Samardzija trade rumors

[Guest]

Yeah, the Giants don't have the players, nor the need really.

so they must be #10 on the list

 

Just checked with Heyman and it turns out they have a 25 year old in A ball hitting .270, so they do have the players. Make them #7.

[Clem Fandango]

I really like the idea of a Betts/Owens package from the Red Sox. I want Betts in the Cubs system quite badly.

[Have a seat, Neifi]

Yeah, the Giants don't have the players, nor the need really.

so they must be #10 on the list

 

Just checked with Heyman and it turns out they have a 25 year old in A ball hitting .270, so they do have the players. Make them #7.

Winner.

[Guancous]

Unnecessary reminder that it takes years to evaluate trades: http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blogpost?blogname=chicagocubs&id=1687&tag=josh-donaldson&city=chicago

[Tryptamine]

I really like the idea of a Betts/Owens package from the Red Sox. I want Betts in the Cubs system quite badly.

 

Agreed. Betts has special player written all over him. I also would really like a package from the Orioles that would be a Bundy/Gausman+Harvey+competitive balance pick.

[Tryptamine]

Unnecessary reminder that it takes years to evaluate trades: http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blogpost?blogname=chicagocubs&id=1687&tag=josh-donaldson&city=chicago

 

I don't know that I agree with that. Say you trade away 3 top 100 prospects for a guy like Travis Wood. It's still a horrible trade even if none of those 3 guys becomes anything because you didn't cash in their full value at the time you made the trade. With those 3 top 100 guys you probably could have landed a much better pitcher.

[Guest]

Unnecessary reminder that it takes years to evaluate trades: http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blogpost?blogname=chicagocubs&id=1687&tag=josh-donaldson&city=chicago

 

I was 6 tabs deep trying to figure out how in the world the Harden trade was a net gain in WAR before I realized that article was nearly 4 years old.

[pitchcs]

Unnecessary reminder that it takes years to evaluate trades: http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blogpost?blogname=chicagocubs&id=1687&tag=josh-donaldson&city=chicago

 

I was 6 tabs deep trying to figure out how in the world the Harden trade was a net gain in WAR before I realized that article was nearly 4 years old.

 

And now Josh Donaldson is an MVP candidate.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'd make that trade again every [expletive] time

[Guest]

I'd make that trade again every [expletive] time

 

+1

[Guest]

yep

[Guest]

I'd make that trade again every [expletive] time

 

I'm more irritated that we can't make fun of Arizona Phil's scouting of Donaldson than anything.

[SouthSideRyan]

Maybe I don't pay enough attention to him beyond the basics he provides but I've never found him the least annoying of all the cubs blog "celebrities"

[Guest]

Maybe I don't pay enough attention to him beyond the basics he provides but I've never found him the least annoying of all the cubs blog "celebrities"

 

I've just never forgiven him for the false hope he gave me regarding Prior in 07.

 

He's the only one who covers what he does so I can't hate too hard.

[Guest]

Maybe I don't pay enough attention to him beyond the basics he provides but I've never found him the least annoying of all the cubs blog "celebrities"

 

No doubt, but still, FORTY HR BASED ON BACKFIELDS PLAY BY A COLLEGE DRAFTEE

[SouthSideRyan]

Errr double negative fail. Meant to say he's the least annoying of all Cubs bloggers. Though it looks like you both understood what I meant.

[Tryptamine]

Apparently Rosenthal is saying the Blue Jays wont be in on Samardzija. Theoyer asked for Hutchison+ Sanchez or Stroman+ and Jays turned it down this winter.

[pitchcs]

I'd make that trade again every [expletive] time

 

+1

 

Who ever said they wouldn't?

[Guest]

Boston's not going to trade for anyone if they keep losing.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Unless something ridiculous is offered, we really need to extend this guy. To those in the 'he doesn't want to resign' camp, if the money's right, and there's a sense that we're really ready to start winning in the next year or two, there's little question that he'll be more than willing to deal.

[pitchcs]

It's just going to take a ton of $$ at this point and I really don't think the Cubs are going to go there at this point in time.

[NOLA]

Unless something ridiculous is offered, we really need to extend this guy. To those in the 'he doesn't want to resign' camp, if the money's right, and there's a sense that we're really ready to start winning in the next year or two, there's little question that he'll be more than willing to deal.

I really hope this is right, but I think there's an enormous question as to whether he would resign. He seems to be counting the days until he's gone, especially when ex Cubs he talks to openly tell him to get the [expletive] outta there.

Edited May 26, 2014 by NOLA

[SouthSideRyan]

"A sense that we're ready to start winning in a year or 2" will never ever attract a FA.

[Guest]

I was thinking about what it would take to change Shark's mind about signing an extension before this offseason(e.g. you can't convince him by proving you spend money on next year's FAs). I think it would come down to 3 things, all of them intertwined: 1) adding talent 2) spending money 3) immediate results e.g. spending on the next Soler or trading Hammel for an awesome A-ball prospect aren't going to move Shark's needle, especially if the MLB roster is stripped for parts at the deadline again.

 

So with those assumptions I tried to think of moves that could realistically be made that meet that criteria, that wouldn't be wildly out of character for the front office either. Here's what I came up with:

 

- Sign Daniel Carbonell (Cuban OF) - Assuming they value him as at least an everyday player, Carbonell makes a lot of sense. He's young, near MLB ready, available for only money, and fits a need on the MLB roster. He'd be a very good use of that money that would've gone towards Tanaka, to help mitigate his cost in future seasons.

 

- Get MLB talent for Hammel - They did this last year with Feldman, and I don't think it's crazy to think they can do that again. For example, Hammel for Allen Webster?

 

- Extend Bryant, bring him up - The expectation here is not coming away with an enormous steal like with Rizzo(especially dealing with Boras), but to get long-term cost certainty with Bryant with a slight discount from his likely market value for the risk.

 

So you do those three things, and Shark gets to see several months of a lineup that features Castro, Rizzo, Bryant, Carbonell, Lake, Castillo, Valbuena (2B), and the best platoon you can muster from the rest of the OF. A pretty sizable improvement if Bryant hits right away like I believe he will. That goes along with a pitching staff of Shark, Wood, Jackson, Arrieta, Webster and the current pen and it's not hard to see that team playing above .500 for a while. You could use that as the baseline to sell Shark on an extension, say 5/105 that rips up his last arb year. You add another SP in the offseason to go along with the ascension of Baez/Alcantara/Hendricks/Rivero/Vizcaino, and next year could be pretty promising.

 

Or maybe none of those are feasible, it is a pretty narrow path. But I thought it was a fun exercise to see that there is a potential path that would fit that mold that doesn't seem like it's diametrically opposed to what the FO is trying to do.

[A New Era]

The FO has the pieces to add quality MLB starters. They could easily go that route of adding NOW, rather than waiting yet another year. Even if you wanted to keep Bryant and Baez there are are handful of quality and even a couple expendable top 100 types in our farm right now where we could easily trade for a good young starting OF or even SP.

 

But the FO won't go that route.