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

[javy knows my name]

Sneaky nailed it when he posted about failed former top prospects being the new market inefficiency. Theo done picked himself up two of em already (possibly three; not sure how well-regarded T Wood ever was).

[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.

 

Is nothing really that different from Volstad? I'm quite sure there were guys this offseason who could have given you a similar performance for similar money without paying Z to pitch elsewhere.

 

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.

 

And there was at least an equal chance Z stank and maybe blew his top again and we get absolutely nothing for him.

[TruffleShuffle]

Would it be that hard to get a Chris Volstad for him at the deadline?

 

if volstad's improving peripherals last year were a sign of him becoming a better pitcher, or if zambrano bashes a teammate in the head with a fungo bat, then yes it probably would be hard to get a chris volstad for him at the deadline.

[toonsterwu]

Yeah, I don't think Z was our 2nd best either. Dempster/Garza were clearly ahead for me. You could make a case for 3rd best.

 

I'm pleased with the deal. I didn't really anticipate anything better in the off-season. This was always going to be more of a salary dump for us, and the fact that we got back an intriguing young arm, even if he was at risk for being non-tendered, is better than I expected. I mean, a Z to Volstad move isn't exactly a big drop in ability, relative to what each did last year, and Volstad could cure his HR problems that have turned up to hurt him at times.

[XZero771679666304]

 

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.

 

Would it be that hard to get a Chris Volstad for him at the deadline?

 

If Z crapped the bed in the first half? For two months of him? We'd get nothing.

 

Aside from Z reverting to his 2004-2007 form for 4 months, there's not much chance we'd have gotten any more, either.

[Guest]

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.

 

Would it be that hard to get a Chris Volstad for him at the deadline?

 

It would be if Z lost his mind again or sucked out of the gate. Plus you're probably less likely to get guys to plug into the MLB roster from a contender in July. If they had bet on Z instead of dealing him now I wouldn't have been upset, but I don't understand why one is considered way preferable.

[Little Slide Rooter]

well, i definitely like Volstad a lot more than it sounds like you guys all do

 

I had interest in him when he was a non tender candidate, but not for our 2nd best pitcher+ 15-16 million dollars. Maybe they're just trying to build an entire team out of 4-5 starters, 4th outfielders, and middle relievers.

 

yeah that's probably exactly what theo is doing, he's decided to not do the things that won two world series in boston and instead build a team that will be the worst team in baseball every year.

 

The only time Theo railroaded a high priced player out of town he didn't get a world series out of it but he did get Jason Bay. I'm not criticizing acquiring Chris Volstad as much as railroading Z out of town for nothing, if that is indeed all we get back. If nobody was willing to give up anything of value for him they should have given him until the summer to build his value.

[Guest]

At least Volstad gets his rematch with Nyger Morgan.

[toonsterwu]

Sneaky nailed it when he posted about failed former top prospects being the new market inefficiency. Theo done picked himself up two of em already (possibly three; not sure how well-regarded T Wood ever was).

 

Travis Wood was relatively well-regarded for a couple years as a prospect. I don't think he falls in that Stewart/Volstad category yet (and I'd hardly say Volstad's pro career has "failed" up to now) because the latter two have had enough time to try and show something.

[Guest]

Yeah, I don't think Z was our 2nd best either. Dempster/Garza were clearly ahead for me. You could make a case for 3rd best.

 

I'm pleased with the deal. I didn't really anticipate anything better in the off-season. This was always going to be more of a salary dump for us, and the fact that we got back an intriguing young arm, even if he was at risk for being non-tendered, is better than I expected. I mean, a Z to Volstad move isn't exactly a big drop in ability, relative to what each did last year, and Volstad could cure his HR problems that have turned up to hurt him at times.

 

I think Wood is a better pitcher than him now, too.

 

There I go overlooking Z's impact at the plate again, though.

[Sammys Boombox]

Not that it's a telling statistic or anything, but the Cubs were 0-5 in the postseason when Zambrano started including a horrendous outing in Game 1 of the NLCS.

[Guest]

well, i definitely like Volstad a lot more than it sounds like you guys all do

 

I had interest in him when he was a non tender candidate, but not for our 2nd best pitcher+ 15-16 million dollars. Maybe they're just trying to build an entire team out of 4-5 starters, 4th outfielders, and middle relievers.

 

yeah that's probably exactly what theo is doing, he's decided to not do the things that won two world series in boston and instead build a team that will be the worst team in baseball every year.

 

The only time Theo railroaded a high priced player out of town he didn't get a world series out of it but he did get Jason Bay. I'm not criticizing acquiring Chris Volstad as much as railroading Z out of town for nothing, if that is indeed all we get back. If nobody was willing to give up anything of value for him they should have given him until the summer to build his value.

 

Manny Ramirez was a hell of a lot better then than Z is.

[Tryptamine]

Volstad was a DFA rumor just a month or so ago was he not? I just don't see peripherals that scream upside.

[PrimeTime]

Soriano next? How much left on his about, 54 mil? We'll probably be paying 53 mil of that if we unload him too.

[Little Slide Rooter]

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.

 

Would it be that hard to get a Chris Volstad for him at the deadline?

 

It would be if Z lost his mind again or sucked out of the gate. Plus you're probably less likely to get guys to plug into the MLB roster from a contender in July. If they had bet on Z instead of dealing him now I wouldn't have been upset, but I don't understand why one is considered way preferable.

 

Wouldn't you think that it would be worth the gamble that Z can have a good first half and get a better return? It's not like if he sucked and nobody wanted him in July anyone would be thinking dammit, we could have had Volstad.

[toonsterwu]

Unless Z was pitching like a stud, Z in the summer might not have netted that much. Contract remaining would've been costly for a couple months, and the fact that a team would've only had him for two months wouldn't help.

 

If he was pitching like a stud, perhaps, but that would've been a risky proposition. If he was pitching at an elite level, then the risk of his option activating becomes a mildly stronger threat. All in all, peace of mind, no real loss in production relative to last year's performance and their "stuff", save a bit of money, and hey, we get a 2nd lefty in the rotation (assuming we keep both).

 

I mean, keeping a Randy Wells for that type of scenario makes sense, since he won't be that costly and potentially had a reason as to why he struggled last year. Z? I like this deal.

[Guest]

well, i definitely like Volstad a lot more than it sounds like you guys all do

 

Really weird to think that he's 2 weeks younger than Cashner.

 

Volstad's HR rate is one thing that's downright bizarre to me. He's a pretty good ground ball guy who didn't give up many HRs in MiLB and played half his games in Pro Player, but he's had some crazy high and crazy low HR rates in his short MLB career. I don't know what to make of it.

 

i'd guess underwhelming stuff plus not good enough command - when he misses high it's probably pretty easy to bash.

 

I'd say that's pretty much spot on.

[Outshined_One]

well, i definitely like Volstad a lot more than it sounds like you guys all do

 

Really weird to think that he's 2 weeks younger than Cashner.

 

Volstad's HR rate is one thing that's downright bizarre to me. He's a pretty good ground ball guy who didn't give up many HRs in MiLB and played half his games in Pro Player, but he's had some crazy high and crazy low HR rates in his short MLB career. I don't know what to make of it.

 

pitch selection?

 

His performance collapses when pitching out of the stretch, for whatever reason. I'd be curious to see how many of his HRs were given up with men on base and how that stacks up across baseball.

[TruffleShuffle]

The only time Theo railroaded a high priced player out of town he didn't get a world series out of it but he did get Jason Bay. I'm not criticizing acquiring Chris Volstad as much as railroading Z out of town for nothing, if that is indeed all we get back. If nobody was willing to give up anything of value for him they should have given him until the summer to build his value.

 

Manny Ramirez was a hell of a lot better then than Z is.

 

and the red sox gave up two prospects in the deal, and paid ramirez' entire salary the rest of that year. great comparison WSR.

[ctcf]

Perfectly fine with this, and I say this as someone who was a huge Z fan during most of his Cubs tenure. Awful clubhouse influence and declining talent.

 

While you can say that the Cubs should have waited until midseason, Z could very easily have sucked through the first half and destroyed all value. Instead of a crazy person, the Cubs get an extra 3 mil and a bounce-back candidate. Sounds good to me.

[XZero771679666304]

Unless Z was pitching like a stud, Z in the summer might not have netted that much. Contract remaining would've been costly for a couple months, and the fact that a team would've only had him for two months wouldn't help.

 

If he was pitching like a stud, perhaps, but that would've been a risky proposition. If he was pitching at an elite level, then the risk of his option activating becomes a mildly stronger threat. All in all, peace of mind, no real loss in production relative to last year's performance and their "stuff", save a bit of money, and hey, we get a 2nd lefty in the rotation (assuming we keep both).

 

I mean, keeping a Randy Wells for that type of scenario makes sense, since he won't be that costly and potentially had a reason as to why he struggled last year. Z? I like this deal.

 

Yeah, this is pretty much how I feel about it. Anything gained by a realistically decent performance in the first half would be negated by the fact a partner would only get two months of him. And if he didn't perform, you get nothing.

 

I'm absolutely fine with this. If we get a prospect or two, I'll be pleased.

[treebird]

the main argument from people who like this trade is basically "why take the chance of getting nothing next july when we can get nothing right now?"

[Guest]

I'll be pretty pleased if they got Dominguez included in the deal. He's still super young and has the potential to add power.

 

If not, I'd still rather watch a bunch of youngsters busting their ass to generate a major league career than a bunch of guys at the tail end of theirs.

[erik316wttn]

Although I must say I will miss the 2-3 Zambrano pinch-hitting appearances per year. Those were always fun.

[XZero771679666304]

Perfectly fine with this, and I say this as someone who was a huge Z fan during most of his Cubs tenure. Awful clubhouse influence and declining talent.

 

While you can say that the Cubs should have waited until midseason, Z could very easily have sucked through the first half and destroyed all value. Instead of a crazy person, the Cubs get an extra 3 mil and a bounce-back candidate. Sounds good to me.

 

I love Big Z and am sad to see him go. But you have to make a deal like this, imo.