resume, their price skyrockets past their value.

 

If your problem is with Hendry re-signing Bell next year, I can't argue either way there. I can't predict what Hendry will do. I can say that making this trade upgrades our team in an area of weakness now, though, and I'm in favor of upgrading the team - at a reasonable cost. A pitcher who wasn't a top 30 prospect in a (then) bad system who is currently pitching well above his head and is likely to regress sooner than later is a reasonable cost for a very good reliever.

 

And what are the chances that Wells keeps up this performance all year and into future seasons? He could, but his stuff and the expectations surrounding him entering this season don't favor him continuing to be a dominant starter.

 

I'm not saying don't trade him, I'm saying don't trade him for another freaking reliever. And I don't know what there is to say about a potential resigning. He's not free agent eligible, and Hendry is not going to non-tender him. He'll get a deal.

 

If Wells' value is higher than Heath Bell, then I'm all for getting more for him. I just doubt his value has skyrocketed from Mitch Atkins level to worth a significant value.

 

At worst if Hendry tenders him and he returns, he is a reliever who is more productive than Gregg at a slightly cheaper price. And Gregg is gone after the year as well.

[dlocks]

Ya know what the funny thing is? THIS IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. Very unlikely. Very unproven "Sources". All a bunch of talk, nothing true at all.

[Guest]

nontendering Bell or keeping bell in the offseason aren't the only two options.

 

I'd guess that if we traded Bell in November, we'd get back more for him than what Randy Wells has been for 99% of his career.

[dew1679666265]

nontendering Bell or keeping bell in the offseason aren't the only two options.

 

I'd guess that if we traded Bell in November, we'd get back more for him than what Randy Wells has been for 99% of his career.

 

That's definitely a possibility. It's also, though, why I think it would take us more than just Wells to get a Bell deal done. And I wouldn't be in favor of giving more than Wells.

[Guest]

Perceived value before the season is very important in a player's current value. Teams aren't likely to look at Wells and see a dominant starter. They're more likely to see a rookie who was never well thought of, was a fringe prospect at best and now is dominating in the majors. They're going to question whether he can keep it up long term because he's doing this without great stuff.

 

How valuable was the perceived value of Josh Hamilton before we drafted and traded him to Cincinnati?

 

Not every star player in the major leagues had an elite prospect following. Albert Pujols was only a 13th round draft pick.

 

Am I saying that Wells is the next Pujols or Hamilton or Kazmir? Absolutely not. What I'm saying is that regardless of his perceived value prior to the start of this season, he's having an extremely successful campain at the major league level. You can't just toss those numbers in the trash as if they are somehow meaningless.

 

Maybe it's fixing his release point. Maybe it's adding an actual out pitch. Maybe it's better command of the strike zone. I really don't know what it is that has made Randy Wells this good, but there is absolutely no way he should be traded for a bullpen arm right now.

 

A guy that can go 6 to 8 innings is more valuable than a guy that only goes 1. Most guys who only go 1 inning are guys who were failures at going 6 to 8 innings.

 

Groom your own 1 inning pitchers. That's how it happens most of the time, anyway.

 

I'll bet San Francisco is real proud of the fact they sold high on Joe Nathan, Francisco Liriano and Boof Bonser to get the glorious AJ Pieralphabet.

 

It's trades like these that people look back and laugh at those teams for being so stupid.

[jersey cubs fan]

A team that cannot hit and doesn't have a dime to spare should not be trading guys who have pitched well as starters for more relief pitchers. He will be back next year making $4m. Once middle relievers start getting saves on their resume, their price skyrockets past their value.

 

If your problem is with Hendry re-signing Bell next year, I can't argue either way there. I can't predict what Hendry will do. I can say that making this trade upgrades our team in an area of weakness now, though, and I'm in favor of upgrading the team - at a reasonable cost. A pitcher who wasn't a top 30 prospect in a (then) bad system who is currently pitching well above his head and is likely to regress sooner than later is a reasonable cost for a very good reliever.

 

And what are the chances that Wells keeps up this performance all year and into future seasons? He could, but his stuff and the expectations surrounding him entering this season don't favor him continuing to be a dominant starter.

 

I'm not saying don't trade him, I'm saying don't trade him for another freaking reliever. And I don't know what there is to say about a potential resigning. He's not free agent eligible, and Hendry is not going to non-tender him. He'll get a deal.

 

If Wells' value is higher than Heath Bell, then I'm all for getting more for him. I just doubt his value has skyrocketed from Mitch Atkins level to worth a significant value.

 

At worst if Hendry tenders him and he returns, he is a reliever who is more productive than Gregg at a slightly cheaper price. And Gregg is gone after the year as well.

 

I don't care what his 1 for 1 value is, don't trade him for a reliever. Include him in a package for somebody that will make a difference. A team that cannot score runs needs bats, not an 8th reliever.

[dew1679666265]

Perceived value before the season is very important in a player's current value. Teams aren't likely to look at Wells and see a dominant starter. They're more likely to see a rookie who was never well thought of, was a fringe prospect at best and now is dominating in the majors. They're going to question whether he can keep it up long term because he's doing this without great stuff.

 

How valuable was the perceived value of Josh Hamilton before we drafted and traded him to Cincinnati?

 

Not every star player in the major leagues had an elite prospect following. Albert Pujols was only a 13th round draft pick.

 

Hamilton, like Kazmir, was an elite prospect before struggling with drugs. Had they traded him when his value was high, he would have garnered more in return because he was an elite propect.

 

A prospect's perceived value makes a lot of difference in how other teams evaluate them.

 

Am I saying that Wells is the next Pujols or Hamilton or Kazmir? Absolutely not. What I'm saying is that regardless of his perceived value prior to the start of this season, he's having an extremely successful campain at the major league level. You can't just toss those numbers in the trash as if they are somehow meaningless.

 

I'm not tossing those numbers in the trash. He probably had value similar to what Mitch Atkins and Kevin Hart currently do before he started pitching this well. Now he's upped that value, but I doubt to the point that he could bring in a major impact player.

 

Maybe it's fixing his release point. Maybe it's adding an actual out pitch. Maybe it's better command of the strike zone. I really don't know what it is that has made Randy Wells this good, but there is absolutely no way he should be traded for a bullpen arm right now.

 

A guy that can go 6 to 8 innings is more valuable than a guy that only goes 1. Most guys who only go 1 inning are guys who were failures at going 6 to 8 innings.

 

Groom your own 1 inning pitchers. That's how it happens most of the time, anyway.

 

I don't know why he's this successful either, but if he does return to what he was originally expected to be, he'll be a 1 inning pitcher who isn't as good as Heath Bell.

 

Maybe he continues this production, but it's unlikely given that his stuff isn't all that impressive. If he regresses, it very well could be to a player less valuable than Bell is now.

 

I'll bet San Francisco is real proud of the fact they sold high on Joe Nathan, Francisco Liriano and Boof Bonser to get the glorious AJ Pieralphabet.

 

It's trades like these that people look back and laugh at those teams for being so stupid.

 

Again, you can't compare a guy who was not even a top 30 prospect in a (then) bad system to top prospects. Nathan, Liriano and Bonser were all top prospects when dealt. They all had the stuff to make it likely they would have success in the majors long term. Wells is not an elite prospect. He's succeeding right now despite average stuff.

[dew1679666265]

A team that cannot hit and doesn't have a dime to spare should not be trading guys who have pitched well as starters for more relief pitchers. He will be back next year making $4m. Once middle relievers start getting saves on their resume, their price skyrockets past their value.

 

If your problem is with Hendry re-signing Bell next year, I can't argue either way there. I can't predict what Hendry will do. I can say that making this trade upgrades our team in an area of weakness now, though, and I'm in favor of upgrading the team - at a reasonable cost. A pitcher who wasn't a top 30 prospect in a (then) bad system who is currently pitching well above his head and is likely to regress sooner than later is a reasonable cost for a very good reliever.

 

And what are the chances that Wells keeps up this performance all year and into future seasons? He could, but his stuff and the expectations surrounding him entering this season don't favor him continuing to be a dominant starter.

 

I'm not saying don't trade him, I'm saying don't trade him for another freaking reliever. And I don't know what there is to say about a potential resigning. He's not free agent eligible, and Hendry is not going to non-tender him. He'll get a deal.

 

If Wells' value is higher than Heath Bell, then I'm all for getting more for him. I just doubt his value has skyrocketed from Mitch Atkins level to worth a significant value.

 

At worst if Hendry tenders him and he returns, he is a reliever who is more productive than Gregg at a slightly cheaper price. And Gregg is gone after the year as well.

 

I don't care what his 1 for 1 value is, don't trade him for a reliever. Include him in a package for somebody that will make a difference. A team that cannot score runs needs bats, not an 8th reliever.

 

If there's a deal out there that we can do, fine. The likelihood is that we can't afford a major difference maker this season, so if we're going to improve, we have to do it with cheap, productive players (like Bell). And Bell wouldn't be an 8th reliever. He'd be our closer and one of Hart or Patton would be gone.

 

We're probably looking at only improving one or both of our bench or bullpen this deadline. The only spot in the starting lineup that can be improved upon realistically is 2nd base, but Hendry may not be done giving Fontenot a shot there. If we can't add more offense to score more runs, then the logical next step is to try to secure the few leads we get now. The way to do that is to improve on Gregg in the closer's role. Bell would do that - as long as we don't overpay.

[Guest]

Hamilton, like Kazmir, was an elite prospect before struggling with drugs. Had they traded him when his value was high, he would have garnered more in return because he was an elite propect.

 

A prospect's perceived value makes a lot of difference in how other teams evaluate them.

 

Hamilton's perceived value was in the toilet when we drafted and traded him to Cincinnati. He wasn't on Tampa's 40 man roster when he was taken in the rule 5 draft. Whatever elite prospect status he had when he was originally drafted was gone when he got back from his narcotic binge.

 

Once again, not every player that makes it to the bigs was labeled an elite prospect.

 

What you are basically saying is that because Randy Wells was never given this label, we should dump him while we have the chance.

 

I happen to disagree with that notion. I'm not saying he can't be traded. I'm just saying that he's currently more valuable than a bullpen arm and if that's all that anyone is offering for him, you might as well keep him.

 

Sometimes it's okay to keep a guy when his value is at an all time high.

 

You just never know who might be the next Sammy Sosa or Greg Maddux.

[dew1679666265]

Hamilton, like Kazmir, was an elite prospect before struggling with drugs. Had they traded him when his value was high, he would have garnered more in return because he was an elite propect.

 

A prospect's perceived value makes a lot of difference in how other teams evaluate them.

 

Hamilton's perceived value was in the toilet when we drafted and traded him to Cincinnati. He wasn't on Tampa's 40 man roster when he was taken in the rule 5 draft. Whatever elite prospect status he had when he was originally drafted was gone when he got back from his narcotic binge.

 

Once again, not every player that makes it to the bigs was labeled an elite prospect.

 

What you are basically saying is that because Randy Wells was never given this label, we should dump him while we have the chance.

 

I happen to disagree with that notion. I'm not saying he can't be traded. I'm just saying that he's currently more valuable than a bullpen arm and if that's all that anyone is offering for him, you might as well keep him.

 

Sometimes it's okay to keep a guy when his value is at an all time high.

 

You just never know who might be the next Sammy Sosa or Greg Maddux.

 

I'm not saying Randy Wells cannot be a good major league starter. I'm saying the likelihood is very low that he will be one because his stuff is only average. He may be great, but the chances aren't particularly high. Before this season, the general consensus, it seemed, was that he'd barely make a starting staff. Maybe everybody was wrong and this current success will continue, but it's unlikely.

 

If he pitches at this level the remainder of the season, then sure he's more valuable than a bullpen arm. But I'm arguing that going by his average stuff he's unlikely to keep up this success as teams see him more. The likelihood is that his effectiveness will begin to go down, perhaps to the point that he's much less valuable than a bullpen arm.

 

If all it took to have great trade value was a few good outings, Jake Fox would have incredible trade value right now. But he doesn't because teams consider both current production level and the likelihood that the current production level will continue. For Wells the current level of production isn't likely to continue.

[JeffH]

For Wells the current level of production isn't likely to continue.

 

Folks, you can't find this sort of quality, quality analysis just anywhere.

[dew1679666265]

For Wells the current level of production isn't likely to continue.

 

Folks, you can't find this sort of quality, quality analysis just anywhere.

 

Mind expanding on your thoughts?

[JeffH]

For Wells the current level of production isn't likely to continue.

 

Folks, you can't find this sort of quality, quality analysis just anywhere.

 

Mind expanding on your thoughts?

 

If Wells' current level of production continues, he'll be considered one of the very greatest pitchers of all-time. If his ERA goes up a run, it would be Hendry-level stupid to trade him for Heath Bell. If his ERA goes up a run and a half, it would be merely dumb to do so. Nobody in this thread is basing his objection to a Wells-Bell trade on Wells continuing his current level of production.

[dew1679666265]

For Wells the current level of production isn't likely to continue.

 

Folks, you can't find this sort of quality, quality analysis just anywhere.

 

Mind expanding on your thoughts?

 

If Wells' current level of production continues, he'll be considered one of the very greatest pitchers of all-time. If his ERA goes up a run, it would be Hendry-level stupid to trade him for Heath Bell. If his ERA goes up a run and a half, it would be merely dumb to do so. Nobody in this thread is basing his objection to a Wells-Bell trade on Wells continuing his current level of production.

 

We're talking about a guy who, even during this season, was viewed much the same way that Kevin Hart and Mitch Atkins are viewed. Besides a great start in a small amount of games, what is it about Wells that makes you think he'll be even a good starter the rest of the season? He won't walk many guys most likely, but even when he's pitching well he's given up 48 hits in 56 IP (and that's with a .275 BABIP). His stuff isn't all that good and he doesn't strike a lot of guys out. That's not a recipe for long term success.

[KingCubsFan]

 

You just never know who might be the next Sammy Sosa or Greg Maddux.

They were both highly regarded prospects. Even people like Ted Lilly and Ryan Dempster were highly regarded. Very rarely does someone with Wells's pedigree actually turn out to be a long-term solution at any valuable position on a contending team. People on this board complain about Hendry selling low on players consistently, but then when it actually appears like he sells high (DeRosa and Wells), people flip out.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

A run prevented is just as good as a run scored. It's entirely possible that the best improvement available could be a reliever, especially since there's not much place the team can upgrade offensively because of contracts. That said, don't trade Randy Wells for Heath Bell, and probably don't trade for a reliever. That best improvement available could be Blake Parker or Jeff Stevens as easily as it could be Heath Bell.

[Little Slide Rooter]

A run prevented is just as good as a run scored. It's entirely possible that the best improvement available could be a reliever, especially since there's not much place the team can upgrade offensively because of contracts. That said, don't trade Randy Wells for Heath Bell, and probably don't trade for a reliever. That best improvement available could be Blake Parker or Jeff Stevens as easily as it could be Heath Bell.

 

While I do fully trust you're knowledge of the farm system, weve already been through a few of our best AAA relievers, and I have no reason to believe that Parker or Stevens will change that trend. Maybe they will, but Id rather aquire a veteran. However, we might be better off adding guys like Parker and Stevens who have had success in the AAA bullpen, rather than Hart and Ascanio who have seen the majority of their minor league success as starters.

 

Ive heard 0 rumors about Bell going anywhere, but I wonder if whoever stated the rumor confused the 2.

Edited July 2, 2009 by Little Slide Rooter