Cubs, Giants Discussing Nico Hoerner Trade

[Rcal10]

2 minutes ago, Thusly Boned said:

I mean most athletes aren't intellectuals, but it's one thing to assume the people you're rooting for are largely regressive morons and it's another to know it. He's in the bucket with Chapman and Addison Russell as far as I'm concerned.

However, IMO there are also sound baseball reasons to want to trade him. For example:

Even before all the nonsense, I wasn't at all in love with what I saw. If his statistically good second half can be spun into a trade for something of value, I say do it.

He is in no way the same as Russell and Chapman. He got sucked into a cult. He is weak minded. And I dislike everything he stands for. But he isn’t like Russell or Chapman. 

[squally1313]

The fact that I would be happy to see Shaw out of Chicago for personal/moral reasons isn't irrelevant, but can be set to the side, largely, for conversations around trading him.

There's the pro arguments around Shaw that he was an above average hitter in the second half of the year, improved defensively (even if some of the metrics don't like him), has positional flexibility, and has either 5 or 6 years of team control.

There's the negative arguments that are largely summed up in Thusly Boned's Savant snip.

But ultimately if there is/are a team/teams that value him in the first bucket, he's a very valuable asset. We are absolutely in a Win Now Year, and that very valuable asset doesn't have a starting spot. Yes, I know, there's room. But if you can turn Shaw into a main piece for say, a front line pitcher, or a RF that is clearly a better hitter than Ballesteros, and then backfill the role of 'utility infielder' with....Ramon Urias/Adam Frazier/etc etc...are we a better team in 2026? And is that improvement worth the likely long term damage to the organization? 

I think you could theoretically get a lot for him. And I tend to lean towards maximizing 2026 and figuring it out after that. Not that he can't help this team, but it's worth exploring.

[Rcal10]

12 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

The fact that I would be happy to see Shaw out of Chicago for personal/moral reasons isn't irrelevant, but can be set to the side, largely, for conversations around trading him.

There's the pro arguments around Shaw that he was an above average hitter in the second half of the year, improved defensively (even if some of the metrics don't like him), has positional flexibility, and has either 5 or 6 years of team control.

There's the negative arguments that are largely summed up in Thusly Boned's Savant snip.

But ultimately if there is/are a team/teams that value him in the first bucket, he's a very valuable asset. We are absolutely in a Win Now Year, and that very valuable asset doesn't have a starting spot. Yes, I know, there's room. But if you can turn Shaw into a main piece for say, a front line pitcher, or a RF that is clearly a better hitter than Ballesteros, and then backfill the role of 'utility infielder' with....Ramon Urias/Adam Frazier/etc etc...are we a better team in 2026? And is that improvement worth the likely long term damage to the organization? 

I think you could theoretically get a lot for him. And I tend to lean towards maximizing 2026 and figuring it out after that. Not that he can't help this team, but it's worth exploring.

I’m not sure they can trade Shaw for a hitter clearly better than Ballesteros. But if they could and that guy has at least 3 years of control left, sure, they can trade Shaw and add a utility guy. But I think Ballesteros is going to do just fine as a hitter in ‘26. But as you said, doesn’t hurt to explore. I just doubt they find anything. 
However, would Wilyer Abreu fit that description? Or do we need better? 

Edited January 15 by Rcal10

[We Got The Whole 9]

34 minutes ago, Thusly Boned said:

I mean most athletes aren't intellectuals, but it's one thing to assume the people you're rooting for are largely regressive morons and it's another to know it. He's in the bucket with Chapman and Addison Russell as far as I'm concerned.

However, IMO there are also sound baseball reasons to want to trade him. For example:

Even before all the nonsense, I wasn't at all in love with what I saw. If his statistically good second half can be spun into a trade for something of value, I say do it.

They just gave 30m AAV to one of the weakest batted ball profiles in the league. I doubt theyre that concerned with this from a 22 year old.

[chibears55]

If Bregman and Jed comments about Nico were sincere, hes not going anywhere. 

[Backtobanks]

53 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

Actually if Shaw has a good year as super sub they may be able to trade him for a different cheap everyday starter or a young controlled rotation piece next year, opening up the possibility of signing Nico. But for now I wouldn’t extend or trade him. I wouldn’t trade Shaw either, this year.

And if Shaw doesn't have a great year, then what?  Most of Shaw's extremely high value comes from his years of control.  A bad year and one less year of control easily cuts his trade value in half.

[Backtobanks]

4 hours ago, Tryptamine said:

Gross gross gross. Shaw is likely to be > Abreu, comes with 2 more years of control and I'm am super underwhelmed by Bello

Abreu plays a position we can use and is super cheap.  Bello is young and can be a solid 3 or 4 in the rotation and has a team friendly contract for the next few years.  Getting 2 young, experienced, and cheap starters for a young utility infielder sounds like a good deal to me.

[Cuzi]

29 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

And if Shaw doesn't have a great year, then what?  Most of Shaw's extremely high value comes from his years of control.  A bad year and one less year of control easily cuts his trade value in half.

You can play this game with every player in the game.

The Cubs are going to have to spend on an OFer next year. They can probably fit in one more large contract. They are going to have to have cheap players they let sink or swim. Shaw is going to be one of those players.

[squally1313]

1 hour ago, Cuzi said:

You can play this game with every player in the game.

The Cubs are going to have to spend on an OFer next year. They can probably fit in one more large contract. They are going to have to have cheap players they let sink or swim. Shaw is going to be one of those players.

The cubs are going to have a lot of money next year with 6 lineup spots and 3 rotation spots filled by players already on the major league roster and only two of those guys are going to be making more than an arbitration deal. It’s two outfielders, a second baseman, and theoretically backend rotation pieces behind Horton Steele and Cabrera. And then the annual bullpen rebuild.
 

They can’t all be marquee signings, but we don’t necessarily need to squirrel away league minimum guys for a rainy day. 

[squally1313]

To expand on the above, put together a quick schedule based on the FG roster resource page. Probably forgetting something, but I have us with a little under $90m to fill 5 main spots (2B, LF, RF, SP, SP). Spread it out, you're not going to get anything elite. But if any combination of Wiggins, Triantos, Alcantara, Rojas, Ramirez, etc can provide even adequate coverage, it really doesn't look that dire. Work below, let me know if there's any blatant mistakes. 

[Bull]

7 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

To expand on the above, put together a quick schedule based on the FG roster resource page. Probably forgetting something, but I have us with a little under $90m to fill 5 main spots (2B, LF, RF, SP, SP). Spread it out, you're not going to get anything elite. But if any combination of Wiggins, Triantos, Alcantara, Rojas, Ramirez, etc can provide even adequate coverage, it really doesn't look that dire. Work below, let me know if there's any blatant mistakes. 

Shaw fills that 2B spot.

[squally1313]

Just now, Bull said:

Shaw fills that 2B spot.

I put together the hypothetical because we were discussing trading Shaw. Probably should have took his name out but it didn't impact the math either way at league minimum.

[cubbiebluphi]

I love that Shaw stands up for his beliefs.  It shows that he has character.  It benefits the cubs more by keeping him on the cubs.

Trading him makes the Cubs worse.  

[Cuzi]

13 hours ago, squally1313 said:

The cubs are going to have a lot of money next year with 6 lineup spots and 3 rotation spots filled by players already on the major league roster and only two of those guys are going to be making more than an arbitration deal. It’s two outfielders, a second baseman, and theoretically backend rotation pieces behind Horton Steele and Cabrera. And then the annual bullpen rebuild.
 

They can’t all be marquee signings, but we don’t necessarily need to squirrel away league minimum guys for a rainy day. 

I'm assuming at this point since Alcantara is still on the team that he will be taking one of those spots, unless he falls flat on his face this year.

C - Amaya

1B - Busch

2B - Shaw

3B - Bregman

SS - Swanson

LF - ???

CF - PCA

RF - Alcantara

Go balls out for a pitcher (Skubal). Get a decent LFer. And then bullpen/bench.

Edited January 16 by Cuzi

[Tryptamine]

2 hours ago, cubbiebluphi said:

I love that Shaw stands up for his beliefs.  It shows that he has character.  It benefits the cubs more by keeping him on the cubs.

Trading him makes the Cubs worse.  

Well this is certainly a strong first post.

[Rob]

3 hours ago, cubbiebluphi said:

I love that Shaw stands up for his beliefs.  It shows that he has character.  It benefits the cubs more by keeping him on the cubs.

Trading him makes the Cubs worse.  

Is being willing stand up for his beliefs moral if the beliefs themselves are not?

It's not just "I support a regime actively engaged in ethnic cleansing (a.k.a. genocide), kidnapping foreign leaders, extrajudicial killings which are 100% illegal under international law, etc..." He's just saying he's unrepentant about his belief in those things.

Standing up for those beliefs doesn't show character. Character would be questioning the validity of those beliefs - being willing to admit he was wrong. That would be character. As is, he's just a jackass. And the Cubs are better off without attracting the attention.

[Hot Sauce]

18 hours ago, chibears55 said:

If Bregman and Jed comments about Nico were sincere, hes not going anywhere. 

Jed is pretty transparent. We can take him for his word here.

[Backtobanks]

17 hours ago, Cuzi said:

You can play this game with every player in the game.

The Cubs are going to have to spend on an OFer next year. They can probably fit in one more large contract. They are going to have to have cheap players they let sink or swim. Shaw is going to be one of those players.

My trade proposal would bring in a solid, cheap OF with a few years of control.  The difference in letting the cheap players sink or swim is that Shaw's trade value is ridiculously high right now and the other players aren't rated that high.

[cubfansince77]

On 1/14/2026 at 10:51 PM, Hot Sauce said:

None of this is groundbreaking news. Bregman pushed Shaw to the bench and the Cubs don’t feel compelled to make a trade. That’s the right call, IMO. There are enough ABs to go around and the Cubs are a stronger team with all 3. 

Exactly right...if Shaw stays on the straight and narrow off the field and  blows up this season on the field then he can slide over to 2nd when Nico hits free agency. Like you say, plenty of AB's for Shaw as a utility guy and backup at 3rd/SS/2nd and if Bregs/Dansby/Nico get nicked we have a solid replacement. 

Edited January 16 by cubfansince77
left out a few facts

[Cuzi]

1 minute ago, Backtobanks said:

My trade proposal would bring in a solid, cheap OF with a few years of control.  The difference in letting the cheap players sink or swim is that Shaw's trade value is ridiculously high right now and the other players aren't rated that high.

Why is his trade value ridiculously high, though? Because hes good with a lot of potential and young with a lot of control? If only the Cubs could potentially use someone like that in the near future.

[cubfansince77]

31 minutes ago, Rob said:

Is being willing stand up for his beliefs moral if the beliefs themselves are not?

It's not just "I support a regime actively engaged in ethnic cleansing (a.k.a. genocide), kidnapping foreign leaders, extrajudicial killings which are 100% illegal under international law, etc..." He's just saying he's unrepentant about his belief in those things.

Standing up for those beliefs doesn't show character. Character would be questioning the validity of those beliefs - being willing to admit he was wrong. That would be character. As is, he's just a jackass. And the Cubs are better off without attracting the attention.

Well said Rob. Some people just can't or won't admit the guy is 'off'. I mean....Turning Point? DUDE........

[Backtobanks]

2 minutes ago, Cuzi said:

Why is his trade value ridiculously high, though? Because hes good with a lot of potential and young with a lot of control? If only the Cubs could potentially use someone like that in the near future.

I will agree that he's young, has potential, and has a lot of control, but his OPS+ was 98 last year. so it's not like he's a "sure thing" star right now.

[cubfansince77]

1 hour ago, Tryptamine said:

Well this is certainly a strong first post.

Oh it's 'strong' alright but not really in a good way, lol

[Soul]

35 minutes ago, cubfansince77 said:

Well said Rob. Some people just can't or won't admit the guy is 'off'. I mean....Turning Point? DUDE........

Calling him OFF, to me, suggests we aren’t really sure what’s going on with him.  But we know!

Can I just get good performances from him and no bestie pics with Erika Kirk at Wrigley?

[Rcal10]

29 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

I will agree that he's young, has potential, and has a lot of control, but his OPS+ was 98 last year. so it's not like he's a "sure thing" star right now.

Based on your name I know you were around for Ryne Sanberg. His first two years his highest 0PS+ was 90. And he wasn’t near the hitting prospect coming into the majors that Shaw was. This is not to compare Shaw to Sandberg. It is just pointing out that Shaw only has one year. His value may go higher. To be a league average hitter, who actually performed much better than that in the second half, as a rookie does make Shaw very valuable. When you add he also played good defense at a position he never played before, there is no reason to trade him unless you get a great deal. Your’s was not it.