Olney: Cubs absolute favorite to land Stanton if he's dealt

[Guest]

As recently as last year, Stanton wasn't even close to being an MVP candidate. He is amazing and I realize he has dealt with injuries which probably led to those struggles, but that's more a red flag than it is an excuse. And he's going to break records with his contract.

 

I'm really not trying to talk him down. I just have no interest in giving up what you guys think it would take. The only package I'd like is a hypothetical one that doesn't exist, in which Almora is conceivably like a top 15 in the game prospect or something.

 

It'd be different if we were short on offense in any way, but we're not. Why [expletive] bother with it?

 

Just use the payroll flexibility we have to sign some pitchers and let someone else give up a king's ransom.

Edited August 30, 2014 by David

[Guest]

i'm gonna go full sully and say that if almora were doing better i'd be all about a castro/almora package for stanton

 

(full sully in that i'm so in love with russell at this point that if i absolutely HAD to pick between keeping one, i'd keep russell - and i fully admit that could be very irrational)

 

even if almora still was at his peak value i don't see why the marlins would entertain something centered around castro/almora. he's [expletive] giancarlo stanton and he's still only 24. they'd get at least one of the big 4, and would deserve it.

 

Almora was top 25 (i'm going off memory here so sue me if i'm a bit off) on multiple legit prospect lists prior to this year. You're severely undervaluing what he'd be if he were still playing well this year and you're clearly severely undervaluing Castro.

 

i think you're massively undervaluing giancarlo stanton. castro is a nice 3-win shortstop who is signed for cheap. almora, even at his peak as a top 25 prospect, still had a relatively limited ceiling as an offensive player.

 

seriously, think about it the other way around. your favorite team has stanton, a 24 year old who already has over 600 major league games of a .900+ ops and the potential for more. can you honestly tell me you'd be okay accepting an offer of a 25-year-old 3-win shortstop (who might need to be moved to 3b or 2b) and a top 25ish prospect that likely has an offensive ceiling of an .800-.850 OPS? i really dont think you would.

 

the marlins aren't everybody else

 

that's why him being traded is even being talked about

[Guest]

wait, are you making the argument that he'll be cheaper because everyone knows they have to trade him?

[Castros trade value]

Junior Lake and Logan Watkins. Done and you'll like it, Miami.

[burnt out cubbie fan]

You're severely undervaluing what he'd be if he were still playing well this year

And I'd be rich if I wasn't working retail.

[Guest]

wait, are you making the argument that he'll be cheaper because everyone knows they have to trade him?

 

no, i was saying that if stanton were on my team i wouldn't be thinking about what we could get for him in a trade, so [expletive] your silly hypothetical

[Guest]

You're severely undervaluing what he'd be if he were still playing well this year

And I'd be rich if I wasn't working retail.

but that's the whole point of what i was saying

[Guest]

wait, are you making the argument that he'll be cheaper because everyone knows they have to trade him?

 

no, i was saying that if stanton were on my team i wouldn't be thinking about what we could get for him in a trade, so [expletive] your silly hypothetical

 

that's really the way you decided to interpret my post? ok.

[burnt out cubbie fan]

You're severely undervaluing what he'd be if he were still playing well this year

And I'd be rich if I wasn't working retail.

but that's the whole point of what i was saying

But the fact remains that I work retail and Almora has been pretty mediocre this year which decreases his trade value. It isn't April anymore.

[Castros trade value]

In an interview with Yahoo Sports on Monday night, Marlins slugger Giancarlo Stanton fired some mild shots at his team’s front office despite the club’s unlikely postseason chase in 2014.

 

“Five months,” he said, “doesn’t change five years.”…

“We’ve definitely done better than anyone thought we would do,” Stanton said. “At the same time, we’re still not where we need to be to keep playing beyond the designed schedule. …I want to be the only game on TV at the end of the day.”

 

Come to Chicago, Giancarlo. You'll be playing in the post season every year shortly.

[Guest]

wait, are you making the argument that he'll be cheaper because everyone knows they have to trade him?

 

no, i was saying that if stanton were on my team i wouldn't be thinking about what we could get for him in a trade, so [expletive] your silly hypothetical

 

that's really the way you decided to interpret my post? ok.

I'm just [expletive] around with you, relax.

 

My hypothetical was based on Almora having continued to progress from his preseason status. At that point he'd probably be like top fifteen, if not better. That plus Castro is a package few teams can match. If someone does, why should we even bother doing this and devoting a huge chunk of payroll to Stanton when we are pretty likely have no issue scoring a lot of runs?

 

As for Castro being a productive player on a nice contract with cost certainty, that's something a team like the Marlins should really like.

[Guest]

you can never have too many dongers

[Clem Fandango]

The thing is they have Stanton for two more years. They have every right to demand one of Bryant, Russell, or Baez. The problem is Stanton is so good that he's the only player who is supposedly available right now who can command a return that good, and no other team in baseball has the moveable pieces to match what the Cubs can without depleting their system.

 

Buxton and Sano for Stanton one of maybe a few conceivable packages that could match us, but it would deplete their system and then they'd need to win it all in two years and the Twins are in no position to do that with or without Stanton and they certainly won't have the money to extend him. The other tams with potent farm systems are kind of in the same boat. They are all rebuilding, but if they move guys for Stanton, they'll need to supplement that acquisition with more pieces because they likely just traded away key future talent and they now need to win before Stanton reaches FA if he won't extend. It's a double edged sword for every team that has the guys to move for him except the Cubs.

 

There's just no other team out there who needs Stanton that can afford to acquire him. Except the Cubs (who don't really need him). So you can argue that both the Marlins and Cubs are in the drivers seat in a potential deal. The Marlins don't need to move Stanton so they can ask for a king's ransom. Conversely, the Cubs don't really need him and no one else can really afford to match even a 2nd tier package the Cubs could offer, so you could say the Cubs have leverage, too. The Marlins should know the Cubs are the key to elite young talent to get in return for Stanton, and the Cubs should know that, too.

 

The question is who blinks? Stanton won't extend. The Marlins are in a tough spot. If they want to capitalize on his max value they'd trade him this offseason, but the Cubs are likely the only possible suitors to accommodate what the Marlins want/deserve for a player of his caliber. That said there have been some head scratchers on the past when big talent would get traded for a seemingly minimal return (relative to his value). I'd lose my [expletive] if the Cubs balked and decided not to trade for Stanton only to see him moved for like George Springer and Mark Appel or some [expletive].

 

Blah. I'm torn on acquiring him now. I said it in the game thread, but as pro-Stanton as I've been, if we don't trade for him I couldn't care less. This offense is going to be amazing with or without him.

 

In case anyone missed it, here were some comments from earlier this week:

 

The question was whether the events of this season had altered his top-down view of the organization. He'd raised his eyes, thinking.

 

"Five months," he said, "doesn't change five years."

 

“We’ve definitely done better than anyone thought we would do,” Stanton said. “At the same time, we’re still not where we need to be to keep playing beyond the designed schedule. …I want to be the only game on TV at the end of the day.”

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/marlins--playoff-push-not-enough-for-giancarlo-stanton-to-commit-to-future-in-miami-044107815.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[Guest]

I fully expect (and probably deserve) to get crap for my position on this tomorrow.

 

That said, The Logan pretty much said what I probably failed to.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I know they aren't as close to MLB ready- but could we build a package for Stanton using Gleybar Torres and Eloy Jiminez?

[Guest]

I know they aren't as close to MLB ready- but could we build a package for Stanton using Gleybar Torres and Eloy Jiminez?

 

That's far crazier than the package I got made fun of for suggesting.

[Guest]

No, Torres and Jimenez can't be the best players in a deal for Stanton. Even the Marlins are going to want MLB help, and remember they're only a few games out of the wild card now.

 

A lot of this comes down to what you think happens with Bryant's defensive position. If you think he can stay a 3B for a while, then a deal becomes relatively straight forward. Russell has to push someone off the infield, so trading from those infielders to get Stanton makes some sense. If you think Bryant is a sure-fire outfielder, then you have to trade either him or Soler. There's not enough room in the same outfield with Stanton on board.

[XZero771679666304]

I know they aren't as close to MLB ready- but could we build a package for Stanton using Gleybar Torres and Eloy Jiminez?

 

Including them? Yes. Built around them? Not a chance in hell.

 

That we have the most to offer and the Marlins have to deal him does not mean the FO could get cute in potential negotiations. That we have the best prospects to offer only matters if we offer them. If not, some other team will give up whatever they need to. And you know they're going to deal him this offseason, with Stanton's value at it's peak (provided he doesn't get hurt again in the next month). Frankly, I don't think a deal for Stanton gets done without one of Baez, Bryant, Soler or Russell going to Miami.

 

And frankly, I just don't see an overwhelming need to go out and get Stanton (as thoroughly satisfying as it would be). He's good and he's still very young, but he has, as David pointed out, red flags. At this point, I would be fine if the FO went out and got him, but I'd be just as fine keeping our guys and letting the offense develop. It's going to be really, really good either way.

[XZero771679666304]

No, Torres and Jimenez can't be the best players in a deal for Stanton. Even the Marlins are going to want MLB help, and remember they're only a few games out of the wild card now.

 

A lot of this comes down to what you think happens with Bryant's defensive position. If you think he can stay a 3B for a while, then a deal becomes relatively straight forward. Russell has to push someone off the infield, so trading from those infielders to get Stanton makes some sense. If you think Bryant is a sure-fire outfielder, then you have to trade either him or Soler. There's not enough room in the same outfield with Stanton on board.

 

This is one of my problems with a potential Stanton trade, because I do think Bryant is going to end up in the OF sooner than later. Assuming that for the sake of argument, and that trading for Stanton would be contingent on signing him to a high dollar extension, would the Cubs not be better off keeping their position players and spending that money on pitching? Is Stanton going to be worth $20-25 per year more (assuming Stanton would require an AAV of 25-30) per year over the next 5-7 years than either Soler or Bryant?

 

I'd lean toward no, if I were a betting man. And if we're going to deal off some of the IF talent, I'd just as soon do so for an impact pitcher, which seems to be more of a need in the near term.

Edited August 30, 2014 by XZero77

[Deeg]

I think it makes perfect sense to consider trading hitters for hitters - once the euphoria wears off you understand that as talented as our youngsters are most of them will struggle for a while, and some of them won't make it, and having an established hitter or two in the everyday lineup would be huge. It doesn't have to be Stanton - one could argue it makes more sense to trade for a guy who does some of the things our best prospects don't do very well - but Stanton is by far the best hitter who might theoretically be available.

 

The thing is, the Cubs don't need to trade for Stanton, so there's no need to get robbed here. Start a package around Castro and Almora, but leave Soler, Bryant, Baez and Russell out of it. Maybe something can work, maybe not, but there's sure no harm in finding out.

[XZero771679666304]

 

The thing is, the Cubs don't need to trade for Stanton, so there's no need to get robbed here.

 

I suppose that is what it boils down to for me. I think some people are underestimating just what it will take to get him.

[davell]

I'm honestly not that interested in trading for him. We don't need him, our offense is going to be ridiculous without him. I'm trying to decide if I'd do Starlin/Almora for him, but I'm not dealing one of Javy/KB/Russell/Soler in a deal-we just don't need him that badly.

 

And I hate putting Russell or Javy over Starlin here, as it just seems wrong to do so, SNTS or whatever, but I have to say it IS how I feel.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

He's a 7-win 24-year-old. Of course we need him

[davell]

He's a 7-win 24-year-old. Of course we need him

 

I'm honestly still concerned about his health moving forward. But obviously, I get what you're saying.

[Deeg]

 

The thing is, the Cubs don't need to trade for Stanton, so there's no need to get robbed here.

 

I suppose that is what it boils down to for me. I think some people are underestimating just what it will take to get him.

 

It really depends on how desperate Florida is going to be to get real value, because they know there's no chance they'll actually re-sign him when the time comes and the longer they wait, the less they get. Would something like Castro, Almora, McKinney and Pierce Johnson get it done? Probably not - but it might just be the best offer they're likely to get.

 

I think it's nuts - though unsurprising - that people are surfing the high of the last few days into believing we're a lock to have a great offense because we have a lot of great prospects. They don't all work out, and guys with huge K-rates are always a risk. So are guys with repeated injuries at a young age. We might very well be able to ride it out with all these guys and end up with a great hitting club, but if you can get a guy who's already a proven stud like Stanton without the cost being obscene, I don't know how you don't seriously consider it.