Jason Ross

I'm sure Hoyer has considered this - it's literally his job. And why I expect if the Cubs trade for him, they will look to extend him.

It could be that the Astros are prioritizing the 3b. I think Parades is a very appealing addition to Houston. Perhaps the Astros are equally enthralled by Gil, but we know the Astros like Parades - they were supposedly the bridesmaid for his services in July. The Yankees may just not be able to bridge that gap realistically. In that event, they probably don't care if the prospect the Cubs get ends up in Houston if they don't think they can get Tucker to begin with.

So then...you think the entire industry is wrong that the Cubs are the clubouse leaders. That's pretty defeatist.

My best guess: 1. The Astros don't expect to get Bregman. Getting Parades gets them a 3b who's tailor made for the Crawford boxes and an immediate replacement. They also get prospects (perhaps Warren, Smith, whatever). This gives them an immediate floor where they don't bottom out and can quickly get back to being good. They were into Parades at the deadline pretty heavily. So they get their second crack on him, and get prospects who could help shortly. 2. The Yankees probably sign Bregman out from under the Astros. They tried to get the Astros to engage on Tucker, maybe for Gil, maybe not, but once it became clear to the Astros that Bregman probably wasn't happening, and the Cubs offered Parades, they pivoted there. Bellinger gives you Dominguez cover if he doesn't hit, but can also handle 1b or a corner spot. Bellinger, a LHH, is a good fit for Yankee stadium. But that's me just trying to see things from their perspective the best I can.

And I just don't remotely see Hoyer trading good assets for a one year rental without trying to engage with the Tucker camp or not understanding what his market is.

Okay. I think this is pretty silly - Hoyer, a notoriously non-aggressive VP when it comes to trades and prospects goes out, makes an aggressive trade and then just throws his hands up when it comes to long term value, flushing good assets down the drain for a one year guy. That just doesn't sound like what's happening here. I'm not going to predict an extension. But I also don't share the defeatist attitude. I do expect that Hoyer would acquire Tucker with the intent to try to sign him to a real market value contract. There's nothing that precludes them from being involved with these players. This would be in the future. That's Jed Hoyer's words on Tuesday, right before the Tucker thing kicked off. A reminder as well: the Cubs reportedly made a massive $400+m offer to Ohtani. They did it once.

So then we should just ignore all of the reports that the Cubs are the leaders in the clubhouse to acquire Tucker? Because he isn't getting Tucker for free and it sounds like the winds across the entire industry are saying "the Cubs are really going to do this". They're going to trade real assets. So then what if it happens?

I like Seiya a lot. He's not stopping me from getting Kyle Tucker.

I get it. But it's being pedantic at that point. The net probably isn't different enough that it really matters. At that point you're just being stubborn because Tucker isn't worth that much in a single move, and not looking at it from the aspect of the net. If you'd do the top, you'd probably do the bottom.

Great minds. That was the name that came to my head.

Warren is interesting. It's small sample, but his stuff (shape, velocity, etc) most compares to: 2024 Michael King and 2024 Bryan Woo. As well, Brandon Pfaadt makes the top-5 (for transparency, so does Jakob Junis and Jonathon Cannon). So I think it's not too hard to look at Warren and think "well I'm getting in on the ground floor if I trust my developmental team". I think he's a nice return on Bellinger, probably better than I was expecting if the Cubs keep the money-eaten to a minimum. But I'm also totally fine sending him on to Houston, who also likes to develop pitchers and lower the overall cost on Tucker for the Cubs.

The plot thickens.

Well...no. Let's put it this way: You trade Parades + Smith + Something else to the Astros for Tucker You trade Bellinger to the Yankees in a pure salary dump Net: Kyle Tucker for Parades, Smith, Bellinger + Things You trade Suzuki + Parades + Smith to the Astros for Tucker. You keep Bellinger Net: Kyle Tucker for Parades, Smith, Suzuki You're not really changing the math here. Yeah, Suzuki is probably better than Bellinger. So much better that you pass on Tucker? Obviously if the Cubs can get Will Warren, then let's change the math. But that's the math on a Bellinger salary dump.

Getting Warren for Bellinger + Eating like $5m would be a killer return.

It's only too much if you're expecting a return on Bellinger. If you're giving Bellinger away...it might still be worth it.

Yeah, there's still some utility with it. I think my issue with that is: 1. I think the team is worse if they send Suzuki to Houston and keep Bellinger. Belliinger is the better fielder, but the worst option at DH. And I'd like to keep Suzuki's bat. Is it enough to cancel the entire trade? Probably not. 2. It's kind of pedantic, but Parades, Suzuki and Smith feels...heavy for 1 year of Tucker. And I guess you'd trade Bellinger for next to nothing, so it's kind of 6 in one hand and half a dozen in another in any other way... So I think you can be okay in the end. It's just not my favorite.

Sure. But I think we have to accept that those talks did happen. Jon Morosi, Bruce Levine, Maddie Lee all mentioned the Cubs had talks with the White Sox about Crochet. Trueblood, multiple White Sox guys (the equivalent of their version of BN) said they had talks including the three-team thing. There's a hierarchy of reporting, and yeah Zanolla probably ran with some lower-tier stuff in terms of "how close" it was. But someone named KatyPerrysBootyHole broke the Quintana trade, so it ain't like a kid having a scoop is the craziest way a Cub-White Sox trade has broken this decade, let alone, ever. Chris Cotillo was Jacob Zonolla once - a kid with a twitter account and some scoops. He's one of the best beats on the Sox out there. Credit to Zonolla as well...he was on the O'Hoppe thing and that was also confirmed by Sharma/Moioney a few times. I agree, I do think it's unfair to say every pundit having us as a favorite was wrong. I think the truth resides in the middle. There were real talks between the Cubs and the White Sox. But I think we just a bit of a sneak peak into all of those trade talks that happen that we never hear about. Like I bet there were a few insane trade talks the Cubs were involved in at some very, very conceptual levels this weekend and we never heard a peep. I think we agree at the heart of it - I just want to defend the kid a bit for having some real information. Even if it's not information everyone else would run with.

I don't think Jed "bungled" Crochet, to be fair to him. If you check out Trueblood's account of the events, it eventually came down to the White Sox and Mariners being unable to agree on compensation on their legs of the three-team-trade and the Cubs refusing to pay the transactional difference between the two. The White Sox and Cubs had been unable to find ground and they brought in Seattle because they knew Hoerner was useful in that way. As with all trade rumors, they're complicated, and most trades don't happen. I also don't think that equates to a bungle. Sometimes teams get together, other times they don't. Considering the price Crochet went for, I think it's probably okay to say "maybe that wasn't the move".

The kid wasn't wrong. Multiple people - our own Mathew Trueblood, as well as more well known beats have picked up the story. There was talks between the Cubs, Mariners and White Sox in regards to that trade.

I do wonder if that's a bit of the plan post-Tucker, is that next offseason is to move off those two a bit. Or at least, that the Cubs should retain internal options still. Assuming Parades goes and Shaw replaces him internally, perhaps next offseason is the year where Triantos is installed in at 2b or Cam Smith (if not traded) is destined for 3b, moving Shaw to 2b. SP could go to Horton, Birdsell, a transition piece like Brown/Hodge/Pearson from the pen. Just spitballing there, though, and trying to replicate a similar 2024 offseason (in the vein of Tucker/Cease).

Maybe, but I tend to think that some of the crosstown stuff is really just driven by the fans less-so-than-teams. I think if the Cubs had offered a similar package but done so a week ago, before the Red Sox went there, Crochet would be a Cub. I doubt the White Sox would have turned that equivalent package down and thought "man, oh, man, that's a good offer but because Dave Kaplan might say something I better ask for more or just trade him for less to another team!" But in the end, I don't blame him for not sending that package. The Cubs don't have three other universal top-10 guys like the Sox do right now, so losing a Shaw hurts a bit more - especially if you're thinking he's going to take over for Parades in a Tucker trade. I like Crochet a bunch! And I think for the Sox it made sense - both Sox.

That's fair. I'm not giving credit to him for getting Tucker, yet. But at the same time, I think Hoyer isn't acting within the same personal limitations he's had in the past...so I'm going to give him some time to cook here before I decide Breslow has balls and Hoyer doesn't.