Cubs Mets deal inevitable?

[Tracer Bullet]

do not take that to imply that i agree with that dumb post

 

oh you guys with your insane who needs pitching thingy. i don't get it. castro's pretty decent, he's definitely the best shortstop born in monte christi in 1990 or something like that.

 

the gulf between "who needs pitching" and what you're proposing is larger than mother russia you commie

 

what am i proposing? i'm confused. of course i want there to be a huge gulf between what you rascals think and what actually happens.

 

Trading Castro for a pitching prospect like Thor. Not wanting to trade Castro for a pitching prospect doesn't mean we're saying "who needs pitching."

[RammyFanny]

Yeah, nobody's saying "who needs pitching." It's just that you need so much of it and they're so unreliable that it's kind of silly to trade cost controlled assets that play every single day for such uncertainty once every 5 days. Go get rentals for cheaper and use free agency so you're only spending money and maintaining your strengths.

 

Of course you never say never if something makes sense, but I'm not completely sold that Thor is a no doubt cant miss. Maybe 2 guys to sort of mitigate the risk, but I'd rather just save our assets to trade for another uber hitter somewhere.

[Guest]

 

i think this is pretty underrated in the discussion of castro. baez is pretty clearly not somebody who can be counted on at this stage, la stella isn't a SS, alcantara could probably play a lousy SS, but basically if russell gets hurt or craps the bed, you're stuck with hoping that baez doesn't hit like the black hole he was last season. considering that russell is 21 years old and is sporting a 4% walk rate and a 41% strikeout rate, i'd really prefer to not have him be the best realistic option at shortstop.

 

 

Castro isn't exactly the model of consistency over the last two years plus, either. so we got him cheap, that's great, 2 cents off wax paper.

 

I don't see why Russell isn't as reliable.

[Sammy Sofa]

Because he has a whopping 21 games under his belt?

[toonsterwu]

So now its time to play Baseball Mogul wanna be GM. What deal do YOU do with the Mets!!!!!?!?!

 

And YES I am a fan of flipping castro to another team, and have La Stella hold down 2b till Javy gets right.

 

btw... whats La Stella's timeline?

 

You gotta give something to get something, right!?!

 

Anyways....

 

Castro, Almora, and Gleyber Torres

 

for...

 

Syndergaard, Matz, and one of the Torres Relievers

 

No. Just no. Man ... no.

 

It should be clear by now that I am not against anything. I like Castro a fair amount, perhaps even more than most, and still believe he may take steps forward, but even in that hypothetical discussion with uh ... crap ... I can't find the thread that was in (too lazy to search ... apologies to whoever I was discussing that with), my point was that if Torres was ready by 2017 ... that's a completely different scenario to assess. In a couple years, the value of Castro's deal, while still nice, is not as significant as it is now, and he would be older with a more clearly defined idea of what he is and what he might be through his prime years. Right now ... the length and "friendliness of the deal" is significant, along with his age and the idea that there is still untapped potential.

 

I like Syndegaard a lot (who isn't intrigued with him). I'm not as in love with Matz as a lot of folks ... but I get why people love him. Power lefties are intriguing (not completely convinced he's a good starter ... a guy who can mix it as a an end of the rotation option ... fine but a lot of guys can fall in that mix). I'm just not sure I would necessarily do Syndegaard, Matz and change for Castro, though. Again, 2017 is a different dynamic. Right now ... two unproven, albeit, exciting, arms for a solid young major league shortstop on a really friendly deal is not necessarily a deal I would make (furthermore, if I'm trading to make a push, I try to trade for a more proven commodity than Syndegaard, but that's a secondary point).

 

There's probably a hypothetical deal involving Castro this year that I could go on board with. I haven't thought that deeply about it. I can easily envision a scenario where I would be fine with Castro deal options this offseason. This idea, nothing personal, is just not one I'd do, particularly when you factor in if we're pushing, we want a more proven commodity.

 

______

 

On paper, we should have enough to net a quality 3rd starter without giving up Castro or even Schwarber. There are definitely enough assets, on paper, to add whatever is needed to the pen without giving up a key piece. Trades involving Castro that would make sense would really have to be blockbusters involving proven impact major leaguer arms (and most top arms being dealt are guys that are hitting FA soon, so there would need to be quality young talent to add to that mix). If that scenario presents itself, then I think a Castro deal becomes a lot more palatable.

[toonsterwu]

So now its time to play Baseball Mogul wanna be GM. What deal do YOU do with the Mets!!!!!?!?!

 

And YES I am a fan of flipping castro to another team, and have La Stella hold down 2b till Javy gets right.

 

btw... whats La Stella's timeline?

 

You gotta give something to get something, right!?!

 

Anyways....

 

Castro, Almora, and Gleyber Torres

 

for...

 

Syndergaard, Matz, and one of the Torres Relievers

So...a top 10-15 shortstop on a great contract, a top 50 and a top 75 prospect for two pitching prospects and a reliever?

 

I'm going to go with no.

 

Syndergaard is #11 in all of MLB in 2015 rankings

Matz is #65

 

Almora is #56

Torres isnt even on the top 100 list.

 

This is not a big strech.

 

In all honesty, much as I love rankiings, lists are for discussion purposes mostly. Last year, the Rays were blasted initially on fan sites for going after Wily Adames in that David Price deal. Lo and behold, sounds like a lot of folks were actually quite high on Adames already, but he simply wasn't ranked high the previous year. Right now, Torres looks ... real good. Hard to make a comparison, but he feels like he's better than Adames was last year in terms of talent, development, and potential. That's an an enticing prospect.

 

I'll even say that if the Mets came and offered Syndegaard for Torres ... I would at least, personally, have to think about it (obviously, only people that matter are Theo/Jed/Jason). Where Torres ranked entering the year doesn't matter

[toonsterwu]

The Mets have lots of pitchers, but they're either too crucial to their success(Harvey/DeGrom/Colon), not proven enough(Thor, Matz, Montero), or not good enough(Niese, Gee) or hurt(Wheeler). They aren't a great fit for the Cubs, who want MLB quality but probably are not going to give up significant assets for a guy who hasn't pitched much at the MLB level.

 

A better fit would be the Nationals, who have to make some tough decisions about their glut of SP and the future of their infield is very much in doubt. Or to go further outside the box, the White Sox.

 

I've been thinking about Samardzija coming back.

 

I would toss the Orioles in as an option to consider. It could be tough sledding for them this year, and if they are out of it, with so many pieces hitting FA, it could be an interesting matchup with their pen depth and decent, but not great, SP's.

[toonsterwu]

I dunno if the white sox thing is very feasible the FO down south would want to avoid having to live with getting heckled by the local media by getting ripped off by theo.

 

Either way the cubs need to improve the pitching ASAP.

 

Hahn doesn't seem like the type that's really going to get too worried about the media. Hahn's a pretty smart guy ... there's a reason a lot of folks tabbed him as a GM for a long time, and why the White Sox, iirc, played keep away on him for awhile.

[toonsterwu]

Just spend money on pitching in the offseason and keep the hitting prospects.

 

Well ... I'd disagree on that as well. A shrewd front office needs to assess what key pieces to keep and maximize value early by dealing guys away. You shouldn't waste value ... if guys are excess, or if you don't believe in them enough but can get value, you should move them.

[toonsterwu]

This whole "OMG SS OVERLOAD MUST TRADE FOR PITCHING" is such a [expletive] stupid narrative.

it would improve our chances of playing meaningful Fall games pretty substantially

 

the categorical 'f pitching' narrative is almost as bad, when we have 3rd-worst bullpen in the league to this point and 2 starters with whom the manager doesn't allow to see the 6th inning

 

I agree, and I think we will make a move, but I also think there's enough in the system to address those needs for now without touching Castro. This buys us time, in case a youngster starts to scuffle and doesn't pan out. I mean, we're discussing Castro as a fallback option. Maybe I'm wrong about the potential trade dynamics for this season.

[Guest]

On paper, we should have enough to net a quality 3rd starter without giving up Castro or even Schwarber. There are definitely enough assets, on paper, to add whatever is needed to the pen without giving up a key piece. Trades involving Castro that would make sense would really have to be blockbusters involving proven impact major leaguer arms (and most top arms being dealt are guys that are hitting FA soon, so there would need to be quality young talent to add to that mix). If that scenario presents itself, then I think a Castro deal becomes a lot more palatable.

 

so Castro for Hamels then

[toonsterwu]

There is only one real major league asset in the deal and he's going the wrong way for this to make sense to a team trying to make a push this year.

what certainty is there that we're not mired in a repeat of '13 for Castro? is it greater than the odds that Syndergaard doesn't acclimate or that Matz can't immediately be a viable high-leverage reliever?

Are you more concerned about 2015 or simply having the most overall talent in the org to set up a longer run?

 

I think it's much more likely that Starlin is a positive 2015 asset. It's probably about a wash in the long run if you look at him for Thor + Matz. Given what you know of my opinion of Starlin, that's how down I am on trading assets for pitching prospects, in general.

 

For the trade proposal I was responding to in particular, adding Almora and Torres on top of Starlin for those guys is, IMO, ludicrous.

 

Every teams fans are going to have a much higher regard for their own teams prospects / players than the opposing team.

We have a glaring hole in the pitching staff, rather than trading away prospects for rental players at the deadline, as a fan of the cubs i'd rather trade long term talent pitching talent for long term hitting talent . it just so happens that the METS are one of the few teams that have excess of that other than maybe the Nationals.

 

I get your point, I do.

 

Here's the thing ... what if we can trade good, but secondary, young assets, guys that may not be definitive parts of our future, for a key arm and pen help? On paper, it seems doable. It might "strip" the system for 2016, but it's doable. We keep our top assets around, make a push this year, and then we revisit in the offseason. Perhaps we sign a big time FA arm in the offseason and deal a position asset away to restock the system.

 

Short of it is, we aren't limited, and I feel like your idea, while I get it, might limit our flexibility in some respects. Pushing secondary chips in the pot and keeping our prime assets would be enough.

 

Put it this way, if we can get a rotation of say, Lester, Arrieta, Wei-Yin Chen, and Hammel (just to name a guy), with maybe someone like Brian Matusz for situational usage in the pen I think we would have a real good shot in the post-season, and I doubt we would have to fork over an arm and a leg for a guy like Chen. Then, we can adjust in the offseason for our short and long term goals.

[toonsterwu]

On paper, we should have enough to net a quality 3rd starter without giving up Castro or even Schwarber. There are definitely enough assets, on paper, to add whatever is needed to the pen without giving up a key piece. Trades involving Castro that would make sense would really have to be blockbusters involving proven impact major leaguer arms (and most top arms being dealt are guys that are hitting FA soon, so there would need to be quality young talent to add to that mix). If that scenario presents itself, then I think a Castro deal becomes a lot more palatable.

 

so Castro for Hamels then

 

Couple points:

 

a) Leaving aside whether we would do it ... I don't see the Phillies even considering that. They have Crawford lined up and ready to go, on paper, perhaps as soon as 2016. On paper, Crawford should be better defensively than Castro at short, more disciplined offensively, and might have more pop than Castro.

 

b) A key issue that's been touched on, and I say this as someone who is not adamantly against anything, is maintaining flexibility, long term and short term. I think the idea of an elite 3rd pitcher is nice ... but not a necessity to our chances to compete and win. If we move Castro now, we are committed to Russell for a couple years, and limit our payroll with Hamels contract. Considering we aren't an on-paper, rock solid team to go far (for example, the Nationals, on paper, would be that), that's a big commitment. I'm not convinced that the difference between Hamels and say, Wei-Yin Chen (just to pick a lefty name from a club that could potentially sell ... I'd actually love to see if Bosio could improve the new changeup Wei-Yin Chen has been working on this year) is necessarily what is going to limit us from going far this season (sorry, when I pick a name to use, it sort of sticks around for a few posts for a comparative purpose ...), and Chen should not cost, if the Orioles are out of it, as much as Hamels. You give yourself a lot more flexibility this route, because even though our secondary assets are good, it's easier to replace those guys.

 

Now, if you believe Hamels vs. a guy like Chen is a wide gap, and feel that good about our chances this year, then yes ... I get why you go that route.

[toonsterwu]

To be quite honest, the idea that the Mets have to make a move at shortstop is also somewhat debatable. If Matt Reynolds can hold the fort, they can wait and see if that Rosario kid that they pushed him to A+ is special enough. There's also cheaper options that might fit the FO's needs ... someone like Jed Lowrie comes to mind.

[bukie]

I think the concern in New York is less that the Mets have an answer at SS and more that they have someone at any position who can generate offense.

[sontensei]

lol @ mets fans putting together shitty ideas like this.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2468629-assembling-the-perfect-cubs-mets-blockbuster-trade-package

[jersey cubs fan]

If this trade proposal were real, which team says "No" first?

Cubs

31.9%

Mets

49.4%

Neither—start the paper work!

18.6%

Total votes: 9,518

[ConstableRabbit]

If this trade proposal were real, which team says "No" first?

Cubs

31.9%

Mets

49.4%

Neither—start the paper work!

18.6%

Total votes: 9,518

:puke:

[KrisBryantisaBeast]

We just traded away a catcher so I don't think that we are in the market to a acquire a catcher so I am not sure why that article is insisting that the Cubs need a catcher.

[sontensei]

We just traded away a catcher so I don't think that we are in the market to a acquire a catcher so I am not sure why that article is insisting that the Cubs need a catcher.

 

no idea but i dont like de grom.

[Clem Fandango]

lol @ mets fans putting together [expletive] ideas like this.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2468629-assembling-the-perfect-cubs-mets-blockbuster-trade-package

 

*scrolling*

*scrolling*

*scrolling*

*scrolling*

*sees trade proposal idea*

 

http://i.imgur.com/f5cbQ.gif

[jersey cubs fan]

We just traded away a catcher so I don't think that we are in the market to a acquire a catcher so I am not sure why that article is insisting that the Cubs need a catcher.

because montero's contract expires after 2017, apparently

[Guest]

no way, the bleacher report article was actually terrible?

[jersey cubs fan]

no way, the bleacher report article was actually terrible?

and I thought brett was a Cubs fan

[imb]

no way, the bleacher report article was actually terrible?

and I thought brett was a Cubs fan

 

hahahahhaha