Random Cubs Musings

[Sammy Sofa]

I was ahead of the curve and pointed out how he was back to sucking a while ago. I've been weeping ever since.

[Sammy Sofa]

Rizzo has also been resoundingly unimpressive for a good stretch, too, and outside of an OBP spike in June has just gotten worse as the year has gone on. But he's walking at a decent clip, so I'm sure someone will tell me that makes everything else OK or something.

[Derwood]

Rizzo has also been resoundingly unimpressive for a good stretch, too, and outside of an OBP spike in June has just gotten worse as the year has gone on. But he's walking at a decent clip, so I'm sure someone will tell me that makes everything else OK or something.

 

I'm encouraged by his steady increase in imaginary hits

[Sammy Sofa]

Plus his glove is big and sexy and OHGODTHINGSAREN'TWORKINGOUTLETSJUMPOFFOFALLOFTHEBRIDGES

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I know that it wouldn't fit with the stock-trading model of baseball, but I really think I wouldn't mind shipping out Castro (for adequate value) this offseason. His bad defense and lack of patience are standing directly in the way of two of our major team-building strategies.

[Guest]

I know that it wouldn't fit with the stock-trading model of baseball, but I really think I wouldn't mind shipping out Castro (for adequate value) this offseason. His bad defense and lack of patience are standing directly in the way of two of our major team-building strategies.

 

I'm not opposed to doing things that upgrade the team, but that last justification is [expletive].

 

Our team building strategy is having players who have value and produce and prevent runs. How they do it doesn't really matter all that much as long as it happens.

 

Obviously, some ways are generally better at producing results than others, but if Castro is a consistent 3-4 win player (which he obviously isn't this year), who really gives a [expletive] how he gets there?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Obviously, some ways are generally better at producing results than others, but if Castro is a consistent 3-4 win player (which he obviously isn't this year), who really gives a [expletive] how he gets there?

 

If he's a 3-4 win player, sure. But if he's not, then it starts to matter a bit how he gets there.

 

We've had a lot of interesting success with the combination of strong defensive infielders, bumping up incoming pitchers' GB rates, and a manager who is a specialist in defensive shifting. If Castro isn't just crapping awesome all over the field, then it's a lot more difficult to live with his lack of contribution to that effort.

[KingCubsFan]

I know that it wouldn't fit with the stock-trading model of baseball, but I really think I wouldn't mind shipping out Castro (for adequate value) this offseason. His bad defense and lack of patience are standing directly in the way of two of our major team-building strategies.

Not sure why you'd want to trade him with his value at its lowest and no ready-made replacement immediately ready to step in.

[Sammy Sofa]

I know that it wouldn't fit with the stock-trading model of baseball, but I really think I wouldn't mind shipping out Castro (for adequate value) this offseason. His bad defense and lack of patience are standing directly in the way of two of our major team-building strategies.

Not sure why you'd want to trade him with his value at its lowest and no ready-made replacement immediately ready to step in.

 

Yeah, seems like you'd be trading for pennies on the dollar at this point. Outside of having a bad year, sure seems like the perception of Castro is pretty low around baseball.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I know that it wouldn't fit with the stock-trading model of baseball, but I really think I wouldn't mind shipping out Castro (for adequate value) this offseason. His bad defense and lack of patience are standing directly in the way of two of our major team-building strategies.

Not sure why you'd want to trade him with his value at its lowest and no ready-made replacement immediately ready to step in.

 

Because:

 

1) We don't know that his value is at its lowest. Right now, his value incorporates the possibility that he bounces back and that he doesn't. If he doesn't, then his value goes lower. The whole "sell high/buy low" thing has become completely misunderstood.

 

2) I wonder if we do have a ready-made replacement destroying the Southern League right now. Or at least someone ready to step after a short run with a veteran stopgap.

[sneakypower]

just move him to 2B when Baez comes up and let him worry more about hitting again

 

i don't trade (or package) him unless Stanton or Price are coming back

[Sammy Sofa]

I know that it wouldn't fit with the stock-trading model of baseball, but I really think I wouldn't mind shipping out Castro (for adequate value) this offseason. His bad defense and lack of patience are standing directly in the way of two of our major team-building strategies.

Not sure why you'd want to trade him with his value at its lowest and no ready-made replacement immediately ready to step in.

 

Because:

 

1) We don't know that his value is at its lowest. Right now, his value incorporates the possibility that he bounces back and that he doesn't. If he doesn't, then his value goes lower. The whole "sell high/buy low" thing has become completely misunderstood.

 

It's not misunderstood; just because his value can get lower doesn't mean that it isn't already low enough now to likely negate any real value you'd get in trading him. Sliding from crap to really crappy isn't necessarily a dealbreaker, especially when, again, you're talking about a player who the attitude about generally seems to be that he's really flawed and very possibly not panning out. He's basically stuck in this middle ground where it's not worth moving him.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I think the reputation/chance for a bounceback is more than sufficient to make it worthwhile to trade him.

 

If I'm wrong and we don't get anything of value offered, then go ahead and keep him. I'm not saying he's a must trade or anything. Just that I woudln't mind, which really surprises me. It's been a weird year.

[Sammy Sofa]

I think the reputation/chance for a bounceback is more than sufficient to make it worthwhile to trade him.

 

If I'm wrong and we don't get anything of value offered, then go ahead and keep him. I'm not saying he's a must trade or anything. Just that I woudln't mind, which really surprises me. It's been a weird year.

 

His reputation is [expletive] right now (and was already pretty bad before this season); I wouldn't mind trading him either (which depresses the hell out of me), but I just don't think it's likely that the Cubs would get value back that outweighs the chance of bounceback (which, right now, holds more need/value to the Cubs than other teams based on what seems to be the perception of Castro).

[neely crenshaw]

I think it depends on your stance about 2014. It's hard to see the Cubs looking to compete for the play-offs with a SS that has half a year of AA ball or a stop gap-even if Stanton or Price are part of the deal. If 2015 is more the timeline, then it might make sense.

It seems funny to me that we have a 23 year old SS that has put 3 solid offensive years at this level, and we're ready to dump him when he has a struggle even though he has been on an upswing since July and his fielding percentage is the highest of his career.

He's certainly taken a dip, but so has a lot of our young guys. At least we know for sure he is capable of putting up good numbers because he has done it multiple times.

[Sammy Sofa]

It seems funny to me that we have a 23 year old SS that has put 3 solid offensive years at this level, and we're ready to dump him when he has a struggle even though he has been on an upswing since July and his fielding percentage is the highest of his career.

 

He hasn't taken an "upswing since July;" he had a hot streak and is now back to stinking again. His third season showed little to no development offensively from the first two seasons and his dWAR has regressed back to what it was two seasons ago, helping him put up a NEGATIVE WAR for the season thus far. There's a "dip" and then there's just flat out having a terrible season after a seemingly stagnant offensive season the year before.

 

And fielding percentage? Seriously? It's .976, and his other three seasons it's been .971, .971 and .970.

[Gilby]

I think the reputation/chance for a bounceback is more than sufficient to make it worthwhile to trade him.

 

If I'm wrong and we don't get anything of value offered, then go ahead and keep him. I'm not saying he's a must trade or anything. Just that I woudln't mind, which really surprises me. It's been a weird year.

 

His reputation is [expletive] right now (and was already pretty bad before this season); I wouldn't mind trading him either (which depresses the hell out of me), but I just don't think it's likely that the Cubs would get value back that outweighs the chance of bounceback (which, right now, holds more need/value to the Cubs than other teams based on what seems to be the perception of Castro).

 

Was his reputation bad before this season? I mean, among the national media and idiot fans who only remember the Bobby V incident and forgetting the outs or whatever, maybe. But for the people who actually matter, like front office personnel, I'll bet his reputation was and still is pretty good.

[Guest]

I think the important (and rare) aspect of Castro's collapse this year is how much success he's had before. The good news is that while there have obviously been adjustments made by pitchers, MLB is not so dumb as to take 2000 PAs to figure out the Starlin Castro groundout pitch. This means that the primary driver of his struggles is Castro himself. It's at that point that we consider his insane youth(he's three years younger than Castillo, 21 months older than Kris Bryant), his lack of previous struggles, and all the reports about his work ethic and coachability, and it adds up to a pretty likely bounce back. I don't think we can speak to the magnitude of that bounce back because the factors involved in him getting back on track are not remotely objective, but I think it is coming.

[Guest]

I think the important (and rare) aspect of Castro's collapse this year is how much success he's had before. The good news is that while there have obviously been adjustments made by pitchers, MLB is not so dumb as to take 2000 PAs to figure out the Starlin Castro groundout pitch. This means that the primary driver of his struggles is Castro himself. It's at that point that we consider his insane youth(he's three years younger than Castillo, 21 months older than Kris Bryant), his lack of previous struggles, and all the reports about his work ethic and coachability, and it adds up to a pretty likely bounce back. I don't think we can speak to the magnitude of that bounce back because the factors involved in him getting back on track are not remotely objective, but I think it is coming.

Or they could knee jerk him for pennies on the dollar like Kyle wants. I don't think he's as good as his trajectory seemed, but he's not as bad as his performance this year. At the plate, I think he's tried so hard to fit the Cub Way he's sort of lost in space. That will only improve.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Or they could knee jerk him for pennies on the dollar like Kyle wants.

 

Out of 29 other GMs, I'm pretty sure at least 25 of them understand the concept of regression.

[Guest]

As for trading Castro, I would trade him for Stanton as long as I was reasonably assured that Giancarlo wasn't damaged goods and that he'd sign a 6+ year extension within a year(doesn't have to be overly team friendly). Save for that, the only people I'd consider dealing him for are not remotely realistic trade targets. I would not trade him for any pitcher in baseball.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

As for trading Castro, I would trade him for Stanton as long as I was reasonably assured that Giancarlo wasn't damaged goods and that he'd sign a 6+ year extension within a year(doesn't have to be overly team friendly). Save for that, the only people I'd consider dealing him for are not remotely realistic trade targets. I would not trade him for any pitcher in baseball.

 

I think that's crazy overvaluing him. His long-term projection doesn't look anything like it did two years ago when I would have said the same thing, or even a year ago.

[Guest]

As for trading Castro, I would trade him for Stanton as long as I was reasonably assured that Giancarlo wasn't damaged goods and that he'd sign a 6+ year extension within a year(doesn't have to be overly team friendly). Save for that, the only people I'd consider dealing him for are not remotely realistic trade targets. I would not trade him for any pitcher in baseball.

 

I think that's crazy overvaluing him. His long-term projection doesn't look anything like it did two years ago when I would have said the same thing, or even a year ago.

 

Even a pretty conservative projection for the remainder of his contract still puts his surplus value at about 60 million, with a ton of room for that number to skyrocket. Where else are you going to get that upside without taking on a bunch of risk of prospects flaming out or pitchers blowing up their arms?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Surplus dollar value isn't the only way to measure value. A small amount of surplus value spread out over a number of years isn't nearly as valuable as having it concentrated.

 

We might have a surplus of infielders very soon, and he could be one who might fetch a concentrated-value return.

[Guest]

8-9 million in surplus value per year, in a conservative estimate, isn't exactly a small amount.