Side effects should Tanaka stay put

Side effects should Tanaka stay put


It's looking unlikely that Masahiro Tanaka will be posted this year which has a few ripple effects for the Cubs and their offseason plans. One example of this might be this: Mark Gonzales is reporting that the Cubs are going after Jonathan Sanchez.

There's a specific line in the Gonzales story that sticks out prominently:

The Cubs envision Sanchez as a reliever, according to a source.

A few other teams are interested in him as a starter but Sanchez has never gone over 200 innings as a starter and the closest he got was 193 IP in 2010.

Sanchez hasn't done a whole lot of relief work over his career. He's logged 722 innings as a starter and 64 innings as a reliever. Over the course of those innings he has almost identical rate statistics (his ERA is slightly lower, his K/9 is slightly higher, WHIP is about the same) but I don't think it's enough of a sample size to draw any large conclusions about how he will perform as a reliever.

So it's a little revealing that the Cubs are going after another lefty reliever perhaps in preparation of a James Russell trade. Sanchez does have very favorable LOOGY splits (.218/.313/.363 Opponents Slash vs. LHB) and he might thrive in that role.


Tanaka staying put in Japan might do wonders for Jeff Samardzija's trade market. The Seattle Mariners would make an interesting trade partner. David Price said that he wouldn't sign a long term extension if he were traded to Seattle which shuts down that avenue a bit. I think they would also be major players for Tanaka and if that gets shut down they'll be in the market for some starting pitching which is where the Cubs and Samardzija come in.

I think it's irresponsible to expect Taijuan Walker back in a trade with the Mariners but that's a system that has interesting young pitching.

Filed under: Pitching

Tags: Cubs, mlb, tanaka


Leave a comment
  • fb_avatar

    Even though Jack Zduriencik has said the Mariners will not trade Walker, many insiders have indicated that is not the case. Edwin Diaz and James Paxton could be had.

    There are interesting names throughout the system and young guys at the big league level though. Yes, Taijuan Walker is totally unrealistic. But that is a system deep in pitching.

  • Axford gone to Indians.

  • Going after Sanchez should be completely independent of what happens to Tanaka. He's been absolutely awful the past two years and doesn't deserve a guaranteed major league contract in my opinion.

  • Paxton, Ackley, plus something else solid-say Diaz-get it done ?

    Are we going to spend all of '14 speculating about the impending free agencies of Scherzer & Homer Bailey? This Tanaka madness is exhausting and he hasn't even been posted yet.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Carl9730:


  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    I really don't see the Mariners trading Zunino unless they get a catcher coming back. They have no depth at the position. The best FA options are John Buck, Kurt Suzuki and Miguel Olivo. It's possible that they'd go with one of those, but not likely considering they're making a push now.

    Samardzija and Castillo to Seattle could bring back Zunino plus pitching. How much do you believe in Zunino is the question. He had a great first pro year making it all the way to AA with great numbers. But last year he struggled at AAA and in the majors albeit at just 22 years old. What might work for Seattle is that he might take a year or two to starting hitting major league pitching while Castillo is above average for a catcher right now. If they're willing to part with prospects for a good major league pitcher in Samardzija, they might be willing to do the same at catcher...

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Quedub:

    Zunino's hit tool hasn't changed, he's obviously a 40 now, potential 60. He was brought up way, way, way too early and they moved him way too fast. Imagine what the Cubs could do with Zunino considering what they did with Castillo.

    The Cubs are also in a position where they can keep Zunino at AA or AAA, let's face it, the Cubs aren't winning anything this year . He is also a potential impact defender. You could pkg Samardzjia and Castillo for pitching and Zunino and I think it's a win.

    Personally I think Castillo is a sell high candidate. I know John and a lot of the comment gallery believe in him a lot more than I do. I could be wrong, but I would take Zunino over Castillo IF the Cubs were willing to let him further develop.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Quedub:

    They *really* pushed Zunino aggressively. I still have faith in the kid. Although that insane first year may wind up being an illusion. The issue I see is the Cubs have made it extremely clear they want pitching. I have a hard time seeing a catching prospect, no matter how exceptional he is, headlining a Samardzija deal.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    I agree. It is highly unlikely the Cubs would trade Samardzija for Zunino. My idea was Samardzija and Castillo for Zunino plus pitching prospects.

    My question is what would Seattle value more at this point given their win now attitude, Zunino or Castillo? Would they see Welington as an upgrade because of wanting to push for the playoffs now? Would they get better pitching prospects for Shark if they added a Castillo for Zunino swap? If so, I say do it.

    Shark, Welington and maybe some prospects to balance for Paxton, Pike, Victor Sanchez and Zunino. Is that realistic? Too much? Too little?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Quedub:

    Your question actually gives me some pause: the reason the Mariners are unwilling to deal Walker is because he is MLB ready and figures to be a cost controlled stud behind (or in front of) Felix Hernandez for years. But Zunino is also cost controlled and after 50 games in the pros, wouldn't he be considered MLB ready? I'm wondering if the Mariners have seen something that scares them off and wanting to capitalize on him now.

    Having said that, let's assume that isn't the case. We know the Cubs really liked Zunino in that draft. I have to think Diaz has to be part of any Samardzija package -- highest upside of non-Walker arms in the system -- so you have a package of Zunino, Paxton, Diaz for Samardzija. I actually think that's fair and realistic. So then the question becomes, is Sanchez and Pike a fair return for Castillo? I tend to think it's a little light. Perhaps Franklin for one of them?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Moody:

    Zunino, for all intents and purposes, is not "major league ready" - he was moved up far too quickly and promoted for the sake of drawing fan interest. How backward is that?

    I'd bet the Cubs would put him at AAA if they acquired him. A trade of Samardzjia and Castillo for Paxton, Diaz and Zunino would work for me. You might have to add slightly around the margins. Maybe. Not totally necessary though, just something you do if you can squeeze it out of them.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Carl9730:

    Not Ackley.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    Just out of curiosity , what is the aversion to Ackley?

    I think he might provide some healthy diversification to the group that's coming through the system(LH, OBP skills). Though not a defensive stalwart,he certainly provides flexibility there. Wouldn't look at him as a key piece but rather as a nice complementary piece.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Carl9730:

    Not an aversion, I just think right now there is a high premium on second basemen (the Yankees are REALLY looking at Barney?) and adding Ackley to the deal might inhibit a better return because of positional scarcity in the open market vs. demand.

    In a bubble I'd love Ackley. But teams are about to overpay to avoid trading for a guy like Brandon Phillips. I'd be happy to wait for some combination of whichever SS or 3B candidate the Cubs decide to move to second base or Alcantara rather than take on Ackley. But that's just me. Diesn't mean I am correct. Dustin Ackley is a fine player due for a breakout.

  • This is the first time I've heard Sanchez mentioned at all this winter. I'm sure it would be a minor league deal, and I would be fine with that. Work some magic, Bosio!

  • He's always had some good days, and some just plain terrible days. His problem is that he's just too danged wild and he beats himself a lot of the time.

    One of those guys who everybody always thought had good 'stuff'. Just maddeningly inconsistent.

  • For a guy threw a No-No @ the MLB level and recorded 200K's in 2010, Sanchez's star sure has faded the last 2 years... Still if he can be had on a MiLB contract with an Invite to ST, why not?

  • In reply to HoosierDaddy:

    He's a guy who occasionlly has amazing stuff,... but regularly his control and ability to get it near the plate just evaporate. He's also not been very durable - although that in part is because he has had high pitch counts because his control has been spotty.

    He might make an effective reliever though. Especially if they can get him on a make-good, MiLB contract to start out.

  • The article said that there were several other teams in on Sanchez. It's not clear how badly the Cubs want him. Far from a foregone conclusion that they get him. If they do, it could lead to the Cubs dealing Russell. Possibly a Barney & Russell deal to the Yanks?

  • In reply to Quedub:

    What return from Yanks ya think??

  • In reply to Hubbs16:

    Hard to say. I know there's been talk of an Alberto Cabrera type pitcher named Jose Ramirez coming back for Barney alone. Don't really know what the Yankees would give if the Cubs added Russell. Their best pitching prospect is Rafael De Paula. He'll be 23 in March and hasn't pitched above High-A yet, but much of that was due to producing verified identification documents and getting a visa. He's got the stuff but needs to work on his control walking 30 in 49 innings in High-A. The Yanks don't have great pitching prospects at the moment, but in exchange for Barney & Russell, he's pretty exciting.

  • In reply to Quedub:

    Any thoughts on where DePaula might land on our prospect list (top 20 etc.)?

  • Mauricio, outside of Paxton (25) who I like but don't love, the rest of the arms in their system are so far away. Tyler Pike (20 next month will start in A+), Luis Gohara (17 will start in A-), Edwin Diaz (20 by opening day will start in A-) and Victor Sanchez (19 next month will start in A+) are all young and promising.

    If the Mariners are not willing to part with Paxton (GMs say a whole bunch of whatever but there was one quote of JZ's saying he would not trade Paxton), would it make sense to deal for pitchers that are 3+ years away?

  • In reply to Quedub:

    I don't think so, but I do think Paxton would be in play a long with a few guys like Gohara and Diaz. I wouldn't do it for all lotto tickets

  • In reply to Mauricio Rubio Jr.:

    Neither would I. So it all depends how highly they value Paxton in win now mode and whether the Cubs brass likes him enough to do it...

  • In reply to Quedub:

    Yeah exactly.

  • The Nationals were also supposedly looking for LH pitching. I'd love to get Span from them. Russell for Span is probably not enough but it is a start.

  • In reply to beckdawg:

    The Nats just traded for Jerry Blevins. Not sure they're still in the market for a lefty reliever. Maybe.

  • fb_avatar

    Mariners are interesting because, other than Walker who is not coming, they really don't have an Aaron Sancez-caliber pitching prospect. I'm not sure there's a match there.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    I know. That's my concern, too. But there is value there. If the Mariners will deal Paxton and 1 or 2 of there younger arms, that might be as close to what the Cubs want as they can get assuming the Blue Jays hold firm on not dealing Sanchez or Stroman.

    Paxton & Pike for Samardzija?
    Paxton, Diaz & Sanchez for Samardzija?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Quedub:

    Diaz is interesting, but so raw I have a hard time seeing it. Paxton is a middle of the order guy and we know the Cubs are shooting higher than that. Moreover, they seem more than willing to just sit back and wait for someone to meet their price, even if that's in the middle of Summer. Perhaps Garza and Tanaka have to be settled before another team gets desperate enough. (Read: the Toronto Blue Jays.)

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    I look at it like this. If you can't get the Sanchez type TOR guy from anybody, plan B is get the Paxton MOR guy with upside TOR guys that are younger and further away.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Quedub:

    Right, but will they go to plan B before the deadline? Their actions to this point and with Garza make me suspect the answer is no.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    True. In this case I think it depends on how highly the value Paxton and Zunino.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Same. And if we're going to make the deal for a lot of lottery tickets/back of the rotation guys, it better be for a butt load of them. I'm talking like 5 or 6.

  • I really do think the Cubs would have gotten Tanaka. But as soon as I saw the $20M posting limit, I saw no hope that he would be made available. Too bad. He fits the plan and he would have created some buzz for the meatball crowd. Oh well.

    I do think there were several teams waiting to see the outcome of the Tanaka situation before deciding whether they needed to give up top prospects to get a starter. So if Samardzija is going to be traded this offseason I think it would happen relatively quickly after the Tanaka decision is finalized.

    I can live with the idea of Sanchez as a reliever. He is kind of a poor man's Oliver Perez. And I am all for trading Russell. He was decent against righties a couple of seasons ago, but he is just a LOOGY at this point. And if Boone Logan can get 15M, then some team might be willing to give a mid level prospect for Russell.

  • fb_avatar

    If the Cubs are really looking at Sanchez as a reliever, their inclination to sign him shouldn't have anything to do with the Tanaka situation, should it?

  • Are the Yankees really interested in Barney?

  • In reply to emartinezjr:

    If reports are to be believed, they are at least contemplating it.

  • As much as I think the Cubs would benefit from Tanaka not being posted till next year, I don't see The Golden Eagles keeping him from coming if he wants to, which he does. There is some whispers about other Japanese club pitching in $$$ to get the Eagles to post him. My bet is that it happens.

  • When can we expect to know if Tanaka will be posted or not? Is it any minute?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Holy Cattle:

    His team is leaving it up to him.

  • In reply to Ray:

    Tanaka wants to go but his team will be making the decision. They are still weighing whether it's better to post him at this lower $20m number or keep him a year (or two) and accrue better sponsorship money, ticket sales, etc. coming off a local championship.

    Expect news within 24 hours.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to TokyoCraig:

    Rakuten's team President told reporters that he would likely post Tanaka if he wished to come to MLB.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ray:

    you know he said this before the winter meetings, right?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to SKMD:

    Yes, I do.

  • In reply to Ray:

    Ray, do you have a link to this? All I found is this:

    "Masahiro Tanaka wants to play in the United States. To do that, his team, the Rakuten Golden Eagles, have to agree to post him. Under the new posting rules agreed to by MLB and NPB, Rakuten stands to get $20 million, which is way less than posting teams used to get. And they’d lose their best player and top draw in the deal.

    In light of that, this is not terribly surprising:
    Sponichi is saying that Rakuten is going to try to get Tanaka to hang around for 1 more year.
    — Patrick Newman (@npbtracker) December 16, 2013
    The nuance to all of this, of course, is that Tanaka has asked to be posted and that, while Rakuten is not under any obligation to honor is wishes, NPB teams try to honor such wishes when possible for general goodwill purposes. They’d love to have agreement with Tanaka if they can. But they’d also like to keep his services given that losing him will get them only $20 million."

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Break The Curse:

    The article is at MLBTR.

  • Maybe the Cubs see Sanchez as a Liriano candidate and are blowing smoke that they want him for the BP to keep his price down.

  • That would only keep the price down if all the other teams also saw him as a BP pitcher.

  • Re: Zunino. I think Castillo is more than adequate on defense and he is adequate on offense. I look for both to improve in 2014. Three or four of the farm hands have just been converted to catcher. Can some of the gurus comment.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to jdale:

    Interesting question. I have heard that the Cubs were very high on Zunino in 2014. May even have taken him over Almora if he'd been available.

    Zunino's calling card has always been his leadership and ability to call a game and handle a pitching staff, areas Castillo is still developing. Castillo has a stronger arm. Zunino is probably a better defender, but I don't think the gulf is as wide as you'd suspect.

    The question on Zunino coming into the draft was how much he was going to hit. He seemed to put that to rest by tearing through rookie league and showing no signs of slowing down after the double jump to AA his first season. But then some of the fears caught up with him last year -- AAA pitchers really managed to exploit him. It would not surprise me for Castillo to be the better offensive catcher.

  • In reply to jdale:

    I've found the whole "Replace Castillo" thing to be puzzling. I'm for making upgrades when you can I'm just wondering what they think Castillo is because he looks like a good player.

  • I don't know if other teams do the same things, but for years, even before the new FO, the Cubs have been taken selected prospects (not top prospects) and converted them to catcher. They did it years ago with Branden Harris, and more successfully with Steve Clevenger. Obviously, most fail, but all it takes to succeed is to get lucky with one of them. Bruno, for instance, is way down on their prospect chart because he doesn't have the power you would like at third, and doesn't have the footwork you would like at second or short. But his hitting tool is interesting enough that if he can make it at catcher, he could become quite valuable. Very long shots, but with a possible substantial return.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to DaveP:

    The Harris experiment must have been done in winterball or something, because he appeared in just one game behind the dish in his entire career. That was in the minors in 2006 and he had zero chances that day, so I'm assuming it was a one inning stint in an emergency situation or extra inning game.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Partipilo:

    And Harris, of course, was no longer with the Cubs in 2006.

  • In reply to Mike Partipilo:

    The experiment didn't last long because Harris told them he didn't like catching. Probably, one or two of those converted this year will go back to their original position without playing in organized leagues.

  • In reply to DaveP:

    The Cubs did try with Bruno last year and Amaya this year. In fact, the Cubs two best catchers in recent history: Geovany Soto and Wellington Castillo were both converted 3Bs.

    It seems that the guy who took best to the position is Ben Carhart, though he's not as good a prospect as Amaya or Bruno.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    I am most intrigued by Mark Malave being moved (back, I believe) to catcher. Though he is at least 3 years (and likely more) from the majors even if he does ever make it.

  • In reply to springs:

    Malave may have the most potential in that group that converted but he is the furthest away from achieving it. He seems to have a knack for hitting and a good arm. He's athletic enough to have played all over the infield last year. He has some raw power, but some question whether he will be able to tap into it much during games as he relies a bit on his natural strength too much. A lot of tools to work with and definitely worth keeping an eye on.

  • The Phillies are aggressively shopping Jimmy Rollins. What do you Denizens think about trading for him and putting him at 3B? He's got one year and $11 million remaining and no option to deal with after 2014. He had a terrible year last year but I still see him as a league average ballplayer who should play passable defense moving to an easier position and could rebound enough to merit something useful in July in a trade with a contender. I'd wager the Phillies would take a non-prospect in order to get out from under that contract. Do it?

  • In reply to Eddie:

    As a FA signing, maybe, 11 mm ain't cheesecake; still nothing to lose but $$ and maybe we get back something in July. However to trade for him giving up some value on the gamble he starts out hot, I'm not big on that idea.

  • In reply to Oneear:

    Yeah I wouldn't trade anything better than a mediocre RP prospect for him.

  • In reply to Eddie:

    I look at this a little like the Uribe situation It'd be nice to get a steady veteran presence but I don't know if he'll produce much more than what the Cubs already have. Even though he had an off year in 2013, he's been an average or worse offensive player the last 4 years. Had nice WAR in '11 and '12 but I think that much of that value came from his ability to play good defense at a premium position. Move him to 3B and he loses some of that value.

    I'm not sure he'll provide more value at 3B than a Valbuena/Murphy or Roberts platoon at this stage, or even a decent showing by Mike Olt. At least I don't think there's enough differential to warrant spending $11M.

    I think I'd have to put a lot of faith in his ability to be a sort of coach on the field, particularly for Starlin Castro. Wouldn't be bad to have a vet like Rollins next to him. Is it worth the money if there isn't a big difference in offense or defensive value at 3B?

    The other factor is that he can still play a good SS and he could be more useful to a contending team with a need there.

  • Nick Franklin.

  • As far as Tanaka not being available, I would have to think that increases the urgency a bit to deal for Price or Samardzija. The price on Price is astronomical from what I hear and it's still high on Samardzija. The Rays aren't known for relenting too much on their demands, so it's possible Samardzija, even with his high price, could end up being the best bargain on the market.

    And then there's next year's situation where Tanaka will still be in prime and perhaps some of the biggest suitors will have already filled that need. A lot of the other players for Tanaka are win now teams. Maybe they can't wait to fill that need and spend the money elsewhere.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    And if not we just trade him to the Rangers at the deadline. It's a fun tradition. Pretty soon the RoughRiders clubhouse will have a sign that reads: "Next stop, Iowa."

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    there will always be a strong market for a 25-26 yr old pitcher not attached to draft pick compensation or a trade of young talent.

  • In reply to SKMD:

    Yes, but timing can still be a factor to some degree. If it were last year for example, I don't think the Cubs would have had a shot at Tanaka with LAD having a hole in their rotation last year. They were willing to overbid on a lesser pitcher in Ryu to fill it, can't imagine last year they wouldn't have done the same with Tanaka had he been available.

    Also the Cubs themselves could use the extra time to make themselves a more attractive option. I don't think it hurts their chances if he posts next year.

  • fb_avatar

    Anyone else think the Diamondbacks were trying to use Skaggs and Davidson to land Samardzija? If yes, what would you have thought of such a deal? Discuss.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    I imagine those two and maybe Eaton were part of the equation. Makes sense they would deal from surplus. Both of those players (Skaggs, Davidson) scare me a little bit. Would not have been happy with that deal. Too much risk and I don't think the ceiling is high enough on either one to warrant it.

    I think what the Diamondbacks have done, in effect, is break up the package they were willing to offer for one SP like Samardzija and sold them separately for what has instead turned into Mark Trumbo and Addison Reed.

    I think they now sign Matt Garza to fill that SP need.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    I do think it's telling that they were one of the first teams reported out on Samardzija. I don't think it would have been too tough to beat that offer. Can't imagine what talks went like, though.

    Towers: "How about Davidson?"
    Theo: "Yuck. No, Bradley."
    Towers: "Eaton? He's scrappy!"
    Theo: "We have a scrap heap full of scrappy. We want Bradley."
    Towers: "Skaggs? He's a lefty."
    Theo: "Did you find those two missing miles per hour? No? Then Bradley, please."
    Towers: "I think I'm going to trade for Adam Dunn without the average. Or the walks. Thanks for your time."

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Towers may be old school but he's no dummy when it comes to the scouting end. I'm willing to bet that they didn't like Trevor Bauer and Matt Davidson nearly as much internally as people outside the organization seem to like them. Addison Reed is a nice asset because he's a cheap, cost-controlled closer who should give them a few more years on a cheap closer, which allows them to spend elsewhere (i.e. Garza). If you look at the big picture here, I don't think he has done as horribly as people are saying. I'm not a Trumbo fan but he'll give them Soriano like production at a cheaper cost in LF. Reed allows them to save money and it helps they got rid of Heath Bell's contract (or part of it anyway). They've clearly moved on. They are not going to trade for Samardzija. If they don't sign a FA SP (most likely Garza) before the holidays, I'll be a little surprised.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    I like the idea for the White Sox -- moving extraneous pieces like a closer to get major league starters. I just don't like the execution. I'm not a fan of Davidson. I don't think he'll be a major league player. 17 HR from a sub-marginal defensive third baseman isn't going to get it done. Right idea, wrong player.

    On pitching, I'd guess they largely have a deal with Garza in place that is finalized if Tanaka isn't on the market.

    Where this gets interesting is if Tanaka is out and an 11th hour team grabs Garza from them. Still fairly sure they wouldn't do Bradley for Samardzija but they might revisit Price. Or just start the season with Bradley in the rotation a la Jose Fernandez.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    I agree with the idea as well. In theory it's a good deal for the White Sox when you consider cost control, position value, and the sheer number of games Davidson will play compared to Reed. But if Davidson turns out to be an average starter, then it's just an OK deal for them.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    This is interesting:
    Bob Nightengale ‏@BNightengale 52s
    Several #MLB executives say they wouldn't be surprised to see Dbacks spin off Addison Reed in future trade for top tier starter.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    I like this deal for both teams.

    The D-backs have a 3B surplus and the White Sox are bare at the position.

    I like Davidson just a little bit more than most here, but either way its an upgrade for the Sox.

    Reed was a luxury for the Sox and a little overrated at that. The D-backs are good enough to not waste him.

  • fb_avatar

    Regarding the subject and the source, referring to Mark Gonzales as a journalist is a lot like calling a Whopper flopper at BK a chef.

  • fb_avatar

    White six trade Addison reed for Matt Davidson. I wonder if they would have taken Olt. Or if that would work for us.

  • In reply to SKMD:

    White Sox gave up a bit much IMO but seem too be banking on Davidson's MiLB numbers too play well at the Cell.That remains to be seen. I've got to wonder if we could have traded Christian Villanueva + for Addison Reed ?

  • In reply to SKMD:

    Villanueva + another prospect added for Reed would have been acceptable at least too me.

  • fb_avatar

    The boys at baseball reference celebrate the holidays with style:

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    5.1 WAR! Who's his agaent? Ozzie Guillen?

  • Since 2014 is being written off, I would much rather the Cubs let their young farm hands get year's worth of big league experience and then make whatever adjustments needed.

  • In reply to GoCubs:


    What is the point in putting Barney at 2nd base if we arent planning to compete even for a WC spot? There isn't.
    1.Give Watkins a shot to play everyday at 2B until Alcantara/Baez are ready
    2. Let Olt play full time at 3B. With Villanueva and Bryant (and Baez) on their way it's best to see what you have in Olt. Don;t know that another AAA year is really needed.
    3. Let Junior Lake and Sweeney play full time and fill your 3rd OF position with Scierholtz until Jackson and/or Vitters out together some remotely resembling competent hitting.
    4. Give Kyle Hendricks a shot to compete for 5th starter out of Spring Training.

    If Theo Co. don't think the Cubs should spend for 3 years of a Beltran and/or Granderson type FA then there is no reason to run 4A players out onto the field every day rather than give potential prospects a shot who might surprise as starters or develop as bench guys.

  • Tanaka will be posted.

  • In reply to Eddie:

    Time to sack up and get him, Cubs.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Eddie:

    Not a surprise.

  • fb_avatar

    Mariners are pretty interesting. Add Julio Morban to a package of pitchers, and I'm interested, although I'd want Hultzen and Paxton along with 2-3 lotto tickets.

  • Here's the latest on Tanaka

    スポニチアネックス 12月16日(月)8時0分配信



    メジャー移籍1年延期も 楽天、残留案を打診へ

     日本野球機構(NPB)と大リーグ機構(MLB)で基本合意している、ポスティング・システム(入札制度)に代わる新移籍制度では、球団が手にする入札金は2000万ドル(約20億6000万円)が上限。 旧制度のポスティング・システムでは上限はなく、田中の入

  • In reply to Oneear:

    Thanks. It all makes sense now.

  • In reply to Oneear:

    Do we have a translator in the house?

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    I'm a translator... unfortunately it's Russian-English / English - Russian so I'm no help here, lol.

  • Buster Olney ‏@Buster_ESPN 4s
    Lots of speculation among executives that the Cubs are poised to try to strike big on Tanaka. We'll see.

    Feel the optimism!


    That's a translated page from a Japanese sports ticker. I can't tease out the meaning even in English (the translation is pretty rough), but I have a friend who reads fluent Japanese, and says it reads roughly as follows:

    "It says the owner originally thought that he didn't want to let Tanaka go, but he also felt that it's not right to make young promising players sacrifice their dreams. He also mentioned that it might not be the best for both Tanaka and the team to have him stay when his motivation will be understandably really low."

  • In reply to Eddie:

    I know, I think I may have misunderstood the Wada piece earlier, so I'm making sure this time. Makes me wish I spoke Japanese.

  • You must have been TDY,when you posted this. TDY? Too drunk in Yokohama in case anybody wonders.

  • Woohoo! Tanaka's coming to the MLB. Now let's go get him Cubs.

    Buster Olney ‏@Buster_ESPN
    Lots of speculation among executives that the Cubs are poised to try to strike big on Tanaka. We'll see.

  • Cubs should go all in on tanaka. We have seen what Darvish and other imports have done in MLB. Best part is all that it will cost them is money. No prospects needed. Nobody off the major league roster. A Tanaka signing would be a big part of the rebuild. To me you do what it takes to get this one done. I think the front office or the fan base can't accept finishing second on this one. I have been all in on the rebuild but now it's time to pounce on this piece to the puzzle. This offseason has been very slow. I for one am a little tired of the lack of progress on the business side of the wrigley expansion. To many hands in the cookie jar. I know this post shouldn't involve that side but it severely limits the baseball operations and the product on the field. We keep hearing the cubs need more revenue streams. It's to bad that a billionaire that wants to spend his own money to improve his product can't. Meanwhile we all suffer. Go all in on Takaka!

  • Tanaka negotiations will be interesting.

Leave a comment