Offseason Rumors

[Clem Fandango]

On a side note, Baseball America keeps getting lazier and lazier with the effort they put into their content presentation. Their site is super difficult to navigate now and everything looks cluttered and hastily thrown together. Their 2014 Top 10 organizational prospects index looks like crap, and their font size choices don't mix well with their site's dimensions and it ends up spacing things out and making things look cluttered. It's annoying to read.

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/2014-top-10-prospects-index/

[Guest]

On a side note, Baseball America keeps getting lazier and lazier with the effort they put into their content presentation. Their site is super difficult to navigate now and everything looks cluttered and hastily thrown together. Their 2014 Top 10 organizational prospects index looks like crap, and their font size choices don't mix well with their

site's dimensions.

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/2014-top-10-prospects-index/

Yeah, with the bigger sites picking off the talent from the various specialist sites it is really hard for those guys to maintain the quality.

[Guest]

Still, Bradley is now the #1 pitching prospect in baseball. He's what Dylan Bundy was last year before his injury, and Samardzija would not have gotten anywhere near Dylan Bundy. That's not to say Bradley couldn't be had, but Samardzija just isn't the level of pitcher that warrants him in a deal without also giving up other somewhat significant players

 

Let's put it this way:

 

Samardzija can be conservatively forecast as a 3 win pitcher these next two years. He's in his prime, he's injury free, and he's done it the last 2 years. That's 30 million in value and he'll earn ~13 million these next two years, for surplus value of about 17 million. The Cubs(and any acquiring team) would also get a 1st round pick for giving him the QO and letting him leave to free agency. The surplus value of that pick is ~6 million, meaning at the lowest end, Samardzija is is worth about 21-25 million depending on how those factors round out. Funny enough, a pitching prospect in the Top 10 is worth about 26 million, and 11-25 about 19 million (link). So on it's face, Samardzija for a pitcher of Bradley's caliber straight up is a pretty even swap.

 

Of course, there's more factors in play here, and they are to the Cubs' benefit. One is that the Cubs don't have to send Shark to Arizona, they can send him to whoever is willing to pay the price for him, and most importantly, they can just keep him and enjoy that surplus value themselves. Recent trades show that the team willing to pay the price are paying more than that surplus value, in fact we have one in this CBA of a team sending a Top 5 position prospect(~42 million surplus value) for a pitcher slightly better than Jeff(there are other pieces involved, but the value KC sent was greater than they received, adding more to the trade value of the pitcher). Greinke is another example of a pitcher fetching a huge price with 2 years to FA.

 

The other factor is that we were conservative with our estimate for Samardzija's projection. Someone acquiring Shark isn't trading for him because he's been Ted Lilly-esque in overall value these last two years. They're acquiring him because he has the potential to be quite a bit better than that. What if the Cubs hold their value at Samardzija being a 4 win pitcher? Now they definitely need more than a Bradley to get him, and if Arizona wants a player of that caliber, then they'll have to give even more than that to get someone like David Price, or try their hand signing lesser gambles like Ubaldo or Garza for similar or greater pricetags.

 

Lastly and least importantly, I reject this conclusion that Bradley is the class of all pitching prospects. He's a great prospect and a worthy centerpiece, but he's walked a ton of guys to carry that mantle when there's guys like Taillon, Ventura, Gray, even Zimmer with A+ stuff and lesser worries that they'll be able to have the necessary control.

[Clem Fandango]

I'm not saying your wrong, statistically or mathematically, but do you really think Samardzija for Bradley is a plausible situation that can or will happen?

[Guest]

I'm not saying your wrong, statistically or mathematically, but do you really think Samardzija for Bradley is a plausible situation that can or will happen?

 

Specifically Bradley? No, because as I mentioned, Kevin Towers is a crazy person. Someone equivalent to Bradley's quality, like Taillon, or one of the KC studs? Certainly. If it weren't, then I really, really doubt Samardzija gets traded this offseason. Garza has shown us they can still wait and get very strong value.

[Vanilla Ice]

Is a 3 WAR projection for Samardzija actually conservative? Just eyeballing it, he's never topped 3 WAR per either BR or Fangraphs.

 

Over the past two years, he put up 3.0 and 2.8 WAR at Fangraphs and 1.8 and 1.0 WAR at BR. I'm not sure that I buy 3 WAR as a conservative projection.

[Clem Fandango]

I'm intrigued by Chris Owings... his patience leaves much to be desired, but BP had this to say about him in September...

 

His offensive approach is likely to get him in trouble during his initial big league trials in 2013 and 2014, but once he settles in he’ll have the natural feel for hitting to post a .270-.275 average, and the pop to pound 25 doubles and 15 home runs. Combined with above-average speed and decent instincts that could lead to 20 steals annually, and Owings has an enticing offensive package for a quality defender up the middle.

 

He's blocked by Derek Jet... I mean Didi Gregorius and Aaron Hill. 22 years old. Can play SS or 2B it seems. As a 21 year old in AAA hit .330 with 12 HR, 81 RBI, 31 doubles, and 20 SB (but only 22 BB's, ouch).

 

Still, he seems like an intriguing potential target who has no room at the MLB level despite likely be capable to play there now. Would he be a solid prospect to include in a possible Samardzija trade?

[imb]

I'm sorry, but even the most optimistic person cannot seriously believe that Samardzidja is "worth" the no. 1 pitching prospect in baseball, much less the no. 1 pitching prospect in baseball plus something else.

[Guest]

I'm sorry, but even the most optimistic person cannot seriously believe that Samardzidja is "worth" the no. 1 pitching prospect in baseball, much less the no. 1 pitching prospect in baseball plus something else.

 

i'd give them shark and castro

[Guest]

I'm sorry, but even the most optimistic person cannot seriously believe that Samardzidja is "worth" the no. 1 pitching prospect in baseball, much less the no. 1 pitching prospect in baseball plus something else.

 

But we're talking about Bradley!

 

More seriously, I don't see why not. I showed the math, recent trades of similar caliber are pointing to that being the price(if not more), and the rumors of what they were asking at the deadline were way more exorbitant than that(so even with Shark losing value since July it's still a high bar). Maybe Shark doesn't get dealt because that's the asking price, but there's quite a bit pointing to that being the price of admission.

[imb]

Price does not equal worth. I love you man, but no.

[Guest]

Price does not equal worth. I love you man, but no.

 

I think you're missing the shift that came with the new CBA. Heck, Texas sent us their preseason #2, 5, 14, and 23 prospects for 2 months of Garza after he had missed nearly a full calendar year with injury.

[imb]

Not really applicable when their 2 was hitting .150 after being determined legally blind, and their 5 is thought by many to be a reliever.

[davell]

Not really applicable when their 2 was hitting .150 after being determined legally blind, and their 5 is thought by many to be a reliever.

Is Parks "many?"

 

I get your point honestly, but pitching is so volatile, I wonder what percentage Bradley has to actually have a better major league career than Shark does? I can't imagine it being 50% or higher myself. I love the guy as a prospect, but I'd take Skaggs and Delgado over him, if presented my choice. Just seems safer.

 

FA pitching is weak, Shark may be the 2nd best SP on the market, after Price, as far as trade possibilities, and he's relatively cheap for the next 2 years as well. With the value our guys got for half a season of Garza, I'm definitely thinking that IF Shark gets dealt, we'll get a return that is at least on a par(and my guess is slightly better than) with Bradley by himself.

 

That said, no way do I see KT doing it, it'll be KC or Pittsburgh, in my opinion.

[WrigleyField 22]

We have no reason to not go all Rays-like with our Shark demands. Very little to lose, so I would expect a big return or you just hold into him.

[Guest]

FWIW, ABTY on Shark to Arizona:

 

Have heard that the Cubs are focused on the D'Backs for Shark mainly due to Towers being willing to include multiple high end assets whereas no other team (including the Royals) are, to this point, willing to add secondary pieces of the level the D'Backs have out there... Ex.: The Royals have kicked around Zimmer's name however will not include anyone of (true) value over A ball...

 

Funny tidbit: Talking to a Royals higher up 'we really like Samardzija, we thought we liked him moreso than anyone else- we were apparently dead wrong' I brought up how I was told they would 'set the market price on Shark' His response: 'We were willing to pay top dollar for a fully loaded [Ford] F-150 but by the time we got to the dealership someone else thought they were buying a Lotus...'

 

"Would one of these assets be of the Bradley variety?"

No.

 

James Russell also in play with D'Backs...

 

So if that info is correct, and put in context with almost every other mention we've seen about how the team is really trying to add pitching, that almost has to mean something like Skaggs and Holmberg, unless Towers was making Delgado available. Actually, now that I think of it, given how much the FO likes Delgado, that would make some sense.

[A New Era]

FWIW, ABTY on Shark to Arizona:

 

Have heard that the Cubs are focused on the D'Backs for Shark mainly due to Towers being willing to include multiple high end assets whereas no other team (including the Royals) are, to this point, willing to add secondary pieces of the level the D'Backs have out there... Ex.: The Royals have kicked around Zimmer's name however will not include anyone of (true) value over A ball...

 

Funny tidbit: Talking to a Royals higher up 'we really like Samardzija, we thought we liked him moreso than anyone else- we were apparently dead wrong' I brought up how I was told they would 'set the market price on Shark' His response: 'We were willing to pay top dollar for a fully loaded [Ford] F-150 but by the time we got to the dealership someone else thought they were buying a Lotus...'

 

"Would one of these assets be of the Bradley variety?"

No.

 

James Russell also in play with D'Backs...

 

So if that info is correct, and put in context with almost every other mention we've seen about how the team is really trying to add pitching, that almost has to mean something like Skaggs and Holmberg, unless Towers was making Delgado available. Actually, now that I think of it, given how much the FO likes Delgado, that would make some sense.

 

If it was Shark + Russel would it be insane to expect a deal headlined by Delgado + Skaggs, then Holmberg + Trehan? TY did mention multiple high end assets. I would hope Shark had enough value to net Delgado + Skaggs + Trehan alone. Thinking adding another asset to get a quality LH prospect.

[KingCubsFan]

FWIW, ABTY on Shark to Arizona:

 

Have heard that the Cubs are focused on the D'Backs for Shark mainly due to Towers being willing to include multiple high end assets whereas no other team (including the Royals) are, to this point, willing to add secondary pieces of the level the D'Backs have out there... Ex.: The Royals have kicked around Zimmer's name however will not include anyone of (true) value over A ball...

 

Funny tidbit: Talking to a Royals higher up 'we really like Samardzija, we thought we liked him moreso than anyone else- we were apparently dead wrong' I brought up how I was told they would 'set the market price on Shark' His response: 'We were willing to pay top dollar for a fully loaded [Ford] F-150 but by the time we got to the dealership someone else thought they were buying a Lotus...'

 

"Would one of these assets be of the Bradley variety?"

No.

 

James Russell also in play with D'Backs...

 

So if that info is correct, and put in context with almost every other mention we've seen about how the team is really trying to add pitching, that almost has to mean something like Skaggs and Holmberg, unless Towers was making Delgado available. Actually, now that I think of it, given how much the FO likes Delgado, that would make some sense.

Getting Skaggs and Delgado would be fantastic.

[sneakypower]

for his two seasons as a starter, Samardzija's in the top-20 in all of baseball for xFIP, better than that of Verlander, Shields, Zimmermann and a host of other proven frontline starters

 

the descriptive stats don't reflect so well on him which explains pessimism about his value (it's certainly worth wondering why he's allowed a .306 BABIP when the other Cubs starters have allowed .277 BABIP), but the Giants just gave Tim Lincecum 2y/$35M, which shows some executives place a ton of emphasis on defense-independent pitching for projection

[Guest]

In general, the Cubs cannot afford to trade Shark unless they get a premium return for him. TT, now you're speaking my language. The question is whether Towers speaks Theo's language. I'm kind of doubting Towers puts much emphasis on FIP stats or advanced metrics, putting more on traditional numbers. We'll see.

[HoopsCubs]

Just heard from a source that the Cubs have been talking to the Royals this week about trading Samardzija, Barney and Scheirholtz for Lorenzo Cain, Kelvin Herrera and 2 high end pitching prospects.

[Clem Fandango]

Just heard from a source that the Cubs have been talking to the Royals this week about trading Samardzija, Barney and Scheirholtz for Lorenzo Cain, Kelvin Herrera and 2 high end pitching prospects.

 

My appreciation for that deal hinges heavily on who those two high end prospects are.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Maybe I'm wrong, but the quantity and specificity of all these Samardzija trade rumors make it seem more like "they are trying to deal him in the next six weeks" than just "ho-hum, we wouldn't mind trading him if someone went nuts, we'll see what happens in the next two years."

[HoopsCubs]

Just heard from a source that the Cubs have been talking to the Royals this week about trading Samardzija, Barney and Scheirholtz for Lorenzo Cain, Kelvin Herrera and 2 high end pitching prospects.

 

My appreciation for that deal hinges heavily on who those two high end prospects are.

 

 

I'd tell you if I knew. Prospects' names are rarely revealed when my sources provide info to me. Don't know if that's because they don't know or they don't want me to know.

[HoopsCubs]

Maybe I'm wrong, but the quantity and specificity of all these Samardzija trade rumors make it seem more like "they are trying to deal him in the next six weeks" than just "ho-hum, we wouldn't mind trading him if someone went nuts, we'll see what happens in the next two years."

 

The other angle is that the Cubs could be indirectly putting these rumors out there through their emissaries as a negotiation ploy to get Shark's agents back to the table.