Cubs talking to Texas?

[SouthSideRyan]

I don't necessarily WANT to trade Geo. But, we've got him for one more year. And while I'd hold onto him for now, if we're not contenders at next year's deadline, I hope we DO trade him at that point. Because I don't want Geo on a 3-4 year deal at 10 mill or so per(Which I figure he'll get).......To trade him now, I want a piece in return I can count on as part of our lineup or rotation for next year. Because we're creating a hole we don't know we can fill, if we deal him now. If we wait, maybe we come up with enough additions over the offseason where he's worth keeping around and with the money we should have to spend, I definitely think it's possible to contend next year, if we do it right.

 

We have Geo for 2 more years.

[Splendid Splinter]

I don't necessarily WANT to trade Geo. But, we've got him for one more year. And while I'd hold onto him for now, if we're not contenders at next year's deadline, I hope we DO trade him at that point. Because I don't want Geo on a 3-4 year deal at 10 mill or so per(Which I figure he'll get).......To trade him now, I want a piece in return I can count on as part of our lineup or rotation for next year. Because we're creating a hole we don't know we can fill, if we deal him now. If we wait, maybe we come up with enough additions over the offseason where he's worth keeping around and with the money we should have to spend, I definitely think it's possible to contend next year, if we do it right.

 

We have Geo for 2 more years.

 

I was gonna say... "Wasn't this year Soto's first arb year?" Just curious... Soto is making $3 mil this year. What you guys think he's going to make the next 2 years? (assuming he gets up to .800 OPS or so at the end of this season and also finish close to his career OPS next year as well) I mean is it possible that he'll get $4.5 and $6 mil the next 2 arb years? Will be it more? Less? I'm willing to give him that, but let him walk as a FA (as he will be 31 during that offseason).

 

I was in the same camp that Soto can be traded, but I realized that the trade offer better be pretty good as you would still have him for 2 more years after this and in his prime years. Don't get me wrong... I would listen to any offer for anybody, but the offers better be worthwhile even consider it and even then, still might not accept the offer. Then there's some I wouldn't care if we traded them for a bag of balls or release them and call up some AAA arms (Lopez/Grabow) or some that are tradeable and should bring back some value (Baker/Johnson/Pena). I mean it got to make sense somehow. Can't trade for the sake of trading or wanting to blow the team up cuz they suck.

[SouthSideRyan]

Ideally, I'd buyout 2 years of Soto's free agency this offseason. Something like 4/27, but I'm not sure that's reasonable.

[Guest]

Kaplan's skin getting darker post-mortem would be an odd sort of justice.

[Exile on Waveland]

I'm still under the impression that Soto is severely undervalued league-wide, so I'm suspicious the Cubs could obtain a remotely fair exchange in a trade for him.

[SouthSideRyan]

Kaplan's skin getting darker post-mortem would be an odd sort of justice.

 

I assumed self-immolation after the 2015 non-tendering of Tony Campana.

[dew1679666265]

I'm still under the impression that Soto is severely undervalued league-wide, so I'm suspicious the Cubs could obtain a remotely fair exchange in a trade for him.

 

That's exactly why I don't think we'd end up getting a deal worth it for Geo. As good as he's been, I think the general impression of him is what a lot of people on here complain about - gets hurt too much, too inconsistent and not good enough defensively. Two of those three aren't true and the inconsistency isn't a problem since he's never terrible, but I think that's the perception of him.

 

I wouldn't openly shop him, but if a team understood how valuable a player he is and paid us accordingly, I'd definitely consider moving him. I'd want quite a bit, though.

[Bull]

I am firmly in the trade anybody not named Starlin Castro camp. Of course, it goes without saying that the trades would have to be worthwhile.

 

I see no one else as untouchable on this squad.

 

I suspect I'll be lit up for this chemistry comment, but I get the impression that Barney is really good for Castro and will be over the next two/three years. While he is hardly an offensive force, and still tradeable, I like these two staying together up the middle.

 

I probably stand alone in the trade anybody not named Barney or Castro camp.

[dew1679666265]

I suspect I'll be lit up for this chemistry comment, but I get the impression that Barney is really good for Castro and will be over the next two/three years. While he is hardly an offensive force, and still tradeable, I like these two staying together up the middle.

 

I probably stand alone in the trade anybody not named Barney or Castro camp.

 

What do you mean good for him?

[Guest]

Barney is more than fine as a reserve middle infielder and can still be that example to Castro you're talking about, but if he's going to struggle to OPS much more than .600 then he isn't an everyday option at 2B.

[Bull]

I suspect I'll be lit up for this chemistry comment, but I get the impression that Barney is really good for Castro and will be over the next two/three years. While he is hardly an offensive force, and still tradeable, I like these two staying together up the middle.

 

I probably stand alone in the trade anybody not named Barney or Castro camp.

 

What do you mean good for him?

 

In a variety of ways.

He's constantly taking to him, and Starlin seems to listen. Especially after an error. Starlin seems like the kid who could get mistakes in his head and barney talks him off the wall. Does anyone else see this or am I making it up?

Their rapport on the double play still makes me stand up and get excited occasionally.

 

ETA I originally mistyped Starlin as Stalin. Stalin Castro.

[dew1679666265]

In a variety of ways.

He's constantly taking to him, and Starlin seems to listen. Especially after an error. Starlin seems like the kid who could get mistakes in his head and barney talks him off the wall. Does anyone else see this or am I making it up?

Their rapport on the double play still makes me stand up and get excited occasionally.

 

Ah, I see. You probably don't have to be too concerned about trading Barney - as long as his offensive numbers plummet he probably won't be in much demand. If there were interest in him, I'd be opposed to trading him as well for scraps or a low A-baller. If somebody came along and offered something of real value or demanded he be included in a larger positive trade, however, I'd most definitely consider it.

 

As TT said, I can't justify starting him if he continues to produce offensively what he has since April ended. He's too much of a liability, despite his defense.

[weis21]

Why couldn't he just talk to him in the dugout between innings about these errors?

[EhDubya]

I suspect I'll be lit up for this chemistry comment, but I get the impression that Barney is really good for Castro and will be over the next two/three years. While he is hardly an offensive force, and still tradeable, I like these two staying together up the middle.

 

I probably stand alone in the trade anybody not named Barney or Castro camp.

 

What do you mean good for him?

 

In a variety of ways.

He's constantly taking to him, and Starlin seems to listen. Especially after an error. Starlin seems like the kid who could get mistakes in his head and barney talks him off the wall. Does anyone else see this or am I making it up?

Their rapport on the double play still makes me stand up and get excited occasionally.

 

ETA I originally mistyped Starlin as Stalin. Stalin Castro.

 

So, you are in favor of making Barney our second baseman of the present and future, and the reason why is because he "is good for" Castro "in a variety of ways", of which you only mention that "he talks to him". Oh, and he can turn a double play, like pretty much any other second basemen out there. Am I getting that right?

[javy knows my name]

I suspect I'll be lit up for this chemistry comment, but I get the impression that Barney is really good for Castro and will be over the next two/three years. While he is hardly an offensive force, and still tradeable, I like these two staying together up the middle.

 

I probably stand alone in the trade anybody not named Barney or Castro camp.

 

What do you mean good for him?

 

In a variety of ways.

He's constantly taking to him, and Starlin seems to listen. Especially after an error. Starlin seems like the kid who could get mistakes in his head and barney talks him off the wall. Does anyone else see this or am I making it up?

Their rapport on the double play still makes me stand up and get excited occasionally.

 

ETA I originally mistyped Starlin as Stalin. Stalin Castro.

 

You are indeed making this up. If Starlin were such a mental midget, he wouldn't have ascended through our system so quickly (or at all), wouldn't be improving his defense seemingly every day, wouldn't have hit a 3-run HR in his major league debut, etc, etc...

 

Barney's very good defensively. Just stick to that, because that's more than pure speculation on your part. And this smacks of some Kaplan-like justification to keep the white guy so that the latin guys stay on task. No thank you.

[Sammy Sofa]

But Darwin is Asian.

[questionmarkgrace]

In a variety of ways.

He's constantly taking to him, and Starlin seems to listen. Especially after an error. Starlin seems like the kid who could get mistakes in his head and barney talks him off the wall. Does anyone else see this or am I making it up?

Their rapport on the double play still makes me stand up and get excited occasionally.

 

Ah, I see. You probably don't have to be too concerned about trading Barney - as long as his offensive numbers plummet he probably won't be in much demand. If there were interest in him, I'd be opposed to trading him as well for scraps or a low A-baller. If somebody came along and offered something of real value or demanded he be included in a larger positive trade, however, I'd most definitely consider it.

 

As TT said, I can't justify starting him if he continues to produce offensively what he has since April ended. He's too much of a liability, despite his defense.

 

its hard not to be concerned about injuries when he has missed 1/3 of the games in 09 and 10. He has a chance to play his most games since his rookie season but his production is down. He is a bigger guy and those little nagging injuries start to add up after a while. It just doesnt project well.

[Guest]

its hard not to be concerned about injuries when he has missed 1/3 of the games in 09 and 10. He has a chance to play his most games since his rookie season but his production is down. He is a bigger guy and those little nagging injuries start to add up after a while. It just doesnt project well.

 

Who's talking about Soto?

 

Since you bring it up, saying he missed 1/3 of games is a misleading expression considering that the vast majority of catchers get 30 or more games off in a season. He does have nagging injury worries with his position and size, but not to that extent.

[dew1679666265]

its hard not to be concerned about injuries when he has missed 1/3 of the games in 09 and 10. He has a chance to play his most games since his rookie season but his production is down. He is a bigger guy and those little nagging injuries start to add up after a while. It just doesnt project well.

 

You may have just picked out the wrong post to quote, but I was talking about Darwin Barney, not Soto.

 

On the topic of Soto, however, I pretty much agree with TT. There's not a very high offensive threshold for catchers to reach to be good and even with his dips in production, Geo is one of the better offensive catchers out there. He will have some nagging injury issues, but he's never missed extended time and, as TT said, that 1/3 of his games stat is misleading.

 

The thing a lot of people are missing, however, is that if injuries are a concern for Soto it's not a reason to get rid of him, but instead it's a reason to have a better backup catcher than Koyie Hill. I'm not sure I'd give Soto a long term deal at this point, but I also am not the least bit anxious to trade him either.

[Brett]

its hard not to be concerned about injuries when he has missed 1/3 of the games in 09 and 10. He has a chance to play his most games since his rookie season but his production is down. He is a bigger guy and those little nagging injuries start to add up after a while. It just doesnt project well.

 

You may have just picked out the wrong post to quote, but I was talking about Darwin Barney, not Soto.

 

On the topic of Soto, however, I pretty much agree with TT. There's not a very high offensive threshold for catchers to reach to be good and even with his dips in production, Geo is one of the better offensive catchers out there. He will have some nagging injury issues, but he's never missed extended time and, as TT said, that 1/3 of his games stat is misleading.

 

The thing a lot of people are missing, however, is that if injuries are a concern for Soto it's not a reason to get rid of him, but instead it's a reason to have a better backup catcher than Koyie Hill. I'm not sure I'd give Soto a long term deal at this point, but I also am not the least bit anxious to trade him either.

 

Perfectly put. If the Cubs can get a good return, great. Make it happen. If not, that's just fine, too.

[Elrhino]

They've been playing Davis at leftfield looking for a spot to play him since he's just murdering AAA ball (OPSing around 1.200) , and he was on the verge of a call up before a groin strain grounded him. Personally, I think he's a good enough athlete to pull the conversion. I know the Rangers organization still has a lot of respect for Byrd, and they likely would not have let him leave if not for their ownership mess at the time. They also need/want a centerfielder since it looks like they've basically given up on Bourbon and they want to limit Hamilton's exposure to CF. I would be pretty open to a Byrd for Davis swap if Byrd can come back and look healthy before the deadline. Byrd is reasonably priced through next year, but no way the Cubs are contending in 2012 even with a Pujols or Fielder. Meanwhile, a path is cleared for a Brett Jackson September call up and a starting CF spot in 2012.

[SouthSideRyan]

Byrd is reasonably priced through next year, but no way the Cubs are contending in 2012 even with a Pujols or Fielder.

 

CAN'TTAKEITANYMORE

[imb]

But Darwin is Asian.

 

he's inscrutable

[Elwood]

They've been playing Davis at leftfield looking for a spot to play him since he's just murdering AAA ball (OPSing around 1.200) , and he was on the verge of a call up before a groin strain grounded him. Personally, I think he's a good enough athlete to pull the conversion. I know the Rangers organization still has a lot of respect for Byrd, and they likely would not have let him leave if not for their ownership mess at the time. They also need/want a centerfielder since it looks like they've basically given up on Bourbon and they want to limit Hamilton's exposure to CF. I would be pretty open to a Byrd for Davis swap if Byrd can come back and look healthy before the deadline. Byrd is reasonably priced through next year, but no way the Cubs are contending in 2012 even with a Pujols or Fielder. Meanwhile, a path is cleared for a Brett Jackson September call up and a starting CF spot in 2012.

 

I like the sound of a Soriano/Jackson/Davis outfield. Lots of upside offensively, and defense should be good in center and right.

[TruffleShuffle]

Byrd is reasonably priced through next year, but no way the Cubs are contending in 2012 even with a Pujols or Fielder.

 

CAN'TTAKEITANYMORE

 

yeah that argument pretty much drives me crazy.