toonsterwu

I don't have a fundamental issue with the idea that people might feel like Addison Russell and Kyle Schwarber is not enough for Chris Archer. I tend to think that should be close, but ... in this homer happy environment ... it's not hard to envision Schwarber's value being even lower than we might think for some teams. With Russell, it's not hard to envision someone wondering if all that offensive potential will ever develop, and wondering if the defensive decline is something for them to be concerned about, at least until they get medical reports. Archer would be far and away the top arm on the market, on a friendly deal. Now, personally, I would think, on some sort of perceived value notion, that we should be in the mix, depending on what Tampa wants, but Archer's going to net a monster return if they move him, and I can see enough of an argument as to why that wouldn't be enough. (I actually didn't see this Russell/Schwarber comment in their chats, I skimmed through it and saw a comment saying that someone thought Tampa could do better than Russell/Caratini). What Tampa wants is a big factor, because Wily Adames is ready. I see what you are thinking on the Archer trade, but it really comes down to this - do people view Happ's production as a sign that he can consistently produce at that level, or more, or do they still view him more as a prospect who got a long cup of tea? If it's the latter, and I can envision enough people feeling that way, Happ's flaws in his game still has to be somewhat troubling, and Eloy was viewed as one of the premier prospects in baseball. I would also argue that Cease's value might be a bit higher than Adbert's value now. I would put Adbert's value closer to Luis Castillo's last year (a breakout youngster with promise, but still a bit raw), which resulted in Luis Castillo leading a package to net Dan Straily. I also think, fair or not, that the perception of Archer has been better than Quintana. I just wonder if we're somewhat under-rating what the trade market on top starters is going to cost. There's some depth in this FA SP market, as there almost always is, but the top level, IMO, is thin. My hunch is that Archer, if he's traded, goes to either the Nationals (they almost always try to go big, but this offseason, they almost have to go big ... that said, I have a hard time seeing them part with Victor Robles, which I think the Rays will draw a line on ... of course, they could go big by going after Wade Davis and building a nasty pen, while adding a mid-tier starter) or Dodgers (I think the WS showed they needed another impact starter, and Archer might be the only guy they could justify giving up Walker Buehler in a package for). All that said, I really am not sold Archer gets moved this winter. The rotation is ugly after Archer, with Cobb likely gone. Snell hasn't progressed that much yet, Odorizzi is who he is, a decent end of the rotation arm that I suspect they'll try to move this winter. Honeywell will probably slot into a spot, but they'll need innings and production, so barring a monster trade for Archer, I think they hold onto him and revisit it mid-season.

Seeing the changes that Chris Taylor made to take him from a fringe major leaguer to a key cog in the Dodgers machine has made me more willing to buy into some guys, and reading about David Bote's changes, which seem similar to the changes Taylor made in attempting to get more loft, has me intrigued. Admittedly, never took much interest in him until this year, as always sort of viewed him just as an organizational guy, but it's back to back solid campaigns, and he's a versatile asset.

I just don't view the contract as a bad thing. Sure, the excess value might not be there, but it's 3 years. There aren't many MLB teams that can't take on that sort of contract (Marlins being the only one that comes to mind off the top). Avoiding the longer term exposure of some of the FA deals isn't the worst thing. At the end of the day, you guys may be right, and I can see the argument for why Samardzija wouldn't net a Happ-ish return (whatever that equates to in other organizations). It's just ... I have a hard time seeing that Samardzija, at that contract, is netting a Dan Straily-esque return from last winter (a highly intriguing arm). Perhaps it ends up closer to say, the Sonny Gray trade where it's several high potential prospects in return (if a trade occurred). I think, with the GIants, it may come down to Cueto. If he wasn't coming off a down year, I'd say he absolutely should opt out and go for more security, as Cueto would be a top arm in the market ... but coming off a poor year ... I don't know if he opts out with a decent deal remaining, 4/84 at a glance. If Cueto opts in, it's not hard to see them shop Samardzija to address other holes and clear up some money. (That said, with Cain's money off the books and a core whose window is rapidly closing, they might have a tiny bit of flexibility, so I guess an argument could be made that if Cueto opted in, they might keep the rotation as is and viewing Melancon's peripherals as a positive, plug the OF hole with a backloaded deal and give it a go). There are those strange Giancarlo Stanton rumors (I think it was basically Nightengale, though) with them, which I just don't see how that happens (unless they can pick up young talent in other trades to piece together a deal).

I don't know how I became the Shark defender as I've never loved him ... I feel like people are missing what a strong year he had last year. He was arguably a top 20-ish SP in baseball last year. He's probably not going to get back to those 2012-2014 levels, as he's a bit of a different pitcher now (looks like far more breaking ball usage), but he was really, really solid last year, outside of that ERA. I mean, if you remove his 2015 ... he's been one of the better starting pitchers over the last half-decade, ERA-aside. Has he been an elite starter? Outside of 2014, which was perfect timing for us, not really, but he's been really, really good, and I think people have somehow overlooked that. Now granted, you can't just lop off a year ... 2015 still existed, and he's unlikely to reverse aging ... so yeah, again, I get why not, but to absolutely rule out Happ for a potential solid mid-rotation starter? I don't know. This is a very mediocre off-season to be searching for quality pitching, with few safe options. I mean, even the top options (Tanaka/Darvish) come with some levels of risk (Darvish moreso than Tanaka, IMO. In terms of production next year, I mean ... I'd probably take Tanaka and Darvish over Shark if I had to gamble, but the chances of Tanaka leaving NY are slim, and Darvish is probably taking a monster deal that ties you into his late 30's, and leaving aside the WS ... something was off about Darvish all-year it seemed. If Cobb is closer to a 12 AAV, which I'm not expecting, then yes, I'd go with him. I don't expect it, tbh, as I think this market is bad enough someone is going to bite the bullet, provided medicals check out, and give him something say, around 4/60, if not more. Honestly, 5/75 ... I wouldn't rule out some team forking that over for him. There's enough desperate teams out there, and he represents a potential bounce back guy. Tbh, I wouldn't touch Lance Lynn. Wouldn't touch him. Even accounting for him working his way back and the fact that he's adjusting as he's aging ... that velocity drop bothers me. I just worry that Lynn's contract will end up being an albatross. Edit: Anyhow, personally, I think this discussion is just another off-season discussion in that I really don't see the Giants moving him. I don't think they are ready to blow it up.

It really comes down to how much they want to move his contract, and if they are rebuilding. If they are in rebuild mode, I could actually see starting a package with Happ as possibly a decent starting point (not suggesting Happ alone, as Shark would likely get a nice return for them). The only problem, in hypothetical scenarios, with offering OF's is that they are loaded with OF's that are close (Slater - sorta their version of Happ/Reynolds/Duggar/Shaw - should be at first). Almora might hold more intrigue in that regards, as he's clearly better CF than almost all their close guys, with the exception of maybe Duggar. You think Shark brings back MORE than just Happ? I don't think theres any way we'd deal Happ straight up for Shark, much less give up more. He's making almost 20 mill a year. He's solid, but he's not an upper echelon pitcher either. If he's available, I can't imagine him bringing back a huge return, unless its to a team that needs his contract paid down heavily, which we don't. I don't think we'd even deal Almora for him. A deal starting with Alzolay, with another guy or two from our top 10(even with our system being down) should be plenty to get Shark. If not, then no thanks. Move on to the next. I'm not suggesting we make a trade for Shark. I'm not ruling it out either, but in general, I think the package for Shark would take yes ... something more than Happ. Maybe Happ straight up. If you are asking if I would personally move Happ for Samardzija this winter, I would say I would definitely consider it (obviously, everything depends on market). That said, there's moves now, in our window, that the Cubs would not do otherwise, and yes, when considering this environment for the Cubs, I would probably consider it. If you are asking if I think the Cubs might consider it ... I think they would. I do. The window is now, and with their moves, they've shown they are going all-in on the window now. Yes, I know the reasons not to, but pitching still costs, and consistent, productive, innings-eating pitching still costs. Jeff Samardzija only has 3 years left, which will likely be a nice thing compared to some FA's possibly getting 4 years. He's been reliable - 6 straight years of 200+ IP's. Yes, he's not a TOR starter, but an innings-eating middle-of-the-rotation arm is still very valuable ... and arguably, in this environment, with the usage of the pens ... perhaps even more valuable that you can turn to a starter to give you reliable innings every 5 days. Command is still strong, velocity is still there. There isn't really a good comparable trade to look at from recent winters. We can toss comparable trades around, and there will be plus and minuses to each argument (I could say, argue that Drew Smyly netted fairly decent return, but the flip side is that Ian Happ is a far more intriguing talent than anything acquired in that trade. Dan Straily looks to have netted a great package for the Reds ... but it was fair to at least question if Luis Castillo was that good when the trade was made. *As an aside, I'm not sure I buy the Giants moving Shark (with the usual caveat of a trade that is too good to pass up would probably not be passed up), because I think they may feel like they don't need to rebuild. I think they may feel like with Bumgarner back, some tinkering in the rotation, and a bat or two, plus some luck, and they are probably in the mix of it again. If they go that route, I think they are at the end of that rope, but it could make some sense for them.

Where is this whole Nola idea coming from (relative to people that have written about it)? I'm baffled - I don't see anyway the Phillies deal a cost-controlled top young starter unless it is just such a monstrous return they can't say no.

Almora would seem to make sense there, they need a CF and think they have said they want to get better on defense. Don’t know if he’s enough but at least a likely starting point. Secondly, does Tyler Beede have any value anymore? He could be a nice second/third SP added this offseason. It really comes down to how much they want to move his contract, and if they are rebuilding. If they are in rebuild mode, I could actually see starting a package with Happ as possibly a decent starting point (not suggesting Happ alone, as Shark would likely get a nice return for them). The only problem, in hypothetical scenarios, with offering OF's is that they are loaded with OF's that are close (Slater - sorta their version of Happ/Reynolds/Duggar/Shaw - should be at first). Almora might hold more intrigue in that regards, as he's clearly better CF than almost all their close guys, with the exception of maybe Duggar.

It was a backloaded contract. The AAV was roughly around what Shark got that year, and they were pretty much lumped together in the same tier of arms that offseason. Shark got a limited no-trade, Chen got the post-17 opt out and a 2021 vesting. Chen 2016: $6M, 2017: $14M, 2018: $17.3M, 2019: $17.3M, 2020: $17.3M 2021 Vesting Option: $16M If Chen doesn't opt out, his sixth year vesting option kicks in if he pitches 180 innings in year five. Signing Bonus: $8M Other Notes: Opt-Out clause after 2017 Shark 2016: $9M, 2017: $18M, 2018: $18M, 2019: $18M, 2020: $18M Signing Bonus: $9M No Trade: Limited Can block 8 teams per year. Other Notes: $3MM bonus immediately and then another $6MM in signing bonus money will be spread out over the last four years in equal $1.5MM installments.

My hunch is that that is too little. I think they are set on moving Stanton, and will find a taker (Boston and some sort of Benintendi trade seems the most discussed option, although I still think Boston is better off going for a cheaper power option and leaving some future flexibility). If they can move Stanton, while they would have to still clear other salary, they wouldn't be in as desperate a position, and could focus on maximizing a Yelich return. After all, that's the stated goal of Jeter's tear down - to rebuild the system and build correctly, for lack of a better term. Much as I have said positive things about Zagunis/Clifton in the past, both look like fringe major leaguers (do wonder about Clifton in the pen as some sort of power arm). Almora has a role in the majors, but whether he's a first division starter is debatable. I think, even with Chen's contract, that they would want a bit more than that. But that's my guess. Yelich is such a prime asset that if he's out on the market, I bet a ton of teams would swoop in, even with the Chen albatross.

I know that stuff, but persona non grata? That seems a little more severe. I'm pretty sure it was the Feldman trade, which obviously turned out great for the Cubs. Um, you're the one who said it No, i read it in that article that davell put up there.

But, how about just the first deal? No idea why they'd not like Shark.....And yes, they could get something fairly decent for him alone. But, if they wanted out of Melancon.....I could see the pairing working on some level. Maybe we'd still need to add a prospect or two? If its just the first deal, it adds about 12 mill to our payroll and leaves us our young position players in tact, to still add another SP, if we want. It'd also allow us to pursue a RF again, if we wanted to. Again, not saying it'd be feasible.....Heyward probably would veto. The Giants may not want to pair those 2 together. All sorts of reasons it wouldn't work. But, it'd be fun if it could. It'd be a great deal for the Cubs. We'd get a capable closer (his numbers weren't bad last year), and a solid innings-eating starter for a guy we desperately want to move on from ... and in that trade hypothetical, get rid of the money in 21-23. I mean, that's a brand, spanking grand slam home run of a win for the Cubs.

Shark was public with his comments about some trades the Cubs did in 2012/2013 and the direction of the ballclub. He was irked that one of the pitchers were traded. I think it was Paul Maholm Scott Feldman? I know that stuff, but persona non grata? That seems a little more severe. I'm pretty sure it was the Feldman trade, which obviously turned out great for the Cubs.

I tend to think Shark has more value than people seem to be acknowledging, even with that contract, and that, if they opted to move Shark, they could probably get a nice haul in return. Leaving all that aside, was skimming that article - when did Shark become persona non grata with Cubs fans?

Had too much time to ponder this yesterday, so I wonder if there's something that could, for a hypothetical, be constructed with the Tigers and, namely, Jordan Zimmermann's contract. I mean, that's a ton for a 4th starter, a bad 4th starter in the AL, so that may be something they may try to get out of. That said, they'd have to get a 3rd team, a team willing to take on Heyward.

Yankees look to be going internal. Tbh, Derek Jeter raiding the Yankees probably has them a bit wobbly right now, sorting out FO issues and managerial issues. __________________________ Color me not convinced that TheoJed are going to really go all-out for Bryce. If Bryce falls into a more lower range, maybe. But it seems fairly certain the Nationals will pony something close to 10/400. With Heyward and extensions coming up, yes, even with a 26 year old Bryce ... there would be some juggling for the Cubs to do. Keep in mind, there's rumors that Bryce and Boras might be pushing for more than 10 years, and when you factor in that it's likely to be the "standard" contract structure, that is something that's probably a bit backloaded, and I don't see it as incredulous to say that there would be some juggling to do.

Looks like Dave Martinez is a set thing. Eddie Matz has it up on ESPN.com. 3 year deal with a 4th year option. Looks like Nats finally ponied up a bit. Also forgot that Dave Martinez was runner-up to Matt Williams several years ago. _______ I'm not saying Bryce Harper to the Cubs won't happen. I just think a lot depends moreso on how the Nats do in the following year than anything the Cubs do. Yeah, he could love Wrigley Field (he also has a dog named ... uh swag?), but he also leaves messing around with people (I recall reading any interview this summer in one of the DC papers or sports sites where Bryce basically said he likes to mess around with people online). He could dream of playing with KB, but financial dynamics are always a factor. There simply aren't that many owners anymore that Boras has a strong tie-in with, and the Cubs would have a ton of juggling to make it work (and tbh, I question this idea that, unless Ricketts decided to really open the bank, that TheoJed would have highinterest in throwing out a mega-deal of that sort, with impending deals for our own guys coming up). Bryce has talked a lot about how he loves the idea of playing with one team, and how he loves the DC area. Could be all talk, because at the end of the day, Bryce is really the modern star in the way he uses social media to try and manipulate things.

This was the least surprising news. One wonders what might've happened if Hickey wasn't a FA, but once it happened, it felt like things were lining up. Alex Cobb makes sense as a 4th starter for the Cubs, but part of it probably depends on how much it will cost.

Never expected Girardi - all accounts was that he wanted to go home. I think Girardi is going home with his family, and the only way I think Girardi manages is after his kids are off. Dave Martinez actually makes sense. It feels like he wasn't getting the looks anymore, so he may be willing to take a managerial job at slightly lesser pay. For the Nationals, they supposedly wanted a younger guy more well-versed in analytics, someone that can grow with their young core. As for Bryce Harper, is the Cubs thing from the whole Peter Gammons thing this summer? I think, at the end of the day, if the Yankees decide they are fine without handing out huge contracts, the Nationals, and their immensely close ties with Boras, are probably in the driver's seat, provided that Harper feels like he's going to be in a good situation. On paper, the Nationals are loaded for continued strength for the next half-decade or so, but Harper's feelings on things may depend on how they do next year and if they can advance in the playoffs. Tbh, the potential impending FA I'm mildly curious about, but do not actually expect it, is actually Manny Machado. He looks all but certain to hit FA, and the Orioles look to be backsliding (I guess you never know ... no one really expected Buck Showalter to put together such a solid string of years with a mediocre talent base). I imagine the market is going to get pretty crazy for him, and he'll probably value a team offering him a chance to win and perhaps play shortstop.

At some of those numbers, I would rather take a flyer on a guy coming off a bad year, like Wade Miley, than giving multiple years to a middling arm. Prior to this year, Wade's 2 years in the AL weren't that far off from his NL days, when, IIRC, the Red Sox front office (not Theo, but Cherington and Co. probably had a lot of similar thought processes) thought he could be a poor man's Jon Lester. The command bottoming out is worrisome, although one wonders if a lot of the Orioles pitchers simply didn't respond that well to Roger McDowell, so he probably won't get more than a 1 year deal, or some sort of structured 2 year deal (option, triggers, something) but taking him on a flyer, like uh ... who was it at the start of the year, Brett Anderson ... it might be better than giving multiple years to another one of those middling arms. If he struggled, you could conceivably flip him with Montgomery (splits), and go looking for a 5th starter at mid-season. Of course, this would require perhaps landing a bigger fish in the off-season, in all likelihood.

Sure, but why would the Yankees do that? ____ Btw, in all these hypotheticals, I'm assuming, for discussion's sake, that Heyward approved the deal. In the Toronto case, let me rephrase my question about it then - Even if they believe in Heyward's offense improving enough in the near future, what seems somewhat clear is that they might be going on a rebuild, particularly with the Red Sox and Yankees looking fairly imposing for a good half-decade or so. Thus, I question if they would want Heyward on the books, as a backup OF, in his mid-30's, even at a diminished rate. At that point, it's fairly likely that their corner OF roles will be at least filled by 1, if not 2 of their youngsters (I think Vlad Jr. moves to corner OF), and we really can't be certain about Heyward's defensive value at that age. Thus, I wonder if they might be, in this hypothetical, more willing to take a short term hit (perhaps even through keeping Tulo/Martin if they can't be moved), then tying up, however minimal, long term resources. There is obviously the x-factor of Caratini in the hypothetical there, so that is a consideration, although those would likely be his arb years at that point, so unless they really believed in Caratini, it's one of those long-term planning things that might not sway as positively as one might suspect. Anyhow, all for discussion's sake, as I really don't expect Heyward to be moved this offseason.

So was looking around to try and find a contract similar in length to Heyward's and at such a high cost, and I came up with Chris Davis, who also has deferred money, which could help make a deal happen. In real life, I don't think the Orioles do it (they have a weird affinity for Davis), but I wonder about something where Heyward goes to the Orioles (can move Mancini or Trumbo to 1st, improve OF defense, Hays can still slide into a corner OF spot), Davis goes to a team needing a DH (for hypothetical purposes, lets say the Red Sox don't want to take on the massive Stanton deal and are amenable with just adding power), and the Cubs send money and just get something (what that is, I don't know). By no means would I be suggesting some sort of Cubs highway robbery. I'm just outlining a random thought.

Other points have been made, but just wanted to say that my guess is that if Shark is moved, he would have a nice enough market on his own. 3/54 for a guy with his production? I think a lot of teams would jump on that. ______ The problem with almost all Heyward suggestions I've seen so far is, IMO, that it benefits the Cubs far more than the opposing organization. This is interesting. So, I think the question becomes, simply, assuming Heyward approved a deal, what would the Jays do at shortstop, and would they want Heyward on the books for, what, 7-8 million (too lazy to check right now) as a backup OF from 21-23? Still, the move seems a bit more advantageous for us (clearing any money from 21-23 will help with extensions), and Martin/Tulo could fill key roles with us in the near future. It seems close to possible, so nice job. I also wonder if the Jays would be able to find people to take enough of Tulo and Martin's contracts on and get some lottery tickets, and that route might be more amenable to them.

I don't really think the Cubs will be able to move Heyward. It's a nice thought, but I just don't see the bad contracts out there that can match up well enough without the Cubs subsidizing a huge portion of the last 3 years. Stanton is the only contract that is big enough and long enough, but the problem is, they are going to want young talent for Stanton, and not just a dump. Only way I could envisage a hypothetical that I think the Marlins would ponder is if we take on another bad contract or two of there's while also forking over some young-ish talent. Even then, I'm not real sure a hypothetical in my mind can actually translate out, as I'm not sure where the matches occur. Put it this way, Heyward and a few pieces for Stanton, and I'm not sure the Marlins necessarily bite unless it's such a good deal, at which point, it makes zero sense for the Cubs. If it's something like Heyward and Schwarber for Stanton and say, Wei-Yin Chen ... I gotta think the Marlins would consider that (as they could then turn around and perhaps flip former Cub Justin Bour for something, perhaps, and keep Ozuna/Yelich), but does that make sense for the Cubs? I tend to think not. This leaves aside that I'm not sure the Cubs should want Stanton. It'd be the cherry on top, adding another run producing bat, but it's far from necessary, and that contract has to be able to fit with potential Cubs extensions in the coming years.

This feels like it's set for Hickey, if he wants it (makes me sorta wonder if Bosio is fired if Hickey isn't available.) At the end of the day, there's only so much a pitching coach can do, and a new voice is a fine swap. Sometimes pitching coaches don't mesh, sometimes it takes time (Roger McDowell really didn't connect well with Kevin Gausman this year, by most accounts, and back in the day for the Orioles, don't recall who, but Arrieta/Matusz/Tillman/Britton and Co. pretty much hated their pitching coach), and sometimes you need new guys. Hickey is well-regarded, although I do find it mildly interesting that Hickey was let go somewhat because they felt that they had a better voice to guide their young guys coming up, like Honeywell, in Snyder. I imagine Bosio is probably going to find a landing spot soon. Tbh, I wouldn't mind Farrell or Mike Maddux, if Hickey opted against coming here. That said, his close relationship with Maddon really seems to suggest a high probability that this is his if he wants it.

Fair enough ... I didn't actually read the question, was just looking at the comments.