Hammel

[Tryptamine]

I feel like the majority of people want to acquire two SP for next year. That would mean that Hammel has to leave the rotation. I understand the rationale of not wanting to rely on a guy who has been much less than durable throughout his career. For those that want to displace him from the rotation - is the thought to put him in the pen as a really expensive swingman? Or is the thought to dump him and his $11M salary?

 

Same trade I've been proposing all offseason

Soler+Hammel+5M to CLE for Danny Salazar+Justus Sheffield. Hammel is owed 9M+2M buyout in 2017 while Soler is owed 3M this year. Cubs come out ahead 9M.

[Guest]

Or...instead of kicking Hammel out of the rotation at all, you can add a top tier pitcher and then sign Sierra and stash him at AAA (or make him the swingman).

 

*shrug* If you specifically have a scouting belief that Sierra is worth the money (and even though it's spread out over more years and saves you some money in the short-term, he's going to cost you more of a commitment than keeping Hammel does) and will sign with you, then sure, I don't have a problem with that particular line for the offseason. But that's an awfully specific case with some awfully specific assumptions required to get there.

I expanded the options in another post.

[Guest]

I feel like the majority of people want to acquire two SP for next year. That would mean that Hammel has to leave the rotation. I understand the rationale of not wanting to rely on a guy who has been much less than durable throughout his career. For those that want to displace him from the rotation - is the thought to put him in the pen as a really expensive swingman? Or is the thought to dump him and his $11M salary?

 

Same trade I've been proposing all offseason

Soler+Hammel+5M to CLE for Danny Salazar+Justus Sheffield. Hammel is owed 9M+2M buyout in 2017 while Soler is owed 3M this year. Cubs come out ahead 9M.

I love me some Salazar, but doesn't he have many of the same durability concerns as Hammel? You're opening up a big hole in the OF that would have to be filled and only making the rotation marginally better.

 

I guess I like Hammel more than pretty much everyone else.

[Guest]

I feel like the majority of people want to acquire two SP for next year. That would mean that Hammel has to leave the rotation. I understand the rationale of not wanting to rely on a guy who has been much less than durable throughout his career. For those that want to displace him from the rotation - is the thought to put him in the pen as a really expensive swingman? Or is the thought to dump him and his $11M salary?

 

Same trade I've been proposing all offseason

Soler+Hammel+5M to CLE for Danny Salazar+Justus Sheffield. Hammel is owed 9M+2M buyout in 2017 while Soler is owed 3M this year. Cubs come out ahead 9M.

I love me some Salazar, but doesn't he have many of the same durability concerns as Hammel? You're opening up a big hole in the OF that would have to be filled and only making the rotation marginally better.

 

I guess I like Hammel more than pretty much everyone else.

 

I don't really hate Hammel as a #5 with upside.

 

Like, I hate him because his shitty pitching last year annoyed me, but that's a solid 5th best guy, especially given what he has shown when he's going well.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

You are ignoring other avenues of depth. You could sign an IFA guy that has options. You could trade for a AA/AAA pitcher who can make the jump if/when required. You could work the lower end of the SP market for a guy that can compete for a SP role but is willing to fall back to swingman role.

 

I just don't see how these avenues are noticeably better.

 

You're going to need a sixth starter/swingman, and you're going to have to spend resources to get it. Committing $30m over a long period to a guy like Sierra, investing trade assets to get a guy for cheap that you can stash in the minors (assuming you can find a trade partner willing to give up for something like that), paying a free agent 1/$8m to come be that guy, or keeping Hammel at 1/$11m to be a bit better than that free agent?

 

They all seem pretty similar to me. Nothing that makes keeping Hammel seem like a problematic option to me.

[Tryptamine]

I feel like the majority of people want to acquire two SP for next year. That would mean that Hammel has to leave the rotation. I understand the rationale of not wanting to rely on a guy who has been much less than durable throughout his career. For those that want to displace him from the rotation - is the thought to put him in the pen as a really expensive swingman? Or is the thought to dump him and his $11M salary?

 

Same trade I've been proposing all offseason

Soler+Hammel+5M to CLE for Danny Salazar+Justus Sheffield. Hammel is owed 9M+2M buyout in 2017 while Soler is owed 3M this year. Cubs come out ahead 9M.

I love me some Salazar, but doesn't he have many of the same durability concerns as Hammel? You're opening up a big hole in the OF that would have to be filled and only making the rotation marginally better.

 

I guess I like Hammel more than pretty much everyone else.

 

Baez goes to 3B and Bryant becomes the everyday RFer in that scenario, so there is no hole. Salazar is also cheap, under control for a long time and has a much higher ceiling than Hammel.

[Guest]

I feel like the majority of people want to acquire two SP for next year. That would mean that Hammel has to leave the rotation. I understand the rationale of not wanting to rely on a guy who has been much less than durable throughout his career. For those that want to displace him from the rotation - is the thought to put him in the pen as a really expensive swingman? Or is the thought to dump him and his $11M salary?

 

Same trade I've been proposing all offseason

Soler+Hammel+5M to CLE for Danny Salazar+Justus Sheffield. Hammel is owed 9M+2M buyout in 2017 while Soler is owed 3M this year. Cubs come out ahead 9M.

I love me some Salazar, but doesn't he have many of the same durability concerns as Hammel? You're opening up a big hole in the OF that would have to be filled and only making the rotation marginally better.

 

I guess I like Hammel more than pretty much everyone else.

 

Baez goes to 3B and Bryant becomes the everyday RFer in that scenario, so there is no hole. Salazar is also cheap, under control for a long time and has a much higher ceiling than Hammel.

 

This is a leap of faith that even I am not willing to take.

[Guest]

You are ignoring other avenues of depth. You could sign an IFA guy that has options. You could trade for a AA/AAA pitcher who can make the jump if/when required. You could work the lower end of the SP market for a guy that can compete for a SP role but is willing to fall back to swingman role.

 

I just don't see how these avenues are noticeably better.

 

You're going to need a sixth starter/swingman, and you're going to have to spend resources to get it. Committing $30m over a long period to a guy like Sierra, investing trade assets to get a guy for cheap that you can stash in the minors (assuming you can find a trade partner willing to give up for something like that), paying a free agent 1/$8m to come be that guy, or keeping Hammel at 1/$11m to be a bit better than that free agent?

 

They all seem pretty similar to me. Nothing that makes keeping Hammel seem like a problematic option to me.

Again, I am apparently valuing Hammel's value to the rotation differently than you.

[Tryptamine]

I feel like the majority of people want to acquire two SP for next year. That would mean that Hammel has to leave the rotation. I understand the rationale of not wanting to rely on a guy who has been much less than durable throughout his career. For those that want to displace him from the rotation - is the thought to put him in the pen as a really expensive swingman? Or is the thought to dump him and his $11M salary?

 

Same trade I've been proposing all offseason

Soler+Hammel+5M to CLE for Danny Salazar+Justus Sheffield. Hammel is owed 9M+2M buyout in 2017 while Soler is owed 3M this year. Cubs come out ahead 9M.

I love me some Salazar, but doesn't he have many of the same durability concerns as Hammel? You're opening up a big hole in the OF that would have to be filled and only making the rotation marginally better.

 

I guess I like Hammel more than pretty much everyone else.

 

Baez goes to 3B and Bryant becomes the everyday RFer in that scenario, so there is no hole. Salazar is also cheap, under control for a long time and has a much higher ceiling than Hammel.

 

This is a leap of faith that even I am not willing to take.

 

What part of it seems unrealistic to you? I was extremely impressed with Baez at 3B and Bryant in RF is likely a fairly significant upgrade defensively over Soler.

[Guest]

I feel like the majority of people want to acquire two SP for next year. That would mean that Hammel has to leave the rotation. I understand the rationale of not wanting to rely on a guy who has been much less than durable throughout his career. For those that want to displace him from the rotation - is the thought to put him in the pen as a really expensive swingman? Or is the thought to dump him and his $11M salary?

 

Same trade I've been proposing all offseason

Soler+Hammel+5M to CLE for Danny Salazar+Justus Sheffield. Hammel is owed 9M+2M buyout in 2017 while Soler is owed 3M this year. Cubs come out ahead 9M.

I love me some Salazar, but doesn't he have many of the same durability concerns as Hammel? You're opening up a big hole in the OF that would have to be filled and only making the rotation marginally better.

 

I guess I like Hammel more than pretty much everyone else.

 

Baez goes to 3B and Bryant becomes the everyday RFer in that scenario, so there is no hole. Salazar is also cheap, under control for a long time and has a much higher ceiling than Hammel.

You're assuming:

 

- Baez can build on his improvement from last year.

- Castro doesn't go into a black hole again.

 

Those are pretty big assumptions. I love having them all still around and letting Maddon do his thing.

[Guest]

 

What part of it seems unrealistic to you? I was extremely impressed with Baez at 3B and Bryant in RF is likely a fairly significant upgrade defensively over Soler.

 

 

The part where you state in declarative fashion that Javy Baez is not a hole in the lineup.

 

And I love Javy.

 

His ability to make enough contact to be a productive MLB player is still very much in question.

Edited November 30, 2015 by David

[Hairyducked Idiot]

This is a leap of faith that even I am not willing to take.

 

Baez in a starting job isn't any more of a leap of faith than Soler is.

[Guest]

This is a leap of faith that even I am not willing to take.

 

Baez in a starting job isn't any more of a leap of faith than Soler is.

But having all the pieces still in place hedges the bets on any single player.

[Guest]

This is a leap of faith that even I am not willing to take.

 

Baez in a starting job isn't any more of a leap of faith than Soler is.

 

Like Tim, I'm just going to disagree with you on this and not bother rehashing this argument.

[Guest]

This is a leap of faith that even I am not willing to take.

 

Baez in a starting job isn't any more of a leap of faith than Soler is.

But having all the pieces still in place hedges the bets on any single player.

 

And this.

 

I still want to keep all the bats. I loved the roster we were fielding down the stretch last year and all the flexibility it afforded. It was so much fun.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

This is a leap of faith that even I am not willing to take.

 

Baez in a starting job isn't any more of a leap of faith than Soler is.

 

Like Tim, I'm just going to disagree with you on this and not bother rehashing this argument.

 

We can rehash it a little bit. It's just yet another iteration of the collective blind spot Cubs fans have given themselves on Jorge Soler's downside.

 

Baez put up a better fWAR than Soler last year and projects to a better one this year with Steamer.

[Guest]

This is a leap of faith that even I am not willing to take.

 

Baez in a starting job isn't any more of a leap of faith than Soler is.

 

Like Tim, I'm just going to disagree with you on this and not bother rehashing this argument.

 

We can rehash it a little bit. It's just yet another iteration of the collective blind spot Cubs fans have given themselves on Jorge Soler's downside.

 

Baez put up a better fWAR than Soler last year and projects to a better one this year with Steamer.

But it isn't about picking whether to gamble on Baez or Soler (and then also making an implied bet on Castro). It is about finding a way to keep them all on the team to mitigate risk on any of them seeing their downside.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

This is a leap of faith that even I am not willing to take.

 

Baez in a starting job isn't any more of a leap of faith than Soler is.

 

Like Tim, I'm just going to disagree with you on this and not bother rehashing this argument.

 

We can rehash it a little bit. It's just yet another iteration of the collective blind spot Cubs fans have given themselves on Jorge Soler's downside.

 

Baez put up a better fWAR than Soler last year and projects to a better one this year with Steamer.

But it isn't about picking whether to gamble on Baez or Soler (and then also making an implied bet on Castro). It is about finding a way to keep them all on the team to mitigate risk on any of them seeing their downside.

 

That's a different argument. I'm fine with that, I guess. I'd be fine with trading one too.

[Guest]

I think Hammel would be an effective swingman...I would be fine using him in that role.

I'm sure he'd be effective. But if adding two SP and having an $11M swingman prevents you from signing Heyward, is it worth it?

 

This is an unequivocal yes for me. There are ways to avoid that decision by taking different paths to SP depth and those are okay too, but having better SP depth is way, way, way more important than having an elite CF compared to just a decent/good CF.

[Guest]

I think Hammel would be an effective swingman...I would be fine using him in that role.

I'm sure he'd be effective. But if adding two SP and having an $11M swingman prevents you from signing Heyward, is it worth it?

 

This is an unequivocal yes for me. There are ways to avoid that decision by taking different paths to SP depth and those are okay too, but having better SP depth is way, way, way more important than having an elite CF compared to just a decent/good CF.

I guess I vastly prefer the different paths to SP depth that still allow me to have the elite CF.

[SouthSideRyan]

I feel like the majority of people want to acquire two SP for next year. That would mean that Hammel has to leave the rotation. I understand the rationale of not wanting to rely on a guy who has been much less than durable throughout his career. For those that want to displace him from the rotation - is the thought to put him in the pen as a really expensive swingman? Or is the thought to dump him and his $11M salary?

 

Same trade I've been proposing all offseason

Soler+Hammel+5M to CLE for Danny Salazar+Justus Sheffield. Hammel is owed 9M+2M buyout in 2017 while Soler is owed 3M this year. Cubs come out ahead 9M.

I love me some Salazar, but doesn't he have many of the same durability concerns as Hammel? You're opening up a big hole in the OF that would have to be filled and only making the rotation marginally better.

 

I guess I like Hammel more than pretty much everyone else.

 

Baez goes to 3B and Bryant becomes the everyday RFer in that scenario, so there is no hole. Salazar is also cheap, under control for a long time and has a much higher ceiling than Hammel.

 

Which is why he wouldn't be traded with a prospect for Soler and Hammel's 1 year contract.

[Guest]

Plus Hammel's ceiling is that he pitches like he did in the first half for a full season. Unless you're Clayton Kershaw or Jake Arreita, pretty much nobody has a "much higher ceiling" than that.

[Guest]

I think Hammel would be an effective swingman...I would be fine using him in that role.

I'm sure he'd be effective. But if adding two SP and having an $11M swingman prevents you from signing Heyward, is it worth it?

 

This is an unequivocal yes for me. There are ways to avoid that decision by taking different paths to SP depth and those are okay too, but having better SP depth is way, way, way more important than having an elite CF compared to just a decent/good CF.

I guess I vastly prefer the different paths to SP depth that still allow me to have the elite CF.

 

Those are far more narrow than you're allowing for, IMO. Go after Sierra, sure, see what AAA prospects can be had in trade, but in practice there's a lot more positive outcomes in adding 2 SP without that limitation(dumpster diving a Turner-style reclamation SP you can stash in AAA is good too).

[SouthSideRyan]

Plus Hammel's ceiling is that he pitches like he did in the first half for a full season. Unless you're Clayton Kershaw or Jake Arreita, pretty much nobody has a "much higher ceiling" than that.

 

Jason Hammel's ceiling is to have easily the best year of his career at the age of 33?

[Guest]

Plus Hammel's ceiling is that he pitches like he did in the first half for a full season. Unless you're Clayton Kershaw or Jake Arreita, pretty much nobody has a "much higher ceiling" than that.

 

Jason Hammel's ceiling is to have easily the best year of his career at the age of 33?

His ceiling is to extend what he did for 3 months to 6 months, yes. Is it likely to happen? No. Is it the expected result? No.

 

But it is certainly possible for him to play at his demonstrated peak for a full year. That's pretty much the definition of a ceiling, isn't it?

 

Phrased another way, it's the 95th percentile outcome of what we could expect from him this year.