If the Cubs were sellers right now

[erik316wttn]

If we can get a good package for him, I'd say do it, but don't move him just to move him.

 

As Sulley said in the Cubs Discussions forum, there are teams out there that could realistically overpay for a 30-year-old career starting pitcher who has never posted an ERA above 4 in a full season. If one of those teams offers a good deal, take it.

[Backtobanks]

Yep trading either of those guys signals a rebuild mode.

 

Are we not in rebuild mode? If not, then why not? Maybe it signals that everyone is being evaluated for jobs next year.

 

I love Z, and I personally think he is much more than a #4 starter, but if the Cubs could get some value for him they have to do it. We have the 2nd worst record in baseball. There are plenty of holes to fill on this team and unfortunately you have to trade value to get value.

 

And trading Z creates another hole which is why Im in the dont trade Z camp.

 

It's always a gamble trading an established player for prospects. There are a ton of "can't-miss" prospects who never made it in the ML. As others have stated, the money coming off the books can change a lousy team into a contender pretty quickly. I wish there was some possible trade out there to pick up young, but established players (like Garza).

[dew1679666265]

If we can get some really good value for him, then that's a different story, but I wouldn't trade him for whatever we can or for minimal value just to get his money off the books or to add some youth.

 

Agreed. I almost commented on the rest of your post, but then I would be sucked into the Pujols discussion again and I won't allow that to happen today. 8-)

 

Haha, other posters probably appreciate that. It's not just Pujols, though, Fielder is also available and would improve this team considerably. The main point was that a team with the Cubs' payroll shouldn't go into a full rebuild mode no matter how terrible the team is.

[Magnetic Curses]

z is not old and he is still very good. people trade for players like him, and not just as rentals.

 

i just don't think trading him for anything less than cheap, contribution-ready prospects while forcing the other team to take his whole salary on would make sense for the cubs.

 

teams looking to contend come searching for players like z. we should be at least trying to contend next year. if he were 35 years old, salary relief would be enough. but he's 30, and it's not.

[SweetZombieJesus]

z is not old and he is still very good. people trade for players like him, and not just as rentals.

 

i just don't think trading him for anything less than cheap, contribution-ready prospects while forcing the other team to take his whole salary on would make sense for the cubs.

 

teams looking to contend come searching for players like z. we should be at least trying to contend next year. if he were 35 years old, salary relief would be enough. but he's 30, and it's not.

 

30 in this non steroid era is ancient. They should be lucky to get back brett gardner or ryan theriot clone.

[Magnetic Curses]

oh

[Sammy Sofa]

TAKE THE [expletive] SHOT.

[SouthSideRyan]

I like that Ryan Theriot is equal to Brett Gardner.

 

Vernon Wells and his hilarious contract was traded for actual talent, but no Z's CRAZZZZZZZZZZZYYYYYYYY

[Post Count Padder]

z is not old and he is still very good. people trade for players like him, and not just as rentals.

 

i just don't think trading him for anything less than cheap, contribution-ready prospects while forcing the other team to take his whole salary on would make sense for the cubs.

 

teams looking to contend come searching for players like z. we should be at least trying to contend next year. if he were 35 years old, salary relief would be enough. but he's 30, and it's not.

 

30 in this non steroid era is ancient. They should be lucky to get back brett gardner or ryan theriot clone.

Gardner- .271/.360/.378, dWAR of 1.9 and 1.6 the last two years

Theriot- .285/.348/.356, dWAR of -1.5 for his career

 

Wouldn't exactly call them clones. Gardner at least walks a ton and is a decent fielder.

 

And we do have to be realistic. Teams might get desperate at the deadline, but I can't see anyone trading their top prospect for Z. A nice package of second-tier prospects would be more likely.

[Little Slide Rooter]

z is not old and he is still very good. people trade for players like him, and not just as rentals.

 

i just don't think trading him for anything less than cheap, contribution-ready prospects while forcing the other team to take his whole salary on would make sense for the cubs.

 

teams looking to contend come searching for players like z. we should be at least trying to contend next year. if he were 35 years old, salary relief would be enough. but he's 30, and it's not.

 

30 in this non steroid era is ancient. They should be lucky to get back brett gardner or ryan theriot clone.

Gardner- .271/.360/.378, dWAR of 1.9 and 1.6 the last two years

Theriot- .285/.348/.356, dWAR of -1.5 for his career

 

Wouldn't exactly call them clones. Gardner at least walks a ton and is a decent fielder.

 

And we do have to be realistic. Teams might get desperate at the deadline, but I can't see anyone trading their top prospect for Z. A nice package of second-tier prospects would be more likely.

 

If we get a package of second tier prospects for Z, unless a significant amount of cash comes with them, someone will need to be fired immediately

[davearm2]

Yep trading either of those guys signals a rebuild mode.

 

Are we not in rebuild mode? If not, then why not? Maybe it signals that everyone is being evaluated for jobs next year.

 

I love Z, and I personally think he is much more than a #4 starter, but if the Cubs could get some value for him they have to do it. We have the 2nd worst record in baseball. There are plenty of holes to fill on this team and unfortunately you have to trade value to get value.

I doubt the Cubs are in rebuild mode. More like "2007 all over again" mode. They went from awful to two straight playoff appearances largely due to an aggressive free agent shopping spree.

 

I'd have to imagine the "rebuild" playbook they're reading now looks like that, and not like, trade away all the expensive 30-somethings and look to contend a few years from now.

 

Ergo, Z stays.

[Elrhino]

I hope the front office is more concerned about getting $18 million a year for a mediocre starter with a ton of innings on his arm off the books than proving a point to hypothetical average Cubs fan.

 

Pretty sure if Z were to hit the market this offseason, he's not approaching $18 million a year.

Zambrano's a mediocre starter only if his numbers right now are indicative of how he'll end up at the end of the season and going forward.

 

 

Considering the 1.45 WHIP last year and the declining velocity that would be indicative of a 30 year old who's thrown a ton of innings over the years, that's hardly going out on a limb. According to fangraphs, his velocity has dropped from an average of 92 mph in 2009 to 89.8 mph this year. I don't anticipate any reason why that decline would change, and I don't anticipate Zambrano easily transforming into some Jamie Moyer crafty junkball type as the velocity continues to decline, considering he's always been a high BB/9 guy who's been prone to giving up the big inning when he gets batted around a little bit.

 

You're the "hypothetical average Cubs fan" since you've apparently convinced yourself that he's mediocre and you think his production is easily replaced.

 

As emotionally subjective as the hatred of Zambrano is by a segment of Cubs fandom , there's an equally emotional response of internet white knights who feel the need to ride to his rescue and battle them. It's two sides of the same irrational coin. Would a 1.45 WHIP be easily replaced? Maybe, maybe not. Could it be replaced cheaper than $18 million a season for the next two years, especially if the arm strength continues to decline? Yes. And to get prospects out of it would be icing on the cake.

[Sammy Sofa]

What's irrational about rightly pointing out that the Cubs would have difficulty replacing Zambrano's production? Nothing. Unless a deal drops in their lap that's too good to be true there's little argument to just dumping him for salary relief. Even if he is in the stages of a significant permanent decline the Cubs only have him signed through next season so it's not like there's a pressing need to dump a contract that's going to bog them down for the foreseeable future. There's little supporting trading him short of a really, really good return, which they're not likely to get since he's hovering right in that "too valuable to trade but not valuable enough/too expensive to bring back a good enough haul"-zone.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I dont think there are any white knights. Zs production would be tough to replace, but nobodies saying he's untouchable, just that he shouldn't be railroaded out of town with nothing to show for it. If someone is willing to cough up a significant amount of his salary, or some really good prospects, then I'd have no problem with the trade. If we end up with a Carlos Silva type or a handful of fringe prospects and a small portion of cash, id have a big problem.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Yep trading either of those guys signals a rebuild mode.

 

Are we not in rebuild mode? If not, then why not? Maybe it signals that everyone is being evaluated for jobs next year.

 

I love Z, and I personally think he is much more than a #4 starter, but if the Cubs could get some value for him they have to do it. We have the 2nd worst record in baseball. There are plenty of holes to fill on this team and unfortunately you have to trade value to get value.

I doubt the Cubs are in rebuild mode. More like "2007 all over again" mode. They went from awful to two straight playoff appearances largely due to an aggressive free agent shopping spree.

 

I'd have to imagine the "rebuild" playbook they're reading now looks like that, and not like, trade away all the expensive 30-somethings and look to contend a few years from now.

 

Ergo, Z stays.

 

Not necessary. This team may have its issues, but if healthy, its nowhere near 2006 bad. My ideal, realistic offseason would be:

 

-Sign Pujols or Fielder for whatever it takes

-Sign Ben Sheets, Chris Carpenter or someone of the like to an inexpensive, incentive laden 1 year deal

-either decline Aramis' option and resign him for cheap, if he really loves the Cubs as much as he says. If not, try to trade for Mark Reynolds.

-I also wouldnt be opposed to seeing of Kosuke would re-up for 1-2 years, in which case we could trade Byrd and give Brett Jackson CF and maybe see how bad Reed Johnson wants to hang around as a backup/plan B.

-and of course, keep Z

[SouthSideRyan]

Why do you keep bringing up his WHIP from last year?

[Sammy Sofa]

Why do you keep bringing up his WHIP from last year?

 

Yeah, it seems odd to use it like it's a trump card when he was being yanked between the starting rotation and the bullpen.

[Tarver]

This team should be looking to add pitching, not subtract. Unless Z makes a nuisance of himself or his trade is part of some larger plan to net us a younger, cheaper TOR guy, forget it.

[Tryptamine]

This team should be looking to add pitching, not subtract. Unless Z makes a nuisance of himself or his trade is part of some larger plan to net us a younger, cheaper TOR guy, forget it.

 

I suppose I could deal with taking Brett Lawrie off their hands.

[Brett]

What's irrational about rightly pointing out that the Cubs would have difficulty replacing Zambrano's production? Nothing. Unless a deal drops in their lap that's too good to be true there's little argument to just dumping him for salary relief. Even if he is in the stages of a significant permanent decline the Cubs only have him signed through next season so it's not like there's a pressing need to dump a contract that's going to bog them down for the foreseeable future. There's little supporting trading him short of a really, really good return, which they're not likely to get since he's hovering right in that "too valuable to trade but not valuable enough/too expensive to bring back a good enough haul"-zone.

 

Yeah, but, like, who cares? He isn't helping the Cubs this year - no one is - and his $18 million next year could almost certainly be put to better use. Unless you believe he's going to reverse course next year (which is not inconceivable given how dominant he was in the second half last year), I just can't be too upset about losing Z's hypothetical production for 2012.

[Brett]

z is not old and he is still very good. people trade for players like him, and not just as rentals.

 

i just don't think trading him for anything less than cheap, contribution-ready prospects while forcing the other team to take his whole salary on would make sense for the cubs.

 

teams looking to contend come searching for players like z. we should be at least trying to contend next year. if he were 35 years old, salary relief would be enough. but he's 30, and it's not.

 

30 in this non steroid era is ancient. They should be lucky to get back brett gardner or ryan theriot clone.

 

And it's not just that he's 30 ... it's that he's got the arm of a 35 year old.

[SouthSideRyan]

z is not old and he is still very good. people trade for players like him, and not just as rentals.

 

i just don't think trading him for anything less than cheap, contribution-ready prospects while forcing the other team to take his whole salary on would make sense for the cubs.

 

teams looking to contend come searching for players like z. we should be at least trying to contend next year. if he were 35 years old, salary relief would be enough. but he's 30, and it's not.

 

30 in this non steroid era is ancient. They should be lucky to get back brett gardner or ryan theriot clone.

 

And it's not just that he's 30 ... it's that he's got the arm of a 35 year old.

 

Where can I find the age adjustment scales for steroids and arms?

[Sammy Sofa]

What's irrational about rightly pointing out that the Cubs would have difficulty replacing Zambrano's production? Nothing. Unless a deal drops in their lap that's too good to be true there's little argument to just dumping him for salary relief. Even if he is in the stages of a significant permanent decline the Cubs only have him signed through next season so it's not like there's a pressing need to dump a contract that's going to bog them down for the foreseeable future. There's little supporting trading him short of a really, really good return, which they're not likely to get since he's hovering right in that "too valuable to trade but not valuable enough/too expensive to bring back a good enough haul"-zone.

 

Yeah, but, like, who cares? He isn't helping the Cubs this year - no one is - and his $18 million next year could almost certainly be put to better use. Unless you believe he's going to reverse course next year (which is not inconceivable given how dominant he was in the second half last year), I just can't be too upset about losing Z's hypothetical production for 2012.

 

Except that the Cubs aren't likely to free up all of that $18 million unless they take back essentially nothing for him. And his salary wouldn't almost certainly be put to better use since the pitching FA class isn't nearly as good as the offensive one. Sure, they could theoretically pick up another impact bat if they were willing to take the hit return-wise and free up all of his salary...but then they leave a gaping hole in the pitching rotation that they likely can't fill with anyone as good as Zambrano. Trading him just to free up money simply isn't very realistic right now and causes more problems than it solves even if it could be done.

[Little Slide Rooter]

What's irrational about rightly pointing out that the Cubs would have difficulty replacing Zambrano's production? Nothing. Unless a deal drops in their lap that's too good to be true there's little argument to just dumping him for salary relief. Even if he is in the stages of a significant permanent decline the Cubs only have him signed through next season so it's not like there's a pressing need to dump a contract that's going to bog them down for the foreseeable future. There's little supporting trading him short of a really, really good return, which they're not likely to get since he's hovering right in that "too valuable to trade but not valuable enough/too expensive to bring back a good enough haul"-zone.

 

Yeah, but, like, who cares? He isn't helping the Cubs this year - no one is - and his $18 million next year could almost certainly be put to better use. Unless you believe he's going to reverse course next year (which is not inconceivable given how dominant he was in the second half last year), I just can't be too upset about losing Z's hypothetical production for 2012.

 

NOBODY is saying that if someone wants to pick up the 18 mil that we shouldnt let them have him. The general consensus is that we shouldnt have to pay him more than 1/3 of his salary to pitch for someone else unless were getting some top prospects. If some team really wants to pick up the remainder of his contract, theres probabbly not a poster on this board who wouldnt happily drive him to the airport. Its similar to the Soriano situation. Sure, it would be better if we didnt have to pay him,but considering the production you get, whether its worth the salary or not, if you do have to pay him anyway, it should be for us.

[davearm2]

What's irrational about rightly pointing out that the Cubs would have difficulty replacing Zambrano's production? Nothing. Unless a deal drops in their lap that's too good to be true there's little argument to just dumping him for salary relief. Even if he is in the stages of a significant permanent decline the Cubs only have him signed through next season so it's not like there's a pressing need to dump a contract that's going to bog them down for the foreseeable future. There's little supporting trading him short of a really, really good return, which they're not likely to get since he's hovering right in that "too valuable to trade but not valuable enough/too expensive to bring back a good enough haul"-zone.

 

Yeah, but, like, who cares? He isn't helping the Cubs this year - no one is - and his $18 million next year could almost certainly be put to better use. Unless you believe he's going to reverse course next year (which is not inconceivable given how dominant he was in the second half last year), I just can't be too upset about losing Z's hypothetical production for 2012.

 

NOBODY is saying that if someone wants to pick up the 18 mil that we shouldnt let them have him. The general consensus is that we shouldnt have to pay him more than 1/3 of his salary to pitch for someone else unless were getting some top prospects. If some team really wants to pick up the remainder of his contract, theres probabbly not a poster on this board who wouldnt happily drive him to the airport. Its similar to the Soriano situation. Sure, it would be better if we didnt have to pay him,but considering the production you get, if you do have to pay him anyway, it should be for us.

I think you're wrong about that. For instance, anyone that believes that the Cubs can contend next year will disagree. Any equation that has the Cubs contending next year includes Z pitching like he has in the past.