The Problem of the Bullpen

[ctcf]

Sorry if this thread is redundant, mods. Feel free to move it if needed.

 

Still, I think there should be a thread to discuss specifically what is going to be a lasting issue through this season. I am personally of the opinion of just going with our in house staff. I figure we have enough talent floating around to get us to at least to the trade deadline and then from there go bargain hunting. Bruce Levine offers some other ideas:

 

The Padres at some point will put closer Heath Bell on the market. The Cubs will have as good a shot as anybody to obtain Bell if they’re willing to give up a No. 1 prospect like infielder Josh Vitters.

 

Yay? How the hell would that solve any of our problems???

 

Cubs GM Jim Hendry will gladly overpay in prospects if he gets the go-ahead from the Ricketts family to trade for a pitcher like Bell and absorb his $5 million contract.

 

Again... yay?

 

No major-league team can develop four young pitchers into bullpen studs during a championship season. The key for the Cubs winning a division is getting some bullpen help.

 

Easily one of the dumbest statements I've read all season. Where did this scenario of needing four bullpen studs come from? We currently have two people that could qualify as studs in our BP (Marshall and Marmol). Do we really need four more? If even 2 of the other players we have in our pen/minors pan out we'd be looking pretty good.

[A New Era]

The worse thing we could do is trade one of our top prospects for a bullpen arm. Vitters for a bullpen arm? My God, no thanks.

[soapy]

It's quite possible that the Cubs will need to make a move for a reliable bullpen arm, but it's way to early to panic. There are still some potentially viable options in-house. Getting the right guys up from the minors would probably be the best first step. Then let's figure out what we have and go from there.

[Guest]

I thought I read on Rotoworld that Kansas City is practically giving away Juan Cruz, even eluding to picking up a significant portion of his salary. I'd rather the Cubs did that than waste a prospect on Heath Bell.

 

That Hendry would happily and willingly overpay with prospects for Heath Bell is why I have been calling for his removal from the team for quite some time now. Whatever mojo he originally brought to this team when he took over as GM died a long time ago.

 

Now he's just drawing a ridiculous contract in relation to his production, and this team doesn't need anymore of those.

[NCCubFan]

If Hendry even talks about a trade such as Vitters for Bell he needs to be fired immediately.

[PackLandVA]

While I don't think the BP is gonna be great (in its current form), isn't the sample size of it's performance pretty small to get too alarmed just yet?

 

I'm not thrilled with some of the younger guys performances yet, but I'm willing to give them more than just a couple of innings to show something. And with Lilly coming back, one of the vets (most likely Silva as he's a righty to compliment Marshall) will be added.

 

A week and a half into the season is a bit early to panic.

[RedFlash]

If Hendry even talks about a trade such as Vitters for Bell he needs to be fired immediately.

 

Exactly. The Cubs don't need a closer, especially if Marmol continues to pitch well, they need another quality arm for mid-relief/set up duties (if Lou continues to refuse to use Marshall in that role) moreso then a closer.

[Sammy Sofa]

The Cubs don't even really know what they have in the bullpen at this point.

[ctcf]

The Cubs don't even really know what they have in the bullpen at this point.

 

Exactly.

[CubbieBum]

The way I look at it is this. We are above .500 even with our bullpen blowing three or four games. Our bullpen as of now I'm not sure can get any worse. So stick with what we got (except perhaps bringing up a guy from minors and sending down another) for now. Come trade deadline we should know what we have. If come trade deadline we still have one of the worst bullpen's but we are in 1st then I think we make a move, albeit nothing like the proposed Vitters for Bell. I want to keep our top prospects as I think we have couple real great players that will be coming up soon.

 

The only way I make a move right now is, as someone else mentioned, another team is just wanting to completely dump a good arm such as Juan Cruz (be weird having him back).

[Sammy Sofa]

The bullpen could very easily be a lot worse than it stands right now.

[NCCubFan]

We are above .500 even with our bullpen blowing three or four games.

We're at .500, not above (at least until a few hours from now). [/nitpick]

[tfarks]

Vitters for Bell is just speculation from Levine, not even the idiocracy of Hendry would do that deal. I wouldn't get worked up over that scenario whatsoever.

 

I also don't think he would gladly overpay, he might regrettably overpay and the Padres will be happy to get rid of Bell's contract.

 

The only one who should be fired here is Levine.

 

Remember, Ricketts is a big fan of the farm system and Hendry is actually good at trading away fringe prospects for talent.

[Cubswin11]

The Padres at some point will put closer Heath Bell on the market. The Cubs will have as good a shot as anybody to obtain Bell if they’re willing to give up a No. 1 prospect like infielder Josh Vitters.

The Cubs could get someone a lot [expletive] better than Heath Bell if they made it known Vitters was available. I used to think Levine was a somewhat decent Cubs reporter/journalist, but this article downgrades him to absolute dog [expletive].

[hawkcub]

I'm of the the thinking we should wait till we see how/if Gorzelanny or Silva shores up the BP when Lilly comes back.

[sneakypower]

everybody here thinks a whole lot higher of Vitters than i do, that's for sure

[Guest]

everybody here thinks a whole lot higher of Vitters than i do, that's for sure

 

Even if you think that he's destined for failure, you have to admit that he has more trade equity than Heath Bell.

[sneakypower]

let's find out, get rid of him before everybody else becomes keenly aware how destined for failure he is

[Little Slide Rooter]

Hednry wouldnt give up Vitters for Peavy when we were a legit contender. I doubt he'll move him for Bell now that were not. besides, we didnt give up anything of real value for Nomar, Aramis, Harden, or D Lee. The one thing Hendry seems to be good at is trades.

 

If were going to deal with the Pads, go for Mike Adams. The guys been quietly consitant for years now. Hes cheap and effective, so wed probably have to give up something, but surely none of our top prospects.

[Cubswin11]

Hednry wouldnt give up Vitters for Peavy when we were a legit contender. I doubt he'll move him for Bell now that were not. besides, we didnt give up anything of real value for Nomar, Aramis, Harden, or D Lee. The one thing Hendry seems to be good at is trades.

 

If were going to deal with the Pads, go for Mike Adams. The guys been quietly consitant for years now. Hes cheap and effective, so wed probably have to give up something, but surely none of our top prospects.

Not to mention he isn't a closer and his perceived value will be lower because he doesn't have a high number of career saves.

[KingCubsFan]

everybody here thinks a whole lot higher of Vitters than i do, that's for sure

 

Even if you think that he's destined for failure, you have to admit that he has more trade equity than Heath Bell.

I think we should definitely look to trade Vitters. But it doesn't make sense to trade him for a guy whose value is tied up with the label of "closer" when Marmol has been lights out.

[Guest]

everybody here thinks a whole lot higher of Vitters than i do, that's for sure

 

Even if you think that he's destined for failure, you have to admit that he has more trade equity than Heath Bell.

I think we should definitely look to trade Vitters. But it doesn't make sense to trade him for a guy whose value is tied up with the label of "closer" when Marmol has been lights out.

 

Why do you believe they should definitely look to trade Vitters? Aramis having an opt out clause in his contract sort of makes having Vitters around a bit of a safety net if Aramis leaves.

[dew1679666265]

Hednry wouldnt give up Vitters for Peavy when we were a legit contender. I doubt he'll move him for Bell now that were not. besides, we didnt give up anything of real value for Nomar, Aramis, Harden, or D Lee. The one thing Hendry seems to be good at is trades.

 

If were going to deal with the Pads, go for Mike Adams. The guys been quietly consitant for years now. Hes cheap and effective, so wed probably have to give up something, but surely none of our top prospects.

Not to mention he isn't a closer and his perceived value will be lower because he doesn't have a high number of career saves.

 

He's very cheap and productive, though, and that combination is very important to a team like the Padres. I actually think we could get Bell for a better deal than Adams, especially if we took all of Bell's contract.

 

That said, I would have no problem trading for Heath Bell as long as we don't overpay. As has been said, Hendry has almost always been very good at making trades work for us. Is Nolasco the best player we've traded away?

[C.C.]

The Cubs don't even really know what they have in the bullpen at this point.

[Cubs Fan Dan]

Not to beat the dead horse but trading any of your top prospects for a bullpen arm this early is dumb, especially when you have other expendable pieces that may net you what you want. Bell is not what the cubs need right now, other than sending Shitmardjza down they need to ride the bullpen out for atleast another 3-4 weeks. They can make minor tweaks from there. Come June is they are needing to add a arm look at people like Coleman, Burke, or other solid prospects to get you a solid bullpen arm. This team will be fine until then.