Rick Porcello a possible fit for the Cubs?

Last year I heard from a source that Rick Porcello was a name to watch in the Matt Garza trade rumors with Detroit.   I mentioned it again recently in the 11/4 rumor thread.  Today, George Ofman mentioned it again on Twitter.

Ofman says he was “told there there was a little smoke here” in regards to the Cubs interest in Porcello.

In many ways, Porcello fits the profile of what the Cubs are looking for.  He’s just 23, he throws strikes (2.25 walks per 9 innings), he keeps the ball on the ground (53.2% GB rate), and he keeps the ball in the park.

On the downside, he doesn’t miss a whole lot of bats.  Last year he struck out 5.46 batters per 9 innings — and that was a career high.  He also gave up a whopping 226 hits in just 176.1 innings.  Part of that can be attributed to a .344 BABIP which in turn can be partially attributed to playing with a poor infield defense behind him.

Porcello does have good stuff, however.  He’s 91-94 mph on his four seam fastball but relies more heavily on his two seamer, which is 90-92 mph but has good downward movement.  He also throws a slider and a change.  The pitch he really struggled with last year was the slider.  It’s possible it may benefit from some tweaking, or perhaps he may be better off junking it and going with a cut fastball instead.  We’ll leave that up to Chris Bosio and the Cubs brain trust should the team acquire him.

The end result was that Porcello finished with a 10-12 record and a 4.59 last season, but his xFIP was a more respectable 3.89.  It’s reasonable to assume he can do better with a superior IF defense behind him.  The Cubs started 3 above average defenders last year in Luis Valbuena,  Darwin Barney, and Anthony Rizzo.  Starlin Castro also played above average after a bad start to the season.

If the Tigers re-sign Anibal Sanchez, Porcello is a 5th starter for the Tigers and a poor fit for the way that team is constructed.  Moreover, he is going to arbitration and projects to make $4.2M next season.  It isn’t a lot but considering he’s their 5th man, they may want to replace him with a cheaper option.  They could use that saved money toward re-signing Sanchez.

As for what the Cubs could possibly offer the AL champs, it’s really difficult to say.  They showed a lot of interest in Darwin Barney last year but have since picked up Omar Infante.  They could save an extra $3.5M, however, by replacing Infante with Barney.  The Tigers also lack a closer after deciding to part ways with Jose Valverde and the Cubs have been dangling Carlos Marmol this offseason, though I don’t know if he’s the type of closer that would interest the Tigers right now.

All of this is speculation, of course, but there seems to be a fit here for both teams.


Filed under: Uncategorized


Leave a comment
  • fb_avatar

    John, that settles it Marmol for Porcello...Done deal...LOL

  • In reply to Luigi Ziccarelli:

    Haha! Let's hope the Tigers agree!

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    my classmate's mother-in-law brought in $18280 the prior week. she has been making cash on the computer and moved in a $360100 home. All she did was get lucky and try the information explained on this site ()

  • fb_avatar

    What is intriguing about him is that his BB/9 has stayed roughly constant while his K/9 has gone up each of the last two seasons.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    It has gone up, though it's still pretty low. Seems like he should get more. Perhaps Bosio can work the same kind of magic he did with Alberto Cabrera, who's K rate doubled after some work changing his grip. Of course, some of that had to do with moving to the bullpen, but there was no doubt he had better velocity and movement after working with Bosio.

  • At this point in time I'd much rather acquire talent on the free agent market than via trade. No need to sacrifice any possible future assets. MaCarthy, Marcum, Braden, and Villanueva are my hopefuls right now, though the Scott Baker signing was probably too expensive to go for another high end guy in MaCarthy or Marcum.

  • In reply to elusivekarp:

    Braden just had his second surgery. He's done, maybe even for his career. I don't know if I'd call either McCarthy or Marcum high end guys. Mid rotation types to me. I do like the way McCarthy throws strikes but also throws a lot of flyballs while playing in a big park. Also doesn't throw a lot of innings.

    Porcello could be a long term fit and Tigers likely looking for short term assets, not future ones. Has better raw stuff than those FAs too. Still has potential to get better too.

  • In reply to elusivekarp:

    Don't get me wrong. Would be happy if we got either of those two guys but they're stopgaps. Would be nice to get a piece that could be here for the long haul.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    We should go after Sanchez, who would be here at the target date.

  • In reply to SFToby:

    They can go after him but he'll be pricey, especially since it will probably take a lot more to get him here than a contender.

    I have reservations about going after these kinds of guys that probably have limited interest because you have to manage your time. If you want a guy like Sanchez, you have to be in on him early and often, and that time spent would probably come at the expense of a player who is more likely to want to come to Chicago.

    Part of signing these guys is about building relationships. You can spend all your time early going after Sanchez and when he signs somewhere else, you have to turn to someone else. By that time its probably too late. Other teams have made significant progress toward signing him.

    I think the Cubs have to be realistic about where they want to spend their time and resources. I'm not convinced it's realistic they can land Sanchez at this point.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Building relationships like signing someone who wants to play here and then flipping them off a few months later? I think we may have to overpay like the Nats did with Jayson Weurth.

  • Scary how much Baseball Reference and Fan Graphs differs on WAR with this guy. Not crazy about this unless we could get him much cheaper than Barney. Seems a lot like Volstad - with his .300+ BABIP year in year out seems less like luck and more that they're squaring the ball up well off him.

  • In reply to Carne Harris:

    I agree it isn't all bad luck. Good stuff, though, and maybe it needs some tweaking. Don't know how he is personally, hopefully more receptive to coaching than Volstad was.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Carne Harris:

    Living in Mich and watching a lot of tigers baseball for the last 30 years. I can tell you this guy is nothing like volstad, he would've a steal for Barney... He has four years in the league at 23 years old and yes it is mostly bad luck and a very very bad defense behind him. This could be a great upgrade for both teams.... You must have a good infield however, so we must be sure Watkins or whoever takes over at second is capable...

  • Porcello has good enough stuff to have swing and miss stuff, but has settled for pitch to contact. He is also still young and learning to pitch, which is perfect for the Cubs.

  • In reply to WickitCub:

    Agreed. Still has some learning to do. May need to change his overall approach on the mound.

  • fb_avatar

    Where do you see him fitting into a big league rotation?

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    I think he can be a 3 with a bit of workhorse in him. If they can get hi without giving up future pieces, I think it's a nice pickup considering his age.

  • fb_avatar

    Totally agree..You ca't have too many workhorses....Gotta save the pen

  • I mean I totally get the logic. Acquire a young cost controlled arm, while giving up nothing that doesn't really fit in with the rebuild. That way if it doesn't work out you lose nothing, meanwhile if it does work out you gain a future SP, I totally get it. He's a young guy with some cost control, numbers inflated with a bad defense, high babip, good control, great gb%, below lg avg hr/fb% + 1.00 hr/9, fb velo 92.3, good peripherals (fip lower than era, etc). I mean what's not to like.

    Then there it is 5.46 K/9 9.8KS% (K's Swinging). Huh? I mean just looking at his stuff, his height, there's no reason he shouldn't be up higher than that. I get that he's young and you can try and get him to change his approach and try and make him more of pitcher than a thrower, but wasn't that the same thing with Volstad? Both tall young guys with good stuff and good peripherals? I mean every time Volstad went up to pitch it seemed like he was already defeated. I haven't seen him pitch much so I don't know for sure but seems like the same guy here. Not much of a bulldog mentality, pitches more to contact, probably doesn't have much faith in his stuff. I mean something just screams Volstad too me.

    I get the sentiment though, gotta take some risks, gotta get creative. You win some you lose some, etc. If we can get him for Marmol (plus cash considerations) or something that doesn't really fit in with the future, then by all means. Although if it's gonna cost Barney I think I'd much rather try and package Barney for Casey Kelly.

  • In reply to Furiousjeff:

    His inability to miss bats is a head-scratcher and I understand the concerns after the Volstad experience.

    Hard to judge someone's mentality from a stat sheet, but If anything, throwing strikes and not being afraid of contact speaks to a tougher mentality, it's what the Cubs like about Nick Struck. When I think of a pitcher who's afraid and doesn't trust his stuff, I think of a guy who nibbles on the corners and walks more people than he should.

  • fb_avatar

    Given all the comparisons to Volstad, maybe the Cubs should consider signing Carlos Zambrano and then trading him for Porcello! (In all seriousness, I wonder if Zambrano's major league career is over. I gotta admit the thought of it bums me out a little.)

  • In reply to João Lucas:

    Wanted to see him do better too but the stuff just wasn't the same anymore. Had a great fastball/slider combo when he first came up.

  • Porcello was rushed to the big leagues. He had good enough stuff and makeup to move up quick and survive, but his H and K rates haven't been pretty, as is usual when guys are in over their heads.

    A lot of times, guys like this, once they adjust to the league (which can take a few years), increase their K rates, lower their H rates and really come into their own later on. It doesn't always happen, but Porcello has a much better chance of that than Volstad did.

    I like the idea of getting Porcello, and I think he could surprise some people down the road.

    If Detroit had been smart, they would have given him a couple more years in the minors to hone his craft and he'd probably be a better pitcher.

  • In reply to SVAZCUB:

    Agree that he was rushed. Everyone was surprised when he made the team out of spring training a few years ago. Tigers were desperate for pitching and they're usually more of a win now team that doesn't really develop a whole lot of players.

  • fb_avatar

    Speaking of acquiring pitchers for the long term, John, how do you feel about the possibility that the Cubs decide to step up and try to sign Anibal Sanchez to a five or six-year contract like he's said to be asking? I realize this is not the way this front office is doing things right now, but I believe Sanchez is young enough (and good enough) for us to at least think about it. After all, players are not available only when it's most convenient to the team...
    Also, this would be pretty much equivalent to extending Garza, with the big advantage that we'd be "extending Garza" (that is, signing Sanchez) while also flipping Garza for prospects next season.

  • In reply to João Lucas:

    I like Sanchez a lot. My concern is that he's no longer a good value at his reported asking price, somethiing the Cubs should be looking for at this stage. I also think the timing is just a bit off for that kind of deal. He's young but if you sign him for 6 yrs/90M like he's asking, the problem is that you get his best two years while the team is still likely rebuilding. Then you have a big 4 yr/60M deal for a 31 year old. Not bad, but you could probably get a similar deal for a similar or better pitcher at that point once the team is good. You could probably also sign Garza for less than that right now.

    It's possible Sanchez doesn't get what he's asking for and if the Cubs could get him at good value, I'd be all for it, but not sure why he'd take less to come to the Cubs right now.

  • fb_avatar

    And John, I'd like to make my first complaint about your work here. How could you not have written a post concerning the big news of the day? BRAZIL BEAT PANAMA IN THE WORLD BASEBALL CLASSIC! (Poor Carlos Lee...)

  • In reply to João Lucas:

    Haha! Brasil!! Usually I have to wait for the World Cup to get excited :) They are developing more and more ballplayers these days.

  • Porcello would be a perfect fir for the Cubs. If they can take Marmol , Vitters or another good prospect, so be it.

  • In reply to Steve Flores:

    Not sure if Marmol's a fit for the Tigers but it's fairly certain that Vitters isn't. The Tigers already have Nick Castellanos in the minors at 3B and he's a potential stud.

  • In reply to Boogens:

    That is a thought I had too. After the Valverde experience, I don't know if they'd be too keen on taking the Marmol coaster.

  • In reply to Steve Flores:

    I'm not sure what they think of Marmol but I would think he'd have to be part of the deal since that seems to be the Tigers biggest need. If they don't like him, this whole idea is moot, I guess :)

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Your probably right John, but don't think the Tigers will ask for too much. It doesn't hurt to ask if they will take Marmol off their hands though.

  • In reply to Steve Flores:

    They should definitely gauge interest and see whether they think Marmol is a fit for them.

  • John,
    Lets expand the trade:
    Porcello. Infante, Castenello, 5m cash, for Marmol, Barney, Vitters, Coleman, and Lake only if needed to close the deal.

  • In reply to Rock:

    that trade will probably never happen my good man. First of all the tigers will never trade castenello right now. The only good thing the tigers would get in return is a good 2nd basemen average closer and 2 prospects that will be utility men while the cubs would get a average 2nd basemen , a pitcher that can be number #3 and a top 10 prospect that could play OF or 3B. So in conclusion the tigers would have to be high (or jim hendry telling them what to do) to get this trade done

  • In reply to kingpro98:

    I understand where you are coming from but let me explain a different view, lets be honest, Costenello, Lake, and Vitters are all prospects (suspects) who each have high ceilings but have proven nothing in the majors, could be the next Mke Schmidt or the next Steve Ontiverois. Coleman is a good AAA pitcher with good pitches but has been given enough chances with the Cubs and has proven nothing and needs another organization, also 40 man relief for the Cubs.
    So, now we are talking a very young gold glove 2nd baseman that the Tigers desperatly need for thier infield and a closer with one of if not the best slider/closer in the league when he is on, and average/frustrating when he is not. Cubs get a very young #5 starter with the possibility of being a #4 or#3 and a journyman 2nd baseman.
    Tigers who have a very elderly owner are playing for today and can fill two glaring holes and a few future chips, where the Cubs are playing for 2020.
    I respectfully understand your stand but might be more of a fair trade than you give credit for.

  • In reply to Rock:

    I think that deal is a huge win for the Cubs.

  • In reply to Rock:

    marmol, barney, vitters, coleman and lake wont even get u castellanos. let alone the other 2 guys with him. the tigers have hung on to castellanos very closely, and will not trade him unless they get (in their minds) an all star talent, such as a number 1 or upper tier number 2 starter or a middle of the order bat. its that simple. this trade makes complete sense for the cubs and very little for the tigers.

    most likely theyd insist on one of the big three (baez, soler, almora) and probably barney, thats how high they are on this kid.

  • I'd like to get a higher ceiling arm if/when Garza is traded. Porcello is fine, but he's just a mid to back end starter. Those guys are available in free agency every year, and it only costs cash to add them. Porcello would come at the price of your best pitcher and most valuable trade chip. It's not the worst idea I've ever heard, but the front office should aim higher.

  • In reply to Eddie:

    I wouldn't use Garza as bait to get Porcello at this point. That'd be selling low, in my opinion. Garza was part of the equation when we talked about it last year, it was Garza for Turner and Porcello in the package. Of course since then, two of the pitchers have gotten hurt (Garza, Turner). Turner looks like he's not the same pitcher anymore and Garza is a question mark, though I think he's going to be fine..

  • John, I've been reading your site everyday for about a year and it's funny because I was thinking of this exact trade possibility just last night! I like Barney's D, but I've accepted his bat leaves a lot to be desired. I think before the season starts the Cubs and the Tigers will have worked out a trade, whether it include Marmol or Barney or both players. RP and defense were two of the Tigers main weaknesses last season.

  • In reply to auggie1955:

    Thanks for reading! And I agree on Barney. I think his defense makes him good enough to start, but he may be better off being on a team with a lot of offense where he can bat 8th or 9th. I expect the Cubs to keep trying to trade Marmol too and I think it happens. There's enough value there.

  • I say we trade Marmol for the best starting pitcher we can get. Marmol was throwing pretty good, but doesn't fit Cubs future. A couple good prospects that do not fit the Cubs as far as defense and hitting approach could be included.

  • In reply to 44slug:

    Would be great to get a SP for Marmol. When you're trying to build anytime you can add value by trading a reliever for a starter, you have to be thrilled.

  • When dealing with Tigers GM Dave Dombrowski, he is one of the top notch GM's in all of baseball of getting the most trade value for players.......

    Porcello will make around $4.7 million......he is staying with the Tigers.....

    F/A pitcher out there named Tim Stauffer.....worth a shot to sign.

  • Blue Jays seeking another starter........trade Garza now or later?

  • In reply to CubsTalk:

    If someone is willing to give surplus value, you trade him. If they're trying to buy low because of the injury, you wait.

  • I do see a few comments-here and elsewhere-about trading Garza now. He is not a favorite of mine and I would like to see him traded but I cannot think we can get much value for him until he can demonstrate he is healthy.

    If I had my preference the Cubs would see what they can sign in the FA area but be VERY cautious about including top prospects in any deal.

  • In reply to Hubbs16:

    I agree. I'm not sure the Cubs are at the point yet where they should trade top prospects for MLB ready players, even young cost controlled ones. The original Garza trade is a reference point for me on that. Not a bad trade for the Cubs, but the timing was bad.

  • in a perfect world this is what id picture happening with our rotation this winter:

    - samardzija slots in at the 1 spot
    - garza is traded to the blue jays for hutchinson and prospects
    - we sign marcum to be our number 2
    - baker will be our number 3
    - we include marmol in some sort of trade for porcello, to be our #4
    - wood slots in at the 5 spot

    at mid season marcum and baker are flipped for prospects and we bring up hutchinson and vizcaino for the rest of the year.

    between possible trades for marcum, baker and garza we could add an entire wave of pitching prospects. also hutchinson (or a pitcher of similar value) and vizcaino have a ton of upside.

    A 2014 rotation of samardzija, hutchinson, porcello, vizcaino, wood, would not only be cheap but also very competitive, if healthy of course.

  • In reply to jshmoran:

    if Garza goes to TOR it better net Sydergaard . i would trade Barney and Coleman to Det and call it a day for Porcello . get Roster spot open that way too.

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    Syndegaard is my favorite from that system. Sanchez best raw stuff, Nicolino with the great pitchability....Syndegaard best all-around.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Sydergaard is the closest to a sure thing in TOR system Pitching wise. Have to get Him for Garza , minimum. He is a solid 2 in any rotation if He reaches potential and He has been very good so far.

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    if theo and jed are all about impact talent, like they say they are, i have to believe that any conversation involving garza has to start with either sanchez or sydergaard, id much rather get hutchinson, one of those 2 and another prospect than 4 prospects that arent sanchez or syndergaard

  • In reply to jshmoran:

    Those are all sound ideas. Cubs will have to get busy :)

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    I'm sorry, I know this probably isn't the right article in which I should be posting this gripe, but why again is everyone in such a hurry to trade Garza? I know he's injured (which diminishes his value), I know we've been given the idea that he'll be traded, but I feel like everyone's jumping on the Trade Garza Wagon simply because of inevitability.

    Why not see if he'll sign for a lesser amount now that he's injured to account for a little bit of risk? I'm sorry, but if we're trading Garza for a guy whose ceiling is a #2 -- wait, isn't that exactly what Garza is already? Plus, he's well-liked, passionate, and enjoys baseball, not to mention the fact that he seems to tire of trade rumors, which could help his game if/once those rumors go away.

    Is the issue the age thing with him? Because if it's not, I see starting pitching as the biggest hurdle to significant Cubs success in the near-ish future, and while it's nice to have potential studs, it's also nice to have near-sure thing great pitchers. I'm not saying we shouldn't trade Garza, but I will say that I won't be upset if we don't.

  • In reply to mosconml:

    Missed this comment somehow. I don't think the Cubs should be in a hurry to trade Garza unless someone gives the Cubs a great offer with surplus value -- and one that may fit their timeline a little better. That said, I don't see that happening right now, and I for one am okay with keeping Garza. I don't know who the other prospects would be in jshmorans proposal but they would have to be pretty good for the Cubs to trade Garza.

  • In reply to jshmoran:

    Perfect world?? I've always pictured our #1 being a little better than Samardzija (who I like). My perfect world is Tampa's season in the shitter at the deadline, Baez and Vogelbach having monster years, and the Cubs trading them along whoever the hell else for David Price. And then locking him up to a huge extension. He's a little bit better candidate to pitch Game 1 of the world series in wrigley. In a perfect world, of course.

  • fb_avatar

    Ironically, trading Barney for Porcello (plus whatever additional players on both sides) would give the Tigers what they would need to make Porcello a better pitcher.

    I suspect, even if Porcello remains a pitch-to-contact pitcher, that he would be *much* better on the Cubs where he's pitching in the NL and has much better infield defense behind him. So Theo/Jed probably see him as a guy who's floor for us is higher than his floor for the Tigers and whose ceiling remains solid.

  • In reply to Kevin Heckman:

    I would be 100% comfortable with Logan Watkins starting at 2B in 2012. The dropoff in defense would be smaller than some make it out to be and the gain in speed OB% and power Watkins gives You over Barney is net gain to me , plus Watkins is just a flat out winner , He reminds me of a few of the filthy idiot Boston player types a few years back. The Cubs NEED to move Barney now , They made a mistake not dealing LaHair early in the season when His value was extremely high , Barneys value will NEVER be higher than now .

  • In reply to Kevin Heckman:

    Very true! Would hurt the Cubs to go with someone other than Barney as well.

    I do think Porcello will be better with the Cubs and in the NL. We'll see if the Cubs feel the same way.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    John--"would hurt", or "wouldn't hurt" to go with someone other than Barney?
    Oh, and if we do trade him now, at his cheapest/peak value, for a good return, imagine the outraged outcry in the mainstream nooze: "Cubs dump Gold Glover for unknown"

  • In reply to StillMissKennyHubbs:

    I meant that if you have a ground ball, pitch to contact guy like Porcello, it'd be nice to have Barney back there.

    But agree he is at peak value and you have to deal him if it helps get you a piece you need.

  • I agree 100% with trading Barney this off season and that his value will never be higher. He will never win another gold glove as long as Phillips is around. He only won this one because of the record season. I have given up on hoping he would draw more walks. He would be great for Detroit in improving their IF defense. His greatest value is being on a contender that has plenty of hitting.

  • In reply to cubman:

    I'd agree with that. Given his age, salary, defensive reputation and the fact that he at least hit enough to be a viable starter this is probably as good as it gets for Barney value-wise.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    It's an interesting idea. Levine says the Cubs really like Barney though, and I wonder if it's because of intangibles. Barney switched positions and broke records within a year, a tribute to his hard work and focus. Barney gets the most out of his so-so natural talent; maybe the FO wants a guy like that around as an example.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Zonk:

    Despite all the talk about Rizzo's leadership, I was incredibly impressed with Barney after the streak ended. He was extremely classy and made sure that there wouldn't be any sniping at his teammates (in this case, Rizzo) for the streak ending. That's a guy I want on my team. But, man, that bat...

  • In reply to Zonk:

    They really like him and my guess is they aren't looking to trade him this year, but I don't think they'd hesitate to do it if they think it helps the team. For them to do it this year, it'd have to a very good return.

  • john are you going to have a post on the mvp award ? I think it could be a good discussion on the site.

  • In reply to seankl:

    I was thinking about it. Will see if I can work it in.

  • fb_avatar

    John, is it just me, or does Porcello remind you of a young Jon Lieber?

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    He doesn't have Lieber's change or pinpoint control, and he throws a bit harder. Both were pitch to contact guys, though. Lieber was just a bit better at it -- though that wasn't until he was about 27, so there is time for Porcello to improve. I'd like to see him improve that change, would really play up his fastball.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Well, that is the thing isn't it. Porcello is only 23, and Lieber really didn't come into his own until he was older. Lieber was already 29 when the Cubs acquired him from the Pirates. I was thinking about Lieber more when he was with the Pirates, but because Porcello has better stuff, he might actually surpass Lieber if he can make the necessary adjustments.

  • Getting off subject a bit: John, do you have any sense of what the timeline to majors is estimated at for Appel? The other stud college SP-name escapes me?

  • In reply to Carl9730:

    I think Appel would move about as quickly as Trevor Bauer did, meaning I could see him in a Cubs uniform by late 2014.

    The other guy is Stanek and he's not quite as polished. I think he needs to show he can trust his good fastball more this coming spring.

  • fb_avatar

    The Melk Man signs with Toronto. 2 years, 16 million.

  • Saw that. Great move for them given where they're at right now. Looks like they're really making a run. Getting that 2nd year is nice too just in case.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:


  • fb_avatar

    Maybe.....what Melk Man did Toronto get? The .349/.390/.516 beast he was last year? Or the slap-hitting journeyman who was released by the Braves?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Zonk:

    They should get the pre-PED Melk Man.

  • Well that would make a guy like Travis Snider available now wouldnt it , TOR fans complained that He was never given a real chance, could be a player to target.

  • Note to self Snider is a Pirate now lol

  • I think there is a reason that Barney is such a valuable trade chip, and I think the FO realizes his value to a team with a young developing SS that wants to stress defense. Trading him would be a mistake unless they are overwhelmed by the offer. Someone said Watkins would not be a big drop off at 2B. I would respectfully disagree. I like Watkins' game a lot, but he will never win a gold glove. We are talking about one of the best seasons EVER in baseball by a 2nd baseman, AND he's young, AND he's cheap. Don't tell me that if he was on another team and rumored to be available that we wouldn't be talking about how he'd be the perfect fit for this team to pair with Castro. If we expect Baez to arrive (wherever he plays) in two years, Barney becomes that much more important. I have to think that Watkins will be the one traded eventually, not Barney.

  • In reply to jimmy mac1:

    Watkins made 9 errors last year , has a better arm , better OB% , better power , 25 stolen base a year guy , will hit for average , Sorry but to me He is a upgrade over Barney. Barney is at an all time high for value and should be traded now. My opinion , I see Your points and respect Your opinion , have to see what the FO does .

  • In reply to jimmy mac1:

    I think you'll be pleasantly surprised at how good Watkins is on defense and he adds some elements that Barney doesn't have, namely OBP and speed. I do agree though that we'd notice a dropoff if Watkins started this year. I think he needs to get some ABs at AAA before he becomes a legit candidate to take over 2B.

    If the Cubs were to trade Barney, my guess is that it would be Valbuena, not Watkins, who would replace him in the short term.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Valbuena at 2B , thats depressing to think about, I am all for having patience in the rebuild but at some point I want to see the kids and not waiver wire retreads, I was not impressed with Valbuena at all. Bench player and that is where He should stay.

  • In reply to jimmy mac1:

    Hear Hear! Isn't it funny how fans (myself included sometimes) get jumpy when you have more than one good player!? Why can't we ever have both guys!? I'll take 3 Darwin Barney's, 3 Logan Watknis', and a great bullpen all day long!! Sprinkle in a good starter and a good hitter and you have the '88 Dodgers...

  • I have a friend who's a huge Tigers fan, we already had this trade worked out a couple weeks ago. Porcello, Casey Crosby, Brennan Boesch and James McCann for Garza, Marmol, Soriano, a ton of cash, and Greg Rohan.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jim Weihofen:

    Tori Hunter and the return of Victor Martinez probably put any shot of Soriano to Detroit out to pasture.

  • It's obvious Barney worked hard to make himself an outstanding fielder at a new position. Why can't he word hard to take more pitches and get his OB% to .350 or higher. Then you would have something. If he did that, nobody would be talking about trading him. Sveum said he thought Barney could beome a .300 hitter. I don't know if he was blowing smoke or really thought it. In any event, if the FO belives it from what Sveum said, they will not move him.

  • In reply to cubman:

    I'm sure he'd like to walk more, but if you're a pitcher, why wouldn't you go right after Barney and attack the strike zone?

  • you know with the blue jays spending maybe they will want sori :). back to reality what do you think about kyle drabek or jeremy hellickson possibly getting a trade for one?

  • In reply to kingpro98:

    Toronto's probably pretty much tapped out as far as payroll. I think both of those pitchers would be appealing, particularly Hellickson because he throws more strikes, but Rays probably asking for a ton.

  • I have a feeling the Tigers are going to let Bruce Rondon close next year and I also have a feeling he's going to outpitch Marmol and all but 5 or 6 relievers in The Big Leagues in 2013. Kid is a stud. I wish Marmol would throw strikes and mix in (learn) a change up (a la K-Rod). Also could care less how much Barney hits. I don't see why we can't have DB and Watkins (in a little bit of a Zobrist-esque role)....We're all really going to wish Barney was around when we're contending and Starlin goes down for a month with a hammy/groin.

  • In reply to Ben20:

    Its been talked about here but just think of how much "better" of a pitcher Rick Porcello would be with a couple of Darwin Barney's in the infield. That plus the good character, plus the knack for a clutch AB, plus the baseball IQ. I really hope he's not dealt. Not as part of a Kelly package. Not as part of a Porcello package. I hope he's playing second base when that last out is made.

  • In reply to Ben20:

    He's a good ballplayer. Knows the game and a guy who's better than the sum of his parts. He'd be missed if the Cubs traded him. I could be wrong but I don't think it happens this offseason.

  • In reply to Ben20:

    Interesting thought. Rondon is a talent and certainly closer material. The only question I have is the Tigers are a team built to win now. Do they entrust that role to a largely unproven reliever?

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Yeah you're right about that, John. They most likely won't in April. I just have a feeling he'll outpitch a lot of guys. I really like the idea of extending Garza but I think there's a good chance Garza for Rondon straight up would've ended up being a huge win! Pitchers do break though...

  • In reply to Ben20:

    LOL as you can see I'm a big Rondon fan!!

  • In reply to Ben20:

    You are. That was quite an endorsement. That said, hes a talented guy and he's certainly capable of seizing that job and holding on to it. However, I don't think the Cubs will trade SPs for RPs at this stage.

  • I cannot remember ever being so excited.

  • I cannot remember ever being this excited.

  • In reply to gposner:

    You say this every other post. Your memory must be on the fritz.

Leave a comment