Re: What would you deal Garza for?

[davell]

Tank for Rodon!

 

Yes. But, in all honesty, I think Houston's already put a plan into motion that allows them to do that much better than what we can even attempt.

[El Duderino]

Tank for Rodon!

 

Yes. But, in all honesty, I think Houston's already put a plan into motion that allows them to do that much better than what we can even attempt.

 

Lots of time left until next season.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Begs the question how low on the Limbo stick the payroll will go, but I kind of expect it to be sitting around 80 mill or so next year, with probably a 70ish win team being talked about, going into April.

 

I'd be pretty surprised if Brett Jackson and Ian Stewart are still in the organization next spring. Traded for arms seems most likely.

 

The payroll is going to be that low. Too many cost-controlled players to really see how it isn't.

[davell]

Of course DeJesus is going to be here.

 

If we see a team lose an OFer between now and Septamber and get offered close to what the Dodgers got for Victorino, I think he's gone. Quick.

[davell]

Tank for Rodon!

 

Yes. But, in all honesty, I think Houston's already put a plan into motion that allows them to do that much better than what we can even attempt.

 

Lots of time left until next season.

 

Short of trading Rizzo, Castro, and Shark, I can't see us getting as bad as them.

[dew1679666265]

Considereing that going into next year, the only positions we're likely to have filled with hat we even halfway know what to expect are 1B, 2B, SS, RF(assuming DeJesus is even still here), and 2 SP, I think it's fairly safe to say we're not gutting the system to add a whole bunch, unless some guys basically 26ish or younger come available that make sense. With what's available on the FA market, I expect us to go into next year with Castillo at C, Vitters at 3B(unless they find a way to trade him for a young guy that's already in the majors) Brett in CF, with us signing a LF(last month I still had LaHair hope, I was proven to be a dumbass) and 2-3 averagish SP, along with some bullpen moves. Only big monetary moves I could see are things we don't know of yet, like another younger, but older than 23(since new IFA rules) comes over, or another Pac Rim import that's young.

 

Begs the question how low on the Limbo stick the payroll will go, but I kind of expect it to be sitting around 80 mill or so next year, with probably a 70ish win team being talked about, going into April.

 

I'm not even advocating gutting the farm system or spending like crazy in the offseason - I think either would be a bad idea. But making a concerted effort to improve both the major league roster and the minor league system would be ideal. Spend some money at the ML level (BJ Upton would be ideal, also maybe Anibal Sanchez) and make use of the large budget and high picks in the draft and IFA - basically the "parallel fronts" idea that Hoyer talked about when he and Theo took the jobs.

 

Make the entire system better for 2013 and maybe contend if a few things go right. It doesn't have to be video game rebuild or gut the system and spend like mad. There is middle ground and that's where I think we should have been from day 1.

[El Duderino]

Tank for Rodon!

 

Yes. But, in all honesty, I think Houston's already put a plan into motion that allows them to do that much better than what we can even attempt.

 

Lots of time left until next season.

 

Short of trading Rizzo, Castro, and Shark, I can't see us getting as bad as them.

 

Don't crush my dreams, man. I am friggin' desperate for an elite starting pitching prospect. Hell, even a very good starting pitching prospect.

[dew1679666265]

Of course DeJesus is going to be here.

 

If we see a team lose an OFer between now and Septamber and get offered close to what the Dodgers got for Victorino, I think he's gone. Quick.

 

You think he'd clear waivers up to a contender? He could, but a shrewd GM might see him as an opportunity for cheap production (basically the same reason Theo signed him in the offseason).

[Sammy Sofa]

Of course DeJesus is going to be here.

 

If we see a team lose an OFer between now and Septamber and get offered close to what the Dodgers got for Victorino, I think he's gone. Quick.

 

I think you're overstating the comparable value of Victorino and DeJesus.

[davell]

Of course DeJesus is going to be here.

 

If we see a team lose an OFer between now and Septamber and get offered close to what the Dodgers got for Victorino, I think he's gone. Quick.

 

I think you're overstating the comparable value of Victorino and DeJesus.

 

It's kind of why I said close, but I do think the reasonable extra year helps make it closer, along with Victorino's struggles AND the act of desperation if a bad injury hits and they're not a team with a lot of cash to spend. Obviously, not a likely scenario, but I don't think it's set in stone he's back next year.

[davell]

Of course DeJesus is going to be here.

 

If we see a team lose an OFer between now and Septamber and get offered close to what the Dodgers got for Victorino, I think he's gone. Quick.

 

You think he'd clear waivers up to a contender? He could, but a shrewd GM might see him as an opportunity for cheap production (basically the same reason Theo signed him in the offseason).

 

Honestly, I don't think he's good enough to warrant a team making a claim on. Most teams probably figure they can address their OF situation over the offseason, if they don't have a big issue that just popped up. Does placing a claim on someone cost money to do? It makes sense to me, just to keep some raging [expletive] from seeing the list everyday, erasing the few guys that make absolutely no sense to claim, and then claiming everyone else.

[toonsterwu]

Begs the question how low on the Limbo stick the payroll will go, but I kind of expect it to be sitting around 80 mill or so next year, with probably a 70ish win team being talked about, going into April.

 

I'd be pretty surprised if Brett Jackson and Ian Stewart are still in the organization next spring. Traded for arms seems most likely.

 

The payroll is going to be that low. Too many cost-controlled players to really see how it isn't.

 

I'm going to be fairly surprised if Brett Jackson is moved this off-season. It's almost over-looked how he's really improved defensively. You don't give away potential solid CF's with his power unless you get a quality arm that's ready, and it's hard to imagine anyone is forking over a quality arm that's ready for Brett.

 

I think a more likely scenario was what TT posted a few days back, that the organization deals Vitters to address needs. In all likelihood, I expect them to keep both Vitters and Brett Jackson, and sign veteran arms in FA's on short term deals, akin to the Maholm move, to fill any holes, provided they don't make a big splash in FA or pick up ready arms in a Garza trade.

[toonsterwu]

Tank for Rodon!

 

Yes. But, in all honesty, I think Houston's already put a plan into motion that allows them to do that much better than what we can even attempt.

 

Lots of time left until next season.

 

Short of trading Rizzo, Castro, and Shark, I can't see us getting as bad as them.

 

But ... let's take a step back for a moment. This could be a horrible rotation next year. In an ideal situation, Samardzija is more of a 2/3 type, but he could be the top arm. He's better than Norris, but not by that much. Travis Wood, based on this year being very similar to 2 years ago, should really be an end of the rotation arm, and yet, it's not hard to imagine him being one of the better arms in the rotation. Jon Singleton is their Anthony Rizzo, and maybe he produces when he gets to the big.

 

I'm not saying it'll definitely be horrible, but it's not hard to envision a really horrendously bad season if they decide to go for more stopgap types in FA.

[Guest]

it's destiny

 

http://www.cubsshowcase.com/images/crodon21.jpg

[dew1679666265]

Honestly, I don't think he's good enough to warrant a team making a claim on. Most teams probably figure they can address their OF situation over the offseason, if they don't have a big issue that just popped up. Does placing a claim on someone cost money to do? It makes sense to me, just to keep some raging [expletive] from seeing the list everyday, erasing the few guys that make absolutely no sense to claim, and then claiming everyone else.

 

Is a team going to find a steady, quality OF at DeJesus' pricetag though? He's signed for next year at about the optimal level for a small market team that needs a solid addition to the OF and it wouldn't shock me if a team decided to claim DeJesus rather than wait around for the offseson and take a chance that they won't find as good a value.

[toonsterwu]

Considereing that going into next year, the only positions we're likely to have filled with hat we even halfway know what to expect are 1B, 2B, SS, RF(assuming DeJesus is even still here), and 2 SP, I think it's fairly safe to say we're not gutting the system to add a whole bunch, unless some guys basically 26ish or younger come available that make sense. With what's available on the FA market, I expect us to go into next year with Castillo at C, Vitters at 3B(unless they find a way to trade him for a young guy that's already in the majors) Brett in CF, with us signing a LF(last month I still had LaHair hope, I was proven to be a dumbass) and 2-3 averagish SP, along with some bullpen moves. Only big monetary moves I could see are things we don't know of yet, like another younger, but older than 23(since new IFA rules) comes over, or another Pac Rim import that's young.

 

Begs the question how low on the Limbo stick the payroll will go, but I kind of expect it to be sitting around 80 mill or so next year, with probably a 70ish win team being talked about, going into April.

 

I'm not even advocating gutting the farm system or spending like crazy in the offseason - I think either would be a bad idea. But making a concerted effort to improve both the major league roster and the minor league system would be ideal. Spend some money at the ML level (BJ Upton would be ideal, also maybe Anibal Sanchez) and make use of the large budget and high picks in the draft and IFA - basically the "parallel fronts" idea that Hoyer talked about when he and Theo took the jobs.

 

Make the entire system better for 2013 and maybe contend if a few things go right. It doesn't have to be video game rebuild or gut the system and spend like mad. There is middle ground and that's where I think we should have been from day 1.

 

Couple quick points -

 

a) It's going to be hard to gut the farm system anyways in that, the top raw talents are all far away, and there's only a handful of guys in the upper levels with decent-solid value. I don't see them trading for "nice" pieces if they can sign stopgap FA's instead, so if they make any moves, I think it'd be for a major piece, and I just don't see our chances at landing said piece as that high, due to the lack of upper level chips, unless Baez is forked over.

 

b) I'm fine with this year, and in general, I'm fine with the idea of another bad season, much as it would suck. I do believe that if you rebuild, you should do it the right way, and I don't believe that guys like Anibal Sanchez/BJ Upton make much sense IF they aren't planning on augmenting things further (not hard to see Brett Jackson do a reasonable facsimile of what BJ Upton can do ... perhaps that's more a testament to BJ Upton than Brett, and while I'm a fan of Anibal, if they aren't intending to push, adding him for multiple years might not make a ton of sense, considering there's already some whispers about him).

 

Anyhow, that isn't the point. I do wonder what the reaction would be, from the fanbase, if they are clearly not making an effort to compete next year, outside of amassing short term assets. I think people were fine with it this year because of the state of the team, but I wonder if they will get backlash from the fanbase if they don't make some sort of tangible effort that fans can see. I also wonder if Ricketts would be that happy about a 2nd full rebuild year.

[dew1679666265]

a) It's going to be hard to gut the farm system anyways in that, the top raw talents are all far away, and there's only a handful of guys in the upper levels with decent-solid value. I don't see them trading for "nice" pieces if they can sign stopgap FA's instead, so if they make any moves, I think it'd be for a major piece, and I just don't see our chances at landing said piece as that high, due to the lack of upper level chips, unless Baez is forked over.

 

That's a good point.

 

b) I'm fine with this year, and in general, I'm fine with the idea of another bad season, much as it would suck. I do believe that if you rebuild, you should do it the right way, and I don't believe that guys like Anibal Sanchez/BJ Upton make much sense IF they aren't planning on augmenting things further (not hard to see Brett Jackson do a reasonable facsimile of what BJ Upton can do ... perhaps that's more a testament to BJ Upton than Brett, and while I'm a fan of Anibal, if they aren't intending to push, adding him for multiple years might not make a ton of sense, considering there's already some whispers about him).

 

I guess I feel like a major market team like the Cubs should always be making some kind of a "push." Again, I'm not saying go all out to win in 2013, but Upton and Anibal would be signed for multiple years, so you don't have to throw all your chips in for 2013. You can add the two of them (primarily Upton's the guy I really want, I'd be ok with keeping Garza and grabbing guys like Liriano and/or Edwin Jackson) to make your team better and still not expect to be truly competing until 2014.

 

This seems like a new idea to me that you only sign players of significance in FA if you plan to make a WS run the next year and I really don't agree with it. Signing a guy to a 4-5 year deal is a long term idea and that player can fit into a long term plan. It's about filling holes as they come open and both Upton and Anibal are young enough to help make us more respectable in 2013 and make us better for the next few years to come.

 

Anyhow, that isn't the point. I do wonder what the reaction would be, from the fanbase, if they are clearly not making an effort to compete next year, outside of amassing short term assets. I think people were fine with it this year because of the state of the team, but I wonder if they will get backlash from the fanbase if they don't make some sort of tangible effort that fans can see. I also wonder if Ricketts would be that happy about a 2nd full rebuild year.

 

I think people will start to get antsy possibly as soon as this offseason. The idea of a long term rebuilding process is fun in theory, but it becomes hard for a fanbase to stomach when it's blatantly obvious that the organization is capable of putting a much better product on the field without hampering the future.

 

I think it helps, though, that Theo and Jed are so smart and are catering to the whims of the masses. Casual fans and media members love phrases like "doing things the right way" and the Theo regime is making full use of phrases like that. I think what they're saying will help buy them more time as the masses eat up the Theo-speak.

Edited August 1, 2012 by dew

[davell]

Considereing that going into next year, the only positions we're likely to have filled with hat we even halfway know what to expect are 1B, 2B, SS, RF(assuming DeJesus is even still here), and 2 SP, I think it's fairly safe to say we're not gutting the system to add a whole bunch, unless some guys basically 26ish or younger come available that make sense. With what's available on the FA market, I expect us to go into next year with Castillo at C, Vitters at 3B(unless they find a way to trade him for a young guy that's already in the majors) Brett in CF, with us signing a LF(last month I still had LaHair hope, I was proven to be a dumbass) and 2-3 averagish SP, along with some bullpen moves. Only big monetary moves I could see are things we don't know of yet, like another younger, but older than 23(since new IFA rules) comes over, or another Pac Rim import that's young.

 

Begs the question how low on the Limbo stick the payroll will go, but I kind of expect it to be sitting around 80 mill or so next year, with probably a 70ish win team being talked about, going into April.

 

I'm not even advocating gutting the farm system or spending like crazy in the offseason - I think either would be a bad idea. But making a concerted effort to improve both the major league roster and the minor league system would be ideal. Spend some money at the ML level (BJ Upton would be ideal, also maybe Anibal Sanchez) and make use of the large budget and high picks in the draft and IFA - basically the "parallel fronts" idea that Hoyer talked about when he and Theo took the jobs.

 

Make the entire system better for 2013 and maybe contend if a few things go right. It doesn't have to be video game rebuild or gut the system and spend like mad. There is middle ground and that's where I think we should have been from day 1.

 

 

For what Theo looks to be doing, there's a lot to take into account here. Money, not even being one of them, as we certainly could afford to extend Garza and sign Upton and Sanchez. But, lets look at the big picture.

 

Adding those 2 and filling out your roster does what? Does it put you in the playoffs? I doubt it. May get you to 80 wins or so. Sanchez may be the best pitcher actually on the market too, from a FA standpoint, so is he going to be worth the 5/90ish deal it may take to get him. Is Garza, for that matter? Is Upton worth trading for, after Tampa hits him with the qualifier? Or worth losing your 2nd rounder for?

 

It's a flexibility issue. Locking in two solid starters is fine, but we're likely wasting a year that we won't be a playoff team at the beginning of those contracts. And them at their best performance-wise. I'm not doing this with a first-hand knowledge of what our payroll capabilities going forward are, but let's say it's in the 140ish neighborhood, I think that's fair. Those 3 guys are going to be 18, 18, and 12. in this exercise. What else are you looking at doing over THIS offseason, becomes the next question? You're definitely going to add to the pen, for one. Let's say that's 8 mill more, even if it's short term deals to 2 guys.

 

My problem with this scenario is it's going to put a decent, not special, team on the field, and not allow you to ever be special, because you're going to run out of money fairly quickly by doing it this way. In this case, you're adding 56 mill to a team that's prtobably sitting at 60 heading into the offseason, counting arb raises to everyone we expect to be back.

 

So, you're at 115ish basically, with raises coming each year to Castro, and Shark, with Rizzo and Barney not long after that. Yes, some of that will be offset by SDoriano and Marmol falling off. But, using 140ish as a top end(which I think is fair), making those 3 moves, doesn't allow you to add more than one bigtime contract going forward from there and the system isn't going to be solid enough to be able to trade for cheap, bigtime talent without gutting it either. Why is this?

 

Because you signed those guys and it's cost you at least 10 spots in draft positioning and probably 2 mill in IFA money. Which to quite a few guys here, doesn't mean jack [expletive], but it's a big deal. It's the possible difference off adding another couple of bigtime impact talents to the system versus not having them. Plus, the return of Garza could produce a guy that gives you his actual production, just in a much cheaper model and allows you to spend money in different spots as well moving forward.

 

Going out and signing a couple of non-elite, but solid FA are exactly what Hendry did. We need elite. Not good. And spending to get average and handcuffing ourselves more in the process from ever being elite, is NOT the way to go here. Video game rebuild/ Yep, it's what they're doing, in a way. But, it's also the smartest way possible to have a very long sustained run too. The parallel fronts thing just means we'll continue to sign the Maholms and DeJesuses of the world and hope to catch lightning in a bottle until we've got enough longterm pieces set up to where adding a couple of bigtime FA makes sense. It's not now though, it honestly does cost us in the long run.

[davell]

I think the lowered payroll has already take into account the loss of some revenue, due to fan apathy. No way that wasn't talked about prior to the plan getting started. And if the Cubs are good, the fans will come back. It's only going to get so bad from that standpoint, and Ricketts knows that. I think there's a good chance the saved money is renovation money too. And then a renegotiated CSN deal after 2014, helps out with all this as well. Just in time for a spending spree and right in line with when our younger guys are producing. I think the fans will be fine with one more year like this one, as long as they see progress, which they should, out of the youngsters. We'll add in 2014 and probably 2015 as well.

[neely crenshaw]

I'm sure they have an eye on this coming market, and for sure next year.

We are thinking as fans and want to be as good as possible right away. Some seem to feel we should grab free agents in order to win 75-80 games instead 65-70. Doesn't matter if that delays the team from getting to the final destiny of competitive every season, they want to pay to get players out there.

It's frustrating but we have to keep faith in the front office and understand they are working on the "business" of baseball not just trying to throw together a team. Hendry proved that if you throw enough money at it you can put a good team together BUT not a good organization.

As much as I hate it, look at the cardinals. They lose guys each year, then bring up another and they can play too.

We can spend and contend right away but then we hurt ourselves long term. The more we develop, the less we have to buy or trade for. The more we develop, the longer we have control of them.

 

If you look at the types of players we have lost (or will lose), If you want to spend money you can easily replace them. They found guys like Dejesus and Maholm last off season, and they have done very well, but don't confuse that with them being elite or irreplaceable.There was a reason they were available, cheap and choose to go to the Cubs. There will be others.

[dew1679666265]

Adding those 2 and filling out your roster does what? Does it put you in the playoffs? I doubt it. May get you to 80 wins or so. Sanchez may be the best pitcher actually on the market too, from a FA standpoint, so is he going to be worth the 5/90ish deal it may take to get him. Is Garza, for that matter? Is Upton worth trading for, after Tampa hits him with the qualifier? Or worth losing your 2nd rounder for?

 

If Anibal gets 5/90, you don't sign him. I threw him out as an example, not as a necessary target. And if Tampa gives the qualifier to Upton, you probably pass on him as well, though I'd still be tempted to give up a 2nd rounder for him.

 

I'm simply throwing out possibilities right now, not absolute targets. The main point I'm getting at is we can make an effort to improve the major league roster without making crazy moves in an effort to have to win in 2013. It's not an all-or-nothing thing.

 

It's a flexibility issue. Locking in two solid starters is fine, but we're likely wasting a year that we won't be a playoff team at the beginning of those contracts. And them at their best performance-wise. I'm not doing this with a first-hand knowledge of what our payroll capabilities going forward are, but let's say it's in the 140ish neighborhood, I think that's fair. Those 3 guys are going to be 18, 18, and 12. in this exercise. What else are you looking at doing over THIS offseason, becomes the next question? You're definitely going to add to the pen, for one. Let's say that's 8 mill more, even if it's short term deals to 2 guys.

 

I really hope Theo doesn't pay $4 million each to 2 bullpen guys. And like I said before, if contracts get too high, you simply move on to the next target. We can make ourselves fringy playoff contenders by next season without severely hampering ourselves long term. And being fringy playoff contenders next season likely means we're just one player away from serious contention in 2014, instead of tanking our 3rd season in a row that year.

 

My problem with this scenario is it's going to put a decent, not special, team on the field, and not allow you to ever be special, because you're going to run out of money fairly quickly by doing it this way. In this case, you're adding 56 mill to a team that's prtobably sitting at 60 heading into the offseason, counting arb raises to everyone we expect to be back.

 

There's no reason signing Anibal Sanchez and BJ Upton should keep us from ever becoming a special team. We have what you've termed possibly the best positional group of prospects in the majors and one of the highest payrolls in the majors. There's a lot of really good young talent in the low minors working their way up and we have a big budget to use this offseason and a really high pick - couple that with great talent evaluators in the front office and we should be able to build up the farm without tanking numerous seasons. If not, we're probably paying the Theo regime way too much money.

 

So, you're at 115ish basically, with raises coming each year to Castro, and Shark, with Rizzo and Barney not long after that. Yes, some of that will be offset by SDoriano and Marmol falling off. But, using 140ish as a top end(which I think is fair), making those 3 moves, doesn't allow you to add more than one bigtime contract going forward from there and the system isn't going to be solid enough to be able to trade for cheap, bigtime talent without gutting it either. Why is this?

 

Should we be adding more than one bigtime contract going forward? I think we could field a very good, even special, team with one bigtime contract, a 2-3 guys like Garza/Upton/Anibal, and the rest largely guys we've developed from the system. Especially since we're starting from the baseline of having Castro and Rizzo on the team and producing at very high levels.

 

Because you signed those guys and it's cost you at least 10 spots in draft positioning and probably 2 mill in IFA money. Which to quite a few guys here, doesn't mean jack [expletive], but it's a big deal. It's the possible difference off adding another couple of bigtime impact talents to the system versus not having them. Plus, the return of Garza could produce a guy that gives you his actual production, just in a much cheaper model and allows you to spend money in different spots as well moving forward.

 

Again, if the return for trading Garza is really good, go ahead. If we can get a couple near major league ready arms with TOR upside for him, fine. But if we're determined to trade him no matter what, there's a good chance we don't get top value for him. So if we settle for an upside arm low in the minors and some other pieces, what if those guys don't pan out? Then we don't have a Garza producing at a high level for us and we have to use the money we could have spent on him to overpay somebody in FA. Or just tank another season.

 

Going out and signing a couple of non-elite, but solid FA are exactly what Hendry did. We need elite. Not good. And spending to get average and handcuffing ourselves more in the process from ever being elite, is NOT the way to go here. Video game rebuild/ Yep, it's what they're doing, in a way. But, it's also the smartest way possible to have a very long sustained run too. The parallel fronts thing just means we'll continue to sign the Maholms and DeJesuses of the world and hope to catch lightning in a bottle until we've got enough longterm pieces set up to where adding a couple of bigtime FA makes sense. It's not now though, it honestly does cost us in the long run.

 

So because Hendry did it, it's automatically the wrong thing to do? Hendry didn't develop enough players from the minors - that was reason #1 why we underachieved with him and no other reason is particularly close to that. He actually did a really good job finding non-elite guys to supplement the roster well - guys like DeRosa, Lilly, Byrd, Dempster, etc. His problem was lacking the elite level guys (outside of Lee and Aramis) and not developing guys from the farm. The Theo regime is really, really good at developing talent from the farm and we have elite level guys currently on the roster (Castro, maybe Rizzo) and in the minors (Soler, Baez, Almora) with a top 1-3 pick coming up in the draft.

 

Signing a couple of solid FAs shouldn't hamper us from becoming special, it should make it more likely if we develop the talent on the farm better than Hendry did.

[davell]

I just think FA class this year is so weak, it's going to be impossible to add the types you're wanting to, without dpending like I'm mentioning. I do think that if Garza comes back strong, a Hutchison and Nicolino type package is solid enough value to make the move. The key for me is the part you didn't address though: The draft positioning and IFA money. That alone is possibly costing you a couple of impact talents that could come in very handy in multiple ways. My guess is they want as much of that type of inventory as humanly possible, so they'll have the flexibility to make the trades needed to push this team forward, instead of relying on overpaying FA, at least as much as they possibly can.

[toonsterwu]

I understand the idea of setting expectations lower on Garza now, since he's being dealt in the offseason. But ... as one of the better arms likely to be moved, I really hope we get a bit more upside than Hutchison or Nicolino, even if that means gambling on some high upside low level kid that's 3-4 years away. That'd be a very disappointing package.

 

I'm not saying the talent should be better, but I'd rather gamble on a different type of arm than Nicolino, if at all possible, to get some upside in that package. Hutchison looks like a good number 3, solid end of the rotation type. Nicolino's more a back end of the rotation type guy.

 

______

 

To piggyback off davell for a moment, sorta ...

 

The weak FA market means if they want to make multiple key moves to get some non-short term assets for the clubs (that is, guys you think could be core pieces in , some of it would have to come through the trade market. Leaving the pen aside for a moment, I'm not sure we have the ability to really address our needs through the trade market. I doubt we could land a TOR type arm in the trade market, as I don't see them giving up a prime piece like Baez. 3rd base? If Vitters isn't the answer, our chances of landing a significant upgrade, say, a Headley type, seem debatable. Headley's price may come down a bit (and I am a fan of Headley), but it was exorbitant this deadline, so it's hard to imagine it coming down dramatically. It's just hard to imagine giving up a prime piece. I can't think of who else that might be available at 3rd, tbh.

 

Two side notes:

 

a) I'm not all that keen on BJ Upton because of Brett Jackson. This isn't a pro-Brett comment, but more a negative opinion on BJ.

 

b) dew, the issue isn't "waiting until we are WS capable to add pieces". At least, it's not for me. This isn't coming out as clear as I want it to, but it's the best I can do for now in the limited time. Clearly, you can't wait until then to build a core. The question is, are the pieces to add guys that can be key pieces of a core without their contracts being a concern when you can compete. You don't want to add a guy this year, on say, a 5 year deal, when the chances to compete for the playoffs in 2013 are slim, unless said player can be a meaningful part of a core in say, 2015. You don't want to take away the flexibility down the line, when that flexibility could be significant. I would have significant worries about guys like Upton/Sanchez (Upton moreso than Sanchez). If you could get them on shorter deals, then by all means, let's do it if we can and Ricketts allows.

[dew1679666265]

I just think FA class this year is so weak, it's going to be impossible to add the types you're wanting to, without dpending like I'm mentioning. I do think that if Garza comes back strong, a Hutchison and Nicolino type package is solid enough value to make the move.

 

I really like the minor league numbers from both of those guys. What kind of upside do they have? If they're TOR, #1-2 type guys, I'd be really intrigued by that trade. I like Syndergaard too, so he could be swapped in for Nicolino as well. Ideally we get somebody closer than Nicolino/Syndergaard, but if their upside is enough (and Syndergaard's seems to be) then I'd be ok with either.

 

Out of curiosity though, you referred to Garza as a #3 type pitcher - a mid-rotation guy. If that's true (which I disagree with), why do you think a smart GM like AA would give up highly rated prospects for him? I guess I just figure that since you seem so down on Garza, it's strange that you think we could get an elite type package for him (which is the only way I'm trading him).

 

The key for me is the part you didn't address though: The draft positioning and IFA money. That alone is possibly costing you a couple of impact talents that could come in very handy in multiple ways. My guess is they want as much of that type of inventory as humanly possible, so they'll have the flexibility to make the trades needed to push this team forward, instead of relying on overpaying FA, at least as much as they possibly can.

 

By the end of next year's draft, we'll have had 3 straight very high draft picks and large draft/IFA budgets (that includes the last year before the new CBA kicked in). So far, we've added a lot of upside to the low minors in guys like Baez, Almora, Soler, Vogelbach, Maples, Johnson, etc. We've also gotten some moderate to high upside guys through trade in Vizcaino, Torreyes, and Villanueva. Sure we could use more, but we could always use more. There has to come a point where it becomes more important to win major league games than it is to purely get high picks. With 3 straight very good drafts and likely another deadline to trade off expiring contracts, we should have restocked the farm enough that we don't have to continue tanking at the major league level for the express purpose of getting high draft picks. Especially since our FO's primary strength is in evaluating and developing young talent.

[Vanilla Ice]

In all honesty, I don't really think the 2013 Cubs are any worse than they were last week, unless Vizcaino's rehab is months different than what I'm expecting as the normal TJS recovery.

 

Which is why I said earlier that the really it's more about the intention to trade Soriano and Garza. If/when those two are traded, I think that'll signal the end of 2013's hope.

Wait, I thought Dave Sappelt could replace Soriano's production.