Winter Meetings thread

[NorthsideAvenger]

24 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

If this is true, what would the cost be? Are we talking Shaw and Horton+? One of them and a few more lower prospects? Does Parades go instead of Shaw? 

I would not give up both Horton and Shaw. I would hold onto Shaw. I think the Cubs have more than enough secondary pieces to make that trade work without having to include Shaw. 

[WhyCantWeWin]

Tucker would be pricey but i dont think it would cost one of their big three prospects. (Shaw, Horton, Caissie)

[JBears79]

I think the Cubs could easily make a Tucker trade work without giving up either Shaw or Horton but id give up both easily for him if an extension was guarenteed

[Rob]

2 minutes ago, WhyCantWeWin said:

Tucker would be pricey but i dont think it would cost one of their big three prospects. (Shaw, Horton, Caissie)

I think it's doable without one of the big three. But I'm guessing Caissie+ would be on the move in such a deal.

[Jason Ross]

2 minutes ago, Rob said:

I think it's doable without one of the big three. But I'm guessing Caissie+ would be on the move in such a deal.

I think you could probably get it done without one of these guys but it'd probably require a Parades or the Astros to be really into Kevin Alcantara (which they might be - that's a profile they've liked a bunch in the past). But I think we have to accept that a Tucker trade will hurt somewhere. But I'm okay with that.

[Irrelevant Dude]

26 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

But don't do it if you aren't planning on signing him long-term.

This is the hard part.  Why would Tucker agree to any long term deal now after seeing that Soto money?

[Cuzi]

Jesse Rogers just said that the Cubs have spoken to Suzuki's agent about a trade. Apparently Suzuki does not want to exclusively be a DH. So probably Suzuki involved in a deal for Tucker.

[squally1313]

2 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

Jesse Rogers just said that the Cubs have spoken to Suzuki's agent about a trade. Apparently Suzuki does not want to exclusively be a DH. So probably Suzuki involved in a deal for Tucker.

The Astros want no part of Suzuki

[Cuzi]

1 minute ago, squally1313 said:

The Astros want no part of Suzuki

A team that threw out Alvarez in left field for 421 innings wants no part of Suzuki? Interesting.

[Bertz]

Ah, so that's why Suzuki's name came up in rumors.  

Honestly, fair.  And it is a limitation, but a minor enough one that I think the clarity it provides is ultimately a good thing.  We know Bellinger doesn't have to be backfilled by a RF, he can be backfilled by a 1B/DH.  That provides a straightforward path to improving the offense and saving money that doesn't require a lot of roster gymnastics.

Bellinger out, JDM in, $15M thrown at the pitching staff.  Easy peasy.

[squally1313]

4 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

A team that threw out Alvarez in left field for 421 innings wants no part of Suzuki? Interesting.

A team that is floating their best player on the trade market who is scheduled to make $16m this year does not have any interest in a noticeably worse version of that player for 2/$38m

[Cuzi]

5 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

A team that is floating their best player on the trade market who is scheduled to make $16m this year does not have any interest in a noticeably worse version of that player for 2/$38m

Ya. It really would be a first in history that a team would trade a player on the final year of his contract for lesser major league players with a little more control and a handful of prospects.

The Astros aren't motivated to move Tucker because of money. They've offered Bregman a $150M contract. They would move Tucker because they dont like their chances of signing him to an extension, dont like their chances of making his final year worth it, and see him as a piece that can restock the system quickly for the next run. Oh and they could have Suzuki play in that band box of a stadium for RHH for a year and offload him for more prospects next offseason or at the deadline.

Edited December 10, 2024 by Cuzi

[Jason Ross]

This Seiya information is weird. But also a bit interesting. What would have Seiya convinced he was headed for a time DH role? There's a few possibilities

• First, is that the Cubs have gotten no real bites on Bellinger. Thus having him move more to a DH space.
• Second, despite them working hard to move Bellinger, there's a replacement RF'er coming. You can make of that how you wish

Seems like the Cubs have a lot of plates spinning right now. 

[WhyCantWeWin]

So did Seiya demand a trade or basically imply he wont accept a full time DH role and would want a trade in that event

[squally1313]

3 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

This Seiya information is weird. But also a bit interesting. What would have Seiya convinced he was headed for a time DH role? There's a few possibilities

• First, is that the Cubs have gotten no real bites on Bellinger. Thus having him move more to a DH space.
• Second, despite them working hard to move Bellinger, there's a replacement RF'er coming. You can make of that how you wish

Seems like the Cubs have a lot of plates spinning right now. 

I think it's one thing to go to Seiya in the middle of August and tell him he's going to be mostly DH the rest of the year based on the presence of PCA and two GG outfielders, and as such he didn't play the field after August 24th. It's a little different going into a new season with three (or more) outfielders locked up multiple years in front of him. The Cubs coming to him about potential trades when he has a NTC probably annoyed them a little bit too, so might as well make their frustrations public. 

[Cuzi]

1 minute ago, WhyCantWeWin said:

So did Seiya demand a trade or basically imply he wont accept a full time DH role and would want a trade in that event

I doubt he demanded anything. They probably talked with him and he brought up that he would like to play in the OF and would be willing to waive his NTC if a trade presented itself where he could be more than a DH.

[UMFan83]

23 minutes ago, Irrelevant Dude said:

This is the hard part.  Why would Tucker agree to any long term deal now after seeing that Soto money?

Considering the Astros are shopping him because of their unwillingness to go beyond 6 years for contracts, what makes us think that Jed would?  I know he went to 7 with Dansby but hes repeatedly come out against long term contracts. 

[WhyCantWeWin]

2 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

I doubt he demanded anything. They probably talked with him and he brought up that he would like to play in the OF and would be willing to waive his NTC if a trade presented itself where he could be more than a DH.

Yeah just did some reading and it looks like thats the case with them presenting him teams that are interested in trading for him and him saying he would waive his NTC for a team where he is not a full time DH. 
 

Have to say, i have say no idea what the hell jed is doing

Edited December 10, 2024 by WhyCantWeWin

[Bertz]

2 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

I doubt he demanded anything. They probably talked with him and he brought up that he would like to play in the OF and would be willing to waive his NTC if a trade presented itself where he could be more than a DH.

Yeah this is my interpretation too.  This conversation was likely had during end of season exit interviews. When Bellinger opted in that made it clear someone needed to go in trade.  The conversations happening right now are most likely about specific scenarios and destinations.

[Jason Ross]

1 minute ago, UMFan83 said:

Considering the Astros are shopping him because of their unwillingness to go beyond 6 years for contracts, what makes us think that Jed would?  I know he went to 7 with Dansby but hes repeatedly come out against long term contracts. 

Hoyer got a lot of flak yesterday for making a comment about Soto, but in that comment, he said that there would be situations they'd consider going big for someone. I think Kyle Tucker fits the mold more so than most.

He's versatile in that he's an above average fielder who can also play some 1b down the road. He's a big hit tool guy, the Cubs covet those in recent years. He's not a platoon guy - he hits LHH and RHP just as well - this isn't a guy you worry about being a lefty. And I think his skill set ages gracefully, so Tucker at 35 is probably on the more useful side of 35, for example. 

Will he do it for Tucker? I dont know. But I think Tucker has a lot of the qualities that if the Cubs were going 10+ years than it'd be for a guy like him.

[17 Seconds]

what's the ballpark going to be on Tucker's next contract?

[Cuzi]

Just now, 17 Seconds said:

what's the ballpark going to be on Tucker's next contract?

I would guess like 12/400. But I also guessed 14/560 on Soto last off season.

[KCCub]

Ugh, I dislike the Suzuki stuff. Also, horrible timing for this to come out right in the heat of Roki discussions with them sharing the same agent. 

[Cuzi]

Just now, KCCub said:

Ugh, I dislike the Suzuki stuff. Also, horrible timing for this to come out right in the heat of Roki discussions with them sharing the same agent. 

I mean, they dont have to do anything. He could just as easily be the RFer for the Cubs when Bellinger is gone.

[Jason Ross]

1 minute ago, 17 Seconds said:

what's the ballpark going to be on Tucker's next contract?

He's 28, so I think it depends on if it kicks in in 2025 or 2026. Let's say for example it's a 2025:

12 years, with an AAV sitting in the $36-$38m. is what I'd guess. Probably an opt out in there, or some version of the Cole "opt out" where the Cubs can opt back in for an increased AAV. Maybe it gets closer to $40m.