toonsterwu

From a Cubs perspective, I could live with that. Gausman struggled with McDowell early on. The trade just doesn't make much sense for the Orioles. They already need 3 starters - I don't think they go create a 4th hole. They already have three 1st/DH types that forces them to throw one into LF. They already have OF spots covered - they aren't moving Adam Jones, and Austin Hays probably will get a shot at a spot.

If the giants do that, is jump for joy. Melancon looks like he can still be a solid late inning arm, and I'm fine with shark with only three years left. His peripherals were solid last year. That would be a home run of a deal ... Shark and Melancon for heyward? Two decent to good options to fill needs while dumping a bad contract?

Yeah, on paper, a dime-a-dozen pen arm type. Big fastball, average slider. IIRC there was some sinking action. That said, some decent minor league numbers, and sometimes, these dime-a-dozen types put it together (witness Blake Parker becoming a good closer).

My hunch is less. They don't seem intent on rebuilding, so trading from their strength (SP) likely wouldn't fix all their other holes. I suspect they'll try to throw money at the problem, and maybe even the rumors of them being one of the only teams willing to eat the entirety of the Giancarlo deal might have some legs to it. Even if they don't land Stanton, they should be able to land an OF. Tbh, I really think they should retool, but that's my opinion.

I know everyone assumes Cobb to the Cubs ... but I'm still not sold it's locked and loaded. He's a Northeast kid, with plenty of teams looking at him. Yankees have often paid for guys with experience in the AL East. Even Boston, his hometown, could be looking for a starter. The Maddon/Hickey connection could win out, but unless I missed something, I'm just not all that sold. I expect they are going to fairly serious competition for him, with plenty of teams likely not caring all that much about the QO.

I just don't see much of a chance that Russell is traded over Baez. If one of the two get moved, my guess is that it's Baez, who should be able to net enough. Russell's combined ceiling, if he ever reaches it, is higher. Cozart's going to get a pretty good deal. I buy that he's coming into his own, but I wouldn't be enthused about forking over a deal for him. I'd rather explore the trade market in that scenario. I'd rather see if, say, a Brian Dozier was available (last year of his deal, chances Twins resign him see slim), with Baez or Russell at short. There's other options. I think Neil Walker may get a pretty short term deal. I just don't want to fork over a likely 4 year deal for a 32 year old. I'd explore a trade for Jurickson Profar.

Kimbrel did, at the point of the Braves/Padres deal (my point on the 2nd deal was that with multiple years of control, the value of Osuna might not be that far off from the Padres/Red Sox deal, which, off the top, was one top prospect (Margot), 1 good prospect (shortstop, can't think of the name right now, has struggled in the Padres system I think, Javier Guerra ... odd I thought he was more intriguing than his fangraphs page looks right now, and two other guys, Logan Allen, who still looks intriguing, and Carlos Asauje), but I'd question that Giles blew him out of the water at the point he was traded. Keep in mind, at the point Giles was traded by the Phillies, he had just started assuming the closers role, and had 2 good years in the pen - okay, two excellent years in the pen. He had a scattershot history in regards to command coming up the ladder. Osuna's had 3 strong years as a closer, is still 3 years younger than Giles when he was traded, and is arguably coming off his best season of work as a closer, in terms of peripherals. The stuff's not Giles-level big, but it's plenty big enough. No comparison is great, and all trades exist within their own environments, but IMO (and certainly it's reasonable to disagree), Osuna's track record now holds enough intrigue that I don't think it's ridiculous to suggest that his trade value might net something similar to what Giles did for the Phillies). (Off the top ... that was ... Velasquez, Appel, Eshelman ... and Oberholtzer?) . Actually, in some respects, it seems similar to the Red Sox package for Kimbrel, except the top prospect was an arm, instead of a positional asset.

Keep thinking there ought to be some fit with the Twins, as they could perhaps use a MI. It might behoove them to sell Dozier this off-season, and it's not like Jorge Polanco is definitively going to block anyone if they are more talented. That said, I can't figure out a good trade - I mean, I could see the Cubs going after say, a Ryan Pressly for the pen (the FO drafted him for Boston back in the day), but they aren't trading Berrios, none of their other starters intrigue, and I'm not sure Gonsalves is a guy they'd move, nor do I think the Cubs should go into the year with someone like Gonsalvez hard-penciled for a rotation spot. If the Cubs move Javier Baez in some sort of deal (I still think he's more likely to be dealt than Addison, btw the two), I'd like to make a run at Jason Kipnis. There's 30.5 left (if the 2020 option is picked up, then it's 44.5. FA money basically, for a quality starter, but if he's healthy, he should be one. It's plausible the Indians may move him due to contract, needing to try extensions for Bauer/Lindor, blocked in CF by Zimmer, and potentially blocked at 3rd if Mejia works out. Furthermore, they may simply want to restock the system (granted, with Nolan Jones in the pipeline, they may have their next elite prospect after Mejia/McKenzie). Kipnis would offer a better top of the order hitter and likely a still solid defender at 2nd, and as he ages, he could perhaps slide into that Zobrist role if someone better comes along. I still wonder if the Phillies consider shopping Cesar Hernandez, with Scott Kingery close to ready and Hernandez likely near peak value. He probably would be too old for their next window. If the Cubs moved Baez (or Russell), I'd like Hernandez as an option as well, but it would be costly. Keep thinking someone has to take a chance on Jurickson Profar at some point, as it looks like Jon Daniels isn't going to, but the most realistic trade I can figure that could involve us would be the Dodgers, and I'm not sure I buy that. Maybe something with the Rays. Some team has to take a chance on Profar ... right? All that said, maybe Jon Daniels wises up and gives Profar another long look, considering Rougned Odor was a catastrophe this year.

Tryptamine ... it's an interesting mock. My question would be ... what would the Blue Jays do about their bullpen? I guess slide Dominic Leone in there? Still, with multiple years of control left on Osuna ... if they deal him, it would seem like an attempt to rebuild, and it makes me wonder if Happ would make that much sense for them as it would seem they would be more looking down the line to when Vlad Jr. was ready (leaving aside the unknown of whether or not they like Happ at 2nd). They could probably give Rob Refsnyder a long look if they were rebuilding. I also wonder if Osuna's value wouldn't skyrocket in this environment. I don't think he's at Craig Kimbrel values yet (at least, not Braves/Padres trade value ... ). I could see him at Ken Giles value. If they aren't rebuilding, it almost seems to make more sense for them to keep Osuna and go to FA to search for a 2nd baseman, where there are some options, or to trade for a 2nd baseman. Dunno, just a thought, and an interesting trade idea.

Well, we'll see on the Dodgers. I'm not sure I see them forking over Walker Buehler, and it's going to take Buehler for them to net that impact guy, in all likelihood. I just don't see Verdugo as enough to lead a package, and I'm not sure what Urias' value is. I mean, in some respects, I think there is some clear cause for concern with Darvish (didn't love his regular season), but in another respect, his WS was understandable in that he didn't adjust to the different ball. Yankees can fit a Darvish contract in there without much of a problem, particularly if they can find a way to dump part of Ellsbury and/or Robertson's deal. They can get under 197 without much a problem. Never thought the Rangers could really get involved. Don't buy the Phillies unless they seriously overbid, and same for the Braves. That does beg the question of what type of contract Darvish gets, and I question the whole straight 6 year idea. I think it'll be something like 5 and an option of sorts, or a trigger. The thing on the Nationals is this - winning now is their only chance to keep Bryce. After last season, it's hard to imagine them not going all-out. I think they are going to do something big - what, I don't know, but with the way the contracts are on paper, and with the fact that they have some young pieces in place to save some costs, they could conceivably make a Darvish move that can stagger across several years. Angels, maybe, but it seems like the thing Eppler wants to avoid. That said, Eppler's sort of stuck in no-man's land with that team. Actually, if I had to pick a darkhorse in my mind, I would pick the Mariners, which really shouldn't be a darkhorse.

I've been pondering the Cubs and Darvish since seeing this, and I still can't. I just don't see them forking over that contract, at that length. I may be wrong. Tbh ... I think the Darvish contract is going to come down to three teams - Dodgers (even after the post-season, I think they'd ponder it, as they know they need impact after Kershaw), Yankees (Tanaka's there, will adding Darvish make them a lock for Otani? Yankees do need another starter and have money to burn), and the Nationals (they are entering a weird phase ... there's going to be huge contract bumps for Scherzer/Strasburg soon, but they are in win-now mode, with Harper's impending FA. Gonzalez comes off the books soon, and Wieters/Murphy/Madson/Doolittle/Kelley all could, but there's obviously guys that are going to get raises. That said, they should be able to stagger a Darvish contract ...but 3 big, long term pitching contracts?). Wouldn't surprise me to see the Yankees jump in on Alex Cobb. They know him, he's from the Northeast, it fits a need.

Feel like Stinnett might be able to make himself into a pen arm if the velocity is there and he's getting sink on the ball like he was back in college. Like a poor man's Derek Lowe.

I trust our braintrust (after all, only thing I've ever seriously critiqued as that Ryan Flaherty waiver back in the day to sign Jeff Bianchi temporarily) ... but ... uh ... plus fastball, plus curve, plus change? I'll believe it when I see it. We're talking about an elite pitcher in the making if Adbert is that good. Granted, McLeod did couch it with the term "showing", but still ... 3 plus pitches, even "showing"/"flashing" it (I mean, Duane Underwood "showed" plus secondaries in A ball) ... dunno if I'm gonna buy that just yet.

How is this a big win for a team looking to cut payroll/get below the tax? He’s owed 22, 22 and 23 million the next 3 years. Well, two-fold. If he had opted out, that would've required them to spend hard to find 2-3 starters. Not the easiest thing to do, so it gives them more flexibility. That said, I think people are under-estimating what Tanaka might've gotten on the FA market (this is, of course, assuming enough health to pass physicals). Assuming he was healthy enough, this was a guy, age-wise, in his prime, with strong peripherals, strong 2nd half, strong post-season, strong recent record, and not declining yet. I said in another thread I thought he was the top FA SP this offseason - ahead of country-mate Darvish. Maybe I'm wrong, but I was of the opinion that, based on recent FA SP contracts and the proliferation of analytically oriented FO's ... that he was probably looking at something like 4/100. (Certainly, that hypothetical contract might've been backloaded so the difference may have been minimal).

I don't see the FO trading a player like Happ with 5 years of control for a 1 year rental in Corbin. Seal boy? Yes. I don't think La Stella would do the trick. They should be able to get more in the open market. An expanded trade might be a consideration in this hypothetical ... something to bring back the Cubs some pen help perhaps.

I'd be fine about Musgrove (although don't love the fact that there's not much velocity differentiation for him), but he's cheap and controllable - they could push him to the pen. Guess it's entirely possible that, after this post-season, they consider keeping Peacock in the pen ...

More I think about it, the DIamondbacks really are a good match for us. Our most likely trade chip - Ian Happ. Diamodbacks likely need - Corner OF with some power (assuming they don't resign JD Martinez ... even if they did, they could still fit Happ in.) Our most pressing need - SP. Diamondbacks strongest area - SP, and specifically, of the most likely trade options for them (Corbin/Walker). The problem is, their most likely trade candidate, if they do shop him, would be Patrick Corbin (with the idea that Shelby Miller might be back to slide into the 5th spot next year, and if not, they have some other options, perhaps giving Archie Bradley or Braden Shipley a look, amongst others) and Corbin is a FA after 2018. It'd be tough forking over Happ for that, so any trade might have to be expanded to succeed, which complicates things. Still, it makes a lot of sense for both sides, IMO, and an early strike would allow both organizations time and options in FA. _____ I don't know that we match up all that well with what they might be looking for, but the Astros have pitching depth (with Verlander in the rotation, there's going to be an odd man out ... Verlander/Keuchel/McCullers/Peacock/Morton). I don't know if I particularly love Collin McHugh, but he's going to get more expensive and he seems the odd man out. Perhaps they use McHugh to try and replenish some system depth. I guess it's entirely possible they keep McHugh and move someone else.

Arrieta, Davis and Lackey all mattered. Arrieta was terrific and will almost certainly be replaced by a lesser pitcher. Davis was great and although maybe a little easier to replace, lots of quality front offices have rolled the dice on the wrong guy in that situation. Lackey's value is under appreciated, as it costs a lot of money to simply get a guy you can reasonably expect to duplicate what he did. It's going to take a lot of work to replace those guys, and they may not collectively improve on that group, so they'll need to other three starters to at least not take a step back. it's a legit big ask. Id agree with you on Arrieta and Davis, but Lackeys only true value came in filling up a jersey with flesh and bones I'm sort of with jcf on this. Lackey wasn't good ... but bad still costs when the system really doesn't have anyone ready to step in and legitimately compete for an end of the rotation spot (maybe Tseng, although I'm still of the opinion that if Tseng can ramp it up, he might hold more impact in the pen). Ideally, you'd throw such a big net that you should be able to find a cheap guy to do what Lackey did last year, but what Lackey did last year, as bad as it was, still costs.

A bit surprised. Tanaka was probably in line for a big deal, or at least more security. A case could be made that he was the top arm on the market this winter, because ERA aside, he actually had a pretty decent year. I think Raisin is probably right to wonder on health here - it's hard to imagine he would've have gotten at least 4/100, if not more. Now, JeffH's point is something to factor in - IIRC, there was talk that Tanaka simply wanted to be in New York,and that he felt like he "owed" the Yankees for this down season. All that said, this is a big win for the Yankees in regards to getting below 197 million. This will give them a lot more flexibility, while also knowing that there's only 3 years remaining.

may be colored by the fact that i've never loved Foltyniewicz ... but I would hope that Happ gets moved in a deal for a higher impact starter. In general, value wise, I would hope Happ could net that type of a trade.

Ok. And I'm saying I don't think the Marlins make that deal. Would you make that deal if you are the Marlins and in a total rebuild ... and Yelich was your prime candidate to get multiple quality young assets to rebuild with? Jeter/Sherman have basically said they are fine taking time. A pop-up arm in Alzolay who, I like a lot, but has enough questions on his secondary pitches. A middle infielder, however promising, 3-4 years away, at best and doesn't project for much power. A "proto-type" in de la Cruz that hasn't pitched much. And Baez ... who is going to start increasing in costs sooner than later. I think they can do better than that in this market, in terms of long term building, if they opted to move Yelich. I'm not debating the value or whether or not it's good for the Cubs. As I noted ... I have my doubts that would do it for Yelich.

That's Javier Baez, not Theodore Baez. huh? Okay, let me phrase it in another way. I'm not sure Baez gets them to budge the needle that much because they are looking to rebuild from the ground up, and that new front office staff has focused on collecting positional assets, so I'm not sure Alzolay necessarily budges the needle when they are in full-rebuild mode. Ademan is too far away to have too much value, but yes, I could see them be quite intrigued with Ademan. If we're talking some generic value thing, yeah sure, that should be close, but that specific trade, I'm just not sure I buy the Marlins jumping on that. I'm not sure we're a match if they move Yelich, and I'm not sure they move Yelich anyways, much as I'd like it.

I'd have my doubts that would do it for Yelich. Sure sounds like they aren't intending on moving Yelich, based off uh ... that article that came out the other day. It's Stanton, Gordon, and then uh ... I forgot who their 3rd goal to move was.

To be real clear ... I'm not suggesting a) That the Cubs should trade Schwarber/Russell for Archer. b) That the value of Schwarber/Russell is not enough for Archer. What I am specifically saying is that (and I also didn't see a Russell/Schwarber comment in the chats)t a) I think it's not hard to envision people poking holes in the value of Russell/Schwarber, enough to downgrade them. b) I'm not sure, with Wily Adames likely up, that the Rays will necessarily be that hard after Russell, unless they just absolutely love him. c) I'm not sure the Rays will deal Archer (barring the usual caveat of if it's a trade that can't be passed up, it usually won't be passed up). d) (Didn't really spell this out above) I'm not sure they do a deal unless it's an elite prospect or a top level pitching prospect, like Walker Buehler or Victor Robles e) That I think the value of Eloy/Cease mid-season trumps that of Happ/Alzolay, and that, fair or not, I think Archer is viewed in better regards than Quintana.

It's easy to make a million and one mocks, so it's a lazy Friday, so I'll throw in an outline. Rather than doing the Shark trade, or talking about Archer, I'll throw out something different for the fun of it: SP - Hendricks/Quintana/Lester/?/? I expect the last two question marks to be filled with one trade and maybe one FA signing. I also expect the Cubs to strike early, rather than wait. So, to throw out a name that hasn't been talked about as much: Cubs get: SP Patrick Corbin, ? (for fun, let's put Jimmie Sherfy here) Diamondbacks get: OF Ian Happ, C Victor Caratini With Robbie Ray having a breakout year, and former Cubs farmhand Zack Godley turning into a solid starter, Patrick Corbin is a nice, but necessarily needed, asset as he was several years ago. Factoring in that they may try to sign Ray down longterm, but may need to definitely a bat, and some financial constraints, Corbin, likely due for 8 mil or so in arbitration, might be moved considering he's close to FA. Now, I can envision the crows coming already, saying Happ is too much ... and I'm just not sold that pitching costs in the trade market are going to be as moderated as some think. Caratini gives them either a backup or a 3rd catcher on the 40 man. They might not want to give up Sherfy, but if the argument is that Happ's years of control deserves a bit more, a secondary piece like Sherfy, a strike-throwing power arm, might be something they part with. Happ could slide into JD Martinez's spot if they don't feel like paying the monster dollars, or he slides into a utility role. Cubs sign: SP Alex Cobb, 4 years/56 million If the above trade happened (since this is supposed to be a mock off-season), the Cubs probably still have the flexibility to make another good SP move, rather than just sign bargain bin guys. I've seen the estimates. I'm just not sure I buy it. If Cobb is closer to 12 mil, Cubs need to go in on it. He looked like he was close to back last year. Even if it's a bit more, like my above 4/56, the Cubs should still go in on it. I think a lot will depend on if they strike fast. Someone's going to end up cheaper than expected, as someone almost always drops. Cubs still have Adbert Alzolay in the upper levels, along with Jen-ho Tseng. Rotation: Quintana/Hendricks/Lester/Cobb/Corbin BP - My thought is this - if a trade is possible for a late inning arm, they may go that route rather than paying the big bucks/years. I've grown somewhat enamored with this idea, but a lot of ways to go. Cubs get: David Robertson, Jacoby Ellsbury, Cash to from 2018-2020 to cover Ellsbury's contract (let's just go with ... 13 million a year, putting Ellsbury, for those three years around 8 million) Yankees get: Prospects of some sort (I'm too lazy to sort this out) (I don't expect it to be high level guys, lottery tickets perhaps ... if they want someone like Charcer Burks ... perhaps) Yankees have a ton of money coming off the books this winter and a young core. That said, they almost have to pay Tanaka, and they probably will try for at least one, if not more, big ticket signing (not hard to envision a Japanese trio there of Tanaka/Darvish/Otani). They want to "reset" their payroll in advance of 2018, to be clearly below 197 million to avoid the taxes. I don't think the Yankees want to move Robertson (sounds like what I suspected will happen - they'll try to shop Betances), but if they can rid themselves of part of Ellsbury's contract? I think they might consider it. Robertson gives them a proven closer, Ellsbury gives them a 4th OF that they know and is an upgrade at the leadoff spot when he plays. Yankees get salary relief and flexibility. At a rough glance, based on davell's numbers above, that should give some flexibility to do a tiny thing or two to fill out the roster. Yeah, I can see the critiques. That Yankees trade could be bleh in regards to taking on Ellsbury while still having Heyward ... the potential Happ critique, which I noted above.