CubsWin

I don't mean that they want someone who Joe Fan recognizes, I mean they literally want to have a star-caliber player added. This is clearly an era where merely good teams are at a greater disadvantages, as the best teams load up as much as possible. The marginal benefit of Darvish over Cobb is greater for the Cubs(especially given their rotation situation) than it is for a team not smack dab in the middle of a competitive window. Darvish, Hendricks, Q, Lester/Chatwood makes for a much more potent playoff rotation than one without Darvish and with a different FA. I'll preface this with the thought that I've never been over the moon about Machado personally, even before he was a trade target. And I'm closer to a years of team control fetishist so I'm more inclined like you to see big moves be for people who stick around. But the front office is really smart and it's undeniable they have real interest in Machado at this point, so let's try to piece it together. If I had to guess, I'd say it's due to the SP market and the luxury tax. The Cubs could really use a pretty good SP to stay at the top of the NL pecking order, and not just someone you can squint and see a path to being real good, like Chatwood or Cobb. That means the FA options in this vein are Darvish or bust. Darvish isn't going to be cheap, and while it is possible to sign him and still get Harper next year, you probably have to get creative, and that's before the reality of the 2018 season happens. Maybe a key pitcher like Quintana or Morrow has their shoulder blow up in August. Now your margin for error gets all the more thin and maybe involves some sub-ideal options like bribing a team to take on a contract(Zobrist? Lester?) with actual good players. So if the FA option is a narrow path, then we're left with the trade market. The Cubs could trade Happ or Almora without a ton of hurt, but the prospect pool is thin enough behind them and those 2 have enough flaws that it limits the market of pitcher you can get, you're probably back to doing more hoping that the pitcher is real good than you want. But, what if there was a way to open yourself up to get a higher end trade candidate? That would involve Russell, who has the best combo of team control, youth, and potential of the non-Rizzo/Bryant/Contreras position players. Sure you could do that straight up and move Baez to SS, but that itself is a downgrade that mitigates the benefit. Insert Machado. You use other players to get Machado where the downgrade is much more marginal(Montgomery and Almora can be replaced without a lot of tears, for example). Now you can use Russell to get your SP that belongs in a playoff rotation, and you've also gotten a sizable upgrade for this year(a peak competitive year) on top of that. This fits much more cleanly into the luxury tax because Machado's money disappears after 2018, and the SP you acquire is going to make far less than Cobb/Darvish. Said another way, I'll go back to my point at the top, this is about stars. Trading for Machado and using Russell for a good SP maximizes your stars in 2018, and it's the path that makes it easiest to get another star player(almost certainly Harper) to replace Machado in the long run. You can possibly do that another way, but it could get dicey and has its own downsides. That's good thinking but in order for it to work, Baltimore would have to agree to trade Machado for Montgomery + without the plus being Russell or Baez. Are you agreeing to Happ or Schwarber or are you thinking Monty, Almora and Alzolay (+ lesser prospects maybe) gets it done?

Yes, I was quite pleased with his signing. The concerns about him are valid (the greatest of which for me is health), but the GB% is elite, the spin rate is elite, the curveball was once well above average and has been under utilized in Coors and his away splits over the last 2 years are very good. I think his stuff plays up in Chicago especially with their elite infield defense behind him. His potential (not his pitching profile) reminds me of Hendricks' when he first came up. He looks like a very good #5 with the upside to be a middle of the rotation starter. The price is right, and they got him for his age 28-30 seasons. Given the obvious concerns of health and BB%, he was the one FA starter this year that checked all the boxes for me. Current performance for the price, length of contract, potential to outperform the contract and age. If he stays healthy, I think not only will he have more value as it relates to his contract than Cobb, but he has a decent chance of being the better pitcher outright. I see a lot of the similarities between Chatwood and Arrieta while he was in Baltimore, actually. Yes, I saw when you posted that statistical comparison. Nice digging. I don't know what Bosio did to unleash Arrieta besides let Jake be Jake, but if Hickey can do likewise with Tyler, we might be in for a very pleasant surprise.

Yes, I was quite pleased with his signing. The concerns about him are valid (the greatest of which for me is health), but the GB% is elite, the spin rate is elite, the curveball was once well above average and has been under utilized in Coors and his away splits over the last 2 years are very good. I think his stuff plays up in Chicago especially with their elite infield defense behind him. His potential (not his pitching profile) reminds me of Hendricks' when he first came up. He looks like a very good #5 with the upside to be a middle of the rotation starter. The price is right, and they got him for his age 28-30 seasons. Given the obvious concerns of health and BB%, he was the one FA starter this year that checked all the boxes for me. Current performance for the price, length of contract, potential to outperform the contract and age. If he stays healthy, I think not only will he have more value as it relates to his contract than Cobb, but he has a decent chance of being the better pitcher outright.

I wonder if the hold up in the SP FA market is Gerrit Cole. With him and the Yankees so closely connected of late, if they are able to finalize a deal, the Yanks are then clearly out on Darvish and Cobb, and the situation becomes quite a bit clearer. While I agree with your assessment that Cobb can certainly (re)establish greater value by having a big year next year and may be looking for an opt out as a result, is it fair to say that he is still in his prime? Not saying he can't be good for the next few seasons, but just how long do a pitcher's prime years extend? Truly asking.

He wouldn't. (Or at least he shouldn't) But more importantly, he doesn't have to in order to be moved. Well, after this season he doesn't have a full no trade clause until his 10-5 rights kick in in 2020. It would still help if he waived his 12-team no trade list, though.

In an ideal world I prefer the trade route for acquiring the next Cubs starting pitcher, but if it were Darvish, how high would you be willing to go to get him? 5 years at 25 million per? 4 years at 28 per? 6 at 22? More? Not what you would ideally (and realistically) hope to sign him for but what would you absolutely not be willing to go beyond? I'd love to learn what different people here have to say...

In my estimation, Theo and Jed had that window (tradeable after 2018 to the beginning of 2020) included in Heyward's contract for two specific possibilities. 1) Harper becoming a FA after 2018 and 2) the likely development timeline of Eloy Jimenez.

EDIT: Could've left this one out of the discussion there, guy. Yeah, the odds of the Cubs signing Harper are a whole lot better than the odds of Heyward opting for FA. But the odds of the Cubs trading Heyward (while still not very good) are whole lot better than Jason opting for FA. Maybe the dude at fanrag was unaware of the fact that Heyward can be traded (while blocking 12 teams) after the 2018 season with that window closing prior to the 2020 season, but it's the far more compelling possibility to raise in his article.

I'd also want Gausman back as part of a much larger deal. Something like Russell, Alzolay and Lange for 1 year of Machado and 3 years of Gausman?

Anything from just signing Hellickson to a cheap guaranteed 1 year deal with incentives to a mega trade for Archer/Stroman or signing Darvish wouldn't surprise me TBH. What would you prefer to see happen? (I should've rephrased the original question...)

So trade for Patrick Corbin as a 1-year stopgap or the field? (The field being make the big trade for Archer (or someone else good), sign Cobb, sign Darvish, sign Arrieta, go with Montgomery and sign lesser depth options.) I'm leaning acquiring Corbin assuming the price is fair (meaning none of Happ, Almora, Schwarber, etc.). Next would be the big trade for Archer or a similar starter and then Darvish.

My guess is Martinez or like Cain and Hosmer (move Belt to the OF) It was Nightengale, but he mentioned Jay Bruce. Bruce would make sense. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day...

JD Martinez? The tweet said it was for a deal that was pending a physical. It would be pretty odd to have a signing the caliber of a JD Martinez get that far without it leaking to the press. The Giants have been in on him and need the power bat desperately. I don't know what other big money signing they'd be in on where they'd need to clear out some salary. With Pence rumored to have been another guy they were seeking to trade, the incoming guy being an OFer makes sense.

I guess that depends on the return they'd get for Grienke or Pollock.

Piscotty to the A's is complete. Cards get back the two minor leaguers that were rumored. Yairo Munoz (22) and Batman villian Max Schreck (68).

I wouldn't describe Cishek as a heavy groundball pitcher in the same way as Kintzler is known to be. Kintzler is consistently in the 55%-62% range year after year. Cishek induced 56% last season but was at 44%, 46% and 43% the 3 previous seasons. Perhaps he made an adjustment and his newfound groundball rate is repeatable, I don't know. But his K-rate is better so that certainly helps balance things out if he regresses. And for 2 years at $6 to 7 mill per season, it's a pretty fair contract.

There are still lots of options here. I mean it's not inconceivable that the top end of their bullpen is set with Morrow, Strop, Edwards and Wilson. They could still add a FA like Steve Cishek or Seung-Hwan Oh and have Monty, Grimm and Maples fill out the rest, but that's rolling the dice in a fairly serious way in the middle of a championship window. They could trade for Britton, Colome or Hand though that might get pricey. They could visit the South Beach Pawn Shop and pick up a Barraclough (I hear they're delicious). Addison Reed is still unsigned (as of this writing). Reed and say a cheaper reclamation project like Neftali Feliz might not be bad. So still plenty of different ways to go to improve the top end of the pen beyond signing Davis (or Holland). On the starter side, there a several trade options (some better than others). My personal favorites are Gausman and Archer but it won't be cheap. Danny Salazar's name has been mentioned. Duffy has been talked about but I'm not high on that idea. Or the Cubs could look for a one-year stop gap guy like Patrick Corbin. A surplus for surplus deal with the Braves could be worked out. Of course, Alex Cobb is still an option if they don't spend big on someone like Wade Davis (or even if they do, but I doubt it). Something tells me, it's trade for one of a high leverage reliever or good MOR starter and sign the other. Or trade for both, I guess. I just don't like the idea of 4 years of either Davis, Holland or Cobb.

Does anyone really see the Cubs signing both Cobb and Davis (or Lynn and Holland)? I don't. It's an either/or for me. Which means either a trade is likely to fill one of those spots (or both spots) or the Cubs are willing to stand pat with the closer options they currently have because they have to add another (decent at least) starter.

Technically he's their CEO (they don't have a GM yet!). I don't even know what CEO means in baseball front office terms. Though, they're not being run like a baseball team right now. It's purely a business right now down there in Miami. It's like Gordon Gekko bought the team and is breaking it up and selling pieces of it off to make a profit. What a total departure from the way they've been running it for 20 years! Ha! So true.

Technically he's their CEO (they don't have a GM yet!). I don't even know what CEO means in baseball front office terms. Though, they're not being run like a baseball team right now. It's purely a business right now down there in Miami. It's like Gordon Gekko bought the team and is breaking it up and selling pieces of it off to make a profit. Jeets is not a good Corporate Rader. Indeed. He's no Gekko.

Technically he's their CEO (they don't have a GM yet!). I don't even know what CEO means in baseball front office terms. Though, they're not being run like a baseball team right now. It's purely a business right now down there in Miami. It's like Gordon Gekko bought the team and is breaking it up and selling pieces of it off to make a profit.

Holy horsefeathers. Cubswin and Cubswin11 are two separate posters. I thought you were arguing with yourself for a second. I promise you I don't have a Peterman situation going on here If it was anyone pulling a Peterman, it would be me. I was here first! :P

His velocity last year was as good as it's ever been across the board and he allowed just 5 homers in 71 1/3 innings with the juiced ball. He's 33 and he could absolutely see the results fade quickly, but it's a risk I'd be fine taking on say a 2-year deal, $12-16 million deal (and ideally just a 1-year deal, of course). If he doesn't have a Proven Closer uplift on his price, I wouldn't mind him as a #3 pen acquisition at all. My dream scenario for pen acquisitions was Morrow, McGee and Nicasio. Two strikes and one home run there. If it's Morrow, Kintzler and someone like Davis, Reed, Holland, Britton, etc., I'd be happy with that FA haul. I have my doubts that'll happen though.

For a closer, I want elite performance, not good performance. I'd be happy to have him in a middle relief role, just not the highest leverage innings. Oh, I wouldn't at all want him closing, but he's plenty fine as another guy in the mix. Morrow would almost surely get the nod over him at least. And Wilson if he hasn't turned into Rick Ankiel. Every good bullpen needs a guy who can induce a double play. And, as you wrote, he'd play up with the Cubs elite infield defense behind him. Theo and Jed have gone out and got ground ball inducers before to varying degrees of success. Kintzler's track record is better than all those guys. I agree he'd be a good guy to have come out of the pen. I think the pushback was in the idea that if the Cubs signed him it would mean they'd be out on someone like Davis, Holland or Reed. So long as that's not the case, I don't think anyone wouldn't want to have him.

I agree with that. I'm speaking organizationally. They had 7 guys in MLB's top 100 at the end of last season with others who could pop this year (Lutz, Peralta, Bickford, Gatewood. etc.). And they've got a pretty good group of young players on the major league roster. Knebel (26) was a really good closer for them. He's under control thru 2021. Nelson (28) and Davies (24) along with Hader (23) if he joins the rotation as rumored form a solid group of young controllable starters. Travis Shaw (27) is under control thru 2021. Santana (25), Arcia, (23) and Brinson (23) form a nice core of young, very good players with Villar (26) a strong bounce back candidate. If the Cards trade away a good chunk of their farm for 2 years of Ozuna and 1 of Machado, I'd say the Brewers would be in a better long term position. No real threat to the Cubs as things stand now, though, just "gaining" on them and improving as an organization. I don't have time to find the post where I tried to say this more eloquently, but they basically have to thread the needle on all those guys to make the advancement they need to make to get to the Cubs' level. They aren't at risk of falling off to 60 wins or anything, especially with the Pirates waning, but they're basically hoping to have enough young guys be sustainably okay so they can be the 2017 Cardinals and win 85 games. They don't have the stars unless someone like Hader or Brinson way overshoots their likely outcome, and even then they have to make up for Nelson's star turn last year because his arm exploded. I agree, TT. I don't even think threading the needle would get them to where the Cubs are. The original comment was about them improving and being in a better long term position than the Cards if they emptied their farm for 2 years of Ozuna and 1 of Machado.