Elrhino

Meh, I'm ready to move on to the Scherzer thread.

Mitch belongs on Sports Sesh.

I don't think it is reasonable to assume that the Cubs are prioritizing Hammel over Lester. Front offices (especially those that effectively have two GMs) can do more than one thing at a time. Who said this has anything about prioritizing or allocating man hours to pursue Lester?

I don't know about that. Giants and Red Sox are getting to make final pitches for the closing sell, and Cubs are moving on to contingency plans while Theo is publicly tampering free agent expectations. I'm not going to be devastated if we're not the ones giving Lester 6/140, but just please spare me how we're going to make the big splash next season. Until Theo actually lands a free agent he covets, we should just assume it won't happen and we're going to be stuck convincing ourselves how Edwin Jackson for 4/52 is really just about as good as 5/80 or Anibal Sanchez.

we must work for the same software company All of them.

It always kind of felt he was just a FO spy or something anyways. Don't need it now, right? I think they view him as the bridge between the manager and the minor league/player development system with all prospects that are coming up. Now as 1B coach he can still do that and synergize across platforms to maximize scalable, integrated value add. And hold batting gloves.

He's going to be the Finchy to Jason Park's David Brent.

My favorite part of the offseason so far was when I was down on the Zimmerman trade reports because I figured why give up prospects when we can just sign our stud ace outright like we had a definitive choice between the 2. Top tier/Ace pitchers testing the market generally go to the highest bidder. Bid the most money, and the choice is pretty close to definitive. It's nice to believe such definitives, but it's not an auction where just the highest dollar bid wins. One of the reasons that the Rangers went all in on the Yu Darvish bid is they repeatedly couldn't attract top tier free agent pitchers to play in their home environment, despite offering the highest salary. They had just watched Cliff Lee walk to take less money from the Phillies. Top tier free agent pitchers rarely see the open market and those that do will have no shortage of suitors willing to put up competitive offers. Salary is the starting point to get into the conversation, not the selling point. Maybe the Cubs might can blow everyone else off the table with a dollar amount for Lester, but it's going to cost a tremendous premium to lure him away from a city he's called home for basically his entire playing career to go to one of the league's worst franchises for well over half a decade. Lee was an anomaly. Generally speaking, the highest bidder wins when a top tier pitcher becomes a free agent. And Maddux took less money to sign with the Braves. And CJ Wilson took less money to go back home to Los Angeles. We're racking up quite the list of anomalies considering we're dealing with a miniscule sample size.

My favorite part of the offseason so far was when I was down on the Zimmerman trade reports because I figured why give up prospects when we can just sign our stud ace outright like we had a definitive choice between the 2. Top tier/Ace pitchers testing the market generally go to the highest bidder. Bid the most money, and the choice is pretty close to definitive. It's nice to believe such definitives, but it's not an auction where just the highest dollar bid wins. One of the reasons that the Rangers went all in on the Yu Darvish bid is they repeatedly couldn't attract top tier free agent pitchers to play in their home environment, despite offering the highest salary. They had just watched Cliff Lee walk to take less money from the Phillies. Top tier free agent pitchers rarely see the open market and those that do will have no shortage of suitors willing to put up competitive offers. Salary is the starting point to get into the conversation, not the selling point. Maybe the Cubs might can blow everyone else off the table with a dollar amount for Lester, but it's going to cost a tremendous premium to lure him away from a city he's called home for basically his entire playing career to go to one of the league's worst franchises for well over half a decade.

i saw a report saying the prospect cost would be more than heyward, but i'm not really sure why that would be. The Cubs are on his (short) no-trade list ah, i see that now. along with cleveland, toronto and milwaukee. interesting list. Apparently he's not a fan of cities next to lakes.

If we nab Lester, I'm wondering about David Ross as a cheap signing to throw into the catcher mix as Lester's personal catcher. Here's a good writeup on Ross framing Lester (and Doubront's) low inside cutter to righties. http://www.overthemonster.com/2014/5/9/5698872/jon-lester-david-ross-red-sox

I suspect they're interested in a corner OF who plays righty 1B for Rizzo's "rest" days (and DH for interleague). If the Cubs are really focused on cutting down on Ks, Olt is a goner.

I saw someone post a slightly older tweet from McCarthy from a few months ago saying he could blow peoples minds and make the case Gomes is more important than Lester. I would like to see that case. I know McCarthy said the 2012 Oakland A's would have been a 70 win team without Gomes and Brandon Inge. He seems to be all in on clubhouse chemistry. http://archive.azcentral.com/insiders/nickpiecoro/2013/03/12/brandon-mccarthy-talks-leadership-analytics-miguel-montero-on-miguel-cabrera-other-stuff/ And then the 2013 A's won 2 more games without Inge, Gomes, or McCarthy McCarthy's comment is not unlike Samardzjia's lobbying for Darwin Barney when he was DFA'd; a guy trying to help his buddies find a job. McCarthy's comments above were in March 2013. Gomes had just signed a 2/10 deal with the Red Sox that offseason.

I saw someone post a slightly older tweet from McCarthy from a few months ago saying he could blow peoples minds and make the case Gomes is more important than Lester. I would like to see that case. I know McCarthy said the 2012 Oakland A's would have been a 70 win team without Gomes and Brandon Inge. He seems to be all in on clubhouse chemistry. http://archive.azcentral.com/insiders/nickpiecoro/2013/03/12/brandon-mccarthy-talks-leadership-analytics-miguel-montero-on-miguel-cabrera-other-stuff/

I fully expect us to go after a few sucky cheap veterans, but Swisher is a sucky veteran with a really bad contract. Gomes seems to have a huge man crush on Maddon from their days in Tampa Bay, and has made no secret that he wants to manage one day. Can't we just talk him into being all lockerroom leadery as the 1st base coach and not actually have to depend on him to play baseball?

He's the "Are you going to eat the rest of that?" guy.

Cards have 6 starters and will end up with Lester because Cards, and Cubs have a bajillion in payroll space and end up with Brett Anderson because Cubs.

And if we don't get him, just roll it into the Tanaka fund. You'll be thankful for the Tanaka Martin Moncada fund when it's time to sign Bryant to his 13 yr/$500 mil extension. Hopefully by that time we'll somehow be the equivalent of today's Marlins when it comes to spending payroll resources for elite players.

And we can keep saying that every time we don't sign someone good. If the Cubs have an offseason like last year, feel free to be upset that they didn't add anyone, I'll be there with you. In the meantime, arbitrary lines in the sand that Jon Lester represents a 'commitment to winning' are silly. It represents a line in the sand that the Cubs recognize top tier talent and are willing to spend premium dollars to acquire it against other organizations who are willing to do the same. Not "Welp, we finished 2nd for Anabol Sanchez, but don't worry ... we've got Edwin Jackson in our crosshairs and we'll pocket the remainder for the rainy day fund that we're totally going to spend in 2013. Super duper promise."

The goal is to utilize every resource available to an organization to put a team on the field that wins a lot of baseball games. The frustration comes when you see other organizations do that and the Cubs do not.

Theo has said that catchers take longer to develop, and when they get into the major leagues they have a longer adjustment period. I would hope Schwarber didn't play much into their thinking, considering he's not even hit AA pitching and most scouts have not projected him to stick at catcher. Even if Schwarber reaches his potential as a catcher, it probably won't be until we've lost most of the cost controlled years on our young talent.

Go home, you're drunk. Heyward had the lowest strikeout rate of his career last year. It was his best OBP since his rookie year. He was one off his career high in SB while posting his best success rate so far. And he's the best defensive right fielder in baseball, by a pretty hefty margin. He's a great player. This trade is pretty simple though. Heyward has one year left on his contract and seems determined to test free agency. The Braves aren't really contenders next year. So it's better to get something for him than nothing. The Cardinals gave up a combined 10 years of cost controlled young pitching, each with #2 potential. It's a pretty big haul for the Braves for a guy they couldn't keep. John Hart is a schmuck, though. If he's really Baseball Jesus and you are so sure that you aren't going to be able to keep him why not wait until the FA market thins-out or until the season starts to deal him? Wouldn't you be in a better position to get more for him? BTW, he slugged .384 last season and posted his lowest OPS+ since his brutal 2011. I get that he's an excellent defensive RF'er, but that seems to be where the majority of his value is based. He's not a good enough hitter to be considered "one of the best players in baseball" by any stretch. So I'd suggest it is you who is drunk. His contact and k rates have been improving for 3 straight years. He stole 20 out of 24 bases. If he regains his power (still just 25), he's an elite Superstar. If not, he'll just have to settle for being very, very good. Can't speak as to why the Braves decided to move him when they did. They also have Justin Upton entering his final season who they might also be moving at the deadline. I'm sure the Stanton contract doesn't help.

If Maddon has any say, we will be from here on out.

Well, case closed then. At what point do you just embrace becoming the Dusty or Harold Reynolds of your era?

Seriously, does it not bother people that really, really smart and data driven front offices seem to value it a lot? we've still got this guy http://cdn.fangraphs.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/SamardzijaBall.gif.opt_.gif Strikes just clog up the count -- Dusty