Trade deadline target

[Jason Ross]

1 hour ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

Who would you be willing to give up for Skubal?

A decent amount. Skubal is great. But looking at SP prices, it's going to cost an arm and a leg and probably another limb. You like what Josiah Hartshorn is doing right now? Assume Detroit does too - type of stuff.

Basically, every team at the deadline who needs an arm will be involved. So you need to take whatever it is you think is fair, and then beat that offer because there will be eight teams who are willing to offer what is fair and you need to beat those eight teams somehow. So for two-three months of one of the three best starters in baseball you're going to pay a price that is going to start at "it hurts" and ends at "it really hurts". And then expect to hear a full discourse on here about how this team isn't one player away from a WS.

I'd pay whatever that price is, probably. I think I'd block off Hartshorn's name, however and be willing to pay whatever else it costs. Prospects are going to fail more than they succeed and Skubal is that good. 

[Geographyhater8888]

17 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

A decent amount. Skubal is great. But looking at SP prices, it's going to cost an arm and a leg and probably another limb. You like what Josiah Hartshorn is doing right now? Assume Detroit does too - type of stuff.

Would Shaw get it done? This is the year to do it for a variety of reasons and especially with the threat of him joining another NL contender. 

No matter how costly he is he’s the only available player at the deadline that’ll significantly move the needle. An over pay should be considered in my opinion. Wouldn’t being a rental cost less than someone with control in Joe Ryan’s tier?

Edited 2 hours ago by Geographyhater8888

[Outshined_One]

8 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

Would Shaw get it done? The infield isn’t getting younger, you have both corner outfielders and 3 starting pitchers off the books, there’s no in house talent to replace Suzuki and or Happs production, who’ll want multi year extensions likely. If he’s traded to another NL contender then the outlook is even more bleak. 

No matter how costly he is he’s the only available player at the deadline that’ll significantly move the needle. An over pay should be considered in my opinion. Wouldn’t being a rental cost less than someone with control in Joe Ryan’s tier?

Generally speaking, yes, it should be enough to get it done since Shaw's present value will almost certainly eclipse the value of any single prospect who'd be on the market and most other teams aren't looking to trade similarly situated major league players at this point.

Whether or not Shaw *should* be available is another conversation altogether, but I'd have to think that trade would be better than anything else the Tigers would reasonably expect to receive.

[Geographyhater8888]

56 minutes ago, Outshined_One said:

Generally speaking, yes, it should be enough to get it done since Shaw's present value will almost certainly eclipse the value of any single prospect who'd be on the market and most other teams aren't looking to trade similarly situated major league players at this point.

Whether or not Shaw *should* be available is another conversation altogether, but I'd have to think that trade would be better than anything else the Tigers would reasonably expect to receive.

To acquire Skubal it’s between Shaw+ or Wiggins+ a lot more capital. Not sure it’d be worth it or even enough when the other suitors have better farm systems and prospects to offer. Skubal for a 10th man who’s blocked in the infield and doesn’t have a corner outfield bat I’m in favor of. It depends on how the next couple months and market shake out obviously.

The only obstacle is the Tigers need for young middle infield talent.

Edited 1 hour ago by Geographyhater8888

[Jason Ross]

58 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

Would Shaw get it done? This is the year to do it for a variety of reasons and especially with the threat of him joining another NL contender. 

No matter how costly he is he’s the only available player at the deadline that’ll significantly move the needle. An over pay should be considered in my opinion. Wouldn’t being a rental cost less than someone with control in Joe Ryan’s tier?

It's Tarik Skubal. I think we have to assume that literally every team who's expecting to make the playoffs will be interested. Of those teams, five to ten of them will have serious discussions over him and if you're going to win that race, you're going to pay more than whatever it is we think a rental costs.

SP's go for insane prices at the deadline the last few years and none of them are Tarik Skubal. 

[Bertz]

I would be loathe to blow our prospect wad on a rental given the shape of the rotation heading into next year.

Go get someone with control (Reid Detmers?) or try to pan for gold like the team did with Soroka last summer (Trevor Rogers?).

[NorthsideAvenger]

4 hours ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

Who would you be willing to give up for Skubal?

Nothing. Unless he came with an extension, he would be strictly a rental. Not interested in giving up assets for a rental.

[squally1313]

1 minute ago, NorthsideAvenger said:

Nothing. Unless he came with an extension, he would be strictly a rental. Not interested in giving up assets for a rental.

He's not coming with an extension. That's why you could get him for, theoretically, a a guy with a sub-300 OBP and sub-400 SLG in 541 PAs who is blocked in the infield for the next 4 years. Getting the arguably best pitcher in baseball for 8-12 costs you that. Getting him for 1.5 years would be Shaw plus our next three prospects. 

[NorthsideAvenger]

Just now, squally1313 said:

He's not coming with an extension. That's why you could get him for, theoretically, a a guy with a sub-300 OBP and sub-400 SLG in 541 PAs who is blocked in the infield for the next 4 years. Getting the arguably best pitcher in baseball for 8-12 costs you that. Getting him for 1.5 years would be Shaw plus our next three prospects. 

Not interested in rentals unless the Cubs are like a Skubal away from winning. Cubs are more than a Skubal away. Why waste assets on a rental who will leave after the season?

[Geographyhater8888]

7 minutes ago, NorthsideAvenger said:

Nothing. Unless he came with an extension, he would be strictly a rental. Not interested in giving up assets for a rental.

Chapman didn’t come with an extension.

[NorthsideAvenger]

1 minute ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

Chapman didn’t come with an extension.

That team was closer to a title than this year's team. 

If you can say the Cubs can and will re-sign Skubal, then I am all in, but I just don't think Jed and Tom will have the stomach to not only pay the prospect cost but also pay Skubal what he wants.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

matt shaw and nobody else for Skubal? yes, please.

[squally1313]

2 minutes ago, NorthsideAvenger said:

Not interested in rentals unless the Cubs are like a Skubal away from winning. Cubs are more than a Skubal away. Why waste assets on a rental who will leave after the season?

'Being an X away' is a false narrative that justifies never making a long term for short term trade. What team isn't currently a championship contender but all of a sudden would be with the best pitcher in baseball?

The Cubs are on an 87 win pace with the third best offense in baseball and 25th best pitching staff (per FG). If that's not a profile that screams 'get an elite starting pitcher for the stretch run' what is?

[Geographyhater8888]

8 minutes ago, NorthsideAvenger said:

That team was closer to a title than this year's team. 

If you can say the Cubs can and will re-sign Skubal, then I am all in, but I just don't think Jed and Tom will have the stomach to not only pay the prospect cost but also pay Skubal what he wants.

If it’s for Matt Shaw who rides the bench, because there’s no position for him to play, because $410 million is owed to 3 middle infielders who aren’t getting any younger, then why not? Why are you content with a wild card and likely a quick playoff exit? Is it worth keeping Shaw around when the best pitcher in baseball is available? It’s certainly possible they’ll demand more and something to consider but we’re talking about Skubal. If he’s a Dodger, Brave, or Brewer then you can stick a fork in any shot at a world series this season. 

Edited 8 minutes ago by Geographyhater8888

[mul21]

7 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

'Being an X away' is a false narrative that justifies never making a long term for short term trade. What team isn't currently a championship contender but all of a sudden would be with the best pitcher in baseball?

The Cubs are on an 87 win pace with the third best offense in baseball and 25th best pitching staff (per FG). If that's not a profile that screams 'get an elite starting pitcher for the stretch run' what is?

I tend to agree with you.  Is the bolded the staff as a whole or just starters?

[squally1313]

1 minute ago, mul21 said:

I tend to agree with you.  Is the bolded the staff as a whole or just starters?

Staff as a whole. Starters are 23rd, 

[mul21]

Just now, squally1313 said:

Staff as a whole. Starters are 23rd, 

That's the part that gives me pause.  Now, Skubal going 7 IP just about every time out certainly lightens the workload on the pen and pushes one of the useful arms that's been starting back down there, so there's a force multiplier at play by adding him, but I'm still not convinced they have enough pitching to make it worthwhile unless some guys suddenly show up healthy and effective.

[Geographyhater8888]

The only obstacle is whether they’d even want Shaw with young middle infield talent like McGonigle, Colt Keith and their 46th ranked SS prospect.

[We Got The Whole 9]

Our farm is such right now that if you want Skubal, I dont think you can take anyone off the table, and Shaw should surely be on the block (even though he would probably contribute pretty equal value to Bregman if you hadn't signed him and let Shaw have 3B and we could have used that money on Cease instead)