Cerami: Cubs Finalizing Edward Cabrera Trade

[Jason Ross]

4 hours ago, Stratos said:

My argument isn't that they should sacrifice quality of innings for quantity.

Right. But teams are willing to trade injury chance for development; that's the opposite. 

Quantity can be found far more easily than quality. There are more Javier Assad types than there are Edward Cabrera types. 

It is great to be available. But what you do when you're available matters as well 

[Geographyhater8888]

9 hours ago, CubinNY said:

Better than what the Nationals got for Soto

I think you mean Padres. Soto had a year left when he was traded him to the Yankees like Skubal.

[thawv]

10 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

I read they had $29M to the LT line. If they have $33M sure they can sign him and not go over. Not sure if they can with only $29M. 

After the official arb numbers were adjusted, Cot's has the at 32.5 million under, and Roster Resource has them at 30.6 under.  So based on this, they have the money for Bo.  They can't "worry" about saving money for the deadline.  

[Rcal10]

25 minutes ago, thawv said:

After the official arb numbers were adjusted, Cot's has the at 32.5 million under, and Roster Resource has them at 30.6 under.  So based on this, they have the money for Bo.  They can't "worry" about saving money for the deadline.  

I absolutely agree with you that they shouldn’t worry about saving money at the deadline. Start below the LT line and worry about how to stay under later, or just go over. Not a big deal. I will also say the off season moves seem to be setting themselves up for one big FA signing. Instead of spending $4M to $7M on a bench bat like Refsnyder or Andujar or even Goldschmidt they spend a little over $1M for Austin. They added several pen arms, but no big spending. The trade for Cabrera adds the arm for a cheap salary. I know Tom can now just decide to sit on the money he didn’t spend. He did that last year. However it will get harder and harder for him to continue to suggest all the money the team brings in he puts back into the team. Last year they held $20M+ and didn’t spend it. They also had 5 home playoff games and huge attendance. There is, without question, more revenues from the ‘25 season than the past several. Plus they have the surplus from last year. And in ‘27 it will be easy to drop under and still put a competitive team on the field. There are no more excuses and nothing to hide behind. And, like I said, they appear to be making moves so they can make one big splash. So we will see🤷.

[thawv]

5 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I absolutely agree with you that they shouldn’t worry about saving money at the deadline. Start below the LT line and worry about how to stay under later, or just go over. Not a big deal. I will also say the off season moves seem to be setting themselves up for one big FA signing. Instead of spending $4M to $7M on a bench bat like Refsnyder or Andujar or even Goldschmidt they spend a little over $1M for Austin. They added several pen arms, but no big spending. The trade for Cabrera adds the arm for a cheap salary. I know Tom can now just decide to sit on the money he didn’t spend. He did that last year. However it will get harder and harder for him to continue to suggest all the money the team brings in he puts back into the team. Last year they held $20M+ and didn’t spend it. They also had 5 home playoff games and huge attendance. There is, without question, more revenues from the ‘25 season than the past several. Plus they have the surplus from last year. And in ‘27 it will be easy to drop under and still put a competitive team on the field. There are no more excuses and nothing to hide behind. And, like I said, they appear to be making moves so they can make one big splash. So we will see🤷.

I agree.  I think that the amount of money available right now is no accident.  I think they have the one big signing coming.  And it should come before the convention if possible. 

 

Is it another OF'er??  Is it a third baseman which would also solve the utility bench guy problem?   

[Rcal10]

If I were ranking probability and it was a fact one guy is added I would rank Bichette as the most likely. Followed by Bellinger, Bregman and then Tucker. Tucker is a long shot. Way long………

Also, because Bichette solves the utility situation and allows the Cubs to keep Ballesteros on the ML roster as a DH, I actually like him best. I probably like Bregman second best for the same reason. If they go with Bellinger they still need a utility guy and Ballesteros goes Iowa.

Edited January 9 by Rcal10

[CubinNY]

1 hour ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

I think you mean Padres. Soto had a year left when he was traded him to the Yankees like Skubal.

No. See what the Nationals got from the Padres. 

[Geographyhater8888]

22 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

No. See what the Nationals got from the Padres. 

I’d be shocked if anyone gives an equivalent package for one year of team control for Skubal like you would for 3.5 years of control for a top 3 slugger like Soto. 

Edited January 9 by Geographyhater8888

[CubinNY]

1 hour ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

I’d be shocked if anyone gives an equivalent package for one year of team control for Skubal like you would for 3.5 years of control for a top 3 slugger like Soto. 

Team control is secondary to getting the best pitcher in baseball over the last five years. 

[Bull]

2 hours ago, CubinNY said:

Team control is secondary to getting the best pitcher in baseball over the last five years. 

It's really not. The days when having a guy on your team for a year means you have a leg-up on getting him when he goes free agent are long gone. 

This is about how long you have the best pitcher in baseball vs a top 5 hitter in baseball. 

One year of A is less valuable than three years of B. it just is. 

[Stratos]

6 hours ago, Jason Ross said:

Right. But teams are willing to trade injury chance for development; that's the opposite. 

Quantity can be found far more easily than quality. There are more Javier Assad types than there are Edward Cabrera types. 

It is great to be available. But what you do when you're available matters as well 

Again i never said they should sacrifice quality of innings for quantity.  What they did was go cheap and got a guy with arm issues who hasn't been able to throw a full season rather than paying for someone on the open market just as or more effective in ERA who have  much better records at staying healthy and don't have recent elbow/ shoulder issues.

Tom is cheap.  He's not serious about winning.  We all know this of course.

[Jason Ross]

8 minutes ago, Stratos said:

Again i never said they should sacrifice quality of innings for quantity.  What they did was go cheap and got a guy with arm issues who hasn't been able to throw a full season rather than paying for someone on the open market just as or more effective in ERA who have  much better records at staying healthy and don't have recent elbow/ shoulder issues.

Tom is cheap.  He's not serious about winning.  We all know this of course.

I don't disagree that the Cubs are cheap, but you're making assumptions here that aren't supported by anything but conjecture. In terms of upside, Edward Cabrera has just as much upside as Dylan Cease, Tatsuya Imai or any of the free agent pitchers. He's also much younger than the proven arms and at the same age as Imai, who has his own question marks.

And the fact remains, the Cubs can't keep every prospect on the planet - not every prospect-for-player trade is "because a team is cheap". Flipping prospects you don't love internally, or don't plan on using for something you will use is certainly a possibility. 27-year-old types with the upside Cabrera has are not available via FA very often.

[CubinNY]

44 minutes ago, Bull said:

It's really not. The days when having a guy on your team for a year means you have a leg-up on getting him when he goes free agent are long gone. 

This is about how long you have the best pitcher in baseball vs a top 5 hitter in baseball. 

One year of A is less valuable than three years of B. it just is. 

No, it really is not. We aren't talking about Edward Cabrera. You can have him for as long as you want if you're willing to pay what he's worth. 

[Bull]

17 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

No, it really is not. We aren't talking about Edward Cabrera. You can have him for as long as you want if you're willing to pay what he's worth. 

So can anyone else. 

[imb]

 

37 minutes ago, Stratos said:

Again i never said they should sacrifice quality of innings for quantity.  What they did was go cheap and got a guy with arm issues who hasn't been able to throw a full season rather than paying for someone on the open market just as or more effective in ERA who have  much better records at staying healthy and don't have recent elbow/ shoulder issues.

Tom is cheap.  He's not serious about winning.  We all know this of course.

name me the pitchers available who will not get hurt next year. Now name me the ones who wont get hurt in 27 and 28 too. 

[imb]

3 hours ago, CubinNY said:

Team control is secondary to getting the best pitcher in baseball over the last five years. 

im not sure where this is coming from, unless you just mean that this is how you would value skubal in a trade. i dont think there's any recent blockbuster trades in the last 5-10 years where team control hasn't been the dominant factor in a trade return. if you've got some examples i'd love to see them

[CubinNY]

Just now, imb said:

im not sure where this is coming from, unless you just mean that this is how you would value skubal in a trade. i dont think there's any recent blockbuster trades in the last 5-10 years where team control hasn't been the dominant factor in a trade return. if you've got some examples i'd love to see them

I think team control is overblown by fans and "smart" people when it comes to a superstar not making superstar money (yet), although Skubal wants $32M in arbitration. 

The Yankees gave up RHP Michael King, RHP Jhony Brito, RHP Randy Vásquez, RHP Drew Thorpe, and C Kyle Higashioka. All I'm saying is that it would be more than that and more than Abrams, Hassell the 3rd, Wood, and Gore. 

[squally1313]

55 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

No, it really is not. We aren't talking about Edward Cabrera. You can have him for as long as you want if you're willing to pay what he's worth. 

After one year, everyone can have the player if they pay what he's worth. So in this scenario, if you want Skubal on your team, you have two options:

Option A: Trade for him now, and then sign him to his market value after the year. In that scenario you receive: his 2026 services, his 2027-2037 services. You give up: the players you give in the trade, the money required to beat all the other contract offers.

Option B: You sign him as a free agent a year from now. You receive: his 2027-2037 services. You give up: the money required to beat all the other contract offers.

The only difference between A and B is that in A you give up players and you get his 2026 performance. Wouldn't it follow that the value of the players you trade should be equal to solely the value of his 2026 performance?

[We Got The Whole 9]

The world is cruel. Skubal's arm will probably explode this year and he won't get the $ he deserves now.

[Stratos]

4 hours ago, Jason Ross said:

I don't disagree that the Cubs are cheap, but you're making assumptions here that aren't supported by anything but conjecture. In terms of upside, Edward Cabrera has just as much upside as Dylan Cease, Tatsuya Imai or any of the free agent pitchers. He's also much younger than the proven arms and at the same age as Imai, who has his own question marks.

I don't disagree with any of this and it doesn't go against what I've said.  Again my point is if the owner was serious about winning he would be spending on top talent and we'd be able to keep good young talent like Cam Smith and Caissie and Cease (when he was in our system). 

This trade is a gamble with a lot of upside if Cabrera stays relatively healthy (without major surgery).  Jed is forced to make a high risk, high reward play like this because ownership doesn't give him the resources he needs to do better.  Nobody on this board would take Cabrera over Cease if money weren't a factor.

[Stratos]

3 hours ago, imb said:

 

name me the pitchers available who will not get hurt next year. Now name me the ones who wont get hurt in 27 and 28 too. 

Again, injury and projections isn't about certainty, it's about probability.  The probability that Cease makes more starts over the next 3 seasons is much higher than for Cabrera.  If you want to defend Ricketts on this go ahead.

[imb]

11 minutes ago, Stratos said:

Again, injury and projections isn't about certainty, it's about probability.  The probability that Cease makes more starts over the next 3 seasons is much higher than for Cabrera.  If you want to defend Ricketts on this go ahead.

im a cease fan so im not gonna horsefeathers on him (and im not gonna defend jed or ricketts, but i can see the vision here), but he's thrown 900 innings in the last 5 years. Sure, you can look at that and say "wow he's durable," but in a world where no pitcher can actually be durable anymore, you can also look at that and say "wow that elbow's about to blow."

You (not you, you, the royal you) really just have no idea anymore. The only certainty is that every pitcher breaks at some point. Maybe Dylan Cease has the magic mechanics, or maybe his elbow snaps like dried spaghetti in spring training. 

So you can spend $210 million and commit 7 years to Cease, where it is a near certaintly he breaks at least once during that contract. Or you can get a guy who is arguably just as talented, who costs you nothing more than 2 lottery tickets and a ginger 4th OF, and you only commit 3 years to him, so if he breaks, it's not nearly as catostrophic. 

And of course the probably most important element of the calculus here is being ignored - if the $30m they would have had to spend on Cease instead get spent on Bregman/Bichette/Tucker/Whoever, it's an enormous win, and a smart bet on upside considering all pitchers are essentially walking timebombs anyway.

 

[javy knows my name]

21 hours ago, CubinNY said:

I think team control is overblown by fans and "smart" people when it comes to a superstar not making superstar money (yet), although Skubal wants $32M in arbitration. 

The Yankees gave up RHP Michael King, RHP Jhony Brito, RHP Randy Vásquez, RHP Drew Thorpe, and C Kyle Higashioka. All I'm saying is that it would be more than that and more than Abrams, Hassell the 3rd, Wood, and Gore. 

So you're arguing that the market should value players and player control differently than it does? This is hot stove fanfic

[cubfansince77]

On 1/9/2026 at 7:41 AM, thawv said:

I agree.  I think that the amount of money available right now is no accident.  I think they have the one big signing coming.  And it should come before the convention if possible. 

 

Is it another OF'er??  Is it a third baseman which would also solve the utility bench guy problem?   

You are right, we need another bat and most of us feel Maga Matt isn't the answer at 3rd. As I've said in other threads today, I think when all is said and done we might end up with Suarez at 3rd. Hear me out, because he's not my first choice (that would be Bregman) but I think that Bregs/Bo/Tuck/Belly are all 30ish and all kinda fragile frankly. Really good hitters but with the exception of Bregman, all average to below avg. defensively. Don't think that juice is worth the squeeze and I really think Jed will pass on all four. Just a gut feeling. 

Suarez is also an avg. defender, older but so much pop and that uppercut swing will play well in Wrigley. He's been more durable than the aforementioned four superstars and is a real pro. I think he can hit 40-50 homers and if his defense is a worry, then Shaw can replace him in the late innings. Thoughts?

[Rcal10]

2 hours ago, cubfansince77 said:

You are right, we need another bat and most of us feel Maga Matt isn't the answer at 3rd. As I've said in other threads today, I think when all is said and done we might end up with Suarez at 3rd. Hear me out, because he's not my first choice (that would be Bregman) but I think that Bregs/Bo/Tuck/Belly are all 30ish and all kinda fragile frankly. Really good hitters but with the exception of Bregman, all average to below avg. defensively. Don't think that juice is worth the squeeze and I really think Jed will pass on all four. Just a gut feeling. 

Suarez is also an avg. defender, older but so much pop and that uppercut swing will play well in Wrigley. He's been more durable than the aforementioned four superstars and is a real pro. I think he can hit 40-50 homers and if his defense is a worry, then Shaw can replace him in the late innings. Thoughts?

Most of us do not feel Shaw isn’t the answer at third. You do. I think he is good and will be better. That said, we still need another bat. If Shaw has to wait until ‘27 to join the line up full time and is a utility guy this year with maybe 400 AB, that is fine. But just because guys want Bregman or Bichette does not mean people don’t think Shaw will be good.