CubsWin

Lol. It's all good. I've been here since the beginning. Just spend most of my time hanging in the minor league forum. Oh, I agree with that. You just wrote "sucky pitching". Average pitching? Sure. Sucky or bad pitching? You might luck your way into the playoffs with a great offense, but it's gonna be tough to seriously make a run at advancing.

Oh. You are realistic and no one else is. But to get serious, why do you take it as a given that trading Bryant is the best/only way to keep the pitching from being bad? And also, why not just let the pitching suck and keep Bryant? Why is keeping that pitching at an arbitrary level of current performance needed, and at the expense of trading away our (probably) best position player? This can all be avoided by not doing any of it. No, if you read what I wrote, I'm saying that some others in this thread are lacking in imagination, not that they haven't been realistic. The straw man trade ideas they've put forth have been unrealistic (like Bryant for Trout or whatever), but the complete inability to conceive of a possible trade that hurts their chances in 2020 but sets them up much better in 2021 and beyond is simply a lack of imagination. It's very realistic to say that you can't improve this team for 2020 by trading Bryant. I agree strongly with that statement. And if that's what a lot of posters have been saying (but just leaving out specifying 2020 only) then this was all a misunderstanding. I also don't say trading Bryant is the only way to keep the pitching from being bad or that the Cubs pitching will suck going forward, but to address your hypothetical, how many teams get to/go deep into the playoffs with a great line-up but sucky pitching? That doesn't sound like a plan that will get the Cubs to the desired result to me. Does it to you? I doubt you'll want to read my ridiculously long post that's coming (I'm moving at the end of the month so I've had small bits of time to write lately. But it's coming if you're really interested. (As an aside, yo, peeps, stop with the knee-jerk reactions to anyone who says something different than you and read dudes, sheesh...)

I appreciate the rest of your response, cutting it here so this page doesn't go on forever. Looking forward to seeing your KB trade ideas, because like people have been saying, I've yet to see one that I think makes the team better and gives them a better chance to make the playoffs. He doesn't have to do that, only accuse everyone else of thinking they are smarter than Theo and also sucking each others dicks because we cannot think for ourselves. Lol. You're not defensive at all, are you...

I appreciate the rest of your response, cutting it here so this page doesn't go on forever. Looking forward to seeing your KB trade ideas, because like people have been saying, I've yet to see one that I think makes the team better and gives them a better chance to make the playoffs. My idea doesn't do that for 2020. I don't believe that's the goal. This is about setting the team up in a better position for 2021 and beyond, and it's apparent necessity is brought about by the fact that the rotation will have only Darvish and Hendricks under contract after this season. This is about acquiring good young pitching as the alternative is signing more expensive vets to fill those upcoming spots. Two problems with that. The available FA pitchers next off season aren't great and you'll be paying a lot of money for more arms in their 30s. None of this would be necessary if the Cubs had produced 3-4 viable starting pitching prospects by this point in time, but they haven't. So here we are. And that's certainly a valid way forward. But so is extending the window while hurting (not destroying) your chances in 2020. That's what I will lay out in this incredibly long post I've been compiling. It's stupid long. I apologize in advance. I'll also supply cliff's notes at the top of the post...

Nope. I'm only referring to this thread and used qualifiers like "largely", "for the most part" and "prevailing opinion" throughout. Yep. Totally possible. In fact I responded to a post at the very bottom of the previous page saying that I thought the plan the poster (TT) described would improve the team without trading Bryant. No mine are actually realistic and take in to account the big picture of where the entire roster and payroll are headed in the next year or two. I don't look at a Bryant trade (or any other trade) in a vacuum because it doesn't exist in a vacuum. In fact, for me, the main reason to trade Bryant, if you do, is to address what is going to happen to the Cubs rotation after next season. And the main reason to trade Contreras, if you do, is to address CF and the hole left if you trade Bryant. It has nothing to do with getting a better player than Bryant in a trade involving him. That's simply highly unlikely to happen. He's going to be the best player in the deal. All of this could've been avoided had the Cubs produced more quality, in-house starting pitching prospects. But they didn't and now they are left dealing with that situation. I actually wrote it all up and when I pressed submit, I lost it all. That horsefeathers was long, too. Sometimes that happens when you've worked on it over time and left the page open for the good part of a day. But I pretty much remember what I wrote and the research I did, so I'll write it out again. You're misreading what I wrote. I never accused anyone of thinking Theo was an idiot. I don't think anyone here thinks Theo and Jed are idiots. I simply pointed out that it seems clear to all of us that Theo and company are open to trading Bryant if not actively seeking it. At the same time, the prevailing opinion in this thread is that there is no imaginable reason to make such a move. It's unfathomable why the Cubs would trade KB. And yet, Theo and Jed are still looking into it. They must see a reason. I simply asked if the Cubs "front office was filled with idiots" with the obvious answer being "no". So if those guys see a benefit to trading him then those of us who think it is completely unfathomable haven't considered all the options and are suffering from a lack of imagination. Go back and read it again, if you don't believe me.

Come on, there are literally dozens of hypothetical offseasons that have been thrown around in this forum, across a number of different theoretical constraints. If you think trading Bryant is better than any of them feel free, but 'I don't see anyone with other ideas' is nonsense. As for me, the basic framework is: - Trade Contreras, embrace the additive improvements from improving framing across the board while getting strong value in trade - Of the young position players(Happ, Bote, Hoerner), pick 1-2 that you think will pan out best, and pave the way for them to get opportunity while providing guardrails in the form of positional player depth. Trade the others if needed. - In those trades, embrace the variance that comes from controllable arms, that makes it possible to take leaps forward and also prepares you for the coming rotationpocalypse. Trade Quintana as needed to fit into whatever constraints the front office has to work with, to further embrace this idea. You can fill in the blanks here a bunch of different ways, but you're getting improvement by better productivity balance out of catcher, playing time for young positional players ready for more, and getting more talented arms in the fold to take advantage of that catching improvement and supposedly improved pitching infrastructure. Better positional player depth by not running out Descalso, Almora, and Russell for 800 PA helps on the margins too. I'd be fine with that off season. No need to trade Bryant to improve, albeit at the margins.

So then you don't trade him. Simple, right? You would think! And yet, the idea of trading Bryant persists. Why do you imagine that is? Is our front office filled with thoughtless idiots? Why would they consider trading Bryant? No one seems to even take a stab it. You only trade him if you can reset your team in a way that you like, right? If they don't get that type of offer, they won't (better not) trade him. The problem with this thread is that hardly anyone is open to the possibility of such an offer. To me, that's just a lack of imagination. I apologize if I missed it (not sarcastic), but I don't think your post illustrated anything. To me, it was just a reiteration of your previously stated opinion. You are simply saying the possibility of a trade working out is so remote, you can't see it. Not to get too philosophical, but a closed mind will find it hard to consider any possibilities period. I see certain possibilities for a Bryant trade (along with other moves) working out. I don't have any inside knowledge as to how possible they are, but these scenarios don't seem unreasonable (way out of the realm of possibility) to me. And yet, I haven't advocated for trading Bryant. I merely have stated I think the prevailing opinion in this thread is largely close-minded and that the idea of a trade is dismissed out of hand without so much as examining the possibilities out there. Perhaps you don't see any. That's cool. I do. But there appears to be no room for a level-headed discussion. Again, that's cool. I just find that disappointing.

Might have to just make this my signature: https://www.northsidebaseball.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=384016#p384016 Is it possible to imagine a combination of players from a single organization in return for Bryant that would make the team better? Of course, that's true for every player in the league save for maybe Trout. But when you layer in the constraint of what teams are willing to pay for 2 years of Bryant at arbitration prices, it becomes impossible very quickly. So then you don't trade him. Simple, right? Have there been reports I've missed that said the Cubs were dead set on moving Bryant no matter the return? The only ones I've seen have said other teams are currently balking because the price is very high. Generally speaking GMs don't trade their star players (or any players really) for a return they're not happy with unless it's a salary dump (and even then the GM is happy to rid the team of a player not worth his salary). This is clearly not a salary dump situation, so I don't see why we should assume that any potential return wouldn't help the Cubs. It may result in hurting the team's chances in 2020, but there's no reason to think Theo and company would pull the trigger on a deal that wouldn't position the team for success in 2021 and beyond. I also imagine that trading Bryant wouldn't be the only move made, so while the return for Bryant might leave holes in the roster, assuming you're okay with backfilling Caratini for Contreras, those holes might be filled soon thereafter. Or a free agent signing could follow. There are a few possible situations I could see working as a quick "Cashman-esque" retool. Are they realistic? Under the right circumstances (teams have to be properly motivated), I'd say so. Currently, the Braves, Padres and Angels seem to be situated for such motivation. Should the Cubs trade Bryant no matter what? Of course not, no one is advocating for that. An honest argument can be made that you don't want to risk hurting the Cubs chances next year and just want to ride out this window. An honest argument can be made that ownership should just pony up and extend Bryant, Contreras, Rizzo, etc. and keep this current group together for as long as possible. But, for the most part, I'm not reading reasoned arguments along those lines. I'm mostly reading out of hand dismissal of the idea of trading Bryant altogether, and that anyone who thinks it's even remotely possible that it could work out well for the Cubs is off their rocker.

Yeah, all group think is is enough people vociferously agreeing with each other that posters feel emboldened to jump on anyone who dares to challenge the prevailing opinion with posts that disparage them or dismiss their post out of hand. If the shoe fits...

“Group think” in a post is dead damn give away that a post is worthless. The Cubs don’t have to trade Bryant. There is no realistic scenario where trading him makes the Cubs better. I got an idea. Why don't I respond to a post about posters making knee-jerk, close-minded reactions by posting a knee-jerk, close-minded response. CubinNY, I must say that was the exact comment I was expecting, and it totally and completely explains your thought process on this issue.

I'll be really disappointed if the Cubs trade Bryant and the return isn't worth it. But I'm already disappointed by the knee-jerk, closed-minded thread the possibility has spurred. You guys really can't see why a trade of Bryant could realistically work out helping the Cubs? It's not that hard. It doesn't take much imagination. The Cubs just can't get an average return, and the players have to fill certain positions. Man, it's like the old days on this board. Group think has run amok on this issue.

Somebody needs to talk Tom off the ledge. The Rays just selected one of his favorite sleepers, Faustino Carrera, in the minor league phase of the Rule 5 draft. It'll be okay, buddy. Don't do anything drastic.

Yes, please. The idea that a franchise almost literally swimming in its own cash would need to trade an extremely productive recent MVP to improve its team (to say nothing of the idea that improving its team would be virtually impossible under that scenario), rather than just going and signing a few players to do so, is horsefeathering bat horsefeathers crazy and anyone who subscribes to that idea out of hand is basically too stupid for any insult to be effective. I think that's pretty logical. Guess not. Carry on.

Can we discuss this logically yet or is the knee jerk hysteria still going?

What do you think it would take to get him, TT?

Gotta like Brailyn gettin some likely top 50 love. I sure hope Ethan Hearn lives up to that ranking. I'd like to hear people's thoughts on whether Riley Thompson is a better prospect than Kohl Franklin. I go back and forth between those two.

Definitely. Yup! Well played, TT. Editorial note: The Walter Matthau/Robert Shaw original far superior to the Denzel Washington/John Travolta remake.

I found this interesting from The Athletic back in May:

That'll work as a lefty reliever. He may have emerged as a possible Iowa shuttle option in the near future which would be a nice result for guy picked up off the scrap heap. He was dominant in the Carolina League (which is notoriously pitcher friendly), so we'll have to see how he handles AA in 2020. Lawlor, 25, was a college junior draftee in the 8th round in 2015 and was mostly used as a starter before his release from the Braves org after 2017. He pitched in Indy ball until the Cubs signed him in July of '18. This year, he started off well in South Bend (.154 BAA, 1.83 ERA, 24 Ks in 19.2 IP) but walked 7 in his first 3 games. He settled in a bit after that and was quickly promoted to Myrtle Beach where he put up: 35.2 IP, 23 H, 1 HR, 13 BB, 61 K, .177 BAA, 1.01 WHIP, 2.02 ERA, 1.59 FIP, 1.97 xFIP. With those numbers coming against High-A hitters while 25 years old, he's not an exciting prospect. But he is a guy who came out of nowhere (Cubs pitching lab?) to be a possible useful depth shuttle arm. A 93-95 mph fastball from the left side with the ability to miss bats is worth giving a follow. I've seen him mentioned a few times during the season as someone to watch and those times, the reports were mid-90s with a good curve too. I guess I missed those reports. I followed his performance in box scores but missed the scouting numbers. I'll def watch a few games of his next season in AA.

We got Law's thoughts on Marquez above, but he also did a write up on Ryan Lawlor, who put together one of the most dominant stat lines of any Cubs minor league pitcher this season as a reliever. Didn't really have any report on his stuff until now. That'll work as a lefty reliever. He may have emerged as a possible Iowa shuttle option in the near future which would be a nice result for guy picked up off the scrap heap. He was dominant in the Carolina League (which is notoriously pitcher friendly), so we'll have to see how he handles AA in 2020. Lawlor, 25, was a college junior draftee in the 8th round in 2015 and was mostly used as a starter before his release from the Braves org after 2017. He pitched in Indy ball until the Cubs signed him in July of '18. This year, he started off well in South Bend (.154 BAA, 1.83 ERA, 24 Ks in 19.2 IP) but walked 7 in his first 3 games. He settled in a bit after that and was quickly promoted to Myrtle Beach where he put up: 35.2 IP, 23 H, 1 HR, 13 BB, 61 K, .177 BAA, 1.01 WHIP, 2.02 ERA, 1.59 FIP, 1.97 xFIP. With those numbers coming against High-A hitters while 25 years old, he's not an exciting prospect. But he is a guy who came out of nowhere (Cubs pitching lab?) to be a possible useful depth shuttle arm. A 93-95 mph fastball from the left side with the ability to miss bats is worth giving a follow.

Drooling... [bbvideo=560,315] [/bbvideo]

Miguel Amaya and Jordan Minch are the Cubs representatives on the AZL All-Star squad.

Thoughts. Reflections. Contemplations.

Nice! More ABs for Davis. SB Cubs advance.

"Baseball is 90% mental, the other half is physical." - Yogi Berra