The Cuban Defectors Thread

[Vinestal]

We need an OFer. I prefer him based on age and his ability to play multiple positions. We've got plenty of money to spend too, so that's not an excuse. The FA market is awful, basically Melky or Markakis, if Baltimore lets him get away. I'd take the risk here, money be damned.

 

Yeah, I fail to see the craaaaaaazy part of that previous statement. 55Mil+, assuming for 5 years is about what I expected. If it's only 4 years, that's still doable. Probably going to pay someone lesser similar annually (maybe not as many years) if they sign an OF.

doubtful

 

Bryant* / Contra / Soler

 

 

*Ruggiano / Coghlan til May

 

For all we know Contra could be better than Castillo anyway.

[rawaction]

We need an OFer. I prefer him based on age and his ability to play multiple positions. We've got plenty of money to spend too, so that's not an excuse. The FA market is awful, basically Melky or Markakis, if Baltimore lets him get away. I'd take the risk here, money be damned.

 

Yeah, I fail to see the craaaaaaazy part of that previous statement. 55Mil+, assuming for 5 years is about what I expected. If it's only 4 years, that's still doable. Probably going to pay someone lesser similar annually (maybe not as many years) if they sign an OF.

doubtful

 

Bryant / Contra / Soler

 

As of 8/19/14, Bryant is a 3B with nobody of great substance blocking him and Alcantara hasn't hit very well at all.

 

Nobody wants to hear this, but that's still a 95 loss OF on paper if that's what the Cubs open with or plays the majority of the season with.

[WrigleyField 22]

I think it'd be silly to count on all our young guys. Go sign this guy and anyone not named Rizzo can take an occasional day off if everyone hits expectations. It's hard to see all of our available money being taken up by FA pitchers.

[Vinestal]

I think it'd be silly to count on all our young guys. Go sign this guy and anyone not named Rizzo can take an occasional day off if everyone hits expectations. It's hard to see all of our available money being taken up by FA pitchers.

This guy isn't a mlb vet and had limited experience in the big Cuban league. He could be a total bust.

[treebird]

we don't want to give young outfielders 60 million dollars but we're going to peel off twice that for a 30+ starting pitcher this off season

 

http://i.imgur.com/4rgKj2U.jpg

[Guest]

We need an OFer. I prefer him based on age and his ability to play multiple positions. We've got plenty of money to spend too, so that's not an excuse. The FA market is awful, basically Melky or Markakis, if Baltimore lets him get away. I'd take the risk here, money be damned.

 

Yeah, I fail to see the craaaaaaazy part of that previous statement. 55Mil+, assuming for 5 years is about what I expected. If it's only 4 years, that's still doable. Probably going to pay someone lesser similar annually (maybe not as many years) if they sign an OF.

doubtful

 

Bryant / Contra / Soler

 

As of 8/19/14, Bryant is a 3B with nobody of great substance blocking him and Alcantara hasn't hit very well at all.

 

Nobody wants to hear this, but that's still a 95 loss OF on paper if that's what the Cubs open with or plays the majority of the season with.

 

uh, no. unless the rest of the team is absofuckinglutely terrible, that is.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

We need an OFer. I prefer him based on age and his ability to play multiple positions. We've got plenty of money to spend too, so that's not an excuse. The FA market is awful, basically Melky or Markakis, if Baltimore lets him get away. I'd take the risk here, money be damned.

 

Yeah, I fail to see the craaaaaaazy part of that previous statement. 55Mil+, assuming for 5 years is about what I expected. If it's only 4 years, that's still doable. Probably going to pay someone lesser similar annually (maybe not as many years) if they sign an OF.

doubtful

 

Bryant / Contra / Soler

 

As of 8/19/14, Bryant is a 3B with nobody of great substance blocking him and Alcantara hasn't hit very well at all.

 

Nobody wants to hear this, but that's still a 95 loss OF on paper if that's what the Cubs open with or plays the majority of the season with.

 

uh, no. unless the rest of the team is absofuckinglutely terrible, that is.

maybe he meant they'd combine for -95 WAR

[WrigleyField 22]

I think it'd be silly to count on all our young guys. Go sign this guy and anyone not named Rizzo can take an occasional day off if everyone hits expectations. It's hard to see all of our available money being taken up by FA pitchers.

This guy isn't a mlb vet and had limited experience in the big Cuban league. He could be a total bust.

Which is basically like 5/8 of our projected starting lineup next year so let's have a little better insurance than Ruggiano and Coghlan.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

As of 8/19/14, Bryant is a 3B with nobody of great substance blocking him and Alcantara hasn't hit very well at all.

 

Nobody wants to hear this, but that's still a 95 loss OF on paper if that's what the Cubs open with or plays the majority of the season with.

 

We don't want to hear it because it's not true.

[Guest]

As of 8/19/14, Bryant is a 3B with nobody of great substance blocking him and Alcantara hasn't hit very well at all.

 

Nobody wants to hear this, but that's still a 95 loss OF on paper if that's what the Cubs open with or plays the majority of the season with.

 

We don't want to hear it because it's not true.

 

such a weird, weird thing to say for so many reasons

[ctcf]

As of 8/19/14, Bryant is a 3B with nobody of great substance blocking him and Alcantara hasn't hit very well at all.

 

Nobody wants to hear this, but that's still a 95 loss OF on paper if that's what the Cubs open with or plays the majority of the season with.

 

We don't want to hear it because it's not true.

 

such a weird, weird thing to say for so many reasons

 

Yea not sure where that even came from.

[Guest]

I think it'd be silly to count on all our young guys. Go sign this guy and anyone not named Rizzo can take an occasional day off if everyone hits expectations. It's hard to see all of our available money being taken up by FA pitchers.

 

Valbuena and Coghlan/Ruggiano have each been 2+ win players at positions there is a potential need for next season. I'm on board with adding another bat, but the depth is there now to hedge against a prospect falling flat or an injury or two.

[rawaction]

As of 8/19/14, Bryant is a 3B with nobody of great substance blocking him and Alcantara hasn't hit very well at all.

 

Nobody wants to hear this, but that's still a 95 loss OF on paper if that's what the Cubs open with or plays the majority of the season with.

 

We don't want to hear it because it's not true.

 

such a weird, weird thing to say for so many reasons

 

Yea not sure where that even came from.

 

I don't know. Haven't really followed the non-important players in the majors this year. Man, the Cubs OF is really bad. That was so wrong of me to say. Next year's Cubs OF should be better even if they had to play me in LF.

[WrigleyField 22]

I think it'd be silly to count on all our young guys. Go sign this guy and anyone not named Rizzo can take an occasional day off if everyone hits expectations. It's hard to see all of our available money being taken up by FA pitchers.

 

Valbuena and Coghlan/Ruggiano have each been 2+ win players at positions there is a potential need for next season. I'm on board with adding another bat, but the depth is there now to hedge against a prospect falling flat or an injury or two.

Wasn't Scheirholtz also about a 2 win player? I think they are great as the two backups, More so if our LF (Castillo) can slide over to CF. Valbuena you could still give 20 some starts in April plus another 40-50 without considering injuries and poor performance. Have him and Alcontara both as super-subs and still pick up 100-120 starts before injuries are considered.

[Fro]

Personally I'd rather get a FA corner OF or trade for one as opposed to rolling the dice on another Cuban OF.

 

Ideally that's the spot where you'd get some veteran leadership.

[WrigleyField 22]

Personally I'd rather get a FA corner OF or trade for one as opposed to rolling the dice on another Cuban OF.

 

Ideally that's the spot where you'd get some veteran leadership.

I don't think the MLB FA hitters are that great. A trade is obviously an option, but it's nice to think we might be able to increase production using only money.

[seanimal]

wtf is a 95 loss outfield?

[Rob]

I've never really seen us as likely bidders for Castillo. Signing him would push Valbuena to the bench when Bryant comes up. And Castillo is very unlikely to be worth $60M+ more than Valbuena.

 

The only good reason I see to sign Castillo is to make Alcantara available as the centerpiece to a trade this offseason. To that end, I could support it. But since I have very little clue what kind of player Castillo really is, I have no idea what contract he'd have to get in order for me to feel comfortable with that plan more than the alternatives.

[jersey cubs fan]

I've never really seen us as likely bidders for Castillo. Signing him would push Valbuena to the bench when Bryant comes up. And Castillo is very unlikely to be worth $60M+ more than Valbuena.

 

Valbuena has been nice, and will be nice, but he's already not an everyday player and will have plenty of opportunity to participate next year even if an actual OF replaces one of our many non-factor players.

[WrigleyField 22]

He doesn't really just need to provide $60M in surplus to Valbuena though. He just needs to provide surplus value over one of our 7 non-catcher hitters. Or even if you want a $/win perspective, provide more value for $60M than a similarly priced FA (when we already have additional money to spend as well), so are the at least two or even three MLB FA that can provide similar value for that cost...

[WrigleyField 22]

Also it's probably more like $20m in surplus value needed over the life of the contract if that's the approach being taken as Valbuena isn't free an will continue to cost more himself.

[Guest]

He doesn't really just need to provide $60M in surplus to Valbuena though. He just needs to provide surplus value over one of our 7 non-catcher hitters. Or even if you want a $/win perspective, provide more value for $60M than a similarly priced FA (when we already have additional money to spend as well), so are the at least two or even three MLB FA that can provide similar value for that cost...

 

i tried this argument in the Hamels thread, people weren't getting the logic sandwich i was feeding them

[bukie]

wtf is a 95 loss outfield?

Considering the OF the Cubs have this year and they probably won't have 95 losses with it, I'm guessing two straw men and a scarecrow.

[Rob]

Also it's probably more like $20m in surplus value needed over the life of the contract if that's the approach being taken as Valbuena isn't free an will continue to cost more himself.

 

Valbuena's skill set is precisely the type that doesn't result in inflated paychecks. So I'm not too worried about his escalating salary.

 

I'm not against a Castillo signing. But his Cuban league numbers aren't all that impressive and the scouting reports are contradictory. All I'm saying is that I want to know more about what type of player he is before I get upset that the Cubs are or aren't willing to offer a certain amount.

 

I am moderately interested in seeing how Renteria would try to cycle Castillo, Alcantara, Soler, Bryant, Baez, and Valbuena around in a lineup. But unfortunately there's not an easy platoon option that I see.

[WrigleyField 22]

He doesn't really just need to provide $60M in surplus to Valbuena though. He just needs to provide surplus value over one of our 7 non-catcher hitters. Or even if you want a $/win perspective, provide more value for $60M than a similarly priced FA (when we already have additional money to spend as well), so are the at least two or even three MLB FA that can provide similar value for that cost...

 

i tried this argument in the Hamels thread, people weren't getting the logic sandwich i was feeding them

I don't think that was the part of your argument that was necessarily poorly received (though certainly by some). I think your biggest issue was the hitter-pitcher exchange on top of seemingly valuing a prospect over proven MLB hitter.