toonsterwu

Giancarlo has leverage to try and force his way to the Dodgers, but it's hard for me to see Friedman taking on any major portion of that salary, which is what the Marlins want. If the Marlins stay firm with their threat to move other assets like Ozuna/Yelich/Realmuto and leave Stanton on a bad team, then it'll be in Stanton's court to see if he's willing to stick it out. At the end of the day, I think Stanton sucks it up and goes to the Giants. Just hard to see him wanting to stick it out there. Of course, maybe he has doubts about the Giants viability long run ....

I like Longenhagen's list, but the one thing that sorta bugs me is Alec Mills at 10. Dunno ... granted, gap from 10 to the end isn't much ... but that bugged me a tiny bit. I really like the recognition given to Galindo, and to a lesser extent, Hudson.

The optimistic outlook on Alzolay is basically to buy in what the Cubs are selling and that his secondaries both are borderline plus, thus, you'd have a guy with three quality pitches that has decent/solid command, with a small sample of successful production in AA. Considering the age, it's really fine. Not saying I buy the optimistic outlook, but Alzolay as the top guy isn't bad. I mean, it's not like people are saying he's the Cubs pitching prospect with the highest ceiling. The phrasing in Keith Law's comments seems to suggest a blend of ceiling and polish, and so placing Alzolay as the top guy in the system is fair, as de la Cruz hasn't stayed healthy and Albertos is a couple years behind.

I'm guessing they'd slide Arroyo in at 2nd, have some sort of Span/Pence time-share, and then find a CF (or let Slater/Duggar get a shot at it). They'd have to find some hits in the pen, but, while the margin of error is thin, it's possible to envision a competitive club. Actually, what I'm more interested in, off-season wise, is if this trade goes through early enough, could the Marlins shop former Cubs farmhand Justin Bour. It's possible they hold onto him, but with Chris Shaw in, a similar-ish player who is borderline ready, Bour might be a cheap positive asset that they could stick with say, Martin Prado, and see if a team will bite.

If that's the return ... well, color me a bit surprised they didn't try for Ramos or Duggar. Maybe Jeter's development folks see something, but Panik/Beede/Shaw? That's not much. Granted, it's the money that matters the most to them. Anyhow, Gordon was on the move anyways, and Shaw may be enough to convince them to shop Bour. The GIants were probably always the favorite, because they were the only team desperate enough to eat a huge chunk of the money. Assuming Bumgarner is back to normal and Cueto bounces back a bit, they look interesting enough, particularly if this is all that it costs them. I think Melancon will be fine, but a bit more tinkering in the pen and maybe another bat would put the finishing touches on the off-season for the Giants. Anyhow, tweet reads as if the Giants aren't certain on taking on all that money, so it's probably not done yet.

Cobb is still the easiest option, as it gets us a quality starter, although I suspect the bidding could get going after Ohtani signs. Maybe a team pushes hard now to get Cobb inked. If you can keep it at 4 years, I think anything under say, 4/72 you can sort of swallow and live with (I've argued before that Cobb, if he had a strong season next year, might be in line for say, a Samardzija/Wei-Yin Chen type deal from 2 years ago). Admittedly, 4/72 is on the high end. I don't know what his agent's style is, but I'd very much like to avoid an opt out here, particularly after 1 year (After 2, I'd be a bit better with that) but I could see Cobb's agents pushing for an opt-out to try and get him back on the market again. If it's an opt out after 2 years, we've conceivably gotten him at a decent rate for 2 years. Get Cobb, take a flier or two in FA on 5th starters (or if they want, bring back John Lackey), and focus on the pen. After that, shore up anything else on the side. That was always the easiest route this off-season. An off-season of not moving assets will likely give the farm the ability to find some legs, which should help around mid-season as well.

Leaving everything aside for a moment, I'd argue that their young positional/hitting core looks more interesting than what they have on the arm side. Adames is there, along with McKay. Jesus Sanchez might be Victor Robles, and Justin Williams had such a strong year last year. There's high floor guys like Bauers and Joe McCarthy. There's some upside pieces like Rondon, Fox, and Franco. It's a nice mix. Now, admittedly, a lot of the guys are corner OF's/1st types, but you get past Snell/Honeywell, and I think things peter out fast on the arm side (with McKay being in that middle for now). I like Genesis Cabrera, but he profiles more as a back of the rotation/pen arm. Dunno, I really don't think there's that much arm depth there.

Not surprised by any of these moves. Had Burks hit better in AFL, I thought there was a slim chance, but Bote was the only guy that really might get plucked, due to his versatility and fit as a depth bench asset. I doubt anyone gets plucked, but I guess there's a chance an arm could get picked.

I'd be fine with adding Jay Jackson. Always thought he deserved a longer look in the majors, particularly after he shifted full-time to the pen. Was one of my irrational favorites coming up. If the slider is still plus, that's a capable middle relief arm with some fringe setup potential. I remember Tony Thomas as well. Had that monster season in Boise. He even had a decent last year in the Cubs system, where he raked in ... were we still in West Tennessee at the time? I want to say yes, but off the top, not sure. He hung around for a long time in the minors.

That's the one team all along that was likely to eat most of the contract. Problem is, will the Marlins settle, prospect wise? Heliot Ramos is probably their most intriguing upside candidate, with Steven Duggar a close 2nd perhaps. There just isn't much unless one really likes Christian Arroyo.

To be clear, that isn't what I've said at all (the 2nd part). What I've said is that I can envision other teams putting together competitive packages such that the value of Addison Russell isn't overwhelming enough to the point that the lack of a higher level secondary asset could conceivably make the difference, and I posited that due to the way the Rays system currently stacks, they might want another pitcher. I've also said that my perception of Alzolay may not match up with "reality", and that he might be good enough value wise. ____ Tom, my Boston scenario was based upon the premise that they add punch to the lineup for adding Stanton or JD Martinez. ____ Yes, the Cubs would be sitting pretty if they were willing to offer up Russell in a deal, like I said above. I just don't think the Cubs would be the only team that might be willing to make a big risky move.

It wouldn't surprise me, if Archer (or Stroman, or another young, cost-controlled arm was on the market) if a) Washington Nationals put up Victor Robles or Trea Turner in a package. I don't expect the Nationals to want to move either Robles or Turner, but Mike Rizzo might be one of the few GM's out there who really will consider everything. He's got a much better system than given credit for (besides Robles, Juan Soto really emerged, they've got a decent collection of arms (Wil Crowe is one of my favorite under-the-radar guys), and they've got some intriguing young lottery tickets (one of my favorite sleepers in all the minors might be Daniel Johnson ... if he puts it together, that could be stunning ... a big if, though). Don't get me wrong - I don't think they willingly offer up Robles/Turner, but like with the Cubs, in the right deal, wouldn't surprise me if they made the move (and then went out and got a replacement ... say Cozart). It's a win-now or else window to try and convince Bryce. b) Boston Red Sox put up Andrew Benintendi If they sign (JD Martinez) or trade (Giancarlo) and OF, that likely means another move is coming. Jackie Bradley Jr. would be the easier move - Benintendi sliding to center is fine, but Bradley likely doesn't return as much in a trade. System's thinned out a bit, but paired with Benintendi, there would be some nice options to forma trade. It would lead them to make another move if they did shop Benintendi and chips for an arm, but it's Dombrowski. c) Dodgers. Say what you want about Buehler, if they pair Buehler with say, Verdugo, that's a heck of an intriguing package. There's probably a few other teams, like the Brewers (although I can't figure out what that package might be), but skipping ahead to d) Phillies There's all this talk about them wanting to make a big splash and looking to add pitching. This would put a lot of their chips on the table, but they have the assets to get into the conversation. ___ Yeah, the Cubs should be considered one of the favorites if we put up Addison Russell, but I think there are a few teams that could put up offers that would give the Rays (or Jays, or whomever) some pause.

Well, yes, no team is going to prioritize pitching prospects in any trade with the Cubs right now, but I'd imagine, due to how their system stacks right now, that they might prefer an upper level pitching prospect. Perhaps Alzolay is that guy and I'm just remarkably wary on him. Russell would trump a lot of team's initial offers, but there are some scenarios one can imagine where Russell isn't an overwhelming, if at all, trump card to another team's top asset.

I think it's unlikely that they'll turn down a trade for Russell because of Adames being there. You make it work someway, somehow. If they don't want Russell, it'll be because of concerns about Russell, not because of Adames being there, if that makes sense. I'm not convinced that they'll go for Javier Baez to do an Archer deal. Could be wrong, but Baez doesn't offer the upside of Russell. All that said, gut feeling is that Archer being moved is still unlikely, particularly since I think they would want an arm or two, and I'm not convinced, despite the FO hyping him up, that Alzolay is going to be that significant. The one thing to be said is that the Rays are willing to be patient, as they were with Archer. ____ It sure feels like, though, that if the Cubs make a trade, they are swinging for a home run, and if not, they'll settle for singles/doubles and bide their time. That is, if they can't find a fit for an impact SP, it might just be Cobb, another SP or two (probably fliers), a couple pen arms, and maybe some depth.

I think there's a hypothetical involving say David Price, Chris Davis, and Jason Heyward (along with money flowing largely from Red Sox to Cubs but haven't really looked at it) in a three way trade that makes enough sense for all parties, assuming Heyward agreed to a deal (Orioles improve OF defense, move Mancini or Trumbo to 1st and can spend rest of offseason focused on pitching; Red Sox add a power bat for 1st/DH ... can go after a power bat in the OF (JD Martinez), freeing them up to trade an OF for pitching or go sign a FA SP; Cubs add a SP and free up PT for kids). This might be one of the few landing spots for Price that works because, like with Cobb, Maddon/Hickey. He's really scorched earth things there, it sounds like. Albeit, he got Farrell out, and maybe that changes things. In real life, I doubt anything happens with these contracts this off-season.

It'd be gutsy, but I think I'd be fine with a Russell + for Archer/Colome package. At the end of the day, it's about the current window right now. _____ I keep revisiting one of my initial thoughts from the early offseason - Cesar Hernandez. By all indications, they will listen on him due to their middle infield logjam with Scott Kingery forcing his way into the picture (along with Crawford pushing at short). Now, this only comes into play if the Cubs move Russell or Baez, but Hernandez would be a nice replacement, a capable leadoff option with a good glove at 2nd. The Phillies also have a need for a young OF with some pop, which would allow them focus money on their rotation. If something involving Russell or Baez happened (and that would only happen, in all likelihood, for an impact SP), trying to swing a trade for Happ/? for Hernandez/Neris would be something that fascinated me. It feels like Happ for Hernandez/+ should be a workable package of sort that should be able to appease both sides and fill needs, but maybe spare parts are need both sides

Pondering it, if it is a full rebuild for the Rays, I'm not sure we match up all that well. They need an arm or two. That said, of all the organizations out there, they might be willing to take far away high upside guys to slowly groom. Still ... I have a hard time envisioning what that package is for Archer that can't be beat by another organization, unless we venture into moving one of Russell/Baez. I mean ... something like Happ/Schwarber or Almora/Albertos/Alzolay is a huge package, and we'd want more than Archer, but Archer at that contract should get some bids going. Dunno, Archer would be the most intriguing addition to that rotation that I can think of, with his combination of cost, age, and production. Dunno, but that'd be a fun thing to add to this off-season, if the Rays tear down.

Hay now. Before we jump on an absolute no, I'd like to know what Lackey is asking for. I want Lackey gone as much as the next guy, but the focus should be on the other starter addition. If Lackey's willing to come back cheap ... then okay, that's a 5th starter who will eat innings. As someone posted awhile ago here, people pay for that stuff, more than people think. All that said, I doubt Lackey is coming back extremely cheap, so my guess is no, but I'd at least want to know what the cost is.

Sure, but here's the thing. My point isn't how we should look at those players. If that was, I'd be ridiculous for taking one extreme versus another. Furthermore, my point, again, isn't that last year's Soler should be ahead of this year's Happ. I'm not making a sell. I'm making an argument for why last year's Soler's trade value is closer to Happ this year than what people seem to think, and essentially, that entails taking one's positives versus another's negatives. I would argue two things as a continuation: a) The injury prone argument was, in many respects, mitigated by the opinion that, with better understanding of health and nutrition, he would get better. b) The contract, when juxtaposed against his potential, was hard to view as a negative. It might not be a positive, but it was hardly a negative. Now, at the end of the day, trade value is subjective. Essentially, what I'm saying is what Dave Cameron said last year (from his article on the trade) The Soler trade was largely viewed as a win-win for both sides. That wasn't a knock on Wade Davis. He was viewed as a premier pen arm, and justifiably so. It was praise for Soler's perceived trade value. (I actually recall a couple blurbs about the Royals perhaps winning the trade, due to Davis' injury history). I think there's a distinction that needs to be made - we're talking about trade value, not who is the better bet, who has proven more. Trade value is, in many ways, a thing that adjusts depending on the circumstances, hence why I always say that comparable trades are only for discussion, as each trade exists within it's own environment.

I wouldn't be stunned if there's some truth to the Dodgers talk. It'll probably come down to years for Friedman. As a darkhorse, I wouldn't rule out the Nationals. I expect them to do something big ... with the way their contracts are staggered, they could probably fit something big. Gio's off the books in a year, and Arrieta as a 3rd starter is fine.

If it is a full rebuild, to me, that signals that Archer is on the market. If that's the case, we should go hard after Archer. We might still have a tough time getting him (I'd be hard-pressed to see Andrew Friedman absolutely shut down the idea of Walker Buehler), but this is where our young MLB positional assets become valuable.

I think your guess on Odorizzi is probably correct, using past trades as an example. It's a borderline top 100 type, and maybe a couple other parts. In particularly, I'm thinking the Straily and Smyly trades last winter, not perfect comps, but close. My hunch is that Odorizzi's value might be a touch lower than Straily and Smyly's. Put it this way, I'll be mildly surprised if, using our system, someone like Alzolay was required as the headliner to nab him.

Happ this year is greater than Soler by a decent amount. This year's Happ versus last year's Soler is a lot closer debate than some may think. I think this year's Happ is ahead, but it's not by that much to make a discussion about it moot. How do you figure? Soler’s only value was with the bat, and even there Happ was far ahead of him. Soler is a liability in the corner outfield, while Happ has an average’ish glove at premium positions. Happ also has more speed and does not have Soler’s history with injuries. Soler was one of my favorites because he had such majestic dongs, but his value was nearly all in potential, which was not looking nearly as promising by the end of last year. Look, I'm not saying Happ this year shouldn't be ahead of Soler last year on some objective analysis of value. Of course Happ's ahead. That said, trade value of young assets tends not to be only focused on immediate value. I really don't think this is some sort of hot take. Soler was an intriguing asset because of said potential, plus the fact that he finished the 2nd half of the year, in his limited at bats, fairly well ( .258/.348/.515). He had cut down on his strikeout rate, in the limited 2016 ab's, from that 2015 rate. There was still a decent amount of folks that believed if he could stay healthy, he could put up some monster offensive seasons. Keep in mind that there was a lot of talk about how he didn't have a good understanding of nutrition prior to coming stateside, and all the other things about body maintenance. However unfair it may be, Happ's ceiling was never viewed at Soler's level. I really don't see how my comment incurred these replies. I think we're easily forgetting the type of potential that was associated with Soler's ceiling and how potential gets overrated in trades. Tbh, I think there's a chance that teams will pick apart Happ as a trade asset a lot more than people think (really still is more a LF, despite decent tools, where the best case is that he might be average; the high strikeout rate, the struggles (I could be wrong about this, haven't checked in awhile) against breaking balls). To be clear, in case that leads to some replies, I'm not saying his trade value is bad or anything like that. In fact, I think Happ's trade value this year is quite high, but I do think teams will pick him apart a lot more than people think here.

The same reason they traded one for Davis. Yea but Happ >>>>> Soler Happ this year is greater than Soler by a decent amount. This year's Happ versus last year's Soler is a lot closer debate than some may think. I think this year's Happ is ahead, but it's not by that much to make a discussion about it moot.

I'm not ... surprised at this list. I'm okay with Ademan at the top. This looks to be a kid who can hit for average, be a solid defensive shortstop, and may grow into some double digit home run power. It's a good package. It's not a typical "number 1 prospect package", but our system is thin. I'm fine with Alzolay at 2. The argument makes sense - he might not have the ceiling of a few other guys, but he's got a decent ceiling and stayed healthy. Tbh, a bit surprised that de la Cruz stayed at 6 as I sorta expected him to slide a bit. the lack of work is problematic,so I imagine he'll be on a tight leash this year, as I don't expect them to push him to a pen track just yet. If anything, I'm a bit surprised at Tseng at 9 but the velocity being back makes it a decent placement. Velasquez over Wilson at 10 surprises a bit, but sounds like Velasquez's ceiling is higher and both are extremely far away. All in all, I buy it. I mean, in the grand scheme of things, this was supposed to be the year with Torres/Jimenez/Cease in the top 5, and in that respect, our system wouldn't have missed a beat, which would've been fairly remarkable, but we pushed all in the last two years, and justifiably so.