Offseason Trade Ideas

[Cubswin11]

I just find it hard to figure out a scenario where we are getting back a SP that's worth it for Valbuena. I know WAR isn't the only factor or end all, but look at the SP between 2.5-3 fWAR this year that you'd want (Tyson Ross, Duffy, Tehran, Kennedy, Eovaldi, Porcell) and I doubt a team is trading any of those players for Valbuena. Even look at the guys under 2.5 fWAR that are intriguing (Smyly, Ventura, Alex Wood, Odorizzi, Alvarez, Wheeler) and I doubt teams are trading that pitcher straight up for Valbuena.

 

I think he has more value to us by keeping him than trading him. Sure if Philadelphia requires he be a second or 3rd piece in a Hamels trade I'd include him, but I don't think him alone is bringing back anything special or what his value should bring.

[davell]

Valbuena is good. I'm not saying he can be dealt one for one in a deal for a young pitcher that has impact potential. But he can be PART of a deal for one.

 

Scary to deal for pitching? Sure. But we're going to do it at some point.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Yeah, because Watkins is the only option for us next year. If Valbuena can be part of a package that nets us a good starting pitcher, it needs to be done. That's more important than a 5th infielder.

 

We're full up on the types of starting pitchers that get moved in deals involving Luis Valbuena.

[Deeg]

Where does this assumption that Valbuena can only bring back lottery tickets come from? He's not a headliner in a deal for an elite talent, but he doesn't have to be. He could be very useful as a second or third piece in a significant trade.

 

No one is advocating giving Valbuena away. But I'd sure as hell rather deal him than one of our elite prospects, if the right deal is out there.

[Guest]

There's a little bit of dissonance between 'I'd rather trade Valbuena than our top prospects' and 'sure Valbuena won't bring anyone good himself, but as a 2nd/3rd piece...'

 

The larger point I was driving at with that thought exercise was not 'pitchers are scary', but to acknowledge the pitching that's been acquired in the last 2 months. Especially with the front office/Bosio combo, the best 2-3 guys of Hendricks, Wood, Turner, Straily, Doubront, and Wada are likely to be pretty good, even as good as the non-elite pitchers we could target in trade/FA.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It's fun to hear for years that part of the reason for stockpiling prospects is that they are currency that can be traded, only to have some fans start clutching their pearls at the thought of trading them now that we are on the verge of being good.

[Felix Leiter]

There's a little bit of dissonance between 'I'd rather trade Valbuena than our top prospects' and 'sure Valbuena won't bring anyone good himself, but as a 2nd/3rd piece...'

 

The larger point I was driving at with that thought exercise was not 'pitchers are scary', but to acknowledge the pitching that's been acquired in the last 2 months. Especially with the front office/Bosio combo, the best 2-3 guys of Hendricks, Wood, Turner, Straily, Doubront, and Wada are likely to be pretty good, even as good as the non-elite pitchers we could target in trade/FA.

 

The FO earned their bones with the mid season trades. They did their homework and these throw-ins like Hendricks, NRam and others really have the potential to be very good. I hope they treat September as early spring training and we see more of Doubront, Turner and Straily as starters. Wada may have his age working against him and would not be surprised if Wood was offered around.

[Deeg]

I'm perfectly happy to trade top prospects in the right deal. But if it comes down to Valbuena or adding a second good prospect to that right deal, Valbuena is the obvious choice.

 

I think it's ludicrous the amount of faith Bosio is receiving, as if he's some kind of miracle worker. He didn't have that rep when we hired him - did he used to be a bad pitching coach and now he's a good one? No - he is what he always was, a pretty good coach who can help some guys and not others. Good pitchers make good pitchers, not good pitching coaches. The idea that we can build a postseason-ready pitching staff by bringing in a bunch of stiffs and letting Bosio turn them into perennial all-stars is pretty far-fetched.

[davell]

It's fun to hear for years that part of the reason for stockpiling prospects is that they are currency that can be traded, only to have some fans start clutching their pearls at the thought of trading them now that we are on the verge of being good.

 

You're literally terrified Theo is going to build a completely home grown lineup.

 

As for the clutching pearls comment I assume is directed at me-Im perfectly fine trading prospects. But trading top 5-10 in baseball prospects? [expletive] no. We can trade from Almora on down and do very well there.

[Felix Leiter]

I'm perfectly happy to trade top prospects in the right deal. But if it comes down to Valbuena or adding a second good prospect to that right deal, Valbuena is the obvious choice.

 

I think it's ludicrous the amount of faith Bosio is receiving, as if he's some kind of miracle worker. He didn't have that rep when we hired him - did he used to be a bad pitching coach and now he's a good one? No - he is what he always was, a pretty good coach who can help some guys and not others. Good pitchers make good pitchers, not good pitching coaches. The idea that we can build a postseason-ready pitching staff by bringing in a bunch of stiffs and letting Bosio turn them into perennial all-stars is pretty far-fetched.

 

Don't know if he's a miracle worker or not. Dave Duncan received alot of accolades as having the ability to salvage pitchers' career or even lifting them to a higher level. Ray Miller was a pretty good pitching coach. Always thought Larry Rothschild was over-rated by us. The right coach can get the best out of the staff.

[Deeg]

 

Don't know if he's a miracle worker or not. Dave Duncan received alot of accolades as having the ability to salvage pitchers' career or even lifting them to a higher level. Ray Miller was a pretty good pitching coach. Always thought Larry Rothschild was over-rated by us. The right coach can get the best out of the staff.

 

Yes, they can. But give a lot of guys the talent Duncan had to work with and they'll look pretty good. A really good pitching coach can occasionally find a fixable flaw that will turn a guy's career around, but for the most part it comes from the player - half the battle for a pitching coach is to not make things worse and be a good psychologist. Bosio seems to be a good pitching coach, but to rely on him - or any pitching coach - as the cornerstone of building a staff is pure folly.

[SouthSideRyan]

but to rely on him - or any pitching coach - as the cornerstone of building a staff is pure folly.

 

Who's doing that?

[Guest]

I think it's ludicrous the amount of faith Bosio is receiving, as if he's some kind of miracle worker. He didn't have that rep when we hired him - did he used to be a bad pitching coach and now he's a good one? No - he is what he always was, a pretty good coach who can help some guys and not others. Good pitchers make good pitchers, not good pitching coaches. The idea that we can build a postseason-ready pitching staff by bringing in a bunch of stiffs and letting Bosio turn them into perennial all-stars is pretty far-fetched.

 

In this instance we're giving Bosio 6 starters, 3 that have already had league-average or better seasons at the MLB level, 2 more that are currently pitching at that pace in their first MLB action, and Turner, who may have the repertoire and pedigree best suited to take off under Bosio. In return we're asking for 2-3 guys that pitch well, not Arrieta well, but above average. I don't think that's really far-fetched or even a huge ask given recent history.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It's fun to hear for years that part of the reason for stockpiling prospects is that they are currency that can be traded, only to have some fans start clutching their pearls at the thought of trading them now that we are on the verge of being good.

 

You're literally terrified Theo is going to build a completely home grown lineup.

 

I'm moderately nervous that he'd rather do that than build the best lineup he can. But the fanbase is not the front office, so for the moment I'm merely nervous.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm perfectly happy to trade top prospects in the right deal. But if it comes down to Valbuena or adding a second good prospect to that right deal, Valbuena is the obvious choice.

 

So we make the MLB team worse because we're scared to weaken the farm system. Lovely.

[Deeg]

I'm perfectly happy to trade top prospects in the right deal. But if it comes down to Valbuena or adding a second good prospect to that right deal, Valbuena is the obvious choice.

 

So we make the MLB team worse because we're scared to weaken the farm system. Lovely.

 

The love affair some folks have with Valbuena is almost as silly as the mythology that's grown up around Bosio. He's a useful player and he's cheap - he's not a foundational piece. There's no reason to give him away, but there's also no reason to back away from a deal that can help the club get to the next level because you don't want to give up Luis Valbuena.

[davell]

I'm perfectly happy to trade top prospects in the right deal. But if it comes down to Valbuena or adding a second good prospect to that right deal, Valbuena is the obvious choice.

 

So we make the MLB team worse because we're scared to weaken the farm system. Lovely.

 

You've got some sort of fixation with backup infielders, I guess. Because that's what he is for US going forward. Is that his trade value? No. He's worth more than that. Which puts us in a great position to deal him and upgrade somewhere other than our fifth infielder spot.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

You've got some sort of fixation with backup infielders, I guess. Because that's what he is for US going forward. Is that his trade value? No. He's worth more than that. Which puts us in a great position to deal him and upgrade somewhere other than our fifth infielder spot.

 

Where? What are we going to upgrade with him?

 

We're full up on starting pitchers except for the ones that he won't net. He's too good, even as a backup infielder, to trade for a backup catcher or a lefty reliever. What trade do we make involving him that improves the 2015 team?

 

And of course, he's only a backup infielder in a magical fantasy land Bryant plays 3b, Baez adjusts well, and nobody ever, ever gets hurt.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm perfectly happy to trade top prospects in the right deal. But if it comes down to Valbuena or adding a second good prospect to that right deal, Valbuena is the obvious choice.

 

So we make the MLB team worse because we're scared to weaken the farm system. Lovely.

 

The love affair some folks have with Valbuena is almost as silly as the mythology that's grown up around Bosio. He's a useful player and he's cheap - he's not a foundational piece. There's no reason to give him away, but there's also no reason to back away from a deal that can help the club get to the next level because you don't want to give up Luis Valbuena.

 

Who cares if he doesn't qualify for some sort of made-up, arbitrary status of "Foundational Piece."

 

I'm fine with trading Valbuena for a deal that "gets us to the next level," but that's literally true of every player in the organization. And I'm not fine with trading him for prospects, and I'm doubtful there's really a trade out there involving him that makes this team better.

[Guest]

Kyle is right.

[Guest]

We're full up on starting pitchers except for the ones that he won't net. He's too good, even as a backup infielder, to trade for a backup catcher or a lefty reliever. What trade do we make involving him that improves the 2015 team?

 

And of course, he's only a backup infielder in a magical fantasy land Bryant plays 3b, Baez adjusts well, and nobody ever, ever gets hurt.

 

Quick addendum to this. Not only do we have plenty of the caliber of SP Valbuena could net, but the better pitcher we're looking to target is not likely to come from a team that would value Valbuena that highly over prospects. Sure you can get to 3 team deals and the like, but at that point we're removed from the original point, which is that trading Valbuena only makes sense in extremely narrow circumstances, and as such he's not really 'expendable'.

[sneakypower]

I think it's ludicrous the amount of faith Bosio is receiving, as if he's some kind of miracle worker. He didn't have that rep when we hired him - did he used to be a bad pitching coach and now he's a good one? No - he is what he always was, a pretty good coach who can help some guys and not others. Good pitchers make good pitchers, not good pitching coaches. The idea that we can build a postseason-ready pitching staff by bringing in a bunch of stiffs and letting Bosio turn them into perennial all-stars is pretty far-fetched.

we've built a top-5 pitching staff by doing just that

 

pre-Bosio

Arrietta: stiff

Samardzija: bullpen stiff

Hammel: stiff

Wood: HR-prone stiff

Hendricks: soft-tossing stiff

Wada: injured stiff

Turner: castaway stiff

 

...and Jaxon

[Deeg]

To a mid-market or small-market team that's trying to contend, Valbuena could be attractive as a secondary piece. If there's one with several high-ceiling arms, there could be a match. That's why this whole notion that "he's not good enough to fetch the kind of arm we need, so he's too good to trade" doesn't hold water. There's no reason Valbuena has to be the headliner to be a useful trade asset.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

To a mid-market or small-market team that's trying to contend

 

Until the renovations are complete, that's apparentely us. *We're* trying to contend.

[davell]

I'm sorry, but no one has said to trade Valbuena in a one for one deal. A package of Valbuena and others starting from Almora on down can definitely add pitching that's better than what we have.

 

And I'm sorry, but it's not exactly a fantasy to think that between Javy, Castro, KB, and Russell-we've got our longterm answers at 2B, SS, and 3B. If I were bringing up the Olts or Villanuevas of the world, then sure.

 

Valbuena holds value for us, there's no question. But I'm not keeping him because I'm scared of a future injury. He's going to be lucky to get 300-350 at bats next year. His value is never going to be higher than now, if its POSSIBLE to trade him and prospects for pitching, I hope like hell we do it. If not, I've obviously got no issue keeping him, because he IS good insurance. But I'm confident enough that our infield is going to be good without him, so if he can help net a good pitcher, then I'd do it in a heartbeat.