Cole Hamels Traded to Rangers

[Guest]

It's clearly a team that should be shedding payroll and rebuilding. And there appears to be little market for Hamels, and basically none for any of the other high dollar contracts on that team. It would be silly to offer up even 1 top 100 prospect talent (let alone 2) while also taking on 100m in payroll over the next 4 years. If that's what they are asking, then look at other avenues.

 

Yeah, you'll get Dan Vogelbach and like it.

 

That's not even close to what I'm suggesting, but I will say that I'd rather offer up Vogelbach and get rejected than offer Baez, Almora, Sands, Johnson and Vogelbach.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'd rather offer up something decent and get the guy and be freaking awesome the next few years.

[Guest]

I'd rather offer up something decent and get the guy and be freaking awesome the next few years.

 

As would I. But I think it could be done without including players the caliber of Baez or Almora. At least not with all of the other players included, also.

[sneakypower]

whomever trades for Hamels, it's not going to take 4-5 legitimate prospects to acquire his services, come on

[SouthSideRyan]

It's clearly a team that should be shedding payroll and rebuilding. And there appears to be little market for Hamels, and basically none for any of the other high dollar contracts on that team. It would be silly to offer up even 1 top 100 prospect talent (let alone 2) while also taking on 100m in payroll over the next 4 years. If that's what they are asking, then look at other avenues.

 

Yeah, you'll get Dan Vogelbach and like it.

 

That's not even close to what I'm suggesting, but I will say that I'd rather offer up Vogelbach and get rejected than offer Baez, Almora, Sands, Johnson and Vogelbach.

 

So you want to offer a smorgasbord of mediocre prospects?

[SouthSideRyan]

whomever trades for Hamels, it's not going to take 4-5 legitimate prospects to acquire his services, come on

 

How about 9 ok ones? That's twice as many

[XZero771679666304]

whomever trades for Hamels, it's not going to take 4-5 legitimate prospects to acquire his services, come on

 

Yeah, we got Russell for one and a half years of Shark, it's going to take more net value than that to get four years of Hamels, even factoring in the money. And obviously this isn't just about shedding payroll, it's about Amaro maximizing the return for Hamels to boost the rebuilding effort (and potentially save his job).

 

Unless Amaro completely craps the bed on this (which is quite possible), it's going to take quite a bit.

[Guest]

whomever trades for Hamels, it's not going to take 4-5 legitimate prospects to acquire his services, come on

 

Yeah, we got Russell for one and a half years of Shark, it's going to take more net value than that to get four years of Hamels, even factoring in the money. And obviously this isn't just about shedding payroll, it's about Amaro maximizing the return for Hamels to boost the rebuilding effort (and potentially save his job).

 

Unless Amaro completely craps the bed on this (which is quite possible), it's going to take quite a bit.

 

just because we got russell and mckinney for shark (and a lights out at the time Hammel) i wouldn't consider that a market setting return, especially seeing what other pitchers (with obviously less control - but comparable to shark's situation - including shark himself) subsequently returned.

 

in other words, i think we made out like total bandits on that trade and i wouldn't expect that to set a trend.

[Guest]

The depth of players involved is not going to be the sticking point, it's the high end quality. The Cubs are not going to trade a Russell or a Bryant for Hamels. The Dodgers won't be trading a Seager or Urias and the Red Sox won't be trading a Betts, and much of the rest of the truly elite prospects are on teams that are either non-competitive(Rockies/Gray, Minnesota/Buxton/Sano, etc), can't afford Hamels anyway(Indians/Lindor), or need that player for their competitive hopes(Orioles/Bundy, Mets/Thor). It's after that you get into the 'really good but flawed' category of prospects like a Baez or a Swihart or a Pederson. Those teams would probably trade them but not much else, and Amaro(unrealistically, IMO) wants the package to be that plus several other pieces of quality. You're not going to get Pederson and Heaney/Holmes from LA, you aren't getting Swihart and Owens from Boston, and you aren't going to get Baez and 2 of Almora/Johnson/McKinney, at least not unless Hamels has a 2014 Lester first half and one of those teams has a gaping rotation hole.

[JennieGarthAlgar]

I want to be great right now. Adding Hamels does that, and makes it so for the next 3-4 years

[XZero771679666304]

 

in other words, i think we made out like total bandits on that trade and i wouldn't expect that to set a trend.

 

I would generally agree, but be that as it may, we're not getting Hamels without giving multiple members of our top 10. It might not take one of the top 3, but we're talking about four years of one of the best starters in the game. I'd love to be wrong, but I think any scenario that see the Cubs get Hamels for anything less then Baez+ is a pipe dream.

 

I still think the guy we end up with is David Price (via FA). And if this season goes well at all, giving up a pick in the 20s plus the dollar cost seems more palatable than giving up the haul that Hamels will likely require.

[Guest]

I want to be great right now. Adding Hamels does that, and makes it so for the next 3-4 years

 

I will absolutely take the Front Office + Bosio with up to 25 million to spend for 2016-2018 over 2016-2018 Hamels. There's a small but non-zero chance it happens starting this year too.

[Guest]

 

in other words, i think we made out like total bandits on that trade and i wouldn't expect that to set a trend.

 

I would generally agree, but be that as it may, we're not getting Hamels without giving multiple members of our top 10. It might not take one of the top 3, but we're talking about four years of one of the best starters in the game. I'd love to be wrong, but I think any scenario that see the Cubs get Hamels for anything less then Baez+ is a pipe dream.

 

Agreed.

[JennieGarthAlgar]

I want to be great right now. Adding Hamels does that, and makes it so for the next 3-4 years

 

I will absolutely take the Front Office + Bosio with up to 25 million to spend for 2016-2018 over 2016-2018 Hamels. There's a small but non-zero chance it happens starting this year too.

 

Good point. My position is, barring a trade that gives up one of the New Core Four, I will trust the FO either way. I love the position we are in.

[sneakypower]

Yeah, we got Russell for one and a half years of Shark, it's going to take more net value than that to get four years of Hamels, even factoring in the money. And obviously this isn't just about shedding payroll, it's about Amaro maximizing the return for Hamels to boost the rebuilding effort (and potentially save his job).

 

Unless Amaro completely craps the bed on this (which is quite possible), it's going to take quite a bit.

that's what the Javy Baez is for!

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

How about we let Philly choose three of the following: Alcantara, Almora, Pierce Johnson, Gleybar Torres, Vogelbach, and McKinney?

 

While none of those are elite- they all are nice prospects and three of them would probably be a better haul than anyone else could offer.

[Backtobanks]

How about we let Philly choose three of the following: Alcantara, Almora, Pierce Johnson, Gleybar Torres, Vogelbach, and McKinney?

 

While none of those are elite- they all are nice prospects and three of them would probably be a better haul than anyone else could offer.

 

That sounds like a great plan. Any three of them are totally replaceable.

[imb]

How about we let Philly choose three of the following: Alcantara, Almora, Pierce Johnson, Gleybar Torres, Vogelbach, and McKinney?

 

While none of those are elite- they all are nice prospects and three of them would probably be a better haul than anyone else could offer.

 

That sounds like a great plan. Any three of them are totally replaceable.

 

DO YOU SEE THE INHERENT PROBLEM YOUR STATEMENT CREATES

[NonProfitCow]

How about we let Philly choose three of the following: Alcantara, Almora, Pierce Johnson, Gleybar Torres, Vogelbach, and McKinney?

 

While none of those are elite- they all are nice prospects and three of them would probably be a better haul than anyone else could offer.

 

That sounds like a great plan. Any three of them are totally replaceable.

 

DO YOU SEE THE INHERENT PROBLEM YOUR STATEMENT CREATES

You didn't let him get to the prospects the Cubs are getting from the third team.

[davell]

I don't think we'll sign another 100 mill arm. I think our next guy does come thru trade. But with acclimating our youngsters, I do not see us giving up value from our farm until we're at least on slightly firmer ground as to where our team stands.

 

It's great seeing we were capable of giving Shields 3/60, so the money is there. But they likely would hesitate giving up value for an arm in a year that still MAY not see us contending. If we ARE, I'd think we're going to add something major during the season to help out.

[Backtobanks]

How about we let Philly choose three of the following: Alcantara, Almora, Pierce Johnson, Gleybar Torres, Vogelbach, and McKinney?

 

While none of those are elite- they all are nice prospects and three of them would probably be a better haul than anyone else could offer.

 

That sounds like a great plan. Any three of them are totally replaceable.

 

DO YOU SEE THE INHERENT PROBLEM YOUR STATEMENT CREATES

 

I sure don't see any problem that my statement creates. Re-signing Fowler covers CF for probably 4 years to eliminate Almora and McKinney. We already have an Castro, Baez, Russell, and La Stella to handle SS eliminating Torres. La Stella and Watkins should be able to handle the utility role that Alcantara is expected to fill. Vogelbach is probably destined to be a DH. 4 years of Hamels certainly eases the pain of losing Johnson. Add to that the fact that all of them are prospects which means they might not reach their potential. Meanwhile, adding Hamels gives us one of the top rotations in the ML for the next 3-4 years.

[Guest]

How about we let Philly choose three of the following: Alcantara, Almora, Pierce Johnson, Gleybar Torres, Vogelbach, and McKinney?

 

While none of those are elite- they all are nice prospects and three of them would probably be a better haul than anyone else could offer.

 

That sounds like a great plan. Any three of them are totally replaceable.

 

DO YOU SEE THE INHERENT PROBLEM YOUR STATEMENT CREATES

 

I sure don't see any problem that my statement creates. Re-signing Fowler covers CF for probably 4 years to eliminate Almora and McKinney. We already have an Castro, Baez, Russell, and La Stella to handle SS eliminating Torres. La Stella and Watkins should be able to handle the utility role that Alcantara is expected to fill. Vogelbach is probably destined to be a DH. 4 years of Hamels certainly eases the pain of losing Johnson. Add to that the fact that all of them are prospects which means they might not reach their potential. Meanwhile, adding Hamels gives us one of the top rotations in the ML for the next 3-4 years.

 

lmao wow

[Deeg]

You don't give up multiple elite prospects for the right to pay a guy $100 million over 4 years. The comparison with the Shark trade is almost as absurd as the notion that trading for Hamels is somehow going to guarantee the Cubs are great immediately. If you want to talk about multiple top 100 guys, it's for a #1 starter well under 30 with multiple years of team control remaining.

 

The absolute most I would offer Amaro is a deal headlined by Almora, with a couple more guys in our 11-20 range. And he won't take it, so why bother? If Baez hadn't gotten the callup last season and was still eligible, he'd still be a Top 10 prospect, in all of baseball, maybe Top 5. Just because casual fans are too myopic to realize that a bad month in the majors didn't turn him into a bust doesn't mean the Cubs should bail on him. Absolutely no way I include him in any deal for Hamels, even if he were the only piece.

[RammyFanny]

How about we let Philly choose three of the following: Alcantara, Almora, Pierce Johnson, Gleybar Torres, Vogelbach, and McKinney?

 

While none of those are elite- they all are nice prospects and three of them would probably be a better haul than anyone else could offer.

 

That sounds like a great plan. Any three of them are totally replaceable.

 

DO YOU SEE THE INHERENT PROBLEM YOUR STATEMENT CREATES

 

I sure don't see any problem that my statement creates. Re-signing Fowler covers CF for probably 4 years to eliminate Almora and McKinney. We already have an Castro, Baez, Russell, and La Stella to handle SS eliminating Torres. La Stella and Watkins should be able to handle the utility role that Alcantara is expected to fill. Vogelbach is probably destined to be a DH. 4 years of Hamels certainly eases the pain of losing Johnson. Add to that the fact that all of them are prospects which means they might not reach their potential. Meanwhile, adding Hamels gives us one of the top rotations in the ML for the next 3-4 years.

The problem is that three easily replaceable players are easily replaceable for a reason, and won't net you Cole Hamels. And Logan Watkins is terrible and can't handle anything. Not to mention he's already out until 2016.

[Backtobanks]

How about we let Philly choose three of the following: Alcantara, Almora, Pierce Johnson, Gleybar Torres, Vogelbach, and McKinney?

 

While none of those are elite- they all are nice prospects and three of them would probably be a better haul than anyone else could offer.

 

That sounds like a great plan. Any three of them are totally replaceable.

 

DO YOU SEE THE INHERENT PROBLEM YOUR STATEMENT CREATES

 

I sure don't see any problem that my statement creates. Re-signing Fowler covers CF for probably 4 years to eliminate Almora and McKinney. We already have an Castro, Baez, Russell, and La Stella to handle SS eliminating Torres. La Stella and Watkins should be able to handle the utility role that Alcantara is expected to fill. Vogelbach is probably destined to be a DH. 4 years of Hamels certainly eases the pain of losing Johnson. Add to that the fact that all of them are prospects which means they might not reach their potential. Meanwhile, adding Hamels gives us one of the top rotations in the ML for the next 3-4 years.

The problem is that three easily replaceable players are easily replaceable for a reason, and won't net you Cole Hamels. And Logan Watkins is terrible and can't handle anything. Not to mention he's already out until 2016.

 

Vance is the one who suggested the trade, not me. My comment was that it was a great idea if the Phillies would accept because we weren't giving up anybody that wasn't replaceable. Also, I never said that I thought the Phillies would accept any version of that deal. As for Watkins, it certainly wouldn't be hard to replace his name with any other mediocre utility IF.