toonsterwu

Is that directed towards me, or the conversation going on? I only mentioned 10 years because I think that's the reason why the Fielder discussions will drag on, as Boras might view a 5-7 year deal as risky in terms of the fact that it might be tough for Fielder to get a 2nd solid contract in his mid-30's. My guess is that he ends up signing for 7-8 years with a couple years of club options that may push it to 10, to allow Boras to sell that he got 10 years for his guy.

I still wonder, whichever team that ends up landing him, if the final deal is going to be something that's ... creative. Perhaps an insanely high AAV on a short term deal to get him back on the market in his early 30's? Or perhaps some sort of long term deal that offers Prince an opt out early, but perhaps gives the team an ability to get out of the contract late based on performance. The biggest problem I see is that, from Boras' perspective, a shorter 5-7 year type of deal, makes little sense in that, it'll be hard for Prince to get that 2nd big contract, and thus, Boras is likely to push for as long a deal as possible, but from a team's perspective, that's just too risky. Hence, why I wonder if a short term high AAV might intrigue, or if an opt out for Prince early in a 5-7 year type of deal makes some sense. Gut guess from the beginning has been the Nationals, but only if they clear some salary, and namely, through shedding Adam LaRoche's contract. Lannan's 4-5 million and Gorzelanny 2-3 million are tougher moves now that they thinned out their SP depth and need at least 1 of those guys, if not both. LaRoche's 8 million might be too much for some teams, though, considering the market. They'd probably have to eat some of the deal. * As a side note, as a 1 year stopgap, if they eat some of the LaRoche deal and we give up a meaningless prospect, he'd be a fine option there if they decide against longer deals for FA's. That said, they are more likely to wait out the market and see if someone like Carlos Pena has to sign for 1 year, I think.

Was away when Cafardo wrote his Christmas Day comments on available talent left on the market. He noted the Orioles as a possible team in the Garza mix to ponder. I have my doubts the Orioles would be in on Garza, but speaking in terms of a possible talent fit for a swap, it would be a potentially interesting option that hasn't been discussed much. I doubt Machado would be available, but even without him, I'd still have intrigue if they were willing to offer Zach Britton up. There admittedly isn't much else that can headline a package, so if it's no on Machado and Britton, there's not much to build a deal around that I would really like. But if Britton was offered? A package of Britton, a positional talent like Jonathan Schoop, perhaps an arm like Robert Bundy would get me intrigued. I think there would need to be a 4th piece in there, as Schoop's still early in his development, and Bundy's ceiling isn't that high. That said, a Britton/Schoop/Bundy trio would be fairly intriguing, and depending on the rest of the deal, could perhaps be a better deal than what the Tigers could offer (I love Jacob Turner, always thought he got a bit over-looked on account of Shelby Miller, but I would still take Britton over Turner). All that said, I still don't see any reason why the Orioles would get actively involved when they are at least 2 years away from a meaningful push (it's possible to envision Machado up in 2 years, and at that point, hopefully some of their young arms, namely, Britton and Arrieta, have settled down. Adding Garza could only potentially delay that hope, as they aren't ready to compete now.) * As for a 4th piece, I haven't pondered it all that deeply since I only saw the Cafardo piece now. That said, as intriguing as Matusz and Tillman are, their velocity dips are more concerning, and I'm not sure I wouldn't rather gamble on someone like David Baker lower on, or go for upside, arm wise, in someone like Parker Bridwell. Anyhow, as noted, highly doubt the Orioles would be that involved, but just saw the X-mas blurb from Cafardo.

As Tim noted, the 2012 Peoria team, at least, based on what is expected as of now, could be an excellent team to go view. A lot of the young, upside arms should be in Peoria, either in a piggybacking role (which buys us time to see which arms can make it) or in the pen. The lineup should get Reggie Golden, possibly Pin-Chieh Chen, and a good chance that Javier Baez is there. There's a chance that Marco Hernandez or Gioskar Amaya could get pushed up at some point. There's a couple guys I still hold out some slim hopes for - Dustin Geiger and Wes Darvill. All in all, it should be a pretty exciting year down in Peoria, prospect talent wise.

I honestly enjoy attending minor league games far more than most major league games. I like it when it isn't as crowded, and you can move around the stadium. I love the cheaper concession prices. Just a far more enjoyable experience than cramming into a stadium, facing crowds and traffic in some form.

Gallagher was one of my favorites coming up. Loved the kid, thought he was always a bit under-rated (and to this day, I still think, as a prospect, he was somewhat under-rated, or at least, under-hyped). His MLB career has been disappointing. The control has been bad since he was traded away from the Cubs. I know there was some, back in the day, that felt that the A's hurt him in a game once (I forget exactly why, though) and that he was never the same after that, but it's going on 4 years now. The breaking ball still flashes at times, and the fastball still has quality life to it. I think his best bet is a move to the pen, where he can ramp up the fastball a bit, and see if he can't be a power middle relief arm that hopes for a breakthrough year here or there.

I actually like aspects of Hulet's list this year, but Kirk at 9? I mean, I like Kirk, and despite my best efforts to sell him to ... me ... at times, he's a guy who has a hard time getting his fastball past 90 on a good day. Add in little room for projection with his frame, and 9 ... well, that seems high to me. All that said, really, after the top few, I guess you could make a case for a lot of guys in the back 10 and have enough points to argue with. Just wasn't too huge with Kirk at 9.

Rosario probably has one of the more electric fastballs in the system, but to the best of my knowledge, everything else is very, very raw and he's still working on fastball consistently. I mean, Rosario might arguably have a better fastball than Peralta in terms of life (a lot of Peralta's excitement is projection, but IIRC, there was some disappointment this year in his progression).

The big thing troubling me about Szczur is his approach at the plate. The issue existed before Daytona - IIRC (and I haven't gone and looked at the numbers in awhile), his BB and K rates were trending in the wrong directions as the season progressed in Low A. Now, it could be much ado about nothing. It could be a kid learning to adjust. Or, combined with his A+ issues, it could be a sign of big troubles to come. That said, he's still so young as a FT baseball player that it is hard not to anticipate/hope for some more development. I never did expect "elite" speed, though. I always viewed him as a good speed guy with good quickness, as those were the reports out of his football days in Vandy (I know there were a couple places that reported elite 40 times for him, but I never heard enough to buy that as legitimate).

I actually think it makes some sense for the Padres. They buy low on a guy (Castro having fallen off enough that he wasn't a key prospect for them anymore), hope he has a big year, and spins him off at the trade deadline. I think it's the type of gamble they can afford to make with their 2nd tier prospects. Sox are getting pretty bashed on this trade, but in general, I think they did alright considering the dynamic - an injury-prone player, 1 year from free agency, not good defensively, and quite streaky. In return, they get a decent system arm in Pedro Hernandez, a guy with borderline back of the rotation potential, and they get a lottery ticket in Simon Castro. Castro's fastball is still there, and his slider still flashes on occasion.

I think Porcello would be flipped to another team. SD maybe. Not sure exactly what Detroit needs but I wonder if we could sell them on someone like Byrd or a reliever instead of a prospect. I know they have crazy eyes and Albaquerqe but I don't know what the rest oftheir pen looks like. Perhaps Dolis or Carpenter would interest them. I'd prefer keep Wood but of they want a 5th starter, they can have Wells. It might not be the Phillies, but Verlander, Garza, Fister, and Scherzer would be pretty sick. the back of their pen, Benoit/Valverde, is excellent. They could perhaps use another piece ahead, but I'm not sure how much they'd prioritize that in a deal with Alburquerque and Dan Schlereth, amongst others, ahead. That said, they really rode the back two hard last year.

Craig, I'd actually argue that Porcello has improved. All in all, not a huge fan of him in a deal, as noted above, but I feel like it's easy to pick on Porcello at times so I'll make a mild defense of Porcello, in general here (and while I understand JeffH's point with the Tomko comparison, I'd note that Tomko never had Porcello's ability to generate ground balls). He's gone away from a significant reliance, arguably over-reliance on his 2-seamer (which was understandable early, as the Tigers rushed him and his secondary pitches were raw), and increased his usage of his change-up and slider. All this has occurred without a significant loss in his command, and he's seen a slight up-tick in his K rate. The groundball rate isn't as high as it once was, but it's still a very healthy 51.4% (according to fangraphs). Considering his age, development history, and body, I see no reason why he can't improve a bit more. He'll probably never reach the ceiling that some projected when he was drafted, but he looks like he might be able to give a solid run of a few years as a solid number 3 starter. All that said, as noted above, not a fan of Porcello in a deal because he'd be in his final 2 arb years (unless I'm missing something about his contract) in 2013 and 2014, and as it stands now, the Cubs should take more cost-controlled years if possible.

I'm actually not as down on Porcello as many are. I think he still has the makings to be a potentially solid number 3. I liked the improvements he made this year - going to the change up more didn't impact his GB rate, and he gets a few more whiffs. I think he can keep improving. That said, I don't really care for Porcello in this deal as anything more than a throw-in. The main reason being that he has one more year left at 1.344 million (club option), which is reasonable and fine for a guy who will give you solid end of the rotation production and eat innings, but his two arb years following that would likely be fairly expensive. With the rebuilding being done, getting more cost-controlled years past 2014 is more valuable, and Smyly, Casey Crosby, or Andy Oliver make a lot more sense. To be honest, I'm still a bit more partial to Crosby than the other two, as I think he has far bigger upside, but he might also be far riskier than Smyly, considering his control questions this past season and his recent injury history (although to be fair, Smyly has some medical concerns, but that was from several years back and most seem okay with it now). Any one of the three would be fine (although Oliver would be a clear 3rd for me). Btw, who is the writer at Cubs Den, and what sort of record does he have on these things?

Sounds like the Cubs need to get this done. I would gladly stand corrected about Tigers giving up Turner if they moved him. If Cubs could get him as headliner of a deal for Garza they need to make that move ASAP. Turner, one of their lefties (anyone of the key 3 would be fine), and I almost would be fine with a 2 player trade for Garza. Would want a 3rd piece, but at that point, it wouldn't matter to me that much who the 3rd piece was. Ideally, we'd land Castellanos in a deal, but I'm not sure Castellanos gets moved, and I feel like Epstein and Hoyer would prioritize another solid pitching talent.

I don't love the Marlins possibility. I wrote about this before I was on the road, and there are some intriguing pieces, as bad as their system is. Yelich fits a corner IF/corner OF role, and if the rumors a couple weeks back about the Cubs looking at C were true, then JT Realmuto makes sense. That said, there's not much else unless they part with big league talent, and both Realmuto and Yelich are too far away to be strong anchors. I really don't see how a prospect oriented deal happens (unless they say we can have our choice of 3-4 more guys along with those two), and that seems a bit unlikely. Their more intriguing prospect arms are 2011 picks (Hope/Lowell/Fernandez). I guess, if they said we could have Rasmussen, Dominguez, and James, along with Yelich and Realmuto, that's enough solid quality that I would be intrigued. On the big league side, Nolasco/Volstad don't hold enough value to carry a Realmuto/Yelich package forward for me. Gaby Sanchez doesn't hold enough long range impact for me to care. We had Jose Ceda, and while I still think he could be a good closer, we don't need Jose Ceda back in a trade like this unless it's a throw in. I'd have some interest in Coghlan (at 2nd), but not enough. A Marlins trade would almost have to be a high package of solid quality for me to like it, but it seems unlikely for them to give up that quantity of solid quality. I'd prefer landing an impact chip (Jacob Turner or Jesus Montero if possible) and taking a smaller deal of guys returning than a deal based more on quantity of quality.

I wouldn't be stunned if the Cubs made a Kuroda type signing, for say, 1-2 years, but honestly, that could fit as much in the rebuild mode as anything. Get a veteran to chew up some innings, and then see if you can spin them off at the deadline if they are pitching well enough to net solid assets.

If you skim my posts in this thread, I'm not exactly jumping for joy for Torreyes, so no, I probably wouldn't give him a "ringing endorsement". That said, you asked if he would be in any team's top 10's. I like him enough, just don't love him, and think his potential ceiling is an average starting 2nd baseman that hits at the top of the order. He was one of the better Reds options after the top tier of guys (Meso was untouchable, Cozart probably as well, then came Corcino). That speaks more to how I feel about the Reds system after the Latos trade, but Torreyes is probably more intriguing than a Todd Frazier for the direction this FO wants to go.

I'm sure this has been covered before, but I'm too lazy to scan the thread. The one interesting dynamic in the Fielder discussions that gets my attention is this - no team is obviously going to fork over 10 years. But does 6-8 years make sense for Fielder from Boras' perspective? That puts him in his mid-30's, with little chance of getting another big contract, so hence, Boras is going to try and squeeze for 10 years now. I still wonder what Boras would say if a team offered a short, 3-4 year deal with a big, big AAV, putting Fielder back on the market in his early 30's, potentially able to get a 5-6 year deal. In my mind, that might be the best way for Boras to try and get Fielder close to 10 years.

How about good left-handed starters? Marshall is listed as a reliever in the MLBTR article. Are you suggesting he's a starter? Or are you referring to Travis Wood? Either way, he's a back end of the rotation starter. Not a commodity to be taken lightly, but still, a 3 at best. That ranking came before Torreyes showed elite contact skills in regular season A ball as an 18-year-old. He would have been much higher in the coming lists. No one is really projecting him to be a star. The guy weighs 14o lbs. how many 140 lb major leaguers are there ? Yeah, he's young and will fill out. Maybe he'll rank higher this year, but even so, would he crack anyone's (including ours!) top ten list? Yes, Torreyes would crack some top 10 lists. While I don't buy him in the Cubs top 10, there are some pretty bad systems out there. There are also some systems that level off real quick after the top tier. I'd imagine (haven't really pondered it that much) that he'd crack the top 10 for at least the bottom 5-6 systems in the game (heck ... after the Latos trade, he was probably top 10 in many Reds Top 10 lists.) Btw, he wouldn't be top 10 in the Pirates system. You guys have a good system. Borderline top 10 system in the game probably.

I'm not enthused about the prospects (although to be fair, Torreyes 22nd ranking was pre-2011 season ... he was going to be much higher this year). All that said, this deal is a win in that, Marshall was only signed for 2012. The organization decided to go the full rebuild mode, which is their right and arguably the right direction. Marshall's value out of the pen just wasn't going to be that important in the whole scheme of things if the organization is essentially tossing 2012. This way, we get some value for him, and we can still bid on him next year. All in all, no on is saying this trade is putting us over the top, but it's a win for the organization.

So would I. In a two team deal, I still prefer a Yankees move, unless a team like the Blue Jays decide to give us 4 guys of our choosing. Otherwise, I'd take the gamble on Montero adjusting to first due to his elite bat and demand either Betances or Banuelos.

problem on the Garza trade is what teams are involved? There's a couple decent pitchers left on the market, and I wonder if some of the AL East teams decide to take a few of those guys, which could lessen demand. I'm not sure Garza brings as much as Gio/Latos unless we get competition. As for Marmol, I almost feel like it might be better for us to keep Marmol to start the year, hope he rebounds a bit, and then move him ASAP.

That would seem to rule out the one curiosity thing I had in my mind, and that was whether or not they would ponder giving Torreyes a look at shortstop, where he's dabbled at. I'm guessing Torreyes goes to Daytona. Gonna be curious what ends up happening with the MI situation there. Shortstop options aren't exciting right now - looks like someone from Soccorro/Soto/Alcantara/Valdes/Zapenas group perhaps. 2nd base has some intriguing possibilities with DeVoss/Silva/LePage, but the former two can move to the OF a bit (and Silva may be better as an OF), and LePage isn't a guy that is going to block anyone. Slow play DeVoss (keep him in Peoria?) Have DeVoss/Silva in the OF (CF/LF?).

Heck no. top 5? I mean, I can understand KG's optimistic take of 11th in the system, but top 5? Baez, Brett Jackson, Szczur, McNutt, Rhee Maples, Wells, and etcetera would easily top him for me. He's not that much more advanced than Marco Hernandez, and hernandez has a better shot to stick at short, so I'd take Marco over him. Our system isn't terrible. Even almost all of the key analyzers out there have acknwoledged that we aren't terrible. Below average, yes. But for a Jose Altuve type to be top 5 would mean a terrible system. I have to disagree with you, here. Other than Baez, Jackson and Sczcur, I don't think there's many comparable with Torreyes combination of age and accomplishments. Rhee has some promise, but he's basically got one half season of good performance following a year and a half of mediocrity following his injury. Hernandez still hasn't played in a full season league, and Ben Wells projects to be a middle of the rotation innings eater with average K rates. I think you can group in Torreyes with a lot of our prospects, but his performance thus far makes me rank him above a lot of the other guys. If it wasn't for the fact that he was short, he'd be getting Howie Kendrick comparisons right now. And given that he just slugged .457 at Dayton, I'll wait to see how much of a detriment his size will really be for a second baseman. Fair enough. To each their own with prospect rankings. I thought Altuve was one of the more over-hyped stories this year (and talking to some folks, they felt he was an average starter at best in the bigs), and I think Altuve is a better talent than Torreyes. I went through my current list, and personally, I wouldn't put him top 15. Granted, a lot of people are bunched after the top 5 or 6. His ceiling isn't high enough for me, and I noted my argument for Hernandez ahead of Torreyes above. I'm still more bullish on Wells than most. He's flashed a good breaking ball before, and if he gains consistency on that, he might move past the mid-rotation innings eater label that he gets right now.

I'm not even all that big on Peacock, but from a value perspective, getting 2 high ceiling arms (Cole/Peacock), 2 ready arms (Peacock/Milone), and 3 overall arms that are all fairly intriguing to some extent is fairly remarkable in this day and age, where pitching talent is protected. Also, if Norris can stick behind the plate as an average catcher (and all indications are yes at this stage), getting a high OBP/good pop combination from the position is fairly valuable.