toonsterwu

I think, for 2018, it's possible McKinney could be in CF. I think he's probably a Brandon Guyer type in that regard - a guy you don't really want in CF, but you can live with him in CF in his youth if necessary. Now, I don't think he'll actually be in CF in 2018 (and I don't think Theo and Jed's wet dream of a homegrown lineup will ever happen).

Still think they are more likely to target prospects, unless Valbuena is more of a "throw-in", which isn't likely. The value of Zobrist to them was as a "roving" starter. They have options at several spots where Zobrist would get PT. Nick Franklin should get a long look at 2nd, with Ryan Brett hot on his tail if he struggles. Yunel Escobar and Hak-ju Lee on the other side. Souza and Kiermaier should get looks in the OF, and Mahtook probably deserves a look as well. It's possible they might want an upgrade to Forsythe in the utility role (and I think Valbuena would be an upgrade) but, at a gut guess level, it's hard to see them placing much emphasis on that as anything more than a 3rd piece. Still think they might ask for someone like Gleyber Torres if the Cubs got into deep discussion with them - a fallback option in case Adames doesn't develop into the stud people think he could be. Otherwise, I think they would ask for arms, as their arm depth in the minors has thinned out a bit.

why do I feel like I wont be surprised that its LAD I seriously doubt it. If its true, my guess is its a non contending team or at least a small market team that's iffy to contend. If he had 110 from a very good team, I bet he'd have taken it already. San Francisco or Detroit seem likely to me. My guess is would be Toronto - he "knows" the division and the Blue Jays see their window as now, and they badly need another arm. That said, San Francisco would be my 2nd guess. I think Detroit goes back to Scherzer before Shields, unless Dombrowski is trying to pre-empt Boras going to Ilitch ... but if it's too convoluted to think about, it seems unlikely. A part of me wonders if there is a darkhorse out there on Shields. 5/110 seems like something a few of those mid-market clubs could probably afford in this day and age.

I was thinking Blackburn. Unless I missed a few things on Blackburn, I think Blackburn's ceiling would be higher than Lively's. I'm curious how Lively plays in the upper levels next year. I can't think of a good "direct comp" for Lively. I get Blackburn, and I get Hendricks. Honestly, stuff wise, Beeler would pop into my mind as well. Honestly, a part of me gets the Reds giving up Lively for Byrd. They are stradding rebuilding and competing, and it is an upgrade in LF at a relatively minor cost. They are deep in right handed arms and his ceiling isn't huge. The thing that stands out to me more about this trade is that it makes two relatively solid deals for Ruben Amaro. Granted, Rollins and Byrd aren't major assets demanding monster returns, but it makes me wonder if RAJ is becoming more realistic about trades. I mean, much as I can make myself understand the Reds rationale in this, this is a very nice trade for the Phillies to get a solid arm in the upper levels for Marlon Byrd (and cash, I guess). They're building some relatively solid upper level arm depth (so there's actually two schools of thought I've seen from Phillies fans online - one would be that this depth would allow them to deal Hamels, the other that I saw today was that this depth means that if they keep Hamels and add a big arm next year, they'll be able to find one or two starters from the org ... I tend to think that it's the former, but who knows).

Only way I go after Rasmus is if it's a short term deal (I could live with 2, obviously 1 and a club option is preferable) to find a stopgap because Alcantara was dealt away in some sort of deal. Otherwise, I'm not so sure that Alcantara might not be more useful than Rasmus sooner than later (more a statement on my feelings on Rasmus than hope in re: to Alcantara).

I sure miss baseball conversations. In my head, I'm thinking Zobrist would cost something like their choice of a starting pitching prospect (honestly, a part of me wonders if someone like Underwood, someone they could mold a bit and work through the system, might have as much intrigue for them as an Edwards/Johnson), maybe a ready pen arm type like an Armando Rivero, and maybe a home run gamble like a Gleyber Torres. I question if a Valbuena (or say, Coghlan) would be desirable with the way their roster is set-up as of now. It's a tough deal to figure out because Zobrist is so good, but he is aging and in the last year of his deal. Short of it is, I think they would look for upside gambles to restock aspects of the system moreso than necessarily finding "ready" pieces. In my "If they wanted to go full bore before the season started" fantasy world, the Nationals would sign Scherzer (a part of me wonders, for all the Scherzer and flip Zimmerman talk, if the Nats might go after Shields and flip Fister) and then we would try and make a big package for Zimmerman/Span (addressing key future positional needs for them, and giving them further flexibility to move, say Clippard by also giving them a pen arm), and then trade for a Zobrist. The would be a fascinating lineup, with Zobrist as the starter that flipped between 2nd/LF with La Stella/Coghlan getting starts at the respective positions, Valbuena holding third until KB is ready and then shifting to a great utility role, and a loaded rotation plus a solid pen. I'm not even sure I would want what it would take to make those deals, but if they wanted to go full bore ...

Definitely hurts the Yankees, but I wonder if they were anticipating it. They got a great deal with the Prado trade, IMO, getting Eovaldi, and Capuano is fine as a 5th starter. I'm not convinced they are going to dive headfirst into a Shields or Scherzer market, unless the price comes down.

The thing I'm wondering/pondering is if they are trying to build up enough depth to offer them some flexibility to make a separate trade. If they fail to land a trade, then they give themselves quality depth to work with, particularly since there's still enough unknown as it pertains to the kids. To be quite honest, I doubt it, but the Colby Rasmus talk and the Motte move has me wondering a bit. I mean, a package of Alcantara and say, Neil Ramirez might be a starting point to build a package if they are aiming high. If not, and this is just depth, it's quite costly and I don't love it, but I don't necessarily hate it. There's a bevy of power righties that they never seemed to love so a look-see at Motte for 1 year isn't horrendous ... but yes, I agree, there's an opportunity cost there.

I really haven't pondered much with baseball in a long time, at least, relative to before. Pretty certain he wouldn't have fit into a top 30 if I did one, even with the graduations. I can sort of piece out enough guys to feel that way without making a list. Top 50, I would have to think about. The plus side is that he has tools to work with/hope on, he's relatively young for the level, there's a platoon split that gives some modicum of hope, solid defensively at short, plus arm, and a few other things. The flip side is that he's not an elite defensive shortstop, the approach leaves one wanting, the power never took the minimal steps it needed to.

Somebody check on toonster I've been fairly clear that I had dropped him way down the list in the past couple years. He wasn't even on my top 30-35 or so, and I'm not so certain I would've put him in a top 50 this winter if I took the time to make the list. There is no denying the tools he has (heck, in the last two winters, at least 1 publication (BA last year, Kiley this year) has noted Marco as a trade asset of some sort, much to my shock), but at a certain point, you have to produce some to move on. Do I care about this trade? I liked the addition of Doubront at the time, so any judgement has to be viewed from then ... and now with the benefit of hindsight. With the benefit of knowing where our rotation stands now, no, I don't love the idea of Hernandez for Doubront, but I don't hate it. I'm just not sure if Doubront will amount to much. That said, Gleyber Torres looks like he'll move fast, and with all the youngsters in the bigs, you can live with a "gap" in the system at a position. Taking a gamble then on Doubront clearly made sense, regardless of the cost, so in the grand scheme of things, it's like the Rule 5 draft this year - if we lost someone and they develop, you nod your head and move on.

This may be a flawed argument that I haven't thought through, but I think one argument for waiting is that you don't want to put all your chips in now when there's still some uncertainty on the youngsters. As you gain clarity on the youngsters, you'll get a better grasp of whether or not spending big on that 2nd big ticket arm is the right move, or maybe you end up having other holes you need to fill. I'm actually okay with Scherzer "long run" (I mean, can anyone really be okay betting on anyone's "Year 7" right now), but I'm just leery of two 6-7 year pitching mega-contracts in one off-season, even if we can afford it and have the young talent base to cover things. Wouldn't be ... angry if that happened.

Weren't there rumors awhile ago that some folks expected the Cubs to land Scherzer AND Lester? I doubt it, and I think I might be "scared" of that, but I'd be mighty curious which top executive Sullivan talked to (guessing Hoyer ... maybe Epstein), so makes me wonder if they might go after another big fish. That said, they really should add one more starter, trade or FA, and then figure something out with the spare rotation parts.

Raisin, you might remember more than I do, but besides Leicester and Mitre, who was the other "under-the-radar" arm from the grouping that there were some hopes on. I don't think I'm thinking of Nolasco. I think I'm thinking of a guy that snuck into the back end of a top 10. Ah, dammit, I'll go look. Was it Todd Wellemeyer? Wellemeyer ... I remember being quite intrigued with him. Totally derailing things for a second, but for the life of me, I always liked Jim Bullinger. Well, that's because that was one of my first baseball cards (so weird, digging through old boxes the other day, I found my entire small collection ... a lot of ex-Mets ... and a stamp collection that I don't recall doing, but my folks said I was into it for a bit). Nah, was thinking Renyel Pinto as they were on a BA list at the same time (with Leicester). Sean Marshall, Billy Petrick, Grant Johnson were other arms on that list as well. Marshall, at least, turned into something.

Raisin, you might remember more than I do, but besides Leicester and Mitre, who was the other "under-the-radar" arm from the grouping that there were some hopes on. I don't think I'm thinking of Nolasco. I think I'm thinking of a guy that snuck into the back end of a top 10. Ah, dammit, I'll go look. Edit: Was thinking of Renyel Pinto. Ah ... the dreams on those arms. Looking at those names now, it's weird, somewhat, to think how there was a lot of intrigue on Chadd Blasko

I would love Zimmerman, and in some respects, we make a ton of sense (they are looking at 2nd (or 3rd, I guess, but they obviously prefer Rendon at 3rd, as they should), or even shortstop, as Desmond is a free agent after next year), but unless a top guy gets moved (not saying he's worth it, not saying he isn't, I don't have the time or desire to dig at numbers these days), my hunch is that they could probably move Doug Fister and find a 2nd baseman.

Without derailing this thread ... oy, that was ... an odd ending. Did not like the last scene (okay with what happened, though), although the finale was okay. Sort of gave up on that show several years back, only occasionally checking in, when they went into convoluted plans and last second reveals (I honestly don't recall what happened to the whole Jax was forced to work for the CIA thing). Uh something Cubs related ... speaking of San Diego ... mildly curious what Jesse Hahn may cost, if he is supposedly available. Seems like a guy that might not cost an arm and a leg, although Preller would probably want something solid for him. May be a bit too costly for our needs for now, but was interesting to see his name pop up. Sort of makes me think Bud Norris (it's totally an off comparison - I think Norris' fastball/slider is probably better than Hahn's fastball/secondaries, but Hahn has a deeper arsenal than Norris ever did) in that, I don't know if he'll ever get the command to be rock solid, but his stuff may be solid enough to get by with it.

Kinda why I want to add McCarthy yet as well. Much as I like McCarthy, and this is saying the obvious, I would only do it at the right cost (most seem to think he'll get 3-4 years). Short of it is, I wonder if his value might get pushed up a bit, now that Lester is off the market, leaving the extremely costly Scherzer or Shields. I think there's enough pitchers on the market, trade and free agency, that the Cubs can be a bit selective if they wanted to add one more guy. We've only dealt Jefferson Mejia this off-season out of intriguing farm assets - there's still enough secondary assets that can be moved without denting the system while adding key pieces to the team.

What about Hendricks makes people think he's a lock for the rotation/is going to be good? His FB averages only 87 MPH and he struck out like 5 per 9 last year. I get he has really good control, but his stuff just isn't there. I don't think anyone is saying Hendricks is going to be great, but that he might be a cheap back of the rotation option. I've never loved the stuff, but his command is better than "good" - it's excellent, and he gets enough groundballs to go with it. Is he a lock for the rotation? As of now, I would hardly say he's a lock, as Lester/Arrieta/Hammel are really the only "locks", but if he's not in the big league rotation, I don't know if there's great value in the pen, and thus, he'd be sent back to AAA. We've got a lot of "back end" guys on the 40 (Beeler, Straily, Wood, Wada, Turner, Jackson, Roach, Jokisch, Doubront, Hendricks) fighting for spots, so I'm not ready to pencil anyone from that group as a rotation lock, but he's probably as good a bet to be a productive, solid end of the rotation arm as anyone in that group. Ideally, I'd like to see the Cubs add another starter (not high end, unless Shields comes surprisingly cheaper than expected or Hamels prospect cost is lower than what Amaro wants) and the market seems to have enough guys that the price on one or two might be alright, but if we have to bang it out with that group to enter the year, okay.

I can't complain about the deal. I think Mejia could be real good, but it's not like Montero didn't have value. Enough teams are looking for catchers, and giving up a high upside kid far away isn't that big a deal. I am mildly fascinated at what sort of value Wellington could have on the market. As bad as catching can be at times, it's quite possible that they might be able to net a raw, high upside guy for Castillo. All in all, a good deal that sets things up well.

Martin got 5/80, is a few months older, both have similar k/bb rates and career slash lines and both are considered very good defensively. I don't think it's a stretch to think he'd get 3-4 years and more than 40 million on the open market. I do. Martin is coming off a career year, and Montero has had two down years in a row. Montero also has some of the worst throwing numbers in the game. I like him, as I said, but a catcher in his 30's coming off two declining years whose defense is a mixed bag (yes, I value pitch framing) is not a comparison with a guy coming off his best year, and arguably the best overall receiver in the sport. Montero as a FA would get, I'd guess, 2-16M. Maybe with a club option for the third year. My guess, as that's all it can be, is that he'd probably get a bit more than that for two reasons - there's a high number of front offices that value pitch framing these days and will thus place emphasis on Montero in that regards, and there is a fairly thin catching market this offseason for free agents. I don't know about 3/40 without really taking the time to analyze it, but I think he'd get more than 10 mil AAV.

You know, with the reports on Tseng's stuff being fairly consistent this offseason, I wouldn't be that bothered, despite personal biases that want him to stay with the Cubs. Considering how far away Mejia is, I think you live with it if that's the demand. Not saying I wouldn't be displeased, but I guess I could swallow that and move on. Underwood's a big heck no, imo, and I really don't think they'd ponder that.

I honestly don't see any way the Cubs gamble on a righty pen arm with inconsistent command like DePaula. They'd have to buy that he'd be more dominant than the dozen or so righthanders guys battling for a spot right now, and it's hard to see that. Honestly, if you were going to do that, you might as well bring Marcus Hatley back, and that's not happening (and if I eat my words on this, I'll be a bit surprised). I guess, you never rule anything out, but I just don't see it. I'd be mildly more intrigued with Bradley if they thought there was something they could fix to improve the command, making him a Travis Wood-ish type guy, or maybe even a JR Graham if they liked the medicals (making it a somewhat Rondon-ish situation ... albeit, they saw a lot of Rondon in winter ball, before Rule 5, that offseason, IIRC). If this was a year or two ago, I would have loved a Mychal Givens gamble and stash. At the end of the day, unless they strike out looking for a backstop they sort of like and want to gamble on a kid, I really will be stunned if they take anyone.

That was as comprehensive as I recall BA doing for a Rule 5 draft. That said, I'd still be fairly shocked if we picked anyone. I really can't see any positional players getting picked for a utility role (I mean .... I guess I could understand picking a guy like DeShields as a utility guy/pinch runner, but I just don't see it)... and I really doubt they'd take a backup catcher. I guess Baron wouldn't be that bad ... but still, seems unlikely. Can't really see any arms getting picked, although there are guys I like (Mychal Givens could be a late bloomer due to making the pitching transition, still like Salcedo somewhat but we have "those" guys (those being average or better fastballs, solid slider, but not dominating enough to really think they would be a closer - hey, Marcus Hatley was one of those guys). I actually didn't realize McKirahan was up to/touching upper 90's. Looking at this list, it seems quite possible that we'll lose a guy or two, but again, so be it if they pan out.

Essentially, the A's bet on the health of Lawrie. A healthy Lawrie (and I didn't peak at the numbers right now, so maybe it's further off than I am thinking) will probably produce enough that the two arms and the upside of Barreto would make up the difference in the trade. Is that a great bet? While I like the trade for the A's (and certainly think this is a good trade for the Blue Jays as well), I can certainly understand people being apprehensive of Lawrie's injury history. Total side note: Reading Donaldson's comments post-trade makes me sort of wish he had been a Cub. Seems like he would've been an awesome personality for the franchise. That said, I still have no gripes about that Harden deal - sold high on some high floor, low ceiling guys (Murton/EPatt), and gave up two intriguing guys at different ends of the development spectrum at the time, with Donaldson being a question mark of sorts because of positional uncertainty.

I really like this trade for the A's as well. I understand it for the Blue Jays - this is probably it for Anthoupoulos if he can't get them to the playoffs next year. That's a lot of talent to give up for Donaldson, though, and I think the A's make out real well with some guys like Lawrie and Nolin that can help now/soon, and some intriguing upside. To the extent that this is "Groundhog Day" for A's fans, I think they should be able to be competitive the next year or two, even if they make a few more moves. Division winning competitive? Probably not, but competitive.