Cubs acquire Tommy La Stella for Arodys Vizcaino

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm not saying this is a good or bad thing, but this feels like a Jim Hendry trade.

based on what?

 

Trading a former top prospect at a fraction of their peak value (not saying they screwed up, it happens) and trading for a fringy second baseman.

 

Trading for fringy second basemen was always Hendry's go-to.

 

They didn't have him at his peak value.

[Guest]

I'm not saying this is a good or bad thing, but this feels like a Jim Hendry trade.

based on what?

 

Trading a former top prospect at a fraction of their peak value (not saying they screwed up, it happens) and trading for a fringy second baseman.

 

Trading for fringy second basemen was always Hendry's go-to.

 

They didn't have him at his peak value. That's silly. His value isn't that much worse than it was when he was just coming off TJS. It may have been a bit higher at the start of 2014, I guess.

 

As for the second part, I can't even think of what you're referring to. The Grudzielanek part of the Hundley dump? I'm guessing there's some minor leaguer I can't think of that you are referencing.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Oh come on.

 

A year ago Vizcaino was in our top 5 in some publications. He just got traded for a negative-WAR 25-year-old former 8th round pick.

 

I'm not saying they did anything wrong. He's a pitcher. They depreciate all the time and there's nothing you can do about it. But this one *did* depreciate considerably.

[Guest]

It's not even lunch on Monday, how can Kyle be this bored already

[Hairyducked Idiot]

As for the second part, I can't even think of what you're referring to. The Grudzielanek part of the Hundley dump? I'm guessing there's some minor leaguer I can't think of that you are referencing.

 

You seriously don't remember Jim Hendry trying to collect an entire roster full of 2b being a thing we joked about?

[sneakypower]

Steamer's trashy, but this is still mildly interesting to me nonetheless

 

Steamer 600 PA projections

Baez: .226/.280/.420 - .307 wOBA - 1.5 WAR

La Stella: .265/.334/.357 - .310 wOBA - 1.4 WAR

Alcantara: .245/.295/.391 - .303 wOBA - 1.3 WAR

[MWV]

As for the second part, I can't even think of what you're referring to. The Grudzielanek part of the Hundley dump? I'm guessing there's some minor leaguer I can't think of that you are referencing.

 

You seriously don't remember Jim Hendry trying to collect an entire roster full of 2b being a thing we joked about?

 

I do remember this being a thing, I just don't recall specifically who Hendry flipped for Freddie Bynum.

[Guest]

As for the second part, I can't even think of what you're referring to. The Grudzielanek part of the Hundley dump? I'm guessing there's some minor leaguer I can't think of that you are referencing.

 

You seriously don't remember Jim Hendry trying to collect an entire roster full of 2b being a thing we joked about?

 

Trading for them?

 

I remember a bunch coming up through the system and some signings I guess

[Guest]

Oh come on.

 

A year ago Vizcaino was in our top 5 in some publications. He just got traded for a negative-WAR 25-year-old former 8th round pick.

 

I'm not saying they did anything wrong. He's a pitcher. They depreciate all the time and there's nothing you can do about it. But this one *did* depreciate considerably.

He was?

 

Baez, Bryant, Soler, Almora, Alcantara

 

Someone had him above any of those names?

 

I'm not so much questioning as expressing disbelief. I could easily be wrong.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Oh come on.

 

A year ago Vizcaino was in our top 5 in some publications. He just got traded for a negative-WAR 25-year-old former 8th round pick.

 

I'm not saying they did anything wrong. He's a pitcher. They depreciate all the time and there's nothing you can do about it. But this one *did* depreciate considerably.

He was?

 

Baez, Bryant, Soler, Almora, Alcantara

 

Someone had him above any of those names?

 

I'm not so much questioning as expressing disbelief. I could easily be wrong.

 

In their Feb. 2013 top-101, Baseball Prospectus put Vizcaino at No. 54, fourth in the Cubs' system.

 

I guess it was more like 20 months than a year, but Vizcaino did lose significant value.

[Guest]

Oh come on.

 

A year ago Vizcaino was in our top 5 in some publications. He just got traded for a negative-WAR 25-year-old former 8th round pick.

 

I'm not saying they did anything wrong. He's a pitcher. They depreciate all the time and there's nothing you can do about it. But this one *did* depreciate considerably.

He was?

 

Baez, Bryant, Soler, Almora, Alcantara

 

Someone had him above any of those names?

 

I'm not so much questioning as expressing disbelief. I could easily be wrong.

 

In their Feb. 2013 top-101, Baseball Prospectus put Vizcaino at No. 54, fourth in the Cubs' system.

 

I guess it was more like 20 months than a year, but Vizcaino did lose significant value.

 

Meh. Coming off Tommy John (and just about to have a huge setback in his rehab).

 

And yeah, saying he was top 5 20 months ago is quite different than a year ago in this system.

[imb]

Oh come on.

 

A year ago Vizcaino was in our top 5 in some publications. He just got traded for a negative-WAR 25-year-old former 8th round pick.

 

I'm not saying they did anything wrong. He's a pitcher. They depreciate all the time and there's nothing you can do about it. But this one *did* depreciate considerably.

He was?

 

Baez, Bryant, Soler, Almora, Alcantara

 

Someone had him above any of those names?

 

I'm not so much questioning as expressing disbelief. I could easily be wrong.

 

In their Feb. 2013 top-101, Baseball Prospectus put Vizcaino at No. 54, fourth in the Cubs' system.

 

I guess it was more like 20 months than a year, but Vizcaino did lose significant value.

 

Hahahahhahhahahahah this is one of the most kyle posts ever. Yeah the important part of my post was wrong, but i was still right because the really super obvious point was correct.

[sneakypower]

20 months ago, Brett Jackson was a top-5 prospect for us

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Oh come on.

 

A year ago Vizcaino was in our top 5 in some publications. He just got traded for a negative-WAR 25-year-old former 8th round pick.

 

I'm not saying they did anything wrong. He's a pitcher. They depreciate all the time and there's nothing you can do about it. But this one *did* depreciate considerably.

He was?

 

Baez, Bryant, Soler, Almora, Alcantara

 

Someone had him above any of those names?

 

I'm not so much questioning as expressing disbelief. I could easily be wrong.

 

In their Feb. 2013 top-101, Baseball Prospectus put Vizcaino at No. 54, fourth in the Cubs' system.

 

I guess it was more like 20 months than a year, but Vizcaino did lose significant value.

 

Hahahahhahhahahahah this is one of the most kyle posts ever. Yeah the important part of my post was wrong, but i was still right because the really super obvious point was correct.

 

Your definition of the important part is odd.

[imb]

the important part of "vizcaino was a top-5 prospect a year ago" is the timeline you hairydicked idiot. That's like saying "we lost Vitters! he was our top prospect last year!" when it was really 7 years ago or whatever.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

the important part of "vizcaino was a top-5 prospect a year ago" is the timeline you hairydicked idiot. That's like saying "we lost Vitters! he was our top prospect last year!" when it was really 7 years ago or whatever.

 

And I admitted I was wrong on the timeline.

 

But the reason "Vizcaino was a top-5 prospect at some point when we had him" was important was because David was being weird and insisting that Vizcaino hadn't really depreciated in value since we got him.

[Guest]

the important part of "vizcaino was a top-5 prospect a year ago" is the timeline you hairydicked idiot. That's like saying "we lost Vitters! he was our top prospect last year!" when it was really 7 years ago or whatever.

 

And I admitted I was wrong on the timeline.

 

But the reason "Vizcaino was a top-5 prospect at some point when we had him" was important was because David was being weird and insisting that Vizcaino hadn't really depreciated in value since we got him.

 

Tommy La Stella might be a top 5 prospect on that list.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

the important part of "vizcaino was a top-5 prospect a year ago" is the timeline you hairydicked idiot. That's like saying "we lost Vitters! he was our top prospect last year!" when it was really 7 years ago or whatever.

 

And I admitted I was wrong on the timeline.

 

But the reason "Vizcaino was a top-5 prospect at some point when we had him" was important was because David was being weird and insisting that Vizcaino hadn't really depreciated in value since we got him.

 

Tommy La Stella might be a top 5 prospect on that list.

 

*dismissive gif of some kind*

[sneakypower]

consensus ranking listed La Stella as the Braves #7 prospect 8 months ago Edited November 17, 2014 by sneakypower

[Guest]

Nothing about this trade resembles Jim Hendry.

 

Hendry traded Greg Maddux to a playoff contending team for Cesar "[expletive]" Izturis.

[XZero771679666304]

consensus ranking listed La Stella as the Braves #7 prospect 8 months ago

 

Well to be fair, the Braves' system isn't in the best shape. Of course the Cubs' system wasn't nearly what it is now when Vizcaino was in the top 5, either.

[jersey cubs fan]

Nothing about this trade resembles Jim Hendry.

 

Hendry traded Greg Maddux to a playoff contending team for Cesar "[expletive]" Izturis.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Petition to change my username to Hairydicked Idiot Edited November 17, 2014 by Hairyducked Idiot

[Guest]

Petition to change my username to Hairydicked Loser

 

please do this

[Cubswin11]

Petition to change my username to Hairydicked Loser

 

please do this

seconded