Advertisement:

Winter meetings blues

Winter meetings blues

I remember the 2006 winter meetings so well. General Managers were spending like drunken wives on a New York shopping trip.

Jim Hendry was the leader of that pack that offseason. I remember thinking the Cubs were finally spending ($300 million)Yankee money. I knew in the long run the big deal (Soriano) would screw the organization, but I couldn’t help but think at the time who cares?

Now the Cubs find themselves at Marshall’s ( $4.75 million) searching through picked over items. Some fans still want the Cubs to spend their way out of this. That isn’t going to happen, but I think we all hoped for some more meaningful additions to the younger core.

Some of us wanted to see Theo and Jed somehow pull off another Anthony Rizzo type deal. That is why I kind of got excited when I heard Texas prospect Mike Olt might have been available. Now this type of deal still may happen as many GMs left Nashville disappointed and surprised themselves at the lack of movement.

Jed Hoyer left Nashville like the others, hopeful that the days ahead would allow him to spread around his owner’s cash reserves.

“There’s a long way to go until we get to (spring training in) Mesa,” he said. “We have to remind ourselves there’s still a lot of players out there and still a lot of time (before spring training).

“When you’re leaving here, sometimes you feel like this is closer to the end of the off-season than the beginning, but it’s actually a lot closer to the beginning. There’s a lot of time left, we still have resources left and we’ll continue to work all winter.”

One media person told me the biggest deal deterrent at the “Grand Ole Opry” was the enormity of the hotel lobby. It was literally difficult to find people to talk about deals. One GM said it was easier if they were in their rooms so they could text and email other clubs, something they didn’t need to be at the meetings for.

There was some talk about the Cubs and Michael Bourn. That rumor seemed like the Cubs either helping out Scott Boras or the media helping the Cubs front office look like they are serious players.

Then there was more sketchy reports made about the Cubs reaching out to Ryan Dempster (more of a friendly formality) and the names Yuniesky Betancourt and Mark Reynolds were thrown around to many of Cubs fans dismay.

The Cubs however didn’t leave empty handed. They improved their pen with Kenji Fujikawa. They added an outfielder with some value in Nate Schierholtz, and finally settled third base by bringing back Ian Stewart (who now looks like George Brett in this desperate 3b market).

So far we here like what has been done this offseason. The starting pitching and bullpen looks respectable and we could still see yet another starter signed.

I myself would like to see the Cubs sell high on Darwin Barney and still sign one more pitcher like Brandon McCarthy or trade for one like Rick Porcello. The one thing that has bothered me is with the mention of every name is the mention of a possible “flip”.

It’s not like the Cubs can’t acquire someone in their 20’s and think they could possibly fit long term is it?

We have passed another year into this rebuild. I would hope by at least 2014 this team should begin to make a move for players they intend on keeping.

Either way, I don’t want to see the Cubs ever replicate those 2006 meetings by overspending. I do hope we never see another winter event like this again for both the Cubs and the rest of baseball.

It could be worse we could be the Red Sox.

 

 

Filed under: Uncategorized

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Excellent stuff, Tom, I couldn't agree more. I, for one, was hoping for a trade or two, something more exciting, but I am content with the moves that the FO have made. They are not splashy and won't bring a title in 2013, but they are solid, consistent moves that have some upside. I was excited to hear that they had resigned Stewart, not because he was great last year, but because he has potential and he could very well be the best 3b option on the free agent market this winter. He could end up being a steal, if (that is a big IF) he returns to the form he showed a few years ago.
    Now that Stewart has resigned, the 40 man roster needs to be adjusted. (Unless his non-guaranteed deal is exempt from 40 man status at the time) I expect to see a few more moves. Marmol and Soriano could, both, still be on their way out, along with Barney. If the Cubs sign another starter, such as McCarthy, does that make Garza more expendable and likely to be moved?
    The team might not win the division this year, but it is exciting to finally see them moving in such a positive direction.

  • In reply to supercapo:

    I feel like even if Garza's arm fell off they would still try and deal him. I don't think there is any doubt they are going to try and move him.

  • fb_avatar

    I was actually with you. But then I thought about the Rizzo deal, and that didn't happen until January. So, there's still lots of time for things to happen.

    Garza especially is a wild card. I know big trades usually don't happen in spring training, but teams are going to want to see him pitch and are also going to want to get the draft pick for him, so we could get an Olt talent just before the season starts.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Moody:

    I would love Mike Olt @ 3rd base!!!

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Luigi Ziccarelli:

    I mentioned Olt only because Bruce Levine specifically brought up that possibility. Don't get your heart too set on him, because if the Rangers really do sign Greinke they're probably off the market for a starting pitcher. But there are other options out there. Levine also specifically mentioned Myers. A bigger package from Atlanta based around our old friend Randall Delgado might do it. Bauer and/or Skaggs from the Diamondbacks is an option.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    I am wary of anything Mr. Levine says on Olt or anyone else. His "imminent mega-deal" heads-up of a few weeks ago was a fizzle; his gossip on Stewart's relationship with the FO was apparently unfounded innuendo; and a Chicago news colleague stated that he was "grossly misrepresenting" the Cubs' interest in Dempster last week.
    Sometimes I think certain people feed the mill with garbage just to see it float downstream. And to get social media "hits".

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to StillMissKennyHubbs:

    I don't disagree, and probably shouldn't even have mentioned it. It was just the first name that popped into my head when I was writing the initial post.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Good point. If you had left off the Levine part, my response would have been yeah, let's get Olt.
    p.s. Thanks for your input and follow-through on the recent BN poster thing, Mike. Much appreciated.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to StillMissKennyHubbs:

    Was more than happy to help out in that case. Really, think nothing of it.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Oh I agree that is what I'm hoping for. I think a lot of GMs are thinking things will get done after the meetings.

  • I don't think Garza or any other pitcher coming off an injury could pitch enough innings in Spring Training to convince another team that he's healthy. They'll need for him to prove that his elbow will hold up for several months and know that they're in the hunt for the postseason before they'll offer the Cubs a fair return for him. Sometime in July, the Cubs are going to have to decide whether to sign him to an extension, trade him to another team or keep him and either re-sign him as a free agent or make a qualifying offer to salvage a compensatory draft pick.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to cubsin:

    He doesn't have a history though. Just one freak injury. Clearly, it's a risk, and they'll definitely want his medicals, but if they believe he's healthy and he looks comfortable being stretched out in spring training, they may pull the trigger in order to salvage the draft pick.

  • It was a bit disappointing. You really hoped you could add another core piece, or at least a couple of young close to MLB ready prospects who are potential core pieces.

    But if you look around the league, most teams were relatively quiet other than a few big name FA signings. Red Sox were busy, but they were busy making bad moves. Poor Cherington, got to think Lucchino has him on a win now mandate to prove how he can win without Theo.

    I think the moves will come. Will have a piece out tomorrow. Most deals will be minor unless Cubs can deal Garza, though they could pick up something interesting for Soriano and Marmol too.

  • Not to knit-pick, but you're referring to the 2006 Winter Meetings. That was the offseason when the Cubs signed Soriano, Jason Marquis, and Mark DeRosa. 2007 offseason, we were treated to Kosuke Fukudome.

  • In reply to tbshaw17:

    Thanks I fixed it.

  • Tom - excellent work - although I do think that dig against the Red Sox at the end was probably not merited,... at least they HAVE had a WS appearance and victory in living memory.

    But - although I wasn't following the 2007 winter meetings closely - I was (and still am) living in the DC region the year that Soriano had his big year for the then lowly Nationals. Soriano was fun to watch that year - but when I heard of the new Cubs contract I knew that there would be trouble before the end. That was some serious overpayment for an aging speed / power combo guy who struck out A LOT.

    That contract, plus the ones handed out to Zambrano, Lee, Ramirez, Bradley,... plus bonehead moves on some trades (still cannot believe they traded DeRosa when they did), and horrible drafting and player development,... brought us to where we are today. Shopping in the bargin bin while trying to remodel the system.

    I'm thinking that this year will bring improvements as the youngsters gain experience and consistency, that the bullpen (IMO the biggest failing most of last season) should be much better, and although I suspect that run production and power will be marginal - at least the defense at the end of games and pitching at end of games should be OK.

    I think next year,... they should start thinking about adding 1-2 moderately young and more expensive FAs, and then plug holes as the guys in AA and AAA mature.

    Have a good Winter all - it'll be February/March in AZ before we know it.

  • In reply to drkazmd65:

    It was kind of tounge in cheek. I would still rather have BOS recent history but I just can't figure out what they are doing now.

  • In reply to Tom Loxas:

    Understood Tom - I was attempting to do a similar thing - but sarcasm doesn't come across well in text.

    :D

    But yeah,... it does seem that the management for the Red Sox is attempting to undo everything that was done there during the late 1990s and early 2000s to build up a decent team and system.

    I'm actually hoping that the current Cubs management team follows a trajectory similar to that the Nationals have done the last several years. You look at their starters,... and most of them have come up within thier system - supplemented by a few free agents.

  • In reply to drkazmd65:

    Oh the Nationals have themselves a something don't they.

  • I hadn't caught any 'Yuniesky Betancourt to the Cubs' rumors, but let me go on the record as saying "No. NO. NOOOOOOOO. PLEASE GOD ANYONE BUT BETANCOURT."

  • What do you guys think about Brandon Snyder as a platoon partner for Stewart. Has nice splits against lefties in limited action. Has played 1B, 3B and a little bit of outfield. Don't know how good he is defensively however, especially at third where we need him the most.

  • Good stuff Tom!

    I for one, appreciate the dig on the BoSox organization. After the crap they pulled with the compensation for Theo. These moves they're making now, vs. the moves Theo is making for us will have the organizations at polar opposites in 3 years and I for one feel they deserve to have every team kicking their teeth out. :steps off soap box:

  • I remember thinking it was about time they spent like a big market club when they signed Soriano. I still feel like I need to go to confession for thinking Milton Bradley was a good pick up.

  • In reply to jimmy mac1:

    Bradley would have been a great pick up at the 08 deadline and even on a 1 year deal in 09 but 3 was just plain crazy.

  • So far as trading Barney.... unless somebody just blows our socks off, we need Dale &/or Rowson to get him squaring the ball up a bit better. Last year, he hit about 20 points below his 2011 avg., but he had a career best 7hrs. Barney has a great work ethic and if he can show some improvement offensively, he becomes a very valuable trade chip by the deadline. His youth and cost control make him valuable as a core member or a trade chip. I just don't think his value is maximized w/o better offensive stats.

  • Thanks for the balanced perspective, Tom. I just looked at the winter meeting recaps for each team, and it was full of "looking at so-and-so" and "talking to x-team" instead of tangible deals. A lot of on-site people were saying how disjointed the place was. That, and the spiraling Free Agent salaries were leaving people shaking their heads and wary of making gross overpays (Red Sox excepted). "The bad deals you don't make" seemed to be the theme.
    All told, the Cubs came out better than when they went in. The loss of Peralta (and he may come back) was more than balanced by the pickups in the pen and the OF. And I'm glad they're giving a healthy Stewart a chance to succeed.
    (Speaking of DeRosa, he's been linked to the Cards. That would be tough to see.)
    Eight weeks or so for more roster deals and tweaks--and that's just till the beginning of Spring Training. Keep up the good work.

  • In reply to StillMissKennyHubbs:

    Thanks!

  • I'm happy with re-signing Stewart. There wasn't much to choose from and career utility guys were being offered twice as much. "IF" he produces 75% of his potential, this is a steal and a valuable "flip" candidate at the deadline. Then again, we may keep Stewart and flip Vitters.... It'd be nice to have options.

    I wasn't too upset about not getting a Mike Olt or any Blockbuster trades. While that would be nice, we don't really have the assets it would take to acquire Olt. But you never know... the Deadline and playoff hunt or injuries tend to make GM's anxious to do a deal and inflate guys value (Marmol, Garza, Sori, etc)....

    The meetings seemed to have a slow pace about them while the Rule 5 draft went lightning fast. Hard to get upset that they didn't make more moves as they're hunting for value and not giving anything away. The more I look into Rondon, the more I like this pick and I wonder why none of the guru's had him tabbed as a top pick. Just shows the depth of our FO & Scouting efforts. The fact that we lost so many guys in the draft is also a testament to the depth of our organization...

    One thing is for sure, there's brighter days ahead. With a similar/better rotation as last year and an improved bullpen, we have a chance to surprise some in 2013. Worse case scenario it's a re-peat of 2012. We need lots of balls to bounce our way, but we are clearly moving in the direction of a contender, and the depth to sustain that by 2015/2016....

  • Just read on MLB Rumors....The Tigers are targeting relievers capable of closing in trade talks, ESPN.com's Buster Olney reports
    Read more at http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/#HoeYszRhLrOqZdIk.99

    Here's the Cubs chance. Trade Marmol for Porcello. Add $$ or another player if needed!!!!

  • In reply to Jer Bear:

    I read that too, and I'd love that deal if Theo/Jed could pull it off. But Gammons specificly mentioned Chris Perez and Hanrahan in his tweet, and not Marmol when everyone knows he's available. Makes me wonder if Detroit doesn't want the risk of Marmol turning wild again, whereas Perez & Hanrahan are both more consistent & All stars for 2011 & 2012.

  • So we ended up addressing all of our "Needs", yet we still need depth at all of them. IMO, we still need another SP candidate and some BP help. We need a RH utility IF/bench/ph that can spell Rizzo & Stewart. We could still use a RH utility OF unless the FO thinks Schierholtz is our every day RF....

    Any ideas on who we can target to contribute on "value" type signings.

  • The Winter meeting struck me as a meal at one of those really fancy restaurants....let's say like Mastro's. You make a reservation to be there. You wait all week. You skip lunches, and work out regularly before hand to allow yourself to gorge like a Viking, and you get there and you're chowing on breadsticks (Chierholtz, Stewart) while the waiter ( Hoyer) says stuff like "Just checked with the Kitchen, you're meal is THIS CLOSE to being ready...."

    Now granted, this would never happen at a first rate place like Mastro's...

    While some poor misguided souls have lost patience with the rebuild, I feel some people have gone too far the other way. They're so committed, maybe even over-committed to this rebuild, that the trade deadline and the Winter meetings become these all encompassing "D-Day"s and every player is looked at like some sort of day stock that can somehow be pinhooked for prospects.

    I think ( yeah, probably hope too) that the Cubs have a few more moves in them this winter. But I know that Brett Jackson's re-worked swing and one or two unexpected incredible Spring trainings from players we never saw coming are every bit as important.

    So Yeah, I'd like my goddamn steak. But all things considered, things are okay. And the breadsticks, while not filling, are keeping me occupied and don't cost nothing....

  • In reply to felzz:

    Thanks for plugging Mastros too BTW. Now I'm hungry.

  • Tom, I was kind of put off by all this talk of flipping guys too. Who's to say Baker or Feldman aren't longer term assets? Obviously they signed one year deals with the hopes of improving their stock and cashing in next offseason. But why can't it be the Cubs who are buying more of their services? I would not be shocked if one or both of those guys are back in the 2014 rotation.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ratmoss:

    Because we saw how Theo operated last year. When he goes into this year locking up starting pitchers to super-attractive offers for the trade market, I don't think it's going too far to assume past behavior predicts future behavior.

  • In reply to Ratmoss:

    I actually wrote an article that I'll have up later where I say the same thing. It's not a slam dunk these guys are traded. Let's say the Cubs make big progress and feel that they're close, maybe thinking they could make a run in 2014. Then let's say Scott Baker was a big part of their improvement in 2013...it makes sense to keep him.

    If you think about it, what if the Cubs pulled a huge surprise last year similar to the A's or Orioles,would they have traded Maholm? I highly doubt it. I'm sure that they not only would have kept him, but they would have picked up his option. And to me, they don't even have to make the playoffs like those teams for that to happen. They just have to show that they are in position to do it.

  • In reply to Ratmoss:

    Yeah I like those guys I don't want to think everyone is a rental.

  • In reply to Tom Loxas:

    To Theo everyone is a rental, overslotting in the draft was Theo's plan to get young talented players, since the new CBA put a cap on that plan his plan B is flipping players. Theo is new school who will trade his own mother for an other organizations top prospects who have just had TJ surgery.

  • In reply to Rock:

    Yeah it seems that is the new method. Wittenmyer called is "medicalball".

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Tom Loxas:

    I've been thinking about that. Theo is smart enough to never tell a soul his tricks (I'm looking at you, Billy Beane), but it wouldn't surprise me at all if they've done a statistical study of TJ guys and have found that under under certain circumstances, say 90% of them come out just as well as they were before the surgery. He's just going around grabbing those TJ guys, knowing that on average he'll be better off.

  • I'm good with signing Stewart, but we cannot assume that he will be healthy.

  • In reply to 44slug:

    He costs us nothing until the end of Spring Training. If he's not healthy or if we have something better.... we let him walk. This is the proverbial "free milk w/o having to buy the cow"....

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to HoosierDaddy:

    Also makes that "6 or 7 teams are interested" line look like an agent's bluster. No way you take this if there's a minor league deal with a reasonable chance to make the roster in front of you.

  • Per Buster Olney, the Tigers are targeting relievers "capable of closing". Time for the Cub FO to give them a call to see if they're interested in Marmol. Maybe expand the talks to include Barney.

  • Why should the Cubs call?.....don't want to look desperate .....make the Tigers think Theo is talking with other clubs about our players....we don't need the Tigers to see us beg.......there are 28 other teams to deal with besides the Tigers.

  • Past behavior predicts future behavior only when you have a large enough sample of past behavior, and only when circumstances do not change.

    We have ONE year of activity from this front office to guide us, and the circumstances are substantially different this year from last year. Both the major and minor league system has improved, and the number of core players has about tripled over that year.

    Much will depend upon how the Cubs do the first half of the year. If they do as badly as last year, it is almost certain that "flipping" will take place in July. But if they get off to a much better start (with a vastly improved bull pen and a decent rotation, all that is needed is a surprise resurgence from Stewart and a good year from Schierholtz or Brett Jackson), Hoyer may well be looking to extend Garza, Baker and/or Feldman rather that to flip them.

    And if it turns out that Stewart's hitting problems have indeed been due to the injured wrist, and it is really healed to the point that he has a good April-May-June-July, he will become one of the core players that the Cubs are seeking.

    I think there is a good chance that the Cubs will be near the 500 mark in July, and if so, flipping will be a minor part of their strategy.

  • Marmol and Barney for Porcello and Crobsy?

  • In reply to apalifer:

    Marmol, Barney, Soriano & Garza plus cash, in a July trade with the Tigers for their Top Six Prospects.

  • In reply to apalifer:

    or....we can tell the Tigers to "Kiss Off" and we are dealing our Vets to other A.L. Playoff teams for their Prospects.

  • Just an early look of which teams are early Contenders for 2013, and who are the Pretenders......

    World Series Ready.....Rays, Blue Jays, Tigers, Angels, Rangers, Giants, Reds, Nationals

    Need that one "Special" player to contend .....Yankees, Orioles, A's, Braves, Phillies, Cardinals, Dodgers

    Stuck in the middle of the Rat Race ......Red Sox, White Sox, Royals, Brewers, Pirates, Diamondbacks....

    Only around to keep their fan base frustrated for another season.....Indians, Mariners, Mets, Padres...

    Fighting for the 1st Pick in the 2014 Draft.....Cubs, Twins, Marlins, Astros, Rockies

  • I would hope by at least 2014 this team should begin to make a move for players they intend on keeping.

    >>am I the only one that thinks all these positional moves are made for players they intend on keeping ...we intend on giving Bret and Josh a good and fair shot to see if we can move forward with them, before we go and sign someone to halt their improvement like Bourn or Youkilis, by signing Schierholtz and Stewart we are assured that Jackson and Vitters will be up next year to get a look and see if there is improvement being made.
    Signing the rotation guy, are not really that, but we give plenty of guys starts and footage to show them what they need to work on and by signing who we have signed allows them time to develop in AAA

    I agree nothing has been splashy, but it doesn't need to be. We really don't want to give up anything right now because our future is so trivial we don't know if this guy or this guy is going to be a core guy and to trade them for another guy that may not pan out would be foolish

    It is a complete rebuild the only real expectation next year is for Boise, Kane County, and Daytona to be extremely competitive; meaning we have to develop young talent for this rebuild to move forward

  • In reply to waitingOn2015:

    Agree with some of that but what I meant was why do we have to necessarily flip guys like Baker or Feldman or even McCarthy if we got him?

  • Not sure it's worth an article but the Cubs signed Andrew Carpenter, RHP, former Phillies prospect. Kind of a mix and match, command type pitcher. Has invite to spring training. Can start or relieve.

    https://twitter.com/CSNMooney/status/277083357169467395

  • fb_avatar

    For all the people saying "oh, I wish the cubs could have added another Rizzo-like piece" there's some things to consider here.

    1. Teams aren't just going to give away core pieces unless they are getting(or expect to get) one back AND are already dealing from a position of strength. San Diego thought they were getting a potential #1 and already had their 1b of the future. The cubs were a good match for the them.

    2. Most teams have learned that keeping your young core pieces are the way to go. Prospects used to be easy to get in multiples for a decent major leaguer. Now not so much. Hell, Texas won't even trade its top prospect for Justin upton.....Justin friggin upton. That should tell you something.

    3. Trading for core pieces require good trade chips, whether that be a Garza-type or trading your own Young core piece from an area of depth for pieces that's your lacking. We are not in a position to do either. Our only chip that could possibly bring back core pieces is injured and trading "my best guy for your best guy" doesn't do anything. We don't have a surplus of close to major league ready talent at any position to trade from except maybe 2b without hindering our team.

    THAT'S why we won't see that Rizzo-deal you guys are hoping for and that's why everyone we get is a flip candidate. The cards simply don't match up for us. Maybe midseason, but not now. While we'd all like Olt think about what it'd take to get him....especially if they get Grienke. What could we possibly give Texas that would entice them but not set us back even more? Nothing. Were better off waiting for Baez, villanueva, etc and not giving up anything.

    Wow long comment.....this should be made into a guest post lol

  • In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    Well if you look at moving guys like Barney, Garza or even some of your prospects that would turn into another building block like an Olt that is the kind of move we are looking at. Im not saying I was expecting it.

  • In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    Great points Marcel.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    Mostly agree with this, but I'd temper it by saying that even the famous Rizzo deal was trading one prospect with damaged status for another. In fact, Cashner was probably looked at as the safer bet at the time of the trade.

    The trades people were talking about was something like Vitters and Amaya for Chisenhall -- damaged prospect and real prospect for close to ready damaged prospect. Clearly, it looks like those aren't happening (Cleveland non-tendering Hannahan wan the end of that dream), but it doesn't seem completely outside the realm of possibility.

  • fb_avatar

    On barney. I agree. We should trade him while he value is high and he's still cheap. Once he gets to ARB he instantly loses value because he's a defense only player in my eyes.

    He doesn't take walks, doesn't hit for power, no speed, Etc so he essentially has to hit over .300 to have any offensive value(Castro was the same a while back but with the power coming he does have to hit .320 anymore) and I doubt Barney will ever hit .300 for a season. We have nice depth at 2b all around the system. Strike the iron while its hot and get a nice package for him before he's sitting on your bench as a utility player a few years from now.

  • dead on Marcel. I hope the FO can find a team that wants Barney enough to give up a good piece the Cubs can use going forward. I dont want the Cubs to miss a sell high opportunity like they did with LaHair. If they would have traded him before the ASB I am sure they could have at least got one prospect with upside, instead He goes to Japan and the Cubs got not even a reach around.

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    what makes you think they didn't try to move LaHair? ...he just went to Japan, sounds like teams continue to pass on him

  • In reply to waitingOn2015:

    if they would have traded him say a month before the asg he was hitting .330 ish had an insane OPS some team would have given a young player , I think they were counting on him to not tank and get a REALLY good prospect at the deadline but by that time He started showing his inability to hit LH pitching . JMO .

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    well i guess something is better than nothing, but noone seemed to trust his average would continue

    I guess you can blame anyone for anything, but I take it as they give LaHair the chance to prove it wasn't a fluke and give a valuable piece back ...it didn't work, but it seems like a good risk

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    They did receive 950K from the Japanese team for LaHair. That helps towards signing other guys.

  • Plus when Watkins is given a chance Chicago will love him. Smart player with more upside than Barney and plays really hard.

  • By no means was I expecting a Rizzo type deal. Just was kind of hoping we can still add to the core soon, but it would probably have to wait until Garza proves he is healthy. I would consider signing McCarthy a move that would add onto core.

  • In reply to Tom Loxas:

    Great article Tom. Really taps into the vibe of all of us. I think the reason that flipping players is appealing is that it is one of the only ways left to stockpile talent. Trades must give up as much as give, and our system isn't mature enough yet to know who's expendable. Drafts help, but everyone drafts. So one way for a bad team to get ahead is sign and flip. It robs from today to pay tomorrow, but that's the plan.

    Doesn't mean we have to like it, though.

  • In reply to drben:

    Yeah good points. I get the flipping thing on certain guys but Id also like to add to the core please.

  • The guy the Cubs are going to move, and it could be sooner than later, is going to be DeJesus. He brings real value to a team. Still a good hitter, 2.0 WAR player. Great contract, 2 years at a little over 10 mil. Look at what Pagan, and Flyin Hawaiin just got. Big bucks. Wait till you see what Luckwick and Swisher are going to get. DeJesus is a steal at his salary.They will flip him for young pitching.
    The signing of Scheirholtz was a start to this. They have the money to go out and get another middle kind of OF. Just can't see DeJesus as the CF, not with Jackson there. If any team should be giving their first round draft picks a chance, it is the Cubs.

  • I'm all for moving him even now. I think you get something for him and then sign Nyjer Morgan to hold down the fort until BJax is ready.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Tom Loxas:

    I think you have a baseball crush on Morgan, Tom :)

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Tom Loxas:

    I'm behind this plan.

    I could see not wanting to introduce Morgan into the locker room, though. In which case, say hello to your starting center fielder: Brian Bogusevic. (Almost certainly misspelled.)

Leave a comment