Advertisement:

Cubs, Reds talking Marshall for Wood deal

Cubs, Reds talking Marshall for Wood deal

Sean Marshall is an outstanding LH reliever.  Perhaps the best in the game.  Travis Wood is a solid, lefty starter who probably fits best in the back of a rotation.

At first glance, it doesn't seem that great a deal.  Especially when you consider that Jed Hoyer just got 2 top prospects in Joe Weiland and Robbie Erlin just last year for reliever Mike Adams.

But times have changed.  Adams was going to be a Type A Free Agent.  So was Marshall.

And then the CBA happened.

Whereas Texas believed they would be getting 2 picks when Adams became a free agent and somewhat compensating for their losses, teams know that Marshall won't be getting Type A under the new agreement.  The price of top relievers took a hit.

It's not a bad deal if it happens, just a bit underwhelming. Wood, 25, was the Reds 7th best prospect in 2009 and projects as a solid back of the rotation starter.  He has decent velocity at 90 mph and a very effective changeup, though he did struggle with it last year.  He's also cost controlled, won't be arb eligible until 2014 and won't be a free agent until after the 2016 season.  He could be a part of the rotation for awhile.

For what it's worth, Keith Law of ESPN called Wood a 4/5 but possibly more with a change in pitching plan.  Theo Epstein has been a fan of Wood since he was in Boston.  Maybe they see Wood the same way Law does and maybe they get a #3 starter.  He looked like he could have been exactly that in 2010 and he certainly has a chance to be the #3 starter in the Cubs rotation in 2012. If that happens, then it could even be a very good deal for the Cubs.

Marshall, 29, will be a free agent next year and it seems unlikely now that the Cubs were planning on keeping him.  So they get a starter for the next 5 years in exchange for one year of Marshall in a rebuilding year.  And the Reds will be getting much less compensation for that than they would have last year.

Still, I'm holding out that perhaps the Cubs get a prospect out of this deal.  It'll make me feel a bit better about it.

UPDATE: ESPN's Bruce Levine reporting that the deal is close and the Cub will also get two minor league players in the deal in addition to Wood.  I'm liking it a lot more now.  Of course.  It depends on who they are.

Filed under: Cubs Rumors

Comments

Leave a comment
  • agreed john. not only are we helping them fill a need but were filling it with possibly the top left handed reliever in baseball. hes very cheap and could absolutely be the missing link in the reds pen. getting a starting pitcher for a reliever is always nice, but we definitely should get a little something extra for a reliever or marshall's caliber. theo isnt crazy hes not gonna demand a top 10 guy, but someone between 11-15 would make sense to go along with wood.

  • In reply to jshmoran:

    I would like us to get a prospect if possible, but it wouldn't shock me if we didn't. We traded 1 year of a reliever for 5 years of a starter, so it's not really as bad as it seems. And for what it's worth, Keith Law thinks Wood can be better than a #4 guy.

  • fb_avatar

    How close to complete is this deal?

  • In reply to Trent Ryan:

    Don't know, it's just in the discussion stage.

  • fb_avatar

    yeah, wood actually had a pretty good year in 2010, and Bill James projects for a pretty solid year next year, his expected xfip is not that far off of Garza's projected figure. So it seems Theo and co. probably believe he can be a #3 guy. I'm guessing they also must think that Marshall has peaked. His hr rate of 0.15 per 9 innings from last year does seem a bit lucky. conversely, wood had an unlucky babip from last year, partially explaining his high 4's era. While I agree that Marshall is more established and certainly one of the better left handed relievers in the game, so you would hope they could get a decent prospect thrown in the deal as well. If they can, I think this could be a pretty decent deal for the Cubs.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Gary Kueper:

    even if they don't get the extra prospect though, it may still be a decent deal as you say when you factor in salary and years of team control

  • In reply to Gary Kueper:

    My first reaction was Wood and who else...???

    But I'm warming up to the idea now. I can see what they're thinking here and while it isn't a glamorous return, it could make them better going forward. If he's a 4/5 guy who sticks around for 5 years, then it's not a bad deal. If he becomes a #3 starter, then it's a very good deal. If they also get a decent prospect, then I'll really, really like it.

  • At first I was really against this trade. After further review, it's not a bad idea. If we are improving our defense, it gets better. However, I would like a second piece in the deal. Maybe package in someone in order to get a prospect that fills a need. I just don't feel like a straight up deal for Travis Wood maximizes Marshall's value in the market.

  • In reply to Cameron Macpherson:

    Great points Cameron...agree with your take here. A straight up deal is so-so unless Wood becomes a 3rd starter. But I agree. It seems like he should have gotten more. But I'm pretty certain that the fact that Reds can't recoup 2 first round picks had a lot to do with a lesser value than relievers (i.e. Adams) have gotten in the past.

  • Since the Reds are going for it in 2002 lets hope we can make the
    deal 2 for 1 or 3 for 2 (we are the 2 or 3)

  • In reply to emartinezjr:

    I'd love to get another useful young player. I'm not counting on it, but it would really make me feel better! Again, I don't think it's a bad deal, but I was hoping we'd get a bit more.

  • Meh. That's all I really have to say. How about we wait until the deadline to trade him? A contender is definitely going to be willing to give a similar deal to the Mike Adams one at that point. The Cubs will also have a better idea of what guys like Maine, Gaub, and Beliveau can bring to the table. We are at a point where I don't trust any of them to be one of just two southpaws in the pen, especially with Russell being the other. I'd rather let one of them step up to the role before Marshall is sent packing.

  • In reply to elusivekarp:

    I think the lesser return on Marshall has to do with compensation changing on relievers. Texas thought they'd be getting 2 first round picks, so they gave more up. Marshall worth a supplemental pick at best now. We probably would have gotten less at the deadline because, under the new rules, a team then wouldn't get any draft pick at all if they pick up a RP midseason.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    It doesn't mean somebody in a win-now situation won't be willing to overpay at the deadline.

  • In reply to elusivekarp:

    It's possible. My understanding though is that in general, you get more during the offseason. In Marshall's case, it's a full year for a team already desperate for LH RP and they get the value of a pick. By deadline, you're getting 2 months of Marshall and no pick.

  • hopefully we can get the bluejays involved and drive up the price. they have a huge hole in the form of left handed relievers.

  • In reply to jshmoran:

    That could be. This is certainly not a done deal and a team desperate for a top LHP like Toronto could step in. Funny how a Theo rumor suddenly leaks when he's kept everything else so close to the vest.

  • Not really an exciting player here. Seems like his ceiling is 3/4 at best. Not sure about it straight up but if we got a decent prospect might be a good trade.

    Having said that, most Reds fans actually think there getting the low-end here since it's a 1yr rental. While we would have Wood for 5yrs of team-control.

  • In reply to furiousjeff:

    That is a good point by them. And if the Cubs get 5 years of a #3 type starter, they win this deal easily.

  • To be honest I don't fully understand the value of Sean Marshall. I enjoy that he's overvalued for the sake of a trade, but I don't think he's nearly as good as the consensus seems to make him out to be.

    I saw him wear down last season and become vulnerable. He isn't a setup guy or closer that people want him to be. He can deal with righties, but shoudln't be asked to face them in pressure situations. He's a left specialist through and through and should be used in that capacity only.

    It's because of this that I value Russell higher based on last season. Because nobody thinks he's good, which leads to him not being misused and not overworked.

    But I digress...and I actually forget what I was going to say. I think it was something about getting a former top prospect who perhaps has fallen out of favour tossed in who can still turn it around.

  • In reply to Cameron Macpherson:

    I think he's more than a lefty specialist. Marshall is pretty effective against righties too. At this point, he's a better pitcher than Russell, but Russell is cost controlled and pretty effective in his own right. Maybe you're guy Beliveau gets a real shot now if this deal goes through.

  • fb_avatar

    What really concerns me is Wood's BB/SO ratio. Walks went up last year, SO went down, meaning command from 2010 to 2011 less effective. For Wood, that's a necessity.

  • In reply to Lou Sofianos:

    Very true. He has decent stuff, but not good enough to get away with below average command. He's been under 3 BB/ 9 IP the past few years, so I'm expecting him to return to that.

  • fb_avatar

    could just be a bit of a sophomore slump. he had pretty good on that ratio in 2010 as you say and the last few years in AA and AAA before that.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Gary Kueper:

    Could be. But with a guy who doesn't have a power arm and has to rely on changing speeds, I worry about that greatly. I don't think the Cubs should do the deal. I'd rather see Marshall maybe packaged with Garza in a deal with the Jays to try to get more out of deal like that should it happen.

  • In reply to Lou Sofianos:

    I'm not supportive of trading Garza at this point, too much uncertainty for our starting pitching moving forward, would like to have at least 1 sure piece of the puzzle, but I would rather target the Jays system, from what I've heard.

  • Even though I would like our trades to happen as soon as possible,
    its better to let the teams fight for the Cub players to give us the
    best, and most, good prospects as possible

  • In reply to emartinezjr:

    One thing we don't know is maybe they have been discussing deals and this was the best one available. It's possible another team could still step in if they really want Marshall and think they might lose him.

  • Bruce Levine of ESPN now saying the Cubs will also get 2 minor league players and the deal is close.

    http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/7496/source-cubs-reds-close-on-marshall-deal?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    I'm hearing that as well. I'm much more ecstatic about this trade as i was earlier. Also good to step back and hear what some of these Reds fans think of him.

    One fan had mentioned that he was sick for a majority of the early season last year. But he bounced back in August with a 2.89 ERA granted as a reliever but he still seems promising.

    Fan also mentioned he trains like Cliff Lee and has a similar pitching style.

  • In reply to furiousjeff:

    Trains with Cliff Lee I should say.

  • In reply to furiousjeff:

    Interesting stuff. The more I hear, the more I like.

  • I think this could shape up to be a pretty good deal, especially if Bosio can get Wood back on track & the minor leaguers turn out to be good prospects.

    Don't forget all you Sean Marshall lovers (& I'm one of 'em), they could always bring him back in 2014.

    I'm just gonna stick with my off-season philosophy of "Trust Theo"

  • In reply to Cub Fan Dan:

    They could bring him back if it looks like they're going to contend soon. By then we'll find out if Russell, Beliveau, and Gaub are suitable replacements too.

    I like Marshall too..but we're only losing a year of him and getting 3 players.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Have we all but given up on Scott Maine? Not that I like him (and I don't), but doesn't he deserve to have his name in such consideration?

  • In reply to elusivekarp:

    I think he'll get a look this spring. He's got great stuff, probably the best velocity of all our LH relievers. It's about health and command with him. Russell has one spot and I think Beliveau, Maine, and Gaub fight for the other 1 or 2 spots.

  • fb_avatar

    The thing is, Marshall is the best LHRP in the game. His numbers are just sick. If we were going to trade him, I would like somebody with the potential to be better than a #3. A staff of #3's or #4/5s does not win anything. I would rather us trade him for a high ceiling AA player of any sort rather than Wood.

  • In reply to Denvil Farley:

    Keep in mind, though, that we are trading 1 year of Marshall. The Padres got Robbie Erlin, who profiles as a #3 starter at best, and Joe Weiland, who is probably a #4 guy at best for 2 years of Mike Adams..and everybody thought they got a great deal. Both guys still are in the minors. The Cubs have a guy who's already shown he can pitch like a #3 guy at the major league level.

  • any word on who the two prospects might be?

  • In reply to jshmoran:

    Not yet. I will update when I find out and do a quick write up.

  • So, if this trade goes through then I would assume that would end talks with Paul Maholm? They're kind of the same pitcher right?

    I'm on the "more I think about it, the more I like it" camp. Maybe he becomes Ted Lilly-ish in his growth. Yeah. More and more I think. The more I like.

    What's next?

  • In reply to felzz:

    I'm thinking Maholm may have priced himself out of the Cubs range. Good question on what's next. The Marshall trade for an MLB cost controlled pitcher suggests a quick rebuild. Maybe more veterans get dealt.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    I'm still hoping we can deal Soriano out of here. I'm also not opposed to a swap of Zambrano + part of his salary for Volstad.

  • In reply to furiousjeff:

    this is what some of us, including myself are hoping for. plus the marlins dont view volstad as much of an asset so if we take him off their hands we'll have to eat less salary (at least thats whats im hearing) and get a guy we covet. win win

  • In reply to furiousjeff:

    I like that Z for Volstad idea a lot. I'd be thrilled if it happens. They'd probably do it. Just depends on the money.

  • I hope this goes through. What a steal for the Cubs. Wood was the 2nd overall pick in the 05 draft, hasn't even turned 25, and is under team control for what, 4 or 5 years?

  • In reply to dgedz27:

    He was actually the Reds 2nd pick in the draft, so he was a 2nd rounder, but as a high schooler that's pretty high status. He's under team control for 5 years.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Ahhh...misread that. But yeah, still good pedigree here. I like the Volstad idea too. Hopefully we're on the brink of some movement!

  • The only reason not to trade Garza and others is if we sign Fielder.
    This mean that we plan to try to win it in 2002. I don't see this
    happening.

  • In reply to emartinezjr:

    I wouldn't say that. The other reason not to trade him is that we don't find a taker willing to give us at least fair value, if not more.

  • fb_avatar

    Guys I trust Theo and Jed and especially John McLeod when aquiring young players..This isn't the same old Jim Hendry crap shoot where he goes after quantity over true quality in deals (see the returns on Ted Lilly and D Lee)... It's obvious that Cincy is going all in with Milwaukee and the Cards taking a step back and hopefully we get 3 pieces that they will regret dealing in the near future...

  • In reply to Luigi Ziccarelli:

    Very true. Wood is almost certain to contribute - at least as a 5th starter and could be a bit more. Very curious to see who the other 2 other guys are.

  • Been hearing David Kaplan say that a source told him the Cubs are going to blow it up and start fresh. I trust Kaplan. His sources seem to be pretty good when he predicts stuff.

    That means no Fielder unless his price comes WAY down. I could easily see Boras floating Cubs out there to play against other teams. Not that I wouldn't be happy to see Fielder come in. As I've stated before, if you aren't going to spend the money now, then when?

    But it sounds like they have a plan. Saw this quote on another site's comments and liked it.

    "Make a decision on which direction you're going and then go 100 mph in that direction. You'll know if you are wrong faster that way."

    It sounds like the whole compete on "parallel fronts" line from Theo means that they'll try to field a competitive team that has an outside chance based on pitching and defense, but are majorly going to focus on rebuilding farm system. That truly is the only thing that makes sense if the end game is "sustained success" and not the Hendry idea of win a couple years and then lose for a few.

    Cubs were good in '03 and '04 (barely missed playoffs), and then again in '07 and '08. Patches of good play followed by rotten repercussions from the contracts. In other words, not sustained success.

    In our division, I believe that Theo will be able to turn the Cubs into a team that makes the playoffs nearly every season. Especially now that we are getting rid of Houston to make it a more fair shot to win. (The past couple years they actually made it easier to win the division because they have been so bad, but they weren't always bad and having to beat 5 other teams instead of 4 for a division crown lowers your odds. But I digress...) And Theo himself said, that being in the playoffs every season is how you will eventually win a World Series. If you are there every year, one of those years you are bound to catch lightning in a bottle, even if you are the Chicago Cubs.

    All that being said, I am a huge fan of them blowing up the team and making moves that will be competitive although not flashy for the coming season so that we can see the reality of "sustained success." It is truly the only thing that makes sense.

  • In reply to Still Love the Cubs:

    Kaplan pretty connected and he's a good guy so I think that it is what he genuinely believes based on the information he has. The Marshall trade does make sense in that light. It could be the first step toward that blowing up and rebuilding process. We'll see.

  • It does seem Theo and Co are going to blow up the team, which is okay with me. I never really thought in my gut that the Cubs were going to sign Fielder, and I still don't , Boras wants a 10 year deal for Fielder and that's not going to happen with the Cubs. Fielder will get a 10 year deal, but not from the Cubs .I say if the Cubs do trade Garza, might as well start looking to trade Marmol, Soto and of course Soriano. If we get good prospects in return and really commit to rebuild, I am okay with that.

  • In reply to Steve Flores:

    Those would be the next logical candidates. And I agree that this kind of move doesn't bode well for a Fielder signing.

  • fb_avatar

    I'd prefer the Cubs just sign Paul Maholm then to trade Marshall for Travis. I think the Cubs can get more for Marshall. So, if the Cubs can also get a prospect or two with decent value along with Wood, then hopefully they pull the trigger.

  • In reply to Danny Guerra:

    They're going to get a couple of minor league players. I assume they're prospects but I don't know how good they will be. I don't expect a top prospect but I'm hoping for at least one decent, usable guy and maybe a second lower level guy with some upside.

  • I like this deal. I hate to see Marshall go, but this deal actually helps us out on the rotation AND we pick up 2 decent prospects as well. I would have preferred for Marshall to go into the season and wait til the trade deadline, but sometimes you gotta strike while the iron is hot! Theo/Jed are taking complete control, working with what they have and adding some additional pieces actually makes you feel better about the process they are taking on rebuilding this team correctly.

  • In reply to lokeey:

    If you trade him at the deadline, Lokeey, then the Reds don't get compensation because of the the new CBA rules. I think you get more value trading him now.

  • By the way, Marshall is 29 (8/30/1982) not 31.

  • In reply to lokeey:

    Ooops...corrected. Having age issues lately. Thanks.

  • fb_avatar

    There are rumors this morning that, if the deal with the Reds is consumated, the Cubs will deal the prospects they get from the Reds to the Padres for Rizzo. Also, Rizzo was just on MLB Radio and said he had spoken to Hoyer since the Latos trade, though not about what.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Really? I'd like that but I have a hard time believing that the prospects will be good enough to send over for Rizzo, but if that happens I'd be thrilled obviously.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Perhaps those Reds' prospects plus current Cub property??

  • In reply to Hubbs16:

    That would seem more likely to me.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Rizzo Also said, of Hoyer, that he and Hoyer had a very "close" personal relationship.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Hopefully that helps motivate Hoyer. I'm sure he's doing whatever he can to acquire him. He's done it twice before.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Rizzo talked about his battle with cancer and how Hoyer and his wife were there for him and his family every step of the way. It made me feel really good about Hoyer as a person.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    It seems both Epstein and Hoyer are good people. So was Hendry, though...but you can't say that about every GM.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    I was at best conflicted about this deal until I read your comments Michael. I think Marshall is perhaps a luxury for this team right now and if we can turn this deal into Wood AND Rizzo then I am more positive.

  • In reply to Hubbs16:

    If we turn this into Wood and Rizzo I'd be bonkers about the deal. Like you said, Marshall is a luxury right now and no guarantee we'd keep him. He'd have been highly sought after next year and there was a reasonable chance someone would overbid and we'd lose him for nothing more than a supplemental pick.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Any chance the Marshall/Wood rumors end up being just rumors?

  • Always possible but there are multiple sources now. This one looks legit.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    I would have no problem with this deal.

  • fb_avatar

    I wonder, of the Reds' prospects, if it won't be some of their major league ready bats,which Dusty consistently refuses to play.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    One guy who sounds like that is Todd Frazier has played 2 years at AAA. Versatile player, a lot like Flaherty but a better defender and a RH hitter. Top 10 guy, though, not sure we're getting anyone in that range -- but I could be wrong.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    There is Chris Heisey also. How Dusty gets away with not playing him more reflects badly on Jocketty in my opinion.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    I thought they were planning starting Heisey for now. I do believe they want an upgrade, though.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Marlon Byrd?

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    His D would probably make him an upgrade to Heisey. At this point, I think anything goes.

  • I don't know how we couple possibly get Travis Wood for us to keep, plus prospects that could net us Rizzo, for just Sean Marshall. There would have to be another piece going to San Deigo, and I really hope it isn't Garza.

  • In reply to Cameron Macpherson:

    San Diego has no use for Garza.

  • In reply to Cameron Macpherson:

    I don't think Garza is going to SD unless it's a 3 way deal. That's not to say he won't be traded somewhere, but I just don't think it'll be SD.

  • Phil Rogers chimes in with this...

    "Marshall-for-Wood deal could be the first of a flurry by Epstein. Keep an eye on the possibility of acquiring 14-game winner Matt Harrison from Texas for Marlon Byrd and others (Wells?) or even a major deal with Garza (Blue Jays, Yankees, Red Sox)."

    Phil is always to be taken with a grain of salt, but Garza-Harrison-Dempster fronting the staff would be very interesting.

  • In reply to Cub Fan Dan:

    I could compare the Cubs' moves so far to flurries.

  • In reply to Cub Fan Dan:

    That would be an interesting young staff to build on. That seems like a cheap price for Harrison, though.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Might depend on who and how many are the "others" to whom Rogers is referring I suppose.

    I appreciate Raymond's "flurries" comment but I am okay with being the tortoise rather than the hare.... IF we win the race.

  • In reply to Hubbs16:

    IF.

  • In reply to Hubbs16:

    Well said Hubbs. If we pull off a few nice under the radar trades, we should be a competitive team next year. I would love a Garza-Harrison-Dempster-Zambrano-Rusin/Cashner rotation. With solid defense and a slap happy offense, we should be in every game.

    On Zambrano, if we can get one more guy to compete and push him to the #5 in the rotation, we would then have a guy who we didn't need to count on so much. I think that's where he's hurt us in the past. When he was our #1 or #2 guy, it hurt bad when he was injured or went nuts. Plus, if he can pitch like a number three for a full season, he becomes a tradeable commodity who helped win ball games.

    On Braun, any news or rumors on the results? Any truth to the spin that what he took was for a medical issue? Was the medical issue that his muscles weren't strong enough?

  • In reply to Break The Curse:

    When he says "private med issue", I wonder if he's going to use the excuse that Manny did. Sometimes men take a fertility drug normally taken by females called Clomid. One of the effects on males is that it raises testosterone levels.

  • John,
    Has Rebel Ridling got lost in the 1B picture? His stats has not been that bad. But I am not as good at reading into minor league stats are you.

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=ridlin001reb

  • In reply to Paris:

    The stats are good with Ridling. The biggest problem is that he did it as a 25 year old against younger kids at AA, so right now there's a lot of skepticism as to his ability to do it against MLB pitching. He was very mediocre at age 24 against A ball pitchers, so he fell off the radar. He could be a late bloomer. If he hits well again in AAA maybe he enters the picture.

  • How come you get 80 comments and we don't get dick?

    Anyway, I say no: http://www.chicagonow.com/goat-riders-of-the-apocalypse/2011/12/2011-player-recap-sean-marshall/

  • In reply to Rob Letterly:

    Good post Rob. Nice thoughts on the other side of things.

  • In reply to Rob Letterly:

    Thanks Rob. Appreciate your input. I enjoy reading your stuff even if I don't always agree. In this case, I don't in that Marshall probably isn't a guy who's going to be a long term fixture here. If you have inexpensive LH relief options like Russell, Maine, Beliveau, and Gaub...and get a cheap LH SP who you control for 5 years, it's probably a gain overall.

  • In reply to Rob Letterly:

    LMAO!

    Why hang on to a guy that you know you will lose after the 2012 season when you can get a servicable young kid for 5 years without having to worry about a contract? Sean knows he's valuable to the Cubs, but do you think he's as loyal as Kerry Wood and give Cubs a discount?

    I understand, it's a hard pill to swallow, but this isn't an "All In" year, this is Theo, Jed and Jason rebuilding with what they have and can get away with giving up. It's by no means a stupid move as some outrageous fans have commented on in different blogs/articles regarding this trade.

  • Cubs have re-signed Reed Johnson to a 1 yr. deal, by the way. Makes sense...wrote a short article on it for now. Will add more later.

  • I wonder if Wood himself could be one of the players flipped to SD in a Rizzo deal. He has a high fly ball rate which should play well there. Unlikely but just a thought.

  • In reply to draco:

    Anything is possible, Draco. My thought is that the Cubs have spent a lot of time looking for a LH SP (Maholm, Chen, Capuano, Saunders) I think they want Wood for their own rotation but I could be wrong.

  • Yeah the move makes sense for the Cubs and it's a good one I think if the prospects are decent. It was just a fleeting thought when I saw his FB% is like 68%. Well things are starting to get interesting for the Cubs it looks like.

  • In reply to draco:

    Flyball rate is a concern but you have to think that if you get that down (he does have a good sinker), you'll see huge improvement.

  • UPDATE: CBS Eye on Sports saying deal is not as close as being reported (via Twitter)

Leave a comment