Levine: Hendry secure but firesale could begin

[Guest]

If the Royals offered you Moustakas, Hosmer and Montgomery for Soto, you wouldn't do it? I'm NOT saying that they would offer that but I am saying that unless your answer to that question is "No" then Soto should be considered available. Unless you put him out there and negotiate you'll never know. This team is going NOWHERE and any assets should at least be considered.

 

And therein lies the problem. Who trades good young/cheap players for other good young/cheap players? No one does. So unless the Cubs start hitting the lottery with guys at the AAA level who haven't broken through yet, that means they are giving up on several seasons while their returns from those deals toil Daytona and Tennessee.

 

Put another way, you start trading off several guys from that Soto, Marmol, Marshall, etc. group, and you're giving up until 2014 or so, which is unacceptable, unnecessary, and most likely unwise.

[SouthSideRyan]

These arguments remind me of the Grabow thread when people were outraged that those arguing against re-signing him would be against a 2Y/1M contract for him.

[soapy]

ok, but you said "decent return"...twice.

Honestly I don't know what would be a "decent return" for Soto but that is sort of my point. If you automatically say he's off the market you'll never know. The people that are saying that he is untouchable are ignoring the fact that there may be teams that are willing to overpay for a guy to fill a position of deep need. PURE SPECULATION: If the Royals offered just Montgomery, would you do it? How about Moustakas? Again I'm not saying that I would do it either, but it at least has to be considered. Soto cannot be untouchable on a team that has a pile of needs.

 

Ok, but I think you can say that for every player. I don't think anyone is saying that Soto is untouchable. Nobody is untouchable. It just doesn't make any sense to trade him unless you get blown away with a great offer.

[Elwood]

For me, it's the eye test. He just looks terrilble at the plate.

 

You're new here, right? You might want to brace for impact.

[davearm2]

Just wondering, what would it take for people to be happy with a Soriano deal?

 

Meaning, would the Cubs kicking 50% of the remaining contract and getting a living, breathing baseball player back be enough. Cubs only kicking in 25% and getting nothing, 80% and getting someone decent? I'll admit, I have no idea what it would take to get someone to take him.

 

I'll also admit, I'd be willing to kick in a substantial amount if I could get someone (through that deal or another trade, MiL, whatever) that could play better D and come close to his numbers, along with saving some of the money. However, I have no idea it that would have even a moderate chance of happening.

 

As an example...

 

Fangraphs has Soriano as a 4 WAR (total) player over the last three seasons, and will make approx. $19 mil per over the next three years. If the Cubs could trade him and acquire, bring up, somehow put some guy in LF avg. 1 WAR per year for a combined $17 mil per, at least until they can improve performance, would it be worth it? Let's say they pick up half his money, $9.5 mil per, and sign someone else for $7 mil and get nothing back in return for Soriano. That's $16.5 mil to replicate his WAR over the next three years. Do you do it?

 

Like I said, I don't know there's even a chance, but until something actually happens it's all hypothetical anyway.

When thinking about this question, you might ask yourself, "how many prospects around baseball would I pay $10M cash (or some other large number) to get into the Cubs' system?"

 

Really that's what it comes down to, given the way you've laid out the options.

 

Soriano + $20M for Prospect A, or

Soriano + $30M for Prospects A and B.

 

Prospect B would have to be really good for the second option to be appealing. Better than the Cubs' first-round pick Baez, for instance.

[Men in Blue]

For me, it's the eye test. He just looks terrilble at the plate.

 

You're new here, right? You might want to brace for impact.

 

Oh, I'm sure. But again, he really does not look right. Very Soriano-esque.

[BeerHere]

If the Royals offered you Moustakas, Hosmer and Montgomery for Soto, you wouldn't do it? I'm NOT saying that they would offer that but I am saying that unless your answer to that question is "No" then Soto should be considered available. Unless you put him out there and negotiate you'll never know. This team is going NOWHERE and any assets should at least be considered.

 

And therein lies the problem. Who trades good young/cheap players for other good young/cheap players? No one does. So unless the Cubs start hitting the lottery with guys at the AAA level who haven't broken through yet, that means they are giving up on several seasons while their returns from those deals toil Daytona and Tennessee.

 

Put another way, you start trading off several guys from that Soto, Marmol, Marshall, etc. group, and you're giving up until 2014 or so, which is unacceptable, unnecessary, and most likely unwise.

 

TT -- what was your take on the 2011 draft consisting of mostly high schoolers? I could be wrong, but my interpretation of that is "take the kid with the highest ceiling possible" with the expectations that none of them are major league ready for at least 3-4 years. To me, that sounds like an organization that is willing to build through free agency for the next few years until the system is ready to start supplying a ready-stream of talent to fill needs or to be used in trades to fill needs. The purely FA route hasn't worked thus far. If there are players on the roster (Soto, Marmol) that can help fill needs why not do it? Again, I don't know what the definition of "decent return" is, but I think it is foolish to at least consider it. Truthfully I don't understand why anyone would say any player on this team is untouchable with the notable exception of Castro.

[SouthSideRyan]

For me, it's the eye test. He just looks terrilble at the plate.

 

You're new here, right? You might want to brace for impact.

 

Oh, I'm sure. But again, he really does not look right. Very Soriano-esque.

 

I can't think of a player on the Cubs who'd be a worse comparison at the plate.

 

ETA: Ok, Darwin Barney I guess, but Soriano and Soto have completely different approaches. I really don't know where you're coming from on this.

Edited June 23, 2011 by SouthSideRyan

[champaignchris]

There's only one untouchable guy - Castro - but there are other guys that you'd only really trade if you were getting something that would immediately contribute to your team next year. You don't trade guys like Barney, Soto, Garza, Marmol, Marshall, Byrd, or Wells for salary relief or for prospects who are a long way from making it to the Bigs. If there's a baseball trade to be made - major league player for major league player, that improves the team, great.

 

Your trade targets are guys who won't be back next year and can net you some future prospects - Pena, Fukudome, and Baker.

 

Or you try to trade a bad contract for salary relief - Soriano. I'm assuming that Ramirez simply can't be moved and the Cubs will just let him walk after this season.

 

Zambrano and Dempster both sort of straddle the fence. Their contracts are bad, but not horrible, and they can be productive members of the team in 2012. Both contracts come off the books after 2012. I think you only trade them if you get immediate help.

 

For all the doom and gloom the media spreads about the Cubs' contract situation, Ramirez' 14.6M, Fukudome's 13.5M, Pena's ~5M, Grabow's 4.8M, and Samardjiza's 3M are all off the books after this season if the Cubs do nothing.

[davearm2]

Put another way, you start trading off several guys from that Soto, Marmol, Marshall, etc. group, and you're giving up until 2014 or so, which is unacceptable, unnecessary, and most likely unwise.

In general I'd agree with you, but I'd tend to exclude relief pitchers from that equation. Especially one that seems like a TJS waiting to happen (Marmol).

[BeerHere]

There's only one untouchable guy - Castro - but there are other guys that you'd only really trade if you were getting something that would immediately contribute to your team next year. You don't trade guys like Barney, Soto, Garza, Marmol, Marshall, Byrd, or Wells for salary relief or for prospects who are a long way from making it to the Bigs. If there's a baseball trade to be made - major league player for major league player, that improves the team, great.

 

Your trade targets are guys who won't be back next year and can net you some future prospects - Pena, Fukudome, and Baker.

 

Or you try to trade a bad contract for salary relief - Soriano. I'm assuming that Ramirez simply can't be moved and the Cubs will just let him walk after this season.

 

Zambrano and Dempster both sort of straddle the fence. Their contracts are bad, but not horrible, and they can be productive members of the team in 2012. Both contracts come off the books after 2012. I think you only trade them if you get immediate help.

 

For all the doom and gloom the media spreads about the Cubs' contract situation, Ramirez' 14.6M, Fukudome's 13.5M, Pena's ~5M, Grabow's 4.8M, and Samardjiza's 3M are all off the books after this season if the Cubs do nothing.

 

Doesn't Ramirez have a buyout ($2M) if the mutual option isn't picked up by the Cubs?

[Prizefight]

PWSullivan Paul Sullivan

Hendry meeting with scouts next week, like he does every July before trading deadline. Nothing new, just the business of baseball.

[BeerHere]

Put another way, you start trading off several guys from that Soto, Marmol, Marshall, etc. group, and you're giving up until 2014 or so, which is unacceptable, unnecessary, and most likely unwise.

In general I'd agree with you, but I'd tend to exclude relief pitchers from that equation. Especially one that seems like a TJS waiting to happen (Marmol).

Personally I think that his value is extremely high right now. If I could turn Marmol into two very good prospects at the deadline I'd do it. The Cubs never seem to trade guys at their peek though.

[davearm2]

Put another way, you start trading off several guys from that Soto, Marmol, Marshall, etc. group, and you're giving up until 2014 or so, which is unacceptable, unnecessary, and most likely unwise.

In general I'd agree with you, but I'd tend to exclude relief pitchers from that equation. Especially one that seems like a TJS waiting to happen (Marmol).

Personally I think that his value is extremely high right now. If I could turn Marmol into two very good prospects at the deadline I'd do it. The Cubs never seem to trade guys at their peek though.

The Cubs never seem to trade guys you really wish you had back, either.

[champaignchris]

There's only one untouchable guy - Castro - but there are other guys that you'd only really trade if you were getting something that would immediately contribute to your team next year. You don't trade guys like Barney, Soto, Garza, Marmol, Marshall, Byrd, or Wells for salary relief or for prospects who are a long way from making it to the Bigs. If there's a baseball trade to be made - major league player for major league player, that improves the team, great.

 

Your trade targets are guys who won't be back next year and can net you some future prospects - Pena, Fukudome, and Baker.

 

Or you try to trade a bad contract for salary relief - Soriano. I'm assuming that Ramirez simply can't be moved and the Cubs will just let him walk after this season.

 

Zambrano and Dempster both sort of straddle the fence. Their contracts are bad, but not horrible, and they can be productive members of the team in 2012. Both contracts come off the books after 2012. I think you only trade them if you get immediate help.

 

For all the doom and gloom the media spreads about the Cubs' contract situation, Ramirez' 14.6M, Fukudome's 13.5M, Pena's ~5M, Grabow's 4.8M, and Samardjiza's 3M are all off the books after this season if the Cubs do nothing.

 

Doesn't Ramirez have a buyout ($2M) if the mutual option isn't picked up by the Cubs?

 

The Cubs will pay the $2M instead of bringing him back for $16M. The $16M option becomes guaranteed if he gets traded. So, the Cubs simply will not trade him unless they can negotiate a deal where they're only on the hook for less than the remainder of this season plus $2M or get significant player value back that justifies the additional expenditure.

 

I don't see either scenario as being likely. I think Ramirez is on the Cubs for the remainder of the season and then becomes a free agent.

 

EDIT - "unless" > "if" Big difference.

Edited June 23, 2011 by champaignchris

[Guest]

TT -- what was your take on the 2011 draft consisting of mostly high schoolers? I could be wrong, but my interpretation of that is "take the kid with the highest ceiling possible" with the expectations that none of them are major league ready for at least 3-4 years. To me, that sounds like an organization that is willing to build through free agency for the next few years until the system is ready to start supplying a ready-stream of talent to fill needs or to be used in trades to fill needs. The purely FA route hasn't worked thus far. If there are players on the roster (Soto, Marmol) that can help fill needs why not do it? Again, I don't know what the definition of "decent return" is, but I think it is foolish to at least consider it. Truthfully I don't understand why anyone would say any player on this team is untouchable with the notable exception of Castro.

 

I don't think the draft is or ever should be considered a reflection of the direction of the MLB team. And again, the problem with "filling needs" by trading guys like Soto and Marmol is that the return is not MLB ready, and likely too far away from being ready to offer you the cost certainty you'd need to trade a player of their caliber. If Toronto wants to send us Lawrie and Drabek for Soto, then awesome, let's do it. But there's a reason you don't see trades like that. It's more or less a meaningless hypothetical.

[davearm2]

There's only one untouchable guy - Castro - but there are other guys that you'd only really trade if you were getting something that would immediately contribute to your team next year. You don't trade guys like Barney, Soto, Garza, Marmol, Marshall, Byrd, or Wells for salary relief or for prospects who are a long way from making it to the Bigs. If there's a baseball trade to be made - major league player for major league player, that improves the team, great.

 

Your trade targets are guys who won't be back next year and can net you some future prospects - Pena, Fukudome, and Baker.

 

Or you try to trade a bad contract for salary relief - Soriano. I'm assuming that Ramirez simply can't be moved and the Cubs will just let him walk after this season.

 

Zambrano and Dempster both sort of straddle the fence. Their contracts are bad, but not horrible, and they can be productive members of the team in 2012. Both contracts come off the books after 2012. I think you only trade them if you get immediate help.

 

For all the doom and gloom the media spreads about the Cubs' contract situation, Ramirez' 14.6M, Fukudome's 13.5M, Pena's ~5M, Grabow's 4.8M, and Samardjiza's 3M are all off the books after this season if the Cubs do nothing.

 

Doesn't Ramirez have a buyout ($2M) if the mutual option isn't picked up by the Cubs?

 

The Cubs will pay the $2M instead of bringing him back for $16M. The $16M option becomes guaranteed unless he gets traded. So, the Cubs simply will not trade him unless they can negotiate a deal where they're only on the hook for less than the remainder of this season plus $2M or get significant player value back that justifies the additional expenditure.

 

I don't see either scenario as being likely. I think Ramirez is on the Cubs for the remainder of the season and then becomes a free agent.

I think your assessment is correct, however if Ramirez is traded then next season's salary is some other team's problem.

[MWV]

For me, it's the eye test. He just looks terrilble at the plate.

 

You're new here, right? You might want to brace for impact.

 

Oh, I'm sure. But again, he really does not look right. Very Soriano-esque.

Soto has walked in 10.8% of his PAs. Soriano: 4.2%

Soto's K%: 23.1%. Soriano: 25.7%

Soto's LD%: 23%. Soriano: 17%.

Aside from a small spike in Ks this year, Soto and Alfonso are totally different animals at the plate.

[abuck1220]

ps...there is NO WAY you are dumping contracts AND getting good prospects for zambrano/soriano. you're probably not doing either, actually.

[Bruno7481]

ps...there is NO WAY you are dumping contracts AND getting good prospects for zambrano/soriano. you're probably not doing either, actually.

 

Agree completely. It is a nice idea that the Cubs will be able to acquire young talent by trading off some of the higher paid veterans on this team. I just don't think it will be very easy to pull off. Leaving the salary out of the equation (which is stupid anyway), Soriano is having a decent year. Teams would love to have him. But we all know why nobody does, its the money.

 

Dempster and Zambrano I don't think will generate the amount of interest needed to bring back high quality talent. Same goes for Pena.

 

Marmol/Marshall might, but I'd love to see the Cubs find a way to get Marshall back in the rotation despite his brilliance in the bullpen.

[Little Slide Rooter]

The thing about Soriano and Z is that while they may not be good enough to make the money they are, theyre too productive to be paying them to play for someone else and getting nothing to show for it. If your going to pay players big money to go away, they better be Carlos Silva, Oliver Perez, or Luis Castillo bad.

[Little Slide Rooter]

If/when Hendry keeps his job and we aren't all that interested in Pujols or Fielder, this place is going to be soooo cranky.

 

I think that would be the equivalent of NSBB civil war.

 

It would definitely be a very angry place.

[Guest]

Marmol/Marshall might, but I'd love to see the Cubs find a way to get Marshall back in the rotation despite his brilliance in the bullpen.

 

I think that ship has sailed. Marshall will be 30 and an FA by the end of next season, hasn't thrown 100 IP since 2007, and has never thrown 150 IP.

[Bruno7481]

Marmol/Marshall might, but I'd love to see the Cubs find a way to get Marshall back in the rotation despite his brilliance in the bullpen.

 

I think that ship has sailed. Marshall will be 30 and an FA by the end of next season, hasn't thrown 100 IP since 2007, and has never thrown 150 IP.

 

That is most likely true. I just can't help but wonder how things would have turned out if he would have stayed in the rotation.

[champaignchris]

Dempster and Zambrano I don't think will generate the amount of interest needed to bring back high quality talent. Same goes for Pena.

 

Pena is younger, cheaper, and better than Derrek Lee was last year, and left-handed, too. The Cubs should be able to get a better package for Pena than they did for Lee.

 

ETA - Pena also doesn't have a no-trade clause, meaning the Cubs don't have to negotiate any trade through him and more teams can be involved in the bidding.

Edited June 23, 2011 by champaignchris