Rosenthal: Cubs want to trade Bellinger

[Bertz]

Feels like we can mostly, though not totally, write this possibility off after the Tauchman news.  

[Rcal10]

25 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

Yankees can't have him for someone they are basically trying to dump, but we are basically trying to dump Bellinger and we somehow get their #3 pitcher in year 1 arbitration?

The whole idea behind trading Bellinger is getting out from under his $32.5 guarantee for next year. We aren't trading him because we have someone ready to take his spot and match his production.

Except Bellinger is still a useful player for any team in their everyday line up. Stoman is not even a #3 starter. I really don’t think the Cubs feel they need to dump Bellinger. There is enough money to put together a good team and they have some prospects to trade to add talent as well. If they traded Bellinger as a dump, they would then need to find someone else. I am fine if the Yankees aren’t interested in that sort of deal. But I see no reason the Cubs need to trade for Stroman. 

[Rcal10]

1 minute ago, Bertz said:

Feels like we can mostly, though not totally, write this possibility off after the Tauchman news.  

This is also true. And I am fine with that. Bellinger does not need to be traded to “dump salary”. 

[Backtobanks]

I agree that we don't need to trade Bellinger and/or Hoerner, but that seems to be all of the Cubs' talk this offseason.  There are lots of ways to improve the club, but not when the front office isn't willing to spend money or trade prospects.

[Cuzi]

1 hour ago, Rcal10 said:

Except Bellinger is still a useful player for any team in their everyday line up.

Doesn't matter if he is useful with a $32.5M price tag on his head. He would need to be a 4 fWAR player just to break even on his dollars. He would need to be much more than a 4 fWAR player to get someone like Clarke Schmidt. No team is going to value Bellinger at 4 fWAR. His value is completely under water. If the Cubs are moving him, it's simply a salary dump, or they are attaching a prospect to him in which case the Cubs are hurting the value of the prospect.

Bellinger isn't returning horsefeathers. It's no different than the deadline when everyone was saying the Cubs are about to get a haul for Taillon. The money owed to the players nullifies any potential value in trade.

[Rcal10]

2 hours ago, Cuzi said:

Doesn't matter if he is useful with a $32.5M price tag on his head. He would need to be a 4 fWAR player just to break even on his dollars. He would need to be much more than a 4 fWAR player to get someone like Clarke Schmidt. No team is going to value Bellinger at 4 fWAR. His value is completely under water. If the Cubs are moving him, it's simply a salary dump, or they are attaching a prospect to him in which case the Cubs are hurting the value of the prospect.

Bellinger isn't returning horsefeathers. It's no different than the deadline when everyone was saying the Cubs are about to get a haul for Taillon. The money owed to the players nullifies any potential value in trade.

Whatever you say Cuzi. But if you are right, then I hope they just keep him. He helps them win in 25’. 

[Backtobanks]

2 hours ago, Cuzi said:

Doesn't matter if he is useful with a $32.5M price tag on his head. He would need to be a 4 fWAR player just to break even on his dollars. He would need to be much more than a 4 fWAR player to get someone like Clarke Schmidt. No team is going to value Bellinger at 4 fWAR. His value is completely under water. If the Cubs are moving him, it's simply a salary dump, or they are attaching a prospect to him in which case the Cubs are hurting the value of the prospect.

Bellinger isn't returning horsefeathers. It's no different than the deadline when everyone was saying the Cubs are about to get a haul for Taillon. The money owed to the players nullifies any potential value in trade.

If a team like the Yankees doesn't worry about breaking even on the dollars for a player that might win them a WS, then he is useful and valuable.

[Rcal10]

1 minute ago, Backtobanks said:

If a team like the Yankees doesn't worry about breaking even on the dollars for a player that might win them a WS, then he is useful and valuable.

Bellinger isn’t going to be traded as a dump. They will just keep him. If they need to trade him at the deadline then they do that. But there is no reason at all for the Cubs to just salary dump Bellinger. If a team doesn’t give them what they want, they keep him. It is that simple. 

[Cuzi]

27 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

If a team like the Yankees doesn't worry about breaking even on the dollars for a player that might win them a WS, then he is useful and valuable.

A team like the Yankees does worry about the dollars. Every team in baseball except the Mets does and the Mets only ignored the cost for a single year before they started dumping everyone they signed.

If the Yankees want Bellinger, the Cubs are taking back a Stroman. The Cubs would save about $14M, get out from under the uncertainty of 2026, and the Yankees would get the better player at a larger financial commitment while using Stroman to effectively eat a little over half of Bellingers 2025 money. It's a classic bad contract for bad contract trade when the teams benefit more from the player they are getting in the deal. No team trades legit pieces for a bad contract.

Edited November 23, 2024 by Cuzi

[Rcal10]

16 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

A team like the Yankees does worry about the dollars. Every team in baseball except the Mets does and the Mets only ignored the cost for a single year before they started dumping everyone they signed.

If the Yankees want Bellinger, the Cubs are taking back a Stroman. The Cubs would save about $14M, get out from under the uncertainty of 2026, and the Yankees would get the better player at a larger financial commitment while using Stroman to effectively eat a little over half of Bellingers 2025 money. It's a classic bad contract for bad contract trade when the teams benefit more from the player they are getting in the deal. No team trades legit pieces for a bad contract.

If the Yankees are offering Stroman the Cubs aren’t trading Bellinger. 

[Cuzi]

43 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

If the Yankees are offering Stroman the Cubs aren’t trading Bellinger. 

Never said they would trade him for Stroman. There's a reason why every time trading Bellinger is brought up by Cubs insiders they also mention the struggle in making that happen. They aren't going to get an offer of Clarke Schmidt for a $32M 2.5 fWAR player.

Saying that the Cubs aren't just going to dump his salary is just foolish, though. The rumor is the Cubs are wanting to trade him. It's not that he is available in trade, they WANT to trade him. They are telling you that they want out of his salary. Now, maybe things have changed since the tender deadline and they have just accepted the fact that there is no way out of his contract, thus the non-tender for Tauchman and they would need plan A in place before discussing Bellinger again, but that doesn't change their desire to get out from underneath that pile of wasted money.

Edited November 23, 2024 by Cuzi

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, Cuzi said:

Never said they would trade him for Stroman. There's a reason why every time trading Bellinger is brought up by Cubs insiders they also mention the struggle in making that happen. They aren't going to get an offer of Clarke Schmidt for a $32M 2.5 fWAR player.

Saying that the Cubs aren't just going to dump his salary is just foolish, though. The rumor is the Cubs are wanting to trade him. It's not that he is available in trade, they WANT to trade him. They are telling you that they want out of his salary. Now, maybe things have changed since the tender deadline and they have just accepted the fact that there is no way out of his contract, thus the non-tender for Tauchman and they would need plan A in place before discussing Bellinger again, but that doesn't change their desire to get out from underneath that pile of wasted money.

Did you miss where I said Cubs pick up half of Bellinger s salary? If the Cubs picked up half of The $32M he would get if he opted out next year, he would only cost the Yankees $16M. So he doesn’t have to play to a $32M contract. If he didn’t opt out, his last year would be for $20M. So it is Bellinger for one year at $16M or two at $36, for the Yankees. That is not really negative value for them. Now, if they don’t want to trade Schmidt, I get that. That is fine. But I wouldn’t have any interest at all in Bellinger for Stroman. To use your argument about last year with Taillon, the rumor was the Cubs wanted to trade Taillon. But they didn’t. Maybe because what was left unsaid in that statement was they wanted to trade him “for fair value”. Not dump him. Maybe that is what is being unsaid again with Bellinger. Wanting to trade and wanting to dump are not the same.

i do agree with you that now that they let Tauchman go the Bellinger talk is probably done. Maybe you weee right. Maybe they really WANTED to trade Bellinger. But maybe I was also right, and they didn’t want to just dump him. So they keep him. I don’t see it as some pile of wasted money. It is an overpay. Every team has those. Good teams with higher payrolls can still win. Hell, Astros won last year paying Abreu to suck and not even be in the team. At least Bellinger is a good player. And, IMO he woukd have been even better in NY. In that park I can see 25-30 homers, maybe .275 average and .350 OBP. Add that to good defense in center, right or first and you have probably a 3WAR player. But as we both said, probably not happening now. And I am fine with that. 

Edited November 23, 2024 by Rcal10

[Backtobanks]

2 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

If the Yankees are offering Stroman the Cubs aren’t trading Bellinger. 

I posted yesterday about the rumor of Stroman, Vrieling, and Selvidge for Bellinger which might be a decent deal (if true).  We fill the bottom of the rotation, get two pitching prospects, and save about $9 million this year.  Trading Bellinger has to get us a player to help the MLB roster next year.  

[NorthsideAvenger]

13 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

I posted yesterday about the rumor of Stroman, Vrieling, and Selvidge for Bellinger which might be a decent deal (if true).  We fill the bottom of the rotation, get two pitching prospects, and save about $9 million this year.  Trading Bellinger has to get us a player to help the MLB roster next year.  

But why would the Cubs want Stroman back? They let him walk for a reason. 

[Backtobanks]

19 minutes ago, NorthsideAvenger said:

But why would the Cubs want Stroman back? They let him walk for a reason. 

We can hope that they luck out and get Sasaki, but Stroman is as good as the 4th level FA starters they're looking at and saves money instead of costing money.  Also, they would get 2 prospects if the rumor is true.  Again, trading Bellinger is not my first choice, but it does fill a hole and might encourage Hoyer to use the money and use some prospects to fill some other holes.

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, Backtobanks said:

We can hope that they luck out and get Sasaki, but Stroman is as good as the 4th level FA starters they're looking at and saves money instead of costing money.  Also, they would get 2 prospects if the rumor is true.  Again, trading Bellinger is not my first choice, but it does fill a hole and might encourage Hoyer to use the money and use some prospects to fill some other holes.

No interest in Stroman coming back to the Cubs. 

[Jason Ross]

3 hours ago, Backtobanks said:

We can hope that they luck out and get Sasaki, but Stroman is as good as the 4th level FA starters they're looking at and saves money instead of costing money.  Also, they would get 2 prospects if the rumor is true.  Again, trading Bellinger is not my first choice, but it does fill a hole and might encourage Hoyer to use the money and use some prospects to fill some other holes.

I'm not sure who you're considering a "#4" but Stroman was really terrible last season. He was bottom 5% fastball velo (down from bottom 15%), his K% was bottom 7% (down from 32%), his whiff was 10% (down from 23%)...his two best skills have been ground ball rate (84% down from 94%) and missing barrels, 70% (down from 88%), so he even declined in what he does best. 

Stroman, as now, is probably a #4 in name only, in that there was once a pitcher named Marcus Stroman who was at least a #4. Today, he may be no better than Javier Assad, a pitcher we'd probably rather see as a swingman. 

I understand trying to find a Bellinger trade. But if Stroman is the return...the Cubs are almost assuredly better signing a #4.

[Rcal10]

17 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I'm not sure who you're considering a "#4" but Stroman was really terrible last season. He was bottom 5% fastball velo (down from bottom 15%), his K% was bottom 7% (down from 32%), his whiff was 10% (down from 23%)...his two best skills have been ground ball rate (84% down from 94%) and missing barrels, 70% (down from 88%), so he even declined in what he does best. 

Stroman, as now, is probably a #4 in name only, in that there was once a pitcher named Marcus Stroman who was at least a #4. Today, he may be no better than Javier Assad, a pitcher we'd probably rather see as a swingman. 

I understand trying to find a Bellinger trade. But if Stroman is the return...the Cubs are almost assuredly better signing a #4.

Thank you. I completely agree.

[Backtobanks]

9 hours ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I'm not sure who you're considering a "#4" but Stroman was really terrible last season. He was bottom 5% fastball velo (down from bottom 15%), his K% was bottom 7% (down from 32%), his whiff was 10% (down from 23%)...his two best skills have been ground ball rate (84% down from 94%) and missing barrels, 70% (down from 88%), so he even declined in what he does best. 

Stroman, as now, is probably a #4 in name only, in that there was once a pitcher named Marcus Stroman who was at least a #4. Today, he may be no better than Javier Assad, a pitcher we'd probably rather see as a swingman. 

I understand trying to find a Bellinger trade. But if Stroman is the return...the Cubs are almost assuredly better signing a #4.

I'll accept the fact that Stroman has regressed, and he may not be what the Cubs want or need, but saying the younger Stroman "was at least a #4" is ridiculous.  His 11-year career ERA+ matches Kyle Hendricks.

[Jason Ross]

42 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

I'll accept the fact that Stroman has regressed, and he may not be what the Cubs want or need, but saying the younger Stroman "was at least a #4" is ridiculous.  His 11-year career ERA+ matches Kyle Hendricks.

You entirely missed the point of that. I wasn't calling Stroman a #4 at his height, I was saying that in his prior years of his career, every year he was at  *least* considered a top-4 pitcher in a rotation, not that I think he *was* a #4. It was to highlight that, yes, in the past Stroman more than qualified for your "#4" comment but almost assuredly doesn't moving forward. 

 

Stroman was good to very good through his career and for much of it was a pitcher you could slot into the top of a rotation. Im well aware. 

[Rcal10]

For me, if the Cubs were to DUMP Bellinger it would be strictly for salary relief. Maybe save at least $20M of his contract and take little back. Then spend that $20M to $30M to replace his bat. Then with the original money go about their original business. Maybe if they got someone to take the entire contract they could also add a better pen arm via FA with extra money they had beteeen the Bellinger money and the money they pay whoever they sign. But is the team better with Teoscar Hernandez, Alonso, O’Neil or even any other FA they might sign (excluding Soto) instead of Bellinger? Honestly, I’m not sure. But what I am sure about is, I would rather have Bellinger and either Eovaldi or Kikuchi over Stroman and one of the FA bats I  mentioned above. Trading Bellinger for Stroman isn’t the proper dumping of Bellinger. It is trading him for a worse, less useful player without gaining enough money to add someone to replace him. Dump to get out of his contract and then spend elsewhere, I get. Not sure I would do it, but I get it. Dump to add a #4 or #5 starter, I don’t get. 

[thawv]

On 11/21/2024 at 12:49 PM, We Got The Whole 9 said:

Is it worth discussing strapping a prospect to him?

They'd have to either strap a prospect to him, or pay down a nice chunk of his salary. 

[Rcal10]

32 minutes ago, thawv said:

They'd have to either strap a prospect to him, or pay down a nice chunk of his salary. 

I don’t know. I really think Bellinger for Castillo is pretty fair. Maybe the Cubs add $5M to $6M to the deal to make salaries the same. Then both guys are good players but just not worth their money. Bellinger is an everyday player that bats anywhere 2 thru 6 in a line up and Castillo is a solid #3 pitcher. Fair deal IMI. But if the Cubs had to add anything I wouldn’t tbh knit would be a high end prospect. Maybe someone not in the top 30? But if that did happen are the Cubs better off with Castillo and  FA bat, not Soto, or Kikuchi, Flanaagan or Eovaldi and Bellinger. That is what has to be asked. 

[Backtobanks]

49 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t know. I really think Bellinger for Castillo is pretty fair. Maybe the Cubs add $5M to $6M to the deal to make salaries the same. Then both guys are good players but just not worth their money. Bellinger is an everyday player that bats anywhere 2 thru 6 in a line up and Castillo is a solid #3 pitcher. Fair deal IMI. But if the Cubs had to add anything I wouldn’t tbh knit would be a high end prospect. Maybe someone not in the top 30? But if that did happen are the Cubs better off with Castillo and  FA bat, not Soto, or Kikuchi, Flanaagan or Eovaldi and Bellinger. That is what has to be asked. 

You do realize that Castillo has between $75 million and $100 million left on his contract over the next 3-4 years,

[LBiittner]

Yeah, somebody please refresh my bad memory, when was the last time jed threw a boatload of money at another team to take one of his players in trade?

Not saying it hasn't happened, but I dunno, doesn't sound like jed's MO to me?