The Three Levels of Possible Guardians-Cubs Trades That Could Be in Play

34 minutes ago, Matt Trueblood said:

At this point, it's not the waiting game of Yoshinobu Yamamoto's free agency that is holding up the Cubs' winter. Rather, it's the long dance they're doing with the Cleveland Guardians, about multiple potential trades that could set the direction of their offseason.

author-tracker.gif author-tracker.gif

Image courtesy of © Matt Marton-USA TODAY Sports

There's no question that the Guardians are interested in trading Shane Bieber, who is set to make somewhere between $12 million and $14 million via arbitration in 2024 and hit free agency after the season. They won't trade him purely to shed that salary, though; they have other ways to manage their budgetary restrictions for the coming year. The Cubs, in turn, are interested in Bieber, but not at the cost of Christopher Morel or any of the top tier of prospects (Pete Crow-Armstrong, Cade Horton, or Kevin Alcantara) in their farm system.

As the free agency of Shohei Ohtani and the trade markets of Juan Soto and Tyler Glasnow played out, these two teams circled each other and exchanged ideas about deals that would include Bieber, but also expand beyond him. Cleveland might have longer-term payroll constraints to consider, which could lead them to move first baseman Josh Naylor, closer Emmanuel Clase, or both. I've written about why Naylor and Clase would each be excellent fits for the Cubs, and I can directly report that the two sides have talked about permutations of deals that would involve each of these three players--though, as far as I know, not all three in any one deal.

Let's take this from the abstract to the concrete. Here are three possible versions of a trade between the Cubs and Guardians, each of which is theoretically possible but (perhaps) none of which is actually likely. This way, we can better define what does and doesn't make sense for each side.

The Clean Rental
Cubs acquire Shane Bieber; Guardians acquire Alexander Canario and Brandon Birdsell

One important thing to keep in mind, when trading with Cleveland, is that they are almost perpetually in a roster crunch. With a highly effective model-based approach to the draft and a solid operation in Latin America, the Guardians' farm system is almost always deep, but it's especially deep with guys who quickly fill up the 40-man roster. That model-centric draft strategy leads to a lot of college picks, and those guys become Rule 5-eligible sooner than high-school selections. Right now, Cleveland has a full 40-man roster, so (while they could always designate someone for assignment or make a separate move) they're not looking to take on multiple MLB-ready pieces in a trade for Bieber.

This deal fits their needs neatly. Canario would slot right into an outfield mix that remains a disaster area, and Birdsell made six starts at Double A this season, but doesn't become Rule 5-eligible until after 2025. In the long run, Birdsell might need to move to the bullpen, and Canario might be a better platoon outfielder than everyday guy, but they each give Cleveland a nice blend of upside and surety, without straining their organizational logistics. The Cubs, meanwhile, can spare both players, as they each exist in areas of depth for the team. Bieber would slot in right alongside Justin Steele, Jameson Taillon, and Kyle Hendricks, in what would be a very flat but impressively deep starting corps.

The Two-Birds, One-Stone Approach
Cubs acquire Shane Bieber, Josh Naylor, and Myles Straw; Guardians acquire Kevin Alcántara, Ben Brown, Alexander Canario, Brandon Birdsell, and Haydn McGeary

Crucially, this deal is not just about the Cubs filling two of their most urgent needs. It also doubles Cleveland's pleasure. The Guardians signed Straw to a five-year contract extension in April 2022, and they almost immediately regretted it. After he'd excited them with a season in which he batted .271/.349/.348 with excellent outfield defense, he's batted .229/.296/.284 in the two seasons since. Now 29, Straw is still a solid defensive center fielder, but that bat is unplayable, at least as anything more than a fifth outfielder. He's due $4.5 million in 2024, $13 million over the following two seasons, and then small buyouts on club options for 2027 and 2028. 

Such a deal wouldn't hamstring the Cubs, of course, but it's the kind of mistake the Guardians really can't afford. They've been looking for ways to get out from under it, although their desire to do so comes far short of compelling them to give up a prospect just to do so. In this trade, they get major value for both Bieber and Naylor, and they also clear Straw's contract from their books. The Cubs, of course, fill both their rotation and their first base void. Alcántara would be a major loss, given his tremendous upside, but the team's medium-term outfield picture is crowded enough to make it worthwhile. 

Notably, this deal amounts to stacking Naylor and Straw (bad contract and all) for Alcántara, Brown, and McGeary atop the first trade. That's a plausible structure, but whether the Guardians would actually take an interest in it depends on where they fall on the wide spectrum of industry opinions about both Alcántara and Brown. For what it's worth, Brown is a good fit for what Cleveland likes to target and do with young hurlers.

The Moonshot
Cubs acquire Shane Bieber and Emmanuel Clase; Guardians acquire Christopher Morel, Kevin Alcántara, Brody McCullough and Brandon Birdsell

This will seem far too rich to most Cubs fans, which reflects the reality of the stalemate between the teams. The Cubs are willing to move Morel, but they view him as a very valuable trade piece. Other teams, including the Guardians, see him as desirable but not a premium chip. If a deal around Bieber and Clase came together, it would probably be because the Cubs capitulated on giving up one of their top three prospects (they'd sooner let go of Alcántara than Pete Crow-Armstrong or Cade Horton, at this stage) and met the Guardians halfway on Morel.

Right now, the Cubs' most urgent need is for better pitching depth. This move would solve that in one fell swoop, and Clase's long-term, team-friendly deal would give it a long-lasting impact. With the losses of Morel and Crow-Armstrong, they'd then face an equally urgent imperative to shore up the offense (and the outfield), and Bieber and Clase would take up a good-sized chunk of their payroll, so the viability of it might hinge on the team's sense of their budgetary flexibility. 

Still, there are ways to make up for the losses of Morel and Alcántara via free agency, and the Cubs' organizational pitching depth is sufficient to cushion the blow of giving up Birdsell and McCullough. This version of the deal is the least likely, but it would have the greatest chance of setting up the Cubs to compete for a World Series in the short term, and it would simultaneously have the greatest long-term impact of any of these possibilities.

What do you think? Are any of these moves you would endorse? What changes to these frameworks do you propose? Bring me any good thoughts. Bring me anything but screenshots of the Trade Values site.

 

View full article

 

The only one I would even consider is just for Bieber. Not a fan of losing Alcántara Brown, and Canario for one year of Bieber and Naylor. And I definitely don’t like losing Morel and Alcantara for Bieber in 24’ plus a closer. Cubs need offense. Trading Morel doesn’t help their offense. In fact, it gives them another hole to fill. If this is truly the cost to make a deal with the Fuardians, I understand why Jed doesn’t make big deals. 

14 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

The only one I would even consider is just for Bieber. Not a fan of losing Alcántara Brown, and Canario for one year of Bieber and Naylor. And I definitely don’t like losing Morel and Alcantara for Bieber in 24’ plus a closer. Cubs need offense. Trading Morel doesn’t help their offense. In fact, it gives them another hole to fill. If this is truly the cost to make a deal with the Fuardians, I understand why Jed doesn’t make big deals. 

I respect Matt but I think he's pretty high on the Cubs side of the Bieber/Naylor trade. Reports today from the Guardians side of things are that the G's are not impressed by offers for Bieber and that teams are treating him like a salary dump. Canario+Birdsell is probably a good bit above a pure salary dump, even if I have reservations on Canario. Myles Straw is legitimately a salary dump. I'm sure you know my high skepticism for BBTV, but BBTV thinks Brown and Canario for those three alone is a rejected trade on the Cubs side because of how much of a dump contract Straw is. We can debate that, but I doubt the Cubs would need to give up both Alcantara and Brown, on top of Canario if they're taking Straw back. I'd guess they might need to give up a bit more than simply Brown/Canario, but I'd guess it'd be well south of Kevin Alcantara to get it done. Once we take Straw and his putrid contract out, then we're getting closer to a trade where the Cubs would have to part with better and better prospects. 

The more I come to grips with this being a no stars offseason, I do agree some variation of a Cleveland trade feels like a perfect fit.

I tend to like door number 2, though I'd probably like to use Morel to defray the prospect cost (he's pretty comparable to Alcantara+Brown I'd reckon).  I think my ideal offseason currently would be in the neighborhood of

- Morel+ for Bieber/Naylor

- Hoskins pillow contract

- Trade for Jorge Polanco

- Sign one of Imanaga/Montgomery/Snell

Do something for the pen, with specifics TBD based on available budget. 

You've added a ton of talent yet the farm is mostly intact (if you use Morel neither trade will require a top 10 prospect) and there's little long term salary added.  Unlike a lot of offseasons that avoid long term deals, you're not hitting a post-2024 wall because Naylor's in arb and Polanco has a club option, so you can easily choose to keep or dump either.

10 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I respect Matt but I think he's pretty high on the Cubs side of the Bieber/Naylor trade. Reports today from the Guardians side of things are that the G's are not impressed by offers for Bieber and that teams are treating him like a salary dump. Canario+Birdsell is probably a good bit above a pure salary dump, even if I have reservations on Canario. Myles Straw is legitimately a salary dump. I'm sure you know my high skepticism for BBTV, but BBTV thinks Brown and Canario for those three alone is a rejected trade on the Cubs side because of how much of a dump contract Straw is. We can debate that, but I doubt the Cubs would need to give up both Alcantara and Brown, on top of Canario if they're taking Straw back. I'd guess they might need to give up a bit more than simply Brown/Canario, but I'd guess it'd be well south of Kevin Alcantara to get it done. Once we take Straw and his putrid contract out, then we're getting closer to a trade where the Cubs would have to part with better and better prospects. 

I agree with you on this. But I am never sure if we, as fans, are the best judge of what is needed to make a trade. I mentioned the other day there was a question on mlb trade rumor, other chat. It was who says no to Brown, Morel and someone else on the Cubs for Alonso. The guy said the Mets say no. I find that hard to believe as well. I wouldn’t like it straight for Morel, let alone adding Brown and another piece. Yet, a guy with no Cubs connection suggested that wasn’t enough. It’s things like that and this Guardian stuff that make me wonder if we are just not valuing the Cubs players like the rest of baseball is. And if the rest of baseball is asking for that much back in trades I understand why our FO isn’t getting much done so far. 

4 minutes ago, Bertz said:

The more I come to grips with this being a no stars offseason, I do agree some variation of a Cleveland trade feels like a perfect fit.

I tend to like door number 2, though I'd probably like to use Morel to defray the prospect cost (he's pretty comparable to Alcantara+Brown I'd reckon).  I think my ideal offseason currently would be in the neighborhood of

- Morel+ for Bieber/Naylor

- Hoskins pillow contract

- Trade for Jorge Polanco

- Sign one of Imanaga/Montgomery/Snell

Do something for the pen, with specifics TBD based on available budget. 

You've added a ton of talent yet the farm is mostly intact (if you use Morel neither trade will require a top 10 prospect) and there's little long term salary added.  Unlike a lot of offseasons that avoid long term deals, you're not hitting a post-2024 wall because Naylor's in arb and Polanco has a club option, so you can easily choose to keep or dump either.

I would rather use the prospects for Bieber and Naylor and keep Morel. Then they don’t have to spend on Hoskins. I like the idea of Polanco as well. But I don’t see them giving out a $100M+ deal to any of those pitchers. And especially so if they are also signing Hoskins. 

Great post. Was just dreaming up Cubs/Guardians scenarios myself. Seems the Moonshot would be all three - Bieber, Close, and Naylor*

*Assuming we get Cody first. Cubs get a top of the rotation starter (who sounds like he’s open to an extension- maybe 3/75M), a fierce closer, and a long term solution at 1B. To get them we give up Canario, PCA, Brown, Alcantara, Wesneski. Even if we have to take Straw.

I’m not as big on PCA as most, would prefer to have Belli in CF for the next stretch of years. And I love Morel. He’s fun to watch and fans/marketing loves him. Mix and match he and Wisdom at 3rd/DH until Shaw is ready. Add one free agent LH late inning bullpen piece and we’re good.

32 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I agree with you on this. But I am never sure if we, as fans, are the best judge of what is needed to make a trade. I mentioned the other day there was a question on mlb trade rumor, other chat. It was who says no to Brown, Morel and someone else on the Cubs for Alonso. The guy said the Mets say no. I find that hard to believe as well. I wouldn’t like it straight for Morel, let alone adding Brown and another piece. Yet, a guy with no Cubs connection suggested that wasn’t enough. It’s things like that and this Guardian stuff that make me wonder if we are just not valuing the Cubs players like the rest of baseball is. And if the rest of baseball is asking for that much back in trades I understand why our FO isn’t getting much done so 

You would not trade Morel for alonzo?

39 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I agree with you on this. But I am never sure if we, as fans, are the best judge of what is needed to make a trade. I mentioned the other day there was a question on mlb trade rumor, other chat. It was who says no to Brown, Morel and someone else on the Cubs for Alonso. The guy said the Mets say no. I find that hard to believe as well. I wouldn’t like it straight for Morel, let alone adding Brown and another piece. Yet, a guy with no Cubs connection suggested that wasn’t enough. It’s things like that and this Guardian stuff that make me wonder if we are just not valuing the Cubs players like the rest of baseball is. And if the rest of baseball is asking for that much back in trades I understand why our FO isn’t getting much done so far. 

That's why I used BBTV. We can debate it all we want, but BBTV thinks that Alcantara/Brown/Canario is a gross overpay. Like almost 3x the value. So while I think we're prone to underrating trades, I don't think we're underrating it that much here.I think BBTV is pretty sketch...but that Straw deal is doing a lot of work. He's been a sub 70 wRC+ hitter for a while and was .4 fWAR last year. Still has 3/$18.7m left. It's rough.

43 minutes ago, LBiittner said:

You would not trade Morel for alonzo?

5 years of Morel for 1 year of Alonso. I don’t think I would.  And I think a lot of people would be bitching about that deal in a few years.

38 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

That's why I used BBTV. We can debate it all we want, but BBTV thinks that Alcantara/Brown/Canario is a gross overpay. Like almost 3x the value. So while I think we're prone to underrating trades, I don't think we're underrating it that much here.I think BBTV is pretty sketch...but that Straw deal is doing a lot of work. He's been a sub 70 wRC+ hitter for a while and was .4 fWAR last year. Still has 3/$18.7m left. It's rough.

I am happy to hear  BBTV views that deal as bad as I do. 

58 minutes ago, ATXCub said:

Great post. Was just dreaming up Cubs/Guardians scenarios myself. Seems the Moonshot would be all three - Bieber, Close, and Naylor*

*Assuming we get Cody first. Cubs get a top of the rotation starter (who sounds like he’s open to an extension- maybe 3/75M), a fierce closer, and a long term solution at 1B. To get them we give up Canario, PCA, Brown, Alcantara, Wesneski. Even if we have to take Straw.

I’m not as big on PCA as most, would prefer to have Belli in CF for the next stretch of years. And I love Morel. He’s fun to watch and fans/marketing loves him. Mix and match he and Wisdom at 3rd/DH until Shaw is ready. Add one free agent LH late inning bullpen piece and we’re good.

That is a huge overpay by the Cubs. 

18 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

That is a huge overpay by the Cubs. 

Maybe. But years of cheap, proven elite or very good production at positions of need at the MLB level are worth more than ‘who knows’ prospects. We’re waaay heavy on outfield prospects with nowhere to put them. Wesneski is the only one who’s touched the big club with mixed results.

I’d rather compete in the near term than keep waiting for a few years from now. 

9 minutes ago, ATXCub said:

Maybe. But years of cheap, proven elite or very good production at positions of need at the MLB level are worth more than ‘who knows’ prospects. We’re waaay heavy on outfield prospects with nowhere to put them. Wesneski is the only one who’s touched the big club with mixed results.

I’d rather compete in the near term than keep waiting for a few years from now. 

None of those guys are likely to be around long term, maybe Bieber, but he's just Kyle Hendricks in a different body, so to speak. If they are going to dig deep into the top of the farm I hope it's for better than Cleveland has to offer. 

10 minutes ago, ATXCub said:

Maybe. But years of cheap, proven elite or very good production at positions of need at the MLB level are worth more than ‘who knows’ prospects. We’re waaay heavy on outfield prospects with nowhere to put them. Wesneski is the only one who’s touched the big club with mixed results.

I’d rather compete in the near term than keep waiting for a few years from now. 

Cubs aren’t overloaded in outfield minor league talent if they trade away PCA. Alcantara and Canario in one deal. They should be able to get those guys from the Guardians without dealing Alcantara for sure. And probably Brown too. Based on BBTV, PCA, Wesneski, and Canario is pretty much an even value. If you want to add a lower end prospect, fine. But not Alcantara AND Brown. 

I've come around a bit on Bieber and think there's some hope for him. While certainly the velocity decline is concerning, I think there's some bounceback there potentially. He sat out a few months with inflammation. You'd have to have a pretty extensive physical performed there, and be confident he wasn't about to explode, but if the inflammation is gone then it wouldn't be shocking to see the velocity return (in some fashion). I know it wasn't there in his last two starts of 2023, but that's a pretty small sample and it wouldn't be shocking to see him not be at 100% yet right off the bat. 

He's also out at Driveline right now doing work. His curveball and slider have kind of fallen into each other with velocity and shape. A fix to separate the two (more of a sweeper to create horizontal movement) could help recapture some secondary stuff.

He's only signed as a one year thing right now and I'd not be super jazzed on an immediate extension unless the Cubs are already seeing the velocity back, but I think there's some hope there. Not enough I can speak to it being fixed, it's all behind the scenes stuff we can't know, but like I said, I'd have a bit of hope.

15 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I've come around a bit on Bieber and think there's some hope for him. While certainly the velocity decline is concerning, I think there's some bounceback there potentially. He sat out a few months with inflammation. You'd have to have a pretty extensive physical performed there, and be confident he wasn't about to explode, but if the inflammation is gone then it wouldn't be shocking to see the velocity return (in some fashion). I know it wasn't there in his last two starts of 2023, but that's a pretty small sample and it wouldn't be shocking to see him not be at 100% yet right off the bat. 

He's also out at Driveline right now doing work. His curveball and slider have kind of fallen into each other with velocity and shape. A fix to separate the two (more of a sweeper to create horizontal movement) could help recapture some secondary stuff.

He's only signed as a one year thing right now and I'd not be super jazzed on an immediate extension unless the Cubs are already seeing the velocity back, but I think there's some hope there. Not enough I can speak to it being fixed, it's all behind the scenes stuff we can't know, but like I said, I'd have a bit of hope.

I'm sure you saw smiley is at Driveline building himself for a shot at the rotation?

2 minutes ago, LBiittner said:

I'm sure you saw smiley is at Driveline building himself for a shot at the rotation?

Yeah, Smyly is out at Driveline, too. With that said, I think they're in very different situations. Bieber's just 28 (going on 29), and has been good much more recently. He's also got the elbow injury which could explain both the loss of velocity and something that he could get back. Drew Smyly was not very good in 2022 regardless of the ERA and is 34. I'm far more willing to believe that Shane Bieber's Driveline experience and Drew Smyly's are not that similar.

What does it take to just get Naylor?  He's improved with the bat every year he's been in the league.  Lefty power, well on the north side of 100 OPS+, nearly drove in 100 runs last year.

I'd want him for more than one year but if we're going to lose Bellinger he looks like a way to soften that blow considerably.

27 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Yeah, Smyly is out at Driveline, too. With that said, I think they're in very different situations. Bieber's just 28 (going on 29), and has been good much more recently. He's also got the elbow injury which could explain both the loss of velocity and something that he could get back. Drew Smyly was not very good in 2022 regardless of the ERA and is 34. I'm far more willing to believe that Shane Bieber's Driveline experience and Drew Smyly's are not that similar.

I'm working with the assumption Jed told Smyly to stretch himself out in starter shape because his 11mil deal is way cheaper than leftys imananga and montgomery, who are too rich for his blood

I actually assume Smyly's time at Driveline is very much about "let's make myself the best reliever I can be."  Last year after being demoted to the bullpen he sat 93-95 and generally shoved (2.51 ERA/3.28 xFIP as a reliever).  If fully dedicating himself over the offseason to short relief for 60-80 innings he might get up another tick to 94-96 and really become a weapon.

1 hour ago, CubinNY said:

None of those guys are likely to be around long term, maybe Bieber, but he's just Kyle Hendricks in a different body, so to speak. If they are going to dig deep into the top of the farm I hope it's for better than Cleveland has to offer. 

Naylor is a free agent in 2026. Class in 2029. Would love to keep ‘em around. They’re cheap and positions of need. And it seems the Beebs is open to an extension. Kyle will be gone after next year. Bieber’s been consistently strong if not elite. Would be a solid #2

It’d be great if we didn’t have to give up 3 outfield prospects. I’d just wish our surplus of outfield prospects could get us what we need THIS year.

And I like this approach much more than one year of Alonso. Agree there’s no way I’d trade 5 years of Morel for the Polar Bear straight up.

58 minutes ago, ATXCub said:

Naylor is a free agent in 2026. Class in 2029. Would love to keep ‘em around. They’re cheap and positions of need. And it seems the Beebs is open to an extension. Kyle will be gone after next year. Bieber’s been consistently strong if not elite. Would be a solid #2

It’d be great if we didn’t have to give up 3 outfield prospects. I’d just wish our surplus of outfield prospects could get us what we need THIS year.

And I like this approach much more than one year of Alonso. Agree there’s no way I’d trade 5 years of Morel for the Polar Bear straight up.

I like the move too. But not enough to just give them an extra 2 top 100 prospects. Maybe add a low level pitching prospect and Murray. And even that is an overpay, but one I would be ok with. Love the idea of one stop shopping filling left handed bat, 1st base. A starting pitcher a and a closer. 

I really like Naylor for his left-handed bat, defense and club house presence. Plus he is only 26 years old with multiple years of team control. The only reason he was available was because of financial constraints related to the Guardians TV contract.

Additionally, Jed Hoyer does not have a history of trading prospects to upgrade the major league roster during the off season. I think Jed over values and hoards prospects to the extent that any trade "feels" cost prohibitive.

As much as I would love to have Naylor and Clase. I just don't see it happening now during the off season while Jed is in charge.

Man, Naylor made a massive improvement vs LHP this year. Lefties that can hit lefties are worth their weight in gold IMO. Dude had neutral splits with a 10% K rate vs LHP. Want pretty badly. 

IMHO, if you don't have a playoff roster, and the Cubs do not currently have that, unless you're acquiring difference makers, none of these trades make a great deal of sense.  It could be aruged that Bieber may "make a difference" though with regressing stuff I'm not sure I'd be willing to pinpoint him as a true needle mover.  The rest of the given options are merely hole-filling and wouldn't make this team playoff-competitive and thus I wouldn't imagine any of them are actually necessary deals to consider.