Cubs 2025 Trade Deadline Thread

[Jason Ross]

Just now, PeanutPunch33 said:

The Tucker trade was pretty horrible in terms of value and he made that trade.  I think he just got cold feet 

I do not believe that is a horrible value trade in any way. I think fans both overvalue what Smith was as a prospect at the time (and even now as an MLB player) and undervalue how expensive Tucker, even at one year, is. 

That trade is probably bang on how I would value both what was lost, and what was gotten. 

[CubinNY]

38 minutes ago, KCCub said:

Brother, you didn’t just today find out the asking prices today. You can’t swim in those waters without a better backup plan….

I read that in a Hulk Hogan voice

[Hot Sauce]

6 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

I do not believe that is a horrible value trade in any way. I think fans both overvalue what Smith was as a prospect at the time (and even now as an MLB player) and undervalue how expensive Tucker, even at one year, is. 

That trade is probably bang on how I would value both what was lost, and what was gotten. 

I have no qualms with the value of that trade and the Cubs are absolutely not 63-45 without Tucker.

I’m 50-50 on whether he resigns or not, but even if he doesn’t, I still would not consider it a bad trade. You essentially made your team better now and allowed yourself a whole season to hash out an extension or at least show Tucker why he should stay.

[PeanutPunch33]

10 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

I do not believe that is a horrible value trade in any way. I think fans both overvalue what Smith was as a prospect at the time (and even now as an MLB player) and undervalue how expensive Tucker, even at one year, is. 

That trade is probably bang on how I would value both what was lost, and what was gotten. 

Fair enough but he's shown that he can swing a big trade when he wants to.  I just don't understand how they didn't do more this year at the deadline when they have what, the 2nd best record in baseball.  If not now then when? 

Like even if they didn't want to "overpay" for guys like Gore and Ryan, why couldn't they get one of the rentals.  Kelly or Gallen. 

Edited August 1, 2025 by PeanutPunch33

[Jason Ross]

Just now, Hot Sauce said:

I have no qualms with the value of that trade and the Cubs are absolutely not 63-45 without Tucker.

I’m 50-50 on whether he resigns or not, but even if he doesn’t, I still would not consider it a bad trade. You essentially made your team better now and allowed yourself a whole season to hash out an extension or at least show Tucker why he should stay.

Absolutely. Good trades generally hurt a bit, and the Tucker trade hurt a bit in future value. I hope they resign him, however.

[Hot Sauce]

2 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

I read that in a Hulk Hogan voice

What’cha gonna do when Taylor Rogers, Mike Soroka, and the Chicago Cubs run wild on you, brother?!

[gflore34]

29 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

I do not believe that is a horrible value trade in any way. I think fans both overvalue what Smith was as a prospect at the time (and even now as an MLB player) and undervalue how expensive Tucker, even at one year, is. 

That trade is probably bang on how I would value both what was lost, and what was gotten. 

Tucker - is it a certainty the Cubs will not make an attempt to sign him?  Moreover, his numbers while good, do not appear to be of mega-contract status.  Maybe he'll go an a massive heater during these last 54 games but, I could see Jed using Tucker' non mega-contract status numbers as justification for not handing out a big long term contract.

Edited August 1, 2025 by gflore34

[Jason Ross]

Just now, PeanutPunch33 said:

Fair enough but he's shown that he can swing a big trade when he wants to.  I just don't understand how they didn't do more this year at the deadline when they have what, the 2nd best record in baseball.  If not now then when? 

I agree with the last sentiment. 

My guess goes back to the good and the bad of Hoyer - you will probably never get a truly horrendous bad trade from Jed. You'll probably never get the slightly irrationally big trade you need to make to get *your* dude.

[bukie]

12 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

I think it's more that Jed is who Jed is? He's very black and white on value. He won't pay a penny over what he feels is fair. And that means we will be very unlikely to lose a trade in a horrible fashion but it's very unlikely that the team will ever make a big move come the deadline. 

Jed would rather not make a move than budge on his value, for good or bad.

 

Personally, I'd feel worse about today if top end starters were being wheeled and dealt everywhere and the Cubs just watched it happen, but no top tier starters were dealt and just one second tier starter was (Kelly), to the point where you could reasonably say the Cubs acquired the second best starter that was dealt.

To me, that paints a picture that the SP market was just unreasonably high.

[Jason Ross]

1 minute ago, gflore34 said:

Tucker - is it a certainty the Cubs will not make an attempt to sign him?  Moreover, his numbers while good, do not appear to be of mega-contract status.  Maybe he'll go an a massive heater of these last 54 games but, I could see Jed using Tucker' non mega-contract status numbers as justification for not handing out a big long term contract.

I think the Cubs will make an offer to Tucker that is reasonable. As always with Hoyer, we should expect him to go to what he deems reasonable, but the moment it goes beyond that, probably fair to worry if he would become irrational enough to make it happen. 

I hope he does. I think he's worth it. But with Jed, it's always a question.

[UMFan83]

3 minutes ago, Hot Sauce said:

I have no qualms with the value of that trade and the Cubs are absolutely not 63-45 without Tucker.

I’m 50-50 on whether he resigns or not, but even if he doesn’t, I still would not consider it a bad trade. You essentially made your team better now and allowed yourself a whole season to hash out an extension or at least show Tucker why he should stay.

50/50?  I mean I guess you could make the argument that the Cubs all those OF MLB ready prospects to  use as trade bait after Tucker hopefully signs.  But seems like they are giving themselves options in case they aren't able to reach his asking price (also possibly an option to replace Seiya after next season)

[gflore34]

5 minutes ago, bukie said:

Personally, I'd feel worse about today if top end starters were being wheeled and dealt everywhere and the Cubs just watched it happen, but no top tier starters were dealt and just one second tier starter was (Kelly), to the point where you could reasonably say the Cubs acquired the second best starter that was dealt.

To me, that paints a picture that the SP market was just unreasonably high.

Plus do think Jed' heavily banking on the returns of Tallion and Asaad as deadline "trades"?

Edited August 1, 2025 by gflore34

[UMFan83]

2 minutes ago, bukie said:

To me, that paints a picture that the SP market was just unreasonably high.

This is one of those things where I'm thinking "so what pay that price" but I know I'd be ranting and ripping Jed for trading Caissie, Alcantara, Wiggins and Wicks (or something) for Joe Ryan.

[gflore34]

1 minute ago, Jason Ross said:

I think the Cubs will make an offer to Tucker that is reasonable. As always with Hoyer, we should expect him to go to what he deems reasonable, but the moment it goes beyond that, probably fair to worry if he would become irrational enough to make it happen. 

I hope he does. I think he's worth it. But with Jed, it's always a question.

What do you think about Tucker' current numbers and his ability to put a big price tag on himself?

[bukie]

1 minute ago, UMFan83 said:

This is one of those things where I'm thinking "so what pay that price" but I know I'd be ranting and ripping Jed for trading Caissie, Alcantara, Wiggins and Wicks (or something) for Joe Ryan.

Or something like Horton + Shaw + prospects.

[Jason Ross]

1 minute ago, bukie said:

Personally, I'd feel worse about today if top end starters were being wheeled and dealt everywhere and the Cubs just watched it happen, but no top tier starters were dealt and just one second tier starter was (Kelly), to the point where you could reasonably say the Cubs acquired the second best starter that was dealt.

To me, that paints a picture that the SP market was just unreasonably high.

It probably was unreasonably high. But at some stage, you either go unreasonably high or you're left where the Cubs are today where they're probably still one player short - a place the Cubs have been since probably February. 

At the same time, how much are prices going to drop on controlled SP in December? The prices were deemed to high by the Cubs last offseason, nothing suggests they'll drop this year. Beyond that, when are Caissie, Long and Ballesteros' ever going to have higher value than now? If they have anything close to even one bad month, even with a drop in price, you probably give back in devalued assets. 

I think any trade would have probably sucked. It would have failed a BBTV evaluation. But sometimes, that's the only way you get better. I wouldn't argue this way for a rental, but when you control the player for 2+ years still, it's a lot easier to live with a 20% overpay.

[KCCub]

General question - are farm system rankings (BA, Pipeline, etc) actually a ways off from what the industry actually thinks? E.g. Yankees were the 24th and 25th ranked system coming into the season (and only have 3 top 100 prospects in most all updated rankings), how are they able to land Bednar and Dovall without giving up a top 100 prospect if their farm system is actually ranked that low? Or did Cashman just take advantage of the Pirates (I know the catcher is a solid get) and Posey.?

[UMFan83]

1 minute ago, gflore34 said:

Plus do think Jed' heavily banking on the returns of Tallion and Asaad as deadline "trades".

I mean yes they will absolutely improve the team for the regular season and to some degree the playoffs but I'm not sure I'm super confident when one of those guys is starting Game 3 or 4 of a playoff series.  It might work, but it was one of the few areas the Cubs could have improved their October chances.  Maybe by a couple of percentage points but no team is going to change their fortunes more drastically than that at the deadline. (I think?)

[Jason Ross]

Just now, gflore34 said:

What do you think about Tucker' current numbers and his ability to put a big price tag on himself?

Probably between $400m-$500m. His slump is still a good player and he'll probably go bananas for a bit and we'll all forget this.

[Michael Busch Light]

I guarantee Jed wouldn’t make the Chapman trade in 2016 but he also wouldn’t have made the Quintana trade either.  

[Jason Ross]

Just now, KCCub said:

General question - are farm system rankings (BA, Pipeline, etc) actually a ways off from what the industry actually thinks? E.g. Yankees were the 24th and 25th ranked system coming into the season (and only have 3 top 100 prospects in most all updated rankings), how are they able to land Bednar and Dovall without giving up a top 100 prospect if their farm system is actually ranked that low? Or did Cashman just take advantage of the Pirates (I know the catcher is a solid get) and Posey.?

I think every team has their own unique rankings. Think like how BA and BP and FG can range wildly sometimes. Now make it...30 different rankings. I think most people have the same few top prospects in the same area, but once you get to 15-75 you probably start to see a pretty wide difference. Beyond that? I'd gues it's wild west. One man's trash is another's treasure. 

Good example is Estuary Ruiz. He was a fringe-top-100 type but the A's traded Sean Murphy, almost exclusively, for him. To get that value they basically had to internally see him as a top-25 type. It has not worked out.

[Hot Sauce]

2 minutes ago, bukie said:

Or something like Horton + Shaw + prospects.

I think this is probably the case and those teams wanted more back than just prospects.

[Post Count Padder]

2 minutes ago, KCCub said:

General question - are farm system rankings (BA, Pipeline, etc) actually a ways off from what the industry actually thinks? E.g. Yankees were the 24th and 25th ranked system coming into the season (and only have 3 top 100 prospects in most all updated rankings), how are they able to land Bednar and Dovall without giving up a top 100 prospect if their farm system is actually ranked that low? Or did Cashman just take advantage of the Pirates (I know the catcher is a solid get) and Posey.?

I think some of it comes down to how each team evaluates prospects. The guys the Yanks gave up weren't in their top 5 or 10 but maybe the Pirates and Giants scouts and front offices were enamored with the prospects they received and valued them higher internally.

[Soul]

So the Cubs essentially behaved like the Brewers once again. They picked up a couple players that are sort of OK, “sounds good” guys but nothing splashy. Then they hope they can get a great Aug/Sept out of them without trading away the farm.  So is Castro this year’s Mark Canha?

[Hot Sauce]

2 minutes ago, Post Count Padder said:

I think some of it comes down to how each team evaluates prospects. The guys the Yanks gave up weren't in their top 5 or 10 but maybe the Pirates and Giants scouts and front offices were enamored with the prospects they received and valued them higher internally.

Absolutely. There was once a prospect debate of PCA vs. Vientos where some would’ve preferred the latter. Rankings don’t determine development.