Random Cubs Musings

[Cubswin11]

It probably takes at least 1 of Bryant/Baez, 2 of Almora/Soler/Alcantara (or if Miami would value another position player equally or greater than those), one of the minor league SP CJ/Pierce/Hendricks/Whoever Miami likes the most, and probably something off the ML roster like Lake or one of the young bullpen arms and maybe even some IFA/Draft money.

[RammyFanny]

So what does it take? Stanton is just what we need. Hell, he's just what everyone needs, but he's the type of cornerstone that sends the message to fans on free agents alike that we're ready to go. We have a top 5 farm last I checked, which is likely to get better by the winter following the draft and whatever we get out of any summer trades.

They are over .500 and 1.5 games out of the division lead with Stanton playing MVP level baseball. I don't think they're in a rush to get rid of him at the moment.

[abohnhoff]

What would it take to get CarGo?

 

Would Almora, Alcantara and a Vogelbach/Candelario type be too much?

[Guest]

They'd probably want more than one guy to be MLB ready. With their start this year and CarGo's tepid start, I doubt they trade him even with their OF surplus.

 

For a similar thought exercise, I wonder how much it would take to get Kemp in the offseason, and how much money the Dodgers would eat to make it happen?

[imb]

Kemp should be the target imo. He went four [expletive] days without playing, and they have Pedersen that they can plug in whenever they want.

[Cubswin11]

Kemp should be the target imo. He went four [expletive] days without playing, and they have Pedersen that they can plug in whenever they want.

I agree. I'd imagine they'd want more MLB ready/in MLB guys since they are in win now mode. Would taking most say ~2/3rd's of his salary on+Bonifacio, 1-2 of Rondon/Ramirez/Carlos Villanueva and someone like Jeimer/Christian Villanueva be enough? Too much?

[Guest]

Hard to say. I'd be interested in taking on Kemp for about 5/60 if there wasn't a ton going the other way, but I don't know what the demand would be to know if that's realistic.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

Kemp is made of glass.

[WrigleyField 22]

How much do we need to add to a Samardzija return to just upgrade to Stanton?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pitchcs]

Rizzo + for Stanton.

[Tryptamine]

Hard to say. I'd be interested in taking on Kemp for about 5/60 if there wasn't a ton going the other way, but I don't know what the demand would be to know if that's realistic.

 

That's about all I'd be willing to pay for him too. He has been miserable the last two years and barely played over 100 games in 2012. He's also definitely a corner outfielder at this point.

[SouthSideRyan]

Hard to say. I'd be interested in taking on Kemp for about 5/60 if there wasn't a ton going the other way, but I don't know what the demand would be to know if that's realistic.

 

That's about all I'd be willing to pay for him too. He has been miserable the last two years and barely played over 100 games in 2012. He's also definitely a corner outfielder at this point.

 

There is at least some double if not triple counting going on on this post

[jersey cubs fan]

#prayfortheo trending on twitter right now, good sign or bad?

[abohnhoff]

Wrong Theo

 

http://www.hollywoodtake.com/theo-horan-hospitalized-prayfortheo-trends-twitter-one-direction-fans-support-nialls-sick-baby-46148

[Clem Fandango]

Only reason Miami would trade Stanton is because they're diabolical douche nozzles. They're contending for first place in their division and Stanton is pretty much the primary reason. He's on a 9 WAR pace. If they trade him, it's because they do not give a [expletive] about anything, and as much as I think that's not far off, I like to think they do want to win when the opportunity presents itself, and it's doing that right now. It would probably hurt our current team and future teams too much to acquire him right now.

 

Now... the offseason or next year's trade deadline? Maybe, but he's probably the most valuable commodity in baseball right now next to Mike Trout. It's hard to put a number on him, and I think for the Cubs to acquire him would take both of Baez and Bryant and one of our core MLB guys... and that's just to open negotiations.

[neely crenshaw]

I don't see how there is any way we can trade for a top tier player without dismantling a lot of the work that has been done to re-build the system.

For someone like Stanton to Price, it'll more MLB ready talent than we can give up. I don't see how we could get either without Baez or Bryant involved, and that with possibly Shark.

If you look at what Tampa got for Shields(with Davis added as a throw-in) KC's player prospect, last years ROTY myers, a MLB ready big arm in Odorizzi, a super talented young lefty in montgomery and a top young prospect in Leonard.

 

Now I wouldn't put Kemp in that category. Because he does have issues, he could probably be had for much less. Add in that they have many options, and he could be expendable. That would obviously come with risks.

[Sammy Sofa]

Yeah, no [expletive] trading for a great playing means dealing a lot of parts; it's one the reasons you want a good farm system, so don't give this garbage like they should get all gunshy now.

 

[expletive], neely, you make me want to hurl things through things.

[neely crenshaw]

That was well written.

 

We have a nice farm system, but not terribly deep at the top.

If we drain all the near ready talent to get one big bat or arm, are we any closer to competing?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

That was well written.

 

We have a nice farm system, but not terribly deep at the top.

If we drain all the near ready talent to get one big bat or arm, are we any closer to competing?

 

 

Yes.

[XZero771679666304]

That was well written.

 

We have a nice farm system, but not terribly deep at the top.

If we drain all the near ready talent to get one big bat or arm, are we any closer to competing?

 

 

Yes.

 

Marginally.

 

Trading some of our top talent for MLB talent would absolutely help, but cleaning out our top 5 for one player, even for a guy like Stanton, would be not be a prudent move. One player is not the difference right now, and imo, even if MLB talent is added, the Cubs need one or two of Baez/Bryant/Almora/Soler/Edawrds to make it. Though at some point, Stanton will be traded. Even if Miami were to make him a market value extension offer, I don't see any way he would accept it. They'll have to deal him sooner or later.

 

Referring to previous conversation, Matt Kemp is a huge question mark at this point. Given his contract, I would be hesitant to give up much for him.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

One player is a lot closer to being "the difference" than four prospects.

[Guest]

Replace Nate Schierholtz with Giancarlo Stanton and this offense suddenly is a lot better.

[jersey cubs fan]

Replace Nate Schierholtz with Giancarlo Stanton

 

done

[neely crenshaw]

We'd be better but not ready to compete.

Add Stanton to the middle=very nice.

Stanton isn't a salary dump, so he is not coming cheap.

 

Project Stanton to win 10 games, and Baez 5.

Our current squad is on pace to win 60, so that gets us to 75 wins- and that's with everyone else staying status quo.

The deal would guarantee us Stanton for only 2 years. Then he's gone, and we are without Bryant, Hendricks and others for two seasons of winning 75-80 games.

Now if we can make a deal to keep both Bryant and Baez, and get him signed for a long haul, that would change everything.

I just don't see that we are ready to make the playoffs in the next 2 seasons, and it isn't worth selling the farm.

 

Better off hoping for those revenue streams come, and we knock his socks off with a huge offer after 2016.

Then you would have Bryant, Baez, and Alcantara on board. Hendricks and hopefully the pitcher from the Shark deal ready, with Edwards, Soler, and Almora all close.

That would then make sense to find that huge bat(or arm) to put us all the way over.

[XZero771679666304]

One player is a lot closer to being "the difference" than four prospects.

 

Only if you add more than just the one player. If you trade away all the top bats and do nothing else, you've done very little to appreciably improve the big league team's prospects. And until it is demonstrated that the team will spend money, I don't see any reason to expect much else would be done. The team would be a handful of wins better, with all the best trade chips gone and still the same cheapskate ownership.

 

Gutting the top 5 in a trade for Stanton would make you feel more eager to tune into the games, but it would only be a marginal step toward making the team competitive in the short or long term. And what then if the Rickettses don't pony up to extend him? Then it becomes a potential catastrophe.

 

Unfortunately, I think it's fairly clear that the lynchpin in any near term Cubs turnaround is going to be whether at least a couple of the top 5-7 prospects in the system make it.

 

Of course all of this assumes that the Cubs would need to give the Marlins both of Baez/Bryant and most of the remainder of our best prospects, which I don't think is necessarily true.