toonsterwu

Smallish CF that the Cubs paid a lot for (above 700 K I believe). Arguably the best CF in the system, but bat is squadoosh right now.

the logic is fine with the deal. I don't think anyone can knock the logic of the deal. I just hope Rizzo becomes this full-fledged corner slugger and stud all around bat that people are making him out to be this year (elsewhere, haven't really paid attention to what the majority think on rizzo here).

Nah, I'm not too psyched on Cespedes (don't get me wrong, would like to add him), but feel that the money is better spent on a younger talent like Soler.

I would have to think so. Eh, I'm just not completely buying Rizzo's bat as elite yet, after the long swing he was showing in the bigs last year. Even if he's slightly better offensively, does that compensate for BJax's defensive value?

Why wouldn't Rizzo? June at the latest. He's 22, and this team is terrible. There's no reason to even consider him on opening day. Why rush him? Let him solidify his abilities in Iowa and call him up in September unless he's absolutely destroying everything. Well, one argument is that Rizzo being such a good fielder may be a positive on a certain MI who can get a little erratic with his throws. I'm okay either way, but I don't know what he can solidify in the hitter friendly environments of the PCL, and his clock has already started so if they are trying to see what they have in BJax/Castro/Rizzo in an attempt to build towards a heavy FA push in 2013, may be best to throw him out there.

wouldn't it be smart for them to allow LaHair to build up some value if he can actually hit in the majors then deal him for something that will matter to the cubs? because if Rizzo can be identified better in Iowa than he was in the PCL, and LaHair can net us something in trade, then it works out multi-fold. it's kind of neat to see that all these deals have been strung together with a very particular idea. that the front office was able to accumulate and execute such a plan in the short amount of time they have had to evaluate their new team is impressive. If any of this Soriano trade stuff is true, wouldn't surprise me if they bite the bullet on the Soriano deal, and then open up a spot for LaHair in LF.

I imagine the majority will have Rizzo ahead of BJax. Personally, I'm not sold that Rizzo's bat is that much better than BJax's bat to offset for the positional value BJax has over him (although Rizzo is a slick fielder at first), so personally, I'll still have BJax ahead.

Really? We just gave up a high upside upper level arm. Granted, Cashner had big concerns to deal with off of injury, but that's a pretty steep price to pay in a deal these days overall, with how teams protect young pitchers with upside. You could make the case that Cashner was the highest valued asset in the deal, thus they had to toss Cates in, who I think is the clear 3rd highest valued asset in the deal, with us throwing a throw in in.

Agreed although I'd like to hear what people think of Cates. Actually, he's probably what tips me into a positive view on the deal. Raw, upside arm with a good live fastball and a solid change, I believe.

Humongous star potential everyday player ... I'm not ready to go all-in on Rizzo yet. The swing needs some work, IMO, to be consistent at the big league level.

Decidedly lukewarm on the whole thing. On the whole, lean slightly to the positive side of the equation I guess. Cashner's chances of becoming a starter were getting slimmer and slimmer, but he was dang intriguing and the chance was still there. I'm just decidedly lukewarm on Rizzo, as I think he's a bit over-hyped and I question if he's this elite corner slugger some are making him out to be this off-season. Overall, they did just add two upper-level team-controlled arms and if they had concerns on Cashner, well, okay. Just not big on Rizzo, but he addresses a need, and with Castro (leaving aside this morning's news), Rizzo, Jackson, there's a young positional core that's being put in place if they come through.

I think they will make Teheran/Vizcaino/Delgado untouchable. Not all three will break into the rotation this year - my guess is only one of them, with the others in the pen or in AAA. They moved Lowe, and will eventually move Jurrjens. Let's see, what does that leave. If I miss someone, let me know. Hudson, Hanson, Beachy, Minor, I believe. Hudson's contract is up soon, after 2013? Hanson has injury problems. So yes, I think I take them at their word, as of now, that they are planning on making T/V/D untouchable this year (plans can change) as they wait to see how things shake out. I anticipate that Jurrjens will be gone sooner than later, which opens up one spot, and they'll wait to see how Hanson's injury history shakes out, along with giving Beachy/Minor longer looks to allow them to make a better judgment.

the braves have like 35 young pitchers who are almost big league ready. they could quite easily trade one or two of jurrjens, beachy, minor, teheran, vizcaino and delgado. a few of those guys could easily serve as the centerpiece of a significant trade. the nationals just traded away half their good prospects to acquire gio gonzalez. john sickels ranked the four guys they dealt away as #3, 4, 6 and 9 in their system. so unless they're going to be trading harper or rendon, they absolutely do not have anything to acquire a significant player at the deadline. I think you are underrating a bit in regards to what is left. Sammy Solis looked real good when I saw him this year, much better than I anticipated and as of now, there doesn't seem to be a ton of worry ... yet. There's several arms and bats in the lower levels that could sneak up on some folks next year, and as O_O noted, they had a strong draft, and by July, teams show a tiny bit more willingness to do PTBNL's. There's a bit of bias here, as I catch the Nats system a fair amount, perhaps even a bit more than the Cubs this past year, and I'll acknowledge some viewer's bias (I loved AJ Cole, thought he was a premier arm and one of the more dominant guys I saw all year, definitely think he is the top prospect in the A's system personally). A personal sleeper I like quite a bit is Jason Martinson. I don't recall is Sickels ranked him or not. Some concern on the hit tool, so that will be worth watching. A bit older, though, so time is of the essence. But, if you'll notice, I coupled strong system with an owner willing to spend (or I meant to and reading it now, it looks like it's two different thoughts, my bad). First off, the Braves have let almost everyone know supposedly that their top arms are untouchable (I guess nothing is untouchable if the right deal came along but I guess nothing has so far). But if you strip away Teheran/Vizcaino/Delgado's availability (and I believe the indications are that Minor is untouchable), prospect wise, that doesn't leave much in terms of pitching (Gilmartin/Hoover, and Gilmartin would be a PTBNL. If Minor is reportedly untouchable, that leaves Beachy/Jurrjens, and I think with the former, there are still enough people that doubt him (though it's probably not fair), and with the latter, I think some feel he's a bit over-hyped, and he's not exactly the cheap asset teams look for in mid-season type deals. Their positional depth is fairly iffy - two guys with impact potential, as of now, in Simmons/Bethancourt, but both far away and with BEthancourt, there are some legitimate questions. It really isn't a deep system on the positional side, at least, in terms of intriguing assets. Everything comes down to their willingness to deal a top prospect, which they will need to to make a deal because they simply don't have that much money to spend. One last point I'd note - while Ian Desmond is regularly bagged on, including by me, if the Nationals offered him up, the sentiment I've heard is that several teams would come calling to see if he could put it together. It's something to ponder if they need to make a deal, because Espinosa can slide over, and Lombardozzi could probably be decent. Anyhow, tis early, so can only paint in broad strokes, and things are obviously impacted by what's out there right now (Braves unwillingness to move top talent). Come mid-season, if they are in it, maybe they'd change their mind when they realize that is the only way for them to get a quality trade without spending more.

Latest minor league transactions from BA indicate that we released Gian Guzman, Manuel Barrios, and Jesus Morelli.

Well, mine has nothing to do with prospect love, other than to say that they have enough chips in the system to possibly make a mid-season deal. I'm talking about their roster as is, right now, excluding Fielder/Harper/Rendon, and I did note earlier that I would still, on paper, pick the Phillies to win the division, but that I wouldn't be surprised if the Nationals edged them out. Edit: Pondering it right now, which is totally pointless with so much of the offseason to go, but on paper, I think the top three teams in the NL are all in the NL East, with the Braves/Nats jockeying for 2nd.

There's speculation that he may start the year in Washington if he has a strong spring. I doubt it, but the Nats aren't going to be afraid to start the clock on him.

I don't know if they need that much. Desmond was markedly better down the stretch last year and there's a belief that he's made tangible improvements. They don't need him to be anything more than a usable 7th/8th hitter who is steady with the glove. I think they'll land Fielder, but it's easy to forget that LaRoche is a decent starting first baseman who has spurts of productivity. If they really went into the season with a rotation of LaRoche/Marrero, I don't think it's going to be all that calamitous, and both are solid defensively. I do believe they need a top of the order bat, preferably in CF. I'm not that concerned about the pen - few teams have really top shelf middle relief, on paper, at the start of the year, and they have enough arms to rotate in there. As long as Clippard/Storen are fine, I think their pen will be solid to good. Espinosa should get better, Ramos should get a bit better as well. I tend to think, their lineup, if they added a top of the order bat, would be fairly good as is right now, sans Fielder. Anyhow, this can go back and forth.

Uh ... I'd challenge the notion that the Nationals are unlikely to make the playoffs in 2012. Not saying they will, but that's a very strong team ... without Fielder/Harper/Rendon. Add in the system to make trades, and I think their chances of making the playoffs are as good as most of the perceived top teams in the majors. I have a hard time seeing the Nationals in the Top 2 of a group that includes Atlanta, Milwaukee, Cincinnati, Washington, and probably a team from the West as well. I'll be honest, I don't. Now, I'm not saying I'm locking them in. I'm just saying I don't have a hard time seeing it. I'm not in love with the Braves lineup, and their farm isn't going to allow them to make any big trades midseason unless they part with a young arm. Milwaukee - let me see how things shake out there. Cincinnati/Philly look dangerous. I'm not saying they will finish that high, but with a strong roster and a strong system, plus an owner willing to spend, I don't have any trouble seeing them, say, win the NL East perhaps.

If you believe in Banuelos as a starter, and buy that he'll iron out his command and sharpern up his breaking ball, I can see a case that high. It's a bit hard to swallow right now, but I can see the case. Power lefty starters are hard to find.

Uh ... I'd challenge the notion that the Nationals are unlikely to make the playoffs in 2012. Not saying they will, but that's a very strong team ... without Fielder/Harper/Rendon. Add in the system to make trades, and I think their chances of making the playoffs are as good as most of the perceived top teams in the majors.

But if you add a Fielder, Cespedes and trade Garza for a package of elite prospects this year, then add a top of the rotation guy and a mid-rotation guy in FA next offseason, this team could definitely compete in 2013 and still be ready to dominate in 2014 and beyond. As a side note first, if you add Fielder/Cespedes (and I'm really not for a Cespedes signing), I would think that you would keep Garza and try to find another big bat in the winter of 2012 to compete in 2013. Without knowing what the rest of this hypothetical situation involves, I'd note that - Adding a top and mid-rotation arm in one off-season is easier said than done with the rising number of teams with money to spend and the general demand for pitching throughout. It's possibly doable next off-season, but tough. - the lineup is a Fielder/Cespedes away. I'm still concerned about finding a better top of the order guy, and another big bat is needed. - this somewhat presumes that Cespedes is going to be ... good. Are there ways to open the window earlier? Sure, but it'd take a massive dump truck of money to make it happen, and it assumes that we'd be able to outbid everyone else without going into silly numbers, which is a debatable notion.

Well, I'll be egomaniacal and chime in for a second. I was one who wasn't for Pujols and was lukewarm on Fielder (I did think the Cubs would sign him, though, so that's been a mild surprise). For the former, it had little to do with the Soriano deal. I was more concerned on the length (10 years) and expected cost of the deal, as I'm not convinced that Pujols will maintain worthwhile production for half of that contract, if that. There were some minor signs of decline - could just be an off year, but could be signs of trouble (relatively speaking, I'm not saying Pujols isn't going to be good) to come. Now, don't get me wrong, if this team was knocking on the doorstep and there was a 30+ year old player that wanted that elite contract of length/years, then I might actually be okay with it. I'd voice my typical reservations, but part of the case was that this team was simply not that close to legitimately pushing for a World Series. If they don't address the first base situation long term, and if this team is knocking on the door when Votto is up (obviously, knocking on the door is a loose term and I haven't really pondered how I would define said term), I don't know if I'd be as against Votto as I was on a Pujols deal. On Fielder - I wasn't as against Fielder. Age and production made me think that it would've been okay to take the risk, provided it wasn't insane numbers. My concerns rested more with what type of production Fielder would provide when the team is ready to make a move. And yes, part of that is his size, but part of that is also that he's only had 2 years of elite production. I still would be okay with a Fielder signing, though, and even a 7 year deal. I guess I'd live with 8. Still think something creative could be done to get both sides to agree to something (frontloading and giving Prince an opt out early is something that I wonder if Boras might be interested in, or maybe some sort of team option on the back years tied to previous years production to give the Cubs some level of protection). All that said, not expecting it. And in general, I agree with Art Vandelay. You can't paint broad strokes on every FA. My perspective on those two deal as much with where this club is right now, and where it will be in the near future. I'm fairly bullish on the system, but even then, realistically, the chips aren't in place for a couple of years, and our "window" is probably opening around 2014 (I mean, the chances of us snapping up enough key, in their prime FA's are slim to build for earlier). Again, that said, I was fine with a Fielder move provided it wasn't silly season. Edit: I just wanted to type egomaniacal (I'd like to get Boyer Mallo Cup into a post one of these days ... took me the damn longest time to figure out what Mallo meant ... or at least what I think it means). I'm pretty sure I know how to spell, so it was irritating to see the red line pop up for egomaniacal. I guess they want me to put the hyphen in there, and considering my background, I probably should, but it's annoying.

There's a part of me that was mildly pondering if the focus on acquiring team-controlled young starters that are in the bigs right now is perhaps an attempt to hit on one of them and spin them away for more talent. Teams do tend to over-pay a bit more for team-controlled young pitchers that have some level of success. I mean, even Doug Fister netted a decent return (Wells, Furbush, Ruffin - though I'm not actually all that big on any of the three).

hopefully the next two ... 6.5 mil for him in 2014 isn't that much to gripe about (even as a 4th OF I wouldn't gripe that much about 6.5 mil for him assuming he is still productive), i guess, but i'd much rather hope that, at that point, we buy him out and have either capable talent (or better) replacing him, or at least an intriguing youngster ready for a bigger push and thus move him aside. Actually, I hope he does so well that the team can deal him at midseason for some more assets, this year or next year.

Season of eligibilty of who? BJax? I like the signing when it occured but now that the off season has played out this way it seems a waste and pointless. Put some retread out there and spend the 4.25 savings on Soler or Cespesdes, guys who could actually help in the future. As it stands now, we still have the room to have DeJesus and go after those guys. If it turns out that the signing of DeJesus prevented a Soler signing (I'm not that enthused about going after Cespedes), then yes, I'd agree with you that it was a problem. It's awfully hard for me to buy 4.25 mil this year as the reason we failed on an IFA like that. _______ Total side note, but wasn't that rumored 200 mil budget debunked a long time ago? It came from 1 source, IIRC, while most other places indicated that the baseball budget would be closer to what it was this past year (which, I guess, when you include the draft and FA signings, was what, roughly around 150-160?)