Potential Kris Bryant trade thread

[Outshined_One]

I dont think i've ever been more disenchanted with the cubs organization

 

i definitely have been... circa 2010-11 or so.

 

i don't think i can say i've been more pissed off at them than i am now, though.

 

Look at it this way, at least this offseason we haven't traded three useful pitching prospects for one season Juan Pierre.

 

Yet.

[Backtobanks]

Having a young center fielder who legit plays great defense and who easily can beat out slow grounders in the infield would be amazing.

 

I just don't think they will be willing to deal him, though.

 

Oh well, then I guess we're stuck with our 5 WAR 3B.

[Regular Show]

Having a young center fielder who legit plays great defense and who easily can beat out slow grounders in the infield would be amazing.

 

I just don't think they will be willing to deal him, though.

 

Oh well, then I guess we're stuck with our 5 WAR 3B.

 

Okay, Victor Robles produced 4.1 bWAR and is legitimately great on defense. I'm not saying Robles is nearly the player KB is, but just going by WAR totals is dumb.

 

Some people here tend to just look at WAR totals without doing any analysis and it's stupid. Are you going to tell me Lance Lynn is more valuable and a better pitcher than Justin Verlander next?

[Deeg]

I have no idea whether Washington could be coerced into dealing Robles for Bryant (I suspect no) but if they are, that's exactly the sort of player we should be targeting in a KB deal. Already a 4 WAR player at 22, already a 20-30 HR/SB type with the potential for more power, and a super-premium defender in center. He's likely to get better and he's already damn good.

[squally1313]

Having a young center fielder who legit plays great defense and who easily can beat out slow grounders in the infield would be amazing.

 

I just don't think they will be willing to deal him, though.

 

Oh well, then I guess we're stuck with our 5 WAR 3B.

 

Okay, Victor Robles produced 4.1 bWAR and is legitimately great on defense. I'm not saying Robles is nearly the player KB is, but just going by WAR totals is dumb.

 

Some people here tend to just look at WAR totals without doing any analysis and it's stupid. Are you going to tell me Lance Lynn is more valuable and a better pitcher than Justin Verlander next?

 

Well I could tell you that Lance Lynn had a better year than Verlander in 2019 by the statistics that make up fWAR, and that calculation makes a lot of sense to me. Verlander's BABIP was over 100 points lower than Lynn's. Obviously no one expects that going forward, but that's what happened. Kris Bryant has basically tossed up a 5 win pace or better his entire career, so yes, he's a 5 WAR 3B. Robles is a lot harder to project.

[chopsx9]

 

Verlander's BABIP was over 100 points lower than Lynn's.

 

I not sure I'm following why that's a negative for Verlander last season.

[squally1313]

 

Verlander's BABIP was over 100 points lower than Lynn's.

 

I not sure I'm following why that's a negative for Verlander last season.

 

It means Verlander's defense played much better behind him, and that he likely got a lot more luck in terms of batted ball profile than Lynn. Neither of those I would really give credit to Verlander for. Lynn gives up a lot more ground balls, which run a higher BABIP, but that's a huge disparity, and Verlander's fly ball tendencies led to a ton of dongs.

[David]

I have no idea whether Washington could be coerced into dealing Robles for Bryant (I suspect no) but if they are, that's exactly the sort of player we should be targeting in a KB deal. Already a 4 WAR player at 22, already a 20-30 HR/SB type with the potential for more power, and a super-premium defender in center. He's likely to get better and he's already damn good.

 

Yeah, of things we've heard, a package around Robles is basically the only way I could come away from this whole thing not completely disgusted.

 

That doesn't mean I want it to happen or would be excited about it, though.

[sneakypower]

there's really no reason to believe they're going to create a giant hole at one position to address another, i'm very confident in saying Robles simply isn't available here

[chopsx9]

 

Verlander's BABIP was over 100 points lower than Lynn's.

 

I not sure I'm following why that's a negative for Verlander last season.

 

It means Verlander's defense played much better behind him, and that he likely got a lot more luck in terms of batted ball profile than Lynn. Neither of those I would really give credit to Verlander for. Lynn gives up a lot more ground balls, which run a higher BABIP, but that's a huge disparity, and Verlander's fly ball tendencies led to a ton of dongs.

 

Ok I get that and I agree that going forward you'd expect some normalization and if you're projecting for next season you'd tweek some numbers as a result. I guess I'm in the camp that if you're looking back,the numbers are what they are, and assessing value on what has already occurred based on what may or may not have been luck is a slippery slope. Looking forward - totally different. I also assume Verlander's BABIP can swing wildly from season to season because he allows comparatively few balls in play.

[David]

there's really no reason to believe they're going to create a giant hole at one position to address another, i'm very confident in saying Robles simply isn't available here

 

idk...the heyman tweet makes it seem like the door might at least be somewhat open (he mentioned him for a reason) if the nationals don't get donaldson. it also is almost literally saying nothing, like most of his tweets, so whatever.

 

i wouldn't call it a giant hole, tho. bryant makes them better the next two years.

[squally1313]

 

I not sure I'm following why that's a negative for Verlander last season.

 

It means Verlander's defense played much better behind him, and that he likely got a lot more luck in terms of batted ball profile than Lynn. Neither of those I would really give credit to Verlander for. Lynn gives up a lot more ground balls, which run a higher BABIP, but that's a huge disparity, and Verlander's fly ball tendencies led to a ton of dongs.

 

Ok I get that and I agree that going forward you'd expect some normalization and if you're projecting for next season you'd tweek some numbers as a result. I guess I'm in the camp that if you're looking back,the numbers are what they are, and assessing value on what has already occurred based on what may or may not have been luck is a slippery slope. Looking forward - totally different. I also assume Verlander's BABIP can swing wildly from season to season because he allows comparatively few balls in play.

 

Yeah the way I look at fWAR is like, if Verlander and Lynn went back and pitched 2019 again, replicating all the elements they can control and then making everything else equal, I think you'd see the production numbers end up being pretty similar, if not tilted towards Lynn. In this case, it's based mainly on HR rate, which removes the fielding element of it, but obviously doesn't remove the hitter element. I think generally bWAR is a more accurate representation of how performance translated to actual results, whereas fWAR tries to isolate individual performance, which for me makes it a better number to look at to predict future performance. Obviously in this exact comparison you'd look at more than just 2019.

[sneakypower]

there's really no reason to believe they're going to create a giant hole at one position to address another, i'm very confident in saying Robles simply isn't available here

 

idk...the heyman tweet makes it seem like the door might at least be somewhat open (he mentioned him for a reason) if the nationals don't get donaldson. it also is almost literally saying nothing, like most of his tweets, so whatever.

 

i wouldn't call it a giant hole, tho. bryant makes them better the next two years.

then they're stuck with worse-hitter-than-Albert-Almora in CF barring other major moves

[Bull]

there's really no reason to believe they're going to create a giant hole at one position to address another, i'm very confident in saying Robles simply isn't available here

 

idk...the heyman tweet makes it seem like the door might at least be somewhat open (he mentioned him for a reason) if the nationals don't get donaldson. it also is almost literally saying nothing, like most of his tweets, so whatever.

 

i wouldn't call it a giant hole, tho. bryant makes them better the next two years.

then they're stuck with worse-hitter-than-Albert-Almora in CF barring other major moves

Throw Almora in. Problem solved. /s

[champaignchris]

there's really no reason to believe they're going to create a giant hole at one position to address another, i'm very confident in saying Robles simply isn't available here

 

idk...the heyman tweet makes it seem like the door might at least be somewhat open (he mentioned him for a reason) if the nationals don't get donaldson. it also is almost literally saying nothing, like most of his tweets, so whatever.

 

i wouldn't call it a giant hole, tho. bryant makes them better the next two years.

then they're stuck with worse-hitter-than-Albert-Almora in CF barring other major moves

 

The solution is obviously to include Almora in the trade!

[Backtobanks]

We all should all agree that trading Bryant is ridiculous, but if the Nationals want him the offer has to start with either Robles or Turner and include at least two other young players that would help the team in 2020-2021.

[sneakypower]

We all should all agree that trading Bryant is ridiculous, but if the Nationals want him the offer has to start with either Robles or Turner and include at least two other young players that would help the team in 2020-2021.

lol now who's gonna be the first to demand Soto

[Backtobanks]

We all should all agree that trading Bryant is ridiculous, but if the Nationals want him the offer has to start with either Robles or Turner and include at least two other young players that would help the team in 2020-2021.

 

JMO that is just one way to look at it. Another is that Theo knows the Cubs will not be fixed with Bryant on the roster and need to move him. In that case, why be disagreeable? What if those teams don't want to give up players they have become attached to?

 

Some info we know: Robles put up 2.5 fWAR/4 bWAR in 2019, is 5+ years younger than Bryant, and has at least double the years of precious sweet power and control an org can wield over him as leverages. Mathematically we can use this to figure that Robles is 25-40x more valuable than Bryant on paper

 

If you can't get players of that caliber for one of the best players in baseball, then don't trade him. I was glad to hear the asking price for Contreras "was absurd", and KB's ought to be absurd too. Trading KB is probably going to set the Cubs back two years (at least) unless the return is very good young ML players and not just lottery tickets. If the offers aren't reasonable, then Theo has to get creative by trading our other assets (prospects, Bote, Chatwood, Schwarber, etc.)

[squally1313]

We all should all agree that trading Bryant is ridiculous, but if the Nationals want him the offer has to start with either Robles or Turner and include at least two other young players that would help the team in 2020-2021.

 

JMO that is just one way to look at it. Another is that Theo knows the Cubs will not be fixed with Bryant on the roster and need to move him. In that case, why be disagreeable? What if those teams don't want to give up players they have become attached to?

 

Some info we know: Robles put up 2.5 fWAR/4 bWAR in 2019, is 5+ years younger than Bryant, and has at least double the years of precious sweet power and control an org can wield over him as leverages. Mathematically we can use this to figure that Robles is 25-40x more valuable than Bryant on paper

 

I know you're mostly kidding towards the end (or at least I assume so), but until someone can give any sort of proof that we'll be remotely competitive 2022-2024 given the current roster/system/contract status/Ricketts being in charge, I'm going to continue to want them to prioritize the last couple years of this core before they all hit free agency and become super old and expensive. Bryant being a clearly better player in 2020 and 2021 is much more important to me than whatever arbitration affordable production someone like Robles can give you the few years after that.

[Tryptamine]

I dont see why Darvish would have to use Bryant to free up money. I think he might bring value back himself.

[squally1313]

I dont see why Darvish would have to use Bryant to free up money. I think he might bring value back himself.

Yeah if other teams are inquiring about his availability, that doesn't signal to me that he has negative value. Teams don't usually ask what other teams would like to get rid of.

[Andy]

Darvish is an interesting case. At 33 he's an aging asset likely to decline due to a combo or age or injury at some point over the 4 years left on his contract. He's signed for $81 million over those 4 years and the Cubs are motivated to sell so they can fix their cap situation and prepare another multi-year run at some point next decade. I wonder how much money the Cubs would have to eat to get say a top 200 prospect? 150? 100?

Darvish has a no-trade clause for this year that he's not waiving.

[sneakypower]

Darvish is an interesting case. At 33 he's an aging asset likely to decline due to a combo or age or injury at some point over the 4 years left on his contract. He's signed for $81 million over those 4 years and the Cubs are motivated to sell so they can fix their cap situation and prepare another multi-year run at some point next decade. I wonder how much money the Cubs would have to eat to get say a top 200 prospect? 150? 100?

he had a 2.37 xFIP after the break; i'm in hell

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I dont see why Darvish would have to use Bryant to free up money. I think he might bring value back himself.

Yeah if other teams are inquiring about his availability, that doesn't signal to me that he has negative value. Teams don't usually ask what other teams would like to get rid of.

 

Eh, it's not hard for me to imagine that teams see what Cole/Strasburg/Wheeler got, what remaining FA want, and combine it with the clear message the Cubs are being $ conscious to see if they want to dump Darvish's contract for a song. Doesn't mean he has absolute negative value, but the value might not be all that positive.

 

As for trading Darvish, if ownership is driving down payroll at all costs, trading Darvish isn't my favorite option but it's worlds better than trying to trade Bryant.

[Cubswin11]

They better hit on some SP prospects in the next ~18 months if Yu is traded (think it’s pretty clear he isn’t going anywhere and it’s baseless speculation by writers) because it’s just Hendricks beyond this year.