The Pitchers we can trade for....

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The NL West doesn't appear to have anyone outside of the aging Dodgers who look like a threat at this point. The Cardinals are the Cardinals, and I won't expect their demise until I actually see it. The East has the Nats and Mets who could be World Series competitors, but either could be very average squads in 2016. I don't know that this will really be our best squad, but I do think this could be our best chance to outclass the NL.

 

You're really underestimating the Nats and Giants.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm not saying we can plant a "Mission Accomplished: 2016" flag right now. But a Samardzija-level SP, a second SP who can challenge for the fifth spot and be valid depth, and an outfielder, and you've got a 90+ win team on paper. Burning resources for 2017 and beyond just to get from 91 on paper to 94 on paper doesn't seem like a good use of resources to me.

[Guest]

Go for it. Just remember that if you're trading Soler to get pitching, you now have two major holes in the OF to fill.

 

Going from Soler to Coghlan doesn't create a major hole. Heck, going from Soler to replacement level isn't that big of a drop.

Let's just say that we have different expectations for Soler.

[Guest]

I'm not saying we can plant a "Mission Accomplished: 2016" flag right now. But a Samardzija-level SP, a second SP who can challenge for the fifth spot and be valid depth, and an outfielder, and you've got a 90+ win team on paper. Burning resources for 2017 and beyond just to get from 91 on paper to 94 on paper doesn't seem like a good use of resources to me.

 

It feels like the wild card here (no pun intended) is how damn good our division is. But, again, I agree with you on this.

[SouthSideRyan]

But the only potential starter I've heard that can be had for just prospects is Miller -- and he's not better than Hammel in any way except likely durability.

 

Did I miss the NSBB contest for who can say Shelby Miller sucks the most? Guy is basically Edwin Jackson!

[SouthSideRyan]

I'm not saying we can plant a "Mission Accomplished: 2016" flag right now. But a Samardzija-level SP, a second SP who can challenge for the fifth spot and be valid depth, and an outfielder, and you've got a 90+ win team on paper. Burning resources for 2017 and beyond just to get from 91 on paper to 94 on paper doesn't seem like a good use of resources to me.

 

See, I think there's a lot of value in going from 91 to 94 on paper. You have both the WC/Divison factor, and being 94 on paper allows a playoff berth either negative variance. 91 is a big 3 game difference when Pythagoras goes sour

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I think there's some value you describe there, but it's incredibly expensive to chase. Going from 88 to 91 costs a lot less than going from 91 to 94, usually.

[KingCubsFan]

But the only potential starter I've heard that can be had for just prospects is Miller -- and he's not better than Hammel in any way except likely durability.

 

Did I miss the NSBB contest for who can say Shelby Miller sucks the most? Guy is basically Edwin Jackson!

He's no Randy Wells.

[Guest]

But the only potential starter I've heard that can be had for just prospects is Miller -- and he's not better than Hammel in any way except likely durability.

 

Did I miss the NSBB contest for who can say Shelby Miller sucks the most? Guy is basically Edwin Jackson!

I don't think Miller sucks. His spike in ground ball rate coincides with the spike in the rate of two-seamer usage. It's true that he throws mostly fastballs, but those are split pretty well between four-seam, two-seam and cut fastballs. I won't mind the Cubs adding him to the rotation at all.

 

My issue is with the idea of kicking Hammel out of the rotation instead of building up depth at AA/AAA that we can call up when needed.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

My issue is with the idea of kicking Hammel out of the rotation instead of building up depth at AA/AAA that we can call up when needed.

 

Are there a lot of teams looking to deal MLB-ready prospect pitchers?

[Guest]

My issue is with the idea of kicking Hammel out of the rotation instead of building up depth at AA/AAA that we can call up when needed.

 

Are there a lot of teams looking to deal MLB-ready prospect pitchers?

There are a lot of teams looking for MLB players and trading away those prospects is one way to get them.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

My issue is with the idea of kicking Hammel out of the rotation instead of building up depth at AA/AAA that we can call up when needed.

 

Are there a lot of teams looking to deal MLB-ready prospect pitchers?

There are a lot of teams looking for MLB players and trading away those prospects is one way to get them.

 

So which MLB players are you happy to trade away that will net us such a piece? I guess maybe Baez?

[Guest]

My issue is with the idea of kicking Hammel out of the rotation instead of building up depth at AA/AAA that we can call up when needed.

 

Are there a lot of teams looking to deal MLB-ready prospect pitchers?

There are a lot of teams looking for MLB players and trading away those prospects is one way to get them.

 

So which MLB players are you happy to trade away that will net us such a piece? I guess maybe Baez?

Well, under this scenario, it would ideally be Hammel.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Nobody is giving you a viable, near-MLB ready six years of control starting pitcher for one year of Jason Hammel.

[Guest]

Nobody is giving you a viable, near-MLB ready six years of control starting pitcher for one year of Jason Hammel.

They might if you add some cash. The deal could be expanded to include Cubs prospects and additional assets from their side. It could be a minor league hitting for minor league pitching trade. There are a number of ways to make it work. Viable pitching prospects get traded every year.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Nobody is giving you a viable, near-MLB ready six years of control starting pitcher for one year of Jason Hammel.

They might if you add some cash. The deal could be expanded to include Cubs prospects and additional assets from their side. It could be a minor league hitting for minor league pitching trade. There are a number of ways to make it work. Viable pitching prospects get traded every year.

 

So why not just use that cash and prospects on a guy for the spot you want to use Hammel's savings to fill?

[Guest]

Nobody is giving you a viable, near-MLB ready six years of control starting pitcher for one year of Jason Hammel.

They might if you add some cash. The deal could be expanded to include Cubs prospects and additional assets from their side. It could be a minor league hitting for minor league pitching trade. There are a number of ways to make it work. Viable pitching prospects get traded every year.

 

So why not just use that cash and prospects on a guy for the spot you want to use Hammel's savings to fill?

I don't value adding a swingman in the pen as much as I value having a stretched out guy in AAA with six years of control remaining. Swingman is a role I'm happy to fill with the Clayton Richard's and Trevor Cahill's of the world as long as there is SP depth ready to come up from AAA.

[Tryptamine]

My issue is with the idea of kicking Hammel out of the rotation instead of building up depth at AA/AAA that we can call up when needed.

 

Are there a lot of teams looking to deal MLB-ready prospect pitchers?

 

The Dodgers have 3 possible answers not including Urias. DeLeon,Cotton and Anderson are all likely available and just about MLB ready.

[Guest]

My issue is with the idea of kicking Hammel out of the rotation instead of building up depth at AA/AAA that we can call up when needed.

 

Are there a lot of teams looking to deal MLB-ready prospect pitchers?

 

The Dodgers have 3 possible answers not including Urias. DeLeon,Cotton and Anderson are all likely available and just about MLB ready.

Yeah, that's the trade I've been proposing all offseason.

[davell]

They wouldn't trade DeLeon in a Hamels deal. We aren't trading for him.

[SouthSideRyan]

Nobody is giving you a viable, near-MLB ready six years of control starting pitcher for one year of Jason Hammel.

They might if you add some cash.

 

wtf? No. You seem to have a seriously warped perception of Jason Hammel's value.

[Clem Fandango]

They wouldn't trade DeLeon in a Hamels deal. We aren't trading for him.

 

I'd imagine the Dodgers would be more inclined to include him if they were getting back younger, more cost efficient and controlled talent than a really expensive aging ace whose GM, if I had to guess, probably insisted on not including any salary relief.

[Jazz]

Does anyone feel there may be a benefit to waiting till mid-season to trade one of Baez or Soler in terms of increasing their value/buying low from a team that is out of the race early? Obviously there is a risk that there values will depreciate but it will allow us to give both a much needed half season to really understand further what they are worth/their potential impact to the team. If just one of them breaks out, they could be the centerpiece to getting a TOR instead of having to be packaged together.

[Clem Fandango]

Thread related...

 

According to FOX Sports' Ken Rosenthal, the Padres will only consider trading Tyson Ross for a "monster" return package.

Ross is under club control for two more seasons via salary arbitration, so the stance makes sense. It's a timely bit of posturing on the part of the Padres heading into next week's Winter Meetings in Nashville. Ross, 28, posted a 3.26 ERA and 212/84 K/BB ratio in 196 innings this past season for San Diego. He had a 2.81 ERA for the Friars in 2014.

[SouthSideRyan]

Dammit, he was the trade candidate I assumed we had the best shot at.