|
Post by kfidd on Jun 12, 2023 9:16:03 GMT -5
I agree it won't be like previous years, but I do think they'll move valuable pieces that aren't locked down. It's unfortunate as I think Bellinger and Stroman are the 2 most solid pieces on each side of the ball and the ones that currently are the most productive, but also most likely to be moved. Just look at where this team has gone in the past month or so without Bellinger, that's what they're going to revert to if they move him, and it's just more rebuilding. I love prospects, but at some point you've got to have veterans on the field that are getting it done. At some point it has to go away from building for the future to playing for the now, and those types of moves just kick the can further down the road, IMO. They might net great prospects, but it's just a longer delay. I think there is a bit of tempering that people should have with Bellinger. He has great energy and plays a tremendous centerfield. He also seems like an excellent teammate by all accounts. But Bellinger going down was not the trigger to the Cubs becoming cellar dwellers. The Cubs record with Bellinger in the lineup is 17-21. They definitely are worse without him but much of his strong season slash (.271/.337/.493) is weighted by his first 3.5 weeks of the season. In May prior to his injury: 58 PA, .226/.276/.302. Just like the rest of the offense did, he starting slumping at the same time and was here for the beginning of their downward spiral. I don’t think his last 60 PA should bear more significance than his first 100 on the season, but just like Happ, Swanson, Wisdom, and Hoerner, he had a strong April and then start falling off. Now coming back from missing a month of the season who knows what we are looking at with Bellinger’s return. This is all not to mention the tremendous uncertainty of what player he will be going forward in 2024+ and the inherent risk his contract will bear. Is he someone we would absolutely regret trading if he comes back hot? I don’t know the answer to that question but I don’t have any more confidence in asking myself the opposite question, is he someone we would absolutely regret signing to a 5-6+ year free agent extension? I like Bellinger but his entire value for me is on the defensive side. He does not have the sustained level of hitting success going on 3+ seasons now (and yes, injuries) to warrant that level of risk for me. So if they do end up trading him (I have my doubts due to his injury status and ability to come back strong quick enough) I hope they maximize his value in a return that helps shore us up in other areas of need.
|
|
|
Post by kfidd on Jun 12, 2023 9:28:43 GMT -5
Here is my problem with them being active in a deep free agency pitching market. I'm not convinced they will be , or they will do anything to improve if they are. They apparently have no interest in their current ace who's a legit Cy Young candidate so what leads you to believe they'd be active in the free agent SP market to the point they'd get anything better than what they have. The thing is you never know how a guy will pitch with a new team , will he click with their philosophy, will he adapt to what they want to change etc etc etc . example Taillon , most people thought he'd get better here, there is still ample time for that to happen but so far to be honest , he's sucked . Stroman they already know what he can do here, aside from the first couple months of last season he's been excellent and one of the better pitchers in the league and a guy who wants to stay here . I get he's getting to an age that is a bit risky for pitchers on a long term deal , but really with how pitchers get injured these days, what age isn't a risk? There are no guarantees of anything and we can work to convince ourselves of all different types of directions they could take. I don’t have a problem with extending Stroman. He’s been excellent in his time as a Cub, the fans love him, his teammates love him. I don’t have a problem with him and would welcome him back. But I think again, this is all a process. The Cubs have a lot of needs, frontline pitching being one of them. I don’t have anything new to say regarding Stroman. I hope he’s a Cub in 2024. But we don’t know his contract demands and any thought of a team friendly deal just because he likes it here is just that, hopeful thoughts. Whatever his contract demands are I’d imagine they aren’t going to get any lower as the season goes on but I also don’t see any reason to believe they aren’t already very high either. If the deadline comes and he’s gone or if come November there’s no extension and he opts out the Cubs will always have an opportunity to explore him in free agency as well. Generally I’m in favor of options, and I don’t think the Cubs can realistically say they are better extending him right now to whatever dollar amount than waiting and assessing the deadline trade market first. But if they extend him before then then cool, we keep a very good starting pitcher around for a long time. Edit: I’ll add one more thing. If the Cubs were better right now, .500+, and had more concrete internal solutions to our offensive woes or we still had guys like Devers/Machado as free agents to be, I’d be more in the camp of extending Stroman now. But with as many holes as the Cubs have I see a valid argument for both an extension and a trade reality.
|
|
|
Post by fine09 on Jun 12, 2023 10:07:56 GMT -5
Just a brief chat about our assets and what you think we might do if we are 10-15 games under .500 right b4 the TDL. 1. I think we will definitely sell Belli for a top 100 prospect. 2. Stro will net us a top 100, maybe top 50. 3. Gomes, Smyly, & the Prof are other names I'd try & flip. I doubt Suzuki & Taillon are going anywhere. I know we still have about a month b4 any serious chatter starts but with this dismal O & BP I am starting to think about next year already. I don't have faith Ross or Jed can turn this thing around. Well it doesn't look like they will have their usual deadline assets to trade and that's desired bullpen arms on short term deals so it's a tough call on the others you mentioned. I don't see them being very active at all in any mjor trades , probably only some minor deals , but I could be totally wrong and there could be a couple major ones. And if there are players available with multi years of control , I could also see them being buyers. I'll start with Stroman , if they don't plan on extending him then he is definitely gone and should bring a lot. If they want him as part of the future it's possible they do trade him and then take their chances in free agency but I doubt they go that route becsuse they can probably get him on an extension for less since he's flat out said he doesn't desire to be a free agent. So it's either extend , or trade. Belly is a tough call, the injury really changed things because it's going to be harder to read if he is back to all star caliber Belly or not with him missing time at a crucial judgement point. Hawkins is on record as saying he hopes they can find a way to keep him here longer and I've also seen an article that Boras doesn't want the Cubs to trade him so he's a real tough call. If they feel they don't want to or can't extend him , then he's still solid trade bait as is because if anything he's going to provide a team with elite defense. Gomes , I really don't see them trading him , they love the guy and they have a 6 million team option on him for 2024 and he's the perfect guy to have around to ease in the transition of Amaya to the starting catcher . Smyly I don't see them trading especially if Stroman is dealt. I think they need a reliable veteran in the rotation and he's been pretty damn solid for them and he doesn't want to go anywhere. Well, even if they do want Stro back I don't think trading him makes that impossible because if Stro really would like to be a Cub forever then he won't have a problem with them trading him for one or two really good prospects to make the club better and then sign with them during free agency - just like Jason Hammel did back in 2014 & that worked out great for both. I think with Cody they really ought to have discussions about an extension if he comes back really hot again and if it sounds doable then keep him, otherwise he has good value & they should do it. I wouldn't trade Gomes at all but even if we have to take a financial hit to move him I'd move Barnhart instead. No way I'd trade Hendricks because the 16 mil. option has a 1.5 mil buyout so he only needs to give us a 1.7 bWAR to be worth it financially & he will be a valuable asset no matter what to the young pitchers moving forward & we simply owe it to him..
|
|
|
Post by Returnofstevefitz on Jun 12, 2023 10:14:50 GMT -5
Well it doesn't look like they will have their usual deadline assets to trade and that's desired bullpen arms on short term deals so it's a tough call on the others you mentioned. I don't see them being very active at all in any mjor trades , probably only some minor deals , but I could be totally wrong and there could be a couple major ones. And if there are players available with multi years of control , I could also see them being buyers. I'll start with Stroman , if they don't plan on extending him then he is definitely gone and should bring a lot. If they want him as part of the future it's possible they do trade him and then take their chances in free agency but I doubt they go that route becsuse they can probably get him on an extension for less since he's flat out said he doesn't desire to be a free agent. So it's either extend , or trade. Belly is a tough call, the injury really changed things because it's going to be harder to read if he is back to all star caliber Belly or not with him missing time at a crucial judgement point. Hawkins is on record as saying he hopes they can find a way to keep him here longer and I've also seen an article that Boras doesn't want the Cubs to trade him so he's a real tough call. If they feel they don't want to or can't extend him , then he's still solid trade bait as is because if anything he's going to provide a team with elite defense. Gomes , I really don't see them trading him , they love the guy and they have a 6 million team option on him for 2024 and he's the perfect guy to have around to ease in the transition of Amaya to the starting catcher . Smyly I don't see them trading especially if Stroman is dealt. I think they need a reliable veteran in the rotation and he's been pretty damn solid for them and he doesn't want to go anywhere. Well, even if they do want Stro back I don't think trading him makes that impossible because if Stro really would like to be a Cub forever then he won't have a problem with them trading him for one or two really good prospects to make the club better and then sign with them during free agency - just like Jason Hammel did back in 2014 & that worked out great for both. I think with Cody they really ought to have discussions about an extension if he comes back really hot again and if it sounds doable then keep him, otherwise he has good value & they should do it. I wouldn't trade Gomes at all but even if we have to take a financial hit to move him I'd move Barnhart instead. No way I'd trade Hendricks because the 16 mil. option has a 1.5 mil buyout so he only needs to give us a 1.7 bWAR to be worth it financially & he will be a valuable asset no matter what to the young pitchers moving forward & we simply owe it to him.. That doesn't happen very often, and Stro doesn't strike me as a guy that would be happy about something like that. Also, someone mentioned the risk of age, injury, ect. Well yeah, we can do that with every single pitcher, all the time. At what point do you not have that mentality? Just feels like fans create this narrative when a guy isn't coming back. Take a chance or don't take a chance, period. No need for excuses.
|
|
|
Post by rvn11 on Jun 12, 2023 10:26:58 GMT -5
I agree it won't be like previous years, but I do think they'll move valuable pieces that aren't locked down. It's unfortunate as I think Bellinger and Stroman are the 2 most solid pieces on each side of the ball and the ones that currently are the most productive, but also most likely to be moved. Just look at where this team has gone in the past month or so without Bellinger, that's what they're going to revert to if they move him, and it's just more rebuilding. I love prospects, but at some point you've got to have veterans on the field that are getting it done. At some point it has to go away from building for the future to playing for the now, and those types of moves just kick the can further down the road, IMO. They might net great prospects, but it's just a longer delay. I think there is a bit of tempering that people should have with Bellinger. He has great energy and plays a tremendous centerfield. He also seems like an excellent teammate by all accounts. But Bellinger going down was not the trigger to the Cubs becoming cellar dwellers. The Cubs record with Bellinger in the lineup is 17-21. They definitely are worse without him but much of his strong season slash (.271/.337/.493) is weighted by his first 3.5 weeks of the season. In May prior to his injury: 58 PA, .226/.276/.302. Just like the rest of the offense did, he starting slumping at the same time and was here for the beginning of their downward spiral. I don’t think his last 60 PA should bear more significance than his first 100 on the season, but just like Happ, Swanson, Wisdom, and Hoerner, he had a strong April and then start falling off. Now coming back from missing a month of the season who knows what we are looking at with Bellinger’s return. This is all not to mention the tremendous uncertainty of what player he will be going forward in 2024+ and the inherent risk his contract will bear. Is he someone we would absolutely regret trading if he comes back hot? I don’t know the answer to that question but I don’t have any more confidence in asking myself the opposite question, is he someone we would absolutely regret signing to a 5-6+ year free agent extension? I like Bellinger but his entire value for me is on the defensive side. He does not have the sustained level of hitting success going on 3+ seasons now (and yes, injuries) to warrant that level of risk for me. So if they do end up trading him (I have my doubts due to his injury status and ability to come back strong quick enough) I hope they maximize his value in a return that helps shore us up in other areas of need. The thing I like with Bellinger, May slide or not, is that he's the only elite type bat in the lineup. Swanson and Hoerner are nice, but they're table setters. Happ gets it done at times but is inconsistent. Bellinger is the type of bat that could be at the heart of the order of a winning team, it's just not easy to find those when you need them. He's the only guy capable of of that 40+HR, 100+RBI type season that carries a team. And the defense appeared to be stellar. But with the 1 year deal the writing was on the wall that he wasn't a long term solution here.
|
|
|
Post by kfidd on Jun 12, 2023 11:02:36 GMT -5
The thing I like with Bellinger, May slide or not, is that he's the only elite type bat in the lineup. Swanson and Hoerner are nice, but they're table setters. Happ gets it done at times but is inconsistent. Bellinger is the type of bat that could be at the heart of the order of a winning team, it's just not easy to find those when you need them. He's the only guy capable of of that 40+HR, 100+RBI type season that carries a team. And the defense appeared to be stellar. But with the 1 year deal the writing was on the wall that he wasn't a long term solution here. I guess I’m just not sure what that means, Bellinger being that type of bat. Is the potential there? Obviously, but he was last that guy in 2019, over 4 years ago. Yes, injuries derailed him. Injuries derail a lot of guys and not many come back from such a long period of less than mediocrity. But the question with Bellinger will have to remain can he be that type of hitter again and how much are you willing to invest in him to find out? I do not mind Bellinger and am open to them resigning him if they believe in him as such. But that type of investment (what are we talking if he can come back healthy and maintain an .800+ OPS, minimum 6/120?) will be a big one and will not offer any guarantees beyond a great glove in center. And what I don’t want to see happen is them make a 20m+ annual investment in him, he underproduces and doesn’t stabilize the middle of the order the way people want him to, and that becomes a hindrance in the way the Cubs fill out the rest of the roster. I thought a Bellinger retention made a lot more sense prior to extending Happ. But there are still some ways it could make sense, I just feel like with his status as an impending free agent, his floor as a great defender, and the major uncertainty with his bat, I’m not likely to get in a free agent bidding war for that when we need is consistent and elite offense.
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Jun 12, 2023 11:23:46 GMT -5
The thing I like with Bellinger, May slide or not, is that he's the only elite type bat in the lineup. Swanson and Hoerner are nice, but they're table setters. Happ gets it done at times but is inconsistent. Bellinger is the type of bat that could be at the heart of the order of a winning team, it's just not easy to find those when you need them. He's the only guy capable of of that 40+HR, 100+RBI type season that carries a team. And the defense appeared to be stellar. But with the 1 year deal the writing was on the wall that he wasn't a long term solution here. I guess I’m just not sure what that means, Bellinger being that type of bat. Is the potential there? Obviously, but he was last that guy in 2019, over 4 years ago. Yes, injuries derailed him. Injuries derail a lot of guys and not many come back from such a long period of less than mediocrity. But the question with Bellinger will have to remain can he be that type of hitter again and how much are you willing to invest in him to find out? I do not mind Bellinger and am open to them resigning him if they believe in him as such. But that type of investment (what are we talking if he can come back healthy and maintain an .800+ OPS, minimum 6/120?) will be a big one and will not offer any guarantees beyond a great glove in center. And what I don’t want to see happen is them make a 20m+ annual investment in him, he underproduces and doesn’t stabilize the middle of the order the way people want him to, and that becomes a hindrance in the way the Cubs fill out the rest of the roster. I thought a Bellinger retention made a lot more sense prior to extending Happ. But there are still some ways it could make sense, I just feel like with his status as an impending free agent, his floor as a great defender, and the major uncertainty with his bat, I’m not likely to get in a free agent bidding war for that when we need is consistent and elite offense. They need a consistent and elite bat , it's clear that having a bunch of possibly productive ones isn't cutting it, there is no fear to pitch around anybody in the line up for other teams. Bellinger is capable of being that I think his struggles were now clearly mostly because of the shoulder injury he had that he's finally over , he's still only 27 and there really isn't going to be many options in free agency that fit that criteria other than Ohtani who I label tham as having about zero chance in signing so that's why he makes sense to me, The other option is trade and although they have the minor league assets to make a major trade happen , who's trading a young elite, consistent slugger these days ? The only real hope is maybe cash in on another teams fire sale like Hendry used to see with Ramirez. Lee etc.
|
|
|
Post by rvn11 on Jun 12, 2023 11:37:08 GMT -5
The thing I like with Bellinger, May slide or not, is that he's the only elite type bat in the lineup. Swanson and Hoerner are nice, but they're table setters. Happ gets it done at times but is inconsistent. Bellinger is the type of bat that could be at the heart of the order of a winning team, it's just not easy to find those when you need them. He's the only guy capable of of that 40+HR, 100+RBI type season that carries a team. And the defense appeared to be stellar. But with the 1 year deal the writing was on the wall that he wasn't a long term solution here. I guess I’m just not sure what that means, Bellinger being that type of bat. Is the potential there? Obviously, but he was last that guy in 2019, over 4 years ago. Yes, injuries derailed him. Injuries derail a lot of guys and not many come back from such a long period of less than mediocrity. But the question with Bellinger will have to remain can he be that type of hitter again and how much are you willing to invest in him to find out? I do not mind Bellinger and am open to them resigning him if they believe in him as such. But that type of investment (what are we talking if he can come back healthy and maintain an .800+ OPS, minimum 6/120?) will be a big one and will not offer any guarantees beyond a great glove in center. And what I don’t want to see happen is them make a 20m+ annual investment in him, he underproduces and doesn’t stabilize the middle of the order the way people want him to, and that becomes a hindrance in the way the Cubs fill out the rest of the roster. I thought a Bellinger retention made a lot more sense prior to extending Happ. But there are still some ways it could make sense, I just feel like with his status as an impending free agent, his floor as a great defender, and the major uncertainty with his bat, I’m not likely to get in a free agent bidding war for that when we need is consistent and elite offense. What it means to me is that the heart of our order is what it is, and we know what their ceiling might be. It's unlikely that Happ or Suzuki is suddenly going to tear up the league and be a major threat in the middle of the order. Bellinger is the only one whose ceiling can go much higher than the rest. Granted there is a wide range between his ceiling and his floor so it's quite the risk, especially given what the anticipated cost might be.
I too agree that the Happ extension complicated things and made a crowded future outfield even more confusing. I just want to get to a point where this team is retaining it's top talent instead of trading it for the future.
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Jun 12, 2023 11:49:47 GMT -5
I guess I’m just not sure what that means, Bellinger being that type of bat. Is the potential there? Obviously, but he was last that guy in 2019, over 4 years ago. Yes, injuries derailed him. Injuries derail a lot of guys and not many come back from such a long period of less than mediocrity. But the question with Bellinger will have to remain can he be that type of hitter again and how much are you willing to invest in him to find out? I do not mind Bellinger and am open to them resigning him if they believe in him as such. But that type of investment (what are we talking if he can come back healthy and maintain an .800+ OPS, minimum 6/120?) will be a big one and will not offer any guarantees beyond a great glove in center. And what I don’t want to see happen is them make a 20m+ annual investment in him, he underproduces and doesn’t stabilize the middle of the order the way people want him to, and that becomes a hindrance in the way the Cubs fill out the rest of the roster. I thought a Bellinger retention made a lot more sense prior to extending Happ. But there are still some ways it could make sense, I just feel like with his status as an impending free agent, his floor as a great defender, and the major uncertainty with his bat, I’m not likely to get in a free agent bidding war for that when we need is consistent and elite offense. What it means to me is that the heart of our order is what it is, and we know what their ceiling might be. It's unlikely that Happ or Suzuki is suddenly going to tear up the league and be a major threat in the middle of the order. Bellinger is the only one whose ceiling can go much higher than the rest. Granted there is a wide range between his ceiling and his floor so it's quite the risk, especially given what the anticipated cost might be.
I too agree that the Happ extension complicated things and made a crowded future outfield even more confusing. I just want to get to a point where this team is retaining it's top talent instead of trading it for the future.
That's why I could never pick a stance on them extending Happ. On one hand, I wanted to see them start to retain their players and he'd become a solid over all player, solid leader/clubhouse guy who 100% wanted to stay a Cub. On the other hand that meant two OF spots are locked up the next 3-4 years with so many other potential in house options. But I don't think Bellinger was ever signed with any intention of keeping him around , it was another mainly sign to flip if we are not contending signing and if he are contending then he still has the QO potential as a free agent since he hasn't been given one yet . But I think they saw how solid a player he can be first hand and maybe it was just talk , but Hawkins did make the comment they'd like to find a way to keep him. I also saw something pop up a week or so ago online maybe from Fansided or something silimar that said Boras doesn't want the Cubs to trade him so does that mean he'd like them to work something out and thinks they can , or more than likely it's probably just he feels playing here is best place for his potential value because he'll get the guaranteed playing time and exposure of a big market team to head into free agency with ? But wouldn't being on a contender possibly be better for that ?
|
|
|
Post by fine09 on Jun 12, 2023 18:58:50 GMT -5
Well, even if they do want Stro back I don't think trading him makes that impossible because if Stro really would like to be a Cub forever then he won't have a problem with them trading him for one or two really good prospects to make the club better and then sign with them during free agency - just like Jason Hammel did back in 2014 & that worked out great for both. I think with Cody they really ought to have discussions about an extension if he comes back really hot again and if it sounds doable then keep him, otherwise he has good value & they should do it. I wouldn't trade Gomes at all but even if we have to take a financial hit to move him I'd move Barnhart instead. No way I'd trade Hendricks because the 16 mil. option has a 1.5 mil buyout so he only needs to give us a 1.7 bWAR to be worth it financially & he will be a valuable asset no matter what to the young pitchers moving forward & we simply owe it to him.. That doesn't happen very often, and Stro doesn't strike me as a guy that would be happy about something like that. Also, someone mentioned the risk of age, injury, ect. Well yeah, we can do that with every single pitcher, all the time. At what point do you not have that mentality? Just feels like fans create this narrative when a guy isn't coming back. Take a chance or don't take a chance, period. No need for excuses. If Stro actually does want to be a Cub for the rest of his career then why in the world would he not want "his" team to be the best that it can be - by acquiring top talent from his trade & then re-sign with them. Honestly, if he doesn't like that then that most likely means he either doesn't understand the concept - which means he's an idiot -OR- he is selfish, which in either case I don't want that kind of player on our team long term if that's the case.
|
|
|
Post by cubbies85 on Jun 12, 2023 19:08:37 GMT -5
That doesn't happen very often, and Stro doesn't strike me as a guy that would be happy about something like that. Also, someone mentioned the risk of age, injury, ect. Well yeah, we can do that with every single pitcher, all the time. At what point do you not have that mentality? Just feels like fans create this narrative when a guy isn't coming back. Take a chance or don't take a chance, period. No need for excuses. If Stro actually does want to be a Cub for the rest of his career then why in the world would he not want "his" team to be the best that it can be - by acquiring top talent from his trade & then re-sign with them. Honestly, if he doesn't like that then that most likely means he either doesn't understand the concept - which means he's an idiot -OR- he is selfish, which in either case I don't want that kind of player on our team long term if that's the case. Don’t think it’s as simple as that. Don’t think cubs can talk to Stro about trading him to improve the team and then signing him in the off season. Pretty sure that’s illegal. So all Stroman knows that cubs won’t talk to him about an extension and then eventually trade him. Easy for us to sit around on these boards and think it’s that simple but end of day these are real people involved in these life changing scenarios and they can’t also know what the other side is thinking.
|
|
|
Post by fine09 on Jun 13, 2023 7:40:44 GMT -5
If Stro actually does want to be a Cub for the rest of his career then why in the world would he not want "his" team to be the best that it can be - by acquiring top talent from his trade & then re-sign with them. Honestly, if he doesn't like that then that most likely means he either doesn't understand the concept - which means he's an idiot -OR- he is selfish, which in either case I don't want that kind of player on our team long term if that's the case. Don’t think it’s as simple as that. Don’t think cubs can talk to Stro about trading him to improve the team and then signing him in the off season. Pretty sure that’s illegal. So all Stroman knows that cubs won’t talk to him about an extension and then eventually trade him. Easy for us to sit around on these boards and think it’s that simple but end of day these are real people involved in these life changing scenarios and they can’t also know what the other side is thinking. I am pretty certain that is not at all illegal to speak of concepts like that and it has been done dozens of times with the last one that I remember being Aroldis Chapman with the Yankees & as I mentioned, Jason Hammel before that. I even recall Stoney talking about that exact concept sometime back in the early 2000's.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2023 9:50:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by cubbies85 on Jun 13, 2023 11:41:13 GMT -5
Don’t think it’s as simple as that. Don’t think cubs can talk to Stro about trading him to improve the team and then signing him in the off season. Pretty sure that’s illegal. So all Stroman knows that cubs won’t talk to him about an extension and then eventually trade him. Easy for us to sit around on these boards and think it’s that simple but end of day these are real people involved in these life changing scenarios and they can’t also know what the other side is thinking. I am pretty certain that is not at all illegal to speak of concepts like that and it has been done dozens of times with the last one that I remember being Aroldis Chapman with the Yankees & as I mentioned, Jason Hammel before that. I even recall Stoney talking about that exact concept sometime back in the early 2000's. I didn’t say the concept is illegal. I think colluding with a player on it is illegal though. I don’t think think Cubs can sit down with Stroman right now and say something like “we want you here long term but clearly we aren’t competing this year so we are going to trade you and then sign you back in the off season. You good with that?” That may be what their intention is and the player involved may think that’s what the org wants to do but I don’t think they can actually discuss doing that with the player beforehand. So I wouldn’t go call Stroman selfish and not a team player for potentially being upset about getting trading when he wouldn’t know for certain what the cubs off season plan is.
|
|
|
Post by cfin on Jun 13, 2023 12:03:42 GMT -5
I didn’t say the concept is illegal. I think colluding with a player on it is illegal though. I don’t think think Cubs can sit down with Stroman right now and say something like “we want you here long term but clearly we aren’t competing this year so we are going to trade you and then sign you back in the off season. You good with that?” That may be what their intention is and the player involved may think that’s what the org wants to do but I don’t think they can actually discuss doing that with the player beforehand. So I wouldn’t go call Stroman selfish and not a team player for potentially being upset about getting trading when he wouldn’t know for certain what the cubs off season plan is. It's called a handshake agreement. And as far as I know, there's nothing illegal or against the rules. BUT... the concern goes both ways. If the Cubs tell Stroman that they'll resign him in the offseason and Stroman says he will sign, neither entity really has anything firm with which to stand on that makes them adhere to that agreement in the offseason. Stroman gets injured with his new team... are the Cubs really going to stick to their handshake agreement and sign him if he's injured and can't pitch next season? If Stroman really lights it on fire with his new team and starts getting massive contract offers from other teams in the offseason, is he really going to stick to his handshake agreement with the Cubs? The handshake agreement generally isn't any specific contract agreement, not because it's against the rules, but because there are too many variable to take into account between now and then. Generally the handshake agreement is more along the lines of "we're going to trade you, but we'd really like to have you back next season and hope you'll listen to our offer in the offseason" to which the player agrees with "I understand, I'll listen to your offer in the offseason."
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Jun 13, 2023 12:23:00 GMT -5
I am pretty certain that is not at all illegal to speak of concepts like that and it has been done dozens of times with the last one that I remember being Aroldis Chapman with the Yankees & as I mentioned, Jason Hammel before that. I even recall Stoney talking about that exact concept sometime back in the early 2000's. I didn’t say the concept is illegal. I think colluding with a player on it is illegal though. I don’t think think Cubs can sit down with Stroman right now and say something like “we want you here long term but clearly we aren’t competing this year so we are going to trade you and then sign you back in the off season. You good with that?” That may be what their intention is and the player involved may think that’s what the org wants to do but I don’t think they can actually discuss doing that with the player beforehand. So I wouldn’t go call Stroman selfish and not a team player for potentially being upset about getting trading when he wouldn’t know for certain what the cubs off season plan is. I think that's done often, being legal or not. If they want a player they are going to tell him they want him and explain the situation to him that the door is more than open for a return, otherwise the guys just going to be totally pissed and probably bitter towards the team if they don't want to be traded.
|
|
|
Post by kfidd on Jun 13, 2023 12:30:38 GMT -5
I didn’t say the concept is illegal. I think colluding with a player on it is illegal though. I don’t think think Cubs can sit down with Stroman right now and say something like “we want you here long term but clearly we aren’t competing this year so we are going to trade you and then sign you back in the off season. You good with that?” That may be what their intention is and the player involved may think that’s what the org wants to do but I don’t think they can actually discuss doing that with the player beforehand. So I wouldn’t go call Stroman selfish and not a team player for potentially being upset about getting trading when he wouldn’t know for certain what the cubs off season plan is. It's called a handshake agreement. And as far as I know, there's nothing illegal or against the rules. BUT... the concern goes both ways. If the Cubs tell Stroman that they'll resign him in the offseason and Stroman says he will sign, neither entity really has anything firm with which to stand on that makes them adhere to that agreement in the offseason. Stroman gets injured with his new team... are the Cubs really going to stick to their handshake agreement and sign him if he's injured and can't pitch next season? If Stroman really lights it on fire with his new team and starts getting massive contract offers from other teams in the offseason, is he really going to stick to his handshake agreement with the Cubs? The handshake agreement generally isn't any specific contract agreement, not because it's against the rules, but because there are too many variable to take into account between now and then. Generally the handshake agreement is more along the lines of "we're going to trade you, but we'd really like to have you back next season and hope you'll listen to our offer in the offseason" to which the player agrees with "I understand, I'll listen to your offer in the offseason." That last paragraph there, that’s all you can really ask in this scenario. Ultimately this is a business, I think organizations need to treat their players like human beings and be respectful towards them, communicate with them. But there are no obligations here for exactly the reasons you mentioned; if the Cubs trade Stroman while expressing a desire to bring him back as a free agent but Stroman goes off and blows out his shoulder needing TJS, well… Since there are no guarantees the question the front office has to answer over the next 7 weeks is, are we better next year and beyond by trading Stroman for X return and signing starting pitcher Y (maybe Stroman) in the offseason? Or are we better extending him now? It’s not as simple as trade Stroman for X return and re-sign him in the offseason. That’s a terrible plan that offers no guarantees beyond the trade return. But it could be a good plan to get that trade return while seeking a front line SP in free agency, Stroman or otherwise. So yep, no guarantees. But Stroman wouldn’t be their only option in free agency in this scenario. So we’ll see. If the Cubs could magically go 7-4 or better during this important 11 game stretch things could get even more complicated.
|
|
|
Post by fine09 on Jun 13, 2023 13:17:11 GMT -5
I didn’t say the concept is illegal. I think colluding with a player on it is illegal though. I don’t think think Cubs can sit down with Stroman right now and say something like “we want you here long term but clearly we aren’t competing this year so we are going to trade you and then sign you back in the off season. You good with that?” That may be what their intention is and the player involved may think that’s what the org wants to do but I don’t think they can actually discuss doing that with the player beforehand. So I wouldn’t go call Stroman selfish and not a team player for potentially being upset about getting trading when he wouldn’t know for certain what the cubs off season plan is. I think that's done often, being legal or not. If they want a player they are going to tell him they want him and explain the situation to him that the door is more than open for a return, otherwise the guys just going to be totally pissed and probably bitter towards the team if they don't want to be traded. Exactly right. No amounts would be guaranteed at all, just the goal for both him & the team. He's not going to give them a discount & he shouldn't, but if two offers are somewhat similar & he knows they really want him he just might lean that direction.
|
|
|
Post by fine09 on Jun 13, 2023 13:20:19 GMT -5
It's called a handshake agreement. And as far as I know, there's nothing illegal or against the rules. BUT... the concern goes both ways. If the Cubs tell Stroman that they'll resign him in the offseason and Stroman says he will sign, neither entity really has anything firm with which to stand on that makes them adhere to that agreement in the offseason. Stroman gets injured with his new team... are the Cubs really going to stick to their handshake agreement and sign him if he's injured and can't pitch next season? If Stroman really lights it on fire with his new team and starts getting massive contract offers from other teams in the offseason, is he really going to stick to his handshake agreement with the Cubs? The handshake agreement generally isn't any specific contract agreement, not because it's against the rules, but because there are too many variable to take into account between now and then. Generally the handshake agreement is more along the lines of "we're going to trade you, but we'd really like to have you back next season and hope you'll listen to our offer in the offseason" to which the player agrees with "I understand, I'll listen to your offer in the offseason." That last paragraph there, that’s all you can really ask in this scenario. Ultimately this is a business, I think organizations need to treat their players like human beings and be respectful towards them, communicate with them. But there are no obligations here for exactly the reasons you mentioned; if the Cubs trade Stroman while expressing a desire to bring him back as a free agent but Stroman goes off and blows out his shoulder needing TJS, well… Since there are no guarantees the question the front office has to answer over the next 7 weeks is, are we better next year and beyond by trading Stroman for X return and signing starting pitcher Y (maybe Stroman) in the offseason? Or are we better extending him now? It’s not as simple as trade Stroman for X return and re-sign him in the offseason. That’s a terrible plan that offers no guarantees beyond the trade return. But it could be a good plan to get that trade return while seeking a front line SP in free agency, Stroman or otherwise. So yep, no guarantees. But Stroman wouldn’t be their only option in free agency in this scenario. So we’ll see. If the Cubs could magically go 7-4 or better during this important 11 game stretch things could get even more complicated. Then I'm hoping it gets really complicated. There is just no reason that this team with 4 potential all stars should have the record that they do & we just can't pin it on the BP either because they just cannot score runs like they really should be able to with the guys individual stats. It's maddening.
|
|
|
Post by kfidd on Jun 13, 2023 15:17:10 GMT -5
I just typed up a whole thing about Tatis Jr and wanted to get everyone’s thoughts and then my browser refreshed and I died a little inside… cliffnotes time.
Could Tatis Jr be an available trade target and if so, how far would you go to acquire him?
- Padres vaunted offense has not performed to expectations thus far, but much of that was tied to slow starts from Soto (relatively speaking), Machado (injury impacted?), and Kim. They’ve all turned it on of late and their offense has woken up. The expectation is the offense will eventually consistently show its strength, and even minus Tatis Jr the lineup would be a huge strength with Kim, Soto, Bogaerts, and Machado still anchoring it.
- The rotation has not inspired, specifically the trio of Musgrove, Darvish, and Snell at the top. Beyond that, Snell is a free agent to be and Darvish, while recently extended, is also not getting any younger. Wacha has been their best starter on the season and they could use some help at the top.
- Their farm has been gutted following the trade for Soto. They have top 10 consensus prospect Jackson Merrill eyeing a 2024-2025 debut and that’s about it. The pitching depth in particular is really thin and their outfield could use a boost.
- Speaking of Soto, they still need to extend him after such an incredible investment of prospect capital. With huge dollars committed already, particularly to Machado, Tatis Jr, and Bogaerts, it could be difficult to add another 30m+ earner to that franchise (though as I said in the offseason, I wouldn’t put anything past Preller).
- Lastly the suspension effect. It doesn’t appear to be a big deal anymore but there have been enough comments circulated by all of players, fans, and media that question Tatis Jr’s maturity and growth. I’ve never bought it but it’s out there.
That all leads to the question: if available can (and should) the Cubs go hard after Tatis Jr? With some strong individual starting pitching performances in Stroman and Smyly, plus a deep farm system with a wealth of quality pitching and outfield prospects, the Cubs could figure to be a match. And I’ll only speak for myself here but damnit would I love an elite bat that is only 24 years young and capable of playing a position of need that is already locked up for the next decade plus.
It’s worth noting that while the Padres have underperformed the commitment from them in recent years to building a winner has set up tremendous expectations. 31-34 is not the most inspiring record, nor is looking up and seeing both Arizona and LA far and away at the top, but they also just sit 2.5 games out of a wild card spot on just June 13th. Time is on their side.
Not saying all of this but among Stroman and Smyly (helping a weak rotation), Bellinger (their CF production has been abysmal), and Gomes (catcher another spot that has blown ass for them), plus a deep farm with quality outfield and pitching talent aplenty (two positions their minor league depth is non-existent at), there could be a strong fit.
They may not trade him and it could all just be a pipe dream, but dreaming is fun and the Cubs are not fun so let’s fix this unfun team.
So much for cliffnotes…
|
|