Levine hints at big, mult-player trade involving young players.

Levine hints at big, mult-player trade involving young players.
Lonnie Chisenhall

UPDATE:  The Cubs have re-signed Shawn Camp to a one year deal for $1.35M.  That's one less roster spot and puts the Cubs at 39. Good move to retain Camp, but now it makes an impending deal to create room even more plausible.

Warning.  Take this with the proverbial grain of salt...Bruce Levine hinted during his Saturday Talking Baseball show that there is a big trade "on the horizon" with the Cubs involving young players.  He didn't mention names on either side, nor did he mention a specific team, but earlier in the show Levine had talked about how the Cubs still like Chisenhall and that the Cleveland Indians like several players in the Cubs system.

In many ways, that would make some sense.  Not only can the Cubs swap young players who are better fits, but maybe also take on a salary to flip later.

I suppose I could speculate all day on which team and which players but the Indians seem a potential match for those very reasons.  So what would a trade involve?  I'll start with young players who might fit with the Cubs philosophy and current needs, a couple of which the front office is already very familiar with.

The Indians seem to want to tear the whole thing down and start from scratch.  They've been considering trading not just veterans with higher salaries, but young players like Asdrubal Cabrera and Carlos Santana.  I do not think the Cubs would be extremely interested in either player, particularly Santana, who now projects more as a 1B.  Cabrera plays the same position as Starlin Castro, so that is probably not a place the Cubs want to upgrade.  They could take on salary, however, with guys like RHP Ubaldo Jimenez, 28, or RF Shin-Soo Choo, 30.  If he should bounce back, Jimenez has a pretty tradeable contract with one year and a team option left.

Here are some of the young players who could appeal to the Cubs...

Lonnie Chisenhall, 24, 3B- A player we've talked about here before.  He fits in that he's similar as a hitter to Vitters, but he does it LH with a bit more discipline and defense.

Michael Brantley, 25, CF He's just 25 and pretty much describes what the Cubs said they were looking for a LH bat who can play CF but has versatility to move positions.  His defense is a bit stretched in CF but he has improved and he'd be better than DeJesus, who could stay in RF.

Justin Masterson 27, RHP - The Cubs are very familiar with Masterson as he was drafted by the Espstein/Hoyer/McLeod team back when they were all with Boston.  Masterson keeps the ball down in the strike zone with his two seamer to produce a lot of groundballs.  He's a fit in Wrigley.

Nick Hagadone ,26, LHP:  Hagadone is a power lefty RP (93-96, plus slider)who was also once part of the Red Sox system, having been drafted in the first round supplemental draft.  He showed some great strides with his control in 2011 but struggled with it at the MLB level in 2012.

As for whom Cleveland would want in return, you'd think they'd want a 3B to replace Chisenhall, so you have Josh Vitters.  They'd also likely want a CF in return and the Cubs have a couple in Brett Jackson and Matt Szczur.  Apart from that, they may want to exchange some young pitchers to balance the trade.  Steve Clevenger may be of interest if Santana makes a permanent move to 1B.

Of course, there are also non-roster minor league players.  If the Cubs want to create roster space, they'd have to acquire non-40 man roster players.  Trading a pitcher who is likely to be protected, such as Nick Struck or Trey McNutt, may also make those roster decisions easier.

Another team that comes to mind are the San Diego Padres.  A source of mine earlier told me to keep an eye on the Padres since the Cubs new front office knows that organization so well.  San Diego also has new members in their front office and perhaps they want to put their own fingerprint on the organization.

Will Venable is another LH batter who has graded out around average in his career in CF.  Venable is arb eligible and while he's a solid player, he doesn't really have the bat you like in RF.  The Padres could replace him in the starting lineup with Chris Denorfia.  The Padres also have a couple of young 3Bs in Chase Headley and Jed Gyorko, so there may be some depth to trade with there, though they could move the athletic Headley to the OF again.  Then there is pitching.  The Padres have a good pitching prospect, Casey Kelly, whom this front office is familiar with but the Cubs may also be interested in obtaining a veteran, such as Clayton Richards, that they could either keep or flip later.

The Diamondbacks are also an intriguing team as they are on the lookout for a young MLB shortstop.  Cubs have one, but it would be costly to pry him lose.  The D'Backs have a lot of young pitching to trade as well as some young CFs who may fit what the Cubs are looking for.

Two other teams possibly in play: The Royals are looking to acquire pitching and making a run in the AL Central.  I think like the Jays situation, the Royals are getting rebuild weary after doing it for so many years.  Another team is Detroit.  We've talked about Rick Porcello here for almost a year now.

Of course, this is all just speculation off of a cryptic Bruce Levine statement about a big, trade on the horizon involving young players. There really isn't much to go on and thus far I haven't been able to confirm the rumor through another source.

We'll just have to sit back and wait.  The deadline to protect Rule 5 major league players is tomorrow and the Cubs only have 2 open spots.

Filed under: Uncategorized

Comments

Leave a comment
  • What about Kansas City ? Is there a match there ?

  • In reply to Rbirby:

    Vitters to KC for two buckets of ribs, sauce and slaw would be a great deal.

  • In reply to CubsTalk:

    As long as it's from Oklahoma Joe's and not some overpriced joint.

  • In reply to Rbirby:

    I think so. Lot of guys young talent there and KC looking for pitching. Could they be interested in Garza? As for whom KC has that would interest the Cubs, there's a few...Moustakas, Gordon, Myers, who are rumored to be available.

  • Any player with a past history with Theo & Jed, could be a Cub.....I do like Choo.....but don't get too excited to get him......pitching is our needs.

    Lake, Vitters & Szczur are bait.

    I would not be surprise if BJax is gone also.......trade away all of the Hendry boys.

  • Another great article, John! The next couple of days could be very interesting.

  • Yes. Tomorrow is a pretty big date and I think the Cubs would like to make a move to alleviate the roster situation if possible.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    And thanks Ray!

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    You're welcome, John. Is there an exact time deadline tomorrow for teams to have their rosters set? Afternoon? Midnight?

  • I don't know the exact time. I'd have to look it up. Anyone know?

  • fb_avatar

    They can trade anyone in the system to get this team better, but I would hate for them to trade Baez, Soler, or Almora unless it is for an established young star.

  • In reply to Nick Johnson:

    Agreed. I think if they were to trade one of those guys, they'd be getting someone very good and who is young enough to be a core piece moving forward.

  • fb_avatar

    Can you imagine getting back Moustakas or Myers from KC?!?! Wow...pipe dream, I know...but getting one of those guys back for Garza+$$$+some other prospects would get me all tingly for 2014.

  • In reply to Chris Lattier:

    That would take some heavy hitters from the Cubs side. Match is tougher because I think KC wants to try and win now. Weak division and their fans, like the Jays fans, are rebuild weary after several years of it.

  • UPDATE: Cubs have announced they have re-signed Camp. Roster now at 39. Even more likely to make a deal now?

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    You beat me to it!!!!

  • In reply to Hubbs16:

    That's rare because you guys are pretty quick!

  • Looks like Camp to be re-signed per MLB Rumors

  • Off topic different trade - I saw Dan Duquette being interviewed over the weekend on mlb tv and he said he wants to add a left fielder and a bat for the middle of the order. Think Sori would play there?

  • In reply to SFToby:

    I don't know why he wouldn't. Supposedly he said "No" to SF because of the weather. But is Baltimore really any different from playing in Chicago?

  • In reply to SFToby:

    We talked about a near trade their last year. I think Duquette has been interested in Soriano for a while now. His resurgent season only reinforces that.

    As for Soriano, I think he's more amenable to going to a contender than he had been in the past. We'll see.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    I think the Yankees make all the sense in the world as a landing spot for Soriano. They are suddenly money conscious, have some good young players to trade, and this is the last year that the "core" is together -- even re-signing Cano is an iffy proposition -- so going all out to win it this year makes a lot of sense.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    They're a possibility too. Cubs would have to pay a huge chunk of that salary but maybe they can get a non-rostered prospect in return. They have some interesting ones in Class A.

  • In reply to SFToby:

    Josh Hamilton is his target.

  • I would love to see Masterson.

  • In reply to Curtis Shaw Flagg:

    Me too. If there is a deal I hope that it is with the Indians. Look for pretty good young players who do not fit the good defense and gride out at bats mode to be moved.

  • In reply to Curtis Shaw Flagg:

    Indians look like a nice fit. Both teams goals seem to mesh with each others. Big guy who'll keep the ball down. Should be what Volstad should have been.

  • In reply to Curtis Shaw Flagg:

    Why???? Masterson is way, way too inconsistent from start to start. And he'll be getting expensive shortly. What he is is a big guy with a powerful arm and a cool name who gives up six earnies in three innngs a whole lot more often than better SP's do.

  • In reply to michaelc:

    Youth + experience + upside in a starting pitcher. Not too many of those around. The guys who are already performing are incredibly costly in terms of a contract or prospects needed to trade for them.

    When a once undervalued guy like Sanchez wants 6/90, you have to consider other options.

  • fb_avatar

    How's this for a theoretic lineup:

    C: Castillo
    1B: Rizzo
    2B: Barney/Watkins (keeping it warm for Gioskar)
    3B: Chisenhall
    SS: Castro
    LF: Baez
    CF: Almora
    RF: Soler

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Wow...that would be a pretty potent lineup if everyone develops as hoped.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Yeah, you're almost guaranteed that at least one of those outfield spots is open. But that's where FA comes in to fill that hole. Let's say its Baez that doesn't learn there's such a thing as a "take sign." Clearly it isn't the same level of impact bat, but you could go sign a Jayson Werth type guy, and the lineup is still pretty potent.

    What that lineup really comes down to: do you trust Theo and Jed's ability to identify and develop talent. At the moment, I do.

  • john how is Lonnie Chisenhall viewed around the league ? I think if the cubs are talking to the indians then masterson has to be in the conversations.

  • In reply to seankl:

    I think he's viewed as a potentially league average 3B, which works for me. The Cubs were nowhere near league average last year.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to seankl:

    Don't know about around the league...but his teammates sure seem to like him a lot.

    http://deadspin.com/5943819/lonnie-chisenhall-hits-walk+off-single-is-thanked-by-teammates-with-an-attempted-cornholing

  • In reply to Chris Lattier:

    Is everyone here aware of Chisenhall's background baggage? I see there have been previous discussions about him, but I didn't see them.

    As a freshman at South Carolina, he and a teammate were caught stealing three Dell laptops, $3,100 in meal vouchers and some other stuff. University and coach's property, broke a window to gain entry. Tanneer immediately kicked him off the team. He had a good-guy rep before, and has since. But that is some hefty baggage. I don't want him for baseball reasons, but I wanted every Cub fan here to know about his past.

  • I'm going to jump on the bandwagon and say that the Indians seems like the likely "other " team , them or the Padres. The Indians seem like a good fit and the Padres due to Hoyer/ Macleod connection

  • In reply to Steve Flores:

    Those two teams make sense to me. AZ and KC are tougher fits. Can't forget Detroit too. Cubs have had on and off again talks with them for a year now.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Cubs could be a third party in a KC-Tampa deal (Barney fits well in KC and Soriano fits well in Tampa) to try to wrestle a good prospect away.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    That's always possible but things are complicated with a 3 team deal. Cubs seem confident enough to be able to add a backup catcher and a middle reliever to the roster in the past few days.

  • So many outfielders' names thrown around here as guys we might obtain.

    I just don't get that. We still have Sori. DeJesus is still a Cub on a team-favorable contract. Brett Jackson is still a top-sx prospect for us, and should get at least one more lengthy look.

    Down the road, we could have two stars in RF J Soler and CF A Almora,

    We need pitchers, a 3B, more pitchers and more pitchers.

    We don't need OF's now, or later. Also, they are a plentiful bunch, and it's not too hard to find a bargain when there is a need. l

  • In reply to michaelc:

    Cubs want a true defensive CF'er that can play everyday. There's not one on the roster right now. Campana a 5th OF'er, BJax needs at least half a season in AAA.

    Sooner or later, either BJax or Szczur will take over full time (until Almora is ready) and if it's a young guy like Brantley, for example, he can move to LF or build value later.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    You and I disagree not just some of the time, but most of the time. And that's fine. I do respect your opinions and knowledge a lot.

    B-Jax may start '13 in AAA, but I don't think he'lll need anything close to half a season there.

    If the Cubs want to get a stopgap CF, fine. But this board keeps bandying about OF names that would cost a lot in trade. I have OF very low on my priority list.

    Re Masterson, you describe the type of pitcher we should pursue. But each must be evaluated on merit and projection. IMO, Masterson is an average SP, way too inconsistent, and a tease, and not worth what he'd cost in trade.

    I also don't want Chisenhall. In this rebuild, I don't care at all about our stinking again for the next season or two. I want us to acquire young players with super-high ceilings, potential impact stars. Chisenhall will cost a pretty significant amount of trade talent. He is, exactly, as you say, projecting as a league-average 3B.

    I want us to trade for more A Vizcaino types. That's a potential stud. I don't care when they'll be ready. This is a rebuild that should entail the targeting and development of future stars. Not Mastersons and Chisenhalls. Thank you for listening.

  • In reply to michaelc:

    We need to move some bodies. Chisenhall could fill in for 2 years without much embarrassment. I'd prefer Jimenez to Masterson, but Vizcaino types aren't traded often. For Vitters and Junior Lake, at least.

  • In reply to michaelc:

    In regard to Masterson, he has given good reason to be a skeptic, but I have not seen too many pitchers plow through good lineups like he has on occasion. Maybe Bosio can help him to be more consistent.

  • I can't remember ever being this excited.

  • In reply to gposner:

    It was just two days ago. You should write things on your arm and keep post-it-notes around the house.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    :)

  • John
    Do you think a deal is imminent in the next 24-hours or is it possible or likely they would DFA a few players &/or cut ties with players to juggle the roster number?

    Not that I'm hoping for latter. Id rather see some younger talent infused into this roster like the names you mentioned above. Just want to see your thoughts on the likelihood of each scenario.

  • In reply to Cub Fan Dan:

    I think IF the Cubs are going to make a deal, they'd rather make it in the next 24 hours, but there's nothing to say that the Cubs can't just DFA 2 or 3 players if they can't make a deal.

    Considering the Cubs are picking up middle relievers and backup catchers, it either means they have little confidence with a couple of guys at the bottom of the roster or they're very confident they can make a deal to create space. We'll find out which is the case soon.

  • Why is Casey Coleman still on the 40 Man?

    More of a rhetorical question, really.

  • In reply to tim815:

    You know, of course, that as soon as someone picks him up he'll become a reliable reliever :)

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Why of course. Dave Duncan teaches him a nasty split.

  • Off topic: Interesting article by Dave Cameron that argues against tanking seasons for draft picks.

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/why-im-not-a-fan-of-losing-on-purpose/

  • fb_avatar

    It's a very good article, but I take issue with a minor point, with larger implications for the article. (You're shocked, I know.) He says:

    "We saw it last year when the A’s signed Coco Crisp to play center field. The perceived value of putting a respectable team on the field is quite low, but as the A’s showed last year, the actual value of doing just that can be extremely high. We simply don’t know enough about the future to say that Dickey and Wright aren’t going to be part of the next competitive Mets team."

    This isn't entirely fair. Billy Beane seems to have seen his minor league talent coming together and knew he was on the verge of one of his runs. While it was unlikely that 2012 was the year, it could have been. Center field was a problem, so take a flyer on a cheap but effective option. He did this not because he's trying to put together the best team you can, but because he saw a window opening and maximizing every year *in that window* is critical.

    Thus, just because Fangraphs and everyone else didn't notice that Billy Beane had put together a rotation 9 guys deep with above replacement level players and a lights out bullpen, it doesn't mean Billy Beane didn't notice that. And, in that light, the Coco Crisp signing isn't simply hoping for the best, but trying to win this year, even if everyone else thinks that's crazy.

    The GMs job really is to balance between winning now and long-term competitiveness. I would argue both the Cubs and and the Astros leaned much too far to winning now, and are paying a price as they try to put the pieces in place to be competitive every year going forward.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    I 100% agree with your assessment here, Mike. I think the Cubs will go through a similar wow year. Nobody will see it coming except for Theo and co.

    On the Marlins, while it was a bit unorthodox, here's another way of looking at it: In the Hanley Ramirez trade, they traded a 28 (ramirez) year old and 37 year old for a 22 and 23 year old. In the latest trade, they scored a 20 year old, 21 year old, two 22 year olds and a 23 year old for a 33 year old, 29 year old and throw in players. I say the jury is out and we won't know for a while whether this was a good trade or not. The Marlins believe that next year wouldn't have been much different, so they traded players while they were still in demand. If they stunk it up again next year, their fan base would have walked anyways. They felt their "window" had closed. Rather than letting it play out, they sold while they could get a premium back. They gave their farm system a serious injection while their parent club took a hit. They did this with two free agent pick ups as well.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Break The Curse:

    The Marlins I'm less sanguine about. I think both the Cubs and Astros have brighter days coming. Until Jeff Loria shows me something, I have to believe the second Giancarlo Stanton because too expensive, he's gone for minimal return. That is not how you win a championship.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    I'm not sure even Beane could have predicted that level of success. I think most teams saw the A's as a team that would be competing with the Astros for a #1 pick. They traded their two best SPs but to their credit, they got MLB ready level talent in return, shored up the defense, which is huge in that park, and made a few shrewd signings. I think what the As (and teams like the Padres and D'Backs have shown in previous years), is that you're never quite as far from winning as you think. They acquired MLB talent while increasing their young core.

    I think the Cubs are following this template to some degree.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Interestingly, the same day the piece above goes up, they publish their Astros Top 15, which is laudatory of Jeff Luhnow, the returns he got for dumping his entire team, and the Carlos Correa "take advantage of the #1 spot" strategy.

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/houston-astros-top-15-prospects-2012-13/

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    With all due respect to Marc Hulet, who does a great job and just gets better and better every year, Cameron has long been one of the better analysts out there right now.

    What Houston did was fine, but only because they didn't have anyone worth keeping to begin with outside of maybe Altuve. They didn't have any other pieces that figured to be there long term.

    But it's still less than ideal because they didn't get any top prospects that are close to being MLB ready -- and that, I fee,l was by design.

    Unfortunately, there's too much that can happen between now and by the time those players get to A ball, much less AA or the majors. It's a high risk strategy that has a chance to succeed, but probably has a great chance of failing.

    Got a chance to see Singleton and Springer this fall. Nice prospects but I don't know if they'll be impact guys at their respective positions. We'll see.

    The Houston strategy pretty much only guarantees only one thing. That they'll be awful for the next 2-3 years. That they'll never be "not awful" in the next 5-10 years is not a bet I'd be as excited about taking.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    I think the Astros did the best thing for them since they were heading to the AL West which is stacked.

    THey are now going to compete w teams that have legit payrolls, real hitters, and pitchers, so there best was to try to build for 3+ yrs down when some of these teams are hopefully not as strong.

    I really like Delino Deshields Jr. I think his future is bright.

    If Vogelbomb has a great year this yr. I think they should try to package him and something for Delino Jr, unless of course the Astros have some monster lumberjack that projects as a DH

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    True. There situation looks a lot more far away than the Cubs, but I have to go back to the Oakland A's again. Same division and most thought they were headed for last place and a big losing season. They traded assets for young players and MLB ready or near ready prospects.

    Astros chose to go with low level guys and tank the current team for draft picks. The risk is huge and the payoff is unlikely to be any better than what the A's accomplished last year. Much more risk for potentially the same reward.

  • Levine was the first to hint at Marmol to Angels so there's probably some smoke with these rumors. I like what both the Padres and Indians have to offer. As for the 40M situation I think either one of the Candidates gets traded or we roll the dice on someone getting nabbed. I could see a guy like McNutt possibly being included in a deal with either of those teams. Maybe Sczcur.

  • In reply to Furiousjeff:

    I've got a hunch on some possible 40 man guys like McNutt and Struck as possible bait right now, as well as young players like Vitters, Clevenger.

    Of course, what will wind up happening is the Cubs will trade Clevenger for a PTBNL or something and we'll all be bummed :)

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    John, do you truly think something is going down here? Odds? Is Levine usually credible on these types of things? I'm excited right now, and you warned us, but it'll be a letdown if nothing happens.

  • In reply to mosconml:

    I think there's something going on and I feel like the Cubs think there's a good chance they can make a move or two. But as Cubs fans know too well, nothing is a guarantee on the trade front.

  • Boy, I hope Lake isn't included. He's grown on me. He has that ability to adapt that's so hard to scout. .264/.333/.398 first year in Daytona, .315/.336/.498 second year. .248/.300/.380 first year in Tenn, .279/.341/.432 second.

  • In reply to Carne Harris:

    He's growing on me as well. I think even those experts who once said he basically had no chance are starting to soften that stance.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Carne Harris:

    I really like him as well. If he becomes and avg defender in the corner of spots and can still play 3B, he has a bright future as a super utility player!

    3b,1b, LF, RF......like a poor man's Marteeeeeeeeeen Pradooooooo

  • There has to be a deal going on. Theo could have just had a deal in place with Camp and not went public with it for a week or two in order to protect a young guy till after the rule 5 . Camp isnt a franchise type player and unless Camp and agent dont trust management they couldve just given him a small in$entive to not go public till after the rule 5. If the Cubs lose a Watkins or a Struck, Villeneuva type player to sign a Camp I will puke.

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    That raises my suspicion as well, as does using a roster spot for a backup catcher at this stage in the game.

  • i will be hitting refresh every hour or so here lol . better have a deal done or serious roster mismanagement . McNutt , Struck , Watkins , and Villenueva need to be on the 40 man ahead of spare parts.

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    And I'll be consistently checking my email and the interwebs! Something has to go down between now and tomorrow.

  • fb_avatar

    Selig finally signed off on the Blue Jays/.Marlins deal. I think that may have been holding up some other deals.

    John, there seems to be some speculation in the internet universe about a deal that would bring Chisenhall, Choo and Masterson to the Cubs. That doesn't sound realistic to me, and it sounds costly. What say you?

  • Bruce Levine ‏@ESPNBruceLevine
    Chicago Cubs are not presently in discussions to move any of their young players .

  • One of the sleepers I liked, Kyle Blanks, just re-signed with the Padres. I like that move on their part. They had a Venable/Denorfia platoon there last year, maybe they trade one if they decide to go with Blanks in RF, Quentin in LF, and Maybin in CF.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    I have always liked Blanks. I am surprised he didn't really build on his strong finish of 2011, but I wouldn't of minded him in our OF.

    Well last offseason I was thinking he was a Stanton light, and I think the Pad's see that potential in him too.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    W that projected OF of Blanks, Quentin, and Maybin. What are they going to do w Gyrko (sp) ? I heard there was an outside shot they would move the athletic Headley back to the OF, but now what?

    Can John or anyone shed any light? Will one of those two 3B be available for the right price ? ( very expensive, no doubt)

  • Now Levine has on twitter that the Cubs aren't currently in discussions with any teams about their young players. Like everyone else I'm guessing really hope that this is just a cover up because he might have let something slip that he shouldn't have. Otherwise I really don't understand the last couple of signings. At least not at this point in the off season.

  • In reply to Zippy2212:

    I agree. Because how would he know? Everyone is on table. They are always in discussions. Maybe not serious ones. This smells of Levine getting a hand slapping from the Cub's brass and covering it up.

  • In reply to Zippy2212:

    I saw that. He took back his own rumor. Like you said, doesn't mean anything either way. Maybe he was told to keep it quiet so we don't hear about another deal falling through!

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Let's hope that's the case!

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Just read that tomorrow's deadline is 11 p.m. Chicago time.

  • I really like Junior Lake too! Personally, I'd be completely fine with him manning the hot corner in 2013. Also seems like with the athleticism and the hose he'd make a really nice big league right fielder. I'm lukewarm on Chisenhall (Even though we're both NC boys) since he doesn't seem to offer anything more than a Stewart-esque stop-gap scenario. I don't hate The Chizz but It seems like we'd be in exactly the same spot with Valbuena playing third every day for the first couple of months.
    Other than his loud skillset of course, the main reason why I like Lake is because there's a unique hidden value there. Junior and Starlin are best homies from way back in the day. I can see that benefiting both guys. It will certainly ease Junior's transition to big league life. I'm sure he'll live with Starlin in Chicago (hopefully Fonzie will keep them out of trouble). Living situations and big league travel can be stressful for young players and I think Junior would have a head start on that. As for Starlin I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a slight uptick in his production if he were playing alongside his best friend on a daily basis. I know the FO doesn't give these things a ton of consideration (nor should they really. This IS a business.) but from a human standpoint I'm sure playing in the same big league infield would be really special to these guys and would probably raise their games. There's definitely still something to be said for having more fun playing baseball. Don't people tend to perform better if they're having more fun?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ben20:

    Great Point !! I always thought Starlin english was horrible when he was in the minors. Well maybe Lake speaks both.

    I am all for giving Lake a shot over Valbuena or Chizz or Stewart!

  • I think it's more than just fun. Adapting to a culture can take time, especially with two countries that are so different like the DR and the US. Different language, different lifestyle, different pace, even different food can all make it hard...and we haven't even touched on baseball.

    BTW, I also think Junior Lake's ultimate position is RF, but only if he develops that power. Otherwise super sub type.

  • I'd really have to start scratching my head if the Cubs don't protect Struck after naming him their minor league pitcher of the year!

  • fb_avatar

    Levine is a moron...It's one of 2 things, either he's making up rumors cause he has none or he got his hand slapped for saying too much..It makes perfect sense for the Cubs to move minor league guys especially guys drafted by Hendry because most of his guys with a few exceptions don't fit what Theo and Co want to do...To me Jackson is definately available because he strikes out way too much, he's got power, speed and covers CF great but that K rate scares the crappola out of me...Vitters another guy, doesn't seem to be mentally tough enough, maybe I'm wrong but they are still young enough where another team would definately be interested and the Cubs could find a match with someone MacCleod likes in someone else's system. I got a feeling we'll see some moves shortly

  • In reply to Luigi Ziccarelli:

    Well put! I believe something will happen before the end of the day today.

  • I don't want Chisenhall if he uses the 16-inch souvenir bat he is wielding in the lead photo......that's no way to hit !!

  • Hey Theo , anytime now lol.

Leave a comment