Zambrano traded to Marlins for Chris Volstad (P. 8)

[Guest]

I wouldn't be remotely shocked if Volstad is a better pitcher than Zambrano next year.

 

 

Granted, that leaves out Z's offensive value.

Edited January 5, 2012 by David

[RynoRules]

Not loving the return, but I dont get why anyone would think Z has value enough to get anything significant in return. I see Tree's point, but really it's not like it makes that much of a difference if we hold him until the trade deadline unless he returns to his form from several years ago, which is highly unlikely. Edited January 5, 2012 by RynoRules

[USSoccer]

I think people are forgetting how low Z's value is. I don't think teams were buying Theo's words about being willing to keep Z. He had to go. There were whispers that the team would not at all be ok with him coming back into the clubhouse after what he did last year. Even getting $2 million dollars and a young major league player and prospect is great IMO. I'll guess that they could have eaten less but since the payroll is so low opted to eat more to get a better return.

 

I can't remember why but I remember really liking Volstad a year or two ago. Obviously his numbers have been rather poor but I like the potential he brings. I like that there are a couple of wild cards in the rotation between Wood and Volstad. It's better than Zambrano who you know what you are getting, a high 3's/low 4's ERA, frustratingly inconsistent performances and at least one humiliating blowup.

 

We're essentially eating an entire $18m contract and getting a garbage player back. Also, there really won't be anyone left in the locker room who knows who Zambrano is-what, like 4 guys at this point?

 

This is stupid.

 

Theo would have eaten the entire $18 million contract and gotten nothing back if it had come to that. He didn't want him Zambrano in his clubhouse. Clearly no one other than Guillen did either.

 

I'd have rather had two A level lottery tickets than Volstad

[davell]

Since it appears as if it's a one for one deal, SSR nailed it. This blows. Money is basically the same as if he hadn't dealt Z. We just went from a potential 2/3 guy in Z to a guy who'll have to compete for a spot in the rotation. Headcase or not, I'd rather have Z in 2012 than Volstad. But, the mantra will be 3 years for 1. True, but it'll be a crappy 3 years versus a potentially good one year and at worst, an average one year. Marlins win this one, as far as I'm concerned. Goldstein mentioned Volstad as a guy who could take a step forward this year, I guess that's about the only thing positive I've got on this.

[TruffleShuffle]

apparentnreturn .... whynanyonenwouldmthink

[UMFan83]

With Z (nearly) gone and Wood technically a FA still, no more '03 Cubs left on the roster.

 

Heck, I only count 6 Cubs that were on the 08 playoff roster (I don't think Koyie Hill was)

 

Dempster

Shark

Marmol

Soto

Soriano

Reed Johnson

 

And of those 6, Reed left and came back, and Shark spent significant time in the minors the next 2 seasons after 08, so really only those other 4 have continuously been on Cubs since 08

[RynoRules]

apparentnreturn .... whynanyonenwouldmthink

 

IPads are fun

[erik316wttn]

Really looks like this insider at PSD is very legit. So that's fun.

 

Yeah this is a [expletive] blast.

 

You're really this upset over this?

 

The hand wringing over this is hilarious.

 

A month or two ago (when there was a chance we'd compete in 2012), I would have hated this. But given the rebuild mode, there was really no reason whatsoever not to trade Zambrano. You can pay Z 18MM to pitch in a lost season and let him go at the end of the season, or you pay 15-16 million to Z and get back something, anything you might be able to use beyond this year.

 

Hendry assured that if Z was going to be traded, it was going to be for next to nothing and we'd be paying for it. The question was whether keeping him made sense. In a year you're not going to compete, it doesn't make sense.

 

If you're going to pay the money either way, you may as well just pay him to pitch, hope that he can be the Z we know he can be, then flip him for something of value before the deadline. At least then if you have to eat the rest of his contract you're getting more than Chris [expletive] Volstad.

[WrigleyField 22]

Hoping we get a prospect too, but after this and finding out Reed got 1.5 im not understanding the front office here.

[SouthSideRyan]

 

You know I would've gone about the offseason differently to this point, but going forward, would you rather win 78 games next year and be done with Z, or win 75 games next year and have someone of potential use for the following 2-3 years?

 

If we're intent on being a shitty team, why not let Z pitch for 3 months, prove he can coexist with people and then trade him rather than trade him fresh off a hissy fit suspension by our blowhard ex-GM.

 

The Hendryness of this move is very troubling to me.

[XZero771679666304]

I don't think you're going to find any TOR talents for Zambrano, even if he's free. Maybe a lottery ticket type like Archer was, but then that's a crummy return. Considering that the opportunity to be truly competitive in 2012 is pretty much gone, there's no real reason to hold on to Carlos, since 2 months of him in this CBA isn't going to be any more valuable in trade. Volstad isn't as ideal as Wood was, but he helps keep you from draining MLB value, and if 2012 is lost, auditioning a bunch of average+ starters like Wood, Wells, Cashner, Samardzija, and Volstad to try and find some solutions for Dempster and Z's rotation spot isn't a terrible option, especially if you get some high end talent for Garza.

 

So then 2013 we have a couple guys who turn out to be league average starters, Starlin Castro, and David DeJesus. Should be turned around in no time.

 

You know I would've gone about the offseason differently to this point, but going forward, would you rather win 78 games next year and be done with Z, or win 75 games next year and have someone of potential use for the following 2-3 years?

 

Well, that's putting it much more succinctly than I did.

[Guest]

Really looks like this insider at PSD is very legit. So that's fun.

 

Yeah this is a [expletive] blast.

 

You're really this upset over this?

 

The hand wringing over this is hilarious.

 

A month or two ago (when there was a chance we'd compete in 2012), I would have hated this. But given the rebuild mode, there was really no reason whatsoever not to trade Zambrano. You can pay Z 18MM to pitch in a lost season and let him go at the end of the season, or you pay 15-16 million to Z and get back something, anything you might be able to use beyond this year.

 

Hendry assured that if Z was going to be traded, it was going to be for next to nothing and we'd be paying for it. The question was whether keeping him made sense. In a year you're not going to compete, it doesn't make sense.

 

If you're going to pay the money either way, you may as well just pay him to pitch, hope that he can be the Z we know he can be, then flip him for something of value before the deadline. At least then if you have to eat the rest of his contract you're getting more than Chris [expletive] Volstad.

I guess you should change your sig then.

[Guest]

If you're going to pay the money either way, you may as well just pay him to pitch, hope that he can be the Z we know he can be, then flip him for something of value before the deadline. At least then if you have to eat the rest of his contract you're getting more than Chris [expletive] Volstad.

 

You aren't going to get more than Volstad for 10 starts of Z at the deadline, even if he has a bounceback year.

[El Duderino]

 

You know I would've gone about the offseason differently to this point, but going forward, would you rather win 78 games next year and be done with Z, or win 75 games next year and have someone of potential use for the following 2-3 years?

 

If we're intent on being a [expletive] team, why not let Z pitch for 3 months, prove he can coexist with people and then trade him rather than trade him fresh off a hissy fit suspension by our blowhard ex-GM.

 

The Hendryness of this move is very troubling to me.

 

because that's likely.

[ConstableRabbit]

#2 similar to Volstad through age 24 is Ben Sheets... there's still hope!

[Guest]

 

You know I would've gone about the offseason differently to this point, but going forward, would you rather win 78 games next year and be done with Z, or win 75 games next year and have someone of potential use for the following 2-3 years?

 

If we're intent on being a [expletive] team, why not let Z pitch for 3 months, prove he can coexist with people and then trade him rather than trade him fresh off a hissy fit suspension by our blowhard ex-GM.

 

The Hendryness of this move is very troubling to me.

 

With no hope of draft compensation, I find it tough to believe that there's a bunch of trade value for Z to recapture when his new team would have him for 2 months.

[Outshined_One]

Curious to see the official announcement; remember we originally thought the Marshall trade was just for Travis Wood straight up.

 

I'm not expecting anyone great, but I wouldn't be surprise if Volstad came with a lottery ticket or two.

[Guest]

 

You know I would've gone about the offseason differently to this point, but going forward, would you rather win 78 games next year and be done with Z, or win 75 games next year and have someone of potential use for the following 2-3 years?

 

If we're intent on being a [expletive] team, why not let Z pitch for 3 months, prove he can coexist with people and then trade him rather than trade him fresh off a hissy fit suspension by our blowhard ex-GM.

 

The Hendryness of this move is very troubling to me.

 

because that's likely.

 

the confluence of that and him pitching well enough to inflate his nonexistent value does seem like a bit of a long shot

[RynoRules]

Realize Volstad hasn't been good last 3 years, but he zipped through the minors and is only 25. Just saying.

[XZero771679666304]

Really looks like this insider at PSD is very legit. So that's fun.

 

Yeah this is a [expletive] blast.

 

You're really this upset over this?

 

The hand wringing over this is hilarious.

 

A month or two ago (when there was a chance we'd compete in 2012), I would have hated this. But given the rebuild mode, there was really no reason whatsoever not to trade Zambrano. You can pay Z 18MM to pitch in a lost season and let him go at the end of the season, or you pay 15-16 million to Z and get back something, anything you might be able to use beyond this year.

 

Hendry assured that if Z was going to be traded, it was going to be for next to nothing and we'd be paying for it. The question was whether keeping him made sense. In a year you're not going to compete, it doesn't make sense.

 

If you're going to pay the money either way, you may as well just pay him to pitch, hope that he can be the Z we know he can be, then flip him for something of value before the deadline. At least then if you have to eat the rest of his contract you're getting more than Chris [expletive] Volstad.

 

I don't for a second think 3 months of Z playing nice would change anyone's mind about his issues. Nor do I have much confidence in his ability to have a great first half in 2012.

[Guest]

http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/index.php/top-5-swstk-surgers/

Chris Volstad had a breakout year by SIERA and xFIP standards, but of course all three luck metrics conspired against him to prevent his ERA from agreeing. Volstad primarily appears on this list because of the decline in SwStk5 he experienced last season. However, in 2009, he posted a 7.4% mark, so this year did not truly represent any real skill gains. Volstad showed some nice control growth and is a heavy ground ball pitcher, though his below average strikeout rate will limit his fantasy upside. However, one of these years he will either learn how to strand runners better or simply get luckier and he will generate a nice profit for NL-Only owners.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/index.php/pitchers-luck-part-time-starters/

 

Chris Volstad – Chris was prone to the long ball in 2011 (15.5% HR/FB) and it led to a miserable season with a near 5 ERA. His xFIP puts his talent level at 3.5. While not a great number, it is still decent and useable in most leagues. Again, ignore the losses and ERA and look to buy low with other pitchers around the 6 K/9, 3 BB/9 and 50% GB rate.

Edited January 5, 2012 by David

[UMFan83]

Since it doesn't seem like many read the fangraphs article posted on page 11, I'll post the Volstad bit. This was in an article talking about the top 5 SIERA Underperformers:

 

Chris Volstad has posted the best skills of his career so far, with the best strikeout and walk rates and second best GB%. Unfortunately, that still leads to a SIERA only a bit below the league average. His BABIP is at .322, the first time it has jumped above the .300 mark, so we cannot immediately say he is simply not Major League caliber and able to post even a league average BABIP. His HR/FB ratio has bounced around dramatically, and although it currently sits at an absurd 17.4%, he actually posted a nearly identical mark in 2009. His real problem has come at stranding runners, as he has only posted a LOB% above 69.6% in 2008, in just 84.1 innings. This could signal some real issues pitching from the stretch, or terrible bullpen support. Maybe even a combination of both. I wouldn’t ever count on him earning a whole lot of NL-Only league value, but I think he has great profit potential next season.

 

I don't mind Volstad being the main player coming back at all. We all wanted Theo in part due to his ability to use statistics to find undervalued players, yet when it comes to acquiring these people we immediately revolt. I say let Theo succeed or fail before we completely judge his moves as horrible.

[squally1313]

Wait, 29 starts last year with a 4.32 FIP, 3.64 xFIP (both better than Zambranos), career high in K/9, career low in BB/9.

 

That's the guy we're so upset about getting?

[TruffleShuffle]

finding out Reed got 1.5

 

he got 1.15

[Tryptamine]

 

You know I would've gone about the offseason differently to this point, but going forward, would you rather win 78 games next year and be done with Z, or win 75 games next year and have someone of potential use for the following 2-3 years?

 

If we're intent on being a [expletive] team, why not let Z pitch for 3 months, prove he can coexist with people and then trade him rather than trade him fresh off a hissy fit suspension by our blowhard ex-GM.

 

The Hendryness of this move is very troubling to me.

 

because that's likely.

 

It doesn't matter if it was likely, there was a chance. The Cubs could have found a half dozen Volstad's this offseason. If the return is nothing, then hold out for the 1% chance Z can make himself valuable again and at least bring a lottery ticket or two back.