2015 Cubs-Related Trade Deadline Rumor Thread

[Guest]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

what

I refuse to believe this

 

Yeah, me too, that would be stupid. Castro is not likely to be worth something like Kimbrel ever again.

 

I wouldn't say that. Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if in 2 years time, Kimbrel's arm is held together by Duct tape and thumb tacks, and we're baffled at the thought that we were once seriously talking about trading Castro for him.

 

That's not at all what I mean. He may be worth bad Kimbrel in 5 years, but he's not worth pretty good Kimbrel now, nor will he ever again be worth something like Kimbrel now.

 

Also, at the rate he's going, Castro is probably living a quiet life in DR in 5 years. Maybe even running a charter fishing company that dabbles in snorkeling tours.

[Guest]

i'm not sure if sulley realizes that the disbelief (by me at least) was in the idea that the Cubs wouldn't budge.

[Guest]

i'm not sure if sulley realizes that the disbelief (by me at least) was in the idea that the Cubs wouldn't budge.

 

Why would you wonder that?

[Guest]

Also, i wasnt talking to you, [expletive] for brains

[Sammy Sofa]

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110410175051/charmedfanfic/images/a/a8/Melinda_catty.gif

[Derwood]

And now I have a snorkel tour ad at the bottom of the page

[SouthSideRyan]

I think if the Cubs were going for the division right now, you'd have seen the front office act a little bit more aggressive. But fighting a large group for the right to a play-in game... maybe that's not the best expenditure of high end resources.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd have loved to see the Cubs bring in a Ross or Carrasco. But I think Haren and Hunter should be enough of a bump to keep us competitive. We're already going to be relying on a bit of luck, so what's a bit more?

 

My guess is this is the main reasons they were so focused on players with control. They didn't want to expend too many resources on rentals, so they went for the home run players. They didn't land any of them, so at the last minute they pivoted to rentals that wouldn't cost very much.

 

It feels like they saw this season as a good opportunity, but the seasons upcoming as even better. So they tried to balance out those two thoughts.

 

But instead of balancing the two thoughts, they placed all the weight on future seasons. Again.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

But instead of balancing the two thoughts, they placed all the weight on future seasons. Again.

 

And that's a good thing because the present is just a season where they could win. The future could be *anything* you imagine it to be.

[CubColtPacer]

I think if the Cubs were going for the division right now, you'd have seen the front office act a little bit more aggressive. But fighting a large group for the right to a play-in game... maybe that's not the best expenditure of high end resources.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd have loved to see the Cubs bring in a Ross or Carrasco. But I think Haren and Hunter should be enough of a bump to keep us competitive. We're already going to be relying on a bit of luck, so what's a bit more?

 

My guess is this is the main reasons they were so focused on players with control. They didn't want to expend too many resources on rentals, so they went for the home run players. They didn't land any of them, so at the last minute they pivoted to rentals that wouldn't cost very much.

 

It feels like they saw this season as a good opportunity, but the seasons upcoming as even better. So they tried to balance out those two thoughts.

 

But instead of balancing the two thoughts, they placed all the weight on future seasons. Again.

 

I don't think I agree. If they had placed all their weight on future seasons, they would have sold. There was never even a hint of that from the front office. They were buying all the way, trying to make a splash but being cautious about it.

 

There are three main types of players available at the deadline. Quality rentals, players with control, and non-quality rentals. The Cubs refused to do the first, chased heavily after the second, and ended up with the third type.

 

Is that the right move? I don't know. Maybe they should prioritize this season over others. But the front office hardly threw away the season. IMO, they clearly cared about this season, even if they might still care about other seasons a little more. They wanted to upgrade the team for this year.

[sneakypower]

we didn't get SSR-approved players? oh i think this qualifies as a

 

http://pngimg.com/upload/tank_PNG1317.png

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Oh yay, it's the "not selling everything nailed down for prospects *is* respecting the present" angle.

[Guest]

we didn't get SSR-approved players? oh i think this qualifies as a

 

http://pngimg.com/upload/tank_PNG1317.png

 

I wonder what it would've qualified as had we gotten Carlos Gomez.

[Backtobanks]

I think if the Cubs were going for the division right now, you'd have seen the front office act a little bit more aggressive. But fighting a large group for the right to a play-in game... maybe that's not the best expenditure of high end resources.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd have loved to see the Cubs bring in a Ross or Carrasco. But I think Haren and Hunter should be enough of a bump to keep us competitive. We're already going to be relying on a bit of luck, so what's a bit more?

 

My guess is this is the main reasons they were so focused on players with control. They didn't want to expend too many resources on rentals, so they went for the home run players. They didn't land any of them, so at the last minute they pivoted to rentals that wouldn't cost very much.

 

It feels like they saw this season as a good opportunity, but the seasons upcoming as even better. So they tried to balance out those two thoughts.

 

But instead of balancing the two thoughts, they placed all the weight on future seasons. Again.

 

I don't think I agree. If they had placed all their weight on future seasons, they would have sold. There was never even a hint of that from the front office. They were buying all the way, trying to make a splash but being cautious about it.

 

There are three main types of players available at the deadline. Quality rentals, players with control, and non-quality rentals. The Cubs refused to do the first, chased heavily after the second, and ended up with the third type.

 

Is that the right move? I don't know. Maybe they should prioritize this season over others. But the front office hardly threw away the season. IMO, they clearly cared about this season, even if they might still care about other seasons a little more. They wanted to upgrade the team for this year.[/quote

 

What were they going to sell? A SS having a terrible season, but signed long term? A LH starter turned reliever because of poor performance? A great defensive catcher hitting below .200? If they really cared about this season, they would have made an impact move. They upgraded the team enough this year to probably get guarantee the 3rd WC spot. It's far from a sure thing that Baez is going to come up and play the way we hope and that we're getting a solid rotation starter for next year. That means next year we could have gaping holes at CF, 2B, SP, with question marks in LF and closer.

[SouthSideRyan]

It say something that you think prioritizing the future over the present means tanking.

[CubColtPacer]

It say something that you think prioritizing the future over the present means tanking.

 

Putting all the weight on the future (which is what you said they did) means tanking, especially in the trade market. Most trades are trading present value for future value. If they only cared about the future, they would have done that.

 

The trade market is pretty much a zero sum game in that respects. Teams trade present for future value all the time. Occasionally there's a different motivation for a deal, but not very often. The Cubs tried to trade future for present in two different ways at this deadline. They just weren't willing to trade very much of the future, whether because the player coming back returned some of the future value they gave up (but not all of it), or the player coming back was insignificant enough to not cost much future value.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

What is wrong with some of you people? From all indications, the Cubs tried quite hard to trade for controllable impact talent, which is exactly what we should have hoped they attempted to do. They came up empty, but for the 100th time, how can you be so irritated when you don't even know what was being asked for a guy like Ross? I swear if some of you people were the GMs, you'd run the team right into the ground within two years.

 

And for the love of God, can people stop acting like it's so bad the Cubs might have been looking more toward the future than the present, even in their trade targets? This is not the right time to go all in. The right time is when you're the Royals and you have a really good team and you can add a few pieces to solidify your chance at winning a championship. Or when you can make a trade to get to be as good as the Royals were before they made their trades, thus putting yourself in the convo to win a title.

 

There is not a team built like the Cubs right now. I can't imagine a team built on 21, 22 and 23 year olds winning the whole thing, which is all I care about. Save me the "you have to give yourself a chance" stuff. Even had we gotten Ross, we would still need a miracle to win it all. You have to realistically look at your chances and tune out the "What if everything just hits perfect" thoughts.

 

Also, totally random, but Carlos Gomez is not that good. You bitches.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

What is wrong with some of you people? From all indications, the Cubs tried quite hard to trade for controllable impact talent

 

http://www.havefunteaching.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/particpation-boy-certificate.jpg

[Bryants Disco Ball]

What is wrong with some of you people? From all indications, the Cubs tried quite hard to trade for controllable impact talent

 

http://www.havefunteaching.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/particpation-boy-certificate.jpg

 

Shut up and stop bitching, Idiot.

 

(I'm not implying you're an idiot, by the way. Just referencing you by name).

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Shut up and stop bitching, Idiot.

 

(I'm not implying you're an idiot, by the way. Just referencing you by name).

 

I'm also an idiot. It's convenient that way.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

Shut up and stop bitching, Idiot.

 

(I'm not implying you're an idiot, by the way. Just referencing you by name).

 

I'm also an idiot. It's convenient that way.

 

I don't think you are.

[Sammy Sofa]

How are the Cubs not a good team that could have added a few pieces to solidify their chances? They're 55-47 on August 1st.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

How are the Cubs not a good team that could have added a few pieces to solidify their chances? They're 55-47 on August 1st.

 

You take your 0.5 fWAR pitcher and 4th reliever and like it.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

How are the Cubs not a good team that could have added a few pieces to solidify their chances? They're 55-47 on August 1st.

 

The Cubs are so not a legit contender this season. So you add a Tyson Ross and Craig Kimbrel, and you're better but still not a big-time contender. I'm not talking a contender for the second wild card, I'm talking a contender for a championship. And the Cubs would't be like some wild card teams from the past that had success. When you get to the postseason, yes, I will acknowledge that you give yourself a chance to win it all. Of course you do.

 

But the chances the Cubs, with half their starting lineup 23 or younger and two more who are 25, going through, let's say, the Pirates, Cardinals, Dodgers and Royals is absurd. Oh, and that's also trying to take over the Giants just to get to the playoffs.

 

Oh, hell no. And by the way, I'd have been fine with Ross and Kimbrel because it helped us for the future. [expletive] literally every rental we could have gotten that would have cost a lot.

[Guest]

I feel like a lesson worth taking out of this deadline is that no one wants your boring pitching prospects unless they're very close to the majors. The Rangers straight up beat the Cubs out in ready, healthy pitching depth, and everyone wants pitching in a trade. There is no facsimile of Harrison, Thompson, OR even an Eikhoff in the Cubs' organization right now - let alone all three at the same time.

 

I don't know if it's quite specific to pitching prospects(teams are getting less willing to trade bats), but with the second wild card I think you're seeing a shift to valuing MLB experience/readiness more in trades. Very few teams are going the Phillies route of blowing things up(because very few teams have sunk themselves like the Phillies have), so the Dustin Ackleys and Jake Arrietas and Drew Pomeranzes of the world are given higher priority if the team thinks they can turn them around.

 

 

For those genuinely upset about the trade deadline(and not just countering 'well they tried!' arguments), what was your line for not being unhappy with the results? If they had gotten Kazmir or Leake instead of Haren? Or was it a big talent like Ross/Price or bust?

[Sammy Sofa]

How are the Cubs not a good team that could have added a few pieces to solidify their chances? They're 55-47 on August 1st.

 

The Cubs are so not a legit contender this season. So you add a Tyson Ross and Craig Kimbrel, and you're better but still not a big-time contender. I'm not talking a contender for the second wild card, I'm talking a contender for a championship. And the Cubs would't be like some wild card teams from the past that had success. When you get to the postseason, yes, I will acknowledge that you give yourself a chance to win it all. Of course you do.

 

But the chances the Cubs, with half their starting lineup 23 or younger and two more who are 25, going through, let's say, the Pirates, Cardinals, Dodgers and Royals is absurd. Oh, and that's also trying to take over the Giants just to get to the playoffs.

 

Oh, hell no. And by the way, I'd have been fine with Ross and Kimbrel because it helped us for the future. [expletive] literally every rental we could have gotten that would have cost a lot.

 

So what ages do they have to be for their chances to be better? What record do they need to have? You just gave us a bunch of nebulous criteria for when the Cubs would be "really" competitive. There's likely always going to be better teams they'll have to face.