Sean Marshall traded: T Wood +prospects Sappelt &Torreys p21

[KaiserCesar]

My problem is that it absolutely isn't necessary, and it's pretty much a cop-out.

 

The only way I see it being necessary is if the Ricketts value the renovations and more peripheral improvements right now more than putting a good product on the field. If they're pouring enough money into all of that, it may sap enough of the available funds that they can't put a $130 million payroll on the field in the short term. If that's the case, I'll begrudgingly be ok with it because I do have faith in Ricketts/Theo, but if that's not the case then there's absolutely no reason why we should be in complete rebuild mode.

 

I can't really see them evaluating large capital expenditures on a cash-flow basis and letting it impact the payroll. While the draft and international signings probably dip into what's available at the major league level, I don't think we can put a Wrigley renovation in the same boat.

[dew1679666265]

I can't really see them evaluating large capital expenditures on a cash-flow basis and letting it impact the payroll. While the draft and international signings probably dip into what's available at the major league level, I don't think we can put a Wrigley renovation in the same boat.

 

This is why I'm skeptical about the explanation I just gave. It seems like an odd way to do business and it seems like there would be a better way to go through the renovation process without completely dismantling the major league (and minor league to an extent) roster. I've never been involved with this kind of large captial project, though, so I don't for sure.

 

It's also possible that the new SABR movement is to put all the emphasis on defense and completely disregard offense - like they've done in Seattle under Jack Z. That doesn't explain Theo falling for soft tossers like Maholm and Wood, though.

[ScrubMD]

My buddy (pro scout for rangers) thinks one of the prospects could be Daniel Corcino.

 

Much more promising than some of the other prospects listed. Works in the low 90's and tops out at 97mph. Seems to have started to figure things out.

 

The other two Coddington and Ward make absolutely no sense.

 

The other name he gave me was Yorman Rodriguez

 

Corcino and Rodriguez. Yes please.

You're kidding right? I think you guys need to come way down off your prospects expectations. I wouldn't trade Wood for Marshall straight up as it is, so if it's anything but low level filler guys I'll be surprised. Coddington/Webb makes much more sense.

 

Well I wouldn't have traded Marshall without getting Votto in return, so you better prepare yourself.

[Guest]

I can't really see them evaluating large capital expenditures on a cash-flow basis and letting it impact the payroll. While the draft and international signings probably dip into what's available at the major league level, I don't think we can put a Wrigley renovation in the same boat.

 

This is why I'm skeptical about the explanation I just gave. It seems like an odd way to do business and it seems like there would be a better way to go through the renovation process without completely dismantling the major league (and minor league to an extent) roster. I've never been involved with this kind of large captial project, though, so I don't for sure.

 

It's also possible that the new SABR movement is to put all the emphasis on defense and completely disregard offense - like they've done in Seattle under Jack Z. That doesn't explain Theo falling for soft tossers like Maholm and Wood, though.

 

This is pretty much exactly what I was about to respond and I'm glad I hit refresh.

 

 

BTW, if Wood hits 94 and works in the low 90s (which is just going off of what I've read - I haven't looked at any data to support this, so it could be way off) would that make him a soft tosser, especially as a lefty?

[jersey cubs fan]

I can't really see them evaluating large capital expenditures on a cash-flow basis and letting it impact the payroll. While the draft and international signings probably dip into what's available at the major league level, I don't think we can put a Wrigley renovation in the same boat.

 

This is why I'm skeptical about the explanation I just gave. It seems like an odd way to do business and it seems like there would be a better way to go through the renovation process without completely dismantling the major league (and minor league to an extent) roster. I've never been involved with this kind of large captial project, though, so I don't for sure.

 

It's also possible that the new SABR movement is to put all the emphasis on defense and completely disregard offense - like they've done in Seattle under Jack Z. That doesn't explain Theo falling for soft tossers like Maholm and Wood, though.

 

It kind of explains it. If you don't have defense you need guys who strike out the opposition, but if you do have defense then letting 'em put it in play isn't a bad idea.

[JonJayCutler]

It's getting to the point where someone needs to change the thread title to "Travis Wood + 2 PTBNLs"

 

My god.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Or they don't believe in a guy with mediocre stuff to continue being useful going forward and a 200 inning sample size isn't enough to disprove their concerns. Kind of like you with Wells, except instead of just starting Wood, we're giving up a good trade chip for him (and prospects).

 

I'm not sure where you are getting "mediocre stuff" from.

 

6.99 K/9

90.0 MPH average fastball velocity this year on pitch/fx.

 

5.94 K/9

88.2 MPH average fastball this year

 

 

If Randy Wells struck out one more batter per 9 and added 2 MPH to his fastball, then I'd be a lot less worried about him.

[Guest]

Doesn't help that Wells has lost velocity since he was pretty good, either.

[Guest]

If Randy Wells struck out one more batter per 9 and added 2 MPH to his fastball, then I'd be a lot less worried about him.

 

You mean like he did the year before?

 

 

Anyway, I'm with you on Wood. Were people hoping for a future all-star in return for a year of Marshall? A young guy with pretty good pedigree who has performed at the MLB level is a nice piece. I guess some would've rather had someone with greater potential but (much) less certainty, but I like Wood, and especially like that they aren't simply draining the MLB roster of talent when trading short term assets like Marshall.

[jersey cubs fan]

If Randy Wells struck out one more batter per 9 and added 2 MPH to his fastball, then I'd be a lot less worried about him.

 

You mean like he did the year before?

 

 

Anyway, I'm with you on Wood. Were people hoping for a future all-star in return for a year of Marshall?

 

In more of a package, yes. On his own it's well worth it. I was hoping he'd be packaged into something for greater return though.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If Randy Wells struck out one more batter per 9 and added 2 MPH to his fastball, then I'd be a lot less worried about him.

 

You mean like he did the year before?

 

 

If he can consistently K 6.7/9 like he did in 2010, then yeah, I'm a lot less worried about him. But given that it was bookended by seasons of 5.5 and 5.7, I'm not optimistic.

[davearm2]

My problem is that it absolutely isn't necessary, and it's pretty much a cop-out.

 

The only way I see it being necessary is if the Ricketts value the renovations and more peripheral improvements right now more than putting a good product on the field. If they're pouring enough money into all of that, it may sap enough of the available funds that they can't put a $130 million payroll on the field in the short term. If that's the case, I'll begrudgingly be ok with it because I do have faith in Ricketts/Theo, but if that's not the case then there's absolutely no reason why we should be in complete rebuild mode.

It seems to me that a far more likely (and obvious) reason to enter a rebuild mode is because the talent on the roster is not very good.

[dew1679666265]

This is pretty much exactly what I was about to respond and I'm glad I hit refresh.

 

 

BTW, if Wood hits 94 and works in the low 90s (which is just going off of what I've read - I haven't looked at any data to support this, so it could be way off) would that make him a soft tosser, especially as a lefty?

 

I was primarily going off the K rates for both. However, according to Fangraphs' PitchFx, Wood sits in the upper 80s with his fastball (89.9 career) and down to 73.2 with his curve and 78.3 with his change up. He's also at 83.5 with his slider.

 

For reference, Dave Bush sits at 87.8 with his fastball, 82.2 with his slider, 81.8 with his change, and 69.2 with his curve. Maholm is at 89.0 with his fastball, 74.2 with his curve, 82.6 with his change, and 81.2 with his slider. Wells sits at 89.4 with his fastball, 80.1 with his curve, 82.9 with his change, and 83.7 with his slider.

[pccubfan]

My problem is that it absolutely isn't necessary, and it's pretty much a cop-out.

 

The only way I see it being necessary is if the Ricketts value the renovations and more peripheral improvements right now more than putting a good product on the field. If they're pouring enough money into all of that, it may sap enough of the available funds that they can't put a $130 million payroll on the field in the short term. If that's the case, I'll begrudgingly be ok with it because I do have faith in Ricketts/Theo, but if that's not the case then there's absolutely no reason why we should be in complete rebuild mode.

It seems to me that a far more likely (and obvious) reason to enter a rebuild mode is because the talent on the roster is not very good.

 

So let's not try and improve the major league roster, let's try to improve the low minors.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm honestly not sure where all these Wells/Wood comparisons are coming from.

 

Using career MLB peripherals, Wood is clearly the better pitcher.

 

K/9 BB/9 HR/9

Wells

5.95 2.86 1.01

Wood

6.99 2.85 0.82

 

Meanwhile, Wood is a 24-year-old lefty fly-ball pitcher and Wells is a 29-year-old righty groundball pitcher.

 

Both are coming off superficially poor years, but Wells' was actually worse than it looked according to FIP and was combined with injuries and a concerning drop in velocity. Wood's season, according to FIP, was significantly better than it looked and his velocity was up a tiny tick.

 

I'm not entirely clear on why they are being compared, but Wells definitely comes up short in the comparison.

[RynoRules]

My problem is that it absolutely isn't necessary, and it's pretty much a cop-out.

 

The only way I see it being necessary is if the Ricketts value the renovations and more peripheral improvements right now more than putting a good product on the field. If they're pouring enough money into all of that, it may sap enough of the available funds that they can't put a $130 million payroll on the field in the short term. If that's the case, I'll begrudgingly be ok with it because I do have faith in Ricketts/Theo, but if that's not the case then there's absolutely no reason why we should be in complete rebuild mode.

It seems to me that a far more likely (and obvious) reason to enter a rebuild mode is because the talent on the roster is not very good.

 

So let's not try and improve the major league roster, let's try to improve the low minors.

 

 

That's a good point if the return includes guys who are at least 2-3 years away, but if they are at a Brett Jackson-level in terms of readiness, it will make a lot more sense.

[dew1679666265]

It seems to me that a far more likely (and obvious) reason to enter a rebuild mode is because the talent on the roster is not very good.

 

So you sap even more talent from it and replace that sapped talent with Reed Johnson and Travis Wood? Unless this team is diverting its funds elsewhere, there's no reason we can't do the parallel fronts idea that Theo/Hoyer talked about after getting hired. There's no reason to punt at least 2012 and probably 2013-2014 as well when you're one of the biggest markets in the majors. Big market teams should reload (add talent to the major league roster while reforming the minor league roster as well) not tear completely down and rebuild for 2-3 years.

[Guest]

Anyway, I'm with you on Wood. Were people hoping for a future all-star in return for a year of Marshall?

 

In more of a package, yes. On his own it's well worth it. I was hoping he'd be packaged into something for greater return though.

 

Did you have anyone in mind? Because I think that gets extremely difficult to manage. Taking a package of Garza/Marshall or Marshall/Byrd or Marshall/Wells is going to be done by a team in contention, and giving up star quality assets at or near MLB isn't going to happen. Even more so in a package deal, I'd want MLB ready assets, and I don't see how you'd be able to get higher potential assets than Wood that are also MLB ready from a contender.

[dew1679666265]

If Randy Wells struck out one more batter per 9 and added 2 MPH to his fastball, then I'd be a lot less worried about him.

 

For his career, Wells is at 89.4 fastball velocity, to 89.9 for Wood. Not a huge difference there. The K/9 and age/cost controlled years is what makes Wood better than Wells, but if one's stuff is underwhelming then the other's is as well.

[KaiserCesar]

My problem is that it absolutely isn't necessary, and it's pretty much a cop-out.

 

The only way I see it being necessary is if the Ricketts value the renovations and more peripheral improvements right now more than putting a good product on the field. If they're pouring enough money into all of that, it may sap enough of the available funds that they can't put a $130 million payroll on the field in the short term. If that's the case, I'll begrudgingly be ok with it because I do have faith in Ricketts/Theo, but if that's not the case then there's absolutely no reason why we should be in complete rebuild mode.

It seems to me that a far more likely (and obvious) reason to enter a rebuild mode is because the talent on the roster is not very good.

 

Even if they aren't explicitly in 'rebuild mode' and are just trying to make good moves, the value of wins 73-78 is less than 88-93, so it just won't make sense to pay a premium for an elite player, meaning the Cubs will lose out on free agents. The player getting moved who would most indicate a complete rebuilding would be Geovany Soto since he is the only tradeable talent in his age range and has a couple years left of team control.

[dew1679666265]

Anyway, I'm with you on Wood. Were people hoping for a future all-star in return for a year of Marshall? A young guy with pretty good pedigree who has performed at the MLB level is a nice piece. I guess some would've rather had someone with greater potential but (much) less certainty, but I like Wood, and especially like that they aren't simply draining the MLB roster of talent when trading short term assets like Marshall.

 

If we're doing the full tear down and rebuild mode (which it's pretty clear we are), I would have preferred somebody with more upside than a mediocre back of the rotation starter. Considering we don't appear to be planning to contend seriously for the next couple of years, if that player were further away from the majors I'd be fine with that.

 

That said, the Marshall deal has hinged on the prospects from the start. If there's a high upside guy or two in the prospects and then you add Wood on top of that, I'm feeling pretty good about the deal. If it's Wood and minor league filler, though, I'm pretty underwhelmed.

[jersey cubs fan]

Anyway, I'm with you on Wood. Were people hoping for a future all-star in return for a year of Marshall?

 

In more of a package, yes. On his own it's well worth it. I was hoping he'd be packaged into something for greater return though.

 

Did you have anyone in mind? Because I think that gets extremely difficult to manage. Taking a package of Garza/Marshall or Marshall/Byrd or Marshall/Wells is going to be done by a team in contention, and giving up star quality assets at or near MLB isn't going to happen. Even more so in a package deal, I'd want MLB ready assets, and I don't see how you'd be able to get higher potential assets than Wood that are also MLB ready from a contender.

 

I don't see any point in putting an artificial barrier in there like insisting on MLB ready. They are already, at best, half assing 2012. There's just no point in trying to toe that line if you aren't actually trying to be good today.

[Guest]

If Randy Wells struck out one more batter per 9 and added 2 MPH to his fastball, then I'd be a lot less worried about him.

 

For his career, Wells is at 89.4 fastball velocity, to 89.9 for Wood. Not a huge difference there. The K/9 and age/cost controlled years is what makes Wood better than Wells, but if one's stuff is underwhelming then the other's is as well.

 

Velocity is not the same as stuff, and their repertoire is very different.

[Guest]

Anyway, I'm with you on Wood. Were people hoping for a future all-star in return for a year of Marshall?

 

In more of a package, yes. On his own it's well worth it. I was hoping he'd be packaged into something for greater return though.

 

Did you have anyone in mind? Because I think that gets extremely difficult to manage. Taking a package of Garza/Marshall or Marshall/Byrd or Marshall/Wells is going to be done by a team in contention, and giving up star quality assets at or near MLB isn't going to happen. Even more so in a package deal, I'd want MLB ready assets, and I don't see how you'd be able to get higher potential assets than Wood that are also MLB ready from a contender.

 

I don't see any point in putting an artificial barrier in there like insisting on MLB ready. They are already, at best, half assing 2012. There's just no point in trying to toe that line if you aren't actually trying to be good today.

 

So you would've been okay with taking on Hak-Ju Lee types that might be 4-5 win players, but spent 2011 in the Florida State League? If I'm putting together a package of two of my best tradeable assets, I personally want more performance certainty than that.

[davearm2]

My problem is that it absolutely isn't necessary, and it's pretty much a cop-out.

 

The only way I see it being necessary is if the Ricketts value the renovations and more peripheral improvements right now more than putting a good product on the field. If they're pouring enough money into all of that, it may sap enough of the available funds that they can't put a $130 million payroll on the field in the short term. If that's the case, I'll begrudgingly be ok with it because I do have faith in Ricketts/Theo, but if that's not the case then there's absolutely no reason why we should be in complete rebuild mode.

It seems to me that a far more likely (and obvious) reason to enter a rebuild mode is because the talent on the roster is not very good.

 

So let's not try and improve the major league roster, let's try to improve the low minors.

Your snide comment might actually have a thread of truth to it if the Cubs had actually done anything to improve the low minors.

 

As it is, they replaced Ramirez with Stewart, and Marshall with Wood. Those new guys are major leaguers, FYI.

 

See the point of a rebuild is to let go of the guys that won't be around by the time you're good again, and replace them with younger guys that can potentially be regular contributors, and help make you good again.