Miguel Cabrera on the block?

[imb]

I wonder if Lee would waive his NTC to go to Detroit for a year? He could be part of a deal for Cabrera, it gives the Tigers a cheaper option at 1B and he is a FA after next year and likely to be a type A so they would also net a draft pick (potentially).

 

something tells me that lee didn't negotiate a no-trade clause so he could waive it to be a one-year rental in detroit of all places

[Sever82]

I wonder if Lee would waive his NTC to go to Detroit for a year? He could be part of a deal for Cabrera, it gives the Tigers a cheaper option at 1B and he is a FA after next year and likely to be a type A so they would also net a draft pick (potentially).

 

something tells me that lee didn't negotiate a no-trade clause so he could waive it to be a one-year rental in detroit of all places

 

I think its more likely Soriano retires or renegotiates his conract than Lee waiving his no trade. According to Bruce Levine, DLee is one of the Ricketts favorites players. To top it off he has a no trade and if the rumors are true, the cubs asked him last year if he would waive his no trade to be with a team in the west coast like the Angels or Padres and Lee said no.

[Guest]

And if the Cubs want elite bats right now, I'd even take a gamble on consistency with Votto and Gonzalez knowing that the Cubs would save between 25-40 million on the deal rather than pay Cabrera in both premium prospects and cash.

 

That's nice, but how do you propose accomplishing that one? Their teams aren't exactly giving them away, and neither is a free agent or soon-to-be free agent. If Cabrera is available you look into it because he will likely be the best player they have a chance to acquire and the best player on the team for several years. You don't pass on an impact bat because you have your eyes on a division rival's best player who is 4 seasons away from free agency. If you can get Cabrera now, you have his services now.

 

I sincerely doubt either Gonzalez or Votto are unavailable if teams are willing to empty the farm to get them. Gonzalez especially has been rumored to be available for the right price.

I don't think Cabrera is all that close to either Votto or Gonzalez. He's a much, much better player. He's was not a terrible OF before he moved to 3rd base. Before I trade for him though I check on his weight.

[Guest]

 

I think its more likely Soriano retires or renegotiates his conract. .

What makes you think that?

[Guancous]

 

I think its more likely Soriano retires or renegotiates his conract. .

What makes you think that?

 

I took that to mean that the odds of Lee waiving his no-trade clause are nil.

[Kid Gleason]

Pure fantasy baseball here but how about Cabrera AND Granderson? Soriano could move back to 2nd base. :)

[Sever82]

Pure fantasy baseball here but how about Cabrera AND Granderson? Soriano could move back to 2nd base. :)

 

Actually i wouldn't mind that to be honest. If the cubs were to trade for both cabrera and Granderson,I would give up the farm to get both players and still be able to keep Castro. A lineup of:

 

CF Granderson

RF Fukudome

1B DLee

LF Cabrera

3B Ramirez

2B Soriano

C Soto

SS Castro

P

 

:pig:

 

I'd seriously part with Jay Jackson, Vitters, Cashner, Lee, Theriot, Marshall, etc

[Tyrant]

Before I trade for him though I check on his weight.

 

It's about 290 pounds, from the looks of it.

[mul21]

I'm not a fan of giving so much value for a 1B when there are always 1B options out there that can give you 50-100 points less of OPS (and I realize I'm generalizing offensive value using OPS) and are not that highly sought after. There are several other impact bats that you could possibly find a better deal with a little patience. And if the Cubs want elite bats right now, I'd even take a gamble on consistency with Votto and Gonzalez knowing that the Cubs would save between 25-40 million on the deal rather than pay Cabrera in both premium prospects and cash.

 

If I'm going to trade the farm (say 3 of the top 5 prospects including Castro) then I want a guy like Hanley Ramirez who is likely going to upgrade your team at least 125 points and often 200-250 points over the SS options who are available year to year on the trade and free agent market. Hanley is a rather unique player in the league. Cabrera is most certainly not.

 

And that doesn't even begin to address the fact that the Cubs will have to take a huge hit defensively to get Cabrera and Lee in the same lineup this year. The Cubs don't even have a desperation factor for a 1st baseman..why pay absolutely top dollar right now for one?

 

I'm not completely opposed to trading for Cabrera. But I probably wouldn't trade nearly the talent that they would want.

 

This is exactly how I look at it. While it's not the same thing, this is usually how I build my fantasy teams. 1B and OF with solid production are always available, while C, SS, and 2B with good numbers aren't. Get the top guys there first and then fill in with solid production for less than premium dollars.

 

i'd give up just about our entire farm minus Castro to get Cabrera, even coupled with his contract

 

That would be okay if he still played defense halfway decent defense at 3B. I just can't see sending as much as they'll want for a 1B. I do see Goony's point about the availability of impact bats, but is the offense really in that bad of shape? there was one guy different in the lineup and a bunch of slumps at inopportune times last year. I'd be surprised if the offense is nearly as bad as it was last year even if they add nothing.

[jersey cubs fan]

That would be okay if he still played defense halfway decent defense at 3B. I just can't see sending as much as they'll want for a 1B. I do see Goony's point about the availability of impact bats, but is the offense really in that bad of shape? there was one guy different in the lineup and a bunch of slumps at inopportune times last year. I'd be surprised if the offense is nearly as bad as it was last year even if they add nothing.

 

The offense sucked. The offense has sucked for much of the past decade. They had one outlier year in 2008, but other than that this Cubs organization has been horrible at fielding an effective lineup. Their core is quite old, and they have no stud hitting prospects either. It looks like they might be able to get decent production from shortstop in a couple years, but none of the other posiiton prospects are standouts. They need offensive help, and it's not just a matter of getting guys back healthy and performing as their normal self. Alfonso Soriano is going to be 34 years old, he's been injured every year as a Cub and wasn't all that good to begin with. Lee is 34, he's had 2 standout seasons in his career and other than that he's been an okay 1B most of the time and his contract is up this year. Aramis turns 32 next year and he can opt out. He's a really nice bat, but a significant step below the elite hitters. The middle infielders are crap, and the rest of the outfield is in doubt. Fukudome is okay, but he's also turning 33, and his best value is if he's playing CF in comparison to ofther CF, but he's probably going to RF, and who knows who they get to replace Bradley.

 

The offense should not be as bad as last year, but it could still be no better than average, with their best players all approaching their mid 30's. They could fall hard the next couple years.

[davearm2]

That would be okay if he still played defense halfway decent defense at 3B. I just can't see sending as much as they'll want for a 1B. I do see Goony's point about the availability of impact bats, but is the offense really in that bad of shape? there was one guy different in the lineup and a bunch of slumps at inopportune times last year. I'd be surprised if the offense is nearly as bad as it was last year even if they add nothing.

 

The offense sucked. The offense has sucked for much of the past decade. They had one outlier year in 2008, but other than that this Cubs organization has been horrible at fielding an effective lineup. Their core is quite old, and they have no stud hitting prospects either. It looks like they might be able to get decent production from shortstop in a couple years, but none of the other posiiton prospects are standouts. They need offensive help, and it's not just a matter of getting guys back healthy and performing as their normal self. Alfonso Soriano is going to be 34 years old, he's been injured every year as a Cub and wasn't all that good to begin with. Lee is 34, he's had 2 standout seasons in his career and other than that he's been an okay 1B most of the time and his contract is up this year. Aramis turns 32 next year and he can opt out. He's a really nice bat, but a significant step below the elite hitters. The middle infielders are crap, and the rest of the outfield is in doubt. Fukudome is okay, but he's also turning 33, and his best value is if he's playing CF in comparison to ofther CF, but he's probably going to RF, and who knows who they get to replace Bradley.

 

The offense should not be as bad as last year, but it could still be no better than average, with their best players all approaching their mid 30's. They could fall hard the next couple years.

Yep an aging lineup is a huge problem. Just look at what's become of the Yankees.

 

If only the Cubs could replace Fukudome with Hermida, Ramirez with Gordon, and Lee with Conor Jackson, the Cubs would be set for years with guys entering their primes.

[jersey cubs fan]

Yep an aging lineup is a huge problem. Just look at what's become of the Yankees.

 

If only the Cubs could replace Fukudome with Hermida, Ramirez with Gordon, and Lee with Conor Jackson, the Cubs would be set for years with guys entering their primes.

 

 

What an incredibly stupid post.

 

 

Yeah, when a mediocre lineup is aging it is a problem. When you are loaded with Hall of Famers and keep acquiring new young studs it's not so much of a problem.

 

But seriously, that was a really stupid post.

[davearm2]

Yep an aging lineup is a huge problem. Just look at what's become of the Yankees.

 

If only the Cubs could replace Fukudome with Hermida, Ramirez with Gordon, and Lee with Conor Jackson, the Cubs would be set for years with guys entering their primes.

 

 

What an incredibly stupid post.

 

 

Yeah, when a mediocre lineup is aging it is a problem. When you are loaded with Hall of Famers and keep acquiring new young studs it's not so much of a problem.

 

But seriously, that was a really stupid post.

A mediocre lineup is a problem. A lineup full of thirtysomethings is not inherently a problem.

 

Take away the "aging" part of the Cubs lineup, and mediocre becomes awful real fast.

[abuck1220]

obviously the cubs are more likely to give him a six year deal once he becomes a FA at age 33.

[Guest]

I always love when people compare the talent of the Yankees to the Cubs.

[davearm2]

I always love when people compare the talent of the Yankees to the Cubs.

Oh brother. I didn't compare the talent of the Yankees to the Cubs.

 

I used the Yankees to debunk the premise that an "aging" lineup is inherently a problem.

 

This isn't difficult to follow.

[Guest]

I always love when people compare the talent of the Yankees to the Cubs.

Oh brother. I didn't compare the talent of the Yankees to the Cubs.

 

I used the Yankees to debunk the premise that an "aging" lineup is inherently a problem.

 

This isn't difficult to follow.

It's easy to follow. You compared the Cubs to the Yankees. An aging lineup is a problem. it's always a problem. But when you're the Yankees and you have an aging lineup that has more talent than most young teams and you can supplement that lineup with the best player available every year it's not as big a problem.

 

It's monumentally stupid to compare the Yankees to any team.

[davearm2]

I always love when people compare the talent of the Yankees to the Cubs.

Oh brother. I didn't compare the talent of the Yankees to the Cubs.

 

I used the Yankees to debunk the premise that an "aging" lineup is inherently a problem.

 

This isn't difficult to follow.

It's easy to follow. You compared the Cubs to the Yankees. An aging lineup is a problem. it's always a problem. But when you're the Yankees and you have an aging lineup that has more talent than most young teams and you can supplement that lineup with the best player available every year it's not as big a problem.

 

It's monumentally stupid to compare the Yankees to any team.

I'm embarrased for you. Nowhere did I compare the Cubs to the Yankees.

 

The Yankees disprove the generalization that an aging lineup is a problem. You're making the same mistake as the other guy by perpetuating that flawed thinking.

[17 Seconds]

You clearly compared the 2 lineups. I'm not sure how you're going to deny that. If you weren't comparing the Cubs lineup to the Yankees lineup, then bringing it up was pointless.

 

Nobody said an aging lineup was automatically a problem. He was clearly talking about the Cubs specifically and this group of players.

 

So yeah, bringing up the Yankees was either a comparison to the Cubs, or it served no purpose. The Yankees old guys have produced. The original post the guy made was clearly voicing concern over how well the CUBS players would age.

 

You know that some players can produce into their late 30's, and some can't..... right?

[Guancous]

Who wants a $200 million Todd Hundley?

 

I'm joking because of Cabrera's drinking problem. I wouldn't mind Cabrera even if he was the love child of Mark Grace and Kyle Farnsworth. I'm concerned about giving up 18-24 years of club control for the cost of one Miguel Cabrera season.

 

(Edited for color)

[davearm2]

You clearly compared the 2 lineups. I'm not sure how you're going to deny that. If you weren't comparing the Cubs lineup to the Yankees lineup, then bringing it up was pointless.

You not understanding the point is not the same as there not being a point.

 

You know that some players can produce into their late 30's, and some can't..... right?

Better than the folks assuming the imminent collapse of the Cubs' lineup, apparently.

[Guest]

You clearly compared the 2 lineups. I'm not sure how you're going to deny that. If you weren't comparing the Cubs lineup to the Yankees lineup, then bringing it up was pointless.

You not understanding the point is not the same as there not being a point.

 

You know that some players can produce into their late 30's, and some can't..... right?

Better than the folks assuming the imminent collapse of the Cubs' lineup, apparently.

It's funny - throughout your posts you show decent knowledge and make some decent points - but you're willfully obtuse when arguing. You seem to insist upon either focusing on a single facet of someone's overall point or you take things in a totally different direction in order to stake some sort of ground you can defend.

 

Does being an older lineup necessarily mean it is going to be bad? No - as you point out the Yankees fielded a very good team with an older lineup in place.

 

Is it generally a problem that you are locked into longer term contracts with players who have already left their prime years? Yes, generally that's the case. Players who are exiting their prime or who have already exited their prime can generally be expected to perform worse in subsequent years.

[Rob]

There's a whole lot of stupid going through this thread.

[Fred Hornkohl]

There's a whole lot of stupid going through this thread.

 

.... and you just can't fix stupid.

[davearm2]

You clearly compared the 2 lineups. I'm not sure how you're going to deny that. If you weren't comparing the Cubs lineup to the Yankees lineup, then bringing it up was pointless.

You not understanding the point is not the same as there not being a point.

 

You know that some players can produce into their late 30's, and some can't..... right?

Better than the folks assuming the imminent collapse of the Cubs' lineup, apparently.

It's funny - throughout your posts you show decent knowledge and make some decent points - but you're willfully obtuse when arguing. You seem to insist upon either focusing on a single facet of someone's overall point or you take things in a totally different direction in order to stake some sort of ground you can defend.

 

Does being an older lineup necessarily mean it is going to be bad? No - as you point out the Yankees fielded a very good team with an older lineup in place.

 

Is it generally a problem that you are locked into longer term contracts with players who have already left their prime years? Yes, generally that's the case. Players who are exiting their prime or who have already exited their prime can generally be expected to perform worse in subsequent years.

What's the point of making broad generalizations, when this particular group of core players is not demonstrating signs of following the general expectation?

 

Lee had one of his best years last year.

Fukudome was better in 09 than 08.

Ramirez, showing no signs of slowing down, and his injury pattern dates well back to his 20s.

And Soriano, his problems go well beyond getting older (IMO of course).

 

So the Cubs are bound to to have some turnover in their core lineup going forward a few years. Big deal. The same can be said of almost every team.