Rcal10

If this is true, what would the cost be? Are we talking Shaw and Horton+? One of them and a few more lower prospects? Does Parades go instead of Shaw?

I am sure they are interested. But can they actually pull the trigger and at what cost? And can they then keep him here?

I’m not sure who the Cubs comps would be to those guys. I imagine Horton would have to go. He would take the spot of the top pitching prospect. Not sure of the rest. I know King had a nice year, but was he highly regarded. Higgy also had a nice year, but he was a mid 30’sbpaer time catcher when the trade was made. And as you said, Grisham went I that deal too.

Then why answer at all.

It is being reported they need to cut payroll. Sure, Correa and Paddock would be the guys they might rather trade. But if they can’t, Lopez also makes a lot of money. My question wasn’t “would the Twins trade Lopez”. My question was if they were going to trade him what would he cost and is he worth it?

How would Pablo Lopez look as a guy to slot into the 3rd slot in the rotation? He has 3 more years to his deal and is getting $18M-$18.5M a year. Twins are said to be cutting payroll. Is that someone that would be a good get? What would he cost? Give them back Assad and a prospect. But how much does it have to hurt? Or is he not someone worth discussing?

I don’t think it is “terrible and even insulting”. I think it is too much of a risk for the Cubs to assume a bounce back year from Montgomery. But he does have some good excuses for sucking and he did pitch in bad luck. That said, he is a much bigger risk. That is why I asked if adding Puk evens it out some. At the very least the Cubs get a good lefty pen arm. And they allow the Dbacks to deal Montgomery, which they very much want to do. And Bellinger replaces Joc.

I get your idea that he might have been bad because of the late start and might be a very good bounce back candidate. I might even agree with that. But you went a little too far suggesting Cody’s contract is worse. It isn’t. And TBH, Cubs can play the season with Cody on the team and I would be fine with it. I think he is much less of a risk than Montgomery.

Has to be more than Montgomery, IMO.

This is a pretty obvious comment. But no one is giving up someone like Puk for Bellinger. He would have to be with Montgomery, not instead of Montgomery. I wasn’t asking which is better. I was asking that if Puk was added. Would that make Montgomery someone the Cubs would take for Bellinger.

I doubt that happens. Amaya has done enough to be on the team over Thaiss.

Why do the Cubs want Crochett and Castillo? For one thing that is a 6 man rotation. Which, ok, maybe. But does that also mean they KNOW Sasaki isn’t choosing them. Personally I think it is bs that they want both. But why would this make you faint?

I don’t really think he was going to LA anyway. But what it does do is take one outfielder away from teams that are looking for an outfielder. Maybe making Bellinger a little more valuable. Or might make the Cubs rethink about trading Bellinger just as salary relief. Maybe they had Conforto in their mind as a replacement. I am fine either way. Don’t want to trade Bellinger just for salary relief.

Would Puk in the deal even it out? Gives the Cubs a pen arm.

I am not going to discuss this any further. I agree with you that the Mariners are interested in Hoerner. But I also believe numerous reports that list Bellinger as an option for Seattle. I guess soon enough we will find out if either players goes to Seattle, and for who.

So you see Mariners interested in Bellinger but because it doesn’t make sense to you it can’t happen. Is that how it works? Seattle has been named several times as a team interested in Bellinger. One of the articles I read specifically mentions how the only way Seattle would realistically consider it is if they got rid of salary in the deal. It even mentions Castillo. I fully acknowledge the Mariners would want Hoerner more than Bellinger. But I also believe the Cubs would much rather deal Bellinger than Hoeener IF Castillo is in the deal. So if the Cubs won’t give Hoerner for Castillo (which I hope they wouldn’t) talks either break down or they change the pieces in the trade. If it isn’t the Cubs doing Bellinger for Castillo and Garver then maybe it is the Cubs doing Hoerner for Woo/Miller/Kirby/Gilbert. Obviously more would need to be added from the Cubs and very possibly Garver would also have to be added. If Garver is added the Cubs don’t have to give up as much. Look. I agree with you the Mariners like Hoerner. I just don’t agree that the Cubs would take back Castillo for him. And I am not sure Woo or Miller would qualify as an established rotation arm. I think there are a lot of scenarios that could work with Seattle and the Cubs. But there are also several problems with any option.

Bro, you have a habit of only seeing what you want to see and only using those points to make your case and discount anything else. Seattle has been named as a possible spot for Bellinger several times. So, as I said, we will see. No one posting here knows that if a deal with Seattle goes down for Castillo it will be Hoerner gone. Not even you.

That makes sense if Hoerner has to go for Castillo. But I think that it wil be Bellinger for him. I don’t want to have less money to spend after that trade. And I don’t want to trade Bellinger to get some of that money to spend so they don’t have to have 2 rookies in the line up. I actually don’t want any rookies penciled in as every day players.

I don’t see the Cubs dealing Nico for Castillo. To me that doesn’t make sense. I also understand Woo or Miller shouldn’t be put under proven major league pitcher. I know you want Kirby or Gilbert, which, so would I. But they need to add a solid #2 and maybe a #3 to make that happen. Maybe only one solid prospect if they take back Garver in the deal. That does lower Seattles payroll. In the ideal world I would like to see either Kirby or Gilbert and Garver to the Cubs for Nico+. But what would that plus be? As for Castillo, he is probably better than Tailon, which is something they have said they were looking for. So he does fit the Cubs. I think him for Bellinger lines up pretty well. And again, if the goal for Seattle is lowering their payroll then take Garver back again. I am not really sure anything else has to be added either end that deal. Either deal finishes the rotation and leaves them $30M to $35M to grab a starting bat, a bench at and a pen arm through a trade or free agency. They should be able to do all of that. Getting Garver solves the catcher spot. Higher priced that what I like, but it does eliminate a need. For me, trading either Nico or Bellinger should not signal that the Cubs opened a spot for a prospect. If they did either deal they would have their rotation in order and their catcher. They would still have $30M to work with to replace that bat they lost, add a pen arm and a bench bat. Very doable. Let all remaining top prospects start in AAA and come up as needed. If they prove themselves maybe then they find a spot for them.

Guess we will see. I think it is more like Nico is talked about when discussing Woo and Bellinger is talked about when discussing Castillo. I don’t see the Xhbs trading Nico for Castillo.

Suzuki was 16th in all of baseball offensively last year. I would call that pretty damn good. Why would a team looking for offense trade their best hitter. His defense is also overblown a bit. He is not a terrible right fielder. He actually rates just a little under average. So solid to star bat and close to league average glove is not someone they should trade. Not on a team that needs offense.

Honestly Wicks was added by me for your benefit. I wouldn’t want to deal him either. But it seems you don’t feel Bellinger for Garver and Castillo was something Seattle would do. So I padded it with Wicks. I actually agree with you that him added is too much. But the fact is it does appear those teams line up pretty well. Bellinger plus something small should get Castillo and Garver. After this add a bat. If it is a FA there is Santander, Alonso, O’Neill and even Adames. Lesser guys could be Pederson or Conforto. Or if they go with a trade there is Lowe or aim high for Vlad or Tucker. If they went with the cheaper bats (Conforto, Pederson, Lowe) they even have enough money to sign a bench right handed bat. Should still leave them with about $10M to sign a pen arm. For me, that would be a great off season. Get Sasaki too and they are a 90+ win team.

I get that. But we are talking about Dipito here. And we should never act like we know what a team would do. As you said, it is pretty fair with Garver in the deal. Maybe the Cubs add Wicks? Maybe that replaces Castillo in the Seattle rotation. Maybe they like him. It is pretty fair and does fill teams needs. If the Cubs were able to do something like this I would hope they would use the money they have to add a big bat. I would rather guys like Cassie and Shaw start in AAA and only come up in the event of an injury.

Castillo in a trade. 🤷

Not top mention, Suzuki is their best hitter.