Morosi: "Cubs Among Viable Candidates for Garrett Crochet"

[KCCub]

15 minutes ago, LBiittner said:

Shouldnt we do the same with Steele? 

Kind of apples to oranges here with two different situations. 

The huge Steele fan in me is yes we should extend the guy who has been one of the lone bright spots over the past few years and really carried us.

The strictly transactional/business side of me is probably a no - ride out his age 29, 30, and 31 seasons and go from there. 

[LBiittner]

3 minutes ago, KCCub said:

Kind of apples to oranges here with two different situations. 

The huge Steele fan in me is yes we should extend the guy who has been one of the lone bright spots over the past few years and really carried us.

The strictly transactional/business side of me is probably a no - ride out his age 29, 30, and 31 seasons and go from there. 

But you're not willing to be transactional/business with crochet, who also has a few more arb years? 

[Bertz]

Generally I wouldn't be in a rush to extend SPs early in arb.  Do it in pre-arb where you get a discount or hold off until as late as you can IMO.

[LBiittner]

24 minutes ago, mul21 said:

I think the age difference and more recent arm issues preclude an extension for Steele at the moment.

Yeah, I didn't realize Steele is 4 years senior. 

[KCCub]

1 minute ago, LBiittner said:

But you're not willing to be transactional/business with crochet, who also has a few more arb years? 

If I'm trading significant assets for a 25 year old SP with only 2 years of control left, I'm typically looking to extend him. Just a personal preference I would have when dealing prospects/assets of this magnitude. Steele is a completely different situation and to me, not comparable when you factor in age, team control, assets used to acquire, etc. 

 

[LBiittner]

1 minute ago, KCCub said:

If I'm trading significant assets for a 25 year old SP with only 2 years of control left, I'm typically looking to extend him. Just a personal preference I would have when dealing prospects/assets of this magnitude. Steele is a completely different situation and to me, not comparable when you factor in age, team control, assets used to acquire, etc. 

 

Very good reasoning. Thanks

[We Got The Whole 9]

2 hours ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Question: What has Matt Shaw done to be essentially randomly selected as the untouchable Top prospect in this org? 

It's not random. The handful of lists say he is our top prospect. #1 org prospects rarely get moved these days. The Cubs are potentially trading a GG 4 win player and will have a hole at 2B and they haven't shown any interest in Adames or Bregman to fill that spot. The Cubs lack options (because despite how much you want to infer that the cap is fan fiction, it's very real and Jed very obviously operates by it) for getting more power on the team, which they've shown a pretty clear intention of doing. Multiple reports have put Caissie and Triantos in the potentially-traded basket and not Shaw. 

 

It's tea leaf reading. There would be some reports out there that Shaw has been discussed in proposals and there aren't. The names are pretty clear, the intention behind the strategy is pretty clear. The Cubs believe the falloff from Nico to Shaw won't be that dramatic and they want to find a way to open a clear path for him, while also upgrading a major weak point. 

 

That said it is possible that this is all just like the Indians/Clase smoke last year and nothing happens. 

 

But Shaw is THE GUY right now and it's quite obvious to everyone but you.

[Rex Buckingham]

Yeah, Shaw isn't untouchable for me - but I think he's (going to be) good enough that I only want him moved for a Gilbert/Kirby type of pitcher - maybe Miller if we don't have to give up much else. 

[squally1313]

1 hour ago, TomtheBombadil said:

- But what is the real Value in being the latest and greatest THE GUY in the Cubs org? Cristian Hernandez was The One a couple years ago, Mervis after, Horton after that…Vibes hasn’t been doing much lifting during 2.0 so far

Equating Matt Shaw, consensus top 30 prospect in baseball, with Matt mervis is pretty disingenuous 

[Rcal10]

5 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Equating Matt Shaw, consensus top 30 prospect in baseball, with Matt mervis is pretty disingenuous 

Christian Hernandez too. He has never even been a top 100, or am I missing something? 

[Cuzi]

53 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Christian Hernandez too. He has never even been a top 100, or am I missing something? 

Hernandez was top 100 on 2 lists in 2022, BA and Pipeline.